I'm just a normal guy; really I am – they told me so at the Calgary think tank that built me from spare parts
Among other things, Harper would re-open missile defense, scrap Kyoto and rip up a $5 billion aboriginal deal?Does he really need a "hidden agenda"? I also love how he keeps claiming that he relates to "working families". Well, unless he's referring to working families where one of the income earners takes in more than $200,000 a year (Harper makes about $150,000 as an MP plus about $70,000 for being leader of the opposition), I'm not really sure what he's getting at.
At leats Mr. Dithers doesn't constantly brag about being in touch with "working families" and "middle class Canadians". I guess, technically, making over $220,000 a year does put you squarely in the upper tear of the middle class, but the average "working" "middle class" Canadian makes nowhwere near that amount. I can't stand how Harper constantly talks about "struggling" to save up for his children's education etc.... Uh, where to, Harvard?
At least Martin makes no bones about being a multi-millionaire shipping tyocoon. You never hear him claiming that he can relate to your financial woes because he and Sheila had to "scrape the money together for a new oven". I can't believe people buy Harper's populist act – it's almost as believable as Bush's cowboy/air force pilot routine. And at least that's full of slapstick-style yuuks. Harper's just plain not funny. And that's why we need Chrétien back.
posted by Werben at 10:36 PM
2 Comments:
But why dogmatically stick to those three policies?
Americans will do missile defence over our airspace whether want want it or not. We might as well get some say in it. They actually respect us, so if we negotiate we might be surprised (like when they gave us a role in NORAD instead us only using a unilateral NorCom). And if missiles are sent their way, would those who fire it not send a few clusters to Canadian cities that would provide aid to America? We'd be targeted just as well.
Scrapping Kyoto doesn't mean the end of all environmental hope. There's no reason we should stick to something a bunch of global interest groups created. Canada must do what's right for Canada. Mr. Martin doesn't believe in Kyoto either, but at least Mr. Harper admits it.
Aboriginals don't need more money. More programs has been the answer to their plight since the 30s. To what avail? Would a $6B deal be better than the $5B one, or would a $4B be worse?
So what I'm saying is, let go of the dogma. You bring up some pretty interesting content on your other posts, but I thought I would just raise some of these things. Also, for credibility sake please add some information to your profile. We have no idea who you are.
Cheers,
Jonathan
1L Law Student at Dalhousie
And make implications of Harvard unless you know about it. It's better to be poor than rich when paying for its bills.
Hey Jonathan,
Thanks for the post...I guess I completely disagree w/ you about missile defense, but we'll have to just agree to disagree on that. First of all, while Americans in general might respect us, the Bush administration sure doesn't (can you say softwood lumber or not thanking us in the Sep 11 speech etc...). Secondly, it's not missiles North American needs to be concerned about. It's our ports, borders, airports. What's more likely? A nuke being launched at us or a dirt bomb being smuggled on a ship? The last time I checked there was no country called "Al Qaeda". But, anyway, we'll just have to disagree on that one.
About Kyoto, I actually agree with you to a certain extent. I don't really think Martin gives a shit about Kyoto either. The thing is though, we are a signatory on Kyoto (even though we haven't fulfilled it at all) and so, how exactly can we keep our international respect and back out of it suddenly? I know it's deeply flawed but it's better than nothing. Pluse, if Harper wants to back out of Kyoto and put in place his own "environmental measures", I'd like to hear more about what those are beyond the usual campaign rhetoric. And I'm not convinced I've heard anything substancial yet.
About Aboriginals and the five billion, I have to completely disagree w/ you there. It's not that they don't need more money (look at what's happened recently in Northern Ontario...it's just plain disgusting that this type of situation has existed for years). Maybe lots of the money has been mismanaged etc...(I'm not an expert on the subject) but Canada's First Nations deserved much better than they have been getting for a very, very long time. Look at the living conditions they are forced to endure? Can you say it's right to have Canadian citizens (who have been here longer than any of us) to have no access to clean drinking water? Is that their fault? Of course not. We need to do much, much more to make sure that Natives have the same opportunities as everyone else.
On the dogma thing, I guess I'm just a bit obsessed w/ dogma! sorry :)
and yeah, I should put up my profile. oops LOL
About Harvard. It was more a dig at the ridiculous cost of American Universities than much else (I'm a dual citizen and I've heard stories of Americans paying off their student loans for years; making our student loans seem pathetically small in the process). But thanks for setting me straight on that. With scholarships etc...I guess being poor helps in this case!
later,
V
Post a Comment
<< Home