Argus Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 That's fine I suppose if they're from the prairies, I mean Joe Clark was from the prairies and he was a very broadly likeable PC conservative. There was very little 'conservative' about Clark. Anyway, he might have been from the prairies, but he had the sense to attend law school in Quebec. That was what made him acceptable and not considered an outsider like Harper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Nobody would vote for someone who actually was one of those. That wouldn't stop the left from making the accusation against someone who was not far enough to the left for their liking. Any leader who does not have the proper credentials, ie, is not from the proper schools in central Canada, will be subjected to the relentless hostility and contempt of the academic/media/artistic/political elites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Personally, I'd rather history dealt with him honestly. We can't improve if we can't admit our mistakes. Still, I've heard people claim that Hitler was a great leader who saved Germany but just went mad at the end and less than a year ago, a huge crowd celebrated Stalin's 135th birthday so I'm sure there will be lots of people who will be in permanent denial about Harper too. Your remarks comparing Harper with Hitler and Stalin are infantile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Chretien had enough brains to stay out of Iraq, while Harper supported going in. So yeah, comparing the two is wrong. Chretien got us into Afghanistan, which was worse and lasted longer. Why in Christ does he get so much credit for this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Global crisis, chretiens mess in afghanistan , the list goes on. And comparing harper to those two is disgusting. It seems to me ,you do not know history at all. Grow up. Do you think an arrogant tone makes you look smart? Or just arrogant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Chretien got us into Afghanistan, which was worse and lasted longer. Why in Christ does he get so much credit for this? Maybe because he knew the difference between what was an illegal war, and one that wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Your remarks comparing Harper with Hitler and Stalin are infantile. I never compared him with Hitler or Stalin - I just used them as extreme examples of how people will distort circumstances or focus on particular elements to defend any leader. People have found ways to glorify Hitler and Stalin so it's understandable that people can find ways to portray Harper as a great leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrypenguin Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 History is far too kind to PET. interest rate at 21% for a start. The NEP... The fact that anyone likes PET is insane. Justin's dad was a swine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Do you think an arrogant tone makes you look smart? Or just arrogant? How do you think comparing Harper to Hitler and Stalin makes you look? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Maybe because he knew the difference between what was an illegal war, and one that wasn't. Spare me your fatuous technical arguments on the legality of bombing the shit out of some scumbag. The results for Canada were that we lost a couple of hundred people to no real purpose in Afghanistan, where we likely would have taken far fewer casualties in Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 I never compared him with Hitler or Stalin - I just used them as extreme examples of how people will distort circumstances or focus on particular elements to defend any leader. Oh spare me. What you produced was an example of hyperbolic ideological hatred, which, by the way, would have been more at home Stalin or Hitler than Harper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 (edited) History is far too kind to PET. interest rate at 21% for a start. The NEP... The fact that anyone likes PET is insane. Justin's dad was a swine. No, he was an intellectual who had grand visions and wanted to do well but lacked patience for the small details, including the grubby business of worrying about money. And, btw, we can no more blame him for 21% interest rates than we can blame Harper for the recession. Of course, if he hadn't borrowed money hand over fist the 21% interest rates would not have damaged us so badly and caused the even higher buildup of debt. Edited October 24, 2015 by Argus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 How do you think comparing Harper to Hitler and Stalin makes you look? If I did that, it would make me look hyperbolic - but I didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Oh spare me. What you produced was an example of hyperbolic ideological hatred, which, by the way, would have been more at home Stalin or Hitler than Harper. Spare yourself. I pointed out that any leader can be portrayed in a positive light by someone who is sufficiently ideologically motivated. The people who are now working overtime trying to salvage Harper's reputation are being pathetic. Anyone who can honestly call Harper a great leader should study up on the art of leadership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Harper has proved the old adage that right wingers believe that governments can't do anything well and then elect governments who prove themselves right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrypenguin Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Spare yourself. I pointed out that any leader can be portrayed in a positive light by someone who is sufficiently ideologically motivated. The people who are now working overtime trying to