Canadian Federal Election 2015

[Londo_Jowo]

I beginning to think someone may be an alias for Incorruptible.

 

[Blue_Max]

We get it troll. Your record on this forum is clear -- you are violent and promote crimes and terrorism to further your hatred of Muslims:

Take your violence and bigoted hatred elsewhere.

You're full of shit and happily twisted my words to suit your agenda. AND took your bullshit to the mods with a sob-story of how it "offended" you.

Well I took the hit for your bullshit and will explain what most people probably already understood:

Trudeau is PANDERING for your muslim vote. He's praying in your mosque despite not being a muslim, he dresses up his wife and mother in dishtowel headscarves, and supports your causes to get your vote.

That should bother you as much as anyone else.

As to your other accusations, I'll also say that I DON'T HATE MUSLIMS. However, I recognize (and see every day) how the religion demands that they HATE KAFIRS (non-believers) and should treat them with the cruelty you've displayed here.

So - at what point does the rest of the world stop being PC and admit there's a problem and defend themselves from invasion and attack? Eh?

You cannot "discuss" moderator actions in open forum. Have a complaint? Post in Moderator Discussions.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[cbrunny]

Eh?

You're not Canadian. I am offended. That's OUR word! You can't use it!

 

[cbrunny]

In the interest of keeping the only thread on the Canadian election on AT on the first page...

Thoughts on Duffy?

 

[KMFJD]

In the interest of keeping the only thread on the Canadian election on AT on the first page...

Thoughts on Duffy?

Should have to give up his pension and repay with interest the 90k?

 

[cbrunny]

He did repay the 90k. Well, Wright did. Then as I understand it, Duffy paid Wright 90k. No clue if interest was part of that.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Duffy should still be a paid Senator (although a worthless one), and should have kept his housing allowance per "the rules".

Stephen Harper should be made to fall on his sword for his insane Senate appointments. Time for a walk in the snow.

If Harper wants to convince the country that the Senate is useless, by appointing a bunch of useless Senators, then his strategy is going well.

 

[KMFJD]

Duffy should still be a paid Senator (although a worthless one), and should have kept his housing allowance per "the rules".

Stephen Harper should be made to fall on his sword for his insane Senate appointments. Time for a walk in the snow.

If Harper wants to convince the country that the Senate is useless, by appointing a bunch of useless Senators, then his strategy is going well.

Oh hell no, he should kicked out above anything

 

[3chordcharlie]

Oh hell no, he should kicked out above anything

Well, he never should have been appointed in the first place, but that's not his fault.

I think by and large he followed the crowd on expenses - feeding at the trough like everyone else - and is now being railroaded. I'm not sure how many Senators are left who respect the institution and care about what they do.

 

[Whiskey16]

Thoughts on Duffy?

Duffy, personally, is the sideshow that CPC handlers, in their oh so glorious incompetent corruptness, oh so hoped to keep contained.

True focus of angst:

Two options --

1. Harper lied in parliament and continues to lie now about not knowing of the payment of potentially Conservative Party of Canada coffers and then Wright's personal deal (bribery or not) that went down;
2. Harper's leadership is that of incompetence as he continues to claim ignorance of the working of his own staff and where there is definite conflicting testimony by senior PMO staff and of a paper trail of defining most of his staff were aware while Harper and his handlers continue with a flat-out lie of little to none knowing than the lone scape-goat, Nigel Wright.

This cuts straight down to Harper's ill-ethics, lack of honesty (or, rather dishonesty), and extremely poor judge of character when looking at his long list of either convicted or accused (dead before trial as with his former conman Arthur Porter appointed into the highest level of Canadian security in his oversight of CSIS) parliamentary and civil service henchmen.

Regardless of one's partisanship, the facts are that this harms the Conservative Party of Canada that has been so enthusiastic to brand itself under the 'Harper Government.'

I wonder how much of the internal CPC polling and knowing of details had let to a record number of cabinet ministers resign before the election -- over the past six months, well after the PMO ultimatum last fall to stand firm or leave before 2015.

Small 'c' conservatives are already questioning their allegiance to the evident corruption and have begun dashing from a sinking ship.

 

[Whiskey16]

Sarcasm for the kicker:

Andrew Coyne: Sympathy for Harper — imagine learning everyone you trusted lied to you

Imagine the sense of betrayal he must have felt — the vertigo, the nausea — as it slowly dawned on him that everything he had been led to believe about the whole affair was a lie: that in fact, everyone knew. Everyone, that is, but him. Imagine the humiliation, to have been played for a patsy in this way — him, Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada — and what is more, for the whole world to know it. He is a proud man, but not immune to feelings of self-doubt. Would anyone respect him now? Could he carry on as leader, if he were not master even of his own office?

It must have felt like the room was spinning, like the earth was opening up in front of him. Inevitably, there must have been a certain amount of self-recrimination. How could he have been so blind? Why had he not suspected? Little things that seemed innocent before — the way everyone suddenly shut up when he entered the room, that time Nigel borrowed his Blackberry without asking — must have suddenly taken on a darker hue.

And then, the fears: If he could have been kept in the dark about this, he must have wondered, if the people he trusted most could have conspired in such a scheme, so repugnant to him in every respect, and not only done so but lied about it to his face, and gone on lying even after the scheme had been exposed — for he must surely have made the most searching inquiries after the story first broke — well, what else could they have been up to all these years? What else did he know nothing about? What other lies had they told him? These things don’t usually happen just once, after all. There’s usually a pattern.

And yet, this good man, deceived, humiliated, betrayed on all sides, found it in his heart to forgive them. You or I, had we found ourselves in the same position, might have taken the most foul sort of revenge: fired the lot, paraded them in front of the media, forced them to answer for what they had done. But that is not, we can see now, Harper’s way...

The campaign is long, and much can still change, but implosion of their own making is brewing.

 

[Whiskey16]

Thoughts on Duffy?

Ahh, in fear of failure, CPC supporters are becoming unhinged at Harper campaign events, where in Orwellian control, only attendees who are vetted by the CPC are permitted to enter.... Straight down to present minders to ensure talk is on message or else an attendee who is off record, is ushered away, followed by profane interdiction by another far too drunk upon CPC Kool-Aid:

Stephen Harper supporter hurls profanity at journalists over Duffy questions

Afterward, outside the room where Harper appeared, reporters gathered to speak to some of the supporters who had attended the event.
Carl Burnell, a 69-year-old who said he's voted Conservative for decades, said he came to the event Tuesday hoping for answers on support for seniors and the Duffy scandal.

Burnell said he doesn't feel the Conservative leader wants to help seniors, and that Harper wasn't being forthcoming about Nigel Wright and the Duffy case.

Burnell told reporters he won't vote Conservative again until he gets some answers.

Another supporter who overheard Burnell got frustrated, interrupted and got angry with reporters, Thibedeau reported.

The man who apparently overheard Burnell spoke with a group that included journalists from CBC News, CTV, The Toronto Sun and The Canadian Press. He said, "You guys and your fantasy scandals amount to zero."

He then accused the reporters of lying on their tax returns and said that the Duffy scandal amounts to the same thing. When asked how he could make such a claim, he answered, "Because you're a lying piece of shit."

Harper knows how to pick'em.

....then to top off the past few days, Peter Panashawee, guilty of election fraud and defended to the end by Harper, is considering re-running yet again for the Conservatives...

No need for hyperbole, unethical, unaccountability and corruption have become entrenched character traits for the Harper Government.

 

[cbrunny]

....then to top off the past few days, Peter Panashawee, guilty of election fraud and defended to the end by Harper, is considering re-running yet again for the Conservatives...

An incredible non-issue for anyone outside of that riding. Honestly, I don't care about this at all.

This is someone that Trudeau supported. An actual candidate: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-ala-buzreba-tweets-1.3195193

How do you feel about that, Whiskey?

Liberal Ala Buzreba:

@israel_shield Your mother should have used that coat hanger.

If you want to argue that absurdly behaving supporters reflect directly on the quality of the party and its leadership, I can't imagine how you feel about the Liberal party, Trudeau, and Buzreba right now. Buzreba isn't a supporter, she's a CANDIDATE! You must be fuming, angry, and - like me - of the opinion that Trudeau lacks the competence to be Prime Minister.

And regardless of what anyone wants the outcome of Duffy to be, there is a third option. It is very possible that Duffy did nothing criminal, as would be decided by court. I mentioned to a friend yesterday that this scandal is only a scandal if Harper lied, and then the scandal really is only the lie. It's a trust issue when it comes down to it. You either trust Harper or you don't. And most people have already made up their minds on that one. So if you don't trust Harper, this is already a non-issue. If you do trust Harper AND it is proven that he did in fact lie, this may be the issue that brings CPC supporters elsewhere. But that's still only the case if trust in leadership is salient to the individual voter, and for many it's not, regardless of if you want it to be.

But even so, this is Duffy's trial, not Harper's. Gonna have to charge him with something if you want true proof that Harper lied.

And I'm pretty sure that many MPs retired because of the new pension requirements that Harper's government brought in. Reform to the pensions of MPs takes effect for those that are elected in this election, and with the "old" pension being so much sweeter, a lot of people think they took off to benefit from their existing pensions rather than be subjected to new regulations. I have a very hard time believing that any MP would resign over Duffy unless they were hands-on in something criminal, and as of today there isn't anything that is definitively criminal. The trial is still underway.

 

[Whiskey16]

An incredible non-issue for anyone outside of that riding. Honestly, I don't care about this at all.

You don't care about a sitting PM defending election fraud?

You have blinders in and your priorities out of whack:

This is someone that Trudeau supported. An actual candidate: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-ala-buzreba-tweets-1.3195193

..

Buzreba isn't a supporter, she's a CANDIDATE! You must be fuming, angry, and - like me - of the opinion that Trudeau lacks the competence to be Prime Minister.

Yes, 16 year olds can post crap. Shocked? You make that out worse to be than election fraud?!

A non-issue. A failure in vetting of a FORMER candidate who's comments were condemned by the party and has now withdrawn from the election.

cbrunny, you're truly scraping at straws to compare her devastating issue to the PM standing aby second election attempt by elector fraud, Penashawee.

And regardless of what anyone wants the outcome of Duffy to be, there is a third option.

Yes, and that can remain damning for the PMO.

Yet, you are saying that is the third scenario? You denying no wrongs and therefore of no lying from the PM to parliament or his total ineptness to be aware of PMO activies while his entire staff kept him in the lying dark???????!

As I said, duffy is a sideshow to the greater issues at hand. The damnation Harper's past brand creation.

You either trust Harper or you don't. And most people have already made up their minds on that one.

How may you define that? This is an election where change in national support by a single percentage point can determine the next government. A portion of CPC supporters are on record for questioning Harper and of likely forgoing a vote for the CPC. Issues such as this have and can cost elections for the incumbent.

I already referred to small 'c' Conservatives, yet for whatever partisan stance you have, you've dismissed a decent portion of the moderate Canadian electorate as inconsequential.

But that's still only the case if trust in leadership is salient to the individual voter, and for many it's not, regardless of if you want it to be.

Ahh, it seems that YOU do not wish it to be an election issue, as the CPC hecklers on Harper's campaign, when it most definitely is.

And I'm pretty sure that many MPs retired because of the new pension requirements that Harper's government brought in. ... I have a very hard time believing that any MP would resign over Duffy unless they were hands-on in something criminal...

Politicians can have self-interest at heart.. If they foresee a strong possibility of their party falling, particularly one so strongly branded under s a single man worship, then a rational tactic could be to quit before being tossed and possibly tainted forever.

All of the record number of sitting cabinet ministers who resigned and/or withdrawn for re-election are relatively young, and are generally associated with small 'c' conservatives and directly with the former Progressive Conservative party. By quitting before a potential Harper defeat and messy party rebuilding, they are making a clean slate to run-again in years off.

 

[cbrunny]

LOL you really do like putting words in my mouth, don't you? FFS its like talking to a child that thinks they know everything.

 

[cbrunny]

People like you drive me batshit insane, Whiskey. We live in a democracy. I think it's great that you have strong opinions on politics but I think it is completely insane to throw up blinders and ONLY perceive political issues from your partisan perspective. I have my leanings on issues too but I am always interested in counter-arguments. I'm not interested in hearing what some guy on the internet says is the truth. I'm interested in having a conversation about what the issue actually is. There's a difference between preaching - as you are doing - and discussing to reach a consensus, or not reach a consensus.

You've pigeonholed anyone who disagrees with you, has a different perspective than you, or even PRIORITIZES issues differently than you do, as a damn fool. Think about that. Really. Think about it.

 

[Whiskey16]

Cbrunny, I have most certainly not ignored your positions nor put any 'words in your mouth.'

I have directed and correctly quoted pertinent parts of your posts and then properly rebuted to them according to an adult discussion.

That you resort to "child like" name calling and go so far a label rationaland supported thought as "batshit insane" damns you, not I.

... Oh, and isn't it curiuous that when supported and rational critiques are presentrd against the Harper government, just as the CPC script, you blare out with the shiny distraction... But, BUT, TRUDEAU!

 

[cbrunny]

Cbrunny, I have most certainly not ignored your positions nor put any 'words in your mouth.'

I have directed and correctly quoted pertinent parts of your posts and then properly rebuted to them according to an adult discussion.

That you resort to "child like" name calling and go so far a label rationaland supported thought as "batshit insane" damns you, not I.

... Oh, and isn't it curiuous that when supported and rational critiques are presentrd against the Harper government, just as the CPC script, you blare out with the shiny distraction... But, BUT, TRUDEAU!

Just about the ONLY thing you've done is ignore any position that isn't yours AND put words in my mouth. You are fear monger, through and through.

 

[Whiskey16]

Just about the ONLY thing you've done is ignore any position that isn't yours AND put words in my mouth.

"Ignored" positions different than my own??? You're lying through your teeth. I've accurately and directly quoted (hint: that's the opposite to ignore) whom I've responded to and made appropriate and substantive rebuttals.

I've have put no "words in your mouth." If you have the respectful ability and interest in discussion, then why do you fail in quoting where I err and make an honest effort to appropriately reply, unlike in the evidence to follow.....

...I am always interested in counter-arguments. I'm interested in having a conversation about what the issue actually is.

Evidentially, no, you're not.

I have contributed to this discussion with grounded reason and often direct citations to support my line of reasoning. When facing such a level of challenging discussion and questioning, just as the aforementioned CPC hecklers, in frustration you got your knickers in a bunch and have gone off rogue in your choice to resort to dismissive name-calling:

You are fear monger, through and through.

Your point? A lame attempt to attack my character and dismiss my posts? Ooooh, cbrunny is an internet tough guy. I'm so quivering in intellectually combative fear of ya.

I'll play above your game: I am horrified at the near decade long recorded policies and behaviour of the Harper government. I fear that the such a government can attain and hold power when consistently in elections only a minority voted them in to power while the majority of the electorate opposes their platform and repressive ideology. I fear for what more damage can be done. I stand that any of the other two major federal parties will do better for Canada, yet fear that without electoral reform power can still go a party representing the fringe of Canadian society as the core Harper base represents. In a thread concerning the Canadian federal election, it most is certainly appropriate to present and support such an analysis.

cbrunny, what's motivating you to express such dismissive and name-calling angst against such?

At the other end of the spectrum, we have you and your own words, cbrunny:

FFS its like talking to a child that thinks they know everything.

Failing to see the hypocritical irony in that, I'll wager...

Let's alter course to some topical levity.

Again, very much like the infamous CPC rally a few days ago, with the hecklers whining and ranting over how unfairly treated their Dear Leader has become.... cbrunny, was that you (Harper supporter memes)???

 

[Whiskey16]

People like you drive me batshit insane, Whiskey.

.. I'm not interested in hearing what some guy on the internet says is the truth.

:whiste:

I'm interested in having a conversation about what the issue actually is.

Let's test that:

Thoughts on Duffy?

Old opposition Harper damns Prime Minister Harper:

"At worst, he personally ordered it done and chose the people who
executed the plan. At the very least, he fostered an attitude within
the party [...], chose the managers of the people who committed
these crimes and completely and utterly failed to exercise any
oversight, supervision or leadership.

In the end, it doesn’t really matter where [his] actions or lack of
them fall on that scale. He is the leader and a leader is
responsible for the actions of the people he leads.

If he had a right or honourable bone in his body, he’d admit that
and resign immediately."

- Stephen Harper, during the Gomery investigation

Today, Duffy's defence got Ben Perrin, the former legal advisor to the PMO, to reaffirm his previous testimony and to contradict both Harper and Wright's position that the current Chief of Staff, Ray Novak, was not present and unaware of the plan to provide $90,000 to Duffy.

Harper claims to have fired Wright for that fiscal impropriety. He continues to stand by that the arrangement was only between that of Wright and Duffy and that himself, Harper, and the rest of his staff knew nothing before hand.

Harper's stubbornness to stick to the story is rather coming apart. Corruption, lies, lack of integrity, and incompetence are not what the majority of Canadians desire from their leadership, let alone one that is nearly a decade stale and past its due date.

I repeat:

Duffy, personally, is the sideshow that CPC handlers, in their oh so glorious incompetent corruptness, oh so hoped to keep contained.

True focus of angst:

Two options --

1. Harper lied in parliament and continues to lie now about not knowing of the payment of potentially Conservative Party of Canada coffers and then Wright's personal deal (bribery or not) that went down;
2. Harper's leadership is that of incompetence as he continues to claim ignorance of the working of his own staff and where there is definite conflicting testimony by senior PMO staff and of a paper trail of defining most of his staff were aware while Harper and his handlers continue with a flat-out lie of little to none knowing than the lone scape-goat, Nigel Wright.

This cuts straight down to Harper's ill-ethics, lack of honesty (or, rather dishonesty), and extremely poor judge of character when looking at his long list of either convicted or accused (dead before trial as with his former conman Arthur Porter appointed into the highest level of Canadian security in his oversight of CSIS) parliamentary and civil service henchmen.


Regardless of one's partisanship, the facts are that this harms the Conservative Party of Canada that has been so enthusiastic to brand (read the above quote) itself in integrity under the 'Harper Government.'

 

[cbrunny]

This message is hidden because Whiskey16 is on your ignore list.

Ahh. Much better. So does anyone want to actually discuss politics? Do you think the Duffy issue is actually salient among Canadians?

I'm not so sure that it is. I think it is clear that there is more to the story than what we're hearing but it is fairly deep "in the weeds" so to speak. As I mentioned above, I think this has more to do with trust than anything else, something Harper was on shaky ground (at best?) with to begin with many Canadians - myself included.

But it still remains true that the outcome of this trial with respect to whether or not Harper lied will likely be inconclusive. That is, the trial is Duffy's. I don't think there will be a smoking gun that incriminates Harper, unless something substantive surfaces about Ray Novak. What has surfaced is certainly interesting - that he was in the room when this was discussed and knew all about it - and leans towards incriminating, but it is not possible to conclude from it that Harper knew as well. It certainly makes it more likely, far more likely even. But not conclusive.

I suspect as well that NDP and CPC supporters are finding it difficult to have reason to trust Trudeau. Recent polling in QC certainly makes that seem true. I heard yesterday the NDP is polling at 47% in QC. I guess that's not really surprising considering we're talking about Trudeau as Liberal leader, given his father's record in Quebec. But it really does seem like the Liberals have a steeply uphill climb if they have any hope of Official Opposition.

I tend to think that because Duffy is relatively deep politically, it lacks the punch to be salient even if it should be. Especially when the middle class is struggling so much, and certainly in Ontario where there are distractions all over the place (Wynne & the Ontario Liberals being the worst government in the history of Ontario, for example), I think people are likely to prioritize this kind of trust issue - Duffy, that is - lower than perhaps they should. And, interestingly, in QC I would expect that Trudeau as leader of the Liberals is a deeply salient issue for many that favour separatism for reasons of nepotism.

 

[Whiskey16]

Ahh. Much better [Whiskey16 is on your ignore list]

What a troll you are, feeling the need to broadcast your "fear" of discussion and your lack of nerve and integrity to address what I have rationally and adequately presented... That's the current CPC meme, ignore, insult, surround by like-minded yes men, and hide in the closet.

So does anyone want to actually discuss politics?

I have not? Wow, your apparently partisan blinders are out in full.

I think this has more to do with trust than anything else, something Harper was on shaky ground (at best?) with to begin with many Canadians - myself included.

"You," think? I thought you claimed to be more concerned with discussional consensus... Apparently not, as cbrunny dismissed and ignores the first presentation of trust in this thread:

True focus of angst:

Two options --

1. Harper lied in parliament and continues to lie now about not knowing of the payment of potentially Conservative Party of Canada coffers and then Wright's personal deal (bribery or not) that went down;
2. Harper's leadership is that of incompetence as he continues to claim ignorance of the working of his own staff and where there is definite conflicting testimony by senior PMO staff and of a paper trail of defining most of his staff were aware while Harper and his handlers continue with a flat-out lie of little to none knowing than the lone scape-goat, Nigel Wright.

This cuts straight down to Harper's ill-ethics, lack of honesty (or, rather dishonesty), and extremely poor judge of character when looking at his long list of either convicted or accused (dead before trial as with his former conman Arthur Porter appointed into the highest level of Canadian security in his oversight of CSIS) parliamentary and civil service henchmen.

~~~~~~

cbrunny, with reasonable cause and support -- that's a discussion of politics, and a discussion that you disregard, out of your frustration and inability to reason when challenged.

But it still remains true that the outcome of this trial with respect to whether or not Harper lied will likely be inconclusive. That is, the trial is Duffy's.

"Inconclusive" What rational is there to for you to manufacture a middle of the line balance? To obfuscate the known realities is all the Conservative Party of Canada has left for a defence. Stay on message. Inspire doubt of the currently known conclusions:

• Harper was utterly unaware of the goings on among nearly his entire PMO staff;
• Harper's continues denial, in light of testimony and email records, that only Wright and Duffy were involved in a possible bribe;
• Harper never mislead parliament of his knowledge of the Duffy affair, Wright makes misleading ("fuzzy on that" of Ray Novaks knowledge) statements on the stand, and to his end, Harper apparently will protect his boarding, garage suite living, adopted man-servant, Ray Novak, all to stay on message...

Ohh, but cbrunny has gone and hid in the closet of an echo chamber and has publicly expressed the CPC party way of staying on message and running from honest discussion. cbrunny, in all of his bravado and manliness, has chose the internet pussy method of discussion -- place topical feedback on his ignore list.

cbrunny, initiated this thread on the Canadian election but resort to calling challenging views as "childish," enforcing an echo chamber to toggle ignore upon fellow forum members who have the nerve to discuss the current politics with a substantiated and cited positions.

I suspect as well that NDP and CPC supporters are finding it difficult to have reason to trust Trudeau.
...And, interestingly, in QC I would expect that Trudeau as leader of the Liberals is a deeply salient issue for many that favour separatism for reasons of nepotism.

Ahh, the Conservative party meme...The shiny. But, BUT, TRUDEAU!

Not very reasonable nor substantive by you, cbrunny.

 

[Whiskey16]

But even so, this is Duffy's trial, not Harper's. Gonna have to charge him with something if you want true proof that Harper lied.

In light of conflicting statements among witnesses and of Harper's strong stance to stay on a now discredited message of only an affair between Wright and Duffy, your statement from above is utterly irrational in its defence of Harper.

Harper's bunkered position does not hold water to reason nor substance.

In conflict to his own legal counsel, the records are of Harper arguing to justify Duffy's residence, and much of his expenses. Harper has a long list of incompetently justified appointments and a record of little to no integrity when confronted with improprieties. cbrunny, chose to ignore my posts after my quoting of Harper integrity position against the former Martin government, is utterly hypocritical upon his handling of the Duffy file and his corrupted PMO.

Yesterday's testimony damns the PMO and the Prime Minister into a lie:

Mike Duffy trial: Ex-PMO lawyer testifies for 2nd day

He (Ben Perrin) also said Novak, the prime minister's principal secretary at the time, was present for the entire conference call when Wright told Duffy's lawyer he would pay for Duffy's expenses.

Perrin's testimony contradicts comments from the Conservative campaign, which has denied that Novak had any knowledge of Wright's $90,000 repayment of Duffy's expenses. They said he was initially part of the conference call but left before the cheque was discussed.

Wright also testified that Novak was not there for the entire call and "popped in and out."

cbrunny, chooses to ignore reality for his irrational and following the CPC position of inconclusive behaviour and the issue being only that of Duffy, not of those who are not on trial...

cbrunny (who runs from discussion in his bunkered echo chamber), even ignored and dismissed the damning sarcasm of the above Andrew Coyne piece, that bitingly condemned Harper and the PMO, regardless of criminal judgement of Duffy.

Old opposition Harper damns Prime Minister Harper:

"At worst, he personally ordered it done and chose the people who
executed the plan. At the very least, he fostered an attitude within
the party [...], chose the managers of the people who committed
these crimes and completely and utterly failed to exercise any
oversight, supervision or leadership.

In the end, it doesn’t really matter where [his] actions or lack of
them fall on that scale. He is the leader and a leader is
responsible for the actions of the people he leads.

If he had a right or honourable bone in his body, he’d admit that
and resign immediately."

- Stephen Harper, during the Gomery investigation

New Harper:

Andrew Coyne: Sympathy for Harper — imagine learning everyone you trusted lied to you

Imagine the sense of betrayal he must have felt — the vertigo, the nausea — as it slowly dawned on him that everything he had been led to believe about the whole affair was a lie: that in fact, everyone knew. Everyone, that is, but him. Imagine the humiliation, to have been played for a patsy in this way — him, Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada — and what is more, for the whole world to know it. He is a proud man, but not immune to feelings of self-doubt. Would anyone respect him now? Could he carry on as leader, if he were not master even of his own office?

It must have felt like the room was spinning, like the earth was opening up in front of him. Inevitably, there must have been a certain amount of self-recrimination. How could he have been so blind? Why had he not suspected? Little things that seemed innocent before — the way everyone suddenly shut up when he entered the room, that time Nigel borrowed his Blackberry without asking — must have suddenly taken on a darker hue.

And then, the fears: If he could have been kept in the dark about this, he must have wondered, if the people he trusted most could have conspired in such a scheme, so repugnant to him in every respect, and not only done so but lied about it to his face, and gone on lying even after the scheme had been exposed — for he must surely have made the most searching inquiries after the story first broke — well, what else could they have been up to all these years? What else did he know nothing about? What other lies had they told him? These things don’t usually happen just once, after all. There’s usually a pattern.

And yet, this good man, deceived, humiliated, betrayed on all sides, found it in his heart to forgive them. You or I, had we found ourselves in the same position, might have taken the most foul sort of revenge: fired the lot, paraded them in front of the media, forced them to answer for what they had done. But that is not, we can see now, Harper’s way...

cbrunny, that is a continuing discussion of politics, one in which you choose to dismiss, ignore, and hypocritically condemn as being such... :thumbsdown:

 

[cbrunny]

lol this is getting crazy: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-trial-benjamin-perrin-testifies-1.3198897

"My understanding from that email is that the prime minister himself had approved of the five points that had been set out by Mr. Wright," Perrin said.

"When Mr Wright wrote 'good to go' from the prime minister I took that to mean the prime minister himself had directly approved them."

But Wright had previously testified was that 'good to go' meant Harper had approved of what he thought was a plan in which Duffy himself would repay the money and admit to mistakes in the claiming of expenses.

On Thursday, Perrin testified that Ray Novak, Harper's chief of staff, was told before and during a 2013 conference call that Wright would personally repay Duffy's expenses, contradicting claims by the Conservative campaign.

 

[Whiskey16]

lol this is getting crazy: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-trial-benjamin-perrin-testifies-1.3198897

Cbrunny has got some serious integrity and cognitive dissonance issues.... :

But even so, this is Duffy's trial, not Harper's. Gonna have to charge him with something if you want true proof that Harper lied.

Isn't that what you said earlier, blew off my rational critique, then ignored me to create your own echo chamber, but now agrde with what I've posted upon the evidence of lies and ill trust?

Cbrunny just posted what I already have done, yet now a doubles the posting in this thread because of his insufferable ignornace to run from discussionand be clueless as to what is present in this thread. :thumbsdown: