The crows are coming home to roost for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and a mangy bunch of birds they are. Will this provoke an election? Not likely. Not yet.
Harper must wake up some mornings and wonder where it all went wrong. Not long ago he was the Iceman, firmly in control of every teensy strand of his government, and seemingly managing it all with aplomb.
With Harper at the helm there were no mistakes. You didn't get charm, but you did get efficiency, intelligence and a ruthless instinct for political combat that made him more winner than loser.
Most Canadians were buying that package, when compared with the alternatives. We weren't warming to the man -- the piranha smile and assassin's eyes make that difficult -- but we were getting used to him. Harper and Stephane Dion, mano a mano? Dion was sure to emerge with two black eyes and his glasses fastened together with Scotch tape...
Assassin's eyes?
Why is it that bloggers need to be so careful, but MSM can say anything they want?
* * * *
37 comments:
The Sun is the kind of rag that seems to be getting worse by the day...But nothing to get upset about in this particular case, Joanne. The Star, Canadian Press, CBC all do it. The only difference is that Sun media is more blunt.
The only guys worth reading in TO Sun is Lorrie Goldstein and Peter Worthington.
The Liberals made a huge calculated error by putting 'election financing' issue in the spotlight.
Partly due to inept leadership, partly due to the arrogance that caused Adscam in the first place, Liberals have assumed that Canadians no longer care that they stole millions, that the Liberals can be an authoritative voice on election funds propriety.
Meanwhile, what yours truly predicted would happen:
Adscam is rearing its head once again, and Harper in a speech (see National Newswatch "Harper Mocking Liberals")is saying "Conservatives spend their own money, Liberals spend stolen money".
I'll say that again, because this is the dichotomy, the direct comparison that the Liberals have helped Canadians to formulate:
Conservatives spend their own money, Liberals spend stolen money.
Worse, the Liberals are daring to point the finger at the CPC, essentially declaring to the world that they don't think their transgressions are all that bad.
Den Tandt must be Weston's protege...all insults and fluff, no substance.
bluetech
I found this article very upsetting. Here we have a PM that looks good and someone has to slander like that. They get away with it all the time on Garth's blog too.
Finally, we have a PM that looks like a Statesman when he goes to other countries.
I think a defamation suit is in order.
Some more food for thought:
1) Why haven't the media done any analysis as to whether the CPC case is a "loser". You know, bringing in their "legal experts" to say the CPC has no case?
Well there has been one analysis I've seen, today, in the Ottawa citizen, in which the commenter (seemingly reluctantly) concludes that the Cons can win.
The reason: the Cons have a great case, and wouldn't have launched such a daring challenge without solid legal advice to that effect (probably the best legal advice in the country).
2) Back to adscam - "Gayle" has been going around telling people Elections Canada had no choice. I took her to task on "Big City Lib" under the post "what else in those boxes" post. EC had plenty of options to charge, and chose not to.
Yet on a technical challenge to transfers to ridings (which no party has denied doing - that's worth repeating - no party has denied Harper's suggestions that the other parties have done the same thing),
the EC raids the CPC office on the eve of their examining EC officials, an unprecedented highly invasive search.
3) Recall the media collusion with the liberals on the Mulroney committee? The secondary story here (the primary story being a corrupt EC abusing its power for partisan political purposes) will be that this was done with media collusion - the "raid" was obviously coordinated with the media, and the liberals, apparently all in concert.
This will make the CBC debacle look like child's play.
Cheers.
Why is it that those left wing writers NEVER put their e-mail addresses.
What a smarmy, biased piece of crap.
Correction, I take Gayle to task in "Scandal what Scandal" post on BCL, re the EC adscam issue.
I am very offended by this personal attack on our Prime Minister.
Write letters to the editor at the sun. This is the email of the Sun letters page in Toronto. Tell the grit brownoser what you think of his vile words.
rob.granatstein@sunmedia.ca
Biff seems to pump the same crap no matter what blog he's on. I thought I was special, Biff.
Its ok to be offended but, I think its time for blogging Conservatives to stop blaming the messenger. As Mr Harper's strength and ability's continue to grow the frequency in which the MSM attacks his personality and his policy's will intensify, its just the way it is and its the way it should be. There is no opposition right now in this country, the Liberals have disappointed, not because of their refusall to vote down the current govt, but, the mindless attacks on events from 25 and 17 years ago, hence, the media is picking up the slack. I'm a non partisan conservative and I dont see the bias that you guys see. On his afternoon show on CFRA Michael Harris blasted and mocked the Chretien and Martin governments, then, when Harper and the Cons took over he aimed his sights on Stephen Harper..pretty fair I think. In hockey, they say that after you score a goal you shouldnt make a huge fuss over it, act like its happened before and will happen again, well, I think the Conservatives and the supporters should start to take some lessons from that and start to take criticism with a little more class, and, like you intend on being around for a while. billg
"... the piranha smile and assassin's eyes make that difficult ..."
I wouldn't get overly excited about those metaphors.
I've come to the conclusion that one of the major differences between conservatives and liberals is the following:
• conservatives use primarily denotative language, i.e. they use language that means literally what they wish to express.
• liberals use primarily connotative language, i.e. language that suggests what they want to express, so that it can be stretched to cover almost anything they want. You know, as in stretching the truth to fit particular situations ...
Anyway, if Dan Tandt had been there yesterday in Montreal when the PM addressed about 1000 party faithful (according to one report I read) he would have seen a handsome PM, speaking primarily in French with increasing ease and fluency, ad-libbing humourous comments, and being very generous with his time, allowing 30 minutes for people to take their individual pictures with him.
So let the Dan Tandts of the MSM get their jollies by using silly metaphors. It just proves their utter insignificance.
hmmmm, aren't we Cons standing behind freedom of speech, where you don not have a right to not be offended?
The media has been equally as ignorant with Dion IMO.
PMSH can take a punch.
Suck it up guys.
I like how the s. hits the fan, PMSH comes home, and in one statement, puts all the angry rats back in their corner:
''Conservatives spend their own money, Liberals spend stolen money.''
Thanks for the email address - I will be doing that for sure.
Also
"Yet on a technical challenge to transfers to ridings (which no party has denied doing - that's worth repeating - no party has denied Harper's suggestions that the other parties have done the same thing),"
I have noticed that when challenged, their stock answer is "We're not the ones being investigated".
From Cadman affair to the old in-and-out, Canadians get it
That's right Mike, they get that the Liberals will try anything to turn the page from their own sad, policy free, leaderless party.
You know Jo, when I read columns like this, I can't help but think that the Conservatives and PMSH are getting under the skin of the writer.
As I have said before, slow and steady will win in the end and Stephen Harper is a very methodical man.
This little lefty minion and his ramblings won't bother the PM, and it shouldn't bother us.
You are right to point it out, if only to show how desperate the left have become.
In the end though, Mechael Den Tandt is just another lost leftie wandering in the wilderness.
==
"We're not the ones being investigated".
LOL, right.
Adscam just keeps on giving.
'Police set to turn spotlight on Liberal officials
With fraud investigations into ad agencies nearly wrapped up, Mounties to intensify scrutiny of possible corruption, influence peddling'
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080425.wsponsorship25/BNStory/National/home
Well, at least some of you Liberals are allowed to post on Conservative blogs..unlike Cherniak, who prints the worst collection of halftruths and inflammatory statements, then censors his comments when you call him on it..no rebuttals to his partisan rants..
So let the Dan Tandts of the MSM get their jollies by using silly metaphors. It just proves their utter insignificance.
Perhaps. But I think he should issue an apology nonetheless.
Something like this one that Mike Duffy issued last week and it's STILL ON THE WEBSITE!
I will never forget that the prime minister and the conservatives were the only party to rise to vote for the crime bill and anti-terrorist act bill.
They proved me that they care for me you and our country.
Watching the liberals ndp and bloc not rise to support our safety and country, shocked me; I realized from then on that they are NOT for me or you or for our country BUT for themselves alone.
what's worse, is to watch a potential terrorist who wears a police ankle bracelet been interviewed by CBC.
• conservatives use primarily denotative language, i.e. they use language that means literally what they wish to express.
• liberals use primarily connotative language, i.e. language that suggests what they want to express, so that it can be stretched to cover almost anything they want. You know, as in stretching the truth to fit particular situations
What utter vacuous and obscurantist tripe. You lost it at they use language that means literally what they wish to express. Do you mean that when Harper implied the Liberals were pedophiles or terrorist lovers, he meant that literally, and would have said as much, circumstances permitting?
What you all are are pieces of work of varying degrees of artfulness/artlessness.
Gabby, I was on the fence about allowing that last one through, but knowing you, I feel confident that you can handle this guy! ;)
I agree that tyguys post should have been let thru, how else are we to know what the other side is spinning. However, I think you ruined his day, he wont be able to diss you on all the sites he spews his hatred for consevatives on. He will not be able to brag he was not allowed to post here, and then repeat his post. And considering the time of his post, he probably had a whole day of dissing planned.
However, we know that the majority of those here will not take the time to read his comments elsewhere.
Lead story today on cbc, the verdict of not guilty of three cops in NYC.
How quick they forget that liberals are again under the gun for adscam. Poor Dion, he will have to sit on his hands re the immigration bill as adscam and sponsorship will be election issues, and PMSH's stmt re we spend our own money liberals spend stolen money will hit a nerve.
Harper rocks I love the line he gave yesterday..
"''Conservatives spend their own money, Liberals spend stolen money.''
Classic.
Pace yourself. If you get your drawers in a bunch over "assassin's eyes," you will drop dead of cerebral apoplexy months before the election results are in.
I went over to Garth's site to see what the other side is spinning and what crap!
But MaryT, they might not have to sit on their hands, they are all talking about telling Dion to pull the plug and have an election right now.
Gabby, I was on the fence about allowing that last one through, but knowing you, I feel confident that you can handle this guy! ;)
There's some of that denotative language I'm sure.
Don't worry JoJo...This guy is not sticking around to get the "treatment" from Gabby in QC.
She'd have to retract the insanely counter-factual assertion that Conservatives express themselves literally. That's a howler I'm planning on dining out on for weeks to come.
'ta!
maryt, there is room for more than two views. I hate to spoil your fun, but not everyone is a player in your little game. Not everyone sees politics as "us vs. them."
To respond to your admittedly rhetorical question, rephrased more respectfully, "how else are we supposed to know what [people with other views] are [thinking]?" I think you will find that if you ask a person an honest question, nine times out of ten you will get an honest answer.
Ruth, I agree with Garth Turner here:
Clearly, we need an election. In it, we’ll yearn for a leader courageous enough, unselfish enough, to simply state facts. So armed, the people will make the right choice.
The right choice will be to give Stephen Harper a majority.
Then he says, "I will tell Mr. Dion this upon my return Monday."
Dion is so lucky to have him, n'est-ce pas?
"the piranha smile and assassin's eyes"
That tells me more about Michael Tandt than it does Harper. Does he still peek under his bed and sleep with a night light?
"OOOOH I am sooo scared of intelligent, efficient and competent leaders!"
Oh, i love the part where he praises B.C.'s carbon tax as "innovative."
Ummm, what's so innovative about a gas tax Michael?
That tells me more about Michael Tandt than it does Harper.
A few people have made that point here, and I'm starting to agree the more I think about it.
Quite pathetic, actually.
Anon 1:09 :
“I will never forget that the prime minister and the conservatives were the only party to rise to vote for the crime bill and anti-terrorist act bill.”
Neither will I. I was shocked too. Thanks for writing that post; I just had memories from that flooding back. That’s when I first realized what Dion was like. When was that? It seems so long ago.
