Who's Doing What? Posted October 4, 2008 Report Posted October 4, 2008 Please, just because the liberals didn't have any spine to go to the commons and vote doesn't make Harper a bully it just showed that the liberals were willing to sell out their party base in hopes of being able to wait it out until their appoval numers improved, just to get caught with their pants down.Harper has never struck or strangled a protestor. (Something a certain Liberal PM did) Or Given the finger to members of the public in western Canada (something another Liberal PM Did) The CPC behaviour in the HoC makes them/Harper a bully. Suing anyone who questions their actions makes them/Harper a bully. Putting a gag on his MP with the exception of a few attack dogs makes Harper a bully. Harper couldn't strike or strangle a protestor. He would have the RCMP keep any protestors well out of camera range and arms length. Harper only metaphorically gives the rest of Canada the finger when he dumps billions into Quebec to try and buy votes. Quote Harper differed with his party on some key policy issues; in 1995, for example, he was one of only two Reform MPs to vote in favour of federal legislation requiring owners to register their guns. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/election/bio/harper.html "You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society." (Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, January 22, 2001)
jbg Posted October 4, 2008 Report Posted October 4, 2008 I don't know that he's earned that distinction after 3 years of merely adequate government.Let's at least go through the PM's I know something about:King - Antisemite (one Jew is too many) who took advice from his dead mother. 'Nuff said;; The two brief Conservative interludes during the King era - Don't know much about them; St. Laurent - Pipeline scandal; Diefenbaker - More than a bit of a whack job, killed Avro; Pearson - Three elections and no majority, drunken sailor spending, dreadful "liberal party" flag when Red Ensign was just fine; Trudeau - Divisive OLA, multiculturalism, martial law in Quebec, Charter of Wrongs and No Rights, 'nuff said; Joe Clark - Who?; Mulroney - Not bad but apparently roundly despised as "lyin' Brian; Chretien - "'Da Proof is in 'da proof"; incoherent, corrupt, discriminated against English-speakers in civil service ;and Paul Martin - A mit bit indecisive? No moral compass. Someone can go further back if they like, but from what I've heard Borden earns no high marks. However, I think he's head and shoulders above his contemporaries.That's an easy assignment. And, as I said earlier in the week, I think he has saved federalism in Canada. This would be an irreparably broken regional landscape without Harper. -k No question that he has pandered least to Quebec of any modern PM and yet seems to be gaining some support there, except, interestingly, in its English-speaking areas. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.