ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 It seems if Harper goes for the amendment, he is following a path Ignatieff wants. I can't see Harper risking things now by not going for the amendment. It's not so much that Harper himself probably wouldn't let his government be brought down, but that his caucus would probably beat him to death if he screwed things up. Quote
Molly Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Well, it would be danged interesting to watch him try to fight an election campagn based purely on an unwillingness to submit to oversight--- unwillingness to show that he's actually living up to his word, and abiding by his own budget! Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) Well, it would be danged interesting to watch him try to fight an election campagn based purely on an unwillingness to submit to oversight--- unwillingness to show that he's actually living up to his word, and abiding by his own budget! Well, there are other ways of framing that that won't sound so much petulant, but the real obstacle wouldn't be trying to come up with a decent argument, but the level of tolerance in the Tory caucus for political adventurism. I think the near-death experience they just had has used up a lot of the political capital that Harper had. It's approaching a situation (if it isn't already there) where Harper is going to have to watch his back for the knives much more than he has to watch the Liberals. His political fortunes are now pretty much married to Ignatieff. Before this is through, the Liberals will probably have an unofficial office at the Ministry of Finance :-) Edited January 28, 2009 by ToadBrother Quote
Molly Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) Yeah, fair enough. That would still be the exact logical crux of it.... throwing it out for fear of scrutiny. Not a strong position to work from. And you are right about the rest of it, too. Not many people smiling at that man right now, nor feeling sorry for him either. Edited January 28, 2009 by Molly Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
DFCaper Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 This is not an NDP budget. It is a Conservative Budget and not a good one. It looks more like a Liberal Budget. Further proving to me that there is not much, if any, difference between the 2 ruling parties in Canada. The true conservatives must be pissed... They win elections, but no political movement right. Although, they probably got something in this budget, as it seems everybody has... The title of this topic should be: "Harper Caves, NDP Loses" As the NDP seem pretty far left if Harper's "right wing" conservatives are putting out this type of Budget. Quote "Although the world is full of suffering, it is full also of the overcoming of it" - Hellen Keller "Success is not measured by the heights one attains, but by the obstacles one overcomes in its attainment" - Booker T. Washington
ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 It looks more like a Liberal Budget. Further proving to me that there is not much, if any, difference between the 2 ruling parties in Canada. Maybe a Liberal budget from the 1970s, but it doesn't resemble at all the Paul Martin budgets of the 1990s. The true conservatives must be pissed... They win elections, but no political movement right. Although, they probably got something in this budget, as it seems everybody has...The title of this topic should be: "Harper Caves, NDP Loses" As the NDP seem pretty far left if Harper's "right wing" conservatives are putting out this type of Budget. There's no room for "wings" right now. The economic collapse rendered all that claptrap moot. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Maybe a Liberal budget from the 1970s, but it doesn't resemble at all the Paul Martin budgets of the 1990s. Yeah theres no removing funds from the EI funds then claiming surpluses. Hrm, yeah PM Harper left that out, so you're right. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Yeah theres no removing funds from the EI funds then claiming surpluses. Hrm, yeah PM Harper left that out, so you're right. The Tories are every bit as guilty of raiding EI. Besides, the risk of this budget is that if things really tank, general revenue could be on the hook for EI shortfalls. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 The Tories are every bit as guilty of raiding EI. Besides, the risk of this budget is that if things really tank, general revenue could be on the hook for EI shortfalls. Toad. I understand you dislike my positions on anything because I'm part of t he Christian Right but come on man, be realistic. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Argus Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 I'm actually more curious about the homo reno credit. We're planning on building an addition this spring which will easily consume $10,000, and I wouldn't complain at a kick-back on it via a tax credit. Of course, I'm hoping that it doesn't have some ludicrous strings attached like "qualified tradesman" because I'm building it myself. As far as I'm aware you just plug in what you spent on your next year's income tax form. But you need invoices/reciepts in case they ask for them later. Clearly you can't charge for labour, but your purchases ought to qualify without much trouble. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Toad. I understand you dislike my positions on anything because I'm part of t he Christian Right but come on man, be realistic. Realistic about what? The Tories had few problems once they had formed a government in continuing the EI practices. I despise political cheerleading. I have no idea why people become so attached to political leaders. Quote
ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 As far as I'm aware you just plug in what you spent on your next year's income tax form. But you need invoices/reciepts in case they ask for them later. Clearly you can't charge for labour, but your purchases ought to qualify without much trouble. The only reason I'm wondering is because of a reference in one of the pamphlets to "tradespeople". I emailed my MPs office, and his secretary said she was pretty sure that the addition would be covered up to the limit, but that she'd get back to me in a week or two once things were a little clearer. This is actually really good news for me, if it pans out, and I'm damn glad I never got a chance to get construction underway last fall. It probably means I'll be able to put a metal roof on. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Realistic about what? The Tories had few problems once they had formed a government in continuing the EI practices. Yes due to PM Martin's constant raiding of the EI fund and treating it like his piggy bank. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Yes due to PM Martin's constant raiding of the EI fund and treating it like his piggy bank. The Tories could have stopped it at any time. Your defense is a little like a mobster defending his extortion of local businesses by saying "Yeah, but Jimmy Knuckles did it before I moved into his turf." Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 The Tories could have stopped it at any time. Your defense is a little like a mobster defending his extortion of local businesses by saying "Yeah, but Jimmy Knuckles did it before I moved into his turf." Good at least you now recognize that PM Martin stole money from EI over and over again. Thank you for being honest. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Sir Bandelot Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) Ignatief proves the "Bigger Idiot theory" applies to politics as well. Ignatieff and the liberals lose, but Harper does not win. Harper only wins in that he gets to play for while longer. Not though, by the will of the Canadian people, who wanted the Coalition. So, the Canadian people lose. Thanks, Iggy. We will not forget it come the next election. Bye Bye, Liberals. For you it's the Day of Reckoning. And if that happens, rightly so... time to decimate the stinking old boys club! Edited January 28, 2009 by Sir Bandelot Quote
ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Good at least you now recognize that PM Martin stole money from EI over and over again. Thank you for being honest. I never denied it. Do you even read my posts? I know Martin started doing that (and much worse, to my mind). My whole point was that deficit budgets were the norm of the Liberals prior to the Mulroney years, but slaying the deficit was a top priority of the Liberals when they retook power in the 1990s. They, to my mind, did it in large part by basically offloading to the Provinces, which meant we got screwed anyways. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Ignatief proves the "Bigger Idiot theory" applies to politics as well. Ignatieff and the liberals lose, but Harper does not win. Harper only wins in that he gets to play for while longer. Not though, by the will of the Canadian people, who wanted the Coalition. So, the Canadian people lose. Thanks, Iggy. We will not forget it come the next election. Bye Bye, Liberals. For you it's the Day of Reckoning.And if that happens, rightly so... time to decimate the stinking old boys club! 38% of Canadians supported the Coalition. Believe it or not but Canada extends further then Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Mr.Canada Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 I never denied it. Do you even read my posts? I know Martin started doing that (and much worse, to my mind). My whole point was that deficit budgets were the norm of the Liberals prior to the Mulroney years, but slaying the deficit was a top priority of the Liberals when they retook power in the 1990s. They, to my mind, did it in large part by basically offloading to the Provinces, which meant we got screwed anyways. Well, we're in agreement there. Nice to see you can be reasonable too. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 Ignatief proves the "Bigger Idiot theory" applies to politics as well. Ignatieff and the liberals lose, but Harper does not win. Harper only wins in that he gets to play for while longer. Not though, by the will of the Canadian people, who wanted the Coalition. So, the Canadian people lose. Thanks, Iggy. We will not forget it come the next election. Bye Bye, Liberals. For you it's the Day of Reckoning.And if that happens, rightly so... time to decimate the stinking old boys club! What "majority" wanted a coalition, or are you doing that dishonest stunt of adding together the vote totals for the NDP, Bloc and Liberals and then make-believing that that meant all those voters were actually coalition-supporters. Ignatieff with the Coalition would have been hamstrung, beholden to a Separatist and a loud-mouthed idiot. His long-term survival as Liberal leader would have been compromised. Now he will owe no one, and in particular, no Separatists, anything, and has a great deal more freedom to maneuver and rebuild. The Coalition is dead, it was practically stillborn, being lead by a guy who didn't even have the confidence of his own party. Quote
ToadBrother Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) Well, we're in agreement there. Nice to see you can be reasonable too. You seem to presume that because I'm a secularist, an atheist and no fan of Harper that somehow I'm some sort of raving socialist. I'm not, I'm a fiscal conservative, but not so married to that notion that I don't see the value of some socialist notions. Whenever I hear the phrase "Martin slayed the deficit dragon", I think of how my province's health care went down the crapper because we got hit with Federal cutbacks whilst at the same time trying to deal with the economic and budgetary woes from the Asian economic flu. While the Liberals were patting Martin on the back, we were in a severe crisis. Quite frankly, I think I'm beginning to like the notion of the Conservatives in a minority situation with someone like Iggy yanking the chain. Edited January 28, 2009 by ToadBrother Quote
Barts Posted January 28, 2009 Author Report Posted January 28, 2009 Ignatieff with the Coalition would have been hamstrung, beholden to a Separatist and a loud-mouthed idiot. His long-term survival as Liberal leader would have been compromised. Now he will owe no one, and in particular, no Separatists, anything, and has a great deal more freedom to maneuver and rebuild. Actually, the two people who will decide if there is an election are Harper and Duceppe. The NDP will always vote against the Conservatives/Harper. The Liberals will bring down the government only when it suits their needs. Harper will never give them that opportunity. All Harper needs to do to stay in power is to throw Duceppe a Quebec bone, and Duceppe will support the Conservatives, as he has made clear. Harper only needs one of the Opposition party's support. Duceppe's support is cheap. Harper will dissolve Parliament when it suits him. He'll stay in power as long as he wants by appeasing Duceppe. The Liberals and the NDP are no longer relevant, and the Conservative's fate is in the hands of the Separatists. Quote Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd -- Voltaire
Sir Bandelot Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) Now he will owe no one, and in particular, no Separatists, anything, and has a great deal more freedom to maneuver and rebuild. To do what- He could have been leading the country through the coalition, and more importantly, Harper is not leading the country. Instead he has given power back to Stephen Harper, making the liberal party look as though they have no direction. Their real role is to act as Harper enablers, giving him another term as leader and proving, that both the Liberal party and CPC have the same ultimate agenda- US appeasement. Edited January 28, 2009 by Sir Bandelot Quote
Mr.Canada Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 To do what- He could have been leading the country through the coalition, and more importantly, Harper is not leading the country. Instead he has given power back to Stephen Harper, making the liberal party look as though they have no direction. Their real role is to act as Harper enablers, giving him another term as leader and proving, that both the Liberal party and CPC have the same ultimate agenda- US appeasement. So grabbing power at all costs is what you support from your post. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
normanchateau Posted January 28, 2009 Report Posted January 28, 2009 This new dynamic is a Liberal dream come true - a newly meek and chastened Harper forced to absorb all the negative side effects of our economic malaise while his new rival gathers strength with the passage of time. Best of all, Harper exposed as having only one remaining principle...holding office at any cost. 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.