Just for old time’s sake


Stephen Harper, October 14. “We’ll never go back into deficit.”

Filed under:

Just for old time’s sake

  1. Clearly you’re relying on a liberally biased definition of never, Mr. Wherry.

  2. I think he meant to say: “We’ll never go back into structural deficit.” ;-)

  3. I thought he was talking about technical deficits.

  4. The fun part of that quote is that it’s in something the Conservative campaign wrote for publication. It’s not even from some scrum where the devilish MSM pushed the poor unprepared Harper back on his heels. It’s precisely what he wanted to say. Three months ago, and only a month before he started talking about the necessity of deficits.

    • The last prime minister who was honest enough to admit that a deficit was inevitable was Kim Campbell in 1993, and look where that got her.

      • ummm so be dishonest and win?

  5. It appears that Aaron doesn’t care for our current Prime Minister. Fair enough. I’m just curious at to why he must remind us of this repeatedly and ad nauseam. And as usual with at least 9/10 of AW’s blog posts, I fail to see how this is either news or insightful commentary. You are in a desperate need of new schtick. Or a new psychiatrist.

    • Ian, I have to say that reading your posts is always an odd experience. In general I disagree with most everything you write, which gives this place a slight Bizzaro World vibe. (I’ll find a new posting name to stop everything from spinning.)

    • So to be clear you are okay than if a PM or whatever stripe says one thing and does another?

      And, I am sure you said the same thing when news folk used to point out when Chretien or Martin spoke out both sides of their mouth right.

      • What I’m saying is that a politician promising one thing and doing another is not news (per se), nor has it been since the first Neanderthal family council. It is particularly un-newsworthy in this context: AW and his choir would be up in arms if the PM wasn’t spending enough to ‘stimulate’ the economy just as he and his blog commenting minions are conspicuoulsy silent about any sort of Ignatieff about face. We expect (or should expect) a certain amount of change (if I am allowed to use that now presidentially trademarked term) from an election or policy platform as conditions change. We may not like it but we need to expect it. What we don’t want is duplicity. There are plenty of legitimate instances of Harper/CPC policy duplicity, all of which he should be hammered on. This isn’t one of them. All it is, is “AW hates Harper so let me use my forum to express that for the 40th time in the past 24 hrs”. We get it. Try and move on if you can.

        And for the record, seatm, yes I did say and beleive the same thing when Chretien and Martin broke promises. I was also able to acknowledge that they sometimes broke them because there was no other choice. How can you honestly expect otherwise?

        • ah yes, a Harper lie is not news, but an Ignatieff one is?

          No wonder people hate rabid partisans so much. They express such stupid ideas.

        • Wherry and his choir are just given too much material to work with. PM Harper says a lot things… that are quickly contradicted by PM Harper, facts, reality, commen sense, etc.

          Would you prefer reporters immune to facts, reality and common sense?

          Welcome home then.

          • ha, commen, thats great

          • thats – that’s fantastic

  6. Well, Harper plays chess, the rest of us checkers, and the Ottawa Press Gallery coin flipping games, heads of tails.
    But that stopping Williams Ayers at the border was a masterful ploy to gain favor with Obama.

  7. ” We’ll never go back into deficit.”
    Obviously the shelf life on SH’s economic predictions is about as reliable an indicator of infalibility as dubya’s prediction that WMD would be found. Just saying so, doesn’t necessarily make it so.

  8. CONBOT ENGAGE: In fairness, every party said that they would not take us back into deficit, and now every party is jumping over the others to promise Canadians that they would stimulate the economy more than the economy has ever been stimulated before. And if I recall, wasn’t it the lack of stimulus (read: deficit spending) in the fiscal update that was the selfless motivation behind the formation of the coalition in the first place? And isn’t sufficiently massive economic stimulus the price the opposition parties are demanding for their support of the budget? In short, this global economic downturn is entirely Michael Ignatieff’s and Jack Layton’s fault. Somehow. I also think that Paul Martin is involved, but I can’t quite figure out how. Yet.

    • Olaf
      Forget about Martin. Two Yen has found a way to blame Trudeau. All the default position that con-bots require.

      • Trudeau’s culpability is only part of the puzzle. I’m in the process of completing a logistic regression analysis that indisputably implicates Wilfrid Laurier in our current fiscal predicament. However, it may take a while, since I have no clue how to properly conduct a logistic regression analysis. I’ll get back to you.

        • A logistic regression analysis i am reliably informed should only be conducted under adult supervision. I believe this is what W was attempting while looking fo those weapons, which does account for their never being found. So bewarned. In Ws case he should have held on to the receipts.

    • In fairness, every party said that they would not take us back into deficit,

      In real fairness, Olaf, only Jack would have avoided a deficit because the NDP plan was to sprinkle pixie dust on the economy and think happy thoughts to stimulate it. It’s true. That was in their platform and the emesem ignored it.

  9. Aaron and his Liberal friends seem oblivious to the fact that it was the structural deficits of the Trudeau years that got Canada into its biggest deficit mess that took decades to remedy. Mulroney inherited the Trudeau structural deficits and it took years for successive governments to lay the groundwork that culminated in the 1995 balanced budget.

    Moreover, wasn’t it the Liberal Party and its coaltion partners that tried to engineer a coup d’etat less than two months ago because the Harper government wasn’t spending enough? They can’t have it both ways.

    Aaron and his friends conveniently forget that the Liberal solution to eliminating the deficit is to tax the hell out of the middle class (Canada does not have a sufficiently large number of wealthy taxpayers to bleed dry). This is not exactly the prescription for pulling the economy out of the current recession.

    • You forgot to say “conbot engage”.

      • I have no idea what you are talking about.

        • If you don’t say “conbot engage” your comment isn’t recorded by PMO spiders, and you don’t get your well deserved tax break.

    • Aaron thinks he can have it both ways. He thinks people cannot see through his illogical shtick. If there were no deficits on the way this thread would be about the lack of spending.

      • Maybe the thread should be more about Prime Ministers who break promises? Occasionly to the tune of over $30-billion.

        Ohh, I think it is… if you want to start a more favourable one however, about how transparency and accountability should be absent from our political system, I’m sure many posters would support your efforts.

        It is time to get the remaining T&A out of Ottawa NOW.

  10. I read Robert’s lame comment, Paul Well’s utterly trivial comment and kc’s predictable effort and then I read Olaf’s on the mark, humorous and touché rejoinder.

    Rob, PW and kc – time to pick up your game.

    • C’mon jarrid. It’s not like i inferred that the failure to find WMD is in any way tied to Steve’s eternal promise to not run deficits. I’m sure they’ll turn up those weapons sooner or later.

      • Why don’t you give up? Bush is history.

        • Two Yen
          Amen! Two yen you seriously need a humour break.

  11. Hear that, Olaf? Your rejoinders are touché. I’m so jealousy.

    • I’m blushing at this point. I’d like to thank the Academy…

    • Don’t get testé. Jarrid is feeling touché-feelé for Olaf. No love for you, Paul or Aaron.

  12. Well, it’s agreed then. Harper lied.

    • A lie is when you say something that you know is wrong. When your a Prime Minister and you say something that you think is right, and you’re proven wrong shortly thereafter, it’s called incompetence. Incompetence is the word you’re looking for.

      • Harper knew Canada was going into deficit shortly, if he didn’t already know the country was in deficit at the time.

        • Perhaps that’s the key. Mr. Harper said that we would never go back into deficit, because he was quite aware that we were already in one.. as such, we can’t go back into it until we get out of it — ergo, what he was saying is that he’ll never get us out of deficit.

      • He did say never which is very likely a lie, but very difficult to prove.

  13. Let’s not forget that the FU forecast balanced budgets off into the next five years. Despite scads of evidence to the contrary. Now it seems we’re looking at $13B in deficit even before we get stimulated beyond our wildest dreams. Take these guys seriously ???

    Iggy’s playing the game for his own purpose. Fine. But I don’t see why anybody else should.

    ** Kady took Coyne’s seat on the At Issue panel tonight. Good to see a little touch of class among those old hambones **

    • what do you want. 5 yrs is almost never, isn’t it?

  14. It’s mildly amusing going into Conservative.ca archives now and then.

    • In fairness, the Conservative press release you linked to was a valid criticism of Dion’s spending promises.

      Dion’s promises would have required Canada to run a deficit in anything less than the “robust economic growth” scenario that had been explicitly assumed by the Liberal party in order to validate the economics of the Green Shift.

      • This is a valid pt; we can at least be grateful for small mercies. Total incompetence does trump mostly incompetent. On the other hand if the libs had won the election we would in all probability now know the full extent of conservative incompetence and Dion would have been taken away screaming: ” he lied, he lied, we’re all doomed, doomed!

  15. I would say that the Prime Minister’s hand has been forced here by the coalition, but let us not forget that Harper fully intended to run a deficit only three days after the election was over, and said as much. We also know that the deficit before stimulus and tax cuts is $15 billion.

    • How do we know that? Is there a breakdown (via the PBO, the masked Finance official, or God forbid the Minister of Finance himself) of pre-stimulus and post-stimulus deficits?

  16. But thankfully we all invested when Harper told us so we’ll never have to go into personal deficit. I’m feeling well warmed and secured with all that Nortel stock his mom at the Loblaws’ checkout counter hinted I should buy… And who’d ever think a gov’t with Jimmy o’Flaherty would ever fall into deficit? Weird, huh?

    • You got stock tips from Harper’s mom, who moonlights as a Loblaw’s cashier? Or was she just ahead of you in line? And yes, Jimmy O’Flaherty is one of those unreliable Irishmen. Truly penetrating satire.

  17. So, we’ve had a $25 billion reversal of fortuntes, resulting in a $13 billion structural deficit, and a $21 billion stimulus related technical deficit.

    Either way, that’s incompetence.

    If Harper and Flaherty hadn’t pissed it all away on buying elections, the $34 billion deficit could be closer to $9 billion.