Pictured: CTV Global Media — Bought and paid for by the Conservatives!
Our good friend “Trusty Tory” wanted me to check out this video of today’s Mike Duffy Live program (which I missed, darn it), presumably so that I could enjoy the spectacle of CTV’s corpulent, chrome-domed clown prince of political spin gleefully rubbing his flabby grubhooks together and mordantly chortling, not only over the woeful state of disrepair the Liberals find themselves in with respect to the province of Quebec (e.g., Paul Martin’s riding of LaSalle-Émard has no money and no candidate! Outremont has no candidate!), but at the juicy prospect of a supposed “civil war” within that particular wing of the party.
Yes, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Mulroney has been completely forgotten and the “big blue wave” is rolling in again! And this is news on what planet? It’s a well known fact that the Quebec wing of the party has been an absolute trainwreck for years now for a variety of reasons and that support from the Bloc has been decaying as the romance of separatism inexorably fades away. Dion can’t count on anything outside of Montréal and even those ridings can’t be considered entirely “safe” anymore. Likewise, much the same can be said of Duceppe’s former strongholds. And so Duffy presents us with the completely obvious scenario that the entire election might hinge on the Conservatives winning big in Quebec. Well duh!
If that actually turns out to be the case, which by no means is an entirely certain thing, there will be a delicious irony of sorts in seeing the party that started as a populist movement in the West that shared much in common with grassroots separatist movements joining forces with disaffected Quebecers, many of them former separatists also it has to be assumed, to form the next government of this country. That seems like a rather unlikely and potentially quite volatile mix to me, but it could work I suppose. One has to wonder however what it is that unites them ideologically speaking… is it perhaps a foggy kind of “autonomist” position that both camps seem to find quite attractive, or is it simply the desire to be in power and rake in all the privilege and federal pork that naturally comes with power?
23 Comments
September 5, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Nice screen capture of Duffy. He looks like a hefty Dr. Evil.
I cannot see Quebec voters falling in line behind Harper unless they choose to ignore such things as massive cuts to arts and culture, aggressive military stance, strong anti-feminist agenda, non-existent environmental policy, etc. Other than decentralization of federal powers, Harpers bread and butter supporters have very little in common with the majority of Quebec voters.
That said, the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party is in shambles and the BQ have become somewhat irrelevant with Harper in power. And I highly doubt that the NDP will make any inroads outside Montreal and are probably limited to two seats maximum.
September 5, 2008 at 9:40 pm
It doesn’t look good for the Libs. The ADQ will throw their support and organization (such as it is) behind the Conservatives and Charet can’t be relied on for much of anything…
September 5, 2008 at 10:01 pm
RT,
The reason there is a disconnect in this country and a polarization is because of comments like this:
Beijing York said:
“…I cannot see Quebec voters falling in line behind Harper unless they choose to ignore such things as massive cuts to arts and culture, aggressive military stance, strong anti-feminist agenda, non-existent environmental policy, etc. Other than decentralization of federal powers, Harpers bread and butter supporters have very little in common with the majority of Quebec voters…”
So here we have BY (if I may) telling us what he/she has been told about Quebecois and what makes them tick rather than trying to understand the nature of the attraction itself. This is why there is a disconnect.
The position that Quebecois may find the PROGRAMMING and NATURE of the governing party attractive is lost on this person.
I see too many comments like this (often at CBC) where people project THEIR views onto others. Rather looking to understand a different perspective they simply dismiss it.
Sorry if I am getting a little esoteric here. Just an attempt to go deeper than point-counter point.
September 5, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Tomm — Hmmm. Well, I can’t speak for commenters here, but perhaps BY has some insight into the Quebec mindset and that’s a reflection of it from his perspective. I really don’t try to presume too much when it comes to that sort of thing, although obviously I’m prone to do it from time to time. I’m sure you too project your own viewpoints onto others — I’ve seen you do it many times when talking about what’s important to “average” Canadians as if you’re the insightful oracle of all that’s quotidian in this country. Weren’t you pontificating on an earlier thread about how people have short memories and will view any jabs the Conservatives make assassinating Dion’s character as “humorous” or some such thing?
September 5, 2008 at 10:21 pm
I can’t put it as eloquently as you, RT, but Mr. Potato Head causes just too much “regurgitation stimulus” for my liking these days.
As for the rest of the article, well…
Sacrebleu!
September 5, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Forget the ADQ. The federal Conservatives have nearly all of Charest’s Liberal Party working for them. That’s a heckuva lot more valuable than Dumont’s ruffians.
What were you saying about a civil war in the Liberal party?
I don’t think the Liberals even really have a provincial party in Quebec anymore.
September 5, 2008 at 10:27 pm
RT,
Yes, that’s my projection. But I justify it by telling myself I am predicting (and can assess accuracy) rather than assuming and dismissing.
I’m concerned when people dismiss others. When I write something and people ignore it because they project that I’m wearing a certain hat, it is disappointing.
Please keep in mind that I have a prediliction to thinking the LPC is just an organization of power gatherers without a moral compass. So I am more highly critical of what they create. But given that, I am still capable of looking and analyzing what they build.
For example the carbon tax. I kind of like this idea of a shift, but its:
-a tax grab
-going to be used as a mask to fund all kinds of social justice programming that I think is wrong headed
-poorly constructed
-poorly timed (try 2013 once China is on board)
-would be destructive to our economy the way it is presently structured.
So I post my disagreement. What I don’t say is what BY said.
In regards to the “humorous” attack ads. You’ve got to keep in mind how seriously the LPC has taken itself. It actually thinks it has the right to disrupt the flow of government by using the Senate to slow legislation to a crawl. It also thinks it has the right to bring the country to the brink of an election 20 times and pull out at the last second. (Buy it a freaking condom). It doesn’t have these rights. It truly has to recognize it is no longer running the government, it has a role, but not the one it has arrogantly appointed for itself.
September 5, 2008 at 10:30 pm
As a matter of note, there was an interesting bit on CBC about an organization of parents in Quebec protesting a new school curriculum that would teach students about religions other than Roman Catholicism.
I recall one guy saying, “If we tell students there is more than one religion it is like telling them they have more than one father”.
You know, before last election I was hardly aware that there were so-cons in Quebec.
September 5, 2008 at 10:32 pm
In regards to Mike Duffy. I like the guy more and more each day.
I too have also noticed how he has become much more “balanced”, or perhaps less condescendingly critical of the CPC over the last two years.
I think its a good thing, but I recognize that if I’ve noticed it, others certainly will, and that the media forms people’s opinions, therefore I can understand how upset some might get.
September 5, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Mike’s straight up fellow too, I think.
September 5, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Tomm — Well, you can call it “balanced” if you want, I still think he’s a joke — and always has been — because he’s a profoundly unserious person who views politics as a big chuckle. It’s all just a game to him, which is a fair enough position to take, I suppose, but his opinions have to be accordingly be discounted as mostly worthless.
Of course you enjoy it because your “team” is on the upswing and Duffy’s coverage will therefore appear to be favorable to the Conservatives. This of course, you’ll describe as “balance” (i.e., anything good for you). You’ll also revel (as does that other Kool-Aid® drinker “Trusty Tory”) in every story that casts the Liberals as being in a state of chaos and disrepair because it’s pleasing to you. If, however, Harper were to stumble of encounter difficulties and Duffy gleefully reported on that, then you’d be screaming “Liberal bias!!!”
September 5, 2008 at 10:44 pm
RT,
Touche. You are a good judge of character and absolutely correct. Go into psychology while you’re still relatively young.
September 5, 2008 at 10:54 pm
The key point here is to leave them with less power than they started with. Believe me the best policy would be to vote against the government no matter what.
ask yourself this before you vote:
1. why do they need the extra power?
2. what have Canadians lost in the last two years that they need to go looking for more power.
3. have things really been that bad under the coalition government?
Look I am a conservative and I like Stephen Harper but I don’t trust these bastards one bit, I think the coalition has put just a little bit of manners on the idiots, seriously don’t give them the chance to fuck everything up because in my opinion this is what will happen if they gets a majority.
September 5, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Urgh. Perish the thought.
September 5, 2008 at 10:55 pm
Tomm — You said:
Well here’s an idea. Let’s do away with ALL “tax grabs” and just disband the country altogether. How’s that sound? Zero tax uber alles! Then you can be free as a bird to do whatever you want! Life will be glorious and happy and there will be an unending supply of candy floss for all!
“Social justice programming”… Wow! That sounds scary! Quick, get on the phone to the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Canadian Identity and alert him to this insidious plot to undermine our Canadian values!!!
I’m sure it is “poorly constructed” and I’d value you telling me exactly how. I’ve got time… Please, do tell. Send me an e-mail with a detailed breakdown of precisely how it’s “poorly constructed” — I’d be fascinated to read your thorough critique.
And “poorly timed” for sure. I think maybe in the next decade it might be better. Or say a few hundred years from now.
Destructive to the present economy. Yes, well you know a lot more than most mainstream economists when it comes to this subject, so I’m sure they’re all completely wrong about how destructive carbon taxes are.
September 5, 2008 at 10:57 pm
What coalition?
What manners?
September 5, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Duffy runs a show that is FULL of mundane and unserious shit thats there to fill the allotted time of the program. Serious stuff just doesn’t happen everyday.
Gosh, RT have you ever seen his guests? How on earth do you think one could withstand being fed party-line BS by three MPs for so long and still stay serious? Or maintain one’s sanity?
I can see that he’s biased but a little chuckle is a better response than getting irritated, shrill and foul-mouthed. Especially if you’re unhealthy.
September 5, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Isn’t Duffy part of the dreaded MSM my Tory friends? Taber and Duffy, what a crack team. Off topic (kinda), check out this great product. It’s only 6.99!
September 5, 2008 at 11:18 pm
BC — Egad, how annoying.
Surely they could have come up with much better ones than that!
September 5, 2008 at 11:20 pm
OR — Granted… he’s surrounded by inane chuckleheads and hacks all spinning like mad. But I’d no more take his opinion on anything seriously than I would Wolf Blitzer’s for exactly the same reason. Like MDL, “The Situation Room” is an intensely silly place, as are most of the cable news shows for that matter.
September 5, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Can you believe it!? I’m not sure why your post reminded me of that product. Harper, Dion, Layton, and Duffy, sure have done a fine job in demoralizing me (re: Canadian politics).
September 6, 2008 at 4:18 am
Geez – the recent promise of another “$4 billion” to Quebec wouldn’t be a factor would it?
Quebec likes Ignatieff….whether some people like him or not…he’s a good orator. Dion should use him to point out to Quebecers what they stand to lose…arts, women’s rights, etc. Not so much the bad Harper thing – but what they stand to lose.
September 6, 2008 at 1:50 pm
That sounds like a reasonable suggestion Rural Sandi.
By the way Thomm, I have worked in Gatineau and Montreal long enough to know that arts, women’s rights, etc are near and dear to many in Quebec. Besides, just look at the public investments the province has made in supporting the arts, or in creating a “national” subsidized day care program.