Sunday, September 13, 2009

"Propped Up by the Socialists and the Separatists"

In some ways my views are the same as the traditional Progressive Conservative party. I'm a fiscal conservative and want government to take a responsible approach to the budget and the economy. I want low debt and a healthy atmosphere for business. Like Joe Clark and John Crosbie, I'm strongly in favor of higher taxes at the pump.

But the defining characteristic of the Stephen Harper Conservative government is something that permits no common ground, and that is the politics of hate.

The politics of hate speaks to a small base and is scathing about anyone outside of that base. Stephen Harper is running the country for nobody but his base. When he compromises his extremist views, it is not because he wants to lead the country for everyone, but for reasons of political expediency.

Some notes about the leaked video of Harper's private address in Sault Ste. Marie:

* He says Liberal victory will only happen if they are "propped up by socialists and separatists." This is not off-the-cuff phrasing. He used exactly the same rhetoric last December-January.
* He makes reference to equal pay lawsuits by female civil servants, referring to them as "left wing fringe groups."
* He says "we've had to do a number of things not associated with Conservative governments" but makes it very clear that that was only for political expediency, to make it possible to win a majority.
* He continues to push the spin that Ignatieff wants to form a coalition. (How stupid can Conservatives be!!? Ignatieff is the one who killed the coalition.) He furthers that spin with the idiotic claim that the two options post-election are a Harper government or a coalition, ignoring the obvious option - the Liberals winning enough seats to form a government on their own. In fact, it's the "socialists", "separatists" and Liberals who are "propping up" Harper.

Look: I'm a Liberal. I'm neither a "socialist" nor a "separatist". But over 4 million Canadians voted for the NDP or Bloc in 2008, and they deserve better than to be dismissed with epithets by their prime minsister. The Prime Minister of Canada runs the entire country, even people who voted for other parties. This utter dismissal of a large chunk of the population is distressing. It makes Harper unfit to be leader of the Conservative party and prime minister of the country.



rockfish said...

completely agree. in fact, my first vote at the polls was for Clark in 1980... Harper's decision to use anger and hatred to create a following is going to take a long time to repair, which really shines a light on the limp and lame leadership in that party besides their stalinesque so-called pm. He doesn't care if he spreads dissent around the country, sparks fires of disharmony, or fans flames of separatism (either in Quebec or the west). Unfortunately, the MsM also seem to think they've got something riding on a Harper majority.

Northern PoV said...

Attn Liberal War Room:

"Ignatieff is the one who killed the coalition"

Hey to para-quote Flannagan: it is not only plausible, it is true!

Iggy took a lot of flak for killing the thing, he has nothing to lose amongst that side.

So how about:
"Stephan Harper created the coalition, Michael Ignatieff killed it."

the pundits can have fun with that one cause it puts Mr. Harper back at the center of the crisis he created

Bert said...

None of you seem to have any problems with a (I'm assuming this) liberal recording a private Conservative address.

Remember nearly exactly a year ago someone recorded a secret Liberal con call ?. As I recall, liberal supporters were up in arms about that.

I'm not so sure about Ignatieff not wanting a coalition. If you're really honest with yourself, there is no way the Liberals would be able to win an election now, if one were called. Something like 70% of Canadians don't want one. The only way Ignatieff would be able to be PM if they do form one.

Also, while I'm at it, I do fully support equal pay for work of equal value. But it is true that women do tend to have less seniority, just because they are the ones taking time out to have and raise children. That is nature. If they take a year off, then like it or not, that is a year they won't be in the work place.

Yappa said...

Hi Bert,

I wasn't arguing about equal pay, but about the way Harper refers to women who stand up for equal pay as "left wing fringe groups." It's one thing for hot-headed bloggers to resort to name-calling of their political opponents; the prime minister should never do that. He does it all the time. This rhetoric of "socialists and separatists" is scarily reminiscent of calling people "un-American" and "commie pinko".

There hasn't been any evidence that the Liberals photographed the talk. If anything, it looks like Harper knew he was being video'ed. My guess is that a Conservative leaked it.

Ignatieff was very clear last year that he didn't want the coalition, and he killed it as soon as he took power. As to what will happen in the future, I think we have to keep the threat of a coalition alive. Harper refuses to work with the other elected representatives, and without the coalition the only leverage the opposition has is calling an election. Coalition will only be raised again if Harper acts irresponsibly and egregiously again: such as presenting plans to cut government spending as we enter a huge worldwide recession.

As to whether the Liberals can get enough votes to form a government... I'm not as sure as you that they can't. Polls before elections are called are extremely iffy.

marie said...

Yet Harper was prepared to do the same thing he is accusing the Liberals of doing. There is more than 2 Harpers. He has more personalites then the three faces of Eve. he's a psychopath And they are not pleasant to look at or Like.

September 9, 2004

Her Excellency the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson,
C.C., C.M.M., C.O.M., C.D.
Governor General
Rideau Hall
1 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A1

As leaders of the opposition parties, we are well aware that, given the Liberal minority government, you could be asked by the Prime Minister
to dissolve the 38th Parliament at any time should the House of Commons fail to support some part of the government's program.
We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority.
Your attention to this matter is appreciated.
Hon. Stephen Harper, P.C., M.P.
Leader of the Opposition
Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada
Also signed by Duceppe and Layton

Bert said...

The most trustworthy leader

* Stephen Harper: 31%
* Michael Ignatieff: 14%

The most competent leader

* Stephen Harper: 36%
* Michael Ignatieff: 20%

The leader with the best vision for Canada’s future

* Stephen Harper: 32%
* Michael Ignatieff: 20%

Leadership Index Score

* Stephen Harper: 99
* Michael Ignatieff: 54

Oops. And Michael Ignatieff won't support the government ?. I wonder why ?.

Bert said...

Um, the person who leaked the video was a Liberal. Invited by the Conservatives mind you, but a Liberal never the less:

Anonymous said...

Proud to be a member of a left wing fringe group: i.e. a woman.

Bert said...

Sigh, Anonymous 6:11, I suggest you read the analysis over at:
However, should you decide not to, here is the pertinant part:

Harper is referencing the abuses of the Court Challenges Program (CCP), a program that was cancelled by his own government shortly after their election in 2006. Kinsella will avoid referring directly to the CCP as much as possible because by and large, the cancellation of the CCP was a wildly popular move that most Canadians approved of. Left-wingers tried to make a big stink over the CCP cancellation back when it happened too, with minimal success. You might recall that we have had an election since then, where the voters had a chance to judge the government who made this “controversial” decision. You might also recall that the Conservatives were sent back to Ottawa with a stronger mandate. But I digress.

First, a little background on the Court Challenges Program (CCP)

Like the unaccountable, secretive, abused, and much-despised Human Rights Commissions (HRCs) that are making regular headlines these days, the CCP sounded good on paper. HRCs were meant to “ensure that the principles of equal opportunity and non-discrimination are followed in all areas of federal jurisdiction,” such cases of housing discrimination, but evolved into arbitrary bloated bureaucracies hell bent on repressing free speech. The CCP was meant to “provide financial assistance for important court cases that advance language and equality rights guaranteed under Canada’s Constitution,” but then evolved into a politically fueled program which tended to fund cases pushing for reforms that did not fit the view of most Canadians and would therefore never come to pass democratically.

Some examples… a private, for-profit abortion clinic launched a legal battle, funded by the CCP, to attain charitable status under the Income Tax Act. In 1992 Elizabeth Symes, a Bay Street lawyer with an annual income of over $200,000, had the CCP fully fund her case in which she argued that she was experiencing discrimination because she could not deduct the cost of her children’s nanny as a business expense on her income tax return. It is worth noting that Symes was a founder of the Women’s Legal and Educational Action Fund (LEAF), which is essentially the legal arm of the far left feminist movement.

With cases like these, it quickly became obvious who was benefiting from the existence of the CCP – left-wing groups and rich liberals.

Bert said...

Also, check out the latest Nanos Poll, and see who has the better ratings with women, Stephen Harper or Michael Ignatieff.

Yappa said...

Hi all,

I don't read too much into those leadership poll numbers. In a poll about a sitting PM and an opposition leader who has never been PM, you'd expect the PM to be ranked higher. Also, the questions were about competence and whether they'd do what they promised - not about policy.

I have to admit that I'm disappointed that we're not having an election now. I think the mood of people is vastly different from last fall. Last fall it was really hard to be a Liberal (as I wrote at the time). But now the situation is much more positive, and while I'm not yet 100% enamoured of Ignatieff, I'm feeling that he's on a big upswing and has momentum. I would enjoy an election now, and I think we'd do really well... probably even form the government.

However, there's nothing we can do while Harper's being propped up by the separatists and socialists. :-)

...just kidding! (I call them "democratically elected representatives of Canada")


marie said...

Bert. Quit taking things you hear out of context will you? Just because Layton or Harper said something that you want to believe in doesn't make it true. Just like the attack ads the Reform/Alliance Harper party keep airing. They were taken out of context , Harper knows it and so do you. You guys sound like parrots.

Bert said...

This is getting to be fun, Marie. Did you even read or look at the url's that I've posted ?. I think not.

BTW. Isn't it great how the liberals voted against the ways and means motion that included a provision allowing the HUGELY popular renovation tax credit to become law.?. /sacrasm

I wonder what kind of kool-aid that are drinking if they think they can pull this garbage off and expect to gain the support of the Canadian people.

marie said...

Bert, you do not speak for all Canadians and neither does Harper. Someone referred to his government as the party of hate and I too have to agree with that. Not only is his party hateful, so are his supporters. Dosen't say much for them does it.

Long time Canadians and seniors would be glad to support the Liberals once an election is called and the polices by both parties are in the forefront.

The young uneducated canadians will vote the same regardless if Harper was proven a con artist and cheat. That's their mentality carefully designed by Herr Harper

Yappa said...

Re that anti-Kinsella site, I'm afraid it's backfired, at least for me. After reading it (and being decidedly unimpressed by the content), I started reading Kinsella's blog more closely and liking it more than before. He posts a lot of great videos!

Yorkville Toronto said...

Well said. Harper basically sucks as a prime minister, doesn't he? Oh, and I want to add - amazingly fruitful discussion guys, it took me a while to read it, wow.

Regards, Elli.