I believe Stephane Dion had expressed support for those clauses six months prior to that vote. He had even suggested making it stronger. That means he chose to vote it down for partisan motives. A betrayal of us all.
I remember how the government was caught by surprise by the change in position. I remember they tried so hard to negotiate a solution with the liberals. They said “let us extend it for just one year while we have a debate.” No. Then it was six months. No. Then three months. During this time the Prime Minister tried everything from tough criticism to offering reasonable solutions; while MPs tried to make a deal behind the scenes. I think at the end they offered to extend them for just one month with the liberal amendments. No. The day before the vote they almost had a deal but Dion rejected it.
During all this I was so angry at Dion but I never believed he would vote the measures down until he actually did it. I thought he was trying to prove himself (couldn’t he have picked something other then national security?) and would back down at the last minute; having proven his point and scared the crap out of everyone. I knew he attended security briefings as leader of the official opposition. He knew exactly what was at stake. I didn’t believe he would put his own political fortune ahead of Canada’s security. I was wrong.
It’s strange that I remember it so clearly. I remember the Prime Minister standing to vote, and then sitting down quickly; lacking his usual confidence. His face was pale; I have never seen him look like that before or since. He knew they were going to lose the vote. The Conservative MPs stood up in applause for him to give their support and he kept saying “thank you” gratefully as he looked at them and then the camera cut away.
After the Tories voted, only two liberals broke ranks. Just two. Then in the brief few seconds of silence before the Nays stood I finally had the numb, hollow realization that they were actually going to do it. 159 people put themselves before the country. All to follow Dion, the only political leader who refused to even meet the victims of Air India and 9/11. “emotional” he called them.
I will never forget. We will never forget that.
Thank you for your concern, Joanne.
"What utter vacuous and obscurantist tripe."
Maybe I hit a nerve with Ti-guy?
Maybe his moniker describes more than just his mind?
Maybe that's why he seems so angry?
Anyway, you know frrom past experience, I'm not the kind of person who relishes getting into flame wars, or whatever they're called.
If someone wants to ridicule me, go ahead. It will simply confirm my contention that people of that ilk cannot present an argument without insulting their opponent.
I do commend Ti-guy, however, for the BIG words he used, rather than the usual collection of ... other choice vocabulary. It's a shame, though, that he missed the word "primarily" in my original post.
Perhaps I should add that as another aspect of liberal speak, i.e. they use only those words in a quote that are convenient to prove their point.
Lastly, the irate Ti-guy seemed to miss the fact I was referring to small l-liberals and conservatives, not the political parties, so his anger about the "pedophiles and terrorist-lovers" is completely unfounded.
But ... if my theory gets his adrenaline going, well hey, let him enjoy it.
You are getting a little dramtic aren't you May? Do you remember all those decades when our country was safe before those provisions came into existance? How about how safe we have been for the year we managed without them.
Anyway, this:
"I remember how the government was caught by surprise by the change in position."
is a bit shocking, since it was the government who changed their position. You see, the liberals agreed to the extension, with the amendments that had been agreed to in the committee. When the legislation was introduced, however, it was without those amendments. The liberals never agreed to pass the measures without amendments.
I realize you think highly of Harper, but this entire incident was never about our safety. This was a wedge issue for him - the reason he was so dismayed with the vote was because he believed enough liberals would break ranks to not only get his legislation passed, but to also break the liberal party. That is why he did agree to include the liberal amendments until the very last minute - and even then the offer was somewhere on the lines of "pass my legislation now and we will pass your amendments later".
"This was a wedge issue for him - the reason he was so dismayed with the vote was because he believed enough liberals would break ranks to not only get his legislation passed, but to also break the liberal party."
And Gayle drops by to tell us what Stephen Harper is thinking.
Tell me Gayle - where ever did you get this idea??
Or perhaps I should have said
Gayle - please provide a link for your last statement otherwise we just have to assume it is your opinion and not fact.
It is my opinion.
I actually thought that was clear. Apologies for any confusion.
Post a Comment