Tuesday, December 13, 2005

On The Trail


Each of the three federalist parties are in the news today:




Liberals: David Wilkins has given Paul a slap on the wrist for dragging the US into the Canadian election. Wilkins says he understands it's good politics to be fighting with the Americans...so he decided to fight with Paul Martin. Way to play into David Herle's machievelian plan Wilkins.

I think the NDP should really pounce on Martin's Kyoto comments at the debates this week. The environment is an NDP issue and the Conservatives are always afraid of looking too close to the Americans themselves. Layton should stand up and ridicule Martin for attacking George Bush on climate change when the US has a better record than Canada. The environment should be his issue after all.


Conservatives: Harper made the mandatory defense spending announcement today. Defense spending rarely wins votes in Canada but Harper did tack on the "no troops to Iraq" which will likely help him. Out of curiosity, does anyone know how the amount pledged for defense this time compares to his 2004 promise? I suspect it's less, but haven't been able to track down firm numbers.


NDP: "Only Jack Layton will look Ralph Klein in the eye and say no." Or something like that. Layton was very smart during his press conference today to attack the Liberals, rather than the Conservatives and he came across as very forceful and strong on the issue. Clearly a rehearsal for the debates on Thursday and Friday.

27 Comments:

  • Harper took a different tack this time. He didn't demand aircraft carriers. However, he does want a regiment of airbourne commandos in case we want to kick the shit out of Denmark.

    By Blogger Don, at 2:24 PM  

  • I think this time the Liberals should take the Americans seriously. The U.S. Ambassador, David Wilkins, is pissed off. Look! He has summoned a fireball of vengence!

    http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/pix/wilkins_david_cp_9120896.jpg

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:31 PM  

  • Great pic Anon - I've added it to the post.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 2:35 PM  

  • Fact is no leader positioned to take government, nor any leader of a provincial energy-rich province, and certainly not Martin or Harper, is willing to talk honestly about the climate change issue.

    And so far not a single media outlet has asked WHY is Canada's emissions growth record worse than the US, over the period from 1990 to 2003. There's some simple reasons behind it, but to go there means talking about Alberta (and energy in BC, SK, the north, Atlantic Canada... well you get the picture):

    Greenhouse Gas Emissions Misdirection

    Harper won't say that the Conservative policy book doesn't even mention climate change, global warming, CO2 or greenhouse gasses once - not a single mention - all it does is promise to rip up Kyoto. Its bad policy, and I am a card-carrying Conservative and former oil industry consultant making that statement.

    Which means the NDP and Greens remain to fight over this issue and split their vote.

    By Anonymous Mike Watkins, at 3:08 PM  

  • PS: I do agree that Layton should use Kyoto on the offensive too, but other than checking off points on the list, it doen't feel like an issue that people will walk away from the debate on going "yeah!".

    As sick and tired of the health care debate as I am, I think the NDP could really do something there.

    Today's NDP health media event was quite good - it Layton can tap into Shirley Douglas's passion (the first part of her bit at today's media event in SK was very strong indeed), Layton's got a very strong attack against Martin and Harper.

    People can fear health care hidden agendas more readily the some nebulous environmental issue (important as it is).

    By Anonymous Mike Watkins, at 3:15 PM  

  • "Out of curiosity, does anyone know how the amount pledged for defense this time compares to his 2004 promise?"

    From my notes last time, in 2004 Harper promised an additional $7 billion in spending over the next 5 years. This time he's promising $5.3 billion over the next 5 years, in addition to the $12.8 billion that the Liberals have promised.

    By Blogger Russil Wvong, at 3:16 PM  

  • David Wilkins has given Paul a slap on the wrist for dragging the US into the Canadian election.

    Clearly this republiclown doesn't recall how the Americans were dragging everyone into their election. Remember the Europeans are endorsing Kerry bs?

    By Blogger Robert McClelland, at 3:35 PM  

  • "Clearly this republiclown doesn't recall how the Americans were dragging everyone into their election. Remember the Europeans are endorsing Kerry bs?"

    Hello Robert "fuck the jews" McClellan,

    Clearly he probably does recall it, actually. It was John Kerry who was boasting about alleged private endorsements he recieved from un-named foreign leaders. The Republicans had a field day mocking Kerry on that one, and Kerry looked like an idiot. So there is nothing inconsistent about Wilkin's position now relative to the Republican strategy during the election.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:28 PM  

  • Hello Robert "fuck the jews" McClellan

    You do realize that this sort of nonsense only serves to reinforce the belief that conservatives are nothing more than a pack of adolescent bully boys, don't you?

    By Blogger Robert McClelland, at 4:43 PM  

  • Yesterday's comment, but still interesting. Harper and $500 deductable for sports? Actually, a fairly good proposal. Too bad everyone's focusing in on hockey, though. Most of will be saying "damn, I wish I could afford hockey for my kid".

    Still a sound policy announcement. How long until the Libs offer $4000 over the next seven years?

    By Blogger Teddy, at 4:48 PM  

  • So according to noted anti-semite Rober McLelland, reminding people of the fact that someone has absolutely no judgement or integrity is unfair and bullying. I imagine he thinks that calling Reid on "beer and popcorn" is unfair bullying also.

    In any case, I actually love being called a bully for going after an anti-semitic creep. That's rather a badge of honour, actually. I enjoy your frustration at being unable to advance your agenda while people are aware of your actual beliefs and behaviour.

    By Anonymous annextraitor, at 5:21 PM  

  • /pushes Robert's face into the mud and takes his sandwich...


    ...sorry Robert, your comments are your own doing...perhaps you could link us to where you apologised for them.

    By Blogger NorthBayTrapper, at 5:38 PM  

  • For those of us who missed what started the name-calling, could someone please explain and provide a link to the start of this nonsense?

    Because for those of us tuning in late, it just looks like nasty mud-slinging.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:52 PM  

  • "You do realize that this sort of nonsense only serves to reinforce the belief that conservatives are nothing more than a pack of adolescent bully boys, don't you?"

    Yes, conservatives are indeed "bullies", so says the guy who publically proclaims "fuck the jews".

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:07 PM  

  • Just for some context, the man throwing around the "bully" accusations, Robert McClellan, is best known as a moron who derives some sort of pleasure from spray painting "fuck the jews" on the side of buildings, and then has the auduacity to post the same phrase on his website. See the link below to check out the article in question. In it, Robert INSISTS that spray painting "fuck the jews" on the side of a building is NOT anti-semetic nor is there anything wrong with it. Apparantley, however, anyone taking issue with this is a "bully".

    http://myblahg.blogspot.com/2004/05/fuck-jews.html


    (Now we await Robert's next frothing at the mouth rant, where he will use the words "neoconservative", "George Bush", "imperialism", a lot of drivel, and still manage to say nothing.)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:18 PM  

  • Now, don, be nice to Denmark. One of my profs here at Dalhousie has Danish citizenship and I'd hate to see anything bad befall that country. And Lars Ulrich is from there too.

    Anyways, my main point at hand for this thread (so far) is that I find it laughable how the term 'neoconservative' is thrown around as a derogatory slag at Harper. As someone who might be able to identify a neo-con, I can say with 100% assurance that Stephen Harper is not a neoconservative. George W. Bush himself is not a neoconservative, even though he has chosen to surround himself with those who are and has backed himself into a corner in Iraq in which he must speak in neoconservative terms. Bush is a case that even though it looks, talks, and acts like a duck, it's still not a duck, even if it is a bit lame. Please note that I'm only referring to his term limit status, not his actual policy.
    If anything, Stephen Harper is a neoliberal. A generic definition of neoliberalism, courtesy of Answers.com: A political movement beginning in the 1960s that blends traditional liberal concerns for social justice with an emphasis on economic growth. That is Stephen Harper in a nutshell.
    Neoconservatives tend to focus on things like this: anti-communism; skepticism about the efficacy of international institutions; a preoccupation with the concept of the “political” as producing unending conflict; an endorsement of “natural right” as the foundation for domestic institutions; the belief that “virtue,” as well as self-interest, matters in political life; a repugnance toward the relativism in modern liberal society; a marked skepticism about the potential for the physical and social sciences to fundamentally ameliorate the human condition; a pronounced anti-egalitarian stance; and a deep wariness about utopian political projects. That's not Stephen Harper at all.

    By Blogger RGM, at 7:38 PM  

  • This is a Stephen Harper in a nut shell Richard

    "Canada appears content to become a second-tier socialistic country, boasting ever more loudly about its economy and social services to mask its second-rate status, led by a second-world strongman appropriately suited for the task. Albertans would be fatally ill-advised to view this situation as amusing or benign. Any country with Canada's insecure smugness and resentment can be dangerous."

    http://stephenharpersaid.ca/

    We are more than 2 weeks in and yet the Liberals have not mentioned the above once. Reid is not the only one how should be fired for gross incompetance, Herle should be as well.

    By Blogger Koby, at 8:19 PM  

  • Haha, that dude got verbally slammed like I've never seen before, ha ha ha! Good lines guys.

    By Anonymous Peter S., at 8:32 PM  

  • "You do realize that this sort of nonsense only serves to reinforce the belief that conservatives are nothing more than a pack of adolescent bully boys, don't you?"

    Just like adscam served to reinforce the believe that liberals are nothing more then a pack of thieves.

    The mudslinging aside - most big/small "c" conservatives would not agree with Robert's views, just as most big/small "l" liberals do not agree with the theft of millions of taxpayer dollars.

    I dislike the current group of Liberals because I believe that a lot of them were at best willfully ignorant, and at worst happily participating, during the sponsorship scandal (or other wrongdoing/impropriety, i.e. income trusts, disregarding the will of Parliament on multiple occasions, etc.). I don't want to see any Liberal government because I believe that the LPC's policies are not the best ones for Canada. That is similar, perhaps, to how some of you to my left feel that the CPC's policies are not the best for Canada.

    But please, for the love of God, don't try to sell conservatism as the hate that Robert is spewing. That crap isn't a mainstream political ideology, it is just... well... crap.

    By Blogger Greg P, at 11:04 PM  

  • As a term "neoconservative" has been bandied about to the point of being meaningless. Originally, it simply denoted a former Liberal who became a Conservative over the belief that it was necessary to fight the spread of Communism.

    Some people have attempted to afix the moniker on Conservative who combine a libertarian economic program with a religious persausion.

    While the rabid elements of the right and left seem to have adopted it strangely as synonymous with "Jew", which I find strange and disturbing.

    And if you want to classify Harper you'd be better off simply saying Conservative. The program thus far as has been "libertarian lite", same great government taste but with less calories.

    By Blogger Chris, at 11:18 PM  

  • Greg P, you do realize that Robert is an NDP supporter, right???

    Im pretty sure most of the people on here trashing that anti-semitic, bigoted piece of shit Robert McClellan are infact Conservatives.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:37 PM  

  • no way is Robert a conservative troll, he's either a liberal or ndp, but not conservative. You guys are stuck with him.

    "Canada appears content to become a second-tier socialistic country, boasting ever more loudly about its economy and social services to mask its second-rate status, led by a second-world strongman appropriately suited for the task. Albertans would be fatally ill-advised to view this situation as amusing or benign. Any country with Canada's insecure smugness and resentment can be dangerous."

    I'm from Alberta - what's your point? That seems like a pretty accurate statement from where I sit. Do you really expect Martin to present himself as a "second-world strongman" in order to dredge this up? Or better yet, widen the rift between his camp and that of the Chretienites by painting Chretien into that picture? That would look good in the debates...

    By Blogger Candace, at 11:40 PM  

  • Why are Americans intervening to help Martin get re-elected?


    Liberal strategists must be rubbing their hands in glee tonight after U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins told Paul Martin to shut up and stop using the U.S. as a campaign target to further his efforts to get re-elected. Wilkins said Martin risks damaging relations between the countries by dragging the United States into the election campaign. In response Martin thumped his chest and proclaimed he would defend Canadian interests always.

    If the Americans are truly annoyed at Martin's pious platitudes at the Climate Change Conference last week, why would they foster his chances for re-election by publicly chastising him? Are they just plain dumb? A scolding from George Bush might be the one thing that would unite the majority of Canadians behind the Liberal Party.

    By Blogger cardinal47, at 12:18 AM  

  • "I'm from Alberta - what's your point? That seems like a pretty accurate statement from where I sit."

    Man if I had a dollar for every time a Conservative said this, I would, you know, be rich. Anyway, I am thinking of starting petition of sorts. If you feel, as Candance and Harper do, that Canada is "second tier", "second rate", "insecure", "smug", and "resentful" please let me know.

    By Blogger Koby, at 3:20 AM  

  • Cardinal,
    I don't believe that earning a rebuke from Washington will translate into any votes at all for Martin.
    When the point they raised was a rather subdued one and based on the truth, it will only highlight that Canada has a very dismal economic record in spite of signing on to the overrated Kyoto Accord (I say overrated because it's hailed as the saviour of the environment. There's no alternative, no other "game in town," and the treaty is not without its flaws) compared to the US in terms of percentage increases. Because Kyoto is based on percentages and not absolute figures, Canada is worse off than the US in this case.
    It also gives the Conservatives better ammo than it does for the Liberals. Upon coming to office Martin pledged to repair relations with Washington, and went so far as to form a Cabinet-level committee on Canada-US relations. I think it's met twice, and given the diplomatic chill going on I think it's safe to say that it hasn't produced much of anything. This gives the Tories just one more opportunity to say that they will be able to fix things that the Liberals have allowed to fall into disrepair.

    By Blogger RGM, at 8:58 AM  

  • Truth: Canadians resent this election.

    Truth: Harper is an American crony - his platform and policies are indistinguishable from the neo-cons in change down south.

    Truth: The NDP is now percieved as morally bankrupt. This from the former Communist Party of Canada?

    Truth: Liberals will be returned to power even after this latest round of musical chairs, initiated by our friends the Conservatives with the help of THEIR good friends the Bloc.

    Truth: The legacy of Mulroney lives. Harper is Mulroney redux. Prepare to face another loss, small 'c''s.

    Sorry, truth hurts sometimes.

    Peak Oil

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:09 AM  

  • It can't really have success, I feel so.

    By Anonymous www.camobel.org, at 1:29 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home