- Re: The Harper Line-Of-Credit

Submitted: 8:15pm. PDT, 27 May '10

Continued from my last Post, below "the buck stops with us, it certainly isn't stopping with Harper":


Rose21 wrote:Posted 2010/05/27
at 1:52 PM ET

"wlloydm: 'I don't recall Harper, or Flaherty, or any Con, asking me, or anyone else in Canada, if they wanted to be "a player on the International scene".'

While the notion of "being a player" sounds a bit frivolous, in the end it means having influence on global decision making. That's important. I agree that the price tag seems excessive, but without details on the expenditures it is hard to judge which costs can be eliminated. There are always "what if" scenarios that need to be covered. I do hope they are getting good advice. Fortunately, the money is being spent in Canada, so it is not a dead loss. There will be a little economic upward blip in Toronto over this. "


Hi Rose located in Ottawa.

This is a well articulated response. Thanks.

So, Rose, what do you actually do in Ottawa.

And, if you are posting such even tempered responses, why not use your real name.

You wrote:

"While the notion of "being a player" sounds a bit frivolous, in the end it means having influence on global decision making. That's important. "

The issue is important to whom. It is clearly important to Stephen Harper and Jim Flaherty.

And, unless you can explain why it is that Harper, Flaherty or any other of the Con's will have "influence on global decision making"; and, if they do, why it is a benefit to the World and more important, why it would be a benefit to Canada.

As stated in the National Post today:
"Sure, being host to their counterparts gives nations’ heads of government plenty of photo opportunities to look influential and to bulk up their parties’ campaign brochures"

I see Tony Clament is getting a photo opp's. What does he have to do with the G20 anyway,oh sorry, I forgot, he's a Con.

I wonder if any Liberals will be placed front and centre. Rose21 perhaps you could hazard a guess.


Continued . . .

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog

********


. . . continued

Hi Rose21,


Selling Canada's resources and future in order to get various countries to go onside with an absolute exclusion on abortion in family planning, abandonment our obligations towards meaningful action towards Global Warming, etc., is not what I nor, in my observation, a majority of Canadians would call a benefit either to the International Community nor Canadians.

Promoting extreme right-wing ideology that is steeped in personal religious beliefs is not what I would consider a benefit.

Spending over a billion dollars of our taxes, which is a significant portion of our deficit, for personal aggrandizement, partizan self-interest in order to buy the next election may be important to Harper but not me and not, I suggest to you, a majority of Canadians.

and let me re-iterate regarding The Harper Line-Of-Credit :

"We are ultimately responsible, the buck stops with us, it certainly isn't stopping with Harper, and we and our children and our children's children, and their children, down thru the ages, will ultimately have to pay. "

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog