...for those of us who understand that governing is different from opposition and prudent compromise is different from idealism, we can only wonder if the conservative base has learned anything yet about realpolitik."
But I think poor Gormley has gotten it backward. The conservative base certainly understands that governing is often about prudent compromise, but now they can only wonder if the Conservative Party has learned anything about idealism.
And this budget is not a 'prudent compromise' as Gormley suggests. This is a no-holds-barred capitulation.
Compromise means both sides give something up to acheive an agreement. It's pretty obvious what the conservative base is giving up, but not at all obvious what the opposition is giving up, if anything at all.
11 comments:
IMO, the priority 'conservative principles'
are keeping this country united, and
'keeping this country strong'.
Tell me what a coalition of separatists and socialists would have done to our country.
Gilles would have done irreparable damage.
Jack would have sent our economy into a tailspin.
I think it is now safe to assume that the GG advised PMSH,
'make it work with the prorogation budget',
or the coalition of losers get a shot at government.
Our PM did what was right for Canada.
Wilson,
You said: "conservative principles" are keeping this country united, and keeping this country strong"
What you are suggesting with that statement is that all those things we used to talk about before we became government would have made the country weak and fractured the country?! So in effect, you are saying that conservatism will destroy this country. Am I understanding you correctly?
You claim that the separatists and socialists would have harmed the country."Jack would have sent our economy into a tailspin".
By what? Running huge deficits of, say, 82$ Billion?
What was right for Canada, is what Stephen Harper spent years when he was in opposition. What he did is what he would have blasted any other government for doing.
This is the most conservative budget (least spending, most permanent tax cuts) of any of the G8 countries.
These are historic times. Once-in-a-lifetime times.
Let's show some reason here! Support our man - he is far and away the best.
I do understand where you're coming from, I'm a grassroots Reformer, survivor of the NEP.
My point of view is coming from Western Canada.
Kirk, our western voice would have been totally wiped out.
In Quebec (and Newfoundland), a coalition government would have actually increased your voices,
at the sole expense of Western Canada
Western separation would have exploded, it's barely under containment now.
You would have to live here to appreciate the down right fear and anger we ALL felt with the threat of a coalition government.
A compromising budget is far far less an evil than the coalition government, for the unity of the country.
As for the budget, from the Ghosts of the future, look no futher than Jack, Danny and Duceppe.
Dippers and Bloc hold 86 seats (a majority in the coalition govt) and could force the 77 Liberals into any agreement they wanted.
In fact, the Bloc & Dippers could form a coalition and force the Liberals out of Official Opposition right now.
Can you honestly tell me you think a coalition budget would have taken Canada into less debt?
LibDipperBloc all want Kyoto credits, the oilsands shutdown, protectionist trade, more money for EI, more money for the 'vulnerable', national daycare, more money for Quebec and Newfoundland.
Guess where that money would come from?
It would be a nighmare come true, NEP groundhog day, not good for Canada.
Michael,
I too would like to just 'support our man', but our man has spent his entire political career arguing against the very thing he did.
As for showing 'some reason', reason would dictate that he make a case for conservatism, and show why a conservative government is key to maintaining our prosperity through bad economic times. If conservatism serves us in the when the economy is growing, should it not bouy us through a difficult climate, too? Is being a conservative a convenience thing? Does it only apply when there is money in the bank? The Stephen Harper I believed in would have asked those same questions.
The tricky part about "principles" and "ideals" is that you actually must have some, and hold on to them when it's difficult. Even when it means being defeated. Otherwise, who are we if we can so easily cast aside those principles we claim to believe in? Who are we if we just allow the wind to blow us without any anchor to let us know when that wind has blown us off course?
It isn't just about the money, either. It's the manner in which we so recklessly threw it around. We didn't just reallocate resources where they are needed, we hobbled future generations by buying our way out of this, and the irony is, stimulus through government spending never works.
Wilson,
I see your point, really I do. I also would rather have a Harper government than any of the other ones, so I must accept the budget and the direction of "Canada's New Government".
But I can't.
We always talk about our country as a "great" country.
Well, greatness isn't just about size, or diversity, or the beautiful landscape. True greatness is so much more than that. Consider what we could achieve if someone actually made a case for greatness. We could be the richest, healthiest, most vibrant, innovative, safe, cleanest, and most beautiful country on the face of the earth with a culture of acheivement that others could only dream of emulating. We could be the country that people line up to get into because they want to live here not just use us to get into the U.S. We could be the country where freedom reigns supreme, where one can pursue his or her dreams without any incumberances or barriers. We could be the country where life springs eternal for the young, the old, the sick, and the weary, and where poverty is a thing of the past.
As conservatives, we believe that small-c conservative values are the best way to get there. But we'll never get there by being apologists for betraying those conservative values.
"These are historic times. Once-in-a-lifetime times" I'm amazed at how
freiky people are getting about this. When an OBAMA front man indicated that he was proud of how Obama was able to remove himself from his ideological box in order to...."Adjust to changing circumstances" everyone nodded in agreement. When Harper climbs out of the box in order to "adjust" he's slammed as an idiot and a labotomy on legs. PMSH is by far the best of the leaders available and I firmly believe he is acting in the best interest of all Canadians. Armchair critics are becoming tiresome with their over the top disaster scenarios. The only disaster we were facing was surrendering our government to people who would have truly destroyed our country. Talk is cheap and anyone trusting Jack an Gilles with the country's purse strings are truly and sadly immature and naive.
The problem is there is probably no way we were going to get an election this soon after the last one, so any budget the liberals wouldn't like gave us the coalition.
The libs have shown both provincially in Ontario and federally, that power is more important than the country and will do anything the dips ask if it keeps them in power.
Had a coalition come then that would have a) done infinitely more damage to the country, and b) given the libs another opportunity for adscams. They would have held out the full four years filling the party coffers and our next election would be a lot worse.
Iggy's amendment is there to give him confidence opportunities every few months. As soon as the libs can beg/borrow or steal enough money for another election they'll pull the plug.
My expectation is most of the bad stuff in the budget will never happen before the election (except the stupid auto bailout) and once we have another election the bad stuff could all just go away.
It would be nice if we didn't have to bend to the libs, but that's the trouble with a 4.5 party system. You can always end up with minority governments.
HA ha Gormley is telling you to be liberal...and some of you suckas are buying it. LOL. You stand for nothing.
The real danger in all these stimulus oriented budgets is where the money is going to come from?
There are not enough crazy investors out there willing to buy the glut of U.S. treasuries about to hit the market at nearly 0% yield. The EU, Canada, and many others have to borrow this money at the same time, in competition and a lot of this new debt will not be borrowed but monetized, created out of thin air, printed, leading to devaluation of currencies vs hard assets and growing inflation.
8 months after this money starts hitting the streets inflation should start heating up and some predict a hyperinflation is planned to allow the U.S. Gov to minimize their unsustainable debt on the back of savers and pensioners. Greenspan once said (parphrased), The U.S. will never default on its obligations to pensioners but there is no guarantee what the money will purchase. We are entering a currency war where every country is devaluing towards zero to pay off old debts with bad script and keep manufacturing jobs buy destroying the buying power of their own citizens.. It's a race to zero folks.
That this is a once in a life time event is not a reason to act irrationaly. Shooting ones self in the head is also a once in a life time occurance.
There is also a disgusting lack of honesty to go with the lack of ideas. Why was no one willing admit the real financial conditions during our recent election. Don't try to tell me this is some big suprise, I predicted this downturn 2 years ago along with under 2% interest rate, $140 oil, numerous U.S. banks failures and the Big 3 on the verge of collapse. Anybody who claims to be qualified as an economist or a finance minister is lying or incompotent to say no one saw this coming.
Hell even Garth turner got the housing slump right, how hard can it be.
Green AB,
I agree with some of your points, especially the one about predicting the housing market slump. Although most of it is stateside, simple economics dictates that a downturn is inevitable. That so many people would kept thinking it would go up and up is just, well, ignorant.
At its most basic level, economic "stimulus" is a zero sum game. Whatever they inject today, must be withdrawn at a later date. Our 'economist' Prime Minister knows this, so it is disheartening that he would ignore such an obvious conclusion and do what every government before him would have done.
It is detrimental to our country.
Post a Comment