Harper's inexperience - this is serious folks

[tml12]

Harper is definately weaker on foreign policy. But if your going to say he has no international ability, then you've also got to stop saying he's going to work hand in hand with Bush. Can't really have both.

Don't understand that logic. Our working relationship with the states seems a little onesided. What could Harper posibly do to resolve this without giving in on issues like missle defence, gay marriage, war on drugs or invading countries on false pretense for oil? Sure we can solve cattle and softwood, we just have to give up on having or own national identiy. So when this comes to pass and Im over "liberating" Iran or North Korea, I wont be hear to tell all you Harper supporters 'I told ya so', so... I told ya so.

What planet are you living on? It has to do with diplomacy or simply manners. Harper won't bash the US in public to win some emotional points with insecure Candians. Conservative MP's won't fire off anti-Bush venom. Harper won't pull out of a deal with out first notifying the people he made the deal with. Harper won't use cheap-shot anti-American campaign ads to to maintain power. It's called statemanship, you libs ought to look into that and re-examine your definition of tolerance.

A study of the Reagan presidency will tell you about statesmenship...

I am not huge fans of Reagan and Mulrooney but you know what? They were diplomatic and treated our countries very well. I miss that relationship...I miss the "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" days.

What we are seeing now is politics and stupidity... :angry:

[Slim MacSquinty]

This is the stupidest, weekest thread yet, what have the Liberals done so well in foreign policy, hell they can't even figure out the US and they're practically immersed in it.

One man does not a government make we have stacks of foreign policy advisors that the Liberals have apparently not listened to for years.

Unless we are looking to export corruption into the increasingly competive world market the Liberals have no advantage over the green party in regards to foreign policy.

Moral and intelectual bankruptcy can be the only explaination for the beginning of this thread.

[Hicksey]

This is the stupidest, weekest thread yet, what have the Liberals done so well in foreign policy, hell they can't even figure out the US and they're practically immersed in it.

One man does not a government make we have stacks of foreign policy advisors that the Liberals have apparently not listened to for years.

Unless we are looking to export corruption into the increasingly competive world market the Liberals have no advantage over the green party in regards to foreign policy.

Moral and intelectual bankruptcy can be the only explaination for the beginning of this thread.

Moral and intelectual bankruptcy is what the Liberals are mired in. Add hypocracy, and mixed thoroughly in equal parts a Liberal you'll make.

They scream negative when we quote them in commercials. And listen to them of late ... They've sunk so low I hear Lucifer has been recruited to stump for them.

[I miss Reagan]

A study of the Reagan presidency will tell you about statesmenship...

Exactly. Even Bush treats his political enemies with respect. Examples include the recent tour of the White House given to Robert Redford, one of the loonies who said he'd leave the US should Bush be elected, as well as the tributes given to Bill Clinton.

[Hicksey]

A study of the Reagan presidency will tell you about statesmenship...

Exactly. Even Bush treats his political enemies with respect. Examples include the recent tour of the White House given to Robert Redford, one of the loonies who said he'd leave the US should Bush be elected, as well as the tributes given to Bill Clinton.

Remember when they did the hanging of Clinton rendering? That speech was classy. As respectful as you'll ever hear one party be to the next.

[I miss Reagan]

A study of the Reagan presidency will tell you about statesmenship...

Exactly. Even Bush treats his political enemies with respect. Examples include the recent tour of the White House given to Robert Redford, one of the loonies who said he'd leave the US should Bush be elected, as well as the tributes given to Bill Clinton.

Remember when they did the hanging of Clinton rendering? That speech was classy. As respectful as you'll ever hear one party be to the next.

Right. Total class. After the scorched earth manner in which Clinton left the White House and all the bashing of Bush by Bill and Hilary, Bush offered complete praise of Clinton and continues to do so despite Clinton's relentless bashing of him.

[Hicksey]

A study of the Reagan presidency will tell you about statesmenship...

Exactly. Even Bush treats his political enemies with respect. Examples include the recent tour of the White House given to Robert Redford, one of the loonies who said he'd leave the US should Bush be elected, as well as the tributes given to Bill Clinton.

Remember when they did the hanging of Clinton rendering? That speech was classy. As respectful as you'll ever hear one party be to the next.

Right. Total class. After the scorched earth manner in which Clinton left the White House and all the bashing of Bush by Bill and Hilary, Bush offered complete praise of Clinton and continues to do so despite Clinton's relentless bashing of him.

The SBV were pretty hard on Kerry in 2004, well at least I thought so. I don't condone Kerry's actions back then, but it was 30 years ago. That and and the Dem dart that never stuck -- Bush's ANG record -- should have been history.

I think Harper's getting it worse than Kerry did and that's saying a lot.

[Hollus]

Wow!?!?!

Class and respect?????

I point out that Harpers only tool in solving economic disputes with the US is to fall inline with their policy on key

social issues. Issues that will define us as a nation. All you have to respond with is liberal insults and a lecture on good manners. If I politely tell another country to surrender or I'll invade does that make it allright? If I walk in to a house and tie up everyone inside-being very polite the whole time-does that change the exchange that occured?

Should'nt the decissions that will form the foundation of or future reflect the veiws of Canadians and not be made to appease our trading partners?

you people making insults need to look in the mirror.

[I miss Reagan]

Wow!?!?!

Class and respect?????

I point out that Harpers only tool in solving economic disputes with the US is to fall inline with their policy on key

social issues. Issues that will define us as a nation. All you have to respond with is liberal insults and a lecture on good manners. If I politely tell another country to surrender or I'll invade does that make it allright? If I walk in to a house and tie up everyone inside-being very polite the whole time-does that change the exchange that occured?

Should'nt the decissions that will form the foundation of or future reflect the veiws of Canadians and not be made to appease our trading partners?

you people making insults need to look in the mirror.

I don't remember the US "telling us to surrender or I'll invade". You lefties need to learn that treating people kindly and with respect, despite disagreeing with them, will often work wonders in getting what you want. Instead you have this attitude of entitlement and cry "no fair! no fair!" when things don't go your way.

[emailforcanada]

Excellent point.

Have you noticed that when a concern is raised about Harper, the folks on this thread who are his suporters can only try to point elsewhere and claim .. "see.. he is not as bad as this other guy". That is a complete acceptance and admission that IS a serious issue .. one that these folks do not want to face or acknowledge.

The other thing you will find is that they will try to claim that this is 'liberal plant' .... you see, they believe that anybody who raises serious concerns about Harper is automatically 'a plant' ... or 'a troll' or some other false accustiaon.

All of this in end end, just bolsters the case that they have an indefensible situation and quite understandably, they are frustrated. This is becuase there is simply no credible response to this other than to acknowledge it as an issue that is causing concenr for Canadians. If there was at least an acknowledgement, it would be worth the time to hear out their other opinions.

Wow!?!?!

Class and respect?????

I point out that Harpers only tool in solving economic disputes with the US is to fall inline with their policy on key

social issues. Issues that will define us as a nation. All you have to respond with is liberal insults and a lecture on good manners. If I politely tell another country to surrender or I'll invade does that make it allright? If I walk in to a house and tie up everyone inside-being very polite the whole time-does that change the exchange that occured?

Should'nt the decissions that will form the foundation of or future reflect the veiws of Canadians and not be made to appease our trading partners?

you people making insults need to look in the mirror.

[Hicksey]

Wow!?!?!

Class and respect?????

I point out that Harpers only tool in solving economic disputes with the US is to fall inline with their policy on key

social issues. Issues that will define us as a nation. All you have to respond with is liberal insults and a lecture on good manners. If I politely tell another country to surrender or I'll invade does that make it allright? If I walk in to a house and tie up everyone inside-being very polite the whole time-does that change the exchange that occured?

Should'nt the decissions that will form the foundation of or future reflect the veiws of Canadians and not be made to appease our trading partners?

you people making insults need to look in the mirror.

You're making the assumption that one has to give in and make Canada the 51st US state to deal with them. What we're saying is that one can catch more bees with honey than with crap. If we want them to deal with us and be fair, we should respect them. We needn't change who we are to do that.

[geoffrey]

You're making the assumption that one has to give in and make Canada the 51st US state to deal with them. What we're saying is that one can catch more bees with honey than with crap. If we want them to deal with us and be fair, we should respect them. We needn't change who we are to do that.

I love how you changed vinegar to crap. How appropriate!

Hicksey has it figured out though. There is a way to politely decline an invitation. If Canada doesn't agree with something, we shouldn't be dragged down that path. Calling George Bush an 'idiot' or 'jerk' and stepping on a doll of him isn't polite, and its a huge embarassment to all Canadians.

Those evil Americans, better on pollution than us, but that doesn't stop us from lecturing them on how to run their country. If the Americans did the same (even thought they are more justified) to us, we'd be horrified and insulted. Why would we wish that on our neighbours?

Building fences between two neighbours never encouraged better co-operation. And throwing the dog crap on his lawn never helped either.

That foreign policy doesn't fly with me. Time to shake it up.

[sage]

emailforcanada do you not see the difference in what people around here are trying to say?

Being polite to the US does not equal surrender.

The point we are trying to make is that simply being anti-American is not an end unto itself. What Martin did was appeal to Canadians who blindly hate the US, not for anything in particular, or any policy in particular, they just simply hate the US.

When you are on a thread that is trying to make the point that Martin is the champion of international diplomacy, this is a problem, because it is the furthest thing from diplomacy.

Does no-one remember that when Martin took over he was supposed to bring us closer relations to the US, as Chretien had eviscerated them?

As for Harper's abilities, the fact remains he really hasn't had an opportunity to illustrate diplomatic skills. I'll give someone a chance who has yet to prove himself, then give Martin another to fail.

[kimmy]

Excellent point.

Have you noticed that when a concern is raised about Harper, the folks on this thread who are his suporters can only try to point elsewhere and claim .. "see.. he is not as bad as this other guy". That is a complete acceptance and admission that IS a serious issue .. one that these folks do not want to face or acknowledge.

The other thing you will find is that they will try to claim that this is 'liberal plant' .... you see, they believe that anybody who raises serious concerns about Harper is automatically 'a plant' ... or 'a troll' or some other false accustiaon.

All of this in end end, just bolsters the case that they have an indefensible situation and quite understandably, they are frustrated. This is becuase there is simply no credible response to this other than to acknowledge it as an issue that is causing concenr for Canadians. If there was at least an acknowledgement, it would be worth the time to hear out their other opinions.

When there are only 2 parties that have a realistic chance of forming a government, "he is not as bad as the other guy" is a very strong argument in Harper's favor.

Harper supporters here have been willing to acknowledge that he has little experience in foreign affairs.

You, on the other hand, have been unwilling to acknowledge or discuss any of Martin's glaring flaws. He's a weak, indecisive leader who can't make up his mind on any issue without consulting his polling firm and his PR consultants. He divided the Liberal party in his quest to unseat Chretien and claim power for himself, and in doing so has created a rift in his party that remains to this day. He can't even unite his own party, let alone the country. He has been flatly rejected by the vast majority of Quebec voters and has now set his sights on attacking Albertans as well. He continues to drive wedges between the regions to try to shore up his strength in his southern Ontario power base. He offers no response on issues of democratic reform, no response on issues of accountability, just more of the status quo-- the status quo that has put this country on a collision-course with break-up.

And to all of this, the only response you have is "yeah, well Harper has no international experience." So who is really the one who is denying the issues?

Yeah, Martin has international experience. He's put this country on the brink of disaster, but at least he has international experience.

-k

[I miss Reagan]

Have you noticed that when a concern is raised about Harper, the folks on this thread who are his suporters can only try to point elsewhere and claim .. "see.. he is not as bad as this other guy". That is a complete acceptance and admission that IS a serious issue .. one that these folks do not want to face or acknowledge.

I would say it is more of a hypocrisy issue than a "he's not as bad as the other guy". How can the Liberals put down Harper's values when they have reneged on promises time and again and are proven to be corrupt.

All of this in end end, just bolsters the case that they have an indefensible situation and quite understandably, they are frustrated.

Correct. It is impossible to defend against negative accuasations about what someone is going to do in the future or about some secret agenda. However, in the case of the Liberals we have 12 years of history to use as an indication of what we can reasonably expect from them in the future.

[Hollus]

Wow!?!?!

Class and respect?????

I point out that Harpers only tool in solving economic disputes with the US is to fall inline with their policy on key

social issues. Issues that will define us as a nation. All you have to respond with is liberal insults and a lecture on good manners. If I politely tell another country to surrender or I'll invade does that make it allright? If I walk in to a house and tie up everyone inside-being very polite the whole time-does that change the exchange that occured?

Should'nt the decissions that will form the foundation of or future reflect the veiws of Canadians and not be made to appease our trading partners?

you people making insults need to look in the mirror.

You're making the assumption that one has to give in and make Canada the 51st US state to deal with them. What we're saying is that one can catch more bees with honey than with crap. If we want them to deal with us and be fair, we should respect them. We needn't change who we are to do that.

