Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Enjoy the hockey game, Mr Harper or


Recommended Posts

PMs have the freedom to have lives too. If Harper wants to go to a game in Boston but security requirements forbid him from travelling commercially, then he has to take the private jet.

Ah yes, the security issue...

Harper can't take a commercial flight with other people for "security reasons", but he apparently can then sit with 17,565 strangers in the Boston arena.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ah yes, the security issue...

Harper can't take a commercial flight with other people for "security reasons", but he apparently can then sit with 17,565 strangers in the Boston arena.

Well, you'll have to talk to the RCMP about that. It's their thing, not his.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you'll have to talk to the RCMP about that. It's their thing, not his.

Right.... :rolleyes:

It seems the Cons are certainly wasting no time in outdoing the Liberals who they used to ridicule in their quest to defend the waste of tax payers money.

Let's see if Harper can remember his own words:

such as a 2005 jab at Martin and his Liberal government.

"As they pad their expense account and look out the windows of their $11,000 per hour Challenger jet flights to B.C., they think that everything is going pretty well," Harper then said. "They just don't get what real life is like for ordinary Canadians."

Good ole Stevie Hyprocrite... never one to let hypocrisy stand in his quest to outdo the Liberals.

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good ole Stevie Hyprocrite... never one to let hypocrisy stand in his quest to outdo the Liberals.

From McLean's:

During his opposition days, Stephen Harper was quick to condemn the government for charging cross-country Challenger flights for cabinet ministers and their cronies to the public purse - estimating the in-flight costs at $11,000 an hour.

The difference is cabinet ministers and their cronies can take commercial airlines. Big difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right.... :rolleyes:

It seems the Cons are certainly wasting no time in outdoing the Liberals who they used to ridicule in their quest to defend the waste of tax payers money.

I certainly wasn't ridiculing Liberals. I was a member of the Liberal Party of Canada then. The Prime Minister travels the way the security experts see fit. That's the truth and always has been, especially since 9/11.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly wasn't ridiculing Liberals. I was a member of the Liberal Party of Canada then. The Prime Minister travels the way the security experts see fit. That's the truth and always has been, especially since 9/11.

Well with the numerous wannabe CEO Barney Fife's that we seem to have parading around as "security experts" these days.. it's no wonder they'd insist on travelling by private jet for "security reasons" and not having any issues about sitting with 17,000 plus foreign, un-scrutinized, un-checked potentially hostile strangers surrounding them.

After all, Harper's boys believe that they're entitled to their entitlements too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From McLean's:

The difference is cabinet ministers and their cronies can take commercial airlines. Big difference.

There were 45 flights in 2009 - 2010 by federal cabinet ministers. In all, 282 trips in the period carried the prime minister, Governor General, ministers or VIPs, according to the mission reports and passenger manifests. Times $10,105 per flying hour. See Harper's saving money :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back when Mulroney was PM, if he wanted something, if its wasn't under the payment of the government then the PC party had to pay for it, so the Conservative Party should pay for the fuel to go then and back. or Even Harper himself, he can afford it now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No you don't get it. If Harper wants to promote austerity, he has to lead the way. The left won't be happy unless our PM is driving himself around in a Hyundai with Onstar installed as his security. :lol:

Well he'd have to drive a GM to get OnStar technically.

However, I would suggest we could save a great deal on PM security, if we hired Chretien to train Harper in the art of PM kick butt. Cream pies in the face or breaking into Sussex drive Mr. Chretien knew how to handle it all!

To the original post however, he's got every right to a hockey game as any other Canadian. Any other Canadian, doesn't need a jet or security detail. It's the cost of maintaining the office of the PM. It's coming out of his own pocket and the Jet is costing the tax payers money regardless of whether it's being used or not. The cost difference is only measure in fuel usage.

I have no problem criticizing Harper when it's due, but this is somewhat ridiculous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's coming out of his own pocket and the Jet is costing the tax payers money regardless of whether it's being used or not. The cost difference is only measure in fuel usage.

I think the difference is close to $4000 per hour. Actually not that much, in the grand scheme of things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem criticizing Harper when it's due, but this is somewhat ridiculous.

Dave, you've put your finger on it. The whole thing IS ridiculous!

Still, we better get used to it. Many people who dislike Harper are just fanatics, for want of a better word. They see him as the Great Satan. For the next 4 years at least they are going to take every possible negative occurrence, no matter how trivial, that happens with Harper and stretch it into a crime against the Universe!

