Harper, IMV

[betsy]

The sudden appointment of Emmerson that left even the media in the dark until the last minute and the ensuing unavailability of Harper for any explanations got me thinking "what's going on?" A few ministers were answering the questions regarding the "scandal".

Speculations were rampant (Mike Duffy and Question Period) as to his "bizarre" attitude. That apparently it is not unlikely for Harper to disregard advices and stick to his own devices.

On sober reflection, after all the hoopla had died down I end up thinking...if Harper ended up granting interviews about the matter, what are the chances things would've only dragged on....being further embellished....fueling more "controversies"?

The actions of the NDP in trying to perpetuate this griping in Vancouver (whereas in other cities people hardly talked about it anymore after the first week), only proved that it was wise of Harper to just let it be.

His silence is confidence in knowing he did nothing wrong. His silence may seem like arrogance to some...but imv, it is a dignified stance by a nation's leader refusing to be lumped along the likes of Tom Cruise as a form of cheap entertainment.

His commitment and support of our troops is almost touching. They need it more than ever from their own people.

This mission was a commitment signed by the Liberals...which Harper inherited from the previous government and which he is only trying to fulfill. But it seems unlike the Liberals, Harper does not only offer support through lip service.

Ironically the Liberals never even stopped for a second to consider using and blighting the reputation and slighting the men and women they had commited to Afghanistan during the election....so why would anyone take the Liberals' lip service concern for the troops seriously? They did more damage to our troops than any terrorist so far.

Imagine how a soldier must feel during that election campaign, while he's over there giving his life over a commitment made by the Liberals.

And now, the mission which everyone was saying was best not only for Canada, but for the whole world, the significant importance of this mission that these soldiers are so proud to be a part of and die for is suddenly being questioned by the same people who had stood by quietly to let it happen in the first place. The ever vigilant NDP never made such a fuss then. And the Liberals...well, flip-flops about it.

It isn't pleasant being in those soldiers' shoes right now.

The other parties and their supporters can criticise all they want and make out of anything about Harper's visit to Kandahar. But imv, Harper was there to rally...at a time when our men and women need it most.

The snub to Bardot was a real treat. Reading and hearing other ministers blasting away at the McCartneys and the Humane Society of America was awesome. And the way they blasted...boy, the Humane Society girl was speechless! Harper had signalled the way it's going to be for these busy-bodies. No more pandering and kow-towing to celebs! It's about time!

So far IHarper strikes me as someone who has a firm backbone. He can't easily be intimidated by fear of losing votes. He takes his leadership seriously...and he's going to do what he is determined to do.

I like that. A real leader who stands firmly.

[scribblet]

The sudden appointment of Emmerson that left even the media in the dark until the last minute and the ensuing unavailability of Harper for any explanations got me thinking "what's going on?" A few ministers were answering the questions regarding the "scandal".

Speculations were rampant (Mike Duffy and Question Period) as to his "bizarre" attitude. That apparently it is not unlikely for Harper to disregard advices and stick to his own devices.

On sober reflection, after all the hoopla had died down I end up thinking...if Harper ended up granting interviews about the matter, what are the chances things would've only dragged on....being further embellished....fueling more "controversies"?

The actions of the NDP in trying to perpetuate this griping in Vancouver (whereas in other cities people hardly talked about it anymore after the first week), only proved that it was wise of Harper to just let it be.

His silence is confidence in knowing he did nothing wrong. His silence may seem like arrogance to some...but imv, it is a dignified stance by a nation's leader refusing to be lumped along the likes of Tom Cruise as a form of cheap entertainment.

.................

The other parties and their supporters can criticise all they want and make out of anything about Harper's visit to Kandahar. But imv, Harper was there to rally...at a time when our men and women need it most.

The snub to Bardot was a real treat. Reading and hearing other ministers blasting away at the McCartneys and the Humane Society of America was awesome. And the way they blasted...boy, the Humane Society girl was speechless! Harper had signalled the way it's going to be for these busy-bodies. No more pandering and kow-towing to celebs! It's about time!

So far IHarper strikes me as someone who has a firm backbone. He can't easily be intimidated by fear of losing votes. He takes his leadership seriously...and he's going to do what he is determined to do.

I like that. A real leader who stands firmly.

Good post Betsy, so far Canada has a Prime Minister we can be proud of, and our Military a leader who will stand up for them. They deserve no less.

The Liberals and the other opposition parties’ threats to defeat the CPC will limit his ability to bring about the changes that Canadians deserve so he has to tread carefully.

[scribblet]

Interesting to note that Harper is up in this poll. I guess now people are having a chance to get a look at him and not just from the left wing media point of view they are pleasantly surprised. Or is it that they aren't buying into the 'secret agenda' conspiracy any more, and the old tired horse of him doing away with health care.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/st...ec-c576a99eb49d

OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper's popularity in B.C. has soared a whopping 21 points -- to 66 per cent -- according to the latest Ipsos Reid poll, indicating the controversy over his appointment of former Liberal David Emerson to his Conservative cabinet is dying.

"Harper's approval rating is way up," said Darrell Bricker, president of Ipsos Reid Public Affairs. "These are Chretien-type numbers by reaching the 60s. Paul Martin didn't know what the 60s looked like," Bricker said. "It's a bounce back from the Emerson situation. That was Harper's low water mark."

The prime minister's national approval rating has also increased -- eight percentage points to 62 per cent -- following his surprise trip to Afghanistan March 12 and 13 to visit Canadian troops.

[michao]

Harper's not being able to speak on behalf of his appointment opf Emmerson is not a strength, it is a clear sign of Harper's weakness and inability to understand the democratic system, the people of Vancouver did not elect Emmerson because he is an outstanding fellow, but because he was part of the Liberal party, because they found that the Liberal party better represented their views. Harper's inability to speak just shows how he is ignoring the peoples voice and has placed himself a the person who has all the say in the decisions, he is a dictator in a way, he does what he wants not what the people want from him.

As for troops in Afghanistan, oh well he surprise visited them, that does not mean anything, he did it to gain public support, he does not care who dies in Afghanistan, why would he.

Next, lets speak more on the topic that affects people, his platform for this election was based on, giving money away and taking away programs. For example, the child care thing, so he is going to give every family(including those people who make millions or those that have family taking care of the children) with a child under 6 a 100$ cheque, or whatever it may be, every month, but as a result he will take away the childcare program that had been put in place by the liberals a while back. I don't see the point in that.

Or even better the entire GST thing, he will reduce the GST from 6-7 percent, but he will return the income tax from the reduced 16% back to 17%, once again, how does that make sense. Oh and by the way if you didn't know an increase of one percent in income tax is more then a decrease of one percent in GST.

I don't see why you are trying to support someone who is clearly not democratic and I don;t see how one can look at his visiting the troops as just a ploy to gain public support.

[Hicksey]

Harper's not being able to speak on behalf of his appointment opf Emmerson is not a strength, it is a clear sign of Harper's weakness and inability to understand the democratic system, the people of Vancouver did not elect Emmerson because he is an outstanding fellow, but because he was part of the Liberal party, because they found that the Liberal party better represented their views. Harper's inability to speak just shows how he is ignoring the peoples voice and has placed himself a the person who has all the say in the decisions, he is a dictator in a way, he does what he wants not what the people want from him.

As for troops in Afghanistan, oh well he surprise visited them, that does not mean anything, he did it to gain public support, he does not care who dies in Afghanistan, why would he.

Next, lets speak more on the topic that affects people, his platform for this election was based on, giving money away and taking away programs. For example, the child care thing, so he is going to give every family(including those people who make millions or those that have family taking care of the children) with a child under 6 a 100$ cheque, or whatever it may be, every month, but as a result he will take away the childcare program that had been put in place by the liberals a while back. I don't see the point in that.

Or even better the entire GST thing, he will reduce the GST from 6-7 percent, but he will return the income tax from the reduced 16% back to 17%, once again, how does that make sense. Oh and by the way if you didn't know an increase of one percent in income tax is more then a decrease of one percent in GST.

I don't see why you are trying to support someone who is clearly not democratic and I don;t see how one can look at his visiting the troops as just a ploy to gain public support.

I see your point on Emerson, however I still think that speaking out would have done nothing but perpetuate a media assault on him and prolong the ordeal. Politically, I think it was the right move. But most of all I'm disappointed because he recycled a Liberal. I voted to get rid of those bums for a reason. The last thing I want to see is one of them in a CPC cabinet.

As for your comment on Harper not caring who dies in Afghanistan, it's pretty obvious that Martin didn't care either. He was the one to send them there in the first place. I think if we're to complete our commitment the least we can do for our soldiers is send our PM over now and then to renew our support. And considering that all the media they'll see from their homeland refuses to get that message out, someone has to.

There never was a Martin health care program beyond giving away money. This has been well documented. The only difference is who Martin had pledged to give the money to--the provinces. Harper's only promised not to filter our money through another inefficient bureaucracy and that all parents got the help. Neither approach ever came close to a bonafide solution for all Canadians so I'd rather get all Canadians get helped equally.

[michao]

Yes Hicksey, I do agree that it was a correct move not to create more trouble, basically for himself, but I disagree that this a quality of a strong leader.

A well yes of course Martin did not care either, but one cannot say that it is almost touching, it was done plainly for political reasons.

Dude I'm talking about childcare not healthcare, which there was a previously set childcare program, and Harper's plan to give money to everyone is not truly fair.

[scribblet]

Yes Hicksey, I do agree that it was a correct move not to create more trouble, basically for himself, but I disagree that this a quality of a strong leader.

A well yes of course Martin did not care either, but one cannot say that it is almost touching, it was done plainly for political reasons.

Dude I'm talking about childcare not healthcare, which there was a previously set childcare program, and Harper's plan to give money to everyone is not truly fair.

A national child care program isn't fair either, as well to do stay at home moms can leave their kid and go to the spa. National is national, no means test, everyone can use it.

[Hicksey]

Yes Hicksey, I do agree that it was a correct move not to create more trouble, basically for himself, but I disagree that this a quality of a strong leader.

A well yes of course Martin did not care either, but one cannot say that it is almost touching, it was done plainly for political reasons.

Dude I'm talking about childcare not healthcare, which there was a previously set childcare program, and Harper's plan to give money to everyone is not truly fair.

I know you're talking about childcare. And there never was a plan from the federal level other than to fund whatever the provinces planned to pass off as childcare. There was no federal mandate other than to pass on funds.

[Hicksey]

Yes Hicksey, I do agree that it was a correct move not to create more trouble, basically for himself, but I disagree that this a quality of a strong leader.

A well yes of course Martin did not care either, but one cannot say that it is almost touching, it was done plainly for political reasons.

Dude I'm talking about childcare not healthcare, which there was a previously set childcare program, and Harper's plan to give money to everyone is not truly fair.

A national child care program isn't fair either, as well to do stay at home moms can leave their kid and go to the spa. National is national, no means test, everyone can use it.

I smell NDP here.

What's the matter with funding all parents the same? The higher income people will end up paying most of it back in taxes anyway.

[betsy]

A well yes of course Martin did not care either,

And Liberals still do not care! What was it again that Dosanjh said?

They're now forced to reluctantly admit support for our troops since it does not make them look good that it was their government who commited these men and women to Afghanistan in the first place!

And look who's trying to drum up and buoy up morale? The guy who inherited this commitment...and who's now trying to do the right thing by our troops!

[betsy]

Dude I'm talking about childcare not healthcare, which there was a previously set childcare program, and Harper's plan to give money to everyone is not truly fair.

What childcare program? 13 years had come and gone....what childcare program???

You must mean what the Liberals had promised in the last election? Based on their record, the promise that they would not have kept anyway...so what program?

[betsy]

A well yes of course Martin did not care either, but one cannot say that it is almost touching, it was done plainly for political reasons.

I don't blame you for being a cynic. 13 years of Liberal government had driven me to cynicism too!

Everything is for political reasons!

Decisions made by the Liberals was not for what is in the best interest of this country...but mainly for the votes and approval they will get. See how they tried to use the military in a bad way just to scare people off Harper....and kept that ad going in Quebec even after they had known how offensive and how slighted our military people were. On one side of their mouths they're so apologetic....and yet....

[betsy]

UPDATE:

Yesterday on MDuffy, journalist fro La Presse revealed that Harper still scrums with reporters, and he compared Harper with Martin. Harper really talks to reporters...whereas Martin usually gave 2 minutes hurried scrum, then runs away.

-------------------------------------------

Just watch MDuffy today. According to John Reynolds, Harper's up by 21% in the poll in BC!

Journalist Fife expressed that he never thought he'd be "fascinated by Harper" regarding Foreign policy.

You could tell this guy really admires Harper.

The journalist from Globe and Mail surprisingly gave only one small criticism of Harper...that he appears to be having a "grudge"...or a chip on his shoulders. But she did add to the praise of Fife, saying that Harper has clarity.

MDuffy commented that Harper's firm approach seem to be catching on, commenting on his poll in BC.

[Montgomery Burns]

Betsy:

So far IHarper strikes me as someone who has a firm backbone. He can't easily be intimidated by fear of losing votes. He takes his leadership seriously...and he's going to do what he is determined to do.

I like that. A real leader who stands firmly.

I agree. I saw Bush being interviewed today and he said that sometimes you have to stick with what you feel is best and to heck with the polls. You or I could be a popular leader if we governed according to the latest polls and focus group results. Clinton did that and what is his legacy?

Harper's been doing a great job so far and I haven't been this optimistic about Canada's future since the Free Trade Agreement was signed.

[Hicksey]

Betsy:

So far IHarper strikes me as someone who has a firm backbone. He can't easily be intimidated by fear of losing votes. He takes his leadership seriously...and he's going to do what he is determined to do.

I like that. A real leader who stands firmly.

I agree. I saw Bush being interviewed today and he said that sometimes you have to stick with what you feel is best and to heck with the polls. You or I could be a popular leader if we governed according to the latest polls and focus group results. Clinton did that and what is his legacy?

Harper's been doing a great job so far and I haven't been this optimistic about Canada's future since the Free Trade Agreement was signed.

Sticktoitiveness can be both a good and a bad quality. History is often the best judge of whether it ends up being a good or bad quality.

[Black Dog]

Interesting to note that Harper is up in this poll. I guess now people are having a chance to get a look at him and not just from the left wing media point of view they are pleasantly surprised.

Actually, it seems the less people actually see of Harper, the more they like him.

[Hicksey]

Interesting to note that Harper is up in this poll. I guess now people are having a chance to get a look at him and not just from the left wing media point of view they are pleasantly surprised.

Actually, it seems the less people actually see of Harper, the more they like him.

Whatever works!

[newbie]

As for your comment on Harper not caring who dies in Afghanistan, it's pretty obvious that Martin didn't care either. He was the one to send them there in the first place.

Actually, I think it was Chretien.

[Hicksey]

As for your comment on Harper not caring who dies in Afghanistan, it's pretty obvious that Martin didn't care either. He was the one to send them there in the first place.

Actually, I think it was Chretien.

Either way. I thought it was a little hypocritical for Liberals to complain about Harper completing a commitment their party made.