jdobbin Posted January 24, 2009 Report Posted January 24, 2009 The type of things we saw in the fiscal update is exactly what they should do. Lower taxes, cuts in political funding, restricting wages in the pubic sector, etc. All things that the CPC will easily hammer the opposition with if they vote against them. Absolutely, Harper should go for it and dare the opposition to vote it down. He should go ahead and act like a horse's ass again. But don't say he is trying to save money when he cuts political spending and increases the cabinet from 26 to 37 ministers. It is game playing and shows he is not really interested in the economy but kicking his enemies in the ribs. Harper probably was warned by the Governor General to not act like a sociopath again. And Harper is likely hoping the Opposition to not pull the plug since he is running radio ads again. What fiddling? This is the best government the country has had in at least 40 years. We have the best economy, and the best managed government in the entire world right now. So good that there is going to be a $64 billion deficit and it is going to get worse every year they are in office. Quote
jdobbin Posted January 24, 2009 Report Posted January 24, 2009 LOL, yeah how dare PM Harper ask parties to raise their own funds! This is Canada the socialist paradise where you can do nothing, whine about it then cash a fat cheque. What was I thinking. Let them raise their own funds then. Stop restricting donations and return them to 2006 levels. Quote
jdobbin Posted January 24, 2009 Report Posted January 24, 2009 "The West's "vast oil reserves" are the West's vast oil reserves and should Ignatieff, Layton or Duceppe (all 3 of whom are/have been Quebecers) even suggest fuddle-duddling with the West's 'energy resources' then, Madam, any 'coalition or otherwise government in Ottawa' would be hard pressed to remain in office for long." And yet you support Harper with his cap and trade plan which will hit Alberta harder than any other carbon plan. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 24, 2009 Report Posted January 24, 2009 Let them raise their own funds then. Stop restricting donations and return them to 2006 levels. Corporate donations needed to be curbed as they foster corruption as we have seen. Party donations should come from the individual voters and them alone. No more party welfare! Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Progressive Tory Posted January 24, 2009 Author Report Posted January 24, 2009 Corporate donations needed to be curbed as they foster corruption as we have seen. Party donations should come from the individual voters and them alone. No more party welfare! They do come from individual voters in the form of $ 1.95 from our tax dollars. Take it up with Harper over the other though. I doubt he'll agree with you. Choking off money from interest groups will throw him in the poorhouse. But I'm interested in this whole party welfare thing. Can I get welfare if I want to throw a party? Why wasn't I told about this? Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
Mr.Canada Posted January 24, 2009 Report Posted January 24, 2009 They do come from individual voters in the form of $ 1.95 from our tax dollars. Take it up with Harper over the other though. I doubt he'll agree with you. Choking off money from interest groups will throw him in the poorhouse. But I'm interested in this whole party welfare thing. Can I get welfare if I want to throw a party? Why wasn't I told about this? You're being a jackass, grow up please. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
guyser Posted January 24, 2009 Report Posted January 24, 2009 You're being a jackass, grow up please. Dont like competition huh? Quote
Progressive Tory Posted January 24, 2009 Author Report Posted January 24, 2009 You're being a jackass, grow up please. This whole 'party welfare' thing is ridiculous, so now you know how it sounds to me when you say it. You once said that the Tories were masters of spin, and I sometimes admire how they can take people's attention away from the things they don't want you to see. Economists were saying that Flaherty's economic statement was a fairy tale, because it showed a surplus when in fact we were already in a deficit. So they made it about the $ 1.95. That became the big issue. They pulled it back, and probably knew it would meet with uproar, because they changed their minds too quickly. They didn't want to lose the ten million dollars either. But the deficit 'smoke and mirrors' was forgotten. Tom Lukiwski's videotape where he says 'homo-sexuals with dirt under their fingernails, etc.." The Tories jumped on it right away, with tearful apologies by Tom. They needed to draw the public's attention away from who else was on that tape. It was taken when Lukiwski was general manager of the Saskatchewan Conservatives of Grant Devine. Look it up. One of the biggest scandals in Canadian history. Cabinet ministers sent to jail and one committed suicide. Even Larry Spencer who was booted out of the Alliance by Harper for his homophobic remarks defended Lukiwski, saying that people know how Evangelicals feel when they are exposed to foul language. Did he listen to the tape? I haven't heard so much profanity since my husband tried to nail his finger to a cabinet he was building and started calling for his 'mother'. You lack skepticism, so are the perfect little pawn. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
