Source
r/canada•
gonna_overreact

Is Stephen Harper's personal life effecting the Nation?

I was speaking to a friend recently, and she brought up the rumor that Stephen Harper and Lauren Harper are, and have been separated for some time. He's tried very hard to keep this fact hidden and show the world a happy couple. I found these links that seem to support that claim.

1 - [2] (http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=17706) - 3

Mr. Harper is entitled to his privacy, I do not want to talk about his marriage What I want to discuss with you is if this is true, and Stephen Harper has habitually hidden his personal life, is this bias effecting his professional decisions?

It doesn't take long to find evidence of the current government cracking down on oversight, removing checks and muzzling information. Could this attitude be due to Stephen Harper's bias of secrecy in his own life? Are his personal fears spilling into public policy? And if so, does this make him unfit to lead? When does this move from private issue to public issue?

Again, I don't really care if it's true or not, I care about the implications if it is true.

Let's keep the conversation respectful.

Posted May 8, 2012, 10:06 PM UTC

035
Issachar•

If you don't want to talk about his marriage, then don't bring it up by posting it on a public discussion site.

If you have a problem with political decisions then you can discuss the merits of each of those decisions. Or you can bring up the Prime Minister's marriage.

You chose the second option despite your protestations to the contrary. I realize you're not trying to be a jerk or anything, but you're in the unfortunate position of thinking that he's in a bad marriage and thinking that it's affecting political decisions, but feeling bad about talking about his marriage.

That's unfortunate, but you can't have it both ways.

I suggest that you ignore the man's marriage altogether and don't bring it up. Discuss political decisions on their merits.

8
gonna_overreactOP•

I want to talk about if his behavior is consistent with someone who is not focused on his job. It could be anything, but in this case it happens to be a marriage. This would be a personal bias unknown to the Canadian people being introduced into public policy.

-3
Issachar•

It could be anything, but in this case it happens to be a marriage.

Or maybe he has a great marriage, but he's not focussed on his job because he's concerned about kid's grades. Or maybe he has a horrible marriage because he's actually really focussed on his job. Who knows? I certainly don't think it's my business to know.

Again, if you want to discuss politics, then you should discuss policies and decisions on their merits. But once you bring in the man's marriage, you should be aware that that's exactly what you're doing. You can't have it both ways.

3
gonna_overreactOP•

I'm assuming that he leads a private life, and because of that he's trying to restrict public information. As this example shows. We've all had bad days that's affected our work, but if there was a systemic problem, chances are your boss would bring you aside and talk to you about it.

At what point to we bring Mr. Harper aside to talk about it?

-2
Issachar•

Typically employers focus on the quality of their employees work. Rarely do they muse on whether or not Bob the accountant's marriage is having trouble.

Seriously man, discuss the quality of his work or the merits of Conservative policies.

Or go ahead and discuss the man's marriage as if it were your business. Many people think some aspects of a politician's private life are public business. But don't try to have it both ways.

4
MrFlaggOntario•

ya. right. you want to keep it respectful but start out by being a douche.

6
gonna_overreactOP•

I'm worried about him making decisions that are bad for the country based on personal issues. Doesn't really matter what those issues are; that's what I'm getting at.

-3
MrFlaggOntario•

should Americans be worried about Obama because he was trying to quit smoking?

apparently the left wasn't too worried about Jack's decision making even though he was facing death.

4
KofOaks•

He makes decision that are bad for the country because he's a corrupted asshole, not because of his personal life.

-1
gonna_overreactOP•

That's not the sort of talking point I was hoping for.

-1
KofOaks•

Sorry i guess I overreac....fuck nevermind.

-1
adaminc•

I don't see how you can make the leap from hiding ones personal life, to forcing secrecy onto the Government. I bet ALL the politicians are hiding their personal lives.

3
gonna_overreactOP•

The leap was made because he is going against his party's policy of having a more open government. You don't see the leap possible; that's fine. What's your explanation for his behaviour?

0
adaminc•

At no point during his campaign did I believe he would have a more open government. No one did, his history showed otherwise.

