Why shouldn't the NDP work with Harper?

107 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Sun, 2007-02-04 07:48

intelligent universe

I hear you Boom Boom. I'm basically an anti-harperite. Here in Alberta it's basically a political wilderness if you are not a conservative. Liberal, Ndp, Green its all the same here.

I'm acutely aware of what Harper is all about, of how he operates and what he hopes to achieve. So normally you won't see me dealing with much else.

When I thanked you it was because you made an effort to throw a little light on something. To me, it was a service to everyone not just me and I thought a thank you was appropriate. I didn't mean to imply you were supporting me in a partisan way. Thanks again.

Sun, 2007-02-04 07:57

#103

Stockholm

Meanwhile, I am readiong that what the Liberals fear most of all is that Harper will actually pull a "only Nixon can go to China" and actually bring in a really aggressive plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions etc... and that would rob Dion of his big issue.

You see the difference. The NDP just wants positive action on the environment. We don't care who does it. We don't care who gets credit for it. We just want it to happen. If Harper ends up going further on the environment as a result of pressure from the NDP and as a result of reading polls than the Liberal ever went during 13 years in office, then so be it!

The Liberals on the other hand, only care about the extent to which they can use the environment for political gain. They are mortified at the thoght that action might occur on this issue and that they won't be able to take any credit for it. The Liberal way of thinking is "the world can go to hell in a handbasket if we can get credit and make this issue get us more votes". Its clear that the Liberals don't give a damn about global warming, they just see an issue that they want to use to get more votes and they are terrified that it might not work out that way.

Sun, 2007-02-04 08:00

#104

Boom Boom

I have my doubts that Harper will give the NDP what they want - it'd cost him too much support from the corporate and oil and gas sectors.

Sun, 2007-02-04 08:43

#105

Boom Boom

CTV's Question Period just had on a panel of Bob Mills, David McGuinty, and Nathan Cullen. Cullen said right out that Harper does not 'get it', that Harper is not an environmentalist, that Harper doesn't think about the environment at all.

Just before that panel, QP had an interview with John Baird in Paris, and Baird said the Cons are committed to regulating industry for emissions. No mention of the oil and gas sector at all. Someone, hopefully, will do a follow-up to ask if Baird includes the oil and gas sector as deserving of the same regulation as industry.

Sun, 2007-02-04 09:16

#106

Stockholm

quote:

CTV's Question Period just had on a panel of Bob Mills, David McGuinty, and Nathan Cullen. Cullen said right out that Harper does not 'get it', that Harper is not an environmentalist, that Harper doesn't think about the environment at all.

I'm sure its true. But Harper is someone who wants to win the next election and he knows that if he is seen as being ineffectual on the environment, that will reduce his chances of winning. He may well therefore take major action on the environ - even if its for all the wrong reasons.

In 1950s, there were lots of rightwing Chrstian Democratic governments in western Europe that drastically expanded the welfare state. They probably all hated what they were doing every step of the way, but they still did it because they wanted to win elections.

Sun, 2007-02-04 09:25

#107

oldgoat

106 posts! Oh my, we can't have that now can we. I'm sure everything that could be said on this subject has been, and we shall hear nothing of the like again.

Pages

Topic locked