Chrétien - Do Nothing PM

[Montgomery Burns]

There is no majority of scientists who back global warming because it doesn't exist.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Try these guys: http://www.ucsusa.org

or these folks: http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming....tent/index.html

how about here: http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/default.asp

And for us Cannucks: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/climate_change/..._ecosystems.asp

I think you might have bought into ExxonMobile myths and disinformation. You can't fight the science though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, the radical David Suzuki.

Yay.

[Montgomery Burns]

Now we're on to Chretien bashing. What's the matter Right; run out of current topics?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Awwww, perhaps you would be more comfortable in the US forum where you can bash President Bush for every single evil in this world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOL, well if the shoe fits.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, you can wear it.

[Montgomery Burns]

Jean Chretien was a disgrace and an embarrassment as a Prime Minister. God (sorry for the cuss word, liberals) knows, Canadians cringed every time this marble-mouthed buffoon opened his mouth.

This was a man (I use the term loosely) who was greedily taking in millions of dollars of blood money from Saddam Hussein. This is a "man" who refused to enforce the broken ceasefire or the 16 broken UN resolutions; a "man" who ignored the Al Qaeda/Saddam ties while greedily accepting Saddam's millions off the back of the bloodied Iraqi citizens; a "man" who looked the other way while Saddam was sending $25,000 cheques to teh families of displaced Arab homicide bombers; a "man" who looked the other way while his benefactor was shooting at US and UK airplanes on a near daily basis; a "man" who looked the other way while the President of his leading trading partner was almost assassianted by Saddam Hussein, and a "amn" who looked the other way while Saddam was allowing Al Qaeda to stay at the Salman Pak terrorist training camp.

About the only good thing I can say about that slimy good-for-nothing weasel is that he didn't roll back the progressive GST back to the regressive FST. When Mulroney scapped the horrid FST (a hidden tax that started at 9% and quickly rose to 13.5%), my prices went down about 2% and that is good for my customers - the people that keep me in business.

Additionally, businesses get to use the GST paid as a credit towards the GST they pay; ergo, it helps free up money for businesses. And that is a good thing. Businesses create jobs. I've never heard of too many people making $20 to $25 thousand a year creating jobs.

[newbie]

Oh, the radical David Suzuki.

Yay. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I shouldn't have to remind you that Dr. Suzuki is a world recognized scientist. And yes, he is radical about our ecological and environmental future. You can read about him here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Suzuki. I take his word over any source I've seen yet on this thread.

[Argus]

Like I have said numerous times. the far left is frightening.  They are not interested in opposing views at all. 

I agree that the far left can be frightening.

I simply disagree that anyone to the left of Jesse Helms is "far left".

[kimmy]

The Mulroney goverment found a great new way to distribute who paid how much tax.  The GST allowed them to drop the progressiveness of the income tax system (to 3 levels) and reduce business taxes. 

Really, only end consumers pay GST.  Businesses get the GST they spend back.  So this huge collection of taxes is just from Canadian consumers pockets...  Business pays nothing... that's why they didn't fight it too hard....

What's your point? End consumers paid the cost of the MST too.

How about a another perspective...  We don't tax goods that we sell to foreigners... we only tax our own people....

Of course. Why would anybody assume the Canadian government would be able to go about taxing people in other countries?

We pay GST on stuff that we import,

indeed. If a Canadian product and its foreign-made competitor are sitting on the shelf next to each other, then it's only fair that there should be an equal tax on both. If the price of the Canadian product includes a 13.5% manufacturer's tax, and the price of its foreign-made competitor includes no tax at all, then the Canadian product (and Canadian producer) has been arbitrarily discriminated against in the market place.

but we don't pay it on stuff that we export....

Of course not. Why would we punish Canadian employers trying to compete in the global marketplace?

  Canada loses taxes when we export,

How do you figure? If the Mississauga Widget Company sells 1000 widgets at $1 apiece in Canada, and another 10000 widgets at $1 apiece abroad, then the Canadian government collects $70 in GST. Perhaps you are thinking that if all 11000 widgets are sold in Canada, then the government could collect $770 in GST, rather than just $70. Perhaps that would be the case if Canadians actually wanted to buy 11000 widgets, more likely it is the case that if MWC was unable to export the 10000 widgets they sell abroad, they'd simply have to cut production and fire a number of their employees. Perhaps it is your view that it was a better idea to tax all 11000 widgets before they leave the factory, but again, why is it a good idea to hamper Canadian companies with higher production costs in comparison to their foreign competitors? Perhaps you feel that with the 13.5% manufacturer's tax that would have been applied before the GST, then we could have collected $1485 in tax. Except that the Belfast Widget Company sells widgets at $1.05, and with the manufacturer's tax applied, Mississauga Widget Company's widgets now cost $1.13. So their market share drops dramatically, because instead of 5% cheaper than the competition, they're now 8% more expensive. Again, before long the Mississauga Widget Company probably has to cut costs, cut production, and cut jobs.

and Canada takes from Canadians when we import ....

Why wouldn't we? Why would we give Canadian consumers an incentive to support producers in other countries at the expense of Canadian producers?

When Joe Consumer is at the store looking at widgets, why would we give him an incentive to reach for the one that is produced in a foreign country over the Canadian-made one? You're giving Joe the choice of paying 13.5 cents of tax if he buys Canadian or no tax at all if he buys foreign. You want Joe Consumer to pay a 13.5% penalty for supporting Canadian jobs. Why? Do you hate people in Canada's manufacturing sector? Do you want Canada to return to a fur and cod based economy?

-k

[Teddy Ballgame]

- Chretien was the most mediocre moron to occupy the prime ministership since the 19th century. He spoke neither offical language, looked like the driver of the getway car, attained the Liberal leadership through seniorty rather than merit, lied his way into 24 Sussex with the infamous conjob called The Red Book of 1993 and always put short term partisan political considerations (especially where Quebec was concerned) above the long term good of the nation.

- His only accomplishment while in office was that he faithfully executed the courageous and bold and beneficial economic policy agenda of Brian Mulroney - the agenda Chretien he promised to scarp on order to steal power - including free trade, the GST, deregulation, privatization, tight monetary policy with attendant low interest rates and, a new emphasis on Canadian prodcutivity and competitiveness to continue and protect and enhance our status as the greatest export nation, proportionally, in the world.

- His lies, boondoggles, bungling, burglary and missed opportunities are too numerous to list here and in any case have mainly been covered in earlier posts in this thread as well as in many of my own posts in other threads.

- But I will leave this topic with an anecdote from last night's Ottawa dinner to honour Brian Mulroney as Canada's greenest prime minister. This has been covered in detail in my own thread on that honour but it is worth mentioning here that Chretien receieved NONE of the 12 votes from the environmental experts on the jury (Mulroney received five of the 12 votes from this mainly left leaning panel) for the simple reason that on the environmental file as with so many other files Chretien's initiatives were utterly useless. Even the rabidly Liberal individual he made his Minister of the Environment, Sheila Copps, refused to vote for him and chose MacDonald instead.

- In any case, the co-host of the event was CBC's Rick Mercer, not the Tories' greatest fan, and in his humorous remarks he noted that some prime ministers did not accomplish the results Mulroney did because "they simply weren't in office for long enough to get things done."

- Mercer than added, "I refer, of course, to John Turner, Kim Campbell and Jean Chretien."

- Since everyone there knew that Chretien had been in office for more than a year longer than Mulroney, this deservedly brought the house down. Chretien, as he is with most in the know political observers, thus was a laughing stock last night as he usually is at other times.

[Black Dog]

TB: Why the obsession with Liberal leaders who are either out of office, dead or both? Do you have such a fixation on the past that you need to dredge up a dormant thread just to take a swing at a guy who's been out of politics for three years? Are you frustrated because the Saint-Rémi-de-Napierville cemetery caretakers keep thwarting your attempts to exhume and defile Trudeau's corpse and are thus moving on to quicker targets? Anyway, I can't wait to see you unleash your rapier wit unleashed against other symbols of Liberal perfidy like this guy or this guy. And to think you're giving all of this to us for free when you could be selling it....

[Teddy Ballgame]

TB: 1/ Why the obsession with Liberal leaders who are either out of office, dead or both? 2/ Do you have such a fixation on the past that you need to dredge up a dormant thread just to take a swing at a guy who's been out of politics for three years? 3/ And to think you're giving all of this to us for free when you could be selling it....

- BD - 1/ I think that if we do not know our history, we are doomed to repeat it. I also think that knowing how previous leaders performed and in what context is essential to making realistic and reasonable evaluations of our current leaders and how they perform. As well, I believe that the main stream media is decidedly liberal in its orientation and accordingly the achievements of former Liberal leaders such as Trudeau and Chretien are embellished by the media while their transgressions and foul ups are ignored or airbrushed while Conservative leaders past and present get the reverse treatment. Since I contend that a healthy democracy requires at least two parties alternating power on a regular basis rather than the Liberals ruling in perpetuity, I consider it to be relevant to remind others of the dark sides of the Liberal leaders that the Liberal oriented media would prefer not to mention. For all of these reasons, I think we should discuss our political history, even history that goes way, way back by your standards, back as far as three years and even farther.

2/ If you don't like reading about political history and/or about former Liberal leaders, THEN DON'T READ THEM. I didn't "dredge up" this dormant thread, I noticed in the summary information that some other posters were reading it today so I was curious to read it myself. When I read it, I thought of Rick Mercer's hilarious put down of Chretien last night and decided to share it with others here by adding it to this thread. Obviously, you only like Mercer when he is cutting up the Conservative leaders. Tough. Nor did I initiaite the threads on Trudeau (or on Mulroney) as part of some obsession as you allege but because they were in the news THIS WEEK with the award to Brian and the book about Pierre's checkered youth. AGAIN, IF YOU DON'T LIKE THIS KIND OF THREAD, DON'T READ IT.

3/ Where did I say I could be selling this thread, my dissembling little nutter? Only my A material sells and sometimes it does not. Obviously, sitting down and typing without pause a quick political commentary does not constitute my A material. But it is certainly superior to anything you have written here that I have read. (Although in fairness, I - unlike you with my posts - don't bother to obsessively follow you around the board making sarcastic comments that add nothing to the discussion so I have read mercifully little of your left wing screeds.) Also unlike you, at least I do have A material and I do get paid for it.

PS ... You mentioned in your snarky little note that Chretien has "been out of politics for three years". In actual fact, Chretien has only been out of politics for two years and three months. You didn't even know when Chretien had left office! But I understand. How could you know? He was A DO NOTHING PM. I am reminded of a do nothing president named Calvin Coolidge. When he died and Dorothy Parker was informed, she asked "How could they tell?".

PS2 ... How far back - in your mind - are we allowed to go in our political discussions on this board. You've said that three years is too far back. How about two years or one year or one month or last week? Is yesterday OK with you?

PS3 ... Since this thread the re-emergence of which so offends you was started last September, more than 18 months after Chretien's retirement, why didn't you write a stupid horse's ass post like thisd one THEN to whomever started the thread? Oh, wait, I get it! You are going to play tag team with your good pal Biblio Bublia aka Rudyard the Insane aka The Lotus Land Lunatic and follow me around like an obsessed nutter, unable to add anything of any value, able only to yap incessently at my heels like an annoying little terrier. If you do this, you will be ignored just as he is being ignored.

PS4 ... If you are able to read simple numbers, you will readily see that threads initiated by me on this forum generate more readership and more responses than the average thread which means, smart ass, that even though YOU don't happen to like my writing (even though you can't seem to keep yourself from reading and responding to it), some other posters here DO. So don't be such a self centered horse's ass. Allow others to choose what they might wish to read and discuss. And you, why you can simply go away.

[Black Dog]

3/ Where did I say I could be selling this thread, my dissembling little nutter? Only my A material sells and sometimes it does not. Obviously, sitting down and typing without pause a quick political commentary does not constitute my A material. But it is certainly superior to anything you have written here that I have read. (Although in fairness, I - unlike you with my posts - don't bother to obsessively follow you around the board making sarcastic comments that add nothing to the discussion so I have read mercifully little of your left wing screeds.) Also unlike you, at least I do have A material and I do get paid for it.

Hmmm...you can't spell and proper grammar and punctuation are foreign concepts to you: hardly the marks of a pro. So, if you're wondering what I'm saying here it is: you're lying about your "accomplishments". Real pros don't need to trumpet their accomplishments every single time they open their yaps, whereas those who's accomplishments are minimal at best talk of little else.

PS3 ... Since this thread the re-emergence of which so offends you was started last September, more than 18 months after Chretien's retirement, why didn't you write a stupid horse's ass post like thisd one THEN to whomever started the thread? Oh, wait, I get it! You are going to play tag team with your good pal Biblio Bublia aka Rudyard the Insane aka The Lotus Land Lunatic and follow me around like an obsessed nutter, unable to add anything of any value, able only to yap incessently at my heels like an annoying little terrier. If you do this, you will be ignored just as he is being ignored

What and further swell your ego? Pfft. (Frankly it wouldn't surprise me if your "stalkers" are your own creations: after all they do seem to have a pretty keen sense of what webforum you're going to appear in next...)

PS4 ... If you are able to read simple numbers, you will readily see that threads initiated by me on this forum generate more readership and more responses than the average thread which means, smart ass, that even though YOU don't happen to like my writing (even though you can't seem to keep yourself from reading and responding to it), some other posters here DO. So don't be such a self centered horse's ass. Allow others to choose what they might wish to read and discuss. And you, why you can simply go away.

I imagine you probably actually tallied up those numbers, then? Because, once again, I call bullshit.

[Drea]

3/ Where did I say I could be selling this thread, my dissembling little nutter?

Rude comment directed at the poster not the issue...

a stupid horse's ass post like thisd one THEN to whomever started the thread? Oh, wait, I get it! You are going to play tag team with your good pal Biblio Bublia aka Rudyard the Insane aka The Lotus Land Lunatic and follow me around like an obsessed nutter, unable to add anything of any value, able only to yap incessently at my heels like an annoying little terrier.

More rude comments directed at the poster not the issue...

PS4 ... If you are able to read simple numbers, you will readily see that threads initiated by me on this forum generate more readership and more responses than the average thread which means, smart ass, that even though YOU don't happen to like my writing (even though you can't seem to keep yourself from reading and responding to it), some other posters here DO. So don't be such a self centered horse's ass. Allow others to choose what they might wish to read and discuss. And you, why you can simply go away.

And again...

Have you read this?

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.p...&CODE=01&HID=17

BE POLITE AND RESPECT OTHERS

Mapleleafweb operates these forums in the hopes that they will promote intelligent, honest and responsible discussion. We encourage you to speak your mind on relevant issues in a thoughtful way. Please respect others using this board and treat them with respect and dignity.

NO PERSONAL ATTACKS

Please respect others using this board by refraining from personal attacks. There is a huge difference between disagreeing with a thought or idea and attacking an individual. We encourage lively debate and intelligent critiques of others viewpoints, not tirades against another poster.

[August1991]

So, was Chrétien a Do Nothing PM?

And who's right? BD or TB?

And finally, given Mulroney's book, is Chretien capable of writing a book, in English or French?

Edited August 24, 2007 by August1991