Stéphane Dion = Jean Chrétien?

[jdobbin]

Stephane Dion's father has a history in Quebec that English Canadians don't know.

I look forward to reading it in a book. I see no reason to attack the man with statements meant to appeal to bigotry. I expect that of Don Cherry, not you.

[Ricki Bobbi]

I look forward to reading it in a book. I see no reason to attack the man with statements meant to appeal to bigotry. I expect that of Don Cherry, not you.

But you condemn others for personal attacks? tsk tsk

[August1991]

I look forward to reading it in a book. I see no reason to attack the man with statements meant to appeal to bigotry. I expect that of Don Cherry, not you.

My point, to the extent it matters, is that Stephane Dion's father was a well-known comentator and an important figure in Quebec. He founded the department where his son studied. For a certain generation, Leon Dion is better known than Stephane. Although solicited, Leon Dion never got involved in active politics. He was a federalist in the style of Claude Ryan.

IOW, the perceptions of Stephane Dion are different in English Canada from what they are in Quebec.

Apparently, William Johnson is now writing a biography of Stephane Dion. It will likely be more interesting than his biography of Harper (if only because it couldn't be more boring).

[jdobbin]

My point, to the extent it matters, is that Stephane Dion's father was a well-known comentator and an important figure in Quebec. He founded the department where his son studied. For a certain generation, Leon Dion is better known than Stephane. Although solicited, Leon Dion never got involved in active politics. He was a federalist in the style of Claude Ryan.

IOW, the perceptions of Stephane Dion are different in English Canada from what they are in Quebec.

Apparently, William Johnson is now writing a biography of Stephane Dion. It will likely be more interesting than his biography of Harper (if only because it couldn't be more boring).

If Dion's father was in the style of Claude Ryan then he comes from a rare breed. I can still remember Pierre Falardeau attacking Ryan when he died in 2004. It was rather sad to see and I wonder if that is what many Quebecers actually thought of man dedicated to the good of Quebec.

At the moment, Stephane Dion has worked to unite the Liberals faster than many expected. He has had three successful fundraising dinners which address some of the pressing needs of money. He has also taken leadership in the Commons.

As James Laxer reported in Tuesdays Globe and Mail, the person and the party that has been hit the hardest by all this so far is Jack Layton and the NDP. The Liberals rise in the polls has mostly come at their expense.

I don't know what son Dion learned at his father's knee but if he learned what it is to be a Liberal federalist from Quebec, I think we'll be alright.

[Ricki Bobbi]

I don't know what son Dion learned at his father's knee but if he learned what it is to be a Liberal federalist from Quebec, I think we'll be alright.

Who is the we to which you refer?

If you mean we, as in the majority of Canadians who think Prime Minister Harper is doing a good job, then you are correct sir.

We Conservatives are happy to have been handed the gift that is Stephane Dion.

[Argus]

You mean as a opposed to an economist who once headed an organization of citizens which opposed wasteful government spending?

I think the interesting thing about the openness with which Chretien is being welcomed back is that it shows the Liberal party has not the slightest embarrassment or sense of guilt over the massive corruption and unprincipaled incompetence and nepotism for which the Chretien regime was so notorious. Perhaps a strong hint of what kind of a government Dion would run.

The NCC is more than just against wasteful spending.

That is its principal watch

As far as unprincipled, the Liberals certainly don't need any lessons from the Harper government who take their advice from Mulroney.

Mulroney's involvement has been relatively slight, and it has been many years since Mulroney was in power. And at any rate, Mulroney was a terrifically honest and ethical man compared to Chretien.

Firing the president of the Canadian Wheat Board over the objections of the Board directors ranks right up there.

There is nothing the least bit unethical about firing someone who is in a position of heading a quasi goverment body who resists the government's instructions and indeed campaigns against the government with the opposition leader.

[jdobbin]

That is its principal watch

Mulroney's involvement has been relatively slight, and it has been many years since Mulroney was in power. And at any rate, Mulroney was a terrifically honest and ethical man compared to Chretien.

There is nothing the least bit unethical about firing someone who is in a position of heading a quasi goverment body who resists the government's instructions and indeed campaigns against the government with the opposition leader.

The role of the Board president is to follow what the directors of the Board want. I don't see how the new appointed president can have anything but a poisonous relationship with the newly elected directors.

The NCC has also come out against immigration for no apparent economic reasons. Likewise, they are against the Canada Health Act for not so apparent economic reasons.

Mulroney and many of his former people are not peripherally involved. They are involved.

As far as ethics go, you have to cite your sources for him being an honest man.

[Ricki Bobbi]

As far as ethics go, you have to cite your sources for him being an honest man.

Why? You never cite your sources for anything. What's good for the goose...

[jbg]

As far as ethics go, you have to cite your sources for him being an honest man.

Actually, the burden of proving dishonesty is on the one asserting it.

[jdobbin]

Actually, the burden of proving dishonesty is on the one asserting it.

http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/torstar-31-05-2002f.html

http://mqup.mcgill.ca/extra.php?id=148

Now can you show he was ethical?

[Ricki Bobbi]

http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/torstar-31-05-2002f.html

http://mqup.mcgill.ca/extra.php?id=148

Now can you show he was ethical?

A poll taken before the Gomery inquiry stating the public thought the Liberals were more ethical than the PCs is your proof? Wow, that is very weak proof indeed.

[seabee]

For a time, Léon Dion was advisor to Robert Bourassa. He suggested to him the "knife at the throat " stategy.

[jbg]

http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/torstar-31-05-2002f.html

http://mqup.mcgill.ca/extra.php?id=148

Now can you show he was ethical?

A poll taken before the Gomery inquiry stating the public thought the Liberals were more ethical than the PCs is your proof? Wow, that is very weak proof indeed.

But a proof is a proof is a good proof, is a proof.

[jdobbin]

But a proof is a proof is a good proof, is a proof.

And do I have to quote your hero Donald Rumsfeld back to you?

"Shortly after leaving office in 1993, Brian Mulroney accepted an envelope containing $100,000 in cash from Karlheinz Schreiber..."

From my earlier link.

From other link as well.

"Those most likely to think the Chrétien government is dirtier live in Western Canada, never completed high school or are at the highest income level."

I wonder which of the two categories some of the people on this forum who say Mulroney was the of the highest ethical standard sit?

[Ricki Bobbi]

And do I have to quote your hero Donald Rumsfeld back to you?

No just provide some actual proof, instead of misleading tripe...

[Argus]

The role of the Board president is to follow what the directors of the Board want.

The board is responsible to the government.

The NCC has also come out against immigration for no apparent economic reasons. Likewise, they are against the Canada Health Act for not so apparent economic reasons.

Any position the NCC has taken has been backed up by economic studies. There are numerous economic reasons for being against immigration as it has been run for the past few decades.

Mulroney and many of his former people are not peripherally involved. They are involved.

As far as ethics go, you have to cite your sources for him being an honest man.

Cite your sources for the involvement of all these nameless "mulroney people".

I said as compared to Chretien, Mulroney is an honest man. Then again, almost anyone would be.

[Argus]

As far as ethics go, you have to cite your sources for him being an honest man.

Actually, the burden of proving dishonesty is on the one asserting it.

I was making a comparison. Ie, compared to Jean Chretien, your average bank robber has superior ethics and values.

[Argus]

Actually, the burden of proving dishonesty is on the one asserting it.

http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/torstar-31-05-2002f.html

http://mqup.mcgill.ca/extra.php?id=148

Now can you show he was ethical?

I like this part: During two terms in office, Mulroney had 10 cabinet minister resign under ethical clouds, ranging from his industry minister Sinclair Stevens who was found guilty of conflict of interest, to his defence minister, Robert Coates, who quit after visiting a German strip bar, to his housing minister, Alan Redway, forced to quit after joking about having a gun as he tried to board a flight at the Ottawa airport.

First, none of the cases cited had anything to do with corruption as such, and all should be taken, by anyone with a knowledge of history, in comparison with the Chretien years. Chretien was notorious for stonewalling. Like the Mafia, his methodolgy was "say nothing, admit nothing". No matter how blatant the misconduct or stupidity on the part of his cabinet ministers, Chretien simply looked at the polls showing his party well in front, and rode it out. No minister was allowed to resign for most of his term in office, and no errors or misconductwere ever admited to. On rare occasions when the howls simply wouldn't let up he shifted a cabinet minister to another portfolio, still never admitting it had anything to do with any errors.

It's troubling that Mulroney took all that cash after he left office. But then again no one has ever satisfactorily explained why Jean Chretien, a little-practiced, small-town Quebec (common law) attorney who hadn't practiced law in years came to be hired by a major Toronto law firm at a simply huge salary which helped make him a millionaire after losing the leadership to Turner when everyone knew he would be the next Liberal leader. What favours did he do to get such treatment, or have to do after he became PM to repay such largesse?

That goes on top of his many ethical lapses, including forcing the BDBC to "loan" money to a business partner, who then gave that money to Chretien. That money was never repaid, btw.

[jbg]

But then again no one has ever satisfactorily explained why Jean Chretien, a little-practiced, small-town Quebec (common law) attorney who hadn't practiced law in years came to be hired by a major Toronto law firm at a simply huge salary which helped make him a millionaire after losing the leadership to Turner when everyone knew he would be the next Liberal leader.

His research and oratorical courtroom skills were top notch. He probably fulfilled a similar function to the one I fulfull, which is as a "troubleshooter" in complex, technical legal situations.

[jdobbin]

The board is responsible to the government.

Any position the NCC has taken has been backed up by economic studies. There are numerous economic reasons for being against immigration as it has been run for the past few decades.

Cite your sources for the involvement of all these nameless "mulroney people".

I said as compared to Chretien, Mulroney is an honest man. Then again, almost anyone would be.

As a Crown corporation the board used to be responsible to the government. Not any more. Check the legislation.

The NCC president during the Vietnam boat people issue certainly wasn't making an economic statement when he made bigoted comments about Vietnamese. They've also spoken against French as a language.

They also didn't have an economic policy paper when they went after Rick Mercer. Yeesh.

http://www.thepolitic.com/archives/2005/06...-to-government/

Here is the Mulroney people working with Harper.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ry2006/national

There have been more in recent months mentioned by the National Post and the Globe and Mail.

Mulroney taking an envelope of cash after leaving as prime minister ranked as unethical even from the likes of Norman Specter.

You don't have to tell me about Chretien. I wasn't a huge fan. As far as money he got as a lawyer, it wouldn't be the first time that a law firm thought a former politician would be a "rainmaker" for them. Mulroney has been a huge rainmaker for his firm just as Trudeau was for his.

[jbg]

You don't have to tell me about Chretien. I wasn't a huge fan. As far as money he got as a lawyer, it wouldn't be the first time that a law firm thought a former politician would be a "rainmaker" for them. Mulroney has been a huge rainmaker for his firm just as Trudeau was for his.

Read my explanation above for Chretien's hiring by the law firm. It was solely for his technical expertise.

[jdobbin]

Read my explanation above for Chretien's hiring by the law firm. It was solely for his technical expertise.

I seem to recall Jean Chretien finishing very high in law school and being director of the bar in his region before being elected.

[mcqueen625]

Chretien, Martin, Dion = Same old, Same old. All three were involved in so many scandals, dirty deals, and other corruptions and misappropriation of taxpayer's money, that none are credible enough to lead Canada. Maybe Quebec and Ontario because these Canadian's don't seem to know any better, or at least they tend to ignore the corruption.

Harper on the other hand is giving Canada another way of doing business, and in a much more responsible way than either the Fiberals or the NDP could ever do. Both of the latter would have us believe that government should be all things to all people from birth to death and every step in between, and both promote invasive programs that decide for Canadians how we are to live our lives. I'm for government that get's their hands out of my pockets and allows me to decide where my money should be spent. I can tell you it won't be on uselss gun registries that does not prevent criminals from gaining access to firearms, which the registry could not do, and it won't be on national day-care programs. The gun registry for one program is simply a very expensive paper exercise that does nothing to get the criminal element to register their illegal guns. Nearly every drug bust has the police reporting the seizure of illegal firearms. So tell me again why we have wasted close to $2 Billion on a registry that does not, and cannot work?

The old Russia and Socialist France is alive and well as long as the Liberals and NDP exist with their Socialist policies.

[jdobbin]

Chretien, Martin, Dion = Same old, Same old. All three were involved in so many scandals, dirty deals, and other corruptions and misappropriation of taxpayer's money, that none are credible enough to lead Canada. Maybe Quebec and Ontario because these Canadian's don't seem to know any better, or at least they tend to ignore the corruption.

You'll have to show me where Dion was involved in the corruption.

[jbg]

Read my explanation above for Chretien's hiring by the law firm. It was solely for his technical expertise.

I seem to recall Jean Chretien finishing very high in law school and being director of the bar in his region before being elected.

Just supremely talented.