Re: That list of Liberal quotes by Harper...

[sir_springer]

Much has been made about a list of quotes by Stephen Harper being circulated about Ottawa by the Liberals. They did the same thing to Stock Day.

Well, to begin with, Stephen Harper is not Stock Day.

Ever see a political leader within living memory of anyone around here who would not back down on his principled stands, not from anyone?

http://www.cbc.ca/programs/sites/politics.html

On the RHS, click on the Monday PM broadcast of Politics.

It begins with Newman getting a report from Ditchburn regarding this list of quotes.

Following is an interview with Stephen Harper in which Newman confronts him with a handful of what I would imagine are supposed to be the most damning of the bunch.

It turns out that, unlike the customary courtesy in which guests like Harper are advised in advance of the theme of the interview, such was not the case this time. In fact, Harper did not even know that Ditchburn was spieling off this list immediately prior to his interview.

Think Harper was caught off guard or rattled by this literal attempt at bushwacking him???

As your watching, try to imagine Paul Martin or Jack Layton under the same circumstances.

This guy literally does not so much as miss a heartbeat, nor break even one tiny bead of sweat.

And...unlike just about every damn politician in recent memory...he does not back down so much as an inch.

It simply does not get any better than this, people.

BTW, this link will only be good until next Monday's broadcast, which will then replace this one.

Enjoy!

[Dennis]

I don't think the list is that big of a deal.

Its just another example of what Stephen Harper said in his victory speech.

The Liberal Party of Canada is acting like a cornered rat.

This list proves it.

They have absolutely nothing substantive to offer to the Canadian people.

All they have is strategies of wild attacks against their opponents.

If this is all they have, its gonna be the Right Honourable Stephen Harper after the next federal election.

[August1991]

First, thanks Mr. Springer for that CBC link. It was enlightening to me because I don't know Harper well. I have heard of him and I saw him in debate here in Montreal.

I was impressed. Except:

He's a policy wonk - no harm there, so was Clinton. But is he a Carter micro-manager? (I previously thought of him as a Mondale, but Harper has more - and he's an English-Canadian.)

His answer to bilingualism was "original" only in CBC, official English Canada. (But certainly not here in Quebec.) His answer to same-sex marriage is practically identical to Bernard Landry's position.

1. Can he be a big picture guy?

2. Can he truly relax, and simply get his message across? (I thought I saw him making the effort to do this.)

Harper's a white bread, WASP. He needs a touch of blarney, chutzpah, but if he can't do it, he shouldn't try. Good WASPs have a big problem exposing themselves. (Gawd, what am I saying?)

PS. In the middle of Newman's awkward questioning, I liked Harper's deadpan line about Martin: "He has a bad story to tell and it will only get worse." (!!!)

[Michael Hardner]

I saw the show. Harper handled himself masterfully, there's no doubting that. I find the comment that he didn't get the questions in advance to be a bit of a whine. He should be able to defend himself on the spot, and he did a fine job.

As for this...

They have absolutely nothing substantive to offer to the Canadian people.

I think the seventh consecutive balanced budget is something to be proud of. Balanced budgets seem to have been a bit of a fad south of the border, but we seem to like them in Canada - especially Alberta. Canada remains the only G7 country with a balanced budget. I would say that is substantive.

[Dennis]

I think the seventh consecutive balanced budget is something to be proud of. Balanced budgets seem to have been a bit of a fad south of the border, but we seem to like them in Canada - especially Alberta. Canada remains the only G7 country with a balanced budget. I would say that is substantive.

If that were so substantive, then why the need for some of the cheap tactics we've seen from the Libs in past days - the quotes plus the Bloc coalition gambit which backfired.

As for the balanced budgets, they did it with high taxes and cuts to health care and defence. Our productivity is low.

And you may disparage the American economy, its fuelling ours.

Withouth its growth we'd be nowhere. We're dependent on them.

The fact of the matter is that the American economy may be the only one capable of growing out of deficits. Its done it in the past and will most likely do it again.

And that growth has helped with our own deficits, as well as the tax and spend ways of the Liberals - both highest in the G7 as well, if I'm not mistaken.

Don't know if the Liberals can run on fiscal management. Its why they're pulling out the quotes.

[August1991]

I think the seventh consecutive balanced budget is something to be proud of. Balanced budgets seem to have been a bit of a fad south of the border, but we seem to like them in Canada - especially Alberta.

Balanced budget? Irrelevant. Think. Paul Martin has both a copy of your Visa card and your cheque book. (Afraid of the Internet? Paul Martin is the Canadian Government, and he's got both.)

Now, does it matter whether Paul Martin uses your cheque book or your credit card to buy something? If he uses your Visa, you'll wisely pay the bill at the end of the month. (Martin's charges, you can't dispute.)

So, what's the difference? None.

IOW, when Paul Martin says he paid the national debt, should you be impressed? (He used your cheque book to pay your credit card bill and because of his finesse, he wants you to vote for him?)

I'll listen to a PM when he says: "I'm not using your credit card nor your cheque book to buy anything."

[Michael Hardner]

Dennis:

If that were so substantive, then why the need for some of the cheap tactics we've seen from the Libs in past days - the quotes plus the Bloc coalition gambit which backfired.

As for the balanced budgets, they did it with high taxes and cuts to health care and defence. Our productivity is low.

And you may disparage the American economy, its fuelling ours.

Withouth its growth we'd be nowhere. We're dependent on them.

The fact of the matter is that the American economy may be the only one capable of growing out of deficits. Its done it in the past and will most likely do it again.

And that growth has helped with our own deficits, as well as the tax and spend ways of the Liberals - both highest in the G7 as well, if I'm not mistaken.

Don't know if the Liberals can run on fiscal management. Its why they're pulling out the quotes. 

All that being what it is, a balanced is still "substantive".

[Michael Hardner]

Balanced budget? Irrelevant. Think. Paul Martin has both a copy of your Visa card and your cheque book. (Afraid of the Internet? Paul Martin is the Canadian Government, and he's got both.)

Now, does it matter whether Paul Martin uses your cheque book or your credit card to buy something? If he uses your Visa, you'll wisely pay the bill at the end of the month. (Martin's charges, you can't dispute.)

So, what's the difference? None.

IOW, when Paul Martin says he paid the national debt, should you be impressed? (He used your cheque book to pay your credit card bill and because of his finesse, he wants you to vote for him?)

I'll listen to a PM when he says: "I'm not using your credit card nor your cheque book to buy anything."

The Liberals only starting balancing the budget after political pressure from the Alliance. It was a good idea, and hardly irrelevant.

I'd rather he pay down the debt, and the interest that eats into the budget. I pay my credit cards off every month.

[Lost in Manitoba]

As I understand it though, there are many ways to make a balanced budget that isn't. There doesn't seem to be a standard form for gov't to follow. Manitoba does this constantly. Changeing the rules, robbing the rainyday fund etc, to make the numbers add up.

Or, as Alberta announces debt free next year, reports start coming about how they achieved this. Cuts and not spending what is required to mantain infrastructure. I've heard reports about failing roads and other public works, especially the state of education. Calgary public schools alone, need somewhere in the neighborhood of 600 million worth of repairs and upgrades. yep, $600 000 000!

Is this really debt free?

[maplesyrup]

-from The "Comment" section of the Globe and Mail today.

I think this explains quite well another approach/theory for paying down the debt.

Paying twice

In some ways all this talk about the debt is a red hering. Of course the debt is important but this is just a diversion by the rich to avoid addressing the fundamental issue - Repair of Taxation

The Government of Canada's number one priority needs to be redistributing the wealth, in a much nore equitable fashion in Canada, to arrest and reverse the growing gap between the rich and the poor.

It is obscene what has happened to the increasing numbers of poor people in Canada. And that is the main reason Martin and the Liberals need to be booted out of office.

Maybe Canada needs to impose a 10% death tax until the problem has been rectified.

[maplesyrup]

I just came across this Globe article.

This is the kind of situation I am talking about:

Dear Mr. Martin: But what about the children? :angry: :angry: