Harper doubles down on trickle down

[laundry_queen]

Okay, so that's not the title of the article, but I thought it was apt.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-harper-economy-markets-1.3201727

A sample of the vomit inducing speech:

"Do we in Canada really want to go down the NDP-Liberal road of out of control spending, permanent deficits and higher taxes?" Harper told a crowd of about a hundred supporters at a Monday evening event in Lac Beauport, Que.

"I think we want to stay the Conservative course that has, in a troubled global economy, consistently made this country an island of stability."


Stephen Lewis called Harper a 2nd rate economist today. He hit the nail on the head. Everything that has been right with our economy over the last 8 years has been DESPITE Harper's policies. And everything wrong with it has been exacerbated by his trickle down, tax-cuts-for-the-rich, oil-focused economy. His policies are anti-Keynesian, and have exaggerated the natural boom-bust cycle. Harper wants to put in place austerity at a time when stimulus is needed. Another Harper term would spell disaster for Canadians.

And, even though it's a tad bit OT, I found this interesting article from 2004:

http://thewalrus.ca/the-man-behind-stephen-harper/

An interesting read knowing what we know now.

[delrem]

1. Harper is going to lose. I'm confident of that. n/t

[rurallib]

2. from this guy in the US I am so hopeful you are right.

[alcina]

4. I wish I were as confident as you

I'm hopeful and I'm working toward that most welcome goal. But I'm still worried.

[Spazito]

3. Stephen Lewis is great and is being generous in only calling Harper second rate...

he is third rate at best. Even an average Jill or Joe knows not to put all their eggs in one basket, economically speaking, while Harper did just that, all in for oil and gas, nothing else, no diversification to speak of at all.

[alcina]

5. Thanks for the link to the 2004 article

It really does explain a lot. Flanagan sounds like Canada's mini-me version of Dick Cheney. But his story has ended quite differently. From a 2014 article:


Today, Mr. Flanagan writes, “I have to accept my share of blame” for the ruthlessness that characterizes the party. Originally, Conservatives like him thought it was the only way to beat the Liberals at their own game.

“Harper led the way, but everyone around him bought into it,” he says. In part, that ruthlessness reflects what he calls the “shadow side” of Mr. Harper’s personality. But it is also “a cancer eating at the whole Conservative movement in Canada.”

That is an extraordinary indictment of the party Mr. Flanagan helped to create. And it feels prophetic.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/how-tom-flanagan-went-from-respected-political-activist-to-pariah/article18232689/?page=all

[arikara]

6. I also remember reading something about that weaselly popinjay

Nigel Wright. That he was instrumental in recruiting Harper, then he went to "work for him" in the PMO. I wish I could find it again. I got the impression that Wright was as much in charge as Harper, in which case if he fell on his sword I highly doubt he's out of the picture.