OOOOOOh. Curran you kill me some times! How Orwellian!
But, seriously, would it surprise anyone? Anyone?
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
The Conservative Response to Harper Plagiarism? Don't Look Behind the Curtain
Very Wizard of Ozish of them I'd say.
From the Globe:
Personally, I didn't know there was a statute of limitations on irresponsible and deceptive behaviour on the part of a Prime Minister. Isn't Mulroney still answering questions somewhere about envelopes in hotel rooms?
From the Globe:
"This is exactly why the Liberals are in the trouble they're in, as a party and as a campaign," Mr. Baran said Tuesday. "They want to focus on a speech from five years, two elections, three Parliaments ago, from a party that no longer exists.
Mr. Baran said the major issue on the minds of Canadians is the economy, and the Liberals should be focusing on that.
The fact the Liberals are making this accusation is evidence of their weak campaign and leadership, Mr. Baran said.
"We're not going to get drawn into which staffer wrote which speech five years ago," he said. "This is nothing but desperation from the Liberal campaign, and it's completely irrelevant to the real concerns of voters in this election."
Personally, I didn't know there was a statute of limitations on irresponsible and deceptive behaviour on the part of a Prime Minister. Isn't Mulroney still answering questions somewhere about envelopes in hotel rooms?
Foreign Policy Based on Others' Policy, Or How I Learned to Plagiarize John Howard
Brought to you by the folks at this is your Reality check Stephen Harper.
Then again, reality is his Pet Peeve.
Then again, reality is his Pet Peeve.
If you Need a Good Paying Job in the Public Sector, You Just Have to Help Out the Conservative Party
Stephen Harper and his lie machine appointed 148 friends to government positions prior to this election being called. This, I would call, is a GOTCHA moment. Does this explain why Human Resources Minister Monte Solberg decided to call it quits? I would imagine many of these appointments had to go through his office first.
You may recall that in May of this year, I was warning Canadians about this. In Fact, I warned about it here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here and here, and here. And now, what better timing then during an election campaign for Canadians to find out how many untruths this Conservative Government has made since the release of their 2006 Election Platform.
Below is a portion of the Conservative Lie Book from the 2006 Election Campaign. It can be seen in its entirety here. OOPS! Turns out the Conservatives don't want you to see the great big Blue lie book. They've pointed it to their 2008 site. Now why do you suppose they did that? That's okay. Jim Curran saved some tasty morsels for you to see.
Here are some excerpts from those posts that I think are worth reading. My favourite is this one:
Today's Stand Up Comedy manual excerpt. This is Stephen Harper's message to Canadians taken from his 2006 campaign manual.
The time for accountability has arrived.
Canadians will soon be able to finally hold the Liberals accountable. After 12 years in power,the Liberals must be held accountable for the stolen money; accountable for the broken trust;and accountable for all that they failed to accomplish because of this government’s total preoccupation with scandal and damage control.
For those Canadians seeking accountability the question is clear: which party can deliver the change of government that’s needed to ensure political accountability in
Ottawa? We need a change of government to replace old style politics with a new vision. We need to replace a culture of entitlement and corruption with a culture of accountability. We need to replace benefits for a privileged few with government for all.
Everyday Canadians – the hardworking people who pay their taxes and play by the rules – want and deserve a new government that will put the people’s interest ahead of self-interest. And this election provides them with a chance to tell Liberal Ottawa that they've had enough; that they’re tired of being forgotten; that it’s finally their turn.
Now don't you think these are words that Mr. Harper can choke on right about now?
Lie number 1. Standing up for Who?
Table of Contents for the entire document.
Wait for it....ACCOUNTABILITY
Lie #2
People who work hard, pay their taxes, and play by the rules want accountability from their political leaders. We don’t expect politicians to be perfect. But we do want to know that our tax dollars – money we’ve worked for – are being spent properly and wisely. Above all, we want and expect our dollars to be spent legally.
Now does that include Minister Flaherty's untendered $122,000 speech? Or Bev Oda's $5000 taxi ride to the Junos?
Lie #3
• Extend to ten years the period for which Elections Act violations can be investigated and prosecuted.
10 years is a lot. Yet Pierre, the stretcher of the truth, Poilievre brings out a 1997 ruling to the House of Commons. Irrelevant at best.
While campaign donations are regulated, it is still legal to give unrestricted amounts of money to political candidates during an election campaign, including MPs who are not cabinet ministers.Thanks to this loophole, some MPs have accumulated large, secret trust funds. The Chief Electoral Officer estimates millions of dollars may be held in these trusts.
Yet we still don't know who donated to Stephen Harper's Leadership Campaign. Big Secret.
Lie #4
The Liberals have repeatedly appointed insiders, in some cases completely unqualified,to important public offices. Liberal candidates and MPs have received appointments as heads of Crown corporations, board members, and ambassadors. Liberal staffers, including some of those responsible for the sponsorship program, have worked their way into key positions in the public service.
• Ensure that all Officers of Parliament are appointed through consultation with all parties in the House
of Commons and confirmed through a secret ballot of all Members of Parliament, not just named by the
Prime Minister. This appointment process will cover:
- The Ethics Commissioner
- The Auditor General
- The Chief Electoral Officer
- The Information Commissioner
- The Privacy Commissioner
- The Registrar of Lobbyists
I guess an unelected person sitting in cabinet like Michael Fortier doesn't really fit here.
Lie #5
The Liberal government commissions some $25 million per year in polling and public opinion research. Much of this polling is conducted by Liberal-connected polling firms. The Auditor General revealed that Paul Martin’s Finance department commissioned polling for which there were “only verbal reports” – nothing was written down so there was no paper trail. Yet the Martin government prevented the Gomery Commission from investigating this part of the Auditor General’s report.
The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Ensure that all government public opinion research is automatically published within six months of the completion of the project, and prohibit verbal-only reports.
Conservatives have spent over $39Million in the past 12 months alone. What about their hidden polling on the death penalty? Countless other polls none of us know about.
Lie #6
Under the Liberal government, abuse of the government contracting process has become
commonplace. Former Liberal cabinet minister Art Eggleton, for example, awarded an untendered contract to a former girlfriend. He was later appointed to the Senate by Paul Martin.
The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Review and amend all contracting rules to make the government’s procurement process free from political interference.
• Appoint a Procurement Auditor to ensure that all procurements are fair and transparent, and to address complaints from vendors.
Back to the Hon. Minister of Finance and his speech contract...
Lie #7
Strengthen the power of the Auditor General
In Light of the recent statements by Sheila Fraser, can anyone believe this?
Anyway, you now see how the game is played, so feel free to browse through the rest of this bull and point out the lies.
Jeff has more on this. So does Impolitical.
You may recall that in May of this year, I was warning Canadians about this. In Fact, I warned about it here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here and here, and here. And now, what better timing then during an election campaign for Canadians to find out how many untruths this Conservative Government has made since the release of their 2006 Election Platform.
Below is a portion of the Conservative Lie Book from the 2006 Election Campaign. It can be seen in its entirety here. OOPS! Turns out the Conservatives don't want you to see the great big Blue lie book. They've pointed it to their 2008 site. Now why do you suppose they did that? That's okay. Jim Curran saved some tasty morsels for you to see.
Here are some excerpts from those posts that I think are worth reading. My favourite is this one:
The Liberals have repeatedly appointed insiders, in some cases completely unqualified,to important public offices. Liberal candidates and MPs have received appointments as heads of Crown corporations, board members, and ambassadors. Liberal staffers, including some of those responsible for the sponsorship program, have worked their way into key positions in the public service.
• Ensure that all Officers of Parliament are appointed through consultation with all parties in the House
of Commons and confirmed through a secret ballot of all Members of Parliament, not just named by the
Prime Minister. This appointment process will cover:
- The Ethics Commissioner
- The Auditor General
- The Chief Electoral Officer
- The Information Commissioner
- The Privacy Commissioner
- The Registrar of Lobbyists
Today's Stand Up Comedy manual excerpt. This is Stephen Harper's message to Canadians taken from his 2006 campaign manual.
The time for accountability has arrived.
Canadians will soon be able to finally hold the Liberals accountable. After 12 years in power,the Liberals must be held accountable for the stolen money; accountable for the broken trust;and accountable for all that they failed to accomplish because of this government’s total preoccupation with scandal and damage control.
For those Canadians seeking accountability the question is clear: which party can deliver the change of government that’s needed to ensure political accountability in
Ottawa? We need a change of government to replace old style politics with a new vision. We need to replace a culture of entitlement and corruption with a culture of accountability. We need to replace benefits for a privileged few with government for all.
Everyday Canadians – the hardworking people who pay their taxes and play by the rules – want and deserve a new government that will put the people’s interest ahead of self-interest. And this election provides them with a chance to tell Liberal Ottawa that they've had enough; that they’re tired of being forgotten; that it’s finally their turn.
Now don't you think these are words that Mr. Harper can choke on right about now?
Lie number 1. Standing up for Who?
Table of Contents for the entire document.
Wait for it....ACCOUNTABILITY
Lie #2
People who work hard, pay their taxes, and play by the rules want accountability from their political leaders. We don’t expect politicians to be perfect. But we do want to know that our tax dollars – money we’ve worked for – are being spent properly and wisely. Above all, we want and expect our dollars to be spent legally.
Now does that include Minister Flaherty's untendered $122,000 speech? Or Bev Oda's $5000 taxi ride to the Junos?
Lie #3
• Extend to ten years the period for which Elections Act violations can be investigated and prosecuted.
10 years is a lot. Yet Pierre, the stretcher of the truth, Poilievre brings out a 1997 ruling to the House of Commons. Irrelevant at best.
While campaign donations are regulated, it is still legal to give unrestricted amounts of money to political candidates during an election campaign, including MPs who are not cabinet ministers.Thanks to this loophole, some MPs have accumulated large, secret trust funds. The Chief Electoral Officer estimates millions of dollars may be held in these trusts.
Yet we still don't know who donated to Stephen Harper's Leadership Campaign. Big Secret.
Lie #4
The Liberals have repeatedly appointed insiders, in some cases completely unqualified,to important public offices. Liberal candidates and MPs have received appointments as heads of Crown corporations, board members, and ambassadors. Liberal staffers, including some of those responsible for the sponsorship program, have worked their way into key positions in the public service.
• Ensure that all Officers of Parliament are appointed through consultation with all parties in the House
of Commons and confirmed through a secret ballot of all Members of Parliament, not just named by the
Prime Minister. This appointment process will cover:
- The Ethics Commissioner
- The Auditor General
- The Chief Electoral Officer
- The Information Commissioner
- The Privacy Commissioner
- The Registrar of Lobbyists
I guess an unelected person sitting in cabinet like Michael Fortier doesn't really fit here.
Lie #5
The Liberal government commissions some $25 million per year in polling and public opinion research. Much of this polling is conducted by Liberal-connected polling firms. The Auditor General revealed that Paul Martin’s Finance department commissioned polling for which there were “only verbal reports” – nothing was written down so there was no paper trail. Yet the Martin government prevented the Gomery Commission from investigating this part of the Auditor General’s report.
The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Ensure that all government public opinion research is automatically published within six months of the completion of the project, and prohibit verbal-only reports.
Conservatives have spent over $39Million in the past 12 months alone. What about their hidden polling on the death penalty? Countless other polls none of us know about.
Lie #6
Under the Liberal government, abuse of the government contracting process has become
commonplace. Former Liberal cabinet minister Art Eggleton, for example, awarded an untendered contract to a former girlfriend. He was later appointed to the Senate by Paul Martin.
The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Review and amend all contracting rules to make the government’s procurement process free from political interference.
• Appoint a Procurement Auditor to ensure that all procurements are fair and transparent, and to address complaints from vendors.
Back to the Hon. Minister of Finance and his speech contract...
Lie #7
Strengthen the power of the Auditor General
In Light of the recent statements by Sheila Fraser, can anyone believe this?
Anyway, you now see how the game is played, so feel free to browse through the rest of this bull and point out the lies.
Jeff has more on this. So does Impolitical.
Even Conservative Bloggers See Through the Harper Bull
h/t to Conservative blogger The Politic, who calls it as they see it.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Conservatives Are Entitled to Their Entitlements...And Their Appointments Too!!!
Stephen Harper and his lie machine appointed 148 friends to government positions prior to this election being called. This, I would call, is a GOTCHA moment. Does this explain why Human Resources Minister Monte Solberg decided to call it quits? I would imagine many of these appointments had to go through his office first.
You may recall that in May of this year, I was warning Canadians about this. In Fact, I warned about it here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here and here, and here. And now, what better timing then during an election campaign for Canadians to find out how many untruths this Conservative Government has made since the release of their 2006 Election Platform.
Below is a portion of the Conservative Lie Book from the 2006 Election Campaign. It can be seen in its entirety here. OOPS! Turns out the Conservatives don't want you to see the great big Blue lie book. They've pointed it to their 2008 site. Now why do you suppose they did that? That's okay. Jim Curran saved some tasty morsels for you to see.
Here are some excerpts from those posts that I think are worth reading. My favourite is this one:
Today's Stand Up Comedy manual excerpt. This is Stephen Harper's message to Canadians taken from his 2006 campaign manual.