2
gonna_overreactOP•

From their own policy manual

the government should ensure transparency, accuracy of and confidence in the government‟s finances by providing the Auditor General with full access to all documents from all federal organizations, including all agencies, Crown corporations, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, and foundations.

They are doing the opposite with the F35.

We support the funding of innovation, technology and research through the granting councils. We support a competitive peer review process and enhanced transparency and accountability to determine who shall receive grants through these councils.

putting a muzzle on academics is not how you achieve this.

We believe that government support should be linked to accountability, transparency and sustainability. We believes that ongoing scrutiny is necessary to ensure programs and policies effectively meet their objectives, to ensure they are based on merit, and to remove political involvement from the process. Arts, culture and heritage make a substantial contribution to Canadian society and have a positive impact on the lives of many Canadians.

But Canadian parks be damned?

We are committed to strengthening Canada's record in foreign aid. It supports the introduction of legislation that will empower Parliament to define a legal framework for Canada‟s Official Development Assistance (ODA) envelope of spending. This legislation will include a clear mandate for development assistance; mechanisms for policy coherence, monitoring, accountability and reporting to Parliament; and enhanced public transparency.

Bev Oda?

0
adaminc•

I don't understand the point of this comment.

3
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
keirani•

Maybe she broke up with him because of all the things she knew he was planning on doing to the country?

1
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
AFX_Has_No_Meme•

  1. It's very unlikely that Harper himself dictates all of his party's policies, but rather he is a figure-head with some room to guide his party's policies but largely acting on behalf of his party's collective decisions.

  2. It isn't respectable, fair, and in my opinion acceptable to address Harper's personal life in the context of politics.

  3. Even if Harper's political motivations are being influenced, to some extent or another, by his personal life, it doesn't matter. The transparency our government so desperately needs in no way includes access to the prime minister's personal life, and when the government is questioned for justification in regards to its' actions or policies the personal lives of its' politicians is irrelevant.

1
gonna_overreactOP•

Employers have a responsibility for their employees health. If someone's personal life was interfering with their ability to do their job, it would only be prudent to help that person. When this person is in charge of running the country, does that no longer hold true?

1
AFX_Has_No_Meme•

In general, yes, but do not confuse a person's inability to do their job with a person who advocates a number of policies you do not agree with. There's absolutely no evidence of the former at this time, in regards to Stephen Harper, no matter how you look at it.

1
gonna_overreactOP•

I think there is evidence

1
AFX_Has_No_Meme•

Specific actions which arguably conflict with non-specific policies are not an example of one person's inability to perform a task or duty, particularly because policies can become outdated with time or erroneous in certain situations, and because the party's actions are largely decided upon collectively. It's easy to make a case for prime minister Stephen Harper being driven by unsubstantiated ideology, and perhaps using misleading practices to some extent, but if you read about the general role of the prime minister of Canada here it's clear that he has been able to fulfill his role as prime minister. There's no case to be made that Stephen Harper's mental health is negatively affecting his ability to perform his duties, so if you'd like to effectively oppose the Harper government and its' type of policies I suggest you focus on different topics. It's also worth mentioning online discussions are practically worthless in the context of encouraging change, as the vast majority of the voting public does not browse websites like Reddit, and those who do not vote will ignore topics such as these, so I suggest you alter your venue as well.

1
sheepo39•

I didn't know what here were this many rumors surrounding their marriage and / or her sexuality.

I have to disagree with you on this, it's like this because Harper's a neocon.

1
pensivegargoyle•

I don't see how it's any of our business and I very much doubt it has anything to do with increasingly centralized and secretive government which is a trend that has been ongoing for at least a couple of decades.

1
nihilfit•

It's not the duplicity of pretending to domestic harmony that is bothersome politically, it's the fact that taxpayers are on the hook for putting up Lauren at the Chateau Laurier (along with her girlfriend) that's the problem. Why should we have to pay so that Harper can look good to Conservative faithful?

1
KofOaks•

Well...she was already married to a cunt....

buuuuurn.

0