No. Your making the assumption that some how being "polite" will have an effect on how the US negotiates with Canada. If you think the US came to its economical power by being polite and fair than i'd say you have a rather naive view of the world. The only way this US administration will care about the plight of Canadians is if we start acting like a 51st state and fall inline with their policy. This is not speculation, they have proven this with their dealings in the international community.

In no way do I condone dissrespect, but the Bush admin. is politely ramming our beaver ass. Electing Harper will be kinda like giving them a big wet kiss for it.

[I miss Reagan]

No. Your making the assumption that some how being "polite" will have an effect on how the US negotiates with Canada. If you think the US came to its economical power by being polite and fair than i'd say you have a rather naive view of the world.

It worked for Mulroney when trying to get a US audience for his concerns on acid rain. I think you are the one who is naive.

[Hollus]

Have you noticed that when a concern is raised about Harper, the folks on this thread who are his suporters can only try to point elsewhere and claim .. "see.. he is not as bad as this other guy". That is a complete acceptance and admission that IS a serious issue .. one that these folks do not want to face or acknowledge.

Yup.

[Hicksey]

Wow!?!?!

Class and respect?????

I point out that Harpers only tool in solving economic disputes with the US is to fall inline with their policy on key

social issues. Issues that will define us as a nation. All you have to respond with is liberal insults and a lecture on good manners. If I politely tell another country to surrender or I'll invade does that make it allright? If I walk in to a house and tie up everyone inside-being very polite the whole time-does that change the exchange that occured?

Should'nt the decissions that will form the foundation of or future reflect the veiws of Canadians and not be made to appease our trading partners?

you people making insults need to look in the mirror.

You're making the assumption that one has to give in and make Canada the 51st US state to deal with them. What we're saying is that one can catch more bees with honey than with crap. If we want them to deal with us and be fair, we should respect them. We needn't change who we are to do that.

No. Your making the assumption that some how being "polite" will have an effect on how the US negotiates with Canada. If you think the US came to its economical power by being polite and fair than i'd say you have a rather naive view of the world. The only way this US administration will care about the plight of Canadians is if we start acting like a 51st state and fall inline with their policy. This is not speculation, they have proven this with their dealings in the international community.

In no way do I condone dissrespect, but the Bush admin. is politely ramming our beaver ass. Electing Harper will be kinda like giving them a big wet kiss for it.

Are you blind to the political realities in Canada? Do you not realize that if Harper bows to Bush like you liberals say he will, his will become one of the shortest parliaments in history because the opposition will topple him in quick order? Do you think that Harper does not realize this? If I do -- he does.

No, I don't think politeness will change the way the US conducts its business. But polite conversation is a much better way to make way toward real negotiation and progress. I'll bet it goes a lot further with them than the hate and vitriole of Martin.

[Hollus]

No. Your making the assumption that some how being "polite" will have an effect on how the US negotiates with Canada. If you think the US came to its economical power by being polite and fair than i'd say you have a rather naive view of the world.

It worked for Mulroney when trying to get a US audience for his concerns on acid rain. I think you are the one who is naive.

This is a perfect example of what Im trying to get through. Mulroney entered us into the very agreement that allows a corporation to sue our government for dicisions that negatively effect the corporations profits. How is this good for us? Under this trade agreement American corporations are currently clearcutting BC forests with no respect for current forestry law, and those logs are not even being prosessd in Canada. Thanks Mulroney, you gave away Canadian rights and freedoms so the americans would act responsibly and address an envirounmental concern shared by us both.

Thanks for the tee up.

p.snafta

Mulroney trade

[emailforcanada]

Let's adress: "But polite conversation is a much better way to make way toward real negotiation and progress."

Look ... this trade dispute started off over 2 years ago if I am not mistaken... someone correct me if I am but it has been in lay a long time.

For the LONGEST time, arrogant people currently running the show in the US gave us the finger. We were polite and dipolmatic but time and time again, when we called them on how they are screwing us .... we again got the finger.

I am actually proud and amazed how patient we have been... and even now, in spite of the insulting behaoviuor and arrogance from those currently in power in the US, we STILL are willing to hold out the hand of friendship. That is because ost Canadians know that Bush's time is limited that he, and those responsible for treating their best friend this way are NOT representative of all Americans. There is viscious backlash in the US by Americans who are discusted by their leadership.

No leader shoudl put up with it. Absolutely none. We said that is enough and we are standing firm. That is the right thing to do.

[I miss Reagan]

For the LONGEST time, arrogant people currently running the show in the US gave us the finger. We were polite and dipolmatic but time and time again, when we called them on how they are screwing us .... we again got the finger.

I assume you mean figuratively giving us the finger. I'm not sure how you can expect the US to do Canada any favours after 12 years of anti-Americanism from our leaders. Honestly why do you feel like Canada should get any special treatment?

No leader shoudl put up with it. Absolutely none. We said that is enough and we are standing firm. That is the right thing to do.

Fine jump up and down, pull out your hair and cry your head off. See where it gets you.

[Hicksey]

Let's adress: "But polite conversation is a much better way to make way toward real negotiation and progress."

Look ... this trade dispute started off over 2 years ago if I am not mistaken... someone correct me if I am but it has been in lay a long time.

For the LONGEST time, arrogant people currently running the show in the US gave us the finger. We were polite and dipolmatic but time and time again, when we called them on how they are screwing us .... we again got the finger.

I am actually proud and amazed how patient we have been... and even now, in spite of the insulting behaoviuor and arrogance from those currently in power in the US, we STILL are willing to hold out the hand of friendship. That is because ost Canadians know that Bush's time is limited that he, and those responsible for treating their best friend this way are NOT representative of all Americans. There is viscious backlash in the US by Americans who are discusted by their leadership.

No leader should put up with it. Absolutely none. We said that is enough and we are standing firm. That is the right thing to do.

Where did I ever say we shouldn't stand firm or that we should give in? Going back to Chretien, American/Canadian relations have been in trouble. It's not anything new.

All I've said is that new approach might garner results where the Liberals haven't gotten any. I stand by my belief that descending from a cordial discourse to hate and vitriole has helped nothing. I also believe that more of it will only make the situation worse.

The reality of the situation is that the US runs itself. You can't whine to the WTO to get results. We need to deal directly with them. And straining relations further won't achieve a thing.

All the while I would be disappointed if Harper did anything less than support Canadians' interests tenaciously. I expect him not to accept less than victory. But I expect him to conduct himself in a respectful way. When I cross the border I do not wish to have bow my head in embarassment because my leaders cannot act respectfully in public. Every time idiots in this country (the Americans are idiots for responding too) boo their national anthem I have to explain that we're really not a country of immature disrespectful arrogant people and that those people are a minority.

[Hollus]

For the LONGEST time, arrogant people currently running the show in the US gave us the finger. We were polite and dipolmatic but time and time again, when we called them on how they are screwing us .... we again got the finger.

I assume you mean figuratively giving us the finger. I'm not sure how you can expect the US to do Canada any favours after 12 years of anti-Americanism from our leaders. Honestly why do you feel like Canada should get any special treatment?

No leader shoudl put up with it. Absolutely none. We said that is enough and we are standing firm. That is the right thing to do.

Fine jump up and down, pull out your hair and cry your head off. See where it gets you.

Are you even Canadian? Fuck-off with your anti-american bullshit. We are not anit-american. Iraq? ya their anit-american. Canada? Freinds. Real Canadians know this and I think emailforcanada sumed that up quite well.

[tml12]

Let's adress: "But polite conversation is a much better way to make way toward real negotiation and progress."

Look ... this trade dispute started off over 2 years ago if I am not mistaken... someone correct me if I am but it has been in lay a long time.

For the LONGEST time, arrogant people currently running the show in the US gave us the finger. We were polite and dipolmatic but time and time again, when we called them on how they are screwing us .... we again got the finger.

I am actually proud and amazed how patient we have been... and even now, in spite of the insulting behaoviuor and arrogance from those currently in power in the US, we STILL are willing to hold out the hand of friendship. That is because ost Canadians know that Bush's time is limited that he, and those responsible for treating their best friend this way are NOT representative of all Americans. There is viscious backlash in the US by Americans who are discusted by their leadership.

No leader shoudl put up with it. Absolutely none. We said that is enough and we are standing firm. That is the right thing to do.

LMAO what part of this country do you live in?

I won't be as point blank as Hollus was but you are taking a complete bias towards this situation...if you live anywhere near a major urban city you know the animosity many Canadians have toward our American friends and you know damn well if you own a TV or the Internet the preached hatred from the PM loather himself Chretien. Bush can be a jerk too don't doubt me on that but you have to look at both sides.

Your post represents your inherent bias which I find reprehensive.