Talk:Mike Harris: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Conservative apologists
Line 51: Line 51:


It says, "In late 2003, he made a speech in Halifax which many believed was the unofficial launch of a campaign to lead the new Conservative Party of Canada. Within weeks, however, he unexpectedly announced his decision to drop out of the race." How can one drop out of a race one never entered? [[User:Srnec|Srnec]] 21:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
It says, "In late 2003, he made a speech in Halifax which many believed was the unofficial launch of a campaign to lead the new Conservative Party of Canada. Within weeks, however, he unexpectedly announced his decision to drop out of the race." How can one drop out of a race one never entered? [[User:Srnec|Srnec]] 21:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

== Conservative apologists ==

The article has changed significantly in its portrayal of Harris in the last few edits. Although certain arguments for Harris' actions were added (improving the article), removal of several critisms and the introduction of typographical errors degrade the article. I am reverting (because of the removal of content)&mdash;the contributor or others can make the additions again. &mdash;<span style="white-space:pre"><span style="background-color:#4080FF">&nbsp;[[Image:Ca-on-sb.gif|20px|Flag of Scarborough, ON, Canada]]&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color:#FFD700">&nbsp;[[User:UTSRelativity|UTSRelativity]] ([[User talk:UTSRelativity|Talk]])&nbsp;</span></span> 03:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:10, 28 May 2006

You make mention of Harris's cuts to healthcare and education (there's no way to avoid mentioning them, in fact). However, the record here ought to show that, during his first election campaign, he plainly and repeatedly said that he would not cut either healthcare or education. [Otherwise it looks like the people of Ontario supported his disregard for the well-being of the citizens... it looks like they voted for cuts to vital social programs.] He knew that if he campaigned on an upfront pledge to cut healthcare, he'd never see the inside of Queen's Park -- no one wanted health cuts! So he had to lie about the actual contents of his "Common Sense Revolution" in order to sell it to the voters. And we paid for his lies with Walkerton and the Aylmer meat scandal...

Perhaps he was counting on the public's short memory and short attention span, but his campaign "promises" are all there in the back issues of the daily papers: his repeated falsehoods are preserved in black and white for those who can be bothered to look them up.

    • Health care funding went up from $17.4 B to more than $25 B. So he kept that promise.

On education the promise was not to cut the classroom portion of spending, but he definitely promised to cut non-classroom spending, which he did.


That figure hides the fact that Health care funding was cut massively early in the term, so much so that money had to be poured in to fix the problem. AndyL 13:56, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Michael Dean Harris

Is his middle name really Dean? I can't find a reference to this anywhere. The initial is certainly "D.".

Actually it appears to be "Deane," according to a Google search (while a search for Michael Dean Harris picks up this article and other websites that use it). Adam Bishop 20:51, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Socialist Encyclopedia!

There is nothing here positive about the Conservatives and the Ontario Progessive Party here. There is much bias in this encyclopedia on the liberals and other socialist's sides. As an encyclopedia you should have a neutral perspective on all historical facts. This favoring of the left wing shows that this encyclopedia will never make it to the print

As a supporter of the Progressive Conservative Party, I don't see how this entry is biased. All of the information printed here is factual, as far as I know. If you have a specific beef, please point it out. Timc 20:50, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I have to agree with the original poster - when you look at this profile in comparison to the profiles of the following Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty, or the previous NDP Premier Bob Rae, there is a very obvious slant.
While the profile on McGuinty makes note of the (disputed) $5.6bn deficit inherited from the Conservative government, Harris' profile makes no mention of the more than $10bn deficit inherited from the Rae government. While every critique of the Harris government has a voice in his profile, there is no mention of the hundreds of broken promises under McGuinty's government (only the health-tax is mentioned), and the strong resentment of the Rae government's term of office is glossed over with excuses about the North American economy. And so it is throughout - excuses made for Liberal/Socialist governments, and harsh criticisms of the conservatives.

Sorry Mr. Murdoch, Rupert that is. Or perhaps since this is a Canadian politician a Canadian conservative media mogul would be better. Sorry Mr. Black. Go read your National Post

Please, let's be real about the cries of bias. You clearly want to represent the Harris years as somehow socially progressive when the record of the facts doesn't bear this out. It concerns me that the Harris article fails to offer an argument that Harris was one of the first examples of a sweeping neo-liberal ideological movement in Canada, nor does the Ipperwash part of the article make mention of the important fact that he possess the self-serving proclivity for selective forgetting/remembering when under oath. If anything, the article is biased toward softening Harris's ultra-conservative politics in order to remove contention. The initial writer's offense is likely the result of an infamiliarity with a critical engagement in politics beyond the received reportage of mainstream (corporate owned) media. Cries of socialism are absurd, without merit, purely polemical, (perhaps the writer should look up the Wikipedia entry on socialism) and point to the writer's lack of political vocabulary and ideological entrenchment in a particular point of view.

905 region?

In paragraph six of the writings current state it reads "Most of his support came from the wealthy "905 region" of Toronto's suburbs". Is this a reference to the 905 area codes in GTA versus the location of the 416 area codes? Can someone elaborate on this, I would just like to take it out because it makes no sense. I think it should be replaced by "Most of his support came from the more affluent regions of Toronto". --Mikeroodeus 19:47, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Ok I edited the article to more reflect what I think the "905 region" means. There didn't appear to be any one who contends the change so I guess it is acceptable or maybe not. I felt that the use of the term "905 region" wasn't from a NPOV it was from a Canadian point of view, specifically the point of view of Canadians who know where the "905 region" is located. I think the sentence that replaced the original has a more univerally understandable version of the same content.--Mikeroodeus 05:00, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Does 905 really constitute the "more affluent regions of Toronto"? I submit it was in fact the aspirational middle class of 905 that held the political sway that kept Mr. Harris in power. His neo-conservatism spoke to those voters and they responded at the polls, while many quite wealthy downtown regions showed inconsistent Tory support. Keep in mind that the neo-conservative bent of the Harris campaigns and some of the curious economic arguments did not always resonate with the old money traditional Conservative minds at the time.--TW- 15:38, 24 Aug 2004 (EST)

That's a tough call. Toronto (former City of Toronto and Metro Toronto) do have more of the very wealthiest citizens of the GTA than the 905 suburbs; Rosedale, etc. But Toronto also has Regent Park, Jane-Finch, Parkdale, and other very poor areas -- and I'd make an educated guess, based on many years of work in poverty (see my resume, linked from Madmagic) that there are a lot more poor people in Toronto than in 905.
So... if both the above are true, to contrast the 905/416 split as a battle between the aspiring middle class and the rich would be a distortion of the truth. Perhaps it would be more accurate to describe it as a conflict between the lower middle class and aspiring working class -- and everyone else? The majority of Harris supporters I've met were lower middle class or aspiring working class.

Titles

Does anyone know what his titles and postnominals are? If so, they should be added to his name on the first line of the article. I assume he is "the honourable'" has at least one university degree, and might be a member of the Privy Council. -Arctic.gnome 23:52, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate?

It says, "In late 2003, he made a speech in Halifax which many believed was the unofficial launch of a campaign to lead the new Conservative Party of Canada. Within weeks, however, he unexpectedly announced his decision to drop out of the race." How can one drop out of a race one never entered? Srnec 21:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conservative apologists

The article has changed significantly in its portrayal of Harris in the last few edits. Although certain arguments for Harris' actions were added (improving the article), removal of several critisms and the introduction of typographical errors degrade the article. I am reverting (because of the removal of content)—the contributor or others can make the additions again. — Flag of Scarborough, ON, Canada  UTSRelativity (Talk 03:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]