salvage Harper's reputation are being pathetic. Anyone who can honestly call Harper a great leader should study up on the art of leadership. You hate Harper, we get it. I hate that pathetic PM designate we have because I believe the people who think he will drive change to Ottawa are delusional. All that man child knows is how to spend money, and lots of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastRunner Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 You hate Harper, we get it. I hate that pathetic PM designate we have because I believe the people who think he will drive change to Ottawa are delusional. All that man child knows is how to spend money, and lots of it. Man child? Pathetic? That's the best you can come up with? This post is nothing but bashing with no facts to support it. You are talking out of your ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 24, 2015 Report Share Posted October 24, 2015 Spare yourself. I pointed out that any leader can be portrayed in a positive light by someone who is sufficiently ideologically motivated. The people who are now working overtime trying to salvage Harper's reputation are being pathetic. Anyone who can honestly call Harper a great leader should study up on the art of leadership. What is a great leader? I think people are mistaking success for greatness. He was a succesful leader, and even into his final year many polls showed people felt he would be a better leader than Trudeau and Mulcair, despite his obvious shortcomings in the charisma department. A great leader, however, would have been able to rally more of the herd into believing in his views rather than bending his views to accomodate the thoughts of the herd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted October 25, 2015 Report Share Posted October 25, 2015 Spare me your fatuous technical arguments on the legality of bombing the shit out of some scumbag. The results for Canada were that we lost a couple of hundred people to no real purpose in Afghanistan, where we likely would have taken far fewer casualties in Iraq. Perhaps you don't understand the UN conventions on what is a legal war. Or perhaps fatuousness is just your domain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted October 25, 2015 Report Share Posted October 25, 2015 A great leader, however, would have been able to rally more of the herd into believing in his views rather than bending his views to accomodate the thoughts of the herd. I think you're confusing dictator with leader. In a democracy, a leader is supposed to care what people think and say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted October 25, 2015 Report Share Posted October 25, 2015 Maybe some Canadians hate Harper but for me, I don't know him personally but I hated how he ran the government and how he acted in Parliament in QP and how he never apologized for anything until...he lost. I don't like the way he interfered in the senate business and all the scams and schemes, and times to the Supreme Court fighting in court just to lose and all the half truths, the lies etc. etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 25, 2015 Report Share Posted October 25, 2015 Perhaps you don't understand the UN conventions on what is a legal war. Or perhaps fatuousness is just your domain. They say a lawyer would defend Hitler, and get him off scott free if he could, because nothing matters but the law, however you bend or twist it. It requires no sense of morality, ethics or moral values. I could not possibly care less what UN conventions say about anything whatsoever. I think the UN is nothing but a collection of dictators, murders and thieves. Those who seek to guide their actions according to the approval of such an organization rather than acting out of morality or even common sense are those who should never be allowed near any power whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 25, 2015 Report Share Posted October 25, 2015 I think you're confusing dictator with leader. In a democracy, a leader is supposed to care what people think and say. A leader leads. You seem to want a follower. A follower constantly seeks the polls to find out where the bandwagon is headed, then runs to jump aboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted October 25, 2015 Report Share Posted October 25, 2015 They say a lawyer would defend Hitler, and get him off scott free if he could, because nothing matters but the law, however you bend or twist it. It requires no sense of morality, ethics or moral values. I could not possibly care less what UN conventions say about anything whatsoever. I think the UN is nothing but a collection of dictators, murders and thieves. Those who seek to guide their actions according to the approval of such an organization rather than acting out of morality or even common sense are those who should never be allowed near any power whatever. So but you are OK with lying about reasons to invade a country, such as WMD. Let's hope you never get near any power! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 25, 2015 Report Share Posted October 25, 2015 So but you are OK with lying about reasons to invade a country, such as WMD. Let's hope you never get near any power! I don't know if they were lying so much as mistaken, and then determined to convince others that their belief was true. I don't believe I have ever, at any point, expressed admiration or approval for the intelligence or abilities of the Bush administration. I simply can't think of any logical reason for them to invade Iraq if they didn't think there were WMDs there. And no, sorry, I'm not buying into any conspiracy theories which involve arms manufacturers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts