Czar Stephen Harper

[Marcel Petrin]

Originally Posted by Titanium48

^^And where's that got Ireland? Last I heard they were bankrupt. If our rates are competitive with the USA there's no reason to lower them further.

Ireland is going through a massive banking crisis for reasons that have little or nothing to do with their corporate tax rate. Also, it's difficult to make straight comparisons with the US, as their tax code is so completely riddled with a mess of exemptions.

Originally Posted by etownboarder

Like where? We already have some of the lowest corporate tax rates on earth.

Nice ninja edit. Perhaps next time tone the hyperbole down a bit so you don't have to come back later and surreptitiously change what you originally said.

[DiscoBandit]

Originally Posted by etownboarder

Like where? We already have some of the lowest corporate tax rates on earth.

I'm certainly not implying that it would happen, I was asking soycd if that is what they thought. Sort of like a housewife not trying to change things to their own betterment so that their abusive boyfriend would stay, seems to be pretty common.

[MrOilers]

Originally Posted by PrairieBoyinExile

Can you not read, or are you just full of crap?

I didn't read what Arcade Fire said. I have never heard their (probably crappy) music either. I simply don't care what musicians think about politics, because most of them sound like idiots when they talk about anything outside of their own jobs. Sorry that it offends you so much.

Sheesh... some people's children.

[MrOilers]

Originally Posted by DiscoBandit

Hmm. Do you think if we raised taxes on the corporations then they'd leave us for somewhere cheaper?

Or somewhere where there are more loopholes in the corporate tax system.

[Jimbo]

None of the party leaders are evil. None are corrupt. All are intelligent, fine, decent people. All of them are control freaks (as am I), or they wouldn't be where they are today (hasn't helped me). They all sincerely want to make Canada a better place. All of them love their country. Etc.

Where they differ, and where their parties differ, is in how they see the issues. They all believe they are doing the right thing. They just have a different view on what the right thing is.

Elections are not about convincing people to support your party, or about changing anyone's mind. People have already made up their mind, including everyone posting on this forum. Rather than looking for facts and the truth, people look for anything that might support the position they've already decided on.

The parties are not going to convert anyone to the cause. Most people who care at all have seen enough to know where each party stands. What a leader says now, or what the party platform is now, isn't really as important. The campaigning is all designed to rally the troops as it were.

The politicians know they aren't going to change anyone's mind. All of the campaigning, and especially the door knocking, isn't meant to change anyone's mind. It's meant to do two things; identify who the supporters are, and get them riled up so they vote. If someone answers the door and it's clear they are not a supporter, a good door knocker will respectfully move on asap.

The last thing any party wants are volunteers and party workers who argue with people. Unfortunately, for each party, many of those who care enough to volunteer like to argue. What the parties hope instead is to pacify those who disagree, in the hope they don't bother to vote. Sleeping dogs, and all that.

It would be really nice if we could have a thread that identifies real substantive issues (child care, health care, the economy, jobs, Afghanistan, transfer payments, etc ???), and perhaps debate those is a respectful manner. What someone wrote in a first draft of a report, since changed, and not released to the public just isn't real. I don't care that Ignatief didn't live in Canada for much of his life.

But it seems that's too much to hope for during silly season.

I am one of those rare people who hasn't decided who I'm going to vote for. Frankly, I'm leaning Liberal. That's never been the case in any other election. But what the leaders say during the campaign won't influence my decision, because I know it's mostly BS.

[Marcel Petrin]

Originally Posted by MrOilers

I didn't read what Arcade Fire said. I have never heard their (probably crappy) music either. I simply don't care what musicians think about politics, because most of them sound like idiots when they talk about anything outside of their own jobs. Sorry that it offends you so much.

Sheesh... some people's children.

Writing off someone's musical ability because of their political views is every bit as short sighted as giving credibility to their political views based on their musical ability. They're one of the most unique and talented bands to come out of Canada in recent memory, and you should do yourself a favor and check some of their music out.

[MrOilers]

Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin

Writing off someone's musical ability because of their political views is every bit as short sighted as giving credibility to their political views based on their musical ability. They're one of the most unique and talented bands to come out of Canada in recent memory, and you should do yourself a favor and check some of their music out.

I write off what they say politically, like I do with any entertainer. I let an artist's music speak for itself.

That said, I downloaded an Arcade Fire album a couple days ago and I couldn't delete it fast enough after hearing it. They are obviously competent musicians, but I think their music was boring and overrated. But to each their own.

[Turtle]

17 days and counting no ignatieff in Alberta.

[PrairieBoyinExile]

Originally Posted by MrOilers

I didn't read what Arcade Fire said. I have never heard their (probably crappy) music either. I simply don't care what musicians think about politics, because most of them sound like idiots when they talk about anything outside of their own jobs. Sorry that it offends you so much.

Sheesh... some people's children.

What offends me is that you were dishonest. Why make accusations that they're telling people how to vote when you haven't even read the article? If they had actually told everybody to vote NDP or Liberal, you would have a point. This is what I don't get about you. You seem like a smart enough guy, but you're more than willing to stretch the truth when necessary.

As for Arcade Fire, it's the kind of music that takes repeated listens but you keep discovering something new. Very rewarding in my opinion. I'd recommend checking out their performance of "Rococo" on the Junos, which you can find on YouTube.

[Titanium48]

Originally Posted by Turtle

17 days and counting no ignatieff in Alberta.

Good. He's obviously focusing on seats he can actually win. ABC votes in Alberta are best directed to the NDP.

[MrOilers]

Originally Posted by PrairieBoyinExile

What offends me is that you were dishonest. Why make accusations that they're telling people how to vote when you haven't even read the article?

Well, I didn't read the article. I just took your word for it that they told people to not vote for the Conservatives. You posted the article, after all.

I don't see what's dishonest about that.

[whynow99]

"Sheila Fraser for Prime Minister. She knows the rules of Parliament and follows them to the letter.Her integrity is admirable and enviable.If Mr Harper had a wee bit of her attitude and grace he might be worth voting for. ^NOT a chance..."

[Admin]

The above comment was moved from the budgetary thread as it is more appropriate here.

[edmonton daily photo]

^ you know that Canada is one of the LEAST corrupt places in the world... (some where around number 5)

our view of what "corruption" is, would be VERY skewed.

[PrairieBoyinExile]

Originally Posted by Turtle

17 days and counting no ignatieff in Alberta.

EDMONTON — Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff and Green party Leader Elizabeth May are scheduled to visit Edmonton within the next couple of days.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...453/story.html

Told you so.

[Dialog]

Ottawa Citizen: Harper hasn't delivered sunlight and prosperity

"As for the stimulus package, the Conservatives only created it when pressed by the opposition and the international community. If the Conservatives wish to take credit for it now, Stephen Harper should first thank Stéphane Dion for showing him the error of his ways."

[North Guy66]

Conservative candidate has links to Tamil Tigers

The Conservative Leader affirmed the party’s stand against the Tigers, but did not answer when asked how Mr. Paranchothy became a candidate or whether he would remain one. Mr. Harper’s spokesman, Dimitri Soudas, said Mr. Paranchothy cleared pre-nomination screening.

“Prior to becoming a candidate for the Conservative Party of Canada, he had to make it crystal clear – and he did – that he had no support or sympathy for the Tamil Tigers,” Mr. Soudas said.

Last November, Mr. Paranchothy hosted a sombre TV special to mark Heroes Day, an annual commemoration of dead Tiger fighters, whom he called “strong and faithful people who stood guard for the Tamils, fought for freedom and peace.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1986256/

[Blueline]

So when is Stevo comming to river city ?

[North Guy66]

Tories forced off message, scramble to douse abortion fire after MPs comments

The Tories have run the same tight, orchestrated campaign that delivered Harper to power in 2006.

But they are clearly moving to avoid a repeat of the 2004 election campaign gaffe that saw backbencher Cheryl Gallant compare abortion to the beheading of hostages in Iraq, spoiling Harper's first attempt to win power, and giving the Liberals a minority government.

Asked why he was so eager to comment on the Trost story, so late at night, Soudas replied: "It just shows that this campaign is on top of every single issue."

Soudas refused to say whether Trost would be punished in any way for straying off message.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/tories-forc...103731465.html

Hmmm, is Harper harbouring a hidden agenda? Don't give this Czar a majority!

[Marcel Petrin]

I really doubt it. The issue is radioactive, on both sides of the political spectrum, and he knows it. If they attempt to make any changes to the (non-existent) laws on abortion in Canada, they know they'd likely be turfed out of office the first chance the electorate got.

I'm completely pro-choice (lol, brain fart, originally said pro-life), but Andrew Coyne has a very good point in this article: http://www.macleans.ca/canada/nation..._112194_112194

Politicians of all stripes in this country have basically abandoned their responsibility to legislate on this issue, and have simply farmed it out to the courts.

[grish]

They can effectively legislate through funding of relevant agencies such as this one making waves and spin their social agenda as government prudency. it would be especially effective if they juxtapose planned parenthood funding agains healthcare as in "we were able to find inefficiencies in the government to increase health care transfers to the provinces". Divide and conquer...

[Marcel Petrin]

Not disagreeing with you in that respect. Planned Parenthood's spending on actual abortions is a tiny fraction of their total spending, most of which is on contraception, education, medical exams and the like so it would be disgraceful for the Conservatives to de-fund them because of ideology.

Semi-related but a similar argument is going on in the US: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/stephen-c...-at-walgreens/

Colbert's bit was on last night (stupid video in the link doesn't work), and it was quite hilarious.

[North Guy66]

Tory crowd drowns out question about support from man acquitted in Air India

A reporter tried to press Mr. Harper on, this asking whether he “really believed” that Ms. Young would not know Mr. Malik, who’s been in the public spotlight for decades due to scrutiny on him after the 1985 airplane bombing that claimed 329 lives.

But the Conservative Leader refused to answer this follow-up query, waiting as the crowd at the Coptic Christian Centre in Mississauga applauded and cheered him for about 60 seconds.

It’s the first time a Conservative crowd has purposely drowned out a reporter’s question of Mr. Harper during the 41st election campaign.

Encouraging were Tory staffers including Marc-André Plouffe, who before the campaign started was a senior adviser in the Prime Minister’s Office.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1996458/

[North Guy66]

How Mr. Harper deals with the media over controversial issues.

[grish]

also, at times, like this:

[Hilman]

Yet the Tories have the support in recent polls over the Liberals, looks like the NDP even have more lol.

[grish]

speaks volumes about the support base of the Tories, doesn't it?

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by grish

also, at times, like this:

is it true that the original caption was "s***w you, i have a report?". interesting how behavior and attitude and one's perception and treatment towards others often depends more on whether they agree with you (generic and not personal you) than on their actual behavior and attitude. what is acceptable from those with whom one agrees - or in one's own behavior for that matter - becomes deplorable from those with whom we do not agree. current support for the tories may well speak volumes about the support base but it probably speaks equal volumes about the alternatives.

[grish]

the non-specific and generic you may wish to review the irony of evoking a completely unrellated discussion in which disbelief reigns in the presence of very specific evidence.

in the case of the Tories, disbeilef is coupled with indifference as all evidence be damned. Tories supporters, not all as Mr. Peter Kent has proven recently as well as the campaign staffers for Julian Fantino in Vaughn, have difficulty noticing all evidence that the party they support has been found in contempt of parliament, the party members face criminal proceedings with respect to elections fraud, G8 spending has been misused as some sort of partisan slush fund, hospitals being given away like candy in Vaughn to reward "correct voting" (yet the funding goes to private interests close to the campaign), documents are withheld from parliament time and time again, influence is being thrown behin port authority candidates with questionable links, people are being removed from rallies based on Facebook evidence, and journalists are only allowed to ask certain questions.

The FU boy picture quite clearly and correctly summarizes the behaviour of Mr. Harper and his approach to transparent, democratic rules for government.

[kcantor]

^
and the behavior of grits for decades - or social credit or ndp or bloc or [insert party of choice here] has been so exemplary as to be above reproach and warrant support regardless of platform or local candidate? this is not a suggestion to ignore or to excuse stupid and inappropriate behavior, simply a comment that stupid and inappropriate behavior knows no political boundaries so unless you want to vote "none of the above" by staying home or - more suitably perhaps - spoiling your ballot, we are left trying to decide what to vote for, not what to vote against. and if the other parties want some of that tory support, they need to do a better job of earning my vote based on what they stand for and how they conduct themselves instead of throwing stones from glass houses.

[grish]

check the thread's title. it is about Harper's approach to governance. To say that he is excused because others may have done something similar in the past is really meaningless.

I am glad, however, that you and I appear to have agreed that Harper's behaviour is at the very least not above reproach. And that is what the thread is trying to debate.

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by grish

check the thread's title. it is about Harper's approach to governance. To say that he is excused because others may have done something similar in the past is really meaningless.

I am glad, however, that you and I appear to have agreed that Harper's behaviour is at the very least not above reproach. And that is what the thread is trying to debate.

noone's behavior is "above reproach".

and pardon me for reading the thread and thinking that it tries to paint everyone's behavior except harper's as above reproach and all tory support as unthinking and uncritical.

[grish]

It shows an extreme luck of judgement to excuse this behaviour by pointing to others who may or may not try the same when in power. Imagine if your child tells you that they should be excused in being dishonest only because all their friends are the same, or an employee telling you that the reason they used company money for their personal need is because all other employees in their place would do the same.

In arguing that Harper supporters should not be seen as unthinking and uncritical, you sure pick interesting points to defend your case.

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by grish

It shows an extreme luck of judgement to excuse this behaviour by pointing to others who may or may not try the same when in power. Imagine if your child tells you that they should be excused in being dishonest only because all their friends are the same, or an employee telling you that the reason they used company money for their personal need is because all other employees in their place would do the same.

In arguing that Harper supporters should not be seen as unthninking and uncritical, you sure pick interesting points to defend your case.

well if you really want to move this discussion to a hypothetical simile, a better one might be to be a good example for your child without having instead to rely on "do as i say, not as i do ".

[grish]

that would be a good similie if you could find a specific example of Ignatieff or even Layton acting in that way.

We certainly have plenty of examples with Harper, however, where he pretends that rules of parliament need not apply when he gets to decide. When has Ignatieff acted in this manner?

[Jimbo]

It would be good if you spent as much time and effort looking for that kind of specific example yourself. Or for any other kind of transgression. Each party leader has shown some of the same kind of disdain for those they disagree with.

I might point out it's the same kind of disdain you are showing in this thread for Tory supporters.

You are telling people who they should support (or more to the point who they should not), and why, completely disregarding the fact voters have their own key issues and priorities, while insisting they should instead be using yours. I'd call that arrogant.

I didn't see you mention health care. The economy. Jobs. Crime and punishment. Afghanistan. The oil sands. The environment. Education. Day care. Etc. I would say each of these is far more important to most people, me for sure, that the fact the Harper gov't was found in contempt, not by a judge, but by members of the opposition party as a pretense for an election. Most of us find that to be mostly partisan BS.

If most people are ignoring your key points it's because they don't find them important, not because they are in disbelief or indifferent.

You are making the same miscalculation the opposition parties did, leading to an expensive election few Canadians wanted. I doubt the outcome of the election will be one you agree with. Don't blame everybody else for not sharing your priorities. And don't be surprised if they don't rush to your side, especially after you give them the finger, which is how your post, above, comes across.