Just when you start worrying that the constant stream of Tory money and vitriol might be having an effect on the general electorate, Stephen Harper conducts himself in a manner so gratuitously oafish it makes you realize that this man, and his party, simply do not understand the nature of the Canadian people. I'm sorry, but whatever the real flaws of the Liberal Party (and they are many), you do not go around smearing them for their role in fictitious scandals (like the income trust "scandal").
As Mr. Ralph Goodale, the man Harper smeared, says:
“If the Prime Minister of this country does not have the intestinal fortitude to be an honourable person, Canadians will judge him and he will pay a price for that.”
In fact, if I were Mr. Goodale and the Liberal Party, and if the CPC did not immediately pull its Quebec ads and issue an apology for running them, I would be looking at pursuing legal action.
If the Tories are willing to put their name to falsehoods, let 'em. And then sue 'em. See how the Canadian people react.
Harper lied to hundreds of thousands of Canadian investors when he promised not to tax income trusts. Trusts held in registered accounts (where most ordinary Canadians hold their investments) will now be taxed twice starting 2011 under Flaherty's oxymoronic 'Tax fairness plan'. 3rd Class Act is being too kind.
"you do not go around smearing them for their role in fictitious scandals (like the income trust "scandal")"
well, since the investigation did find evidence and there has been a subsequent charge (even tho Goodale assured us there was no leak) it would seem this makes this scandal less fictitious than you suggest.
"If the Tories are willing to put their name to falsehoods, let 'em. And then sue 'em. See how the Canadian people react."
Kinda like "guns in our streets"?
That said, I do not think Goodale did anything wrong, other than a major mis-handling of the file. I also think he had some ministerial responsibility in that he should have called the RCMP himself to investigate and also stepped down. The buck has to stop at the minister. And yes, that goes for any party in power.
I just shot down a ReThuglican on a HarperCon site who claimed that Dion was socialists third choice. I reminded him that Liberal leaders are prime ministers and that it took cons three choices to come up with a guy who could only do a minority government. Now I see I should have said: "Better third choice than third class like Harper". LOL!!
No one should hold any breath waiting for an apology from any fear-mongering neo-cons. Even though Gooddale obviously deserves one. Only first class people say sorry.
Sue the Conservatives for every penny possible.
(then give the $ back to the taxpayers that got ripped off by the LPC)
Kinda like "guns in our streets"?
Nice try, but it never ran. The Liberal's had the decency to see that the ad was misleading and pulled it.
knb . . . The only reason the Liberal guns in our streets ad was pulled was because of public backlash. Prime Minister Paul Martin appeared on CBC and was asked directly if he approved the ad for airplay. His exact words were "I approved all the ads". Pulling of the ad had absolutely nothing to do with decency. Decency is not a word in the Liberal vocabulary. Power is.
Well the question at issue is whether "decency" is a word in the Tory vocabulary. You seem to feel that it isn't, and you're okay with that.
PLEASE . . launch a lawsuit . . helps keep the scandals, thefts and corruption stories alive in the minds of Canadian voters.
Wonder where the missing millions are ??
Maybe the impending criminal charges the RCMP will soon lay will remind Canadians of how corrupt the Liberal were and still are.
Throw the thieving Liberal bastards in jail . . . please
If Goodale could sue for the french ads Kinsella would have already had the papers drawn up. Even Warren know you can't sue against a truth. The ad does not accuse Goodale, it states that his department was under RCMP investigation (which would include him).
'I reminded him that Liberal leaders are prime ministers'
how high was your nose in the air when you typed that?
Could you see your monitor?
You new to the politics scene?
Stephane Harper is the FIRST leader and co-founder of the Conservative Party of Canada,
As the new leader of the CPC, he reduced what was supposed to be the 'largest majority in Canadian history' to a minority government, 2004.
On his second try PMSH took the government with a minority, 2006.
On his third try.....majority fits the pattern.
Goodale lied when he said no one in his department was involved.
What else has Goodale been lying about????
But let's turn the microscope back to Harpor for a minute... lied on the Grewal affair. Lied on income trusts. Lied on the 'media blocked from viewing return of dead soldiers. Heck, i know Cons like to go back to the past on Liberal missteps, so lets walk back and see what Harpor said about, hmm, Arar, and don't forget how the truth never got in his way when it came to Liberal gov't departments, like doubling the true cost of the gun registry or creating out of thin air the 'million-dollar boondoggle' when it was nothing of the kind. The same sex issue, which he tried hard to massage into a faux-hatred meme on poor, hetero white people.
Now just look at how he treats his own people who speak out of line. Chong, gone. those candidates paid to step aside - might as well not exist and he'll take care of the justice system to make sure they get theirs. Elections Canada commissar, environmental lady, does the line start on the left or just circle the globe? Harpor is a cretin and we've got to start pulling the same games to get it out as the lying Cons... This is about the state of our country, its future and how it treats its citizens, afterall.
Agreed. I thought the Libs should have sued over the Grewal cover-up since it had to be someone(s) in the CPC which made the edits to the recordings which "proved" the criminal allegations of Harper and the CPC correct when the unedited version did the exact opposite. Harper went out of his way to claim no one on the CPC side did anything wrong and that any claims to the contrary were the Liberal war room and the Liberal media bias/conspiracy at work and totally untrue.
There is a reason why I do not let the Grewal fraud slide; it demonstrates just how far Harper will go in making false smears, defending false smears, and even in defending those that create the false smears even after they have been exposed. It shows how comfortable Harper is making specific criminal allegations against his opponents, something most Canadians consider a very serious act and not something to be done lightly nor without hard evidence to back it up with, yet Harper and the CPC did exactly that then and covered it up once it was exposed as a fraud.
This business with the IT "scandal" that wasn't and the way Goodale specifically and the Liberals more generally were slimed and smeared as corrupt crooks on this specific issue is quite similar in nature. There was no evidence whatsoever to back up the claims of political interference/involvement in a leak (which at the time had yet to be confirmed ever happened and only was with this recent charge of the civil servant) yet this did not stop the NDP and especially the CPC from assuming it was accurate and treating the premise there was Liberal political involvement in this matter as a fact/given. We now know this is totally wrong.
As to the ministerial responsibility argument, nice try. If this guy had been on Goodale's own personal staff, if this had been a coordinated effort among several people in his department, then that argument would carry more weight with me. This though was one person out for private personal financial gain that did all he could to cover up his illegal actions. Now, unless ministerial accountability means that whenever any civil servant at any level within a department is charged/convicted of a criminal act this automatically means the minister must resign this argument does not work, and I do not believe that is considered the standard for ministerial accountability resignation, although if someone can conclusively prove otherwise I will of course retract this and acknowledge my error.
Post a Comment