At Home in Hespeler

Diplomacy

The so-called referendum held today was conducted with Crimea under illegal military occupation. Its results are a reflection of nothing more than Russian military control.

This “referendum” is illegitimate, it has no legal effect, and we do not recognize its outcome. As a result of Russia’s refusal to seek a path of de-escalation, we are working with our G-7 partners and other allies to coordinate additional sanctions against those responsible.

Any solution to this crisis must respect the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine as well as the constitution of Ukraine. Mr. Putin’s reckless and unilateral actions will lead only to Russia’s further economic and political isolation from the international community.

Uncategorized Crimea, Putin, Stephen Harper, Ukraine

—noun, plural soph·ist·ries.

1. a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning.
2. a false argument; sophism.

NDP Foreign Affairs Critic Paul Dewar

They set up a false choice and put it out there that if you’re not with us, you’re against us. And if you’re not with the government sworn in in Israel, you’re against the people of Israel.Which is nonsense. It shows a lack of sophistry.*

The question is, is Paul Dewar having an Inigo Montoya moment, or does he believe Canada’s foreign policy should be fundamentally dishonest?

__________________________________________________

*Note: The Canada.com version of this article removes the key sentence from the Mark Kennedy story. Below is a screen shot from the digital edition of today’s National Post showing the full quote.

Uncategorized Israel, NDP, Paul Dewar, Stephen Harper

For many years Prime Minister Harper has mentioned a small project he works on when the politics is done: a book on the history of hockey. Today, that book, A Great Game: The Forgotten Leafs & the Rise of Professional Hockey hit the bookstores. Looking at the rise of professional hockey in the early years of the 20th century, “A Great Game is about the hockey heroes and hard-boiled businessmen who built the game, and the rise and fall of legendary teams pursuing the Stanley Cup.”

Prime Minister Harper was on Toronto’s Prime Time Sports yesterday to talk about the book.

You can buy the book at the usual bookstores, buy it for your Kindle, iPad or other tablet device or, of course, do what I’m going to do and put it on your Christmas list.

Books, Stephen Harper A Great Game, history, Hockey, Leafs, Stephen Harper

The lead clip on the homepage is a Stephen Harper diss called “I hate you, son” that’s ostensibly written from the perspective of the prime minister’s mother…

“Had I known it was you (who would be born) I never would have f—– your father. I would have consulted a clairvoyant. Had she told me about my child, I would have chosen abortion.”

"...go check it on the Internet, it will make you laugh, too."

Stephen Harper Amir Khadir, Jean Charest, Mise en demeure, Stephen Harper

It’s a classic bully maneuver: taking the victims arm and punching the victim with his own hand, meanwhile saying, “why are you punching yourself?” As the middle boy of 3, I’ve been both victim and aggressor in this classic game of making you feel bad about yourself, all the while being able to legitimately say, “I never touched him.”

Last week I used the “punching yourself” motif to describe NDP leader Thomas Muclair, because it seemed apt. Why wasn’t that bully Stephen Harper beating up on Muclair, Warren Kinsella asked, so I answered.

Never beat on someone who’s beating on himself I suggested:

Perhaps they feel it’s better to let Muclair define himself his own image…

Just a few days later, that same Warren Kinsella has read, digested and seemingly agreed with me:

A few days ago, this writer questioned the whereabouts of the Conservative party’s anti-Mulcair attack ads…

Stephen Harper, looking down at his opponent as he hollers away on an Ottawa street corner, knows the answer.

“We don’t need any ads to scare voters away from this guy,” you can picture Harper musing. “He’s doing that all on his own.”

You don’t have to be Stephen Harper to know the answer, you just have to read the same people Stephen Harper reads.

The Media Following My Lead. Stephen Harper, Thomas Muclair, Warren Kinsella

Yea, I’d be upset too if my portrait of a nude Christy Clark was covered every-time some kids group came to the library.

Good thing Rob Ford isn’t PM.

Stephen Harper Kingston, Stephen Harper

Earlier in the week Warren Kinsella penned a piece in Sun Media suggesting it was strange the Big mean Stephen Harper Conservatives have not run a negative ad on new NDP leader Thomas Muclair… yet:

So where, in all of this, is the Conservative attack on their real enemy, Thomas Mulcair?

It’s not like they don’t have a reason to attack. According to the latest national polls, the Conservatives are no longer merely tied with the NDP. For the first time ever, the New Democrats actually are ahead of Stephen Harper’s party.

But still, the Cons do not attack. Apart from a poorly conceived swing at Mulcair’s caucus, only silence emanates from the Harper war room. No one knows why. Here’s one theory: With the Liberals, all of the Conservative attacks were centred on character, not policy. The Tory ads took something that was personal to a succession of Grit leaders, and made it political. But with Thomas Mulcair? Nothing.

It is all very odd. The Cons have nothing to fear from the third-place Libs, yet attack; from the Dippers, there is now much to worry about, but they do nothing. Why the change in strategy? The likeliest explanation is the Tory war room has yet to settle on a character-based attack that will work. Until then, Mulcair should enjoy his holiday from pain. It’s pleasant. But it isn’t going to last.

The attack is coming.

But perhaps the “Tory war room,” has made an other assessment, that once Canadians get a good look at Thomas Muclair, they won’t like what they see. Perhaps they feel it’s better to let Muclair define himself his own image:

What’s more interesting is Mulcair’s response. On Tuesday, he told Postmedia News the premiers of Alberta, B.C. and Saskatchewan (and presumably everybody else, including that notorious Stephen Harper sycophant, Stephane Dion) are merely acting as Harper’s “messengers,” that he (Mulcair) is right, they’re wrong, and he won’t respond to mere premiers since his fight is with Harper.

That prompted Paul Wells of Macleans.ca to humourously observe the idea of premiers Wall, Clark and especially Redford waiting by the “Harperphone” for instructions could only come from Mulcair, who believes anyone who disagrees with him must be part of a conspiracy. (If Mulcair starts twirling ball bearings and musing about who stole his quart of strawberries, run!)

Why get accused of being mean when half the political establishment is accusing your opponent of being out of touch?

NDP, Silly Politicians Lorrie Goldstein, Stephen Harper, Thomas Muclair, Warren Kinsella

Now that the election is over, some Hesplerian thoughts:

I agreed back in February or so with Gerry Nicholls that a Conservative majority was coming. Why? It struck me that Michael Ignatieff had lousy political instincts and would be terrible in a hard election. Contrary to the media meme that he ran a good campaign, he was terrible. On day one he wouldn’t answer a simple question about coalition, all the while insisting he was answering it. It was obvious to anyone watching he was evading, and he wasn’t good at evading.

By the end of the first week, we had the absurd, red door blue door quote to make fun of. By week two it was “Rise Up!” which we on the right were busy making fun of, but the Ignatieff campaign kept repeating. The Liberal candidate in my riding was using a #riseup hashtag on his tweets. Guys, when they are laughing at you, stop making the joke.

Then there’s the debates. Jack Layton clearly knocked out Michael Ignatieff in both debates. Not speaking french, I’ll leave discussion about that to others. The english debate, however, was in hindsight all Jack. It wasn’t the suggestion that Ignatieff doesn’t show up to work, although it was a good shot, but Ignatieff’s response that killed him. Here’s the right response:

First off Jack, your numbers are wrong, I have not missed 70% of the vote. Secondarily, as leader of the opposition, I have responsibilities beyond normal Parliamentarians. Those responsibilities reasonably keep me out of the house sometimes. It’s far more reasonable for the leader of the opposition to miss some votes than the leader of the third place party spend almost $1m of taxpayers money transporting himself and his wife all the way to Toronto.

Here’s what you don’t say, especially when the label the opposition has placed on you is arrogance:

I don’t need any lectures on democracy from you.

Ignatieff went for the latter response, and today the Canadian Forces are dumping the corpse of his political career over the side of a frigate off the coast of Peggy’s Cove.

Stephen Harper’s best move was one he was heavily criticized for. He offered to debate Ignatieff one-on-one, then withdrew the offer when Ignatieff jumped at it. At to that Ignatieff’s response to Layton in the debate that (and I paraphrase) he should stop acting like he has a chance at forming government. The opposition groups were working together, trying to unseat Stephen Harper. What Harper did by offering the one-on-one debate was put the fox in the hen-house of the coalition. Ignatieff confirmed that indeed, some pigs are created more equal than others in any possible coalition/co-operation. The game was on, and the NDP helped take down the Liberals.

Champagne notwithstanding, the NDP has a real problem. It is now the party of Quebec, having gained only 8 more seats outside of Quebec. Half their caucus is from one province. Quebec voters have long memories and don’t forgive perceived insults. So what do you call it when a party runs a bunch of inexperienced kids? If some of these very lightweight politicians emerge to show what they are not made of, Quebec voters may well turn on the NDP. And controlling political amateurs who have nothing to lose by going off reservation is going to be a Herculean task. The expression herding cats comes to mind.

Beside that, Quebecers will expect Layton to stand in the house and speak for Quebecers. It’s what is done. When he goes in to his “I speak for all Canadians,” schtick, Quebecers won’t be happy. But if he stands and starts doing Gilles Duceppe’s old “I speak for all Quebecers,” schtick, the rest of the country will notice and note. He will also now have to make up his mind on a number of issues where he said one thing on Quebec and another elsewhere, particularly out West. You can’t play two sides of the fence in Parliament. It will be a delicate balancing act, and one if he gets wrong, could be very bad for the NDP next time around.

***********
Note: Ruth Ellen Brosseau is already a problem

What’s next for the Liberals? If I were the Liberal Party of Canada, here’s what I would do.

First off, disregard any talk of Liberal/NDP merger. Not this time, not with the NDP having the trump cards. A Liberal/NDP merger only works for Liberals if it is the NDP being absorbed by the Liberals, not the other way around. Like the PCs before them, they will need more than one drubbing to get the hint.

That said, the goal is rebuild. And like a hockey team, the best rebuilds are youth movements. I am not a Liberal, and I don’t pretend to know everybody in the party. Insiders would be better informed on the talent within, but I would shoot with a guy like Justin Trudeau. Yes, I know what the detractors say: his father’s charisma, his mother’s brains. That may be so, it may not, but I would risk it all on him, or someone like him.

To be sure I’m talking about a long-term project. Your new guy has to be willing to go riding to riding, Liberal to Liberal and shake hands, discuss what’s important to them, and convince them to leave a few dollars in the collection box on their way out. Every riding, every Liberal need to shake your guys hand, look him in the eye and connect (note: I am using the masculine here, but it could just as well be a woman. The prose was just getting too bloody awkward trying to neutralize the gender).

This strategy depends on one uncomfortable fact: you have to be prepared to lose the next election. Not that you can’t win it – 4 years is a long time in politics – but that winning it is not your aim. Rebuilding the party, developing policies, improving the finances, those are the goals. Two election from now, and we are talking 6 – 8 years, you are looking to win. By then you have a veteran leader who has been through the wars, he has made his mistakes, and he’s ready to lead. That’s the route I would take and it is, I think, the only way to avoid the end of the Liberal party.

Of course, you could disagree and make 64 year-old Bob Rae your leader, just as the PC’s went back to Joe Clark. That worked so well for them, after all.

Ruth Ellen Brosseau lives in Ottawa and works at a student pub, does not speak french and has never been to Berthier-Maskinongé. During the campaign, she went on holiday to Las Vegas, and had to be called in Vegas and told to come back, because she was winning. The voters of Berthier-Maskinongé elected her to Parliament anyway: can we now do away with the myth that Quebecers are more sophisticated voters?

election '11 Jack Layton, Joe CLark, Justin Trudeau, Michael Ignatieff, Ruth Ellen Brosseau, Stephen Harper,  Berthier-Maskinongé

I’m trying to remember, the Liberals are aways positive in their messaging, right?

election '11 Conservative Party, Election 2011, Stephen Harper

The scene unfolds easily in front of you. The Government has fallen, a minority Parliament ends in a vote of non-confidence. The governing party is reeling from scandal, yet the polls say the election will end much as it began, with the current Prime Minister returning to Ottawa with a minority mandate. Radio shows ask the question: why would the opposition force an election they can’t win? Why waste this money on a vote that will end in the same Parliament as it began?

The leader of the opposition was on the defensive. Canadians don’t want this election, don’t need this election. His patriotism had already been called into question and he was gaffe prone. On day one of the campaign he makes, the media assert, another gaffe. Without prompting, without a clue, he says there will be a free vote on gay marriage in the house under his government.

Why, why would Stephen Harper give such a gift to Paul Martin? Why would he make it about his scary agenda instead of Paul Martin’s corrupt, bag of money under the table, Liberals?

In reality, what that statement did was take the question of gay rights out of the debate. It took from the Liberals the, “those scary Conservatives and their hidden agenda want to take away your human rights,” attack. It saw what was coming, and neutered it. It was a well thought out strategy, and served warning that the Conservatives were ready and serious about the 2005/06 campaign.

They ran a brilliant campaign focusing on five core policies and announcing one new policy initiative every day. They were lean, they were direct, and they spoke to voters with simple policies that resonated. And when the going got tough, when the very nasty Liberals personally attacked, they ignored it and stayed on message. It worked, and the Conservatives won.

Now the roles are reversed, the Conservatives have the dirt of governance on their hands, the attack ads, the scandals involving accounting tricks with their own money. Things are so bad in Ottawa, even Jack Layton is indignant. Yet the polls say the Conservatives will be back, probably with a minority. Why would the opposition risk so much?

Like Stephen Harper, Michael Ignatieff is going to answer to charges he has a scary hidden agenda. In Harper’s case it was a social conservative agenda. In Ignatieff’s, it is the question of forming a coalition that includes the Bloc. It is there, it will be in the ads, and Ignatieff had better answer the question directly and honestly right off the bat.

Day 1:

• blue serge suit dry cleaned – check
• non-confidence voted – check
• have answer to sticky question ready…

There is a blue door, there is a red door. We’re gonna elect a Liberal Government.

Here’s a hint Mr. Ignatieff. The answer to every single question you ever get asked in politics is not a quote from Go Dog Go!

Day 2:

Someone please, get on the phone and explain to the Count that it is a yes or no question: If the Conservatives get a plurality, but not a majority, will you enter into a coalition with the NDP and Bloc? Yes/No.

And here’s a tip, the right answer is no. The worst answer is, “The light is green now, Go Dogs Go!”

Coalition of the Treasonous, Pompous Igghead, The Count Coalition, Michael Ignatieff, Paul Martin, Stephen Harper

Will they, or won’t they? It’s the question on the lips of political junkies and shut-ins from sea to sea to sea. Will the opposition vote non-confidence in the Harper Government, or will the electorate have to wait until 2012 to punish Stephen Harper by eviscerating Michael Ignatieff?

Either way, Harper should bring a band on the campaign trail, and sing a few numbers. Here’s a couple of suggestions. First, one to show he’s serious about winning.

Then to show he has a sense of humour:

I think full make-up and snake around his neck would also be a nice touch. I’ll tell you one thing, he’d lock up my vote.

Cool For Cats Alice Cooper, Election 2011, Stephen Harper

Our first priority remains the evacuation of Canadians, safely and quickly by any means possible

human rights Libya, PM Harper, Stephen Harper

Interesting piece by John Ivison in today’s National Post: Jack Layton apparently has his sights sets on leader of the official opposition.

The task looks Herculean – the Liberals polled an average of 29% in the four polls this month: the NDP just over half that…

It may seem nuts, but I like Layton’s chances, just as I like the Conservatives chances of forming a majority. The truth that’s not being told is, Ignatieff has never been a big player in a high level campaign. He ran one leadership campaign, was way out ahead when it began and blew it: the more Liberals saw him, the less they liked him.

His second leadership campaign he won by backroom manoeuvring, taking the decision making out of the hands of Liberal party members and their inconvenient votes.

You can’t backroom your way through a general election.

Everytime I see Ignatieff, my spidey senses tingle the same little tingle: when the going gets real and tough, this guy will fold like an Ikea chair at an overeater’s anonymous meeting.

Jack Layton is right (yes I wrote that: Dec 15, 2010, mark it on your calendars), Michael Ignatieff is very vulnerable in a campaign. He talks about a campaign on leadership, but what he means is he thinks Ignatieff isn’t up to the job of winning peoples minds and hearts when it counts.

Jack Layton Jack Layton, Michael Ignatieff, National Post, Stephen Harper, Stornoway

Yesterday I hit my five year blogging mark. To celebrate the occasion, the Conservative Party held a conservative party. It is appropriate. Five years ago the Conservatives were in opposition. Six weeks after I took up the mantle, they were governing.

It’s been a wonderful five years: I have had some fun, took some pictures, and run, very unsuccessfully, for Senate.

But lest we think Prime Minister Harper is ungrateful for all I have done, here he is, singing my praises last night:

Blog Administration Blogivarsary, Stephen Harper, The Seeker

Holy cow! Prime Minister Harper took his Little Help From My Friends schtick from last year, and extended it last night. This year for an encore he took a full band onstage in Ottawa, Celtic band Herringbone, and performed a five song set, plus a snippet of John Lennon’s Imagine, in honour of the musician who died 30 years ago yesterday.

Here’s the setlist

Sweet Caroline
I’m on My Way
The Seeker
Share the Land
Jumpin’ Jack Flash

Audio of the whole show is available at David Akin’s blog: here

Here’s some video snippets.

Stephen Harper Herringbone, I'm On My Way, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Share The Land, Singing, Stephen Harper, Sweet Caroline, The Seeker