Pity the poor Liberals… They’re really throwing absolutely everything and anything they can at the wall in the hopes it will stick. I doubt today’s feeble charge of “plagiarism” by Bob Rae will gain much traction, but it’s pretty funny.
In fact, it’s somewhat reminiscent of the scaremongering line of attack from the 2004 campaign…
Unfortunately, that was then — this is now. Then, Harper was a largely unknown commodity, and as such, the “risky” option for Canadian voters. Now the roles have been reversed (albeit on different grounds).
I hate to agree with Harper’s weasely spokesdouche, but it really is a measure of the Liberals’ desperation. Is this actually the best the LPC can come up with… “a debate about a five year-old speech that was delivered three Parliaments ago, two elections ago, when the prime minister was the leader of a party that no longer exists”? Quite pathetic really.
Note-to-Self Update: Never, ever become a “campaign worker.”
85 Comments
September 30, 2008 at 9:14 am
I don’t care….it speaks of who Harper is and what he’s always been….neo-con envy, like a child that copies his hero.
“[Y]our country [the USA], and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world.”
- Conservative leader Stephen Harper, then vice-president of the National Citizens Coalition, in a June 1997 Montreal meeting of the Council for National Policy, a right-wing American think tank.
It’s not a blip in his political life….it’s his beliefs all along.
September 30, 2008 at 9:19 am
I think you’re dead wrong on this. Did you ever hear this before? We aren’t looking at old news – it is new news and, therefore, worth talking about.
I do agree that the problem is not “plagiarism”. The problem is that he didn’t even care enough to form his own policy on this important issue.
September 30, 2008 at 9:21 am
Why do you find it necessary to “spin” this, Red? Had it been possible to bring it up earlier, most people would have forgotten it by now.
September 30, 2008 at 9:25 am
It’s important because it proves that Harper doesn’t operate with the best interests of Canadians in mind. He operates with an agenda of parroting the Bush agenda.
As a regular voting citizen of this country, this certainly does matter. It destroys any credibility Harper may have on anything. He refuses to be accountable to us and our country and I’m tired of the bullying from Harper.
September 30, 2008 at 9:31 am
I don’t know Red.
The Chretien decision on Iraq is considered one of his finest and reminding Canadians of Mr. Harper’s position on that decision is not a bad thing. This is particularly true in Quebec where Mr. Chretien’s decision received almost universal praise.
As well, showing that Mr. Harper giving someone else’s speech would give a few people pause, particularly on that issue.
This leaves Mr. Harper open to the accusation that he did not have his own ideas on foreign policy in 2003 and leads to legitimate questions of whether he has any of his own ideas now.
As well, I am wondering if this could be the first salvo in comparing Mr. Harper’s statements to those of his conservative heros.
There are a whole bunch of issues where Mr. Harper made statements that were virtually identical to that of Mr. Bush.
Maybe we will seeing a similar presentation to today’s with those more recent statements. Just the juxaposition of their statements would have a large impact and it would be useful in showing that Mr. Harper has not changed his mind or approach in the last 5 years.
I guess we will see if the Liberals are willing to bring a sitting President into a Canadian election campaign.
September 30, 2008 at 9:31 am
I’m just amused that he copied it. It’s not a killing or wounding blow… but it is funny that it’s revealed now, the day before the start of the debates.
September 30, 2008 at 9:38 am
Ti-Guy — I think this would perhaps have been wonderful grist for fundraising mill when speaking to partisans six months ago, but I don’t see it holding much water with “average” voters with vastly more troubling things on their minds at the moment. Um, imminent financial meltdown… Hello! It reeks of desperation.
September 30, 2008 at 9:48 am
And, Harper’s decision making process -
I don’t know all the facts on Iraq, but I think we should work closely with the Americans.”
- Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, March 25th 2002. As it turned out, Harper wasn’t the only one who didn’t know all the facts.
….make a decision when facts aren’t known, no questions Harper?
September 30, 2008 at 9:57 am
Anything that takes the focus off of Dion is a good thing.
September 30, 2008 at 9:59 am
I think this would perhaps have been wonderful grist for fundraising mill when speaking to partisans six months ago…
What this available to the Liberals six months ago?
I don’t give a shit about fundraising. How much money the Liberals have to employ consultants and marketing strategists to massage the rest of us doesn’t affect me in the least…that’s what “Conservatives” are for. And in the long-term, conflating democratic politics and advertising fails anyway (look; it’s failing right now), and one should never support the notion that citizenship is just another consumer activity.
The Liberals don’t have to talk about the financial meltdown (which, I shouldn’t have to remind you, the Iraq invasion is very much linked to)…you can watch the news for that. Besides, no one understands it anyway. Niall Ferguson asserted on TVO’s the Agenda yesterday that the issues involved really are rocket science.
September 30, 2008 at 10:33 am
On the eve of the french debate. This was a good hit by the Liberals.
September 30, 2008 at 10:39 am
Well, as much as I’d like to think so, I’m still not convinced that a significant mass of the Canadian electorate is sensate or morally-grounded enough to really care. That remains to be seen.
September 30, 2008 at 10:45 am
True, but it is good to see the Liberals employing something resembling strategy. Mabye they picked up a chessboard somewheres. Also, it is nice seeing Conservative partisans all tied up in knots over at Macleans.
We shall see…
September 30, 2008 at 10:49 am
Desperation may be in play …. but it says more about our media environment than about the state of one faltering campaign.
The media seems to be thinking
“Issues? We don’t need no stinkin’ issues!”
How much coverage would the 19-dead/bad-meat scandal have gotten w/o the bad-joke scandal to carry it?
How much coverage would Rae have gotten for raising this foreign-policy-risk-issue* if he didn’t use this ancient plagiarism tape?
*We ducked the last really bad one (Iraq) cause of Chretian’s incredible call (according to Wells everyone in Govt and media were shocked by Chretian’s decision and most thought it would turn out to be a huge mistake). With Stevie at the helm how long will it take for him to say “Ready aye Ready Sir!” (or god forbid “Ready aye ready Sarah” )
September 30, 2008 at 10:53 am
RT
Desperation? You really don’t see anything relevant here? You mean you’ve never posted on Harper’s import of ideas, you’ve never drawn a comparison to the Australian model?
I think you’re missing the point, and attaching something else. Think strategically for a moment. This is dead air time, everyone on hold for the debates. What a perfect day to drop this story, it will be forgotten after the debates, so it has no chance to blowback on the Liberals, it only PACKS the frontpages for a day, with the Cons on the defensive. I think it’s brilliant, and I’ll use every publication I can find right now as proof.
September 30, 2008 at 11:01 am
Mabye they picked up a chessboard somewheres. Also, it is nice seeing Conservative partisans all tied up in knots over at Macleans.
Isn’t that embarrassing for the Conservatives? It’s so clogged up with Conservative shills and their stupid points that the site has slowed down to a snail’s pace. I just caught “Chuckercanuck” over there, so you know it’s going to get even dumber.
I really fault Macleans for spreading the story over several posts. Like Jon Stewart remarked one time…the media jumps on issues like a bunch of kids on a soccer ball, thus preventing anyone from developing a coherent narrative.
And the narrative is this…the invasion of Iraq is integral to the US’s imperial overstretch and very much central to the financial meltdown we’re seeing right now. And that puts Harper squarely in the middle of this history that is not, by any means, ancient, never mind the fact that Harper is very much an ideological a neo-liberal when it comes to economics, his one and only expertise.
September 30, 2008 at 11:11 am
chuckercanuck… bud, kody. those names are hilarious. I lost about 5 thousand on stocks yesterday and I really don’t have that much invested. I can imaginge the heart rates of those heavily invested. The narrative you suggest sure is working well for Obama.
September 30, 2008 at 11:22 am
Pity the poor Liberals? They’re really throwing absolutely everything and anything they can at the wall in the hopes it will stick? I doubt today’s feeble charge of “plagiarism” by Bob Rae will gain much traction? But it’s pretty funny?
Yep. Boring. Nothing to see here. Move along!
LOL
Come on. You might just as well take this little grumble of yours over to the Blogging Tories. I mean really. What did you get some Govtweets in your donation box or something?
September 30, 2008 at 11:43 am
Maybe I’m missing the boat altogether, but I suggest that a lot of the comments here are of the “inside baseball” variety and will be completely lost on the wider public that still doesn’t seem to be paying much attention to this no-issue, “nothing-to-see-here” election.
Will people appreciate the fact that Harper was parroting talking points from the neo-cons back during the run-up to the war in Iraq about WMDs? Will they take that as reflection on his poor judgment skills when they themselves may have subscribed to the very same “kill the evil-doers” thinking at the time? After all, how many people conflated Iraq with 9/11 — and continue to do so? Will they buy the association between Harper and Bush? Or will it, as I’m more inclined to think, simply be written off as desperate scare-mongering in lieu of any substantive policy alternatives by the Liberals and a “hail-Mary” gambit to create a distraction from the shortcomings of their leader?
As I said quite a while back, this election will be about the economy and, unfortunately, Dion’s “Green Shift,” for all its theoretical merits and purported good intentions was bound to be a massive deadweight in that regard. Kinsella rightly made that call early on in the game back in the summer. Perhaps it’s a worthy idea, a noble concept and all that… it may even make sound economy sense in theory, but with the price of oil skyrocketing then, the timing sucked. Add to that now the catastrophic financial meltdown on Wall Street and all of the looming uncertainty about how the U.S. recession (I think we can put the argument over the r-word to bed now, right?) and its inevitable cascading effect on the Canadian economy and the timing REALLY sucks.
The Liberal finance minister of Ontario really nailed what’s likely to be the definitive nail in the coffin of Dion yesterday when he said that it wouldn’t be prudent at this time to be venturing off into tax transfer schemes. Could that announcement have possibly dovetailed more perfectly with the Conservatives’ campaign theme? I don’t think so. And sadly, well sadly for the federal Liberals at least, he’s right.
So, throwing shit like this “plagiarism” charge at the wall to see if it sticks may make sense to those invested in rationalizing their way out of the completely obvious insofar as it temporarily disguises the foreboding writing on said wall that they simply refuse to accept, but to most people it’s bound to appear desperate and somewhat absurd.
September 30, 2008 at 11:48 am
RT
Nobody is assuming this is anything but “inside baseball” stuff. But, and you know this, if you can get your opponent off message, that’s a good day. Say they didn’t drop this today, then maybe we would be talking about Duncan’s comments, or Harper’s challenge on the debate, but were not, in fact the coverage is CONSUMED with this story. From a strategic point of view it’s a shrewd move, even Fife called it a “clean hit” at Harper, so we don’t have to expand the argument to a testament on “too little too late”, it’s just a move to put others on the defensive. Let’s take it to the bottomline question- are the Cons happy with today’s narrative yes/no? Exactly, nothing more, nothing less.
September 30, 2008 at 11:50 am
Well, I’m starting to not really care what you think anymore. It’s like you’re demanding that your readers be as insensate as the mythical”Joe Canadian” and have no better expectations of the their democracy and their party politics than the Conservatards do.
September 30, 2008 at 12:04 pm
That mythical Joe Canadian and his hockey wife Barbie North are corner flintstones of Harper’s propaganda campaign. Don’t buy into it, RT. It’s still only a third of Canadians. A third too many. The rest of us are puzzling through the Red Tory’s campaign.
September 30, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Omar — Yes, I probably could take my whiny little “grumble” over to the BTs where it would be welcomed with open arms, but that doesn’t mean that I can support this government. I haven’t suddenly forgotten what a miserable bunch of peckerheads they are… what a scheming jackass and dismally pretentious mediocrity Stephen Harper is, or that collectively this stumblefuck bunch of nitwits, jumped-up hicks, hairy-backed swamp developers and corporate shills, faith-based economists, fundamentalist bullies with Bibles, Christians of convenience, freelance racists, misanthropic frat boys, tax cheats, nihilists in golf pants, brownshirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons, hacks, fakirs, aggressive dorks, Lamborghini libertarians, dimestore hacks, Godbothering loons, and greasy pole-climbers, is an absolutely horrific manifestation of so-called “conservatism” in our fine country.
There. Feel better now?
September 30, 2008 at 12:13 pm
I assume RT’s point is that, while this story certainly gives people who wouldn’t vote for Harper to save their mothers yet another reason to rend their garments and not vote for him, it is unlikely to persuade anybody planning or inclined to vote for him. Dr Dawg has a post up entitled “No Majority for Harper–Reason #417 “. When I saw it my first thought was “So how come the first 416 aren’t working?”. Hope springs eternal, I guess.
Meanwhile, today’s MSN (non-scientific) poll is showing that among 25,000 respondees, almost 50% think the Cons would be the best party to manage an economic downturn, with 20% for the Libs and 10% for the Dippers.
September 30, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Red Tory and common sense…
I know, I know, it’s really hard to digest, but Red Tory actually makes sense today in light of the moronic accusations of plagiarism against the Prime Minister — as if this were a real issue of national significance to Canada:[I]t really is a measur…
September 30, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Ti-Guy — Well, I’m starting to not really care what you think anymore. It’s like you’re demanding that your readers be as insensate as the mythical”Joe Canadian” and have no better expectations of the their democracy and their party politics than the Conservatards do.
Allow me to direct your attention to the previous post wherein I decried the superficial “analysis” of the so-called presidential “debate” last week and suggested that people need to start getting serious about the REAL issues that matter and cut through all of the spin and insufferable BULLSHIT.
Well, make of it what you will, but there wasn’t much response to that.
Look, I’m not “demanding” anything of readers. I would never be so presumptuous. What I would like people to do, if anything, is by-pass the massive amounts of crapola being doled out and start getting a bit serious about the various issues at stake rather than nit-picking over trivial matters that are utterly inconsequential.
Personally, I don’t think ANY of the parties are entirely on the right track at the moment.
September 30, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Count on Peter Burnet to imply that everyone is too stupid to understand what people mean without the benefit of his intervention.
He only supports liberals and lefties when they’re being self-critical. He has no idea how intellectually bankrupt that makes