Canada’s Conservative movement as a whole has been damaged severely by Prime Minister Stephen Harper himself — a past longtime fiscal Conservative and champion of the free market – in some parts of Canada
Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s total turnaround from cautious fiscal conservatism to profligate government spender and deficit creator has surely betrayed fiscally conservative voters who elected Conservative MPs based on their public pledges at that time that “our economy is sound” and “we will never run a deficit”. One can only reasonably conclude that to hang on to power in Ottawa, Harper and also next his MPs have betrayed every fiscal Conservative principle they had once claimed that their party holds dear, sacred. Harper’s main opposition these days seems to be the c Conservatives members themselves.
To me and for good reasons Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper is not a real Evangelical Christian
When it come to admitting, facing, dealing with one’s own shortcomings, sins, negative truths, Most people are next in a false denial, wrongfully do take the ostrich approach still. Too many Men too are often big liars and cowards who tend to blame it all falsely on the wife or vice versa. While the Conservatives falsely blame it on the Liberals, others.. what a pathetic approach. We the citizens all seem to know that they are big unrepentant sinners still too. Is anyone foolish to still maintain that there any Christian politicians, Harper included now too?
With accusations of “sell-out,” right-wing commentators have denounced Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government for producing a Liberal budget this week. “You can find some things in the budget that are consistent with the Conservative philosophy, but the weight is like 90 to 10 against it,” University of Calgary political scientist Tom Flanagan, a former senior adviser to Harper, told the Calgary Herald. “Some of the right-wingers have even suggested that the budget signifies the end of small-c conservatism in Canada.” John Ivison has declared that Stephen Harper is down to his last few principles. “Today’s budget will be the final act in a long transformation of Mr. Harper’s Conservative Party from a policy- driven, principled voice for conservatism to a process-driven electoral machine, intent only on surviving the coming budget vote and winning the next election.”
Even to the die hard reformers, conservatives the Harper government now sadly acts and looks very much like many of the bad liberal governments that preceded them.
Canadians say Stephen Harper was motivated by political survival and would never have unveiled this week’s multibillion-dollar stimulus budget were it not for opposition pressure. A new Globe and Mail-CTV poll also found that, despite moderate support for the budget, most Canadians continue to hold Mr. Harper responsible for the crisis atmosphere that prompted it and believe he hasn’t fundamentally changed. “Canadians think Harper has done this with a gun to his head,” said Peter Donolo, a partner with the Strategic Counsel, the firm that conducted the poll. “They feel this wouldn’t have happened had the opposition not held his feet to the fire.” The poll also shows that Quebeckers are significantly more negative about the Prime Minister and the budget than are Canadians in other regions, and that voters are now less likely to support the government because of the budget.According to the poll, 72 per cent of Canadians say the government would not have introduced the stimulative budget of this week had it not been for the pressure of opposition parties, whose members threatened to bring down the Harper government and install a coalition. Similarly, 69 per cent say they still blame Mr. Harper for causing an unnecessary political crisis late last year when he should have been focusing on the economy. In Quebec, 83 per cent of respondents blame the Prime Minister for the crisis. Asked whether they believe Mr. Harper has changed since the fall and is taking the country’s economic troubles more seriously, 63 per cent said they perceived no change and that the budget is all about politics. In Quebec, 74 per cent said they don’t believe he changed. “In Quebec, Stephen Harper has the reverse Midas touch,” Mr. Donolo said. “This budget suffers by being associated with him.” http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090131.POLL31/TPStory/
On top of that there is the valid criticism of the federal Conservative new anti recession budget, a transparently “political document” which also had failed to foresee or to allow provisions for the US protectionist policy that has been going on for over a decade now too.. It is not a conservative budget.
“There’s no way Stephen Harper and his government would have come up with this budget if he hadn’t been goaded into it by the coalition and the fear of losing power. On the contrary, a right-wing, fiscally conservative government would have drawn up something quite different — heavier on the tax cuts with far less spending.” ” With accusations of “sell-out,” right-wing commentators have denounced Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government for producing a budget this week that betrays conservative principles. Also driving the right-wingers crazy is Harper running up the deficit not just with tax cuts, which they support, but also with more spending on infrastructure, social housing, employment insurance, aboriginal communities, and so on. All these expenditures are anathema to them. Some of the right-wingers have even suggested that the budget signifies the end of small-c conservatism in Canada.”
Stephen Harper has turned liberal for his own political expediency, survival. Like the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois, the Harper Conservatives now also do maintain that a vast increase in deficit spending is necessary to revive job-creating economic growth. While in opposition, Harper said one thuibgm and next died the opposite typically as well, Harper and Flaherty had before decried the billions upon billions of taxpayers’ dollars wasted on failed corporate handouts by the Liberals. Yet now that the new Conservatives are in power, they are doing the same things too. Prime Minister Stephen Harper used to advocate both sound fiscal policies and a stricter separation of federal and provincial powers. Now, his own government proposes to spend billions of taxpayers’ dollars on a host of provincial and local projects too. This is as liberal as one can be. What, then, is the real purpose of such fiscal improvidence? The answer is evident: By this means, the Harper Conservatives aim to bribe voters and win support for their minority government from the opposition Liberals. Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff backed the Conservatives on the budget — a plan that clearly could have been rather put forth by the Liberals. Liberal leader himself Michael Ignatieff criticism of the Harper’s budget has been tempered with praise for its Liberal-inspired elements. Ignatieff just made the wise political move by criticizing the budget, then supporting it, on Liberal terms. He Ignatieff also bought time crucial to his political future. The Grit boss Ignatieff can now also force an election in March, June or September, on any of the budget updates. No question about it, the hoped for coalition’s collapse, Stéphane Dion’s fall, unexpected Michael Ignatieff’s rise and Stephen Harper’s realignment have rather all lead to serious negative effects for all Canadians.
But three errors in judgment by Harper changed the game fundamentally and will now likely cost him the keys to 24 Sussex Drive.
The first was a stupid pre-election gambit to reduce the GST to 5 per cent over the objections of every credible economist in the country. That cost the government at least $10 billion in annual revenue, and more importantly the fiscal flexibility to respond to the recession without resorting to so much deficit spending. (Compounded by the sad fact to try to get reelected the Harper government started spending billions of dollars, the surplus left to it by previous Liberal governments — money that should have been available for a rainy day, but next it was not there. Here is more poof that Stepehen Harper is not a real Christian, he does not know or practise the Biblical truths. Remmeber the story about Joseph the boy with a multi coloured coat who next becamse a ruler in Egypt during a recession, famine. Jospeh stored up the resources for a rainy day, he did nto foolishly give them away like Harper did.)
The second was rolling out a November economic statement projecting a stay-the-course balanced budget for 2009 when the rest of the world, including the parliamentary budget officer, was forecasting significant deficits. When Finance Minister Jim Flaherty had to backtrack less than two months later and admit a much starker reality, the government looked both lost and incompetent.
The third mistake was Harper’s misguided attempt to strip the federal parties of public funding at a time when the Liberals were destitute and desperate. That triggered an unpalatable coalition between the Libs and the NDP, but also reduced the prime minister to cowering behind the Governor General while he played for time.
More importantly, it precipitated the bloodless Liberal coup that replaced the hopeless Stephane Dion with Michael Ignatieff without the cost or carnage of a leadership battle. Ignatieff is Harper’s intellectual equal and plainly a superior political talent.
The combined effect of these errors in judgment is that Harper’s aura as a competent and tactical leader has been obliterated. With the economy now tanking, Harper must accept an economic prescription that is alien to his lifelong embrace of free markets. The prime minister is an old-fashioned populist with a bedrock belief in balanced budgets. The Reform Party that he helped found was a visceral reaction to the chronic deficits of both the Mulroney Conservatives and Trudeau Liberals. But in an age of renewed public faith in interventionism, Harper is out of step with a Canadian electorate enamoured of U.S. President Barack Obama and his enormous appetite for stimulus spending. http://www.thespec.com/Opinions/article/504989