The time for accountability has arrived.
Canadians will soon be able to finally hold the Liberals accountable. After 12 years in power,the Liberals must be held accountable for the stolen money; accountable for the broken trust;and accountable for all that they failed to accomplish because of this government’s total preoccupation with scandal and damage control.
For those Canadians seeking accountability the question is clear: which party can deliver the change of government that’s needed to ensure political accountability in
Ottawa? We need a change of government to replace old style politics with a new vision. We need to replace a culture of entitlement and corruption with a culture of accountability. We need to replace benefits for a privileged few with government for all.
Everyday Canadians – the hardworking people who pay their taxes and play by the rules – want and deserve a new government that will put the people’s interest ahead of self-interest. And this election provides them with a chance to tell Liberal Ottawa that they've had enough; that they’re tired of being forgotten; that it’s finally their turn.
Now don't you think these are words that Mr. Harper can choke on right about now?
Lie number 1. Standing up for Who?
Table of Contents for the entire document.
Wait for it....ACCOUNTABILITY
Lie #2
People who work hard, pay their taxes, and play by the rules want accountability from their political leaders. We don’t expect politicians to be perfect. But we do want to know that our tax dollars – money we’ve worked for – are being spent properly and wisely. Above all, we want and expect our dollars to be spent legally.
Now does that include Minister Flaherty's untendered $122,000 speech? Or Bev Oda's $5000 taxi ride to the Junos?
Lie #3
• Extend to ten years the period for which Elections Act violations can be investigated and prosecuted.
10 years is a lot. Yet Pierre, the stretcher of the truth, Poilievre brings out a 1997 ruling to the House of Commons. Irrelevant at best.
While campaign donations are regulated, it is still legal to give unrestricted amounts of money to political candidates during an election campaign, including MPs who are not cabinet ministers.Thanks to this loophole, some MPs have accumulated large, secret trust funds. The Chief Electoral Officer estimates millions of dollars may be held in these trusts.
Yet we still don't know who donated to Stephen Harper's Leadership Campaign. Big Secret.
Lie #4
The Liberals have repeatedly appointed insiders, in some cases completely unqualified,to important public offices. Liberal candidates and MPs have received appointments as heads of Crown corporations, board members, and ambassadors. Liberal staffers, including some of those responsible for the sponsorship program, have worked their way into key positions in the public service.
• Ensure that all Officers of Parliament are appointed through consultation with all parties in the House
of Commons and confirmed through a secret ballot of all Members of Parliament, not just named by the
Prime Minister. This appointment process will cover:
- The Ethics Commissioner
- The Auditor General
- The Chief Electoral Officer
- The Information Commissioner
- The Privacy Commissioner
- The Registrar of Lobbyists
I guess an unelected person sitting in cabinet like Michael Fortier doesn't really fit here.
Lie #5
The Liberal government commissions some $25 million per year in polling and public opinion research. Much of this polling is conducted by Liberal-connected polling firms. The Auditor General revealed that Paul Martin’s Finance department commissioned polling for which there were “only verbal reports” – nothing was written down so there was no paper trail. Yet the Martin government prevented the Gomery Commission from investigating this part of the Auditor General’s report.
The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Ensure that all government public opinion research is automatically published within six months of the completion of the project, and prohibit verbal-only reports.
Conservatives have spent over $39Million in the past 12 months alone. What about their hidden polling on the death penalty? Countless other polls none of us know about.
Lie #6
Under the Liberal government, abuse of the government contracting process has become
commonplace. Former Liberal cabinet minister Art Eggleton, for example, awarded an untendered contract to a former girlfriend. He was later appointed to the Senate by Paul Martin.
The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Review and amend all contracting rules to make the government’s procurement process free from political interference.
• Appoint a Procurement Auditor to ensure that all procurements are fair and transparent, and to address complaints from vendors.
Back to the Hon. Minister of Finance and his speech contract...
Lie #7
Strengthen the power of the Auditor General
In Light of the recent statements by Sheila Fraser, can anyone believe this?
Anyway, you now see how the game is played, so feel free to browse through the rest of this bull and point out the lies.
Jeff has more on this. So does Impolitical.
You may recall that in May of this year, I was warning Canadians about this. In Fact, I warned about it here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here and here, and here. And now, what better timing then during an election campaign for Canadians to find out how many untruths this Conservative Government has made since the release of their 2006 Election Platform.
Below is a portion of the Conservative Lie Book from the 2006 Election Campaign. It can be seen in its entirety here. OOPS! Turns out the Conservatives don't want you to see the great big Blue lie book. They've pointed it to their 2008 site. Now why do you suppose they did that? That's okay. Jim Curran saved some tasty morsels for you to see.
Here are some excerpts from those posts that I think are worth reading. My favourite is this one:
The Liberals have repeatedly appointed insiders, in some cases completely unqualified,to important public offices. Liberal candidates and MPs have received appointments as heads of Crown corporations, board members, and ambassadors. Liberal staffers, including some of those responsible for the sponsorship program, have worked their way into key positions in the public service.
• Ensure that all Officers of Parliament are appointed through consultation with all parties in the House
of Commons and confirmed through a secret ballot of all Members of Parliament, not just named by the
Prime Minister. This appointment process will cover:
- The Ethics Commissioner
- The Auditor General
- The Chief Electoral Officer
- The Information Commissioner
- The Privacy Commissioner
- The Registrar of Lobbyists
Today's Stand Up Comedy manual excerpt. This is Stephen Harper's message to Canadians taken from his 2006 campaign manual.
The time for accountability has arrived.
Canadians will soon be able to finally hold the Liberals accountable. After 12 years in power,the Liberals must be held accountable for the stolen money; accountable for the broken trust;and accountable for all that they failed to accomplish because of this government’s total preoccupation with scandal and damage control.
For those Canadians seeking accountability the question is clear: which party can deliver the change of government that’s needed to ensure political accountability in
Ottawa? We need a change of government to replace old style politics with a new vision. We need to replace a culture of entitlement and corruption with a culture of accountability. We need to replace benefits for a privileged few with government for all.
Everyday Canadians – the hardworking people who pay their taxes and play by the rules – want and deserve a new government that will put the people’s interest ahead of self-interest. And this election provides them with a chance to tell Liberal Ottawa that they've had enough; that they’re tired of being forgotten; that it’s finally their turn.
Now don't you think these are words that Mr. Harper can choke on right about now?
Lie number 1. Standing up for Who?
Table of Contents for the entire document.
Wait for it....ACCOUNTABILITY
Lie #2
People who work hard, pay their taxes, and play by the rules want accountability from their political leaders. We don’t expect politicians to be perfect. But we do want to know that our tax dollars – money we’ve worked for – are being spent properly and wisely. Above all, we want and expect our dollars to be spent legally.
Now does that include Minister Flaherty's untendered $122,000 speech? Or Bev Oda's $5000 taxi ride to the Junos?
Lie #3
• Extend to ten years the period for which Elections Act violations can be investigated and prosecuted.
10 years is a lot. Yet Pierre, the stretcher of the truth, Poilievre brings out a 1997 ruling to the House of Commons. Irrelevant at best.
While campaign donations are regulated, it is still legal to give unrestricted amounts of money to political candidates during an election campaign, including MPs who are not cabinet ministers.Thanks to this loophole, some MPs have accumulated large, secret trust funds. The Chief Electoral Officer estimates millions of dollars may be held in these trusts.
Yet we still don't know who donated to Stephen Harper's Leadership Campaign. Big Secret.
Lie #4
The Liberals have repeatedly appointed insiders, in some cases completely unqualified,to important public offices. Liberal candidates and MPs have received appointments as heads of Crown corporations, board members, and ambassadors. Liberal staffers, including some of those responsible for the sponsorship program, have worked their way into key positions in the public service.
• Ensure that all Officers of Parliament are appointed through consultation with all parties in the House
of Commons and confirmed through a secret ballot of all Members of Parliament, not just named by the
Prime Minister. This appointment process will cover:
- The Ethics Commissioner
- The Auditor General
- The Chief Electoral Officer
- The Information Commissioner
- The Privacy Commissioner
- The Registrar of Lobbyists
I guess an unelected person sitting in cabinet like Michael Fortier doesn't really fit here.
Lie #5
The Liberal government commissions some $25 million per year in polling and public opinion research. Much of this polling is conducted by Liberal-connected polling firms. The Auditor General revealed that Paul Martin’s Finance department commissioned polling for which there were “only verbal reports” – nothing was written down so there was no paper trail. Yet the Martin government prevented the Gomery Commission from investigating this part of the Auditor General’s report.
The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Ensure that all government public opinion research is automatically published within six months of the completion of the project, and prohibit verbal-only reports.
Conservatives have spent over $39Million in the past 12 months alone. What about their hidden polling on the death penalty? Countless other polls none of us know about.
Lie #6
Under the Liberal government, abuse of the government contracting process has become
commonplace. Former Liberal cabinet minister Art Eggleton, for example, awarded an untendered contract to a former girlfriend. He was later appointed to the Senate by Paul Martin.
The plan
A Conservative government will:
• Review and amend all contracting rules to make the government’s procurement process free from political interference.
• Appoint a Procurement Auditor to ensure that all procurements are fair and transparent, and to address complaints from vendors.
Back to the Hon. Minister of Finance and his speech contract...
Lie #7
Strengthen the power of the Auditor General
In Light of the recent statements by Sheila Fraser, can anyone believe this?
Anyway, you now see how the game is played, so feel free to browse through the rest of this bull and point out the lies.
Jeff has more on this. So does Impolitical.
Harper Loves Future "Elitists" and "Gala Attendees"!!!
Prime Minister Stephen Harper was hoping to atone Monday for describing the denizens of Canadian arts and culture as government-subsidized elitists with nothing in common with ordinary Canadians
Looking at the Quebec numbers and feeling the wrath of Margaret Atwood, Stevie Harpercrite knew it was the end of his dream majority. So, with the lack of any platform -and no sign of one coming- he decided to make up some policy on the fly. Not unlike Martin's notwithstanding debacle, Harpercrite has stepped in it. What else will he change on the fly over the next two weeks?
Harper Turns His Back on Evangelicals
Today, when asked by the Quebec media if he was going to re-open the abortion debate, PM Harper was quick to say his government has no mandate to do so. OOOPS, there goes the reform/alliance fan base.
All this to try to regain momentum in Quebec. Talk about selling your soul!
All this to try to regain momentum in Quebec. Talk about selling your soul!
Illegalelection.ca
Really. I'm sort of surprised nobody in this country has brought an action against the Prime Minister and his bogus election call. Anyway, this is an informative site. Go visit illegalelection.ca
Sunday, September 28, 2008
New Nanos is Out...Liberals back in Striking Distance
Update: Apparently Jack is gonna release his plan in writing. Creative financing 101.
....and Jack? Well, Jack is Jack. Let him continue his fantasy about being Prime Minister...he's only scaring people.
Here's the numbers.
Notice the Liberals - although CTV will never report it - have taken the lead once again in Ontario? Notice the NDP has dropped to 10 points in Quebec where they keep telling people they could win 10 seats? And, the Libs are in a virtual tie in Quebec with the fleeting Hapercrites? Notice how Stephane Dion has passed Jack Layton on the leadership index?
The NDP are perfectly poised to win what they already have...fourth place in the House of Commons. Perhaps some news outlets might try reporting the the real truth for a change. Then again, that would involve actual work and research. Not quite as easy as just piling on a PhD such as Stephane Dion and treating him like a moron - as they have been (read:CTV) - because they don't like the way he pronounces words in English.
There's only one true Canadian hero in this election running to be Prime Minister of Canada. That hero is Stephane Dion. A man of courage. A man of conviction. A man with a vision of hope for Canada's future! And, to date, the only man willing to put his plan on paper.
....and Jack? Well, Jack is Jack. Let him continue his fantasy about being Prime Minister...he's only scaring people.
Here's the numbers.
Notice the Liberals - although CTV will never report it - have taken the lead once again in Ontario? Notice the NDP has dropped to 10 points in Quebec where they keep telling people they could win 10 seats? And, the Libs are in a virtual tie in Quebec with the fleeting Hapercrites? Notice how Stephane Dion has passed Jack Layton on the leadership index?
The NDP are perfectly poised to win what they already have...fourth place in the House of Commons. Perhaps some news outlets might try reporting the the real truth for a change. Then again, that would involve actual work and research. Not quite as easy as just piling on a PhD such as Stephane Dion and treating him like a moron - as they have been (read:CTV) - because they don't like the way he pronounces words in English.
There's only one true Canadian hero in this election running to be Prime Minister of Canada. That hero is Stephane Dion. A man of courage. A man of conviction. A man with a vision of hope for Canada's future! And, to date, the only man willing to put his plan on paper.
Deficit Financing...Brought to you by Jack Layton
And just how are you paying for all this Jack?
Now who's not dealing with reality Jack? Here's a hint. When you want to campaign on jobs Jack, you don't raise corporate taxes. Corporations Jack are the ones that give jobs to people.
Can't wait to see the cost of this, non-released platform...a strategy the Cons -the NDP running mates- are employing. My guess is both the Dippers and Cons plan on releasing, if ever, their platforms on Friday October 10 at 6:00 PM.
