KingIggy Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 (edited) Raitt-gate rocks Tories : http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/645348 If you read the article thoroughly, you'll see the Harper's blind hypocrisy and internal contradiction. Much like.... Harper's stunning reversal on income trusts : http://www.thestar.com/article/153783 Harper not required to abide by election date law : http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national...22-aab47e14449d Do the rightwingers see the pattern ? Probably not. Edited June 4, 2009 by KingIggy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 Raitt gate? Aaahhhhhahahahahah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 (edited) From the Editorial of the Star. As much as they seldom have anything nice to say about the Conservatives, I couldn't agree with them more on this matter: The Lisa Raitt affairJune 04, 2009 The opposition parties were in high dudgeon in the House of Commons yesterday, with their ire directed at Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt. But it wasn't her handling of the isotopes affair or the privatization of AECL or any of the other weighty topics on Raitt's plate that caused the uproar. Rather, it was a confidential government document left behind at a TV station. An aide to Raitt has resigned over the incident, but the opposition wanted more. Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said it was "despicable" that an aide took the fall. Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe demanded Raitt's resignation for "negligence." Not to be outdone, Thomas Mulcair of the NDP said she should "leave immediately." This is "gotcha politics" at its worst. Yes, ministers should be careful with confidential documents. But there is no indication that high state secrets were involved in this case or that Raitt herself was responsible for leaving the document behind. The opposition compared Raitt's situation to that of Maxime Bernier, the minister who resigned last year after leaving a government document at Julie Couillard's home. But in that case, Bernier himself was clearly to blame, and it was the last straw after a series of embarrassing revelations about his relationship with her. In this case, Raitt offered her resignation and Prime Minister Stephen Harper rightly refused to accept it. Time for the opposition to move on to more substantive issues. Link: http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/645127 Edited June 4, 2009 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 Ignatieff doesn't like 26 year-old bimbos taking the blame for being bimbos. HAHAHAHAHAHAH! KingIggy, please, do you have any more intellectually devoid commentary? Your posts carry the same sort of intelligence as a Fox News smear on Obama. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 Ignatieff doesn't like 26 year-old bimbos taking the blame for being bimbos.KingIggy, please, do you have any more intellectually devoid commentary? Your posts carry the same sort of intelligence as a Fox News smear on Obama. I was going to say the same about your disdainful remarks about the woman in question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 At least get the name of the "scandal" right. It's Fife-Gate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 Aren't we in a recession? Doesn't Ignatieff have better things to do? He pretends to be Lord and Savoir, some brilliant academic. But really, he's as scum as the rest. He takes his first chance to roll in the dirt with glee. The difference is that he doesn't realise the trash that he is. Go back to the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 Aren't we in a recession? Doesn't Ignatieff have better things to do? Can't the government be consistent on policy when it comes to missing documents? They want to sell AECL. It would help if they didn't lose minister briefing notes. As Harper has said, ministers are responsible for their departments and responsible for their documents. He pretends to be Lord and Savoir, some brilliant academic. But really, he's as scum as the rest. He takes his first chance to roll in the dirt with glee. The difference is that he doesn't realise the trash that he is. Go back to the US. Talk about over the top commentary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 Can't the government be consistent on policy when it comes to missing documents?They want to sell AECL. It would help if they didn't lose minister briefing notes. As Harper has said, ministers are responsible for their departments and responsible for their documents. There is a difference between a star Minister that has been very strong in performing her tasks having an aide leave rather boring AECL documents at CTV and a bumbling Minister that left critical top secret foreign affairs documents at the house of an associate of organized crime. Big different. He's very consistent in that the two scenarios are not at all the same. Talk about over the top commentary. I don't pretend to be the second coming of Fuddle Duddle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 Big different. He's very consistent in that the two scenarios are not at all the same. The minister is responsible for ministerial documents. Period. I don't care which party is in power. She did the honourable thing and offered her resignation. I question Harper's judgment. Harper was clear that the ministers would be held accountable for missing documents that they were responsible for. Certainly the aide should have been fired or allowed to resign but ultimately, a minister is responsible for their department and their own documents. I don't pretend to be the second coming of Fuddle Duddle. It is obvious you have an intense dislike for Ignatieff but is his job to question the security of government documents, especially when they deal with nuclear operation. Just as important, the documents could cause a problem for future sales or a sell off of the company. And yes, that is something we should be concerned about in a recession. The minister's rather cavalier attitude about the shortage of isotopes makes me question whether she realizes that people's lives hang in the balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 There is also another problem with this. The Bloc and the NDP are attacking what the call a double standard when it comes to Anglophone and Francophone ministers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 It is obvious you have an intense dislike for Ignatieff but is his job to question the security of government documents, especially when they deal with nuclear operation. Just as important, the documents could cause a problem for future sales or a sell off of the company. And yes, that is something we should be concerned about in a recession. You are quite right about this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 I was going to say the same about your disdainful remarks about the woman in question. Sorry if I used a feminine term for idiot. I did a terrible thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 What exactly makes the person in question a neo-con? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingIggy Posted June 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 What exactly makes the person in question a neo-con? The truth is the truth. Harper walks the same path as BUSH. 1) Wreckless tax cuts (just like Bush) 2) Increased military funding (just like Bush) 3) Increased drug war (just like Bush) 4) Increased national debt (just like Bush) 5) Republican style attack ads (just like Bush). 6) False, hypocritical claims of "fiscal conservatism" (like the Republicans). 7) Failed attempts at banishing party moderates (just like Cheney tried with Powell). 8) Let (CPP) CEO's keep huge bonuses while their corporation LOSES money (something Bush-like for sure). 9) No boosting of the social safety net (EI) during recession (like Bush). 10) Little or no plan for environment (just like Bush). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zachary Young Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 You claim to speak the truth. You are lying. There is no such thing as a wreckless tax cut because government spending is evil. You are right to attack increased military spending and the war on drugs - I have no complaint with your criticism here. I'm not going to discuss tactics because I don't care (with regards to the adds) and I mean every politician is a hypocrite so it's hardly a unique complaint here. Let me remind you of Goldwater's advice, that moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue and extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. As for the "social safety net" (what is that, the new term for Ponzi Scheme?) why do you need to steal my money to do this? Go save for yourself deadbeat. The only thing that will help the environment is the only thing that ever has - new technology, and that will be developed like everything else worthwhile, on the free and open market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 The truth is the truth. Harper walks the same path as BUSH.1) Wreckless tax cuts (just like Bush) 2) Increased military funding (just like Bush) 3) Increased drug war (just like Bush) 4) Increased national debt (just like Bush) 5) Republican style attack ads (just like Bush). 6) False, hypocritical claims of "fiscal conservatism" (like the Republicans). 7) Failed attempts at banishing party moderates (just like Cheney tried with Powell). 8) Let (CPP) CEO's keep huge bonuses while their corporation LOSES money (something Bush-like for sure). 9) No boosting of the social safety net (EI) during recession (like Bush). 10) Little or no plan for environment (just like Bush). NO CROSS-POSTINGCross posting is defined as posting the same information in more then one forum on the Internet. It is also considered cross posting if you post the same information in different areas of these forums. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.p...E=01&HID=17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 I'll ask again. How is Lisa Raitt a "neo-con"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingIggy Posted June 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 You claim to speak the truth. You are lying.There is no such thing as a wreckless tax cut because government spending is evil. You are right to attack increased military spending and the war on drugs - I have no complaint with your criticism here. I'm not going to discuss tactics because I don't care (with regards to the adds) and I mean every politician is a hypocrite so it's hardly a unique complaint here. Let me remind you of Goldwater's advice, that moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue and extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. As for the "social safety net" (what is that, the new term for Ponzi Scheme?) why do you need to steal my money to do this? Go save for yourself deadbeat. The only thing that will help the environment is the only thing that ever has - new technology, and that will be developed like everything else worthwhile, on the free and open market. So Norway is evil because they redistribute wealth to the poor ? Did you know they have the highest amount of millonaires per capita ? They stop oil industry nationalization at 50% so as to not totally destroy the capitalist engine segment. NORWAY = Best of BOTH worlds (capitalist and socialist). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingIggy Posted June 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 I'll ask again. How is Lisa Raitt a "neo-con"? By supporting... 1) Wreckless tax cuts (just like Bush) 2) Increased military funding (just like Bush) 3) Increased drug war (just like Bush) 4) Increased national debt (just like Bush) 5) Republican style attack ads (just like Bush). 6) False, hypocritical claims of "fiscal conservatism" (like the Republicans). 7) Failed attempts at banishing party moderates (just like Cheney tried with Powell). 8) Let (CPP) CEO's keep huge bonuses while their corporation LOSES money (something Bush-like for sure). 9) No boosting of the social safety net (EI) during recession (like Bush). 10) Little or no plan for environment (just like Bush). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted June 4, 2009 Report Share Posted June 4, 2009 So Norway is evil because they redistribute wealth to the poor ? Did you know they have the highest amount of millonaires per capita ? They stop oil industry nationalization at 50% so as to not totally destroy the capitalist engine segment.NORWAY = Best of BOTH worlds (capitalist and socialist). Until the oil stops flowing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 By supporting...1) Wreckless tax cuts (just like Bush) 2) Increased military funding (just like Bush) 3) Increased drug war (just like Bush) 4) Increased national debt (just like Bush) 5) Republican style attack ads (just like Bush). 6) False, hypocritical claims of "fiscal conservatism" (like the Republicans). 7) Failed attempts at banishing party moderates (just like Cheney tried with Powell). 8) Let (CPP) CEO's keep huge bonuses while their corporation LOSES money (something Bush-like for sure). 9) No boosting of the social safety net (EI) during recession (like Bush). 10) Little or no plan for environment (just like Bush). Your premise is ridiculous. President's of both parties have pursued tax cuts, increased military funding, increased national debt, political attack ads, etc, etc, etc. By your own joke of a definition of neo-con, Barack Obama would be a neo-con. As would Bill Clinton, John Kennedy, etc. 8) Let (CPP) CEO's keep huge bonuses while their corporation LOSES money (something Bush-like for sure). I'm not sure if you know, but it's not in the power or the right of any government to control or decide what a private company does with it's own earned income. 9) No boosting of the social safety net (EI) during recession (like Bush). Now you're just lying. Jobless benefits were both increased and extended under President Bush. Look it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 The truth is the truth. Harper walks the same path as BUSH.1) Wreckless tax cuts (just like Bush) 1) This is Canada, not the US. 2) Increased military funding (just like Bush) 1) This is Canada, not the US. 3) Increased drug war (just like Bush) 1) This is Canada, not the US. 4) Increased national debt (just like Bush) 1) This is Canada, not the US. 5) Republican style attack ads (just like Bush). 1) This is Canada, not the US. 6) False, hypocritical claims of "fiscal conservatism" (like the Republicans). 1) This is Canada, not the US. 7) Failed attempts at banishing party moderates (just like Cheney tried with Powell). 1) This is Canada, not the US. 8) Let (CPP) CEO's keep huge bonuses while their corporation LOSES money (something Bush-like for sure). 1) This is Canada, not the US. 9) No boosting of the social safety net (EI) during recession (like Bush). 1) This is Canada, not the US. 10) Little or no plan for environment (just like Bush). 1) This is Canada, not the US. See? We can ALL copy and paste our own posts. Anything you want to add, Mr. Highschool? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 Mr. NoBrain above ignores the 10 point policy pattern in order to ignore the Bush-Harper policy pattern. Actually, EVERYONE ignores the 10 point policy pattern in order to ignore the Bush-Harper-KingIggy policy pattern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 You never got a date in school, did you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.