Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Stephen Harper; Guardian of National Unity

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, you had a good day today. And the Liberal leadership hopefuls should be sending you thank-you notes tonight.


* * * *

UPDATE: Lots in MSM and blogs this morning. I think Chucker Canuk's insight is brilliant as usual - "Call me anything you want; just not late for dinner".

Yes indeed. If we can water down the word 'marriage', why not the word "Nation"? Just one more semantic sacrifice to preserve our unique muticultural, all-inclusive, politically-correct country.

24 comments:

Zac said...

Joanne, in all respect, I'm not sure that you've actually grasped what's happened here today.

Anonymous said...

zac,

I think she has a grasp. What happened today was the BQ got cut off at the knees.

And that's about it. Federalists look better in Quebec by simple recognizing their distinctness.

Anonymous said...

It's a good move because it states the obvious.

Zac said...

Federalists look better in Quebec by simple recognizing their distinctness.

Quebec was recognized in the House of Commons in 1995 as a "distinct society", why was that insufficient?

The distinctness of the province is a political truism that has already be acknowledged. This motion cedes precious ground to the seperatists in my estimation and is something that should be approached carefully.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I'm not sure that you've actually grasped what's happened here today.

Oh, I grasped it very well, mon ami! Harper continues to play chess while everyone else is playing checkers.

Zac said...

Harper continues to play chess while everyone else is playing checkers.

While I would normally agree with you on that one, today he, like all federalists, got snookered.

The Bloc did not introduce their motion hoping that MPs would affirm that Quebecers "form a nation", they wanted a hollow concession which acknowledges Quebec as a nation. They got it.

Playing chess would have been Harper, along with the Liberals and the NDP, saying that we, as a collective parliamentary body, are not going to play games with semantics and then voted the motion down, sayinng that Quebec did not "form" a nation, but are instead "part" of a nation.

Your party and mine lost a crucial battle here today Joanne.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

sayinng that Quebec did not "form" a nation, but are instead "part" of a nation.

Can't see a whole big nuance of difference there.

Zac said...

Can't see a whole big nuance of difference there.

Giving the seperatists the ability of rightly define Quebec as a "nation" without objection allows them to come forward with the argument that:

1) What is a nation, without a state?

2) Canada has already admitted that Quebec, as a political body, is capable of autonomy, within, or without the state of Canada.

3) Once a state exists, could it exist without Canada?

4) If Quebec is already a nation, what is the use of Canada?

The problem is that we're giving more and more ground to seperatists, as opposed to confronting their arguments head on.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Zac, all good questions, and ones that I asked myself when I first heard this news. Then I watched Joel Denis Bellavance from La Press on Mike Duffy, and I got a whole new perspective.

Good discussion going on at Stephen Taylor's on this subject.

Going back to my reading. Bonne nuit!

Zac said...

I'm just saying think hard about this subject before making a decision. It's potentially damaging to Canada.

Et une bonne nuit a vous aussi.

Liam O'Brien said...

Nobody on the "opposed" side of this resolution has shown how calling Quebec a nation in any way, shape or form harms anyone in the rest of Canada or in any way weakens or hurts Canada as a whole.

If anything, this marks an improvement. As I've said elsewhere today, it's possibly a positive step towards more flexible, sophisticated, and mature federalism.

Good for Mr. Harper. I support this motion 100%.

Swift said...

Does Harper play a deeper game than anyone else? Before answering this question you should read "The Tomorrow Testament" by Barry B. Longyear published by Berkley Books December 1983 ISBN 0-425-06319-4. When you find out what the deepest level of game playing is, ask yourself if Harper is playing at that level, or is he rulebound.

Chris from Winnipeg said...

All that happened is that the Prime Minister said the same thing aboout Quebec as what has been said about Natives in this country.

They are nations unto themselves. If the First Nations are not flocking to leave Canada, why would Quebecers?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Chris, you took the words right out of my mouth.

First Nations, Six Nations, what's one more?

Swift, thanks for the book suggestion! One more for my list.

Merci, Zac, but "vous"? Not "tu"? Je suis désolé.

Liam, I agree. He made a distinction between nation vs. nation within Canada, and that makes all the difference.

Anonymous said...

are you all new?
doesn't anybody remember "deux nations"?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

doesn't anybody remember "deux nations"?

I think there is a subtle difference.

Anonymous said...

subtle difference? how so? who was the second nation if not the quebecois?

Zac said...

but "vous"? Not "tu"? Je suis désolé.

My french is rather lousy. My apologies.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Zac, I forgive you. ;)

Anon - "Deux nations" implies two separate nations.

Harper's proposal defines Québécois (and note; not Quebec) as "a nation within a united Canada". It is an official recognition of a unique culture and language. Read Chuckercanuk's post.

Chuckercanuck said...

its pretty key that Quebec the province is not included in Harper's language.

the territorial implications are not there. that's the scariest part of the Liberal motion - territorial integrity of a Quebec nation.

its not in the government resolution.

Chuckercanuck said...

"Yes indeed. If we can water down the word 'marriage', why not the word "Nation"? Just one more semantic sacrifice to preserve our unique muticultural, all-inclusive, politically-correct country."

great, great line.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

its pretty key that Quebec the province is not included in Harper's language.

the territorial implications are not there. that's the scariest part of the Liberal motion - territorial integrity of a Quebec nation.


Very astute observation, Chucker. I didn't fully grasp the implications until I read your post.

great, great line. Coming from a master of prose that is quite a compliment! Thank you. I humbly accept it.

Cherniak_WTF said...

Oh, I grasped it very well, mon ami! Harper continues to play chess while everyone else is playing checkers.
Comme d'habitute, il joue tout seul...

Pandering to the BQ and softening Canada - yup. I'd call that standing up for Canada...

Joanne (True Blue) said...

CWTF - Comme d'habitute, il joue tout seul... Pas de tout.

From yesterday's Post:

Mr. Harper's attempt to resolve the delicate question of Quebec's nationhood began on Tuesday in response to an opposition day motion introduced by the Bloc. Liberal and New Democratic Party sources said the Prime Minister approached Mr. Graham and Jack Layton in the Commons after an evening vote and suggested the three parties "work together" to defeat a Bloc initiative that "would be a headache."

The Prime Minister's Office forwarded the wording of the resolution to opposition leaders at lunchtime yesterday, about three hours before the Prime Minister's speech.


Alors, he had a few accomplices.

Pandering to the BQ and softening Canada

On the contrary, this will strengthen Canada by unifying the federalists. It also blew Duceppe's motion out of the water. It makes him look very feeble. He had to reword his motion after Harper's pre-emptive salvo.

Read ChuckerCanuk's blog and become informed.