Stephen Harper Tilting at Windmills

[madmax]

Apparently the Stimulus monies has been dispersed throughout the country. All is well, and the 50 Billion dollar deficit is a good thing.

Stephen Harper did his best Oprah, or Dr. Phil show and I can see next year, Jerry Springer isn't that far off.

Perhaps Senate seats for all media patsies.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/burea.../article1178335

Neither Mr. Ignatieff nor the Prime Minister were in the House of Commons for Question Period. Mr. Harper unveiled his report earlier Thursday from Cambridge, Ont., in an elaborate presentation hosted by Conservative Senator Mike Duffy, formerly of CTV’s Mike Duffy Live.

In the meantime.. Mr. Ignatief is going to have some Harsh Words for Mr. Harper.

BOO!

That's about all that's coming as Iggy tries to suck and blow at the same time. If the economic engines based upon the combustion engine... Iggy is going to say, yup it sucks, and blow off any possibility of an election.

Somehow the media are following him around, actually expecting him to do something. There's a joke.

The same clowns who turned their back on Severance and Pensions, and will do so again with EI have no intentions of going to the polls and they will get creamed if they do.

Expect a quite summer and a government that tells you it won't spend anymore money, but considering that this year is going to be flat and so is next year, the fact is, the Deficit will continue to add to the debt.

Harper soft selling the Canadian Economy is a total farce from an economist who doesn't understand what drives the Canadian Economy. Noticed it has SUCKED ever since he took office.

He has huge deficits because he believes in Tax Cuts for the Rich Corporations to help them leave, and Corporate Welfare for those which require an extra hand to relocate.

Revenues down, spending up..

How do you present to the Canadian Public a Balanced Budget, but only out by $50billion.

The Liberal and Conservative Solutions to the economy is to DUMP MONEY with no strings attached. To allow those with the most ability to pay revenues to the government a bailout and a break on taxes. And shift the burden, the deficit onto the people of Canada and their children and grand children.

[jdobbin]

That's about all that's coming as Iggy tries to suck and blow at the same time. If the economic engines based upon the combustion engine... Iggy is going to say, yup it sucks, and blow off any possibility of an election.

Sort of like Layton who will criticize Ignatieff if he votes no confidence yet feels that if he votes 91 times against Harper's government that he should get a free ride and not face an election.

The Liberal and Conservative Solutions to the economy is to DUMP MONEY with no strings attached. To allow those with the most ability to pay revenues to the government a bailout and a break on taxes. And shift the burden, the deficit onto the people of Canada and their children and grand children.

And the NDP solution differs?

The NDP truly say they don't want an election. If that is true, they will vote for the government. The Liberals can simply blame the NDP for the election since they had promised no election.

Edited June 12, 2009 by jdobbin

[madmax]

Dear Mr. Harper,

Please find below my suggestion for fixing Canada's economy. Instead of giving billions of dollars to banks and car companies, that will squander

the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use the following plan:

There are about 20 million people over 50 in the work force. Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire. Twenty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.

2) They MUST buy a new Canadian CAR. Twenty million cars ordered -

Auto Industry fixed.

3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage - Housing

Crisis fixed.

4) They must send their kids to school / college /university - Crime

rate fixed

5) Buy $50 of alcohol / tobacco / petrol a week... there's your money

back in duty / tax etc

It can't get any easier than that!

P.S. If more money is needed, have all members of parliament pay back

their falsely claimed expenses and second home allowances.

[Vancouver King]

Most likely you are right, big business will continue to drive the national agenda whether Ignatieff wins or not. The not so inconsequential difference is this: a Liberal govt is far less likely to impose social discrimination on minorities or impose a 1950's type chill on issues like abortion, law and order and soft drug use.

I can stomach big banks and big oil drafting national budgets, I will never accept Harper's commitment to a Texas style social order.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Dear Mr. Harper,

Please find below my suggestion for fixing Canada's economy. Instead of giving billions of dollars to banks and car companies, that will squander

the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use the following plan:

There are about 20 million people over 50 in the work force. Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire. Twenty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.

2) They MUST buy a new Canadian CAR. Twenty million cars ordered -

Auto Industry fixed.

3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage - Housing

Crisis fixed.

4) They must send their kids to school / college /university - Crime

rate fixed

5) Buy $50 of alcohol / tobacco / petrol a week... there's your money

back in duty / tax etc

It can't get any easier than that!

P.S. If more money is needed, have all members of parliament pay back

their falsely claimed expenses and second home allowances.

Are you running for office in my riding?

[punked]

Dear Mr. Harper,

Please find below my suggestion for fixing Canada's economy. Instead of giving billions of dollars to banks and car companies, that will squander

the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use the following plan:

There are about 20 million people over 50 in the work force. Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire. Twenty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.

2) They MUST buy a new Canadian CAR. Twenty million cars ordered -

Auto Industry fixed.

3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage - Housing

Crisis fixed.

4) They must send their kids to school / college /university - Crime

rate fixed

5) Buy $50 of alcohol / tobacco / petrol a week... there's your money

back in duty / tax etc

It can't get any easier than that!

P.S. If more money is needed, have all members of parliament pay back

their falsely claimed expenses and second home allowances.

There are only 10 million people over 45 in Canada. Nice math hot shot.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

There are only 10 million people over 45 in Canada. Nice math hot shot.

Does that mean we get a bigger split? I still love the idea!!

[Smallc]

That email is so stupid. You can't take a British MP expense scandal and pretend that the same applies to Canada.

[daniel]

Dear Mr. Harper,

...2) They MUST buy a new Canadian CAR. Twenty million cars ordered -

Auto Industry fixed.

4) They must send their kids to school / college /university - Crime

rate fixed

5) Buy $50 of alcohol / tobacco / petrol a week... there's your money

back in duty / tax etc

...

I like it, but it needs tweeking.

2) there's no such thing as a Canadian Car (except the ZENN). They're all foreign owned.

4) trouble kids drop out of school and our current school system is having a hard time getting them motivated to stay in.

5) omit Petrol - too much pollution and Green house gases. The oil companies are rich enough even in this current recession.

[Topaz]

I like it, but it needs tweeking.

2) there's no such thing as a Canadian Car (except the ZENN). They're all foreign owned.

4) trouble kids drop out of school and our current school system is having a hard time getting them motivated to stay in.

5) omit Petrol - too much pollution and Green house gases. The oil companies are rich enough even in this current recession.

It was brought out in the commons that the tories gave the oil sands ONE BILLION$$$$$$ that was to go the wind power. Prentice didn't deny it and said the wind power will get their share, we spend a billion to create pollution so we can charge industry that pollute???

[Jerry J. Fortin]

It was brought out in the commons that the tories gave the oil sands ONE BILLION$$$$$$ that was to go the wind power. Prentice didn't deny it and said the wind power will get their share, we spend a billion to create pollution so we can charge industry that pollute???

OH my, wonderful news for Alberta! At the expense of the rest of the nation I am afraid, and that truly sucks wind.

[Army Guy]

Max you got my vote.....

[Argus]

Dear Mr. Harper,

Please find below my suggestion for fixing Canada's economy. Instead of giving billions of dollars to banks and car companies, that will squander

the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use the following plan:

There are about 20 million people over 50 in the work force. Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

Unless my math is wrong that means we have to give them $20 trillion.

I'm not sure have that much lying around, and I suspect this would make the deficit somewhat larger.

[Topaz]

Unless my math is wrong that means we have to give them $20 trillion.

I'm not sure have that much lying around, and I suspect this would make the deficit somewhat larger.

Harper said on FOXNEWS tonight, he has had to borrow. What do you think the interest rate is that WE are paying?Is he printing money like the US or are we also being bought by China?

[normanchateau]

Most likely you are right, big business will continue to drive the national agenda whether Ignatieff wins or not. The not so inconsequential difference is this: a Liberal govt is far less likely to impose social discrimination on minorities or impose a 1950's type chill on issues like abortion, law and order and soft drug use.

I can stomach big banks and big oil drafting national budgets, I will never accept Harper's commitment to a Texas style social order.

Too bad that Ignatieff has chosen the high road by rejecting the idea of engaging in Harper-style negative advertising. Canadians need to be reminded about Harper's social conservatism and intolerance.

[Moonbox]

Too bad that Ignatieff has chosen the high road by rejecting the idea of engaging in Harper-style negative advertising. Canadians need to be reminded about Harper's social conservatism and intolerance.

Harper's social conservatism has had absolutely zero impact on his governing. It was also blown out of proportion by negative Liberal advertising in 2004-2006.

As for Ignatieff, he hasn't done much or said much of anything. Nobody has ANY idea what his plans are.

[daniel]

Harper's social conservatism has had absolutely zero impact on his governing. ...

It was his economic statement last November, more ideological than economic, that was the catalyst for the coalition. Harper's never been the same since. Imagine that - Liberal loser Dion ends up getting the better of tough-guy Harper.

[Molly]

Harper's social conservatism has had absolutely zero impact on his governing. It was also blown out of proportion by negative Liberal advertising in 2004-2006.

