Why we must prevent Harper from becoming PM

[kimmy]

The most important thing to note about responses like this is that ultimately it shows that there is an complete acceptance of the issue raised about Harper. There is clearly no defence

I've already responded to your previous criticisms of Harper.

As for Harper's inexperience on the world stage, sure. I agree. I just don't think it's a major issue-- not when compared to all of Paul Martin's shortcomings and the personal baggage he carries.

And here's an interesting thought: Paul Martin's own party is going to axe him after this election anyway, and whoever takes his place will be inexperienced on the world stage too.

-k

{You really think we should choose a party that we know is going to be picking a new leader shortly?}

[sage]

How is it international experience in foreign affairs is a requirement to be PM of Canada?

There is absolutely no such requirement to be president of the US (in a role that has a much greater role in international affairs). In fact it generally never happens.

[mowich]

As Mr. Harper correctly pointed out during the discussions with Peter Mansbridge and audience, most new PMs had little or no experience on the International stage. I do not see his lack of exposure in any way diminishing his capacity to represent us during talks with foreign leaders. If anything I believe that other heads of state will welcome his forthrightness and see it as a refreshing change from the wishy-washy, policy flipping of Martin..

I can't believe I had to get to the last page before we actually got back on topic. M/

Three days to go and it won't matter a whit anyway. Mr. Harper will form the next government with my blessings and best wishes. Canadians will wake up to a new way of governance on Jan. 24th. GO CONSERVATIVES.

[justcrowing]

Another area Harper has no experience is in the area of CORRUPTION!! Should we be worried?

Go Conservatives Go!! Get that majority.

[Melanie_]

How is it international experience in foreign affairs is a requirement to be PM of Canada?

There is absolutely no such requirement to be president of the US (in a role that has a much greater role in international affairs). In fact it generally never happens.

Yeah, that's worked out so well for the Americans.

[emailforcanada]

Bush PR people wrote superb speeches for him that fooled a lot of people. While Harper has a well run campaign in recent weeks, the true measure of hwat you can expect is from him, looking at what he said over the last few years. Globe and Mail just ran a 2 page spread of one of his speeches to the right wing in the US. This is the true Harper and considering he was talking to, this is the true allegiance.

Nothing ... abolutely nothing can change or take back those words.

Stop Harper tomorrow.

How is it international experience in foreign affairs is a requirement to be PM of Canada?

There is absolutely no such requirement to be president of the US (in a role that has a much greater role in international affairs). In fact it generally never happens.

Yeah, that's worked out so well for the Americans.

[August1991]

Globe and Mail just ran a 2 page spread of one of his speeches to the right wing in the US. This is the true Harper and considering he was talking to, this is the true allegiance.

Is this the speech you are referring to?

Text of Stephen Harper's speech to the Council for National Policy, June 1997

Ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by giving you a big welcome to Canada. Let's start up with a compliment. You're here from the second greatest nation on earth. But seriously, your country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world.

CBC

Did the Globe publish that speech too? The CBC has had it posted on their web site for ages. (The CBC and the Globe are both based in Toronto, I note.)

I found Harper's speech interesting, and thought-provoking. It lacked elegance.

The reaction to it in English-Canada reminds me of the reactions to many of Trudeau's essays written in the late 1950s and early 1960s, before he became PM. At various times, people were always digging up quotes of Trudeau.

In Harper, Canada will once again have a thinking prime minister.

[emailforcanada]

Hmmm Harper... a thinking PM eh? Yes, thinking about how to suck up to Bush... ..thinking how on earth to implement the poorly thought out cg tax promise... that is one promise that has enormous ramifications in terms of managmenet, costs, figuring out the rules ,exceptions and monitoring. Certainly not a sign of PM material who thinks things through. He wasnt thinking when was decided to puch so hard for us to follow Bush into the Iraq mess.

He would need to be thinking about how to achieve his rw agenda without facing the inevitable backlash.

Harper has done a fine job of hiding his true face this time around. He and his team have done much thinking about winning and election strategies this election, and not at all enough about Canada' best interest long term.

The two page spread shows that he is willing the belittle Canada when it suits him.

Slightly different angle to the term ...thinking.

Globe and Mail just ran a 2 page spread of one of his speeches to the right wing in the US. This is the true Harper and considering he was talking to, this is the true allegiance.

Is this the speech you are referring to?

Text of Stephen Harper's speech to the Council for National Policy, June 1997

Ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by giving you a big welcome to Canada. Let's start up with a compliment. You're here from the second greatest nation on earth. But seriously, your country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world.

