Stephan Harper Criticism

[Topspin]

Reading about Stephan Harper I haven't been able to find anything that is really wrong. I mean I know politician have a tendency to stick their hand in the honey jar from time to time, but he really doesn't appear to have been that bad.
Yet somehow he has this massive following of people convinced that he is the worst thing to happen to Canada since John Diefenbaker.
So folks, please post the bad stuff, I'd like to hear it if there is any.

[niss]

I heard he uses the blood of gentile children in his bizzare passover feast.

[Hedley]

I always admired his slaughtering of income trusts,
especially after he said he would never touch
them

Stephen Harper, like Richard Nixon, is a very intelligent
man, who learned an awful lot when he was in opposition
from Jean Cretin and Paul Martian about how to stay in
power. You can see him apply the lessons he learned
pretty much every day.

Also - and this is not a change of topic - I do not like
how governments perpetually over-tax, and then
criminally spend that money to buy votes when it
comes to election time. Re-read above paragraph.

[Dust Devil]

He did flip on income trusts adn equalization. However I think both decisions were the right ones. I would rather a politician flip on an issue then do something that is bad for the country. Being in opposition is considerably different than being in government. I would not expect Dion to follow thru with every statement he has made either.

[Hedley]

He did flip on income trusts

Worse than that, his solution to the situation was
atrociously brutal.

[TheCheez]

It's the lego hair.

[bornagain1340]

Imagine that, a politician that doesn't keep his/her word

[Guido]

Imagine that, a politician that doesn't keep his/her word

The Conservatives have delivered on all five of their main campaign promises from the 2006 election campaign.

With the exception of the income trust decision, they did everything they said they were going to do. And anyone who thought they were going to leave income trusts untouched was deluding themselves. We'd all be fucked as individuals if they hadn't done something about it.

What federal government in the past has delivered on their promises like that? Have fun looking, because you won't find one.

Some people may not like Harper, but he did what he said he was going to do. You can't ask much more of a politician.

For those of us that don't like him, that's the problem I knew he'd do what he said he was going to do (which indeed is admirable from a politician) but I don't like what he's done, and I don't like what he wants to do in the future...

[Topspin]

Imagine that, a politician that doesn't keep his/her word

The Conservatives have delivered on all five of their main campaign promises from the 2006 election campaign.

With the exception of the income trust decision, they did everything they said they were going to do. And anyone who thought they were going to leave income trusts untouched was deluding themselves. We'd all be fucked as individuals if they hadn't done something about it.

What federal government in the past has delivered on their promises like that? Have fun looking, because you won't find one.

Some people may not like Harper, but he did what he said he was going to do. You can't ask much more of a politician.

For those of us that don't like him, that's the problem I knew he'd do what he said he was going to do (which indeed is admirable from a politician) but I don't like what he's done, and I don't like what he wants to do in the future...

I guess that's it? I mean theirs all these people talking about super secret government, corporate deals & the 51st state. I naturally take it with a grain of salt, but usually these people have something to go on. I just can't find it with this though.

[Four1oh]

The FIRST thing Martian and Goodale were going to do when 're-elected' as the government was to do exactly what Harper did with income trusts. As far as I'm concerned it had to be done, and I'm glad it was done, it's just too bad that some of the babies got thrown out with the bath water, but the system was getting seriously abused.

[BibleMonkey]

I guess that's it? I mean theirs all these people talking about super secret government, corporate deals & the 51st state. I naturally take it with a grain of salt, but usually these people have something to go on. I just can't find it with this though.

It's not really secret-all of it anyway-but in a general sense corporations are being allowed to write laws-rather than what we think should happen ( I hope we think that way ) -that the people have a voice -in electing dudes to make law.

E.G-How much pesticide should be allowed on food-should we increase that amount to the amount allowed in the United States? What should the oil royalty rate be? Should the governmnet be allowed to sell health care or car insurance ? Should Canada have adopted the U.S no fly list?

Should the voters decide-or should a group of 30 un-appointed, unelected company CEOs from the largest corps in North America decide?

Should Canada's laws be 'harmonized' with American law-and profit be the only decider?

That's some of the reasons they were tear gassing people at Montebello last year...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Amer ... ss_Council

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_a ... th_America

[Icebound]

Reading about Stephan Harper I haven't been able to find anything that is really wrong. I mean I know politician have a tendency to stick their hand in the honey jar from time to time, but he really doesn't appear to have been that bad.
Yet somehow he has this massive following of people convinced that he is the worst thing to happen to Canada since John Diefenbaker.
So folks, please post the bad stuff, I'd like to hear it if there is any.

Did you get to THIS?

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/Report ... a=BB736455

It ought to give you one or two reasons.

...

[Topspin]

Reading about Stephan Harper I haven't been able to find anything that is really wrong. I mean I know politician have a tendency to stick their hand in the honey jar from time to time, but he really doesn't appear to have been that bad.
Yet somehow he has this massive following of people convinced that he is the worst thing to happen to Canada since John Diefenbaker.
So folks, please post the bad stuff, I'd like to hear it if there is any.

Did you get to THIS?

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/Report ... a=BB736455

It ought to give you one or two reasons.

...

Interesting reading, some good stuff in there. But on the whole are you certain Michael Moore didn't right it? They get a little carried away in places for people that give you two pages describing how non-partisan they are.

[niss]

Imagine that, a politician that doesn't keep his/her word

The Conservatives have delivered on all five of their main campaign promises from the 2006 election campaign.

With the exception of the income trust decision, they did everything they said they were going to do. And anyone who thought they were going to leave income trusts untouched was deluding themselves. We'd all be fucked as individuals if they hadn't done something about it.

What federal government in the past has delivered on their promises like that? Have fun looking, because you won't find one.

Some people may not like Harper, but he did what he said he was going to do. You can't ask much more of a politician.

And what will happen once he has the majority and he is free to rule the roost? Harper may be a decent PM in a minority gov't where it can all be taken away but I have a feeling we will be seeing quite a different man once he locks in on power. Why is he being so secretive? What does he want us to not find out?

I personally think they are trying the old Trojan-new-conservative-platform manouver.

You let your guard down, bring them in and the next thing you know ultra right wing nutcases come out and slaughter your way of life.

[Icebound]

[

[Hedley]

Never figured you for the strong, silent type!

[Dust Devil]

Imagine that, a politician that doesn't keep his/her word

The Conservatives have delivered on all five of their main campaign promises from the 2006 election campaign.

With the exception of the income trust decision, they did everything they said they were going to do. And anyone who thought they were going to leave income trusts untouched was deluding themselves. We'd all be fucked as individuals if they hadn't done something about it.

What federal government in the past has delivered on their promises like that? Have fun looking, because you won't find one.

Some people may not like Harper, but he did what he said he was going to do. You can't ask much more of a politician.

And what will happen once he has the majority and he is free to rule the roost? Harper may be a decent PM in a minority gov't where it can all be taken away but I have a feeling we will be seeing quite a different man once he locks in on power. Why is he being so secretive? What does he want us to not find out?

I personally think they are trying the old Trojan-new-conservative-platform manouver.

You let your guard down, bring them in and the next thing you know ultra right wing nutcases come out and slaughter your way of life.

You always have the option of booting him out the door in the next election if this super secret agenda surfaces. Unless you think he will do away with elections all together.

[PopnChipper]

I took this quote off of the website posted about "The Harper Records".

"We need the CCPA to remind us that our dreams of a decent, egalitarian society are reasonable — indeed that with a little work, they are practical. And I love that practicality, that protection of the dream of the possible.” - Naomi Klein Speaking at a 2007 CCPA http://www.policyalternatives.ca/welcome/index.cfm

When you do a little exploring around it, I think you will find that it is hardly an unbiased site concerned with informing Canadians of the whole truth, nothing but the truth, etc. I doubt you would find such a site.

IMHO, if you are indeed voting for the national leader, and not your local choices, the liberals tend to be all about spending initiatives, while the conservatives seem to be more about a sound financial footing for Canada. The liberals would like to see environmental action taken in questionable ways, while the conservatives would like to take a more restrained approach, and hopefully see technollogy and "free market" initiative come up with practical solutions. There are plenty of other reasons each party would like to be in power, and to be honest, their websites normally outline what they are all about. I would stay far away from believing secret agenda type rhetoric, the conspiracy theorists are alive and well in Canada.

Just my 2 cents

[cisco]

problem with Harper is that he delivers on promises:
- promise to cut services, cut taxes, eliminate surplus, reward polluters, fuel inflation, do nothing to build strong society, look too much like republicans

[. ._]

Harper can't play pool as well as Smilin' Jack.



I guarantee it.

I had a beer with Jack back before he was leader of the NDP, and we talked about real politics and real life. He has a good head on his shoulders and there was no sense of him bullshitting me like many other politicians I've met.

Harper doesn't drink.

-istp

[Sheila]

I heard a blurb they are doing better than the Liberals because of things like these,

NDP Promises

$8.2 billion over four years to create, protect and foster growth of "green-collar" jobs and manufacturing.

A "cap-and-trade" system to create incentives for big business to reduce their emissions. No cost provided.

OTTAWA -- New Democrat Leader Jack Layton called Monday for all federal leaders to put their campaigns on hold for an emergency all-party meeting on the unfolding financial crisis in the U.S and its implications for Canadians.

Layton's proposal came after the U.S. House of Representatives voted down President George W. Bush's bailout package for the American banking system.

The problems with Stephen Harper are that he doesn't have a contingency plan which should be very important these days. We feel insecure because we don't see solutions or relief from the turmoils. Plus, now that he has plagarized a speech from somewhere, what are we supposed to think?

[niss]

You let your guard down, bring them in and the next thing you know ultra right wing nutcases come out and slaughter your way of life.

Niss, you DO realize that the laws of government are subject to our constitution and charter of rights, correct?

Short of temporarily suspending those protections by implementing the War Measures Act, no government of any stripe can suddenly turn Canada into a land which resembles something run by a two-bit dictatorship like those found in North Korea or Burma, despite what the fear-factories in opposition would like you to believe.

And we're not electing a leader for life. We have regular elections in this country.

If any of this comes as a surprise to you, then I suggest you enroll in a citizenship class, or maybe consider topping up your education beyond a grade 7 level, because you come across sounding like an uninformed fool when you make comments like the ones above.

There is pleanty he can do while working within the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Does abortion fall into this area? And of course we are not electing a leader for life but we do have to put up with him for his term. Look at the shitstorm that Bush has plunged his country into and is going to fufill his term.

I firmly believe that Harper is every bit as two faced as the opposition accuse him of being. I think that its safe having him in power as a minority government just to ensure that he stays in balance.

But hey, what do I know? Clearly I am a fucking moron for not siding with the conservatives and thinking that the cops should be able to taser people who endanger others. Clearly I am a fucking idiot.

[Dust Devil]

But hey, what do I know? Clearly I am a fucking moron for not siding with the conservatives and thinking that the cops should be able to taser people who endanger others. Clearly I am a fucking idiot.

No your not an idiot. You're just from Ontario. Both are similar of course. The difference being I tolerate people from Ontario where as I tend not to tolerate idiots

My impression is Harper manages the government where as other politicians manage their careers. Granted there is some vote pandering done by the Conservatives but that is a reality of the system we have in this country.

Those of us who are small "c" conservatives don't have a lot of options when it comes to elections where as the liberal voter has a number of parties to choose from. I don't agree with everything Harper has done but as a right winger have no other option so Harper gets my vote. I don't feel bad about it because over all I think he has done more good than bad.

[Dust Devil]

Look at the shitstorm that Bush has plunged his country into and is going to fufill his term.

Keep in mind that on the intellectual level Harper is miles ahead of Bush. Also Harper is obviously the man in control in his government (something he takes a lot of criticism for for some reason) where as I think Bush has little control over his.

The Conservatives are much more to the left than the Republicans. To tie the two together is very unfair. As is tying Layton to Communists. Layton is just unrealistic.

[niss]

Look at the shitstorm that Bush has plunged his country into and is going to fufill his term.

Keep in mind that on the intellectual level Harper is miles ahead of Bush. Also Harper is obviously the man in control in his government (something he takes a lot of criticism for for some reason) where as I think Bush has little control over his.

The Conservatives are much more to the left than the Republicans. To tie the two together is very unfair. As is tying Layton to Communists. Layton is just unrealistic.

My point was in response to cpl_atc saying that we dont have harper for life and he isnt free to do whatever he wants, clearly Bush has still had the ability to @#$! up the country within only another 4 years.