Here’s the straight-talking, amiable, bright, and level-headed Prime Minister that the broadcast media seem intent on hiding away behind their own editorializing, caricaturing talking heads:
h/t Alberta Ardvark
Here’s the straight-talking, amiable, bright, and level-headed Prime Minister that the broadcast media seem intent on hiding away behind their own editorializing, caricaturing talking heads:
h/t Alberta Ardvark
He’s very impressive. I’m proud to have him as our Prime Minister.
Anyone has the right to disagree with anyone else about anything. But how so many Leftards ABSOLUTELY HATE this man is beyond my comprehension.
SDA Trolls Bill Stewart and Davenport come to mind. Though they both live in Toronto so perhaps we need to give them a pass.
Robert, I think it has to do with the fact that certain MSM outlets – the CBC being the prime and most egregious example – do nothing but bash him, and caricature him, and “explain” to the Canadian public “what he’s like.” You know, that he’s “mean”, and “fascist”, and “anti-democratic” — that kind of thing. Nothing could be further from the truth.
When Saul Alinsky wrote his “rules for radicals’ he emphasized the need to personal every battle.
With the CBC et al filled with radicals one should not expect anything else.
On a positive note…this election is shaping up differently than past ones. One of our team knocked on 52 doors yesterday; 1 went to the NDP, the other 51 went Conservative for Steven Harper.
Who cares about the others…no one brought up their names!
The best Prime Minister Canada has ever had!!
as our swarthy brethren say ….what Frank Q said..
There’s one thing PM Harper needs to get a handle on IMMEDIATELY or else it’s going to put the screws to the economic aspects of the platform, and that’s fuel taxes.
Gas and diesel prices are going to bring the economy to its knees again if they continue into the 140s. Ending the federal excise tax on gasoline and diesel will bring immediate relief to individuals and businesses, add some padding to the economy and, I contend, hand him a majority in a heartbeat.
Harper is so much easier to listen to than that weed whacker voice of Ignatieff’s when he gets wound up. (maybe he sounds more like one of those crotch rocket motorcycles) Harper IS Prime Ministerial and sounds the same.
I agree PMSH does come across as Prime Ministerial, on the other hand Ignatieff comes across as Presidential…in a Obama sense.
Why do I still get the guilty dog video? This is the fourth time a video has been posted, and I get Guilty dog?
if the actual hyperlink is posted, I get the subject video, but not the direct video link off the story
Dan, try this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk6O4mWklcg
Just copy & paste the link into your browser.
Thanks for posting this video! Harper is more natural and *credible* than any of the other party leaders. The hate-on the CBC, CTV and Globe have for him is beyond strange.
Uh oh…he said “artic” at 6:19. Guess he really is just like George ‘Nucular’ Bush.
There’s your story, CBC. Run with it!
Sorry Gen. Wright – I heard Arctic, with a ‘c’. Stephen Harper comes across as a reasonable chap I wouldn’t mind having for a neighbour and certainly am happy to have as a PM for at least another five years.
PMSH has to get out of the bubblewrap that his handlers keep him enveloped in!
He speaks easy, he is the common man, he make eminent good sense economically/ strategically, he espouses ethical Christian values…..No wonder our whacked-out media can’t stand him!!
He needs to be seen more playing road hockey, jamming with seniors, kids, community groups, hobknobbing with workers, farmers, students.
He’s really not that scary! Listen to what he says! It’s just what our sedtitious media is telling everybody, and unfortunately, the vast majority have never learned how to think for themselves…they’d be jostling Jack (of beanstock fame) for some of those magic beans.
EBD, thanks for posting this thread. It was a pleasure to listen to intelligent questions rather than those with an entrapment agenda like those he gets from MSM after a speaking at a rally.
Oh, come on Aviator. The General was just trying to make things easy for the Corpse. You don’t expect them to actually work for their wages, do you?
@Mark: Great point. I think a CPC initiative to reduce fuel tax would not only bring the undecided on board, but more importantly it would help illustrate the fundamental difference in political philosophy that other parties are trying to blur. The argument that we should be paying higher fuel prices in order to ‘save’ the environment and thereby pay more for virtually everything will not resonate with most.
Try a Q-tip, General Lee. Arctic it was.
Fuel fax cuts at this point in the campaign would be roundly criticized as political opportunism and reckless – how would the cpc make up the revenue shortfall?
