To be a PM, do you have to be a BULLY?

[Topaz]

I find the way Harper acts and talks in Parliament is not PM-like and I for one don't like it. Its not what I want a PM to act like. I remember on one forum, the people from the west complained that all the PM always comes from Quebec. I told them to send someone that ALL Canada could get behind by and if Harper is the best, then no thank you!!! He shows no respect for others, I've never seen a PM act this way. When he was the opposition he never tried working with the Libs and now he's PM he causes more trouble running the government. The Libs have treated him better than the he did them as opposition party. If Harper wasn't there we have a more peaceful government.

[Argus]

I find the way Harper acts and talks in Parliament is not PM-like and I for one don't like it. Its not what I want a PM to act like.

It's the nature of the way the House is now. And really, how else do you respond to the constant self-righteousness of Goddal or the simpering complaints of Dion, or the shouts and abuse from the rest of the Liberal ranks. Chretien was just as bad, while Martin was even worse, and I don't recall anyone complaining at the time.

I remember on one forum, the people from the west complained that all the PM always comes from Quebec. I told them to send someone that ALL Canada could get behind by

Do you think all Canada is behind Dion? Do you think they were behind Chretien or Martin? Or does "All Canada" have limitations to you, meaning "all Canadians who think like me" ?

I've never seen a PM act this way.

So you never watched Martin or Chretien in the House, eh? Or for that matter, Mulroney?

When he was the opposition he never tried working with the Libs

Did they ever try working with him? Seems to me the Liberals' policy over the last thirteen years was to portray Harper and his kind as dangerous, cruel, racists who wanted to destroy health care and break up the country. How do you expect his cooperation?

[madmax]

Did they ever try working with him? Seems to me the Liberals' policy over the last thirteen years was to portray Harper and his kind as dangerous, cruel, racists who wanted to destroy health care and break up the country.

And Harper responded calling Martin a supporter of Child Pornography. Hardly a way to gain public support.

You can't defend the behaviour of this Prime Minister by simply brushing off his childish behaviour.

I don't think that Stephen Harper is going to grow up. But then the Liberals create fake outrage and phoney melodrama. But for me I find Stephen Harpers behaviour to be offensive.

However, the thread title suggests to be PM do you have to be a BULLY

Yet there is no doubt that Chretian was a BULLY in his own party and held it together by his force of will.

[Argus]

However, the thread title suggests to be PM do you have to be a BULLY

Yet there is no doubt that Chretian was a BULLY in his own party and held it together by his force of will.

I don't think you have to act like a bully if you have other characteristics. If, for example, you have solid control of the leadership of your party, and a majority in Parliament, then no, you can afford to compromise, to be a gentleman, to treat others with respect. Actually, you can always afford to treat others with respect. It's just sometimes hard, given their own behavior. I note the same thing here, where I simply have no patience for some of the braying asses which have come to infest this site over the last year or so. And I know that were I in the House listening to Goodal's vastly insincere self-righteous whining I would not treat him respectfully.

In any case, in the leadership category, Harper lacks charisma, which is the ability to sway people through his eloquence and presence. Lacking that, he browbeats them. Chretien and Martin did the same. Trudeau was the last leader we had who really had charisma. Mulroney had some of it, but that was a more oily kind of schmoozing. Clark had none. And from what I've seen, neither does Dion.

[madmax]

In any case, in the leadership category, Harper lacks charisma, which is the ability to sway people through his eloquence and presence. Lacking that, he browbeats them. Chretien and Martin did the same. Trudeau was the last leader we had who really had charisma. Mulroney had some of it, but that was a more oily kind of schmoozing. Clark had none. And from what I've seen, neither does Dion.

I really like this paragraph. Particularly the Mulroney reference. That said, people have been bringing out the Stockwell day analogy for Dion and it just didn't work for me because Stockwell appears to be an empty vessel. But you might be closer in linking Dion to Clark for charisma and possibly other factors in leadership.

[Canuck E Stan]

So you never watched Martin or Chretien in the House, eh? Or for that matter, Mulroney?

Argus,You forgot the "Just Watch Me","Fuddle Duddle" guy.

[Leafless]

Liberals cater to self-determination unlike the Conservatives who try to run government for the benefit of the country and not for the benefit of a bunch of spoiled asses.

[Saturn]

If Harper wasn't there we have a more peaceful government.

Harper is running a completely disfunctional government to the detriment of the country as a result of his bullying, his complete lack of will to work with anybody, and his tactics of smears and personal attacks. He managed to pass his first piece of legislation after 9 months in office. This year he hasn't passed anything at all and it doesn't look like he will pass any legislation from this point on either.

He has no will and/or ability to bring people together and to work for a common cause (the good of the country supposedly). He works only through confrontation and he is at constant war with the opposition (and probably some in his caucus). With him it's "my way or the highway and you are a terrorist by the way". He is the boss at work that everyone loves to hate. In this kind of environment, not surprisingly, nothing gets done. His government will go down in history as the most unsuccessful (in terms of legislation) and the most disfunctional. Canada is effectively on autopilot while the Conservatives posture and scream in QP and are only concerned how to spend their surplus in the most effective way as to buy the most votes.

[madmax]

Liberals cater to self-determination unlike the Conservatives who try to run government for the benefit of the country and not for the benefit of a bunch of spoiled asses.

That myth was ruined almost from the moment the CPC got in and Stephen Harper became Prime Minister. The shocked look on MPs faces when David Emerson was given a Cabinet Position and a Party Bagman given a Senate Position in charge of the portfolio that the sponsorship scandel derived from. The only thing that changed was the Spoiled asses.

It has been an never ending battle to change the politicization of Immigration. Finally an independant commission was put in place 3 years ago to promote people on the basis of merit. But the Conservatives and Diane Findley wants to go back to the good ole days of Patronage Appointments.

I am getting Conservative people talking the talking while hiding the walk.

While the element of Reform in the Party needed to be tamed a little, it is clear to me they have been completely silenced.

[Who's Doing What?]

From what I have witnessed during Question Period the govt. is a disgrace. Every bloody question is answered with an insult to either the Member who asked the question, the party the member is from, or just a blanket statement about how it is the former Govt. fault. Not once have I seen a direct answer.

All I want to see is some answers given. If their programs and ideas are so damned impressive why are the Conservatives having such a hard time answering questions about them. What is going on now is just a waste of taxes.

Basically it boils down to deflection away from the real issues and attacking the messenger and ignoring the message.

Just where the hell is the integrity we were promised?

[Canadian Blue]

I was reading Macleans online the other day, and the people who asked the question's weren't much better.

One question to Harper ended of asking him if he was "going to continue of the ideological right wing republican agenda", and all Harper replied with was "Mr Speaker, I am a monarchist".

Their's plenty of childness to go around, and alot the question's are seemingly over melodramatic. In one question that Pat Martin asked the government, he basically made the conservatives out to be child eaters.

Perhaps we should ask all parties and all MP's to smarten up.

[jbg]

I find the way Harper acts and talks in Parliament is not PM-like and I for one don't like it. Its not what I want a PM to act like.

Ah yes, the good old days of the Shawinigan Handshake, the one-finger salute, fuddle-duddle.

[Argus]

If Harper wasn't there we have a more peaceful government.

Harper is running a completely disfunctional government to the detriment of the country

I don't think you would find anyone with any expertise or knowledge of government who would agree with you. Harper's government is clearly functioning quite well. The fact you don't like him is beside the point.

He managed to pass his first piece of legislation after 9 months in office.

I think you're forgetting a few others - like the last budget, for example.

This year he hasn't passed anything at all and it doesn't look like he will pass any legislation from this point on either.

Well, Parliament didn't meet until the end of January. And I think that if the current poll numbers hold you will find the Liberals and NDP considerably less brave in their baiting and obstructionism, and you will find things being passed they do not want to fight an election on.

He has no will and/or ability to bring people together and to work for a common cause (the good of the country supposedly).

I think it's childishly naive to presume the Liberals have any interest in working with the Tories for any reason other than their own political benefit.

But then your post is little more than bluster and blather anyway.

[Saturn]

Harper is running a completely disfunctional government to the detriment of the country

I don't think you would find anyone with any expertise or knowledge of government who would agree with you. Harper's government is clearly functioning quite well. The fact you don't like him is beside the point.

The fact that you like him doesn't change the fact that he has been immensely unsuccessful in passing legislation.

He managed to pass his first piece of legislation after 9 months in office.

I think you're forgetting a few others - like the last budget, for example.

Oops! That's one not "a few".

This year he hasn't passed anything at all and it doesn't look like he will pass any legislation from this point on either.

Well, Parliament didn't meet until the end of January.

So? Normally, a couple of dozen bills get passed in this amount of time. His count - one big round ZERO. One month of heckling at the cost of $100 million.

And I think that if the current poll numbers hold you will find the Liberals and NDP considerably less brave in their baiting and obstructionism, and you will find things being passed they do not want to fight an election on.

It's great that the only way to pass legislation is through extortion.

He has no will and/or ability to bring people together and to work for a common cause (the good of the country supposedly).

I think it's childishly naive to presume the Liberals have any interest in working with the Tories for any reason other than their own political benefit.

No, I can't imagine that anyone can work with the Tories.

[August1991]

I remember on one forum, the people from the west complained that all the PM always comes from Quebec. I told them to send someone that ALL Canada could get behind by

Do you think all Canada is behind Dion? Do you think they were behind Chretien or Martin? Or does "All Canada" have limitations to you, meaning "all Canadians who think like me" ?

These are the key posts in this thread.

There are some 30 million Canadians. How can they "all" get behind a leader? [i'd be suspicious if it ever happened.]

In fact, this thread simply states that many Canadians don't agree with you, Topaz. It's called society. Get used to it.

Harper is running a completely disfunctional government to the detriment of the country as a result of his bullying, his complete lack of will to work with anybody, and his tactics of smears and personal attacks.

Sorry if I pick on you for this remark, Saturn, but you've been so eloquent.

I figure some (English) Canadians really dislike Harper. It's visceral. The mere sight of the guy drives them crazy. I don't know if it's his face, eyes or hair. I know that gays in particular generally dislike, on a personal level, Harper and the Conservatives. For such people, Harper could come out of the closet and they'd still hate him.

As I say, we live in society. Many other Canadians have a similar hate for the CBC and the mere sound of Michael Enright's voice drives them crazy.

----

As to the question of whether a PM has to be a bully, IME, successful politicians are extremely ambitious. Beyond that observation, I don't know how much I'd want to generalize.

[munsinger]

RE: To be a PM, do you have to be a bully?

SEE: Chretien, Jean

[leonardcohen]

RE: To be a PM, do you have to be a bully?

SEE: Chretien, Jean

Sorry to be blindingly obvious, but this is politics,by it's very nature it is patently absurd

to expect decorum and politeness.

The schoolyard yelling and namecalling,i for one really don't see a problem with that.

Good solid entertainment, who can forget ''Pass The tequila,sheila,lie down and love me again''.

I miss Trudeau and his eloquent insults, too bad there is nothing like that nowadays.

A well placed insult ,well there's something in the political correctness of the time

that is very rare to see or hear.

[Argus]

Harper is running a completely disfunctional government to the detriment of the country

I don't think you would find anyone with any expertise or knowledge of government who would agree with you. Harper's government is clearly functioning quite well. The fact you don't like him is beside the point.

The fact that you like him doesn't change the fact that he has been immensely unsuccessful in passing legislation.

Didn't say I like him, although the country seems to. And I don't think you can really judge him by one month.

This year he hasn't passed anything at all and it doesn't look like he will pass any legislation from this point on either.

Well, Parliament didn't meet until the end of January.

So? Normally, a couple of dozen bills get passed in this amount of time.

A couple of dozen bills? In a month? You really don't know a single damned thing about government, do you?

[jbg]

A couple of dozen bills? In a month? You really don't know a single damned thing about government, do you?

Speed reading, 3 times, plus Senate + Royal Assent. No reason they couldn't give speed reading lessons to the MP's so they could read three times real fast.