CBC

Did the Globe publish that speech too? The CBC has had it posted on their web site for ages. (The CBC and the Globe are both based in Toronto, I note.)

I found Harper's speech interesting, and thought-provoking. It lacked elegance.

The reaction to it in English-Canada reminds me of the reactions to many of Trudeau's essays written in the late 1950s and early 1960s, before he became PM. At various times, people were always digging up quotes of Trudeau.

In Harper, Canada will once again have a thinking prime minister.

[geoffrey]

Globe and Mail just ran a 2 page spread of one of his speeches to the right wing in the US. This is the true Harper and considering he was talking to, this is the true allegiance.

Is this the speech you are referring to?

Text of Stephen Harper's speech to the Council for National Policy, June 1997

Ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by giving you a big welcome to Canada. Let's start up with a compliment. You're here from the second greatest nation on earth. But seriously, your country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world.

CBC

Did the Globe publish that speech too? The CBC has had it posted on their web site for ages. (The CBC and the Globe are both based in Toronto, I note.)

I found Harper's speech interesting, and thought-provoking. It lacked elegance.

The reaction to it in English-Canada reminds me of the reactions to many of Trudeau's essays written in the late 1950s and early 1960s, before he became PM. At various times, people were always digging up quotes of Trudeau.

In Harper, Canada will once again have a thinking prime minister.

August, if Harper is another Trudeau I just started voting Green.

I see your point, Harper is an intellectual, and this is both good and bad, either way, when this type of person gets into power, real changes are made. Lets see what he's up to.

Just watch him.

[August1991]

August, if Harper is another Trudeau I just started voting Green.

I see your point, Harper is an intellectual, and this is both good and bad, either way, when this type of person gets into power, real changes are made. Lets see what he's up to.

Just watch him.

I don't know if I would call Harper an intellectual (whatever that means). And I certainly wouldn't say he's like Trudeau.

It seems to me that he is a thinking man, and clearly he has thought about Canada. That makes for the comparison with Trudeau. (This idea is not original and comes from William Johnson's book.)

I agree that that is both good and bad. In the case of Harper, we'll have to wait and see.

[tml12]

August, if Harper is another Trudeau I just started voting Green.

I see your point, Harper is an intellectual, and this is both good and bad, either way, when this type of person gets into power, real changes are made. Lets see what he's up to.

Just watch him.

I don't know if I would call Harper an intellectual (whatever that means). And I certainly wouldn't say he's like Trudeau.

It seems to me that he is a thinking man, and clearly he has thought about Canada. That makes for the comparison with Trudeau. (This idea is not original and comes from William Johnson's book.)

I agree that that is both good and bad. In the case of Harper, we'll have to wait and see.

Harper is a scholar in the field of Canadian studies and economics but he is not an intellectual.

Intellectuals are truly genious individuals. Clinton, Trudeau, and Ignatieff--like their policies or not--they are brilliant men.

What we have in this election in the Liberal and Conservative camp are individuals who are scholars in their field: Martin (Philosophy/Law) and Harper (Economics/Canadian Studies).

[Montgomery Burns]

How is it international experience in foreign affairs is a requirement to be PM of Canada?

There is absolutely no such requirement to be president of the US (in a role that has a much greater role in international affairs). In fact it generally never happens.

Yeah, that's worked out so well for the Americans.

Indeed it has. Hundreds of millions of Eastern Europeans liberated, in great part, by Ronald Reagan. Over 50 million Muslims recently liberated, in great part, by President Bush.

Not too shabby.

[geoffrey]

Indeed it has. Hundreds of millions of Eastern Europeans liberated, in great part, by Ronald Reagan. Over 50 million Muslims recently liberated, in great part, by President Bush.

Not too shabby.

You know those lefties don't believe freedom is important, they'd rather see dictatorships that occasionally feed their people in order to raise armies or what not.

[tml12]

Indeed it has. Hundreds of millions of Eastern Europeans liberated, in great part, by Ronald Reagan. Over 50 million Muslims recently liberated, in great part, by President Bush.

Not too shabby.

You know those lefties don't believe freedom is important, they'd rather see dictatorships that occasionally feed their people in order to raise armies or what not.

The left says only the right is hypocritical. You know what? We do what is best for the country. The right-wing is patriotic and supports our armed forces and those who defend our freedom.

The left in this country would have us rally around our supposedly socialistic health care system which, , isn't even left-wing anymore.

[BubberMiley]

Over 50 million Muslims recently liberated, in great part, by President Bush.

Liberated from this mortal coil, anyway.