A better policy would be to provide incentives for natural gas fuel station construction and vehicles. Prices at the pump in California are abouthalf that of regular gas.
This is the man we in Alberta knoe and appreciate. The descriptions of him as cold and dictatorial are caricatures and have very klittle to do with reality.
We’llknow there is no justice in this world if Stephen Harper and the Conservatives do not get a majority government. They’re obviously the most qualified and they’ve done the work to deserve it. Let’s get the message out.
@Robert: To be fair I despise Harper no more than I do Michael Ignatieff. But it’s over for Harper. It’s not personal, it’s business. I’m simply looking at current projections and I don’t see a Harper majority. In fact, that elusive majority recedes by the day. As a progressive things are only very marginally better with Ignatieff and only if the NDP has some leverage in negotiating the formal arrangement that will bring the LPC to power. If I’m wrong I’ll happily come on here and take my lumps.
What do I like about Harper? His hair. His taste in socialist anthems when he does cheesy photo ops with little girls. His newfound appreciation of Bollywood. The way he shakes hands with his little boy when he drops him off at school. His love for corporations and fellow freemasons.
As for Ignatieff, I can’t think of a single nice thing to say about him.
Oh C’mon EBD what word or sentiment in my post offended the filter? Nothing outrageos or offensive that I can discern,
Harper should do more of these.
I’m still waiting for his platform.
We know the Liberals only want power, & the NDP to dip into peoples bank accounts.
JMO
@KDL: “I’m proud to have him as our Prime Minister.”
You mean “I’m proud to have HAD him as our Prime Minister”
@FrankQ:”The best Prime Minister Canada has ever had!!”
Really. Really. A what 5 year tenure in a minority government which was rancorous and acrimonious, dysfunctional and wildly adversarial. A tenure during which he was brought in to fix scandal ridden Ottawa and he leaves as leader of the only government in parliamentary democracy to be brought down on contempt for parliament. A tenure which only lasted as long as it did because the Liberals were to poor to fight and thus abdicated their duty as Opposition and continually propped up his government. A tenure that for me is marked by Harper’s hubris and vindictiveness in trying to destroy and bankrupt all the opposition parties and then shutting down parliament to avoid their wrath.
To each his own I guess.
I spoke to MP Joe Preston in London, and told him they could win the election tomorrow if they only set a fixed tax per litre on gas, not a percentage that can greatly increase the cost of fuel.
Joe said they could only do that if McGinty agreed, since the HST came in. Still, I think the Conservatives should float the idea and if McGinty blocks it, it’ll be on his head.
Hats of to Stephen Harper. Down with the coalition. Thanks EBD.
“Ending the federal excise tax on gasoline and diesel will bring immediate relief to individuals and businesses, add some padding to the economy and, I contend, hand him a majority in a heartbeat. Posted by: Mark at 10:29 PM”
Never happen, it makes too much sense. When did any government do the right thing when it came to taxes and helping the economy like you suggest – sad. Besides if the Federal government did lower the tax, would the provincial governments follow suit?
I hope I am wrong.
I echo Frank Q and Plainzryder. Thank-you for posting this interview EBD. Does anyone know if and when PMSH will be on the Dave Rutherford show? It is nice to have a chance to see the Prime Minister without the vitriol spewing on the camera lenses and making the PM grit his teeth to sieve the lumps.
The msm wonders why he makes them stand back – those of us with eyes know why!
b.s.
You may think that all the parties are entitled to a free donation stolen from my pocket, I do not. Why not, a la Tommy Douglas, round up all your like minded friends and YOU donate to the party you never voted for, never would vote for, don’t care if they fall off the face of the earth. Stop stealing money from the productive to handout to Political parties that it’s own supporters can’t be bothered to uncork their own wallets for…Sink or swim, be relevant or disappear. If these parties are soooo bloody popular/relevant/needed then they should have no need to come take money out of my children’s mouths to feed their slimy election machine and agendas.
I agree, Jemma. I couldn’t believe the outright bias of the ctv reporter yesterday at Harper’s rally when he asked a question regarding the proposed elimination of the deficit one year sooner than projected. “Mr. Harper, you’ve said you would get rid of the deficit ahead of schedule, but won’t indicate which programs will be slashed… (blah blah) …it sounds like you have a hidden agenda?” and then goes on to attack Harper for supposedly comparing Iggy to Trudeau. But it was entertaining to watch Harper make the reporter look… intellectually bankrupt.