Mr.Canada Posted January 24, 2009 Report Posted January 24, 2009 We eliminate the $1.95 per vote forced subsidy we eliminate the Separatist Bloc, Canada wins. Political parties need to be raising their own funds. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Oleg Bach Posted January 24, 2009 Report Posted January 24, 2009 We eliminate the $1.95 per vote forced subsidy we eliminate the Separatist Bloc, Canada wins. Political parties need to be raising their own funds. Run for office and shut up.. You really like the details of bureacracy ---go for it fella! Quote
jdobbin Posted January 24, 2009 Report Posted January 24, 2009 Corporate donations needed to be curbed as they foster corruption as we have seen. Party donations should come from the individual voters and them alone. No more party welfare! Don't think I mentioned anything about corporate donations. I said raise the limit for personal donations back to what they were in 2006. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 25, 2009 Report Posted January 25, 2009 Don't think I mentioned anything about corporate donations. I said raise the limit for personal donations back to what they were in 2006. $1000 is a good amount as proposed by Jean Chretien, your former King. It's enough to be useful but not enough to buy anyone. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
jdobbin Posted January 25, 2009 Report Posted January 25, 2009 $1000 is a good amount as proposed by Jean Chretien, your former King. It's enough to be useful but not enough to buy anyone. Actually, it was not proposed by Chretien. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 25, 2009 Report Posted January 25, 2009 Actually, it was not proposed by Chretien. Whatever, he was the PM when it was passed. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Smallc Posted January 25, 2009 Report Posted January 25, 2009 Whatever, he was the PM when it was passed. No, he wasn't. 2006. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 25, 2009 Report Posted January 25, 2009 No, he wasn't. 2006. lol. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Smallc Posted January 25, 2009 Report Posted January 25, 2009 (edited) lol. You don't have an answer it would seem. Edited January 25, 2009 by Smallc Quote
capricorn Posted January 25, 2009 Report Posted January 25, 2009 Sure, he's a straight shooting flip-flopper. Remember when he said he wasn't losing any sleep over Israel bombing Lebanon? Then he turned around a couple days later, and said that they were war crimes? So, what can we deduce? Michael Ignatieff doesn't lose any sleep over war crimes? ---- Sorry, but I want a PM who actually loves Canada unconditionally. Someone who has lived abroad the last twenty years does not qualify. Not to mention what a US ass kisser the man is. He and Harper can have another contest there. If Harper ever wanted to make the Conservative party, the choice for patriotic blue-collar Tim Hortons hockey parents, Ignatieff will help him achieve that and far beyond. I agree with you KeyStone. This article, which I linked and quoted from elsewhere, addresses your comments not only in relation to Iggy but Harper as well. It presents a good comparison of both leaders as intellectuals and as politicians. http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Ph...2626/story.html I think Iggy's long absence from Canada will prove to be a drawback. ------ I will add another dynamic. Iggy's reaction to the budget this week will be crucial in evaluating his qualities as a politician and as a leader. Let's remember that Iggy is the interim leader, yet to be confirmed by the Party. I suggest that some top Liberals who are unhappy with Iggy's handling of the budget may be so dissatisfied as to organize for a contender to run against Iggy for the leadership at the upcoming Liberal convention. I'm thinking especially of Martinites or Chretienites that have been left out of the shadow cabinet or who were otherwise slighted by Iggy. IMO this scenario is in the realm of possibilities. Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
normanchateau Posted January 25, 2009 Report Posted January 25, 2009 $1000 is a good amount as proposed by Jean Chretien, your former King. Here are the facts Mr.C Chretien proposed $1000 for unions and corporations, $5000 for individual donations. Quote
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.