[tml12]

Over 50 million Muslims recently liberated, in great part, by President Bush.

Liberated from this mortal coil, anyway.

You couldn't be more left, , I mean right Bubber!!!

[Guest eureka]

WHO WILL STAND FOR CANADA?

"Not I" says Stephen Harper. I say, "it doesn't matter if Canada has one national government, two national governments, or ten national governments."

Who will stand for law and order in Canada?

"Not I" says Stephen Harper. The Conservatives will throw criminals in jail for a long time - if they are caught. They will do nothing to deal with the causes of crime.

Who will sustain the caring society that Canada has struggled to build and still has to improve?

"Not I" says Stephen Harper.

The Conservatives will cancel the childcare agreements with the Provinces and give some people, need it or not, a few (taxable) dollars instead. They will exacerbate an already income inequality situation and put Canada to the bottom of the list of advanced countries, along with the USA, in its poverty rates.

Who will stand for Canada's healthcare?

"Not I" says Stephen Harper.

Harper once wrote as policy that there should be different access for the rich, the middle class, and the poor. He also wrote that the federal government should get out of healthcare altogether.

Who will stand for civil society in Canada?

"Not I" says Harper. Harper told a rabid "Right" Wing audience in the USA that they were an "example and an inspiration."

Who will stand for the generations to come: to preserve a liveable planet?

"Not I" says Stephen Harper. Harper will renege on Canada's commitment to the world to do its part in seeking to mitigate the catastrophical effects of climate change,

Canadians should look very hard at the change they are being offered. Is it just "chump change," and who are the chumps.

Is the unholy alliance of neo-liberals and social conservatives who have joined together as "Conservatives really what Canadians want to govern them and to determine the future shape of Canada and Canadian society?

Voters can stand up for Canada. Voters can stand up for the real Canadian values of both economic and social progress. Voters can send the message that a caring society is not an anachronism..

Voters can deny support to these "Conservatives" who do not have a conservative principle to proclaim.

Those who have not found the Liberal message to be the answer they are seeking can look at the NDP. There they may find an ideal that does stand for Canada and for humanity.

[Harare]

Hey Eureka may I suggest that you immigrate to the workers paradise of strong central government, free health care and education and income equality for all...............Cuba.

When I see Libs insiders sharing their ill gotten gains, cushy jobs and pensions with the poor that you keep proclaiming is the rock on which Liberalism is built I might consider your views.

Guess what kind of healthcare Alexa McDonaugh arranged for her mother.

Bloody hypocrites the lot of them,

[geoffrey]

A vote for the Liberals is a vote for a criminal organization. As your making up quotes from Harper, I'll post real quotes from Gomery:

"The public trust in the in its system of government was subverted and betrayed, and Canadians were outraged, not only be cause public funds were wasted and misappropriated, but also because no one was held responsible or punished for his misconduct."

-- Justice John Gomery

"Good intentions are not an excuse for maladministration of this magnitude," he said.

-- Justice John Gomery

"Mr. Pelletier failed to take the most elementary precautions against mismanagement – and Mr. Chrétien was responsible for him."

-- Justice John Gomery

The leader of the Liberals criminal mismanged our money, setup a kickback scheme, in which our money ended up in the Liberal Party's bank account. Thief and fraud in the clearest sense. If this was a mafia organization, every member would be guilty by association. Why do the Liberals get special treatment? Why has no one served a day in jail for stealing millions of dollars that should have been spent on these so called Liberal priorities?

Martin is equally guilty. He continues to hide who the members are that got elected on our stolen money.

Someone needs to go to jail, many people need to go to jail. This isn't Canadian values, to steal openly from the public purse. Until Liberal members spend real time in jail, this party will lack the moral authority to govern this country and its people.

I have nothing against NDP voters. Just an idealogical difference.

So here I am, never thought I'd beg people for votes, never thought I'd ever care. Vote Conservative or NDP tomorrow, whatever you believe. The Liberals can't be allowed to get away from this without punishment. Please don't reward criminal fraud and deception with another mandate.

[stignasty]

Mr. Martin, whose role as Finance Minister did not involve him in the supervision of spending by the PMO or PWGSC, is entitled, like other Ministers in the Quebec caucus, to be exonerated from any blame for carelessness or misconduct. Ministers are not responsible for what they do not know about the actions and decisions of the PMO or other Ministers, or about the administration of departments other than their own. Sponsored events that took place in a Member’s riding, or that may have been supported or advocated by the riding association, do not create a presumption that the MP in question was familiar with the Sponsorship Program as a whole. http://www.gomery.ca/en/phase1report/ffr/F...er%2016_v01.pdf

[Guest eureka]

Please, please, I beg you. All that I wrote is trie. Stephen Harper told me so.

