Excerpt from Stephen Harper's speech to the Council for National Policy, a right-wing U.S. think tank, in 1997 when he was VP of the National Citizens Coalition:
Ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by giving you a big welcome to Canada. Let's start up with a compliment. You're here from the second greatest nation on earth. But seriously, your country, and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world.
Now, having given you a compliment, let me also give you an insult. I was asked to speak about Canadian politics. It may not be true, but it's legendary that if you're like all Americans, you know almost nothing except for your own country. Which makes you probably knowledgeable about one more country than most Canadians.
But in any case, my speech will make that assumption. I'll talk fairly basic stuff. If it seems pedestrian to some of you who do know a lot about Canada, I apologize.
I'm going to look at three things. First of all, just some basic facts about Canada that are relevant to my talk, facts about the country and its political system, its civics. Second, I want to take a look at the party system that's developed in Canada from a conventional left/right, or liberal/conservative perspective. The third thing I'm going to do is look at the political system again, because it can't be looked at in this country simply from the conventional perspective.
First, facts about Canada. Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it. Canadians make no connection between the fact that they are a Northern European welfare state and the fact that we have very low economic growth, a standard of living substantially lower than yours, a massive brain drain of young professionals to your country, and double the unemployment rate of the United States.
For the complete speech, follow this link:
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/SpecialEvent7/20051213/elxn_harper_speech_text_051214/
Stumble It!
http://dawn.thot.net/harperstiestousa/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfhLJ7Kw8xE
It Appears We May Be Heading For An Election
Canadian Politics
Written By:
Wednesday, March 23 at 09:38
And, if nothing else, please remember the utter contempt our present Prime Minister expressed for Canada, just over a decade ago.
read more
It amazes me that the Reformacons can score points with Iggy's statements while he was out of the country, but the Liberals aren't using speeches such as this one to counter effect.
It Appears We May Be Heading For An Election
Canadian Politics
Written By:
Wednesday, March 23 at 09:38
And, if nothing else, please remember the utter contempt our present Prime Minister expressed for Canada, just over a decade ago.
read more
When you actually read it, and don't just fixate on the "Northern European welfare state" sound bite, it's an well thought out and insightful speech. If I were to describe Canadian politics to a US audience, I'd do so in a similar way. Reading it makes me just that much more glad that he's our PM.
But I will say one thing for you - you sure can be inciteful.
Indie: HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Not for long, what with an election on the horizon.
It's dangerous to underestimate your enemy. But to ask the left to give up smugness is kind of like asking Charlie Sheen to give up drugs and porn actresses.
But I will say one thing for you - you sure can be inciteful.
Someone has to stir things up in this musty echo chamber. No sense letting you guys get too removed from the real world.
I sure hope Layton and Iggys foolishness of saving the abysmal gun registry, doesn't give Harper a majority. Had they scrapped it, it would have been forgotten by now, and the Tories would have become irrelevant to rural people. Such a screw up was a stab in the back for their campaigners. Urban voters won't be thinking fondly of the $2 billion squandered on the gun registry, as the drive by shootings continue unabated, while rural people will definitely have it in their mind. .
CBC radio was right this morning, when they said a shift of only 2% is huge in this situation.
They were also right when they said this will be the last election for the three main party leaders. Not being able to get out of stalemate in three attempts, means party members will definitely be looking for new leaders to run with.
The history of the welfare state goes back 150 or more years, but the concept was introduced in England by the real Conservatives, before WW2, hoping to prevent a revolution in case of another depression. Which is coming alright, caused, once again, by stockmarket gamblers and the multinational corporate mafia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state
The big question now is, will Stevie's new eyeglasses, covering his eyes, give him a majority, so he can sell the country for a string of directorships, beating even Mulroney's collection ?
Ed Deak, lifelong private enterpriser, ass opposed to capitalist. .
I think that so-called "individualists" often picture themselves as the predators, and not the predatees..............
Over the past five years, many of the promises made by Stephen Harper's Conservatives during campaigns have gone by the wayside once they assumed their seats in government. There are numerous and dramatic examples of this selective integrity, but few stand out more than their unfulfilled commitment to reform the Senate.
The promise of Senate reform stood out for a number of reasons for the Harper Conservatives, mostly because Mr. Harper, himself, and many MPs have campaigned on such reforms for nearly two decades.
While sitting on the Opposition benches, they railed on and on about the Liberals' abuses of the upper chamber, and their use of it to reward their friends and supporters. Election after election, Mr. Harper promised never to appoint an unelected senator and to seek democratic reform of that institution.
But since coming to power five years ago, Mr. Harper has become one of the largest abusers of the Red Chamber in recent history.
To date, Mr. Harper personally has appointed 36 senators in five years - each of them earning a salary of $132,000 until they turn 75.
While having personally appointed a full 36 percent of all senators currently in the Senate is bad enough, Mr. Harper has chosen to elevate some very unusual people to this most powerful institution.
Some of those who have been granted a job for life by Mr. Harper include his former press secretary (Carolyn Stewart Olsen), the chief fundraiser for the Conservative Party (Irving Gerstein), a former Conservative party president (Donald Plett), and the Quebec co-chair for his 2004 Conservative leadership bid (Judith Seidman).
?There are more. Mr. Harper also has appointed the husband of a cabinet minister (Doug Finley, husband of Diane Finley) and a current Conservative candidate in Quebec who will be able to begin his campaign early from his new perch in the Senate (Larry Smith).
The Harper appointees also include a whole host of defeated Conservative candidates from the last three elections who were rejected by the electorate in a democratic vote.
What has made these appointments all the worse is that many of these senators are using their newly-found offices to fundraise for the Conservatives on the public dime. For example, Sen. Gerstein cost Canadians more than $341,000 in salary, travel, and office costs, yet he is one of the Conservatives' most prominent fundraisers and is in high demand by Conservative candidates across the country.
Another prominent Conservative senator, Mike Duffy, cost Canadians more than $386,000 in the same kinds of expenses, and he has become known for hop-scotching around the country helping to headline fundraisers for Conservative candidates from coast to coast.
I think you will agree there is a better use of our tax dollars than granting jobs for life to past Conservative candidates who run up huge travel bills while fundraising for current ones.
New Democrats always have believed that the existence of this unelected and unaccountable body runs counter to our country's democratic principles and we are committed to abolishing the Senate.
Abolition of the Senate may prove difficult constitutionally, so we also have some practical solutions that can help reform the institution in the meantime.
To start with, we want a ban on partisan fundraising by senators of all parties, and a cooling off period for appointments of party insiders and failed candidates.
No more travelling hundreds of kilometres on the public dime to speak with 20-30 citizens in the daytime before hosting $150-a-ticket fundraisers for 250 plus partisans in the evening.
When we pressed the Harper government on these proposals in Question Period, their response was typical - they attacked us for politicizing the Senate and said they were the only party committed to true Senate reform.
It was surreal.
The Conservatives always have claimed to want an elected Senate and committed to never appointing an unelected senator - only to appoint 36 of them in just five years. They said taxpayers shouldn't subsidize political parties, but now have their taxpayer-funded senators regularly fan out across country spending hundreds of thousands of our dollars fundraising for new Conservative candidates.
For a government that has not kept their promises on so many fronts, it has to be said their position on Senate reform - and their subsequent abuse of that institution is the worst by far.
http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1980
This also gave supporters of the registry the chance to campaign for it.
When their bill to scrap it failed ,the Tories popped the champaign corks and celebrated. It meant they could continue to suck support and cash out of rural people for bit longer, over this issue.
Gun owners should be calling them on this, during this campaign. In think we could get it scrapped, if we continue to hound them over it, especially during the campaign, and daily after the election. Otherwise, they will delay and delay, so they can milk the issue after the next election etc etc.
If the NDP members had stuck to their guns , called their bluff, and scrapped it, it would be a non issue by now.
I sure hope those NDP members who voted to scrap the registry, get full credit from their constituents , and don't get tarred by the same brush as those who abandoned their election promises.
With them, we can get rid of the registry, without a Tory majority.
Nathan Cullen, and those NDP Members who voted to scrap the registry, deserve far more than anyone , to get re-elected ,with an increased vote.
They had the huevos to keep their election promises, something no Tory can be trusted to do.
It looks like Green party leader Elizabeth May could defeat Lunn, a Tory cabinet minister, in his own riding.
The Green party supports scrapping the gun registry..