Bill Stewart:
If not PMSH, then who?
Let us know please. These are your choices.
Check one.
A. PM Iggy
B. PM Layton
C. PM Duceppe
D. All of above
I was privileged to be at the Mississauga Convention Centre on Friday, Apr 8 along with my 2 older kids to hear the Prime Minister speak. It was a wonderful experience – he is soft spoken, polished and confident. Not surprised that he has put a limit of 5 questions on the press – all the ones they asked were extremely stupid and a waste of time. There really needs to be a minimum IQ requirement for journalists, I’m sure the current crop of liberal fools would all fail.
@Grey Lady: Harper was on board with the per vote subsidy and agreed on principle. When democracy worked in his favour, he did advocate for things like coalitions, Senate reform, and fair elections campaigns (which is why the subsidy was introduced in the first place).
I keep saying it’s not the competition I disagree with, its the loaded dice and the monopolistic casino capitalism I disagree with. Bring on meaningful and fair competition and I’m with you.
@Frank: I don’t know about you, but I don’t vote for a PM, I vote for the best local candidate (btw one of the few good things about our joke of an electoral system). The next PM will be the leader of the party that can assume the confidence of our parliament.
I’m predicting that will be Ignatieff (I’m not thrilled about, I despise Ignatieff). Layton will be Deputy Leader and Duceppe will vote on an issue by issue basis according to his conscience. But who knows for sure at this point? Although I do think Harper’s done as leader of the CPC.
In the large, left-wing, urban area where I live, there are, first of all, very few campaign signs up: people seem really uninterested, to pi**ed off, about this election. Secondly—and quite encouraging, I think—there are many fewer Liberal and NDP signs up, but more Conservative ones. I hope this reflects what’s going to happen at the ballot box.
PMSH is SO much more impressive than the other “leaders”. Did anyone else here tune in to the lunatic ravings of Iggy the other day? Re paying for the F-35 Jet Fighters, he accused the PM of a secret agenda—what else is new?—a la the Da Vinci Code. It was a low point, even for Iggy. WHAT a “maroon and ignoranimus” he is. Keep ranting, Iggy!
Stephen Harper is/Likes:
– A serious politician, not a wanna be celebrity or a sneering elite
– A Libertarian at heart
– An economist
– Hard Working
– Intellectual but pragmatic and logical
– Humble but will defend his Gov’s achievements if required
– A true and proud Canadian (From Coast to Coast, not just an ‘Eastern’ Patriot)
– A strong advocate for freedom and democracy
– He is there to serve the Country first, his party’s and his political career second: A rarity these days.
– Passioned for Hockey
– Likes pop music (Some favorites are The Beatles and AC/DC)
– Has one of the nicest, warm and most down to Earth wife in the country…Good looking to boot.
“The best Prime Minister this country has ever had” is no exaggeration. He is a treasure that Canadians are just starting to realize only because of his time span at the helm; certainly not because of the MSM or that many Canucks are politically engaged like people at SDA are.
In a sense just like the Canadian band Rush, Harper has won his acceptance and growing popularity as our leader the hard way…Basically by doing what he promises which these were transmitted word of mouth from one Canadian to another; here and there; slowly but surely.
Just like Rush, Stephen Harper had to prove himself without any help from the press; au contraire, in most times the critics always again’st him, his party or policies.
Stephen Harper will be Canada’s Prime Minister for a long time to come…If we are so lucky.
I’ve heard he eats babies.
Why isn’t Harper doing more of these radio shows and why aren’t they using clips from shows like this as advertisements?
It would show just how ridiculous the ‘evil robot’ and ‘control freak’ accusations from the liberal media.
Here’s a question for Terry Mileski of the CBC; does Harper appear to be angry here?
They should also skip the 30 second ads and use longer ones, if that is possible.
He should keep hammering away at the budget that was proposed and show Canadians it was a good plan.
Stan, It does not matter how hard politicians try to pass their messages when most people deliberately tune off, switch channel, avoid, ignore or shutdown debate because “Political discussions are not allowed at this reunion, we are hear to have fun” (These words often stated by the women)
This weekend, people in Montreal were asked if they are happy that the French debate was moved a day ahead to allow viewers to see the Habs play on thursday…
One woman replied: “Yeah, I guess.”
When the reporter asked her if she is now going to watch the French debate, she answered:
– “No, because it’s not very entertaining anyway”
Entertaining????
BS,
Actually that subsidy was brought in by a french (allegedly)thief by the name of crotchien who was vendictively trying to cripple the CPC because he foolishly thought that only BIG Business supported the CPC. He also foolishly thought that the average Joe, whom he deluded himself into thinking HIS party represented would be lining up to uncork their wallets for the cause. He was wrong.
Get rid of the free ride on my dime, freeloading politicians are worse then mere parasites.
Here is a situation where a leech openly admitts that he has no chance to win but is only in the race because he wants to steal more money from me and you for the high priestess of control freaks Lizzy May.
In the heart of true-blue Tory Alberta, Green candidate Konrad Schellenberg said he doesn’t have much chance winning in his home riding of Crowfoot, which stretches from the eastern edge of Calgary up to Camrose.
Conservative incumbent Kevin Sorenson won the riding last election by more than 35,000 votes with 82 per cent of ballots cast. Schellenberg said the per-vote subsidy is critical for his party and the driving force for carrying the Green banner into the May 2 election.
“That’s the reason I’m running, is to make the federal party more strong,” he said. “I know it’s a losing cause, but I have to put up a fight.”
Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/life/parties+gladly+fight+losing+cause+Alberta/4590305/story.html#ixzz1JEJ4q4Gn
How noble a thief…..
This is up on the Sympatico home page:
“Auditor: Harper Government broke the law?
“The Harper Government may have broken the law over the G8 summit, says the auditor general . . .” Notice the disclaimers: a question mark and the words, “may have”. Of course, they’ll disappear in the MSM translation. What scum they are.
It never stops—and the Liberals STILL owe the $ 40 MILLION they STOLE in the Adscam fiasco.
(Yup, this story is top of the noon news on CBC. They’ll play it like a dog with a bone. Now Gilles Duceppe’s comments on this are being reported: no comment from the Conservatives.)
” a minority government which was rancorous and acrimonious, dysfunctional and wildly adversarial.”
Entirely due to an opposition that had no interest in co-operation or compromise but were fixated on seizing power by any means.
“the only government in parliamentary democracy to be brought down on contempt for parliament.”
Simply a lame excuse by the opposition to force an unwanted and unnecessary election.
“the Liberals were to poor to fight”
And why is that? Apparently if the Liberals don’t have access to the treasury, they seem to have trouble coming up with money to operate. Maybe they should have put away some of the Adscam loot for a rainy day.
“hubris and vindictiveness in trying to destroy and bankrupt all the opposition parties”
An obvious reverence to the vote subsidy whereby Canadians’ tax dollars are used to finance political parties that are unable or unwilling to raise funds on their own. Typical leftist unwillingness to put their money where their mouth is.
“shutting down parliament to avoid their wrath.”
No. Shutting own parliament to save the country from the clutches of the Coalition of the Swilling. Where would Canada be now financially if those three intrepid gentlemen had been running the show? Probably in the same boat as Greece.
Gord, introducing a tax break after the platform has been released would be widely criticized, I agree. But what CPC plank isn’t?
Now, perhaps the CPC want a wide range of excuses for not implementing various promises, and maybe that’s why they don’t want to toy with the excise tax? All I can say is, right now, there’s a massive problem in the foreground that threatens to bring the nation’s economic engine to a halt. It can be dealt with to short-term political advantage and long-term economic advantage. And Canadians will understand the need to cut in various areas to make up the shortfall; they do it on a personal level.
Pity, though, that it didn’t find its way into the blue book.
Mark,
The most logical thing we can do at this time is give Harper the chance to form a majority so he can finally show us his true colors…It is still unknown at this time because he was never given both reins to steer, just the right hand one, the left one clenched by the opposition for the last 2 elections.
I agreee RHTT,
Give harper a chance you guy’s give him his majority govornment and see who he really is other wise you can be sure we are in hot water with the others .
A couple of comments on the public subsidy of political parties based on votes. Anyone who thinks that Harper’s desire to eliminate it is anything other than political manouvering should check again.
The vote subsidy was part of a major change to the way political parties finance themselves introduced by the Liberals. Financing laws capped contributions from corporations and unions at $5000 and added a vote subsidy. When Harper was first elected, he seemed to like this more level playing field so much he capped contributions at $1000.
When Harper ran for re-election in 2008 it was neither part of the CPC platform nor ever mentioned by him that he would eliminate the vote subsidy if elected. Suddenly he finds himself in another minority parliament, he is out fundraising other parties, and he invents an excuse for eliminating the subsidy -the economic recession (which only mere months earlier he had denied was coming -worse when he finally admitted the recession was inevitable Harper actually had the gall to suggest it would present a good opportunity for those who are liquid).
Harper then blindsided the opposition with a vindictive attempt to bankrupt them and tried to use cost savings to justify it.
Here’s the problem. If cost savings were anywhere in the mind of Conservatives at that time, why wouldn’t they have changed the exorbitantly expensive tax credit for donations to political parties. That tax credit is a much much heavier burden on tax payers than the vote subsidy. The answer is obvious, it had nothing to do with cost savings.
More recently, Harper has been attempting to justify scrapping to vote subsidy on the grounds that it incites elections because the opposition is always ready to go to to an election.
Problem is that quite arguably every election since the introduction of the vote subsidy, the vote subsidy has actually not played a role in triggering the election.
You folk don’t really believe that Harper wasn’t itching for this election, do you? He spent months and millions of dollars of public treasury attempting to destroy Ignatieff’s reputation, and spread the reckless coalition crap. His polling numbers had been trending toward a majority, and he brings down a campaign budget. Do you really believe the vote subsidy triggered this election???
In 2008, Harper broke his own fixed election date law to once again throw us into an election in the hopes of reaching his desperately coveted majority. Do you think the vote subsidy played a role in forcing that election?
Hey, I’m not averse to debating changing the financing system. The left was deeply crippled by the Liberals unilateral imposition of new “fairer” financing laws, since unions used to contribute significantly to NDP campaigns.
But, for a thriving democracy I believe that party financing laws should be fair and campaigns should be played on a level playing field. And, only the truly naive think that Harper’s attempt to scrap to vote subsidy is in the interest of anyone other than himself and his desperate search for unfettered power. Certainly, it is not out of respect for taxpayer monies.
But then again we live in different worlds, but not different countries, which is why debate matters.
B.S.
YOu are not answering my question are you? YOu are trying to deflect onto a seperate funding matter, close but no cigar. Stop whining “what about this…what about that” “It’s not good enough”…Deal with this one small aspect please and thank you.
Political parties should have to stand alone period, this is a step in the right direction. We get rid of this, then on to the next one. I’ll take baby steps over throwing up my hands and total inaction any day.
If Stephen Harper is such a libertarian, then why do we still have the CBC funded, the CHRC running amok, and a prominent civil servant toying with randomly selected conservative victims of his arbitrary campaign conducted from within the offices of the DND? Is he just not aware of these situations, or does he tolerate them, or is he really just a Liberal with a blue template? And what about this Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act, with its potential for abuse in the field of internet surveillance and regulation, and also the inclusion of Fantino into the Cabinet — I guess there are no conservative interests in Caledonia. What about all this patronage and the wild overspending on security for the G8/G20 (which would not have been an issue had the meetings been sited away from a large city)?
I take a contrarian position and say that this government is CINO and that we need a full debate on the appropriate directions for any future Conservative government in Canada. The record is not all bad, and I acknowledge that anything would be better than Liberal rule, but still, those are very low bars and why should we settle for second-best or worse? Are we going to go forever and a day before somebody stands up to the elites and calls climate fraud what it really is, for example? Well, internet bloggers can do that, for the time being.
Sorry Grey Lady, you’re out of your depth and your simply using typical libertarian sink or swim bs. Do you think Harper would ever frame the issue that way? I despise Harper but I don’t see him as a fool. Can you see Harper making that case? Parties should stand alone period. There should be no financing laws, nothing to regulate advertising and campaigning. Just stand on your own.
What does that even mean? There should be no party financing laws? Corporation and Unions should be able to fund the respective parties without a cap? Is this with or without the tax credit in place, because in the interest of selfregulating competition there should be no tax credit for political contributions- then we’ll see raw fundraising? We should abolish the vote subside? If yes, shouldn’t we have a good reason?
So the answer to your ridiculous “question” is NO! and so is any other sane person’s, including your beloved former PM Harper.