[geoffrey]

Mr. Martin, whose role as Finance Minister did not involve him in the supervision of spending by the PMO or PWGSC, is entitled, like other Ministers in the Quebec caucus, to be exonerated from any blame for carelessness or misconduct. Ministers are not responsible for what they do not know about the actions and decisions of the PMO or other Ministers, or about the administration of departments other than their own. Sponsored events that took place in a Member’s riding, or that may have been supported or advocated by the riding association, do not create a presumption that the MP in question was familiar with the Sponsorship Program as a whole. http://www.gomery.ca/en/phase1report/ffr/F...er%2016_v01.pdf

So who's responsible stignasty? Are we supposed to forgive and forget without even knowing who was guilty? It takes more than a handful of people to construct such an 'elaborate kickback scheme.'

Until we know who in the party are criminals, how do they have any authority over this country?

[kimmy]

Those who have not found the Liberal message to be the answer they are seeking can look at the NDP. There they may find an ideal that does stand for Canada and for humanity.

The NDP have no realistic chance of forming a government, and another term of Paul Martin at the helm will break this country irreparably.

If the Liberals are so crucial to this country, then they must be sent from office, at once, so that they can find a real leader and rediscover themselves. The country will survive a few years of Stephen Harper. It won't survive a few more years of Paul Martin.

Paul Martin is the biggest disappointment since the Crucifixion. And he won't even do what you'd have us believe he would, eureka.

Programs with national standards? Is that why Ken Dryden has been making deals with individual provinces, handing out cash for daycare with no strings attached and no commitment to even a single daycare space? Is that why the much-ballyhooed Health Accord was likewise really just about the provinces banding together to shake down the federal government for cash, with again virtually no commitment as to how the cash would be spent. The only national standard that Paul Martin holds dear is that premiers must give him a photo-op before he forks over the dough. Likewise he's proven that he'll bend over backwards to accomodate each premier who comes running to him with a list of demands. In this respect, the difference is that Harper is honest about what he stands for while Martin is not, and that Harper will do this out of his political philosophy while Martin will do so out of cowardice and fear of confrontation and the belief that he can curry favor in regions where he needs more votes. Paul Martin is a piss-poor imitation of the kind of centralized federalists you admire, eureka. In fact he's not even an imitation of those prime minister, he's a mockery of them. I'm surprised you can hold your supper down while you write your messages of support for him.

-k

[stignasty]

So who's responsible stignasty? Are we supposed to forgive and forget without even knowing who was guilty? It takes more than a handful of people to construct such an 'elaborate kickback scheme.'

Until we know who in the party are criminals, how do they have any authority over this country?

You were spouting Justice Gomery's report like gospel, you can't have it both ways.

kimmy, you sound just like those Liberals who say things like "Stephen Harper has a secret agenda," but then can't elaborate. Ooooh, Paul Martin will destroy the country. That may fly in the Hanna Legion, but really, let's try to keep this on an adult level.

[emailforcanada]

Bush and his crew, through their blind arrogance and an incredibly idiotic approach, have made a complete mess of Iraq. They are on the brink of civil war...with severe lack of medical supplies, constant power outages and now it is coming out more now that untold thousands of innocent women and children have died or been maimed by US bombing. We do not see much of the pictures of children with limbs ripped off and 3rd degree burns. On top of that, the Bush administration has put their own citizens in even more danger than they ever were before and have only exacerbated the dangers instead of making their country safer.. That is not just shabby, it is an embarrassment to the people of America and will be for years to come.

There are those in the US who still have their head stuck in the sand.... long held beliefs they hold are so very so hard to let go of, that in fact it is almost impossible for some people to even accept that the US is in trouble because of all this insanity. There are radio stations with these raving fanatics running 24/7. Many of us have friends or relatives in the US... for their sake, I hope that someone has the courage soon to stand up to the Bush administration and turn things around.

It shows that the wrong leader can be absolutely disasterous. While not suggesting for a millisecond that Harper is the same as Bush... there are still very serious concerns about the choices he has made and consequently serious concerns about what kind of mess he could potentially get us into.

Indeed it has. Hundreds of millions of Eastern Europeans liberated, in great part, by Ronald Reagan. Over 50 million Muslims recently liberated, in great part, by President Bush.

Not too shabby.

You know those lefties don't believe freedom is important, they'd rather see dictatorships that occasionally feed their people in order to raise armies or what not.