Veteran Tory MP Might Vote Against

[Michael Bluth]

That was a personal feud; it wasn't nice but it was not like the Steve government treats our democratic process.

The fact that you are so disrespectful and dismissive is pretty telling. Do you somehow feel better demeaning our Prime Minister?

You are probably suggesting that I am not politically aware and should not be posting, however, I do post and I do pay attention and I do have a pretty good grasp on what is going on. And I don't like what I see.

I'm not suggesting anything.

Merely asked a question that you responded to by ascribing the nastiest possible intentions to my post.

Something tells you whatever angers you goes far beyond my posts or the "Steve" government.

Yikes!

[normanchateau]

You are probably suggesting that I am not politically aware and should not be posting, however, I do post and I do pay attention and I do have a pretty good grasp on what is going on. And I don't like what I see.

Something tells you whatever angers you goes far beyond my posts or the "Steve" government.

And what exactly is that something? A miniature, talking Stephen Harper homunculus permanently imbedded in the neuronal synapses of your auditory cortex?

[scribblet]

I'm not suggesting anything.

Merely asked a question that you responded to by ascribing the nastiest possible intentions to my post.

Something tells you whatever angers you goes far beyond my posts or the "Steve" government.

Yikes!

I think the rhetoric and polemics on here towards the CPC and Harper are based on nothing but sour grapes, anger and bitterness because the beloved Liberals were toppled and no longer rule with their Divine Right of Kings attitude. They just can't get over themselves.

[jdobbin]

I think the rhetoric and polemics on here towards the CPC and Harper are based on nothing but sour grapes, anger and bitterness because the beloved Liberals were toppled and no longer rule with their Divine Right of Kings attitude. They just can't get over themselves.

I guess the criticism of Casey's eviction has noting to do with the way Tories howled when Dion evicted his own MP for voting with the budget. I suppose it has nothing to do with MacKay saying that Tories would never do something so odious as to evict an MP who voted his conscience.

[scribblet]

I think the rhetoric and polemics on here towards the CPC and Harper are based on nothing but sour grapes, anger and bitterness because the beloved Liberals were toppled and no longer rule with their Divine Right of Kings attitude. They just can't get over themselves.

I guess the criticism of Casey's eviction has noting to do with the way Tories howled when Dion evicted his own MP for voting with the budget. I suppose it has nothing to do with MacKay saying that Tories would never do something so odious as to evict an MP who voted his conscience.

Maybe, and McKay obviously shouldn't have said that. However, overall I'd say not, because nothing Harper or the CPC did would hold validity in the eyes of the opposition. Its all part of the Bush/Harper Derangement Syndrome you know

cheers

[normanchateau]

I suppose it has nothing to do with MacKay saying that Tories would never do something so odious as to evict an MP who voted his conscience.

Sounds remarkably like the same honourable MacKay who promised that his party would never merge with the Canadian Alliance and called his ex a dog.

[jdobbin]

Maybe, and McKay obviously shouldn't have said that. However, overall I'd say not, because nothing Harper or the CPC did would hold validity in the eyes of the opposition. Its all part of the Bush/Harper Derangement Syndrome you know

Maybe its because Harper is on the wrong side of issues that are important to Canadians such as Kyoto and Afghanistan that he continues to fall back from majority territory.

Perhaps, it is because he appoints cabinet people who are known for their political barbs rather than trying to get a minority government to work as Chantal Hebert wrote this week.

Maybe it is MacKay opening his maw and making a promise that everyone in Nova Scotia took to be a big, fat, outrageous and insincere lie when their MP was tossed.

Stop playing the victim. Most of the Tory problems are self inflicted.

[scribblet]

Stop playing the victim. Most of the Tory problems are self inflicted.

Whatever - you still wouldn't like anything they did, and besides for a minority government that's only been in for less than two years they have accomplished a lot more in that time. Its just sour grapes because they are still governing. LOL

[jdobbin]

Whatever - you still wouldn't like anything they did, and besides for a minority government that's only been in for less than two years they have accomplished a lot more in that time. Its just sour grapes because they are still governing. LOL

Actually, I have pointed out policies that I have agreed with. You're just sticking in your own partisan jabs now. And you wonder why the Tories have run out of gas and can't get anywhere near a majority.

[Fortunata]

The fact that you are so disrespectful and dismissive is pretty telling. Do you somehow feel better demeaning our Prime Minister?

Merely asked a question that you responded to by ascribing the nastiest possible intentions to my post.

Something tells you whatever angers you goes far beyond my posts or the "Steve" government.

Yikes!

Do I have to pretend respect for someone I have absolutely no respect for? I think I'm more honest than that.

And you are right, I did use the worst scenario since I have no intention of opening myself up to forum nastiness. If you did not intend it that way, I apologize.

As far as being angry, I'm not but it's handy for the pro's to ascribe that attribute as it would never occur to them that the man they seem to idolize is not trustworthy. I truly think Steve was one of the worst choices for PM that could have been made. Obviously people did not pay attention to his years before his CPC leadership. And it becomes increasingly apparent that unless he holds the reins even firmer, becomes even more secretive, he and his minions can't handle being government. The only bright spot is that he is having trouble gaining majority ground as people on the street are uncomfortable with the way he does politics.

[Michael Bluth]

Do I have to pretend respect for someone I have absolutely no respect for? I think I'm more honest than that.

And you are right, I did use the worst scenario since I have no intention of opening myself up to forum nastiness. If you did not intend it that way, I apologize.

As far as being angry, I'm not but it's handy for the pro's to ascribe that attribute as it would never occur to them that the man they seem to idolize is not trustworthy. I truly think Steve was one of the worst choices for PM that could have been made. Obviously people did not pay attention to his years before his CPC leadership. And it becomes increasingly apparent that unless he holds the reins even firmer, becomes even more secretive, he and his minions can't handle being government. The only bright spot is that he is having trouble gaining majority ground as people on the street are uncomfortable with the way he does politics.

Is using somebody's last name really that much of a stretch for you to pretend to be respectful?

You are consciously being rude and dismissive referring to "the Steve" whatever. Going out of your way to insult him.

You open yourself up to forum nastiness behaving as such.

Harper is a keen student of history. The largest reason he has been so tight on the reins is the nigthmare of leaks and loose lips that was the first two or three years of Mulruney's term in office.

You may not be an angry person (or see yourself that way) but you definitely post with an undeniable sense of anger.

[margrace]

Yep he reads history, and he is a Randite from the top of his head to the end of his big toe. Randites hate and despise ordinary working people. Just read some of the rhetoric in the books by Anye Rand and then Read Barbara Brandons book about her and her ideas.

[Michael Bluth]

Yep he reads history, and he is a Randite from the top of his head to the end of his big toe. Randites hate and despise ordinary working people. Just read some of the rhetoric in the books by Anye Rand and then Read Barbara Brandons book about her and her ideas.

The term is objectivism.

Objectivists just hate Government interference in our lives at all.

A real objectivist wouldn't have introduced all the myriad of programs that Harper has.

He is far too sophisticated to be suckered in by Ayn Rand's cereal box philosophy.

Rona Ambrose on the other hand...

[Fortunata]

Is using somebody's last name really that much of a stretch for you to pretend to be respectful?

Why should I pretend? I thought forums were supposed to be open and honest but I should pretend? Ok, here it is just for you ..... Steve Harper is not the man for the job of PM. I don't trust him.

You are consciously being rude and dismissive referring to "the Steve" whatever. Going out of your way to insult him.

It's not Steve Harper that should mind me using his first name; is he really so uptight and unbendable? I would say it insults your idolistic sensibilities for me to use his first name. If I really wanted to be insulting I would use Stevie.

You open yourself up to forum nastiness behaving as such.

Really? Gee whiz, nobody else comments on it since renaming a PM seems to be fair game, ie. Mr. Dithers, Jean Poutine, etc. Why is Steve Harper exempt?

You may not be an angry person (or see yourself that way) but you definitely post with an undeniable sense of anger.

Yeah, whatever. Better angry than idolizing.

[Michael Bluth]

Really? Gee whiz, nobody else comments on it since renaming a PM seems to be fair game, ie. Mr. Dithers, Jean Poutine, etc. Why is Steve Harper exempt?

Actually the moderator made numerous public warnings about the use of Mr. Dithers IIRC...

[margrace]

Yep he reads history, and he is a Randite from the top of his head to the end of his big toe. Randites hate and despise ordinary working people. Just read some of the rhetoric in the books by Anye Rand and then Read Barbara Brandons book about her and her ideas.

The term is objectivism.

Objectivists just hate Government interference in our lives at all.

A real objectivist wouldn't have introduced all the myriad of programs that Harper has.

He is far too sophisticated to be suckered in by Ayn Rand's cereal box philosophy.

Rona Ambrose on the other hand...

Oh Really, then why does he not meet with the provincial premiers. Right he doesn't have time, is that right?

He despised the common man, he makes does not deny that, G.Bush thinks he is superior tool.

If it were not for government intervention a lot of women in Canada would not be working for fair wages, It it were not for government intervention we would not have health care for everyone. You can yell all you want about waiting lists but at least we do get care. I can go to a hospital and get looked after. If it were not for government intervention a lot of seniors would be destitute. And from the sound of young people on here I wonder how many would take their parents into their homes and look after them. Very few from what I can read.

If it were not for government intervention we would not have food we can count on, water we can safely drink etc. We would not have public schooling, we would not have good roads or public transportation.

[geoffrey]

Harper isn't rich, how can he despise the common man??

If anyone depised the common man, he wouldn't be handing out all these stupid social programs left and right. I see no evidence of an objectivism attitude or anything even remotely conservative for that matter in Harper. He's the redest of red Liberals. He spent more than Martin did in the NDP budget this year. Need I say more?

[Fortunata]

There is more to conservatism than fiscal. I no longer say fiscal conservative because that's a falsehood - the more honest phrase would be fiscally responsible.

Harper does think less of the common man; there is an elitism about him that is very apparent. (It isn't only rich people that think less of their countrymen - why is it that money seems to be the only thing that sets one apart from another in your mind?) Steve is against grass root input and decisions within the party; he said at the leadership convention he wouldn't be bound by the recommendations/decisions made there. And yet you Cons voted him in, not that there was much of a choice. He was the worst that could have been picked imo; Stronach, who is rich, would have been better than Steve Harper.

Chase said on Question Period that he had warned his leader and his party that if there wasn't movement to get back to the original accord he would be voting against this budget. Heavy weights such as Mulroney contacted him to put pressure on to vote for the budget regardless of what it would mean to Nova Scotia.

Also interesting that it has come out that Steve told Lorne Calvert there would be no more side deals with the provinces but is working on a side deal with Nova Scotia. Man oh man, that Steve is some uniting PM.

[nbguyca]

Harper isn't rich, how can he despise the common man??

If anyone depised the common man, he wouldn't be handing out all these stupid social programs left and right. I see no evidence of an objectivism attitude or anything even remotely conservative for that matter in Harper. He's the redest of red Liberals. He spent more than Martin did in the NDP budget this year. Need I say more?

I'm guessing that you didn't have a straight face when you wrote that.

[geoffrey]

I'm guessing that you didn't have a straight face when you wrote that.

No, I did. He outspent the NDP. What's conservative about that?

[madmax]

He was the worst that could have been picked imo; Stronach, who is rich, would have been better than Steve Harper.

Now that is a Scary Thought!

Also interesting that it has come out that Steve told Lorne Calvert there would be no more side deals with the provinces but is working on a side deal with Nova Scotia. Man oh man, that Steve is some uniting PM.

No he is a politician. Calvert should be wise enough to realize that Harpers word means nothing. Think of how he put his stamp on things within the first week. That should have sent the alarm bells off and that all bets were off regarding integrity and this government. Pretty sad, considering that is what they hung their hat on to get elected.

[Michael Bluth]

Think of how he put his stamp on things within the first week. That should have sent the alarm bells off and that all bets were off regarding integrity and this government. Pretty sad, considering that is what they hung their hat on to get elected.

Does anybody on this board who voted CPC in 2006, or at least seriously considered it, share that view?

Probably the best test of whether or not that argument is blindly partisan or dead-on accurate.

[jdobbin]

No he is a politician. Calvert should be wise enough to realize that Harpers word means nothing. Think of how he put his stamp on things within the first week. That should have sent the alarm bells off and that all bets were off regarding integrity and this government. Pretty sad, considering that is what they hung their hat on to get elected.

Hard to imagine all those Tory MPs in Saskatchewan and none of them could get Harper to honour the deal.

[Michael Bluth]

Hard to imagine all those Tory MPs in Saskatchewan and none of them could get Harper to honour the deal.

Hard to imagine all the whining with all the other things that were given to the provinces in the budget.

Do the Liberals really want to trigger an election over this?

[nbguyca]

I'm guessing that you didn't have a straight face when you wrote that.

No, I did. He outspent the NDP. What's conservative about that?

You keep believing that he is liberal and I will believe that the Green Party will form the next government.