Now who's not dealing with reality Jack? Here's a hint. When you want to campaign on jobs Jack, you don't raise corporate taxes. Corporations Jack are the ones that give jobs to people.
Can't wait to see the cost of this, non-released platform...a strategy the Cons -the NDP running mates- are employing. My guess is both the Dippers and Cons plan on releasing, if ever, their platforms on Friday October 10 at 6:00 PM.
Why is Jack Layton standing by Andrew McKeever?
Why are you Jack? I seem to remember a Liberal that paid a huge price for a comparison of some nature about Olivia Chow. I think he's still paying the price. Yet, Jack Layton has decided, not only to stand by Mr. McKeever, but, in fact, defend him. McKeever, who actually put threats to people in written word over the internet is being allowed to continue his run as a candidate for the House of Commons.
Another question is: Isn't there still a law somewhere that deals with "uttering a threat" in this land? Mr. McKeever uttered threats over the internet and they are in writing. Couldn't a charge be laid? It's obvious Mr. McKeever has clearly lost sight of how serious the ramifications of his comments really are.
Seriously Jack, isn't this guy a bit worse than your dope smokers in BC? At least they didn't call a woman a cu*t JACK! Fire McKeever Jack. Do the right thing.
Another question is: Isn't there still a law somewhere that deals with "uttering a threat" in this land? Mr. McKeever uttered threats over the internet and they are in writing. Couldn't a charge be laid? It's obvious Mr. McKeever has clearly lost sight of how serious the ramifications of his comments really are.
Seriously Jack, isn't this guy a bit worse than your dope smokers in BC? At least they didn't call a woman a cu*t JACK! Fire McKeever Jack. Do the right thing.
Harper "Net Jobs"... Reality Check...Part 4
ISSUE:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper claimed again yesterday that Canada has the strongest financial position among the G7 and has created 80,000 “net new jobs” so far this year.
STEPHEN HARPER:
•“Amid instability and economic uncertainty the imperative for government is obvious. The only responsible way to address global uncertainty is to maintain a stable, certain and careful plan here at home.”
REALITY:
•Mr. Harper broke his promise to maintain the $3-billion contingency fund in the federal budget and reduced the federal surplus to $2.3 billion in 2008 and reduced it to only $1.3 billion in 2009 – which is only 0.5 per cent of federal government revenues. Financial institutions have dropped Canada’s real GDP growth forecast to as low as 0.7 per cent. This is far from a “responsible,” “certain and careful plan.”
STEPHEN HARPER:
•“And our budget is in surplus, we are in the strongest financial position by far of any G7 country.”
REALITY:
•Canada has the worst economic growth in the G7 and, Statistics Canada just reported, the worst labour productivity growth in 18 years.
STEPHEN HARPER:
•“Our unemployment rate is near its lowest level in 30 years and our economy has managed to create over 80,000 net new jobs this year.”
REALITY:
•According to Statistics Canada Labour Force Survey, from January to August 2008, Canada’s economy only created 40,500 “net new jobs.” In fact, in 2008, Canada has lost 11,900 full-time jobs and only created 52,400 part-time jobs. This is hardly a record to be proud of. (http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/080905/d080905a.htm)
STEPHEN HARPER:
•“This approach reflects our clear conviction as Conservatives that low taxes, less debt and controlled and effective spending at the national level are key to the long run success of any economy.”
REALITY:
•The evidence of Mr. Harper’s “controlled and effective spending” is lacking. The Conservatives committed in the 2008 budget to moderate spending federal spending growth to 3.4 per cent but the Department of Finance reported expenditure receipts swelled by 8.4 per cent in the first three months of the year.
•In 2006, the Conservatives promised to limit federal spending increase to 5.4 per cent but in fact, spending increased by 7.5 per cent.
•
In 2007, the Conservatives promised to limit federal spending increase to 5.6 per cent but spending actually increased by 6.9 per cent.
•Since June 2008, the Conservative government has announced $19.2 billion in pre-election spending.
And that's your reality check.
It Appears The Harper Evangelical Views Do Get Attention
Jeff Heinrich writes for Canwest about scary, evangelical agenda being a real possibility. This should be exciting when the Cons write yet more blogs about me this week.
MONTREAL - Francis Pearson has something in common with Stephen Harper: They're evangelical Christians. Not only that, he and Harper belong to the same Protestant sect, the Christian and Missionary Alliance.
Harper worships at East Gate Alliance Church, in Ottawa. Pearson runs the Alliance network in Quebec and worships at Fairview Alliance Church, in Dollard-des-Ormeaux, Que.
But that doesn't mean Pearson's vote is a lock for the Conservatives on Oct. 14. Pearson says he doesn't mix politics and religion.
"I'm apolitical - I consider myself a citizen of the world," said the pastor, who was once municipal councillor in Quebec.
At his church, "we pray for all government authorities, whether they be municipal, provincial or Canadian," he said. "We leave it to the discretion of each of our members to decide what politics to espouse. We don't favour any one party or hold any in disfavour. Everyone is entirely free to choose."
Other conservative Christians sing from the same hymnal.
Eric Lanthier, director of Academie Chretienne Rive-Nord, an evangelical school for Christian boys and girls in Laval, said he won't guarantee his vote will go to the Conservatives.
"Of course, some Protestants will vote Conservative, but there are no marching orders telling them to do so," he said. "No one's saying 'Let's vote for Harper's party and no other'."
Same sermon at 4 MY Canada, an Ottawa-based organization for young evangelicals that is militantly "pro-family" - that is, anti-abortion.
"We want to make it clear that 4MYC will NOT be endorsing any one party in this election," its website says. "We are endorsing individuals on the basis of their values."
Still, the organization wants a "pro-marriage Parliament" and encourages members to support "value-based campaigns" in 45 swing ridings in B.C., Ontario and Quebec.
"This time, the evangelical vote must be a significant force," the 4MYC site says.
It's in the realm of values that the conservative agenda of the Christian right and some of the big-c Conservative policies under Harper match up - ideologically, at least.
"The fact the Conservatives favour a smaller role for the state, that appeals to Protestant evangelicals, and the fact the Conservatives have opposed gay marriage, that appeals to us, too," Lanthier said.
Other Tory policies - helping mothers stay at home with the kids instead of sending them to day care, for example, or eliminating tax credits for "offensive" films - fit in with what evangelicals believe: that "family" means a mother and a father raising their kids together in a happy God-fearing home, and that the Bible is more than just a moral guide, it is revealed truth.
Harper's Tories appear to be headed for a majority next month. For evangelicals, that ascendancy makes this election different from others.
"Elections shouldn't just be limited to atheists," said Lanthier. "As evangelicals, we want politicians to promote our values" and Harper just might do that, he said.
That said, the prospect of a Tory majority isn't cause for rejoicing just yet - the Conservatives' move to the centre hasn't pleased a lot of evangelicals.
"We wanted the abortion debate opened up again, and that didn't happen," said Lanthier. Same with the death penalty.
The prospect that, with a majority, Harper might feel free to translate his fundamentalist Christian principles into legislation scares people who are wary of the party's attraction for the Christian right.
"That's the big question," said Toronto author Marci McDonald, who is writing a book on what she calls the "theo-cons" - evangelicals, conservative Catholics and orthodox Jews - who she's documented have helped bring Harper to power.
"They are there - they are all over his government," she said. In cabinet, in the PMO, in the candidates running under the Tory banner, "he may have muzzled his far right, but he hasn't eliminated them."
In the end, "it matters less where Harper himself stands, than on what he owes to this constituency, because they will be demanding," McDonald said.
"They very meekly sat through the 2006 election and the last two years, not speaking to the press, not venturing anything. But they expect payback."
MONTREAL - Francis Pearson has something in common with Stephen Harper: They're evangelical Christians. Not only that, he and Harper belong to the same Protestant sect, the Christian and Missionary Alliance.
Harper worships at East Gate Alliance Church, in Ottawa. Pearson runs the Alliance network in Quebec and worships at Fairview Alliance Church, in Dollard-des-Ormeaux, Que.
But that doesn't mean Pearson's vote is a lock for the Conservatives on Oct. 14. Pearson says he doesn't mix politics and religion.
"I'm apolitical - I consider myself a citizen of the world," said the pastor, who was once municipal councillor in Quebec.
At his church, "we pray for all government authorities, whether they be municipal, provincial or Canadian," he said. "We leave it to the discretion of each of our members to decide what politics to espouse. We don't favour any one party or hold any in disfavour. Everyone is entirely free to choose."
Other conservative Christians sing from the same hymnal.
Eric Lanthier, director of Academie Chretienne Rive-Nord, an evangelical school for Christian boys and girls in Laval, said he won't guarantee his vote will go to the Conservatives.
"Of course, some Protestants will vote Conservative, but there are no marching orders telling them to do so," he said. "No one's saying 'Let's vote for Harper's party and no other'."
Same sermon at 4 MY Canada, an Ottawa-based organization for young evangelicals that is militantly "pro-family" - that is, anti-abortion.
"We want to make it clear that 4MYC will NOT be endorsing any one party in this election," its website says. "We are endorsing individuals on the basis of their values."
Still, the organization wants a "pro-marriage Parliament" and encourages members to support "value-based campaigns" in 45 swing ridings in B.C., Ontario and Quebec.
"This time, the evangelical vote must be a significant force," the 4MYC site says.
It's in the realm of values that the conservative agenda of the Christian right and some of the big-c Conservative policies under Harper match up - ideologically, at least.
"The fact the Conservatives favour a smaller role for the state, that appeals to Protestant evangelicals, and the fact the Conservatives have opposed gay marriage, that appeals to us, too," Lanthier said.
Other Tory policies - helping mothers stay at home with the kids instead of sending them to day care, for example, or eliminating tax credits for "offensive" films - fit in with what evangelicals believe: that "family" means a mother and a father raising their kids together in a happy God-fearing home, and that the Bible is more than just a moral guide, it is revealed truth.
Harper's Tories appear to be headed for a majority next month. For evangelicals, that ascendancy makes this election different from others.
"Elections shouldn't just be limited to atheists," said Lanthier. "As evangelicals, we want politicians to promote our values" and Harper just might do that, he said.
That said, the prospect of a Tory majority isn't cause for rejoicing just yet - the Conservatives' move to the centre hasn't pleased a lot of evangelicals.
"We wanted the abortion debate opened up again, and that didn't happen," said Lanthier. Same with the death penalty.
The prospect that, with a majority, Harper might feel free to translate his fundamentalist Christian principles into legislation scares people who are wary of the party's attraction for the Christian right.
"That's the big question," said Toronto author Marci McDonald, who is writing a book on what she calls the "theo-cons" - evangelicals, conservative Catholics and orthodox Jews - who she's documented have helped bring Harper to power.
"They are there - they are all over his government," she said. In cabinet, in the PMO, in the candidates running under the Tory banner, "he may have muzzled his far right, but he hasn't eliminated them."
In the end, "it matters less where Harper himself stands, than on what he owes to this constituency, because they will be demanding," McDonald said.
"They very meekly sat through the 2006 election and the last two years, not speaking to the press, not venturing anything. But they expect payback."
Harper/Ritz Fact Check...Part 3...Listeriosis
ISSUE:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced he would introduce a range of new initiatives to protect consumers.
“Canadian families and taxpayers need a government that will deliver real consumer protection,” he said.
REALITY:
Mr. Harper talks tough about protecting consumers but he has abandoned the most basic principle of all - the safety of foods for Canadians.
“The listeriosis epidemic is a timely reminder that the Harper government has reversed much of the progress that previous governments made on governing for public health.” (Canadian Medical Association Journal, September 16, 2008)
“Right now, we're walking in a fog...We don't have any idea what foods are making us sick in this country…” (Rick Holley, a food-safety expert at the University of Manitoba, September 22, 2008)
“Government policy errors helped bring about this epidemic.” (Canadian Medical Association Journal, September 16, 2008)
“The Canadian Food Inspection Agency, by its very name, leads Canadians to believe that it inspects food. Trying to pass off the inspection agency’s duties to industry is a disgusting abrogation of its duties. The cuts are not in the interests of the consumers of Canada.” (Bruce Cran, president of the Consumers’ Association of Canada, Edmonton Journal, June 15, 2008)
“Overall, it would seem that as a country, Canada is far less prepared now for epidemics than in the past,” (Canadian Medical Association Journal, September 16, 2008).
“The changes, which took effect in April 2008, have dismayed meat inspectors, particularly the fact that they can no longer take immediate action to clean up contaminated plants, say the head of the union for federal food safety inspectors.” (Canadian Medical Association Journal, September 16, 2008)
“They’re moving towards the U.S. model, where the inspectors don’t actually do the inspection, they just oversee and the companies actually do the inspection. That’s a really dangerous thing.” (Michael Hansen, BSE senior scientist with the NY based Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports, The Leader−Post June 12, 2008)
“Companies are in business to make profit, pure and simple, and we, as a society have fully accepted and bought into that, but with the understanding that somebody will be riding herd on them – minding the shop – to safeguard societal interests. Otherwise, history has shown that we are at risk.” (Ann Clark, professor, University of Guelph, The Leader−Post June 12, 2008)
And that, my friends, is a reality check.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Harper's Pet Peeve: Reality!!! Part 2...the $12 Billion Deficit
Just watching Harper speak "live" from Ajax, where he just told a screened crowd of supporters that the Liberal Platform will leave a $12 Billion deficit in Canada. I can certainly see where Reality would be a pet peeve to the Prime Minister, because that statement is nowhere near reality.
Who's running a scare tactic campaign now, Mr. Harper?
Harper's Pet Peeve: Reality!!!
Apparently nothing has changed since Stephen Harper left high school.
And, while other leaders chose to campaign in the most important election for a generation to come, the Ontario Provincial Police had to ask the taxpayers to pay for them to go and metal detect a pool hall so His Royal Highness Steve Harper could have some beers with his buddies. That's a reality check! Your tax dollars in action folks.
Harpernomics Reality Check...Part 1
ISSUE:
• The Stephen Harper fabrication machine continued churning out misinformation today by telling reporters that Stéphane Dion has refused to rule out running a deficit if elected Prime Minister.
REALITY:
•A Liberal government will never put Canada into deficit. Period.
•The Prime Minister has deliberately ignored a public commitment Mr. Dion has already made to continue the long Liberal tradition of sound economic management that includes balanced budgets and a contingency reserve of $3 billion a year to be applied to the debt if it’s not used.
•If, at the end of the fiscal year, that $3-billion reserve is not used, a Liberal government will put all of it towards debt reduction.
•In his February 15, 2008 speech to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), Mr. Dion said:
“A Liberal government will ensure that the federal budget has a contingency reserve of $3 billion each year to help keep us out of deficit in times of economic challenges, and to ensure that the government has resources available in times of urgent need, such as when our country has faced floods, SARS or the ice storm.”
•In his June 1, 2008 speech, again to the FCM, Mr. Dion reiterated this:
“We will invest any surpluses (beyond a contingency reserve) in infrastructure, starting with sustainable infrastructure as a priority.”
•The irony of this Prime Minister criticizing Liberals for bad fiscal management should not be lost on anyone. It is another example of his distorted ‘Harpernomics.’
•This is the same Prime Minister who:
a)in just 30 months in office, squandered the $13-billion surplus he inherited from the previous Liberal government, and ran a deficit in the first two quarters of this year;
b)irresponsibly ended the prudent Liberal practice of maintaining a $3-billion contingency reserve in order to pay for his inefficient tax cuts and bloated spending promises;
c)heads the highest-spending government in Canadian history, despite his promises to the contrary. The 2009-2010 spending projection in their last budget represented a 25 per cent increase from when they took office. They made $19.2 billion in pre-election spending promises alone (between June and September 2008);
d)has overseen the worst economic growth and productivity growth since 1990 – the Mulroney days. We are the worst-performing economy in the G8; and
e)has sat idly by and watched, real stable full-time jobs being replaced by unstable part-time jobs. A whopping 154,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost.
•Compare that to the Liberal record:
1.Liberal governments delivered eight consecutive balanced budgets – a first for any government since Confederation. The Conservatives are quickly unravelling Canada’s once sound economic record.
2.When the Liberal government took office in 1993, the previous Conservative government had run up an annual deficit of $43 billion in 2005 dollars. The Liberal government was able to turn Canada’s fiscal situation around and balanced the budget in four years. During this period Canada was the only country in the G7 to record total budget surpluses.
3.Allowing for inflation, the average Canadian family’s income was 20 per cent higher in 2004 than in 1993. Between 1993 and 2005, the Canadian economy grew by almost 300,000 new jobs every year.
Fiscal discipline is part of the Liberal DNA. We were the party that turned a huge deficit into eight years of surpluses, and we will continue to put fiscal responsibility first. And that's your reality check.
Gary Lunn Chickens out of Municipalities Speech
Yet another Harper MP has been muzzled. I'm certain there's a logical explanation.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Still Think it's Funny Mr. Ritz
Today, death #19 from the listeriosis breakout was confirmed. This time in Quebec. That's not a joking matter, Mr. Ritz.
The Not-So-Christian Conservative Lies to his Flock Again
UPDATE: Apparently another Christian Conservative has his knickers in a knot.
Andrew Prescott over at Christian Conservative has once again called to question my integrity. It's not the first time. I suspect it won't be the last.
First, there's the title of his blogpost: "Liberal blogger attacks Valeriote for his faith" Well that's a lie. In fact, it is Mr. Christian Conservative that chose to bring up Mr. Valeriote's name. Here's my post. Anyone see Frank's name in there? Anyone? Bueller?
Then the not-so-Christian states:
Launched an attack? Really? I simply reposted an article from the Vancouver Sun. So who is really not being honest with people here? I would think my Evangelical friend doth stretch the truth a wee bit much.
Then the less-than-Christian-like blogger goes on to ask the question:
I don't recall stating anything of that nature in my blog.
For the record, here's Frank Valeriote's answer on abortion:
While Frank states it is not a part of his faith, he goes on to state he supports a woman's right to choose. So no Andrew, Frank will not be injecting his religion into his politics as you claim I suggested. You sir, are deceiving your readers and are, quite frankly, lying. Not very Christian of you.
Andrew Prescott over at Christian Conservative has once again called to question my integrity. It's not the first time. I suspect it won't be the last.
First, there's the title of his blogpost: "Liberal blogger attacks Valeriote for his faith" Well that's a lie. In fact, it is Mr. Christian Conservative that chose to bring up Mr. Valeriote's name. Here's my post. Anyone see Frank's name in there? Anyone? Bueller?
Then the not-so-Christian states:
You see, Liberal blogger James Curran followed the exact "Fear & Smear" gameplan I expected the Liberals to follow, and launched an attack on evangelical Christians on his blog today, in a misguided attempt to smear Prime Minister Harper.
Launched an attack? Really? I simply reposted an article from the Vancouver Sun. So who is really not being honest with people here? I would think my Evangelical friend doth stretch the truth a wee bit much.
Then the less-than-Christian-like blogger goes on to ask the question:
So now... is a somewhat prominent Liberal blogger suggesting that Evangelicals are not fit for public office in this land?
I don't recall stating anything of that nature in my blog.
For the record, here's Frank Valeriote's answer on abortion:
While Frank states it is not a part of his faith, he goes on to state he supports a woman's right to choose. So no Andrew, Frank will not be injecting his religion into his politics as you claim I suggested. You sir, are deceiving your readers and are, quite frankly, lying. Not very Christian of you.
The Not-So-Christian Conservative Lies to his Flock Again
Andrew Prescott over at Christian Conservative has once again called to question my integrity. It's not the first time. I suspect it won't be the last.
First, there's the title of his blogpost: "Liberal blogger attacks Valeriote for his faith" Well that's a lie. In fact, it is Mr. Christian Conservative that chose to bring up Mr. Valeriote's name. Here's my post. Anyone see Frank's name in there? Anyone? Bueller?
Then the not-so-Christian states:
Launched an attack? Really? I simply reposted an article from the Vancouver Sun. So who is really not being honest with people here? I would think my Evangelical friend doth stretch the truth a wee bit much.
Then the less-than-Christian-like blogger goes on to ask the question:
I don't recall stating anything of that nature in my blog.
For the record, here's Frank Valeriote's answer on abortion:
While Frank states it is not a part of his faith, he goes on to state he supports a woman's right to choose. So no Andrew, Frank will not be injecting his religion into his politics as you claim I suggested. You sir, are deceiving your readers and are, quite frankly, lying. Not very Christian of you.
First, there's the title of his blogpost: "Liberal blogger attacks Valeriote for his faith" Well that's a lie. In fact, it is Mr. Christian Conservative that chose to bring up Mr. Valeriote's name. Here's my post. Anyone see Frank's name in there? Anyone? Bueller?
Then the not-so-Christian states:
You see, Liberal blogger James Curran followed the exact "Fear & Smear" gameplan I expected the Liberals to follow, and launched an attack on evangelical Christians on his blog today, in a misguided attempt to smear Prime Minister Harper.
Launched an attack? Really? I simply reposted an article from the Vancouver Sun. So who is really not being honest with people here? I would think my Evangelical friend doth stretch the truth a wee bit much.
Then the less-than-Christian-like blogger goes on to ask the question:
So now... is a somewhat prominent Liberal blogger suggesting that Evangelicals are not fit for public office in this land?
I don't recall stating anything of that nature in my blog.
For the record, here's Frank Valeriote's answer on abortion:
While Frank states it is not a part of his faith, he goes on to state he supports a woman's right to choose. So no Andrew, Frank will not be injecting his religion into his politics as you claim I suggested. You sir, are deceiving your readers and are, quite frankly, lying. Not very Christian of you.
Explain This Harper Crime Bill Hypocrisy to Me Will Ya
UPDATE: Apparently one Conservative Blogger reads different meanings into articles.
I'm certain there's an easy explanation of great scientific thought, so I thought I'd ask you, good readers, to help me out.
PM Harper and Justice guy Rob Nicholson put forth a Bill raising the age of consent from 14 to 16. In other words, 14 year olds and 15 year olds are not mature enough to determine whether or not they should be able to have sex. So an 18 year old having sex with a 15 year old could be charged with rape.(Update: they COULD also fall into the close in age category as Right as Rain eludes to.)
So, if you're under 16, you're basically incapable of mentally making the correct decisions concerning your own body and the state is stepping in.
But then, the other day, the same Prime Minister and the same Justice Minister got up in front of the microphone and announced that their new Crime Bill will enable judges to try those same 14 year olds as adults in a court of law.
I see. So, 14 year olds don't have the mental capacity to have sex, but they have the mental capacity to determine the scale of crimes they commit? And these same 14 year old criminals will be named for these crimes to act as a further deterrent to future crimes they may or may not commit (depending on whether or not they been sodomized to death in a general population of adults in one of the new penitentiaries Mr. Harper will have to build to accommodate all these new criminals).
For good measure, Mr. Harper has already told Canadians that we'll be going back to the polls again next year if he doesn't get this new bill passed. Geez, we haven't finished this one yet and he's already getting ready for the next one.
So, to recap, 14 = NO SEX (not mature enough) AND 14 = life sentence + lifetime scorn (mature enough).
I'm certain there's an easy explanation of great scientific thought, so I thought I'd ask you, good readers, to help me out.
PM Harper and Justice guy Rob Nicholson put forth a Bill raising the age of consent from 14 to 16. In other words, 14 year olds and 15 year olds are not mature enough to determine whether or not they should be able to have sex. So an 18 year old having sex with a 15 year old could be charged with rape.(Update: they COULD also fall into the close in age category as Right as Rain eludes to.)
So, if you're under 16, you're basically incapable of mentally making the correct decisions concerning your own body and the state is stepping in.
But then, the other day, the same Prime Minister and the same Justice Minister got up in front of the microphone and announced that their new Crime Bill will enable judges to try those same 14 year olds as adults in a court of law.
I see. So, 14 year olds don't have the mental capacity to have sex, but they have the mental capacity to determine the scale of crimes they commit? And these same 14 year old criminals will be named for these crimes to act as a further deterrent to future crimes they may or may not commit (depending on whether or not they been sodomized to death in a general population of adults in one of the new penitentiaries Mr. Harper will have to build to accommodate all these new criminals).
For good measure, Mr. Harper has already told Canadians that we'll be going back to the polls again next year if he doesn't get this new bill passed. Geez, we haven't finished this one yet and he's already getting ready for the next one.
So, to recap, 14 = NO SEX (not mature enough) AND 14 = life sentence + lifetime scorn (mature enough).
The Harper Nobody Knows....Shhhhh, it's a Secret
Mr. Evangelical. Oh, Sarah Palin, we've got you beat.
Why Stephen Harper keeps his evangelical faith very private
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is damned if he does talk about his evangelical beliefs and damned if he doesn't. If he continues to avoid answering questions about his religious convictions, political observers say he appears secretive, like he's hiding something. But, at the same time, most Canadians do not share the moral convictions of his evangelical denomination, the Christian and Missionary Alliance Church.
The Alliance Church, to which Harper has belonged for decades, believes Jesus Christ will return to Earth in an apocalypse, won't ordain women, strongly opposes abortion and divorce, condemns homosexuality as the most base of sins and believes those who aren't born-again are "lost."
Readers have requested that I post this feature about the prime minister's religious beliefs, which I wrote in the summer of 2007 based on a trip to visit his former pastor in Calgary. (Until now this piece was not available on this blog because of a technical glitch. The photo of Harper outside a church is from a funeral he attended.)
August 17, 2008
CALGARY - The mega-church headed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's pastor friend boasts a coffee bar, a soft-rock band and a shopping-mall-sized parking lot. Rev. Brent Trask's RockPointe Church -- which displays moving images of Jesus on three giant screens when elders serve communion -- is perched on rolling farmland right next to Highway 1A.
Overlooking the snow-capped foothills of the Rocky Mountains, Rockpointe is a giant "destination" church, accessible only by car, SUV or truck. It's reached by driving west of the endless, look-alike subdivisions of this sprawling, oil-rich city.
On the outside, RockPointe Church looks like a bunker. On the inside, it's a cavernous auditorium with no crosses, altar or pulpit. Instead it has a "stage" on which its many pastors champion conservative moral values while strolling like casual talk-show hosts, remarking on how "cool" things are, exclaiming "Right on!" and referring to adherents as "You guys."
Trask believes the more than 2,000 evangelical Protestants in his thriving church, as well as most of the 2.5 million evangelicals across the country, are enthusiastic supporters of his old friend, the prime minister.
Evangelicals like the Conservative leader, Trask says, because he's a "small-c conservative" on moral issues, encourages followers to help the poor through Christian charity rather than government programs, trusts in the free market and shares the evangelical belief Jesus Christ is the route to salvation.
As a sign of how evangelicals support Harper on policy issues, Trask last year joined a network of Christians across the country in vigorously supporting Harper's cancellation of the Liberals' universal daycare program, in favour of handouts for parents. Evangelicals, Trask says, don't want the state meddling in the sacred duty of raising children.
Harper, the 48-year-old leader of a minority Conservative government, virtually never talks publicly about his Christian beliefs. As a result, those who are curious about his spiritual views resort to visiting Harper's friends, such as Trask, and congregations like RockPointe -- which belongs to the Christian and Missionary Alliance denomination, with which Harper has been connected for about two decades.
Political observers say Harper -- who has been criticized for muzzling his cabinet and his many evangelical MPs -- could suffer politically if he were more open about his form of Christianity in a diverse, multicultural country such as Canada.
Fewer than one of 10 Canadians consider themselves evangelical Protestant, the religious stream to which the Christian and Missionary Alliance denomination firmly belongs.
The percentage of Canadians who might generally follow evangelical-style theology, say pollsters, could at the most rise as high as 18 per cent, but only if one were to include theologically conservative mainline Protestants and Catholics.
A recent poll, in addition, revealed Canadians are growing much less inclined to vote for a prime minister who is evangelical.
"Stephen is a personal friend of mine," Trask said after a Sunday service in which he urged about 700 worshippers to "be relentlessly focused on the lost [people who have not converted to Christianity]."
Well-muscled, dressed in a short-sleeved shirt and sporting a goatee, Trask said he and Harper have talked frequently, beginning in the 1980s.
That's when Harper was on an intense spiritual and political quest and becoming involved with the then-new Reform party of Preston Manning, an evangelical radio preacher.
"[Harper] didn't just believe what he was told. He had to rationalize what he was hearing about Christianity. He wasn't a blank slate. That's the best way to come to faith," said Trask (left).
About two decades ago, Harper shifted away from the mainline Protestant denominations of his father and began finding a home in the Christian and Missionary Alliance Church, which has about 2.5 million members and 14,000 congregations worldwide. One fifth of its members live in North America, with Alberta a Canadian hotbed.
Since Harper moved in 2003 to Ottawa, he has been attending the capital city's Christian and Missionary Alliance Church, called East Gate, under the guidance of Pastor Bill Buitenwerf.
Evangelical political journalist Lloyd Mackey, author of The Pilgrimage of Stephen Harper, says the prime minister is a "cerebral" evangelical Christian who appreciates Buitenwerf and "speaks warmly of the influence" and intelligence of Trask.
Two other important religious mentors for Harper, according to Mackey and others, have been Calgary Conservative MP Diane Ablonczy, a fellow evangelical, and Manning, who like Harper is an Alliance Church adherent.
Foundational convictions of Alliance Church
Indiana State Purdue University religious studies Prof. Philip Goff says the Alliance Church holds to four foundational convictions, which emerge out of its belief the Bible is without error.
The Alliance Church places an intense focus on the need for personal salvation, emphasizes the importance of leading a "holy" life and encourages spiritual healing, says Goff.
The denomination also stresses that Jesus Christ's return to Earth is imminent, says the evangelical specialist, who was raised in the Alliance Church.
Alliance Church doctrine, like those of other evangelical denominations, strongly oppose homosexual relationships, describing them as the "basest form of sinful conduct."
The Alliance Church is also tough on divorce and holds that Christians who have been adulterous do not have a right to remarry.
The denomination's leaders, in addition, oppose abortion, stem-cell research, euthanasia, the use of marijuana and ordained female clergy.
When Trask told his suburban Calgary congregation during a recent Sunday sermon about RockPointe's mission to be "relentlessly focused on the lost," he was reflecting the Alliance Church's belief in the need to rescue non-Christians from damnation.
The Canadian church's website features a list of sample prayers "for the lost," so members can pray for sinful non-Christians they hope Jesus Christ will save from "eternal damnation."
Harper doesn't respond to journalists, including those from The Vancouver Sun, who want to ask whether he shares such Alliance Church doctrines.
Goff, however, says saving the "lost" is "general evangelical language about the need to be born again, otherwise you will not get to heaven."
Airing such a belief in the U.S. would not cause a politician any damage, says Goff, in part because evangelicals dominate President George W. Bush's Republican party and are active among the Democratic party.
But Notre Dame University's Mark Noll, one of North America's leading evangelical church historians, says: "I suspect many Canadians would be upset to learn about the conservative beliefs of the Christian and Missionary Alliance. They certainly are far less tolerant than, say, the United Church of Canada."
For his part, RockPointe's Trask, who spoke regularly to Harper until 2004, didn't want to say what Harper believes about the need to convert non-Christians.
"I'm not going to talk about his [Harper's] personal life."
It's interesting to know which theologians have shaped Harper.
Mackey says he "risks embarrassing" Harper by revealing that Harper has been inspired by two British Christian thinkers: C.S. Lewis and Malcolm Muggeridge.
Lewis (1898-1963) is the famed Irish writer of The Chronicles of Narnia fantasy series, who converted in mid-life to evangelical Anglicanism.
Lewis is much-loved in evangelical circles for his apologetics -- his engaging literary defences of traditional Christianity. In books such as Mere Christianity, Lewis outlines his conviction that Jesus Christ was more than a wise man, that he was the divine, only son of God, responsible for handing down absolute positions on morality.
Muggeridge (1903-1990) was another British author and agnostic who converted as an adult to conservative Christianity.
A drinker, heavy smoker and womanizer in his earlier life, Muggeridge first made his name as an adventurous journalist and soldier-spy. But he went on to become known as the "discoverer" of Mother Teresa, producing the film, Something Beautiful for God.
As a conservative Christian, Muggeridge adopted right-wing economic views and attacked Britons and others for relying on alcohol, sex, birth control and marijuana.
Mackey, who is well-connected in Canada's evangelical community, understands why Canada's prime minister won't talk more about his loyalty to the Alliance Church, even to sympathetic biographers such as himself.
In Canadian politics, Mackey believes Harper is one of many conservative Christians who have been striving to downplay the public's fears about evangelicals being "scary."
A 2006 Ipsos Reid poll showed the percentage of Canadians willing to vote for a prime minister who is evangelical had fallen 17 percentage points in a decade.
Only 63 per cent of Canadians said they'd vote for a prime minister if he were an evangelical, below the 68 per cent who wouldn't hesitate to vote for an atheist or a Muslim.
Even though two-thirds of Canadians tell pollsters they believe the resurrection of Jesus provides for the forgiveness of sins, just one-fifth share the Alliance Church belief the world will end with the return of Jesus Christ and a cosmic battle called Armageddon.
And only one-quarter of Canadians support evangelicals' push to convert non-Christians.
Aware that many Canadians are suspicious of evangelicals, Manning last year organized a series of conferences to urge conservative Christian leaders to tone down their Biblical, "peel-the-paint-off-the-walls" rhetoric.
As head of the new Manning Centre for Building Democracy, he called on religious people to be patient as they pursue their political agendas, whether it's opposing abortion and homosexuality or supporting capitalism and reducing the size of government.
Some commentators said Manning's "charm school for Christians" could sound to outsiders like "stealth evangelism."
Harper buries religious beliefs to win majority government
Bruce Foster, head of policy studies at Mount Royal College in Calgary, believes Harper keeps his religious beliefs close to his chest because he's a strategic thinker who worries it would hurt his chances of winning a majority government.
"If Harper came out and said those who don't know the Lord are 'lost,' are doomed, he'd be held up to ridicule," Foster said. "In a multicultural, diverse, relativistic country like Canada, that's toxic stuff for most voters."
It is hard for the Canadian public to reconcile Harper's image as a highly rationalistic policy wonk with the conservative Christian morality and leap-of-faith belief system of the denomination to which he belongs, says Foster, a specialist on Canadian politics and conservative Christianity.
Harper's "near-Teutonic" rationalism, says Foster, seems at odds with his evangelical faith, which Foster says relies on supernatural belief.
"It's as if the two hemispheres of his brain are warring with each other."
If Harper was upfront about his evangelical loyalties, Foster believes he could be mocked by opposition politicians and the media.
That's the fate Foster maintains befell former Alliance party leader Stockwell Day (left), now a Conservative cabinet minister, when journalists learned he was a Biblical creationist who thinks humans once lived with dinosaurs.
Canadians tend to be suspicious about evangelicals in high office. Only 39 per cent of Canadians believe "Christians should get involved in politics to protect their values."
That's a drop of seven percentage points from 1996, according to Ipsos Reid, and well below the 54 per cent of Americans who want Christians running governments.
Still, it appears Canadian voters may be beginning to polarize along religious lines, like Americans.
Andrew Grenville's research for Ipsos Reid shows the 2006 federal election brought the first indication of a new national religious-conservative voting bloc.
Compared to the 2004 federal election, the Conservatives in last year's February election enjoyed a 25-per-cent increase in votes from Protestants who attended church weekly, with no increase from those who did not.
Despite such new religiously shaped voting trends, Foster doesn't believe Harper is pretending to be an evangelical just to court conservative Christian support.
Noting that Harper's wife, Laureen Teskey, is not interested in evangelical religion, Foster says Harper would probably draw conservative Christian support whether he was one or not. "Evangelicals have nowhere else to park their vote."
Still, the Calgary-based political scientist says Harper has to find a way to appeal to non-conservative Christians for support, especially the many secularists who live in Quebec and major Canadian cities. That's where Harper's party did badly in 2006 -- and where skepticism is strong about politicians who blend religion and politics.
As a result, Foster believes Harper is in a double bind. He's damned if he becomes more open about having conservative religious connections. But he's also damned if he remains silent about his faith "because it makes it look as if he has something to hide."
Notre Dame's Noll, who frequently teaches at Vancouver's evangelical Regent College, believes Harper could ease Canadians' fears of evangelicals by emphasizing the Alliance Church has traditionally had a "quietistic," or private, approach to religion, which emphasizes converting individuals rather than imposing faith-based values on the public.
Whatever strategy Harper adopts, polls show his personal popularity has fallen since he took office in February 2006. In July an Environics poll revealed his approval ratings dropped below 50 per cent for the first time.
Given such low ratings, Foster says, Harper may have no choice but to come more boldly out of his religious closet.
Like Harper, former Liberal prime minister Pierre Trudeau was also an intellectual who was coy about his Roman Catholicism, Foster says. But, unlike Trudeau (left), Harper has been unable to make his aloofness entertaining.
"Harper is stolid. He's solemn. The man is almost robotic. You can't get a feel for the guy. And he must know it's a problem. If voters can't get a sense of the man, then it's no surprise his personal ratings have stalled, or worse.
"He's the prime minister. Questions about his faith and personality are not going to go away."
Why Stephen Harper keeps his evangelical faith very private
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is damned if he does talk about his evangelical beliefs and damned if he doesn't. If he continues to avoid answering questions about his religious convictions, political observers say he appears secretive, like he's hiding something. But, at the same time, most Canadians do not share the moral convictions of his evangelical denomination, the Christian and Missionary Alliance Church.
The Alliance Church, to which Harper has belonged for decades, believes Jesus Christ will return to Earth in an apocalypse, won't ordain women, strongly opposes abortion and divorce, condemns homosexuality as the most base of sins and believes those who aren't born-again are "lost."
Readers have requested that I post this feature about the prime minister's religious beliefs, which I wrote in the summer of 2007 based on a trip to visit his former pastor in Calgary. (Until now this piece was not available on this blog because of a technical glitch. The photo of Harper outside a church is from a funeral he attended.)
August 17, 2008
CALGARY - The mega-church headed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's pastor friend boasts a coffee bar, a soft-rock band and a shopping-mall-sized parking lot. Rev. Brent Trask's RockPointe Church -- which displays moving images of Jesus on three giant screens when elders serve communion -- is perched on rolling farmland right next to Highway 1A.
Overlooking the snow-capped foothills of the Rocky Mountains, Rockpointe is a giant "destination" church, accessible only by car, SUV or truck. It's reached by driving west of the endless, look-alike subdivisions of this sprawling, oil-rich city.
On the outside, RockPointe Church looks like a bunker. On the inside, it's a cavernous auditorium with no crosses, altar or pulpit. Instead it has a "stage" on which its many pastors champion conservative moral values while strolling like casual talk-show hosts, remarking on how "cool" things are, exclaiming "Right on!" and referring to adherents as "You guys."
Trask believes the more than 2,000 evangelical Protestants in his thriving church, as well as most of the 2.5 million evangelicals across the country, are enthusiastic supporters of his old friend, the prime minister.
Evangelicals like the Conservative leader, Trask says, because he's a "small-c conservative" on moral issues, encourages followers to help the poor through Christian charity rather than government programs, trusts in the free market and shares the evangelical belief Jesus Christ is the route to salvation.
As a sign of how evangelicals support Harper on policy issues, Trask last year joined a network of Christians across the country in vigorously supporting Harper's cancellation of the Liberals' universal daycare program, in favour of handouts for parents. Evangelicals, Trask says, don't want the state meddling in the sacred duty of raising children.
Harper, the 48-year-old leader of a minority Conservative government, virtually never talks publicly about his Christian beliefs. As a result, those who are curious about his spiritual views resort to visiting Harper's friends, such as Trask, and congregations like RockPointe -- which belongs to the Christian and Missionary Alliance denomination, with which Harper has been connected for about two decades.
Political observers say Harper -- who has been criticized for muzzling his cabinet and his many evangelical MPs -- could suffer politically if he were more open about his form of Christianity in a diverse, multicultural country such as Canada.
Fewer than one of 10 Canadians consider themselves evangelical Protestant, the religious stream to which the Christian and Missionary Alliance denomination firmly belongs.
The percentage of Canadians who might generally follow evangelical-style theology, say pollsters, could at the most rise as high as 18 per cent, but only if one were to include theologically conservative mainline Protestants and Catholics.
A recent poll, in addition, revealed Canadians are growing much less inclined to vote for a prime minister who is evangelical.
"Stephen is a personal friend of mine," Trask said after a Sunday service in which he urged about 700 worshippers to "be relentlessly focused on the lost [people who have not converted to Christianity]."
Well-muscled, dressed in a short-sleeved shirt and sporting a goatee, Trask said he and Harper have talked frequently, beginning in the 1980s.
That's when Harper was on an intense spiritual and political quest and becoming involved with the then-new Reform party of Preston Manning, an evangelical radio preacher.
"[Harper] didn't just believe what he was told. He had to rationalize what he was hearing about Christianity. He wasn't a blank slate. That's the best way to come to faith," said Trask (left).
About two decades ago, Harper shifted away from the mainline Protestant denominations of his father and began finding a home in the Christian and Missionary Alliance Church, which has about 2.5 million members and 14,000 congregations worldwide. One fifth of its members live in North America, with Alberta a Canadian hotbed.
Since Harper moved in 2003 to Ottawa, he has been attending the capital city's Christian and Missionary Alliance Church, called East Gate, under the guidance of Pastor Bill Buitenwerf.
Evangelical political journalist Lloyd Mackey, author of The Pilgrimage of Stephen Harper, says the prime minister is a "cerebral" evangelical Christian who appreciates Buitenwerf and "speaks warmly of the influence" and intelligence of Trask.
Two other important religious mentors for Harper, according to Mackey and others, have been Calgary Conservative MP Diane Ablonczy, a fellow evangelical, and Manning, who like Harper is an Alliance Church adherent.
Foundational convictions of Alliance Church
Indiana State Purdue University religious studies Prof. Philip Goff says the Alliance Church holds to four foundational convictions, which emerge out of its belief the Bible is without error.
The Alliance Church places an intense focus on the need for personal salvation, emphasizes the importance of leading a "holy" life and encourages spiritual healing, says Goff.
The denomination also stresses that Jesus Christ's return to Earth is imminent, says the evangelical specialist, who was raised in the Alliance Church.
Alliance Church doctrine, like those of other evangelical denominations, strongly oppose homosexual relationships, describing them as the "basest form of sinful conduct."
The Alliance Church is also tough on divorce and holds that Christians who have been adulterous do not have a right to remarry.
The denomination's leaders, in addition, oppose abortion, stem-cell research, euthanasia, the use of marijuana and ordained female clergy.
When Trask told his suburban Calgary congregation during a recent Sunday sermon about RockPointe's mission to be "relentlessly focused on the lost," he was reflecting the Alliance Church's belief in the need to rescue non-Christians from damnation.
The Canadian church's website features a list of sample prayers "for the lost," so members can pray for sinful non-Christians they hope Jesus Christ will save from "eternal damnation."
Harper doesn't respond to journalists, including those from The Vancouver Sun, who want to ask whether he shares such Alliance Church doctrines.
Goff, however, says saving the "lost" is "general evangelical language about the need to be born again, otherwise you will not get to heaven."
Airing such a belief in the U.S. would not cause a politician any damage, says Goff, in part because evangelicals dominate President George W. Bush's Republican party and are active among the Democratic party.
But Notre Dame University's Mark Noll, one of North America's leading evangelical church historians, says: "I suspect many Canadians would be upset to learn about the conservative beliefs of the Christian and Missionary Alliance. They certainly are far less tolerant than, say, the United Church of Canada."
For his part, RockPointe's Trask, who spoke regularly to Harper until 2004, didn't want to say what Harper believes about the need to convert non-Christians.
"I'm not going to talk about his [Harper's] personal life."
It's interesting to know which theologians have shaped Harper.
Mackey says he "risks embarrassing" Harper by revealing that Harper has been inspired by two British Christian thinkers: C.S. Lewis and Malcolm Muggeridge.
Lewis (1898-1963) is the famed Irish writer of The Chronicles of Narnia fantasy series, who converted in mid-life to evangelical Anglicanism.
Lewis is much-loved in evangelical circles for his apologetics -- his engaging literary defences of traditional Christianity. In books such as Mere Christianity, Lewis outlines his conviction that Jesus Christ was more than a wise man, that he was the divine, only son of God, responsible for handing down absolute positions on morality.
Muggeridge (1903-1990) was another British author and agnostic who converted as an adult to conservative Christianity.
A drinker, heavy smoker and womanizer in his earlier life, Muggeridge first made his name as an adventurous journalist and soldier-spy. But he went on to become known as the "discoverer" of Mother Teresa, producing the film, Something Beautiful for God.
As a conservative Christian, Muggeridge adopted right-wing economic views and attacked Britons and others for relying on alcohol, sex, birth control and marijuana.
Mackey, who is well-connected in Canada's evangelical community, understands why Canada's prime minister won't talk more about his loyalty to the Alliance Church, even to sympathetic biographers such as himself.
In Canadian politics, Mackey believes Harper is one of many conservative Christians who have been striving to downplay the public's fears about evangelicals being "scary."
A 2006 Ipsos Reid poll showed the percentage of Canadians willing to vote for a prime minister who is evangelical had fallen 17 percentage points in a decade.
Only 63 per cent of Canadians said they'd vote for a prime minister if he were an evangelical, below the 68 per cent who wouldn't hesitate to vote for an atheist or a Muslim.
Even though two-thirds of Canadians tell pollsters they believe the resurrection of Jesus provides for the forgiveness of sins, just one-fifth share the Alliance Church belief the world will end with the return of Jesus Christ and a cosmic battle called Armageddon.
And only one-quarter of Canadians support evangelicals' push to convert non-Christians.
Aware that many Canadians are suspicious of evangelicals, Manning last year organized a series of conferences to urge conservative Christian leaders to tone down their Biblical, "peel-the-paint-off-the-walls" rhetoric.
As head of the new Manning Centre for Building Democracy, he called on religious people to be patient as they pursue their political agendas, whether it's opposing abortion and homosexuality or supporting capitalism and reducing the size of government.
Some commentators said Manning's "charm school for Christians" could sound to outsiders like "stealth evangelism."
Harper buries religious beliefs to win majority government
Bruce Foster, head of policy studies at Mount Royal College in Calgary, believes Harper keeps his religious beliefs close to his chest because he's a strategic thinker who worries it would hurt his chances of winning a majority government.
"If Harper came out and said those who don't know the Lord are 'lost,' are doomed, he'd be held up to ridicule," Foster said. "In a multicultural, diverse, relativistic country like Canada, that's toxic stuff for most voters."
It is hard for the Canadian public to reconcile Harper's image as a highly rationalistic policy wonk with the conservative Christian morality and leap-of-faith belief system of the denomination to which he belongs, says Foster, a specialist on Canadian politics and conservative Christianity.
Harper's "near-Teutonic" rationalism, says Foster, seems at odds with his evangelical faith, which Foster says relies on supernatural belief.
"It's as if the two hemispheres of his brain are warring with each other."
If Harper was upfront about his evangelical loyalties, Foster believes he could be mocked by opposition politicians and the media.
That's the fate Foster maintains befell former Alliance party leader Stockwell Day (left), now a Conservative cabinet minister, when journalists learned he was a Biblical creationist who thinks humans once lived with dinosaurs.
Canadians tend to be suspicious about evangelicals in high office. Only 39 per cent of Canadians believe "Christians should get involved in politics to protect their values."
That's a drop of seven percentage points from 1996, according to Ipsos Reid, and well below the 54 per cent of Americans who want Christians running governments.
Still, it appears Canadian voters may be beginning to polarize along religious lines, like Americans.
Andrew Grenville's research for Ipsos Reid shows the 2006 federal election brought the first indication of a new national religious-conservative voting bloc.
Compared to the 2004 federal election, the Conservatives in last year's February election enjoyed a 25-per-cent increase in votes from Protestants who attended church weekly, with no increase from those who did not.
Despite such new religiously shaped voting trends, Foster doesn't believe Harper is pretending to be an evangelical just to court conservative Christian support.
Noting that Harper's wife, Laureen Teskey, is not interested in evangelical religion, Foster says Harper would probably draw conservative Christian support whether he was one or not. "Evangelicals have nowhere else to park their vote."
Still, the Calgary-based political scientist says Harper has to find a way to appeal to non-conservative Christians for support, especially the many secularists who live in Quebec and major Canadian cities. That's where Harper's party did badly in 2006 -- and where skepticism is strong about politicians who blend religion and politics.
As a result, Foster believes Harper is in a double bind. He's damned if he becomes more open about having conservative religious connections. But he's also damned if he remains silent about his faith "because it makes it look as if he has something to hide."
Notre Dame's Noll, who frequently teaches at Vancouver's evangelical Regent College, believes Harper could ease Canadians' fears of evangelicals by emphasizing the Alliance Church has traditionally had a "quietistic," or private, approach to religion, which emphasizes converting individuals rather than imposing faith-based values on the public.
Whatever strategy Harper adopts, polls show his personal popularity has fallen since he took office in February 2006. In July an Environics poll revealed his approval ratings dropped below 50 per cent for the first time.
Given such low ratings, Foster says, Harper may have no choice but to come more boldly out of his religious closet.
Like Harper, former Liberal prime minister Pierre Trudeau was also an intellectual who was coy about his Roman Catholicism, Foster says. But, unlike Trudeau (left), Harper has been unable to make his aloofness entertaining.
"Harper is stolid. He's solemn. The man is almost robotic. You can't get a feel for the guy. And he must know it's a problem. If voters can't get a sense of the man, then it's no surprise his personal ratings have stalled, or worse.
"He's the prime minister. Questions about his faith and personality are not going to go away."
Harper 2002.
I see. Govern by religion AND intimidation.
Power Shift: Canadian Alliance replaces lightning rod Stockwell Day.
New opposition party head Stephen Harper wants to be less divisive
Irving Hexham | posted 7/08/2002 12:00AM
Related articles and links | 1 of 1
ADVERTISEMENT
The brief and controversial era of Stockwell Day, a former lay Pentecostal minister, is over for the Canadian Alliance, the leading opposition party.
Stephen Harper, a Christian & Missionary Alliance church member, took office in May as the opposition leader in Parliament after soundly defeating Day in a bitter contest for the party leadership.
"You have just voted to move our party forward into the future," Harper, well known as a fiscal conservative, told cheering supporters at a spring rally in Calgary.
That future will almost certainly include a change in the party's approach to divisive moral issues. Canadian Alliance enjoys its strongest support among evangelicals in Canada's more conservative west.
Day endured intense public criticism last year for his evangelical beliefs and his efforts to have the party become more conservative on social issues. Under pressure from party members, Day resigned last December, barely a year after taking the reins (CT, Sept. 3, 2001, p. 33).
Harper, 42, says he will try to change the way Parliament works. Party-line votes dominate Canadian parliamentary procedure. Harper wants to promote the increased use of free votes in the House of Commons. In a free vote, individual lawmakers, regardless of party affiliation, vote according to their conviction or their constituents' views, not by party.
Harper wants to make members of Parliament more accountable to voters through recalls or referenda.
On moral issues, Harper resists "litmus tests." As a Reform Party member in 1994, for example, Harper opposed his party's resolution against gay marriage. Harper opposes same-sex marriage but says a political party should permit its members greater freedom. "People have to be able to belong to political parties regardless of their views on [moral] issues."
"I'm in politics for the long haul," Harper said in an interview with CT. "Too many people expect victory at the next election. I want to build a party that can govern, not make a big show. The important thing is to gradually build trust through credible policies and honesty."
Day and Harper clashed repeatedly during the Canadian Alliance leadership campaign. Harper accused Day of seeking votes from churches, prolife Christians, and other special interests. Day then blasted Harper's "hypocrisy" for accepting the support of the Calgary-based Concerned Christian Coalition. The group said it would contact 4,000 churches on Harper's behalf.
Harper chided Day in the news media, saying, "This race is not about religion. It's about choosing a leader for this party, which is going to have a range of religious views in it."
Tom Flanagan, a political adviser to Harper, told Christianity Today, "Harper is a political strategist who has a real chance of influencing government policy and eventually becoming prime minister."
Copyright © 2002 Christianity Today. Click for reprint
Power Shift: Canadian Alliance replaces lightning rod Stockwell Day.
New opposition party head Stephen Harper wants to be less divisive
Irving Hexham | posted 7/08/2002 12:00AM
Related articles and links | 1 of 1
ADVERTISEMENT
The brief and controversial era of Stockwell Day, a former lay Pentecostal minister, is over for the Canadian Alliance, the leading opposition party.
Stephen Harper, a Christian & Missionary Alliance church member, took office in May as the opposition leader in Parliament after soundly defeating Day in a bitter contest for the party leadership.
"You have just voted to move our party forward into the future," Harper, well known as a fiscal conservative, told cheering supporters at a spring rally in Calgary.
That future will almost certainly include a change in the party's approach to divisive moral issues. Canadian Alliance enjoys its strongest support among evangelicals in Canada's more conservative west.
Day endured intense public criticism last year for his evangelical beliefs and his efforts to have the party become more conservative on social issues. Under pressure from party members, Day resigned last December, barely a year after taking the reins (CT, Sept. 3, 2001, p. 33).
Harper, 42, says he will try to change the way Parliament works. Party-line votes dominate Canadian parliamentary procedure. Harper wants to promote the increased use of free votes in the House of Commons. In a free vote, individual lawmakers, regardless of party affiliation, vote according to their conviction or their constituents' views, not by party.
Harper wants to make members of Parliament more accountable to voters through recalls or referenda.
On moral issues, Harper resists "litmus tests." As a Reform Party member in 1994, for example, Harper opposed his party's resolution against gay marriage. Harper opposes same-sex marriage but says a political party should permit its members greater freedom. "People have to be able to belong to political parties regardless of their views on [moral] issues."
"I'm in politics for the long haul," Harper said in an interview with CT. "Too many people expect victory at the next election. I want to build a party that can govern, not make a big show. The important thing is to gradually build trust through credible policies and honesty."
Day and Harper clashed repeatedly during the Canadian Alliance leadership campaign. Harper accused Day of seeking votes from churches, prolife Christians, and other special interests. Day then blasted Harper's "hypocrisy" for accepting the support of the Calgary-based Concerned Christian Coalition. The group said it would contact 4,000 churches on Harper's behalf.
Harper chided Day in the news media, saying, "This race is not about religion. It's about choosing a leader for this party, which is going to have a range of religious views in it."
Tom Flanagan, a political adviser to Harper, told Christianity Today, "Harper is a political strategist who has a real chance of influencing government policy and eventually becoming prime minister."
Copyright © 2002 Christianity Today. Click for reprint
Thursday, September 25, 2008
What Jokes Will Gerry Ritz Make About This
Geezuz!!! Another listeriosis recall. Tell us more about what we should do about it Mr. Ritz. Your boss tells us you are aware of deficiencies.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Be Honest Mr. Harper....
Well the kids are finally taking things into their own hands. Today there was a launch of a new and exiting website. So come on and have a look at behonest. Everyday people - even Liberals - can stop by and give their view on some issues.
Why is it I get the feeling Mr. Harper won't be tuning in to offer an opinion.
Why is it I get the feeling Mr. Harper won't be tuning in to offer an opinion.
What Galas Were YOU FORCED to Attend Then MR. HARPER???
Was it this one?
And Galas are okay if you courting business and immigrant groups.
Or perhaps you just attend Galas involving celebrations of your colleagueswhen they retire.
I think it's only fair Canadians understand you attend galas...but only when you HAVE TO.
And Galas are okay if you courting business and immigrant groups.
Or perhaps you just attend Galas involving celebrations of your colleagueswhen they retire.
I think it's only fair Canadians understand you attend galas...but only when you HAVE TO.
Harper Claims Canadians have Gala-Phobia
On the campaign trail in Saskatoon on Monday, Conservative Leader Stephen Harper criticized big arts galas as elitist.
Really Steve? This, rather ordinary person, that writes this here blog, thinks Conservatives LOVE galas. So, I call bullshit.
Here's a Picture of Mrs. Harper at the annual Politics and the Pen gala held in the ballroom of the Fairmont Château Laurier.
If you look over her left shoulder, you can see Environment Minister John Baird at the gala too.
And Look, it's none other than Julie Couillard with Party Whip Jay Hill at the gala.
And Vic Toews with his son at the gala.
And look, Minister Jason Kenney and his staffer Tenzin Khangsar at the gala.
And there is, of course, the time the Prime Minister's wife attended the 2008 Gala Juno Dinner.
More Conservative hyperbola. In other words do as I say, not as I do, right Mr. Harper. What I think resonates with Canadians, Mr. Harper is that you are a hypocrite.
“I think when ordinary working people come home, turn on the TV and see a gala and all sorts of people at a rich gala all subsidized by the taxpayer, claiming their subsidies aren't high enough when they know they have actually gone up, I'm not sure that's something that resonates with ordinary people," he said. "Ordinary people understand we have to live within a budget.”
Really Steve? This, rather ordinary person, that writes this here blog, thinks Conservatives LOVE galas. So, I call bullshit.
Here's a Picture of Mrs. Harper at the annual Politics and the Pen gala held in the ballroom of the Fairmont Château Laurier.
If you look over her left shoulder, you can see Environment Minister John Baird at the gala too.
And Look, it's none other than Julie Couillard with Party Whip Jay Hill at the gala.
And Vic Toews with his son at the gala.
And look, Minister Jason Kenney and his staffer Tenzin Khangsar at the gala.
And there is, of course, the time the Prime Minister's wife attended the 2008 Gala Juno Dinner.
More Conservative hyperbola. In other words do as I say, not as I do, right Mr. Harper. What I think resonates with Canadians, Mr. Harper is that you are a hypocrite.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
The Conservative Television Network
(Read as CTV). You know, for some time now, bloggers have been hinting that Mike Duffy, Bob Fife and crew are over the top in their Conservative bias. But yesterday's Duffy Live show took the cake. Duffy asked Stephane Dion if it was true he didn't eat meat. Is that what Canadians were looking for Duff? Really? That super duper kind of info that changes their minds during elections.
Seriously, here is the clip.
Then, on a day for analysis of the Liberal platform, who does good old Duff have appear on the show? Michael Percy to analyze the cost of the platform and Sanjeev Anand to analyze the Tories' tough on Crime announcement.
With all due respect though Duff, are these the only two "experts" in Canada you could find? Both from the University of Alberta, a bastion of Conservative think tanks. Percy went out of his way to talk about the tar sands and how well Alberta and Saskatchewan are doing.
Then Duff brings up Darryl Plecas on his 8:00 show. You might remember Plecas, he was appointed by the Conservatives to the board of the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.
Two interesting excerpts:
AND
Is this responsible journalism? Me thinks CTV has gone too far in their attempt to skew the issues.
Seriously, here is the clip.
Then, on a day for analysis of the Liberal platform, who does good old Duff have appear on the show? Michael Percy to analyze the cost of the platform and Sanjeev Anand to analyze the Tories' tough on Crime announcement.
With all due respect though Duff, are these the only two "experts" in Canada you could find? Both from the University of Alberta, a bastion of Conservative think tanks. Percy went out of his way to talk about the tar sands and how well Alberta and Saskatchewan are doing.
Then Duff brings up Darryl Plecas on his 8:00 show. You might remember Plecas, he was appointed by the Conservatives to the board of the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.
Two interesting excerpts:
But Plecas, who generally supports tougher sentences, said he's doubtful.
AND
Last October, for instance, the government named B.C. criminologist Darryl Plecas of the University College of the Fraser Valley to the board of the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse. While Plecas has no obvious Tory ties, he is an outspoken advocate of tougher jail sentences - an approach warmly received in Conservative circles.
Is this responsible journalism? Me thinks CTV has gone too far in their attempt to skew the issues.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Peter MacKay Spends $16,800 on Lunch...How's That for Fiscal Stewardship?
"The hospitality tab does not appear in MacKay's or Harder's mandatory disclosure of such expenses on the Foreign Affairs website.
Dan Dugas, a spokesman for MacKay, said the minister is not required to post hospitality expenses that are incurred by the department, such as the Passport Canada lunches, even though he may have approved them.
The Conservative government came to power in 2006 on a reform platform in which they pledged to end the rule-breaking of the previous Liberal government, which was tarred with the sponsorship scandal.
But since their election, the Conservatives have been embroiled in allegations that they themselves have flouted the rules for expenses, hospitality, contracting and advertising."
When will the fiscal hypocrisy of the Harper Government stop? Peter MacKay, while Foreign Affairs Minister broke government spending regulations in March of last year. Then again, laws and rules don't really apply to Conservatives, do they?
With the Liberals Release of the Platform, What Can We Expect...
...from the Conservatives and the Dippers. Not much. Both will rejig entire platforms to come in line with Dion. Except neither the Dippers or the Conservatives really have a plan for the environment. It should be interesting to see how both attack the Liberal plan for a Richer, Fairer, Greener Canada. Better yet, what are they going to scrap to attack the Liberals.
My Prediction for the Liberal Platform?
Where's the $70 Billion in infrastructure? It's only $15.1 billion in your platform. What's Revenue Neutral? I don't get it. I give up. That'll be the reaction I think they'll get.
Hopefully Stephane can explain it better than the other folks on the phone did today. Hopefully...because there is truly somethiing for everyone in this platform. Truly something for a Richer, Fairer, Greener Canada.
Keep in mind...I know nothing.
Update: I'm thinking Stephane pulled that press conference off very well. Direct and to the point. Answered questions frankly and aggressively. Let's see what "the pros" have to say now.
Hopefully Stephane can explain it better than the other folks on the phone did today. Hopefully...because there is truly somethiing for everyone in this platform. Truly something for a Richer, Fairer, Greener Canada.
Keep in mind...I know nothing.
Update: I'm thinking Stephane pulled that press conference off very well. Direct and to the point. Answered questions frankly and aggressively. Let's see what "the pros" have to say now.
Harper to Make All Criminal Code Bills a Matter of Confidence
He just said that. I kid you not. So Canadians, get ready for another election before this one's already finished.
Update: Scott has more on the subject.
Update: Scott has more on the subject.
Today is the Last Day for Nominations
So who will be the last candidate to get axed by their party? Any guesses? Any more bloggers taking down candidates today?
Harper Calls in the Internet Cops
My question is: when they catch these guys (or girls) what will they charge them with? Telling the truth?
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Ken Dryden Speaks About This Election
Here it is in its entirety
September 21, 2008
We’re now about a third of the way through this election campaign. What’s been happening up until now? Where does it all seem to be going?
Stephane Dion has been talking about our economy - our economy now and in a very changing world; about the environment; about poverty, what it does to people, to kids, and the need to engage that fight now.
But really, up to this point, Mr. Harper has controlled the message of this election. Yet, this message has often been odd and surprising.
Like their slogan: “We’re better off with Harper.” This is their slogan; their ad - “We’re better off - with Harper” - like saying “taking everything into consideration, despite all this or that, on the whole, really, probably we’d have to say, (“we’re better off with Harper”). Not exactly a ringing endorsement. Nothing energizing about it, nothing exciting. Nothing that makes you want to wake up in the morning and race into the possibilities of your day. Yet this is their message. Even in their dreams they can’t quite express anything stirring, anything big. Is this what being a Prime Minister is about? What Canada is about?
Then there’s the blue vest, the “Mr. Nice Guy” ads. Ad firms are paid millions to tell the story their client wants told. It’s much easier for them when it’s a new “product” or a new “person” launch. When the information they provide is the only information - when the public knows nothing else. The problem for Mr. Harper is that the public does know something else. They’ve been watching him for 2 ½ years and Stephen Harper, they know, may be lots of things, but he’s not a “nice guy.” He’s not.
Nice guys don’t cut literacy programs. Nice guys don’t cut funding to women’s groups, aboriginal groups, health and childcare and poverty and disability groups. Toying with them month after month, teasing them with silence and desperate hope. If, they say to themselves, if I don’t say anything, if I just go quiet, maybe I might get something. Please. Then crumbs, or nothing.
Nice guys don’t decide there’s only one voice in this country that matters. Not these voices of our communities. Not those of his own Cabinet or Caucus. Not voices in the arts who get their programs cut because they say things that might make us squirm. Not any voice competent and professional who disagrees - Linda Keen, Adrian Measner, Jean-Guy Fleury - who then feel the pulverizing weight of a Government machine come down on them just so they know: you don’t mess with “the vest”.
Arts groups, literacy and poverty and childcare groups - it’s the same story. Nice guys don’t make the weak weaker and the vulnerable more vulnerable.
Nice guys don’t act like there are Canadians and not-quite Canadians. Those who fit Mr. Harper’s understanding of how life is supposed to be lived, and those, Canadians too - single mothers, addicts, gays and lesbians - who don’t.
And nice guys don’t take someone else’s person, as he did Monsieur Dion, they don’t take their personality, their character, their life, what they’ve worked hard to build, what is decent and substantial and good. What they’ve earned. They don’t take that, twist it, stretch it, caricature and distort it. They don’t buy air time and in front of millions of people, assassinate it. And pretend, ahh, that’s just politics.
Oh, and the puffin and the poop - oops, sorry. Didn’t mean it. Just like I don’t mean all the other just-as-new ads on the Conservatives’ website, that reach tens of thousands just like the Mr. Nice Guy ads on TV, that are just as abusive as the others in the pre-Mr. Nice Guy time.
If it quacks like a duck, put a blue vest on it, it’s still a duck.
But who says you need a “nice guy” to be a Prime Minister? It’s a tough, often disagreeable job. As they say about war - with the enemy all around, who do you want in that foxhole next to you. In politics, in sports and business, some not-so-nice guys are good leaders and win, and some nice guys are good leaders and win too. And some nice guys and not-so-nice guys fail. Being a good leader isn’t about that. It’s something more.
From these first 13 days, it is clear that Mr. Harper has decided this election is about him. He’s saying to Canadians: I’m a leader. I know what I want - I’m decisive - I deliver. And that, he says, is leadership. And in uncertain economic and global times, he says, Canadians need that and want that. But what Mr. Harper confuses is the posture of leadership, and the substance of leadership. Leadership is . . . leading - getting others to follow. But critically, fundamentally, leadership is direction. It is going . . . somewhere. The question is “where”? Leadership matters because the “where” matters, and it’s the job of a Prime Minister to know better than anyone else what the best “where” is. For the country. For your life and my life. That’s real leadership.
As a golfer, I can hit the ball a long way. The problem is I can’t hit it in the right direction. And a ball hit - decisively, competently - in the wrong direction is a ball that goes further and further and further into the woods. History is filled with leaders who have competently, decisively gone in the wrong direction with disastrous results.
Where is Mr. Harper’s “where”?
He doesn’t seem to want to talk about that. In making this election all about him, he is doing his best to make this election about nothing. It’s his “Seinfeld campaign.” But in 2008, how can that be? This is a time when the cost of carbon economically and environmentally is forcing the world’s countries to re-imagine the future. To reward the constructive and punish the destructive. To act. To change. To create the hard-won possibilities to compete in the economy ahead.
It’s a time when the gap between rich and poor is growing. When too many Canadians live the way no Canadians should have to live. When too many don’t have a real chance at a real future.
It’s a time when our children need more and better opportunities to learn - when they’re young and need a good start; later in college and university. A time when aboriginal peoples finally and forever need the chance of a full Canadian life.
It’s a time when, as Canadians, we need to think about ourselves differently. We are 33 million people - one of the world’s largest economies; one of the world’s richest nations; with a land mass so big and abundant amidst a world of countries that have neither. We are safe, secure and stable; we can count on tomorrow, plan for tomorrow, imagine and build tomorrow, when just about everyone else cannot. With our French and English past, with our present where people from almost everywhere live within our borders - we are a country which has learned to live with difference, accept difference, learn from difference; live the global world of the future, when to much of the rest of the world difference still means guns and blood.
Countries come and go, prominent at one time, pushed to the sidelines in another. History is a long time. And undeniably, whatever Canada has been in the past we will be far more in the future. The world knows that. We need to know that too. And our leaders need to know that, and embody it and act that way in everything they do.
There is more to us, more to Canada, than tax breaks as the answer for everything. More to Canada than life as pieces and parts - East; West. Quebec; the Rest of Canada - firewalls everywhere. More to us than Mr. Harper’s small, pinched vision of ourselves and our future.
“Better off with Harper”?
NO.
We are more than this.
This election is about something.
Stephane Dion may get a lot of criticism, but he is trying to make this campaign about something. Mr. Harper is not.
Leadership, real leadership, is first of all, most of all, knowing what’s important - then focusing on it, sharing it with others, then determinedly, relentlessly, together, getting there.
I don’t believe in “hidden agendas.” I find arguments like that just too easy. I just want to know where Mr. Harper’s going. Tell me. Tell us. What is your vision of this country? How should it work? What should it be? What is the best “US” now and for the future? How does Canada become what Canada can be? Tell us. We need to know. Tell us how, person to person, we, as Canadians, should relate to each other? What we can expect of others, and what others can expect of us? Tell us what role government should play, and shouldn’t? Tell us about families, in busy, complicated real, not fanciful lives, how as parents we give ourselves and our kids a real chance at all that’s in us to be. Families are not just card games with kids - tell us. We need to know.
And once you’ve told us that, tell us why you’re not saying to Canadians that to realize this vision, one you believe so important to our present and future, so unbelievably exciting to you and to all of us, that you need us, all of us, that you need a majority to do it? Say it, say it, why wouldn’t you? Shout it from the rooftops - - after you’ve told us your vision of the country, and for the country. After you’ve decided this campaign is not about nothing.
Mr. Harper wants this campaign to be about nothing because on all those things the campaign needs to be about, he has nothing to offer.
This campaign is NOT about Mr. Harper. It is NOT about him. It is about our present and future economy, about climate change, poverty and learning. It is about all Canadians having a real chance. It’s about encouraging, allowing, seeking out voices different from our own, that make us smarter; that bring us to our best and keep us from our worst. It’s about our understanding of ourselves as a country, about the importance of Canada in the world of our future. This is a campaign about BIG, IMPORTANT things.
In an election about nothing, Mr. Harper will win. In an election about something, we will win. We have 23 days.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT HIM. THIS IS NOT ABOUT NOTHING.
September 21, 2008
We’re now about a third of the way through this election campaign. What’s been happening up until now? Where does it all seem to be going?
Stephane Dion has been talking about our economy - our economy now and in a very changing world; about the environment; about poverty, what it does to people, to kids, and the need to engage that fight now.
But really, up to this point, Mr. Harper has controlled the message of this election. Yet, this message has often been odd and surprising.
Like their slogan: “We’re better off with Harper.” This is their slogan; their ad - “We’re better off - with Harper” - like saying “taking everything into consideration, despite all this or that, on the whole, really, probably we’d have to say, (“we’re better off with Harper”). Not exactly a ringing endorsement. Nothing energizing about it, nothing exciting. Nothing that makes you want to wake up in the morning and race into the possibilities of your day. Yet this is their message. Even in their dreams they can’t quite express anything stirring, anything big. Is this what being a Prime Minister is about? What Canada is about?
Then there’s the blue vest, the “Mr. Nice Guy” ads. Ad firms are paid millions to tell the story their client wants told. It’s much easier for them when it’s a new “product” or a new “person” launch. When the information they provide is the only information - when the public knows nothing else. The problem for Mr. Harper is that the public does know something else. They’ve been watching him for 2 ½ years and Stephen Harper, they know, may be lots of things, but he’s not a “nice guy.” He’s not.
Nice guys don’t cut literacy programs. Nice guys don’t cut funding to women’s groups, aboriginal groups, health and childcare and poverty and disability groups. Toying with them month after month, teasing them with silence and desperate hope. If, they say to themselves, if I don’t say anything, if I just go quiet, maybe I might get something. Please. Then crumbs, or nothing.
Nice guys don’t decide there’s only one voice in this country that matters. Not these voices of our communities. Not those of his own Cabinet or Caucus. Not voices in the arts who get their programs cut because they say things that might make us squirm. Not any voice competent and professional who disagrees - Linda Keen, Adrian Measner, Jean-Guy Fleury - who then feel the pulverizing weight of a Government machine come down on them just so they know: you don’t mess with “the vest”.
Arts groups, literacy and poverty and childcare groups - it’s the same story. Nice guys don’t make the weak weaker and the vulnerable more vulnerable.
Nice guys don’t act like there are Canadians and not-quite Canadians. Those who fit Mr. Harper’s understanding of how life is supposed to be lived, and those, Canadians too - single mothers, addicts, gays and lesbians - who don’t.
And nice guys don’t take someone else’s person, as he did Monsieur Dion, they don’t take their personality, their character, their life, what they’ve worked hard to build, what is decent and substantial and good. What they’ve earned. They don’t take that, twist it, stretch it, caricature and distort it. They don’t buy air time and in front of millions of people, assassinate it. And pretend, ahh, that’s just politics.
Oh, and the puffin and the poop - oops, sorry. Didn’t mean it. Just like I don’t mean all the other just-as-new ads on the Conservatives’ website, that reach tens of thousands just like the Mr. Nice Guy ads on TV, that are just as abusive as the others in the pre-Mr. Nice Guy time.
If it quacks like a duck, put a blue vest on it, it’s still a duck.
But who says you need a “nice guy” to be a Prime Minister? It’s a tough, often disagreeable job. As they say about war - with the enemy all around, who do you want in that foxhole next to you. In politics, in sports and business, some not-so-nice guys are good leaders and win, and some nice guys are good leaders and win too. And some nice guys and not-so-nice guys fail. Being a good leader isn’t about that. It’s something more.
From these first 13 days, it is clear that Mr. Harper has decided this election is about him. He’s saying to Canadians: I’m a leader. I know what I want - I’m decisive - I deliver. And that, he says, is leadership. And in uncertain economic and global times, he says, Canadians need that and want that. But what Mr. Harper confuses is the posture of leadership, and the substance of leadership. Leadership is . . . leading - getting others to follow. But critically, fundamentally, leadership is direction. It is going . . . somewhere. The question is “where”? Leadership matters because the “where” matters, and it’s the job of a Prime Minister to know better than anyone else what the best “where” is. For the country. For your life and my life. That’s real leadership.
As a golfer, I can hit the ball a long way. The problem is I can’t hit it in the right direction. And a ball hit - decisively, competently - in the wrong direction is a ball that goes further and further and further into the woods. History is filled with leaders who have competently, decisively gone in the wrong direction with disastrous results.
Where is Mr. Harper’s “where”?
He doesn’t seem to want to talk about that. In making this election all about him, he is doing his best to make this election about nothing. It’s his “Seinfeld campaign.” But in 2008, how can that be? This is a time when the cost of carbon economically and environmentally is forcing the world’s countries to re-imagine the future. To reward the constructive and punish the destructive. To act. To change. To create the hard-won possibilities to compete in the economy ahead.
It’s a time when the gap between rich and poor is growing. When too many Canadians live the way no Canadians should have to live. When too many don’t have a real chance at a real future.
It’s a time when our children need more and better opportunities to learn - when they’re young and need a good start; later in college and university. A time when aboriginal peoples finally and forever need the chance of a full Canadian life.
It’s a time when, as Canadians, we need to think about ourselves differently. We are 33 million people - one of the world’s largest economies; one of the world’s richest nations; with a land mass so big and abundant amidst a world of countries that have neither. We are safe, secure and stable; we can count on tomorrow, plan for tomorrow, imagine and build tomorrow, when just about everyone else cannot. With our French and English past, with our present where people from almost everywhere live within our borders - we are a country which has learned to live with difference, accept difference, learn from difference; live the global world of the future, when to much of the rest of the world difference still means guns and blood.
Countries come and go, prominent at one time, pushed to the sidelines in another. History is a long time. And undeniably, whatever Canada has been in the past we will be far more in the future. The world knows that. We need to know that too. And our leaders need to know that, and embody it and act that way in everything they do.
There is more to us, more to Canada, than tax breaks as the answer for everything. More to Canada than life as pieces and parts - East; West. Quebec; the Rest of Canada - firewalls everywhere. More to us than Mr. Harper’s small, pinched vision of ourselves and our future.
“Better off with Harper”?
NO.
We are more than this.
This election is about something.
Stephane Dion may get a lot of criticism, but he is trying to make this campaign about something. Mr. Harper is not.
Leadership, real leadership, is first of all, most of all, knowing what’s important - then focusing on it, sharing it with others, then determinedly, relentlessly, together, getting there.
I don’t believe in “hidden agendas.” I find arguments like that just too easy. I just want to know where Mr. Harper’s going. Tell me. Tell us. What is your vision of this country? How should it work? What should it be? What is the best “US” now and for the future? How does Canada become what Canada can be? Tell us. We need to know. Tell us how, person to person, we, as Canadians, should relate to each other? What we can expect of others, and what others can expect of us? Tell us what role government should play, and shouldn’t? Tell us about families, in busy, complicated real, not fanciful lives, how as parents we give ourselves and our kids a real chance at all that’s in us to be. Families are not just card games with kids - tell us. We need to know.
And once you’ve told us that, tell us why you’re not saying to Canadians that to realize this vision, one you believe so important to our present and future, so unbelievably exciting to you and to all of us, that you need us, all of us, that you need a majority to do it? Say it, say it, why wouldn’t you? Shout it from the rooftops - - after you’ve told us your vision of the country, and for the country. After you’ve decided this campaign is not about nothing.
Mr. Harper wants this campaign to be about nothing because on all those things the campaign needs to be about, he has nothing to offer.
This campaign is NOT about Mr. Harper. It is NOT about him. It is about our present and future economy, about climate change, poverty and learning. It is about all Canadians having a real chance. It’s about encouraging, allowing, seeking out voices different from our own, that make us smarter; that bring us to our best and keep us from our worst. It’s about our understanding of ourselves as a country, about the importance of Canada in the world of our future. This is a campaign about BIG, IMPORTANT things.
In an election about nothing, Mr. Harper will win. In an election about something, we will win. We have 23 days.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT HIM. THIS IS NOT ABOUT NOTHING.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
