fellowtraveller Posted September 5, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 If anybody is looking for a tangible example of what the NATO presence in Afghanistan means look to this reality: since the invasion, over two million refugees have returned to their homes. The people there have voted with their feet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 He appears, in my view, to be too much in bed with the Americans, Mr Bush in particular, and getting no particular benefit for it. This is not surprising. considering his long standing political policies which appear more American than Canadian. I am not entirely certain that he knows the difference between the two countries, and this is sometimes reflected in his statements and policies. I'd like to see a list of policies which show that Harper is too in bed with the Americans. I hear this a lot, but nobody seems able to come up with much. Well lets see, he does use an SUV in his motorcades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watching&waiting Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 I find that Harper has done quite well so far and he is going in the right direction with regards to improving the Military, and spending on new equipment and also increasing the size of the overall forces. I still believe that Canada will again learn to be proud of our forces and their abilities. Something that under Liberal rule was always left to detoirate to a small shell of what it once was. For that I give him an A+ His appearance of being more inline with Bush is not going to win favour in Quebec, but I think the rest of Canada will see that this is not giving into Bush but just showing that both Harper and Bush share some common ground on security and other things. Harper has said that when it comes to Canadian soveirgnty he will alway be Canada first. for this part I will give him a B-. For being able to rule within his minority government and still get some controversial issues passed I give him an A. From seeing him once again making the government something that is honest and willing to be more in step with the people I will say he is miles ahead of all the rest of them in this. This coming fall house, will show more of the metal he is made of. If he goes on as he has already then I will again give him top marks. So for me, I think that yes Harper has been a very good honest leader and I see no problem with the policies I have seen so far. Many will critisize him for things, but seldom is there any viable alternative shown with the said arguments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 Harper and the Tories have been governing for about six months.How would you grade them at what may be the middle of their term, assuming this minority government will survive for another six months? I'm thinking of an overall grade, but feel free to comment on what pluses or minuses in the last six months influence the overall mark. C+ Could have been higher except they actually came through on some of their election threats. Cutting the GST. A boon to retailers who for the most part, raised the prices to compensate. A pint at my local before the cut....$5.25...guess what the price is now? $100. Harper baby bonus.....Can't say we don't use the money.....it goes to a sitter and expenses for a monthly night out....where else but Canada would the feds pay you to get you and your wife tipsy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 (edited) [ Edited July 22, 2007 by Figleaf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 Public relations: B-Caucus control: A Foreign affairs: D- Economic policy: C+ Govt. Relations: B- So not too bad, really. Though I'd never trust them with a majority. I would have to give them a less than passing grade on PR. If you remember the flack about Harper's office controlling the message......and his disdain for the tradition of the scrum..... definitely a d+ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 (edited) .. Edited July 22, 2007 by Figleaf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 Public relations: B- Caucus control: A Foreign affairs: D- Economic policy: C+ Govt. Relations: B- So not too bad, really. Though I'd never trust them with a majority. I would have to give them a less than passing grade on PR. If you remember the flack about Harper's office controlling the message......and his disdain for the tradition of the scrum..... definitely a d+ Ah, but, you haven't reflected on the true level of contemptibility of the Ottawa press corps. Just because Harper hates them doesn't mean they're not detestable. Just becasue they are detestable doesn't mean you can ignore them. I personally want my government to be cornered, ambushed and made to say things off the cuff......it provides insight. And you ignore the press at your peril. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uOttawaMan Posted September 5, 2006 Report Share Posted September 5, 2006 I copied your scheme Fig to do my own little report. Public relations: C Caucus control: A Foreign affairs: B Economic policy: C+ Govt. Relations: B Overall I find that the Harper gov't has done a fairly good job of pushing through un-opposable reforms and making their own distinctive mark on the governing style of this country. I find no fault with wanting to get away from a select group of Hill reporters who cry when they don't exclusive access to politicians, but it would be a big mistake to try to cut them out entirely. After all.. transparency right..? Foreign affairs.. I'm pleased with the re-vitalisation of the armed forces that is underway, and what looks like to be the infant stages of an attempt to exert control over the Arctic. Afghanistan is the wild card here, only the future will tell the true grade of our government on this issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 I copied your scheme Fig to do my own little report.Public relations: C Caucus control: A Foreign affairs: B Economic policy: C+ Govt. Relations: B Overall I find that the Harper gov't has done a fairly good job of pushing through un-opposable reforms and making their own distinctive mark on the governing style of this country. I find no fault with wanting to get away from a select group of Hill reporters who cry when they don't exclusive access to politicians, but it would be a big mistake to try to cut them out entirely. After all.. transparency right..? Foreign affairs.. I'm pleased with the re-vitalisation of the armed forces that is underway, and what looks like to be the infant stages of an attempt to exert control over the Arctic. Afghanistan is the wild card here, only the future will tell the true grade of our government on this issue. That's a relatively fair set of grades. The grade on economic policy comes down to whether or not you agreed with Harper's election promises. If you did that grade necessarily jumps up. The one exception is the public relations grade. The entire *tiff* with the Hill Press Gallery has been about the PMO creating a list for reporters to ask questions at Hill press conferences. In this piece Paul Wells points out how there is historical precedence. i.e. Paul Martin's staffers created lists of journalists who could ask questions during scrums in the January election. Prime Minister's have always given preferred access to journalists they like by being more likely to answer their questions. It should be noted that the Hill Press Gallery agreed to suspend its boycott of the Prime Minister's questions list for 30 days. Seems like that will give the public the chance to judge if Harper's proposal was fair or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerryhatrick Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 Well... He's conducting focus groups on the environment to find out what he needs to say and do on the issue from a purely electoral perspective. That alone earns him an "F". Yet another rule broken by gerry. You already started a thread on the polling and this is at least the third thread you have posted the same information on. Good work! NO CROSS-POSTING Cross posting is defined as posting the same information in more then one forum on the Internet. It is also considered cross posting if you post the same information in different areas of these forums. If you want to propose a new topic, find the appropriate category and only post once. All cross-posts will be deleted without warning. Cross posting my a$$. Stop wasting everyone's time with your nonsensical complaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerryhatrick Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 Are there only two left-leaners on this board? Seeing as how I made comments on two posters who were pretty nasty in spouting hatred against Harper. My bad for reading the board for a while before actually start posting. I managed to get a take on two posters who hate our Prime Minister, defame him and repeatedly break the rules of this forum in slagging him off. Yup, it is a conspiracy. Please go ahead and check my IP... After 5 days here you have me pegged too!!!!!!! Its an incredible coincidence isn't it! Greg, did you check this IP? Sounds like this poster may have been around before, seeing as though he knows all us left leaners so well.... I've defamed Stephen Harper and I break the rules of the forum? I spout hatred? Really? Can you back that up at all? That is his routine, accuse people of breaking rules and spouting hatred. Did you see me break the rules? I "cross-posted". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerryhatrick Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 You are a great individual Shakey. I give you full credit for giving me nothing to come back with in your very next post. But I'll bide my time.Exactly as I thought RB... exactly as I thought. Like a good troll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 Weren't you accusing me of following you around the forum? Like a good troll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 I find that Harper has done quite well so far and he is going in the right direction with regards to improving the Military, and spending on new equipment and also increasing the size of the overall forces. I still believe that Canada will again learn to be proud of our forces and their abilities. Something that under Liberal rule was always left to detoirate to a small shell of what it once was. For that I give him an A+For being able to rule within his minority government and still get some controversial issues passed I give him an A. From seeing him once again making the government something that is honest and willing to be more in step with the people I will say he is miles ahead of all the rest of them in this. This coming fall house, will show more of the metal he is made of. If he goes on as he has already then I will again give him top marks. So for me, I think that yes Harper has been a very good honest leader and I see no problem with the policies I have seen so far. Many will critisize him for things, but seldom is there any viable alternative shown with the said arguments. Out of deference for the rules, and bandwith concerns, I rarely quote most of another post. This post is so "spot on" with my beliefs (again, viewing from the outside as a Yank who knows nothing about Canadian politics) that I simply quote rather than paraphrase to indicate my agreement with the views and excellent phrasing. His appearance of being more inline with Bush is not going to win favour in Quebec, but I think the rest of Canada will see that this is not giving into Bush but just showing that both Harper and Bush share some common ground on security and other things. Harper has said that when it comes to Canadian soveirgnty he will alway be Canada first. for this part I will give him a B-. I'd give a higher grade, maybe an A-. There is nothing wrong, IMHO, with a leader of a country that is, in fact, a brother country, expressing that commonality publicly. It is a sign of strength rather than weakness for the Anglosphere leaders to express, from time to time, the obvious, which is that blood is thicker than water. This has been shown over and over again, with both World Wars, with Canada's rescue of American hostages in Iran, with Katrina, with Hurricanes Andrew and Katrina and, the other direction, with the Peterborough, Ontario floods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 Tradition of the scrum? But the press gallery is complaining about not being able to decide who gets to ask questions. The scrum leaves the power to choose who asks questions solely in the hands of the PM. *No reporters* are argung for the tradition of the scrum. Hey, the parliament hill press gallery agreed today to agree to Harper's request for a list of who will ask quetions. Poor Julie Van Dusen... I would have to give them a less than passing grade on PR. If you remember the flack about Harper's office controlling the message......and his disdain for the tradition of the scrum.....definitely a d+ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerryhatrick Posted September 6, 2006 Report Share Posted September 6, 2006 Hey, the parliament hill press gallery agreed today to agree to Harper's request for a list of who will ask quetions. Poor Julie Van Dusen... Where did you stumble upon this bit of news? I don't think you got it quite right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 7, 2006 Report Share Posted September 7, 2006 Where did you stumble upon this bit of news? I don't think you got it quite right. Got it from Paul Wells' blog. He is a member of the press gallery. Read his post from yesterday. For at least 30 days the press gallery won't boycott the list. Given how split the gallery is on the boycott I doubt anything will change after the 30 day period ends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 9, 2006 Report Share Posted September 9, 2006 Hey, the parliament hill press gallery agreed today to agree to Harper's request for a list of who will ask quetions. Poor Julie Van Dusen... Where did you stumble upon this bit of news? I don't think you got it quite right. Glad to see some people stay mute after asking for support then realizing they were totally in the wrong. If obstinance ane obfuscation were postive character traits... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerryhatrick Posted September 9, 2006 Report Share Posted September 9, 2006 Where did you stumble upon this bit of news? I don't think you got it quite right. Got it from Paul Wells' blog. He is a member of the press gallery. Read his post from yesterday. For at least 30 days the press gallery won't boycott the list. Given how split the gallery is on the boycott I doubt anything will change after the 30 day period ends. Still not quite right though. The press gallary has not "agreed today to agree to Harper's request for a list of who will ask quetions. " They voted to suspend the boycott and allow reporters to sign the list for the next 30 days. Slight difference. Next time post your source up front. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 9, 2006 Report Share Posted September 9, 2006 Still not quite right though. The press gallary has not "agreed today to agree to Harper's request for a list of who will ask quetions. "They voted to suspend the boycott and allow reporters to sign the list for the next 30 days. Slight difference. Next time post your source up front. What is the significance of the difference gerry? Seems like you are just picking a fight for the sake of it instead of admitting when you are in error. any other orders on how I should behave on the board? Maybe you should ask the moderators to change the rules of the forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerryhatrick Posted September 9, 2006 Report Share Posted September 9, 2006 What is the significance of the difference gerry? Well, the reality is that the boycott has been lifted for 30 days. What you claimed was that they'd agreed to Harpers demands. They haven't. If they'd agreed to Harpers demands they would have passed a resolution saying that press gallery reporters will now submit their names for the PM's list. The resolution simply suspends the boycott for 30 days. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. And frankly RB I don't care what you do. If you want to cry about me making "demands" of you or giving you "orders", go ahead. You and Harper, the two biggest victims in the world! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted September 9, 2006 Report Share Posted September 9, 2006 Well, the reality is that the boycott has been lifted for 30 days. What you claimed was that they'd agreed to Harpers demands. They haven't. If they'd agreed to Harpers demands they would have passed a resolution saying that press gallery reporters will now submit their names for the PM's list. So they have agreed to Harper's demands for *thirty days* is the difference? Seems like pedantic hair-splitting. The reality of the matter is there will now be a list of reporters to ask questions at the Prime Minister's press conferences. Will it last for more than 30 days? Remains to be seen, but I would guess so. It will be very tough for the press gallery to make a case for not signing onto the list 30 days from now. Instead of focusing on the minutiae, what do you think will happen 30 days from now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerryhatrick Posted September 10, 2006 Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 Instead of focusing on the minutiae, what do you think will happen 30 days from now? It's pretty significant that they've just voted to suspend the boycott for 30 days. It is hardly a "minutiae" point. And in 30 days if Harper hasn't met with them to work out a solution I'm quite sure the boycott will resume. The reason the press gallery decided to boycott the list is because Harper was stone-walling reporters who were working stories he didn't like. It would be like Martin not taking questions from reporters who were working the sponsorship beat. Would that have been OK by you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted September 10, 2006 Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 Maybe the so called "journalists" should get off their collective asses and find news inside of eatting spoon fed government verbage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.