When Free Trade was passed John Crosbie the Finance Minister made a great quote. He referred to all the criticism when he said "From now on, every sparrow that falls from the sky will be blamed on Free Trade!"

I believe we are going to see even worse examples. It will be more like "Every time a sparrow farts it will be proof that Harper is trying to gas millions into a horrible death!"

They have no perspective or objectivity at all. Worse yet, they won't shut up! They seem to think that they can just heap up a bigger and bigger pile of anti-Harper crap and people will be so impressed that they'll feel no need to actually examine the argument.

These are 'heart' people, not 'head' people. With such, arguments that appeal to the head are a total waste of time.

I'm not fond of Harper either but I know when a story is crap, no matter where it comes from!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't it Aline's mastery of defense by soapstone that saved the day at 21 Sussex? Please, credit where credit is due!

Hah actually you're right, it would behoove Mr. and Mrs. Harper to meet with the Jean and Aline apparently. That's one feisty family.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There were 45 flights in 2009 - 2010 by federal cabinet ministers. In all, 282 trips in the period carried the prime minister, Governor General, ministers or VIPs, according to the mission reports and passenger manifests. Times $10,105 per flying hour. See Harper's saving money :P

According to the mission reports and passenger manifests, how many of those were for personal reasons?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have no perspective or objectivity at all. Worse yet, they won't shut up! They seem to think that they can just heap up a bigger and bigger pile of anti-Harper crap and people will be so impressed that they'll feel no need to actually examine the argument.

These are 'heart' people, not 'head' people. With such, arguments that appeal to the head are a total waste of time.

Gosh, Bill! You should name some of these awful irrational people so we know who to watch out for! (And that they exist at all.)

We wouldn't want to be buried in hyperbole, now would we?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, you've put your finger on it. The whole thing IS ridiculous!

Still, we better get used to it. Many people who dislike Harper are just fanatics, for want of a better word. They see him as the Great Satan. For the next 4 years at least they are going to take every possible negative occurrence, no matter how trivial, that happens with Harper and stretch it into a crime against the Universe!

When Free Trade was passed John Crosbie the Finance Minister made a great quote. He referred to all the criticism when he said "From now on, every sparrow that falls from the sky will be blamed on Free Trade!"

I believe we are going to see even worse examples. It will be more like "Every time a sparrow farts it will be proof that Harper is trying to gas millions into a horrible death!"

They have no perspective or objectivity at all. Worse yet, they won't shut up! They seem to think that they can just heap up a bigger and bigger pile of anti-Harper crap and people will be so impressed that they'll feel no need to actually examine the argument.

These are 'heart' people, not 'head' people. With such, arguments that appeal to the head are a total waste of time.

I'm not fond of Harper either but I know when a story is crap, no matter where it comes from!

It is quite amusing to see someone argue about "heart" and "head" people when you yourself are not using your head.

Who has demonstrated that I "hate" Harper?

Even RNG (I think) has admitted that it is legitimate to try and hold Harper accountable but we disagree over whether or not the amounts are big enough or the issue is big enough to warrant whether it is much ado about nothing or not. So, this is not exactly a touchy feely thing here: it is about accountability which usually involves thinking about such issues.

I have presented facts as they have come available - the estimated cost of flying the Challenger at $10,000 per hour [for which Harper is on the record back in 2005 as sayin $11,000 per hour), the amount Harper is reimbursing us for a commercial flight at $530, and the cost of a last minute ticket at $2,600.

Once again if I was appealing to the "heart" I would not have presented such facts.

Most of this thread is filled with calling me names: "hater," "sore loser" and "lefty" being the most prevalent - and, now, that I'm a "heart" person. Yeah, tell that one to my wife!

Usually people arguing with their "heart" call names and, as I stated earlier, attack the person rather than the issue.

This not only inculdes RNG, Sandy, CPCFTW but also includes you, Wild Bill, since you partake in these ad hominem attacks by implying that I'm a Harper hater who doesn't think (only feels the hate with my "heart") etc...

It is a BS form of argument.

The point of this thread is this: it is wrong for a politician to receive an undue personal benefit at taxpayer expense.

Harper going to the hockey game/Chretien flying to Florida to golf on a taxpayer funded jet is an undue personal benefit.

However, they are entitled to vacation time and they should not travel commercially for security reasons.

So, therefore, it's alright for them to take the taxpayer paid jet (within reason) but they should reimburse us taxpayers for an equivalent cost of the commercial flight that they would have booked.

I fail to see how this is so unreasonable.

I also fail to see how taking such a position makes me a "lefty" or arguing with my "heart" rather than my "head."

Sure, maybe the numbers are not material, in your opinion.

But if Harper wants to take credit for being better than Chretien for reimbursing us taxpayers then he better reimburse us for a proper and reasonable amount which, imo, he has not done.

And, if you think the numbers are two small to care about in the first place then maybe Harper/Chretien and all PM's should be able to do whatever they like with the jet and who cares about accountability of any kind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is quite amusing to see someone argue about "heart" and "head" people when you yourself are not using your head.

Who has demonstrated that I "hate" Harper?

Even RNG (I think) has admitted that it is legitimate to try and hold Harper accountable but we disagree over whether or not the amounts are big enough or the issue is big enough to warrant whether it is much ado about nothing or not. So, this is not exactly a touchy feely thing here: it is about accountability which usually involves thinking about such issues.

I have presented facts as they have come available - the estimated cost of flying the Challenger at $10,000 per hour [for which Harper is on the record back in 2005 as sayin $11,000 per hour), the amount Harper is reimbursing us for a commercial flight at $530, and the cost of a last minute ticket at $2,600.

Once again if I was appealing to the "heart" I would not have presented such facts.

Most of this thread is filled with calling me names: "hater," "sore loser" and "lefty" being the most prevalent - and, now, that I'm a "heart" person. Yeah, tell that one to my wife!

Usually people arguing with their "heart" call names and, as I stated earlier, attack the person rather than the issue.

This not only inculdes RNG, Sandy, CPCFTW but also includes you, Wild Bill, since you partake in these ad hominem attacks by implying that I'm a Harper hater who doesn't think (only feels the hate with my "heart") etc...

It is a BS form of argument.

Of course it is. If these fellows are implying that criticism of a politician is "hating" then they are haters of a profound sort.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it is. If these fellows are implying that criticism of a politician is "hating" then they are haters of a profound sort.

Exactly.

I can't wait until some of these guys go and criticize some "lefty" politician.

I'll just point to this thread and say "why are you a hater?" Why are you being a "sore loser" righty?

It's going to be fun - in a stupid kind of way. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

I can't wait until some of these guys go and criticize some "lefty" politician.

I'll just point to this thread and say "why are you a hater?" Why are you being a "sore loser" righty?

It's going to be fun - in a stupid kind of way. :lol:

To be fair, what they really believe is that hating politicians is perfectly legitimate; but that there are exemptions.

I'm just curious about what constitutes these exemptions. Surely the line can't be drawn by "the one whom I vote for." :) Lawds, no. I'm sure the parameters have been drawn in a sober and enlightened way.

Edited by bloodyminded
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh, Bill! You should name some of these awful irrational people so we know who to watch out for! (And that they exist at all.)

We wouldn't want to be buried in hyperbole, now would we?

Examples of such people aren't hard to find, Molly. A 'heart' person tends to go with how something feels, not how it adds up. They are the ones who if they hear that their favourite politician was caught in a massage parlour raid will instantly minimize the significance, whereas if it is their 'enemy' politician they will consider it a crime against the universe!

Back in the days of daily Liberal scandals under Chretien someone in the media tried to start a scandal about Preston Manning. It seems there was a discrepancy as to his laundry being dry-cleaned at some hotel for a party function. Technically, it was a personal bill and should not have been paid by the party.

Hordes of 'heart' people who knew in their gut (because the Liberals had been constantly telling them!) that Manning was an evil agent of penny-pinching Big Business anyway trumpeted this sin in the papers like it was a Bill Clinton cigar scandal!

'Head' people just watched in amused amazement. It was a bill for less than $10! THIS was supposed to be equivalent to the Chretien scandals like getting a bank loans officer fired for not giving a loan to someone who wanted to buy some land that Chretien had been trying to sell?

I'm not saying that one or the other kind of people is better, Molly. Actually, we need both and we need to BE both in different situations. I guess my point is really that people who let their heart lead instead of their head are prone to lack perspective.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My gripe is that the ones criticizing Harper in this thread have just said the same things over and over and over and over and over .........................................

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...