Excuse me?!!!

There are threads here discussing proposed hyper-authouritarian, revenge-based crime law... and you say that social conservatism has noting to do with it?

We have a creationist handling research money, yet you don't think that social conservatism has been expressed at all?

Wow!

[ToadBrother]

Harper's social conservatism has had absolutely zero impact on his governing. It was also blown out of proportion by negative Liberal advertising in 2004-2006.

As for Ignatieff, he hasn't done much or said much of anything. Nobody has ANY idea what his plans are.

And yet the Tories are sliding down the polls. The fact is clear. Harper is a spent force, caught between a caucus that doesn't want an election, and an Opposition leader who basically can force dictates down his throat. Maybe it's time to give Harper a good epithet like they used to in Medieval times (y'know, Ethelred the Unready, Charles the Bald, that sort of thing) and called Harper "Harper the Hapless".

[Moonbox]

Excuse me?!!!

Sorry, but did my rhetoric cause confusion? I should have said, "Almost" no impact.

There are threads here discussing proposed hyper-authouritarian, revenge-based crime law... and you say that social conservatism has noting to do with it?

SOMEONE LIKES TO EXAGGERATE!!!!

We have a creationist handling research money, yet you don't think that social conservatism has been expressed at all?

Wow!

Maybe a little. Nothing like you're saying. Many of his conservative principles (which for the record I don't agree with) have totally been ignored while he's governed.

[Moonbox]

And yet the Tories are sliding down the polls. The fact is clear. Harper is a spent force, caught between a caucus that doesn't want an election, and an Opposition leader who basically can force dictates down his throat.

Except Ignatieff hasn't forced anything. All he asked for was more information. That's hardly a tough ultimatum. Harper's already responded and said, "okay sure". This is about as bold as demanding the 'updates' when Ignatieff voted to pass Harper's budget. He's basically backing down but posturing as if he's playing tough.

Maybe it's time to give Harper a good epithet like they used to in Medieval times (y'know, Ethelred the Unready, Charles the Bald, that sort of thing) and called Harper "Harper the Hapless".

What would you call Ignatieff? Ignatieff the Blow-Hard? Ignatieff the Bluffer? Ignatieff the Unclear or Transient?

[normanchateau]

Harper's social conservatism has had absolutely zero impact on his governing.

His failed attempt to "revisit" same sex marriage in December, 2006 was despicable. Even his less socially conservative colleagues did not support his shameful motion.

http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/advocacy/mot061206.htm

[ToadBrother]

Except Ignatieff hasn't forced anything. All he asked for was more information. That's hardly a tough ultimatum. Harper's already responded and said, "okay sure". This is about as bold as demanding the 'updates' when Ignatieff voted to pass Harper's budget. He's basically backing down but posturing as if he's playing tough.

There's asking for more information, then there's holding a baseball bat with a nail in it and asking for information. Seeing as how quickly Harper went grovelling, we can safely assume that the baseball bat was involved.

What would you call Ignatieff? Ignatieff the Blow-Hard? Ignatieff the Bluffer? Ignatieff the Unclear or Transient?

I wouldn't call him anything. He's doing his job, but he's not, at least theoretically, in the position of power. When he gets his chance (and the odds seem pretty damned good that he will), then we can decide on whether he's been effective, or simply aimlessly bounced around just trying to hang on to power.

[Moonbox]

There's asking for more information, then there's holding a baseball bat with a nail in it and asking for information. Seeing as how quickly Harper went grovelling, we can safely assume that the baseball bat was involved.

It's nothing but bluster. If Ignatieff was ready to do ANYTHING he would have made demands of substance. He would have given concrete demands on what actually needed to be DONE to allow the government to continue. All he did was back down (again) and try and make a show of it.

I wouldn't call him anything. He's doing his job, but he's not, at least theoretically, in the position of power. When he gets his chance (and the odds seem pretty damned good that he will), then we can decide on whether he's been effective, or simply aimlessly bounced around just trying to hang on to power.

Theoretically he has all the power he needs to halt whatever wrongs Harper is doing. Theoretically if he was upset with the Harper government and was serious about doing things differently, he wouldn't continue to rant against Harper's government while meekly voting WITH it.

[Smallc]

It's nothing but bluster. If Ignatieff was ready to do ANYTHING he would have made demands of substance. He would have given concrete demands on what actually needed to be DONE to allow the government to continue.

Actually, that would go against his strategy. He's always said that it's up to the government to come up with the ideas and the answers. He's not going to bring things forward because it isn't his job. This is a different kind of politician and many on here don't seem to realize it.