April 27, 2006

Flip-Flop Harpocrisy Strikes Again

Harper’s position when he was not accountable.

The Proposal in question involved the chance that Jim Peterson would accept a deal that gave the industry less than 100% of what the Byrd Amendment collected

Excerpts are from Hansard

March 22nd 2005
we have seen this government's weak proposal to the Americans on the softwood lumber dispute. It is a virtual capitulation despite the fact that Canada has won virtually every round. The United States is continuing to collect over $3 billion in duties and threatens to disburse it under the illegal Byrd amendment.
Will the Prime Minister tell the president that he will stand fast on the illegality of the Byrd amendment and insist that Canadian softwood producers get their money back?

March 23rd, 2005
we have won every round, and the minister put forward an offer that gives away the store before we even get to the table.
Yesterday the Prime Minister refused to answer my questions on softwood lumber and on softwood lumber duties. I am going to ask the government again. Did the Prime Minister tell the President today that we will stand fast on the illegality of the Byrd amendment and insist that Canadian softwood producers get their money back?

So did Stephen Harper give away the store? Only 22% of it. Was this in their platform?

The Conservative government plans on giving away 22% of the store.

Actually, this is what the platform says a Conservative government will do:

Demand that the U.S. government play by the rules on softwood lumber. The U.S. must abide by the NAFTA ruling on softwood lumber, repeal the Byrd Amendment, and return the more than $5 billion in illegal softwood lumber tariffs to Canadian producers.

Why have platforms if you aren’t gonna follow through on it? Not that the Red Books were any better, but there goes another argument the Tories used at the doors and in the town halls.

How will they get themselves re-elected? I don’t think Harper will be dumb enough to do what Clark did in 1979, but Clark’s problem in 1980 was that he tried to get re-elected on the same platform as 1979, but didn’t have the ability to bash the now opposition Liberals. Polls also had him at majority level numbers early in his government as well.

In the meantime, let the flip-flopping continue.

6 Commentaires:

Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

Harpocrisy! Save us Marg, warrior-princess!

4/27/2006 6:18 p.m.  
Blogger H. Cowen a dit...

the harper government sounds like a pancake house.

4/27/2006 8:50 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...


Ken Dryden launched his leadership campaign today. He made particular note that reconnecting with current, old and potential Liberals is the key to the Liberals getting back to power. This selflessness suggests he is a true Liberal interested in winning the NEXT election, not the one 6 years down the road.

He also aptly linked education in allits form to increased productivity, decreased poverty and a more robust economy, which allows for more funding to develop important social programs.

I'm impressed with him!

4/28/2006 3:08 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

we need someone who isn't influenced by trudeau, chretien, or martin. those ideals belong in the past. time to look at reality and look fwd to the future.

4/28/2006 5:35 p.m.  
Blogger Diamond Fan a dit...

Scott Brison is the MAN!

Come join the greatest Liberal in Canada, Mr. Richard Diamond on Team Brison!


4/28/2006 9:57 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

Damn, this Harper gov't is terrible! Not only did they resolve the softwood lumber dispute after 20 years of problems, but they've also gone back to the tradition of not lowering flags for fallen soldiers, as a show of solidarity and strength for the troops.

Just a quick history lesson for you kids! Before the Chretien-Martin era, the flag was NOT lowered for fallen soldiers. This is a tradition stemming from before WW2, where the flag would remain at full mast, as a symbol of Canada's resolve. Obviously, Chretien and Martin showed very little wisdom when dealing with the military after countless cuts(yes, we are practically the laughing stock of NATO).

Yes, I know a lot of you extreme-lefties (who will probably destroy the Liberals if power is moved further to the left) don't like military or war. WHO DOES? WHO likes seeing their own soldiers killed at the hand of extremists?As a democratic nation, is it not our responsibility to put an end to terror and stop human-right abuses in other countries? Is it not our responsibility to promote democracy, human rights, freedom of expression and religion and lifestyle?

Back to the topic, common sense indicates that a strong party is always close to the centre of the political spectrum. This is why the Liberals have been in power so much in Canadian history. A move to the left to take away NDP votes is ill-conceived, and will further allow Harper to move more to the centre, building strength with the party. IT IS A FACT. Harper has slowly moved the Conservatives closer to the centre, and the fact that his is our prime minister shows that his strategy is working. Will the Liberals realize this? The way it's going, they seem more focused on the NDP clan of clowns then the governing party.

4/29/2006 9:39 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home