Psychopath: a person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse.
On a day when we learn that his Harper's been lying to Canadians over the issue of torturing prisoners in Afghanistan, has our dear leader apologized or shown remorse for his perverted behaviour?
No, Harper and his legions of unthinking minions decided instead to spend a few hours in an orgy of self-congratulations, thanking themselves for being great stewards of Afghanistan, of the economy - by cutting taxes and paying down the debt (nevermind about what he said about the environment, it's not worth paying attention to).
Not only was today's bombshell non-existent from his speech, but he lied about the economic record of the opposition, too, saying "their reckless spending would, in one budget, push the country back into deficit, adding to the federal debt and putting upward pressure on interest rates."
Forgive me for my lack of amnesia, but wasn't it only recently that your government fucked up its numbers and eked out a pathetic $100m surplus because of a fetish for cutting taxes and and overconfidence in the economy (it was our dear leader that just over a month ago said "the fundamentals of our economy are as strong as they've ever been").
The irony on the issue of Afghanistan isn't lost on any of us. Our dear leader's psychopathic behaviour isn't just alienating the media anymore. After today's bout of nauseating stupidity, he might even be alienating the military, too.
Labels: economy, psychopathic behaviour, Stephen Harper
8 Comments:
2 things,
1- 1.6B was supposed to be for the year, the 100m surplus was for 1 month. plus it is still a surplus, not a deficit. When there were surpluses, the opposition bemoaned the fact that the government was hoarding money.
2- Lied about Afghanistan. They kept operational information secret, which they should for the safety of our soldiers. Yes let us debate the merit of being there (questionable at best in my opinion)but when we are there, let them do the job they are supposed to do without interference.
Regardless, in a time of declining revenues, 100m down from the half-billion of November is troubling.
And telling the people of Canada that the government "wasn't told" about what's going on in Afghanistan is quite different than saying the information must be kept quiet for operational reasons. That qualifies as a lie. A retraction on behalf of Buckler is not an apology. Canadians aren't idiots.
And on the issue of it being an "operational matter":
"Alex Neve, the Canadian head of Amnesty International said it 'doesn't seem sensible' that the government could know about the Nov. 5 abuse incident, but have no knowledge of the policy change that flowed from it.
'This was a fundamental policy shift with respect to one of the most contentious and most important issues in the Afghan issues last year, one that was the subject of a court case back in Canada, one which had dominated political time in the House of Commons,' he said. 'To claim that's simply an operational matter is simply not fair.'"
http://www.nationalpost.com/rss/story.html?id=264199
"Regardless, in a time of declining revenues, 100m down from the half-billion of November is troubling."
Based on what theory is this troubling?
Either right wing or left wing, economic theory tells us there is bigger economic benefit in injecting money into the economy(either from increased program spending or tax cuts) than hoarding cash.
I've read all the winged economic bibles, too - my "theory" is that logic, not dogma, will prevail in times of crisis.
If we look at the bigger picture, as taboo as it is, we might choose to act more wisely in a time of unprecedented climate emergency (do you hear alarm bells?) - one which is quite closely linked up with our economic practices and obsession with growth at all costs (how about now?). Public spending in this area is one thing. Tax cuts are another. I'm not morally opposed to tax relief, but I humbly - and I mean that - humbly think the dumbest thing we could do right now is throw so *much* money away in the form of tax cuts. But, according to economists, I digress.
Suffice it to say that if revenues are declining, there could feasibly be less wiggle room next month. According to some interpretations - like that of the CPA - so may begin the slippery slope toward a deficit. We can await with bated breath. Or something.
I completely agree that money should be poured into envrionmental issues more so than tax cuts. However, if there ever is a 'good' time to hav ea deficit, it is when the economy is in recession and you are spending money to help shorten the recession. Not saying it is ideal, but now is not the worst time for it to happen if it does.
Though with foresight, if you had to choose between a deficit or somewhat more moderate tax relief, it's a no-brainer, eh!?
yes, but we are not in deficit.
"Why has slamming a ball with a racquet become so obsessive a pleasure for so many of us? It seems clear to me that a primary attraction of the sport is the opportunity it gives to release aggression physically without being arrested for felonious assault." ~Nat Hentoff
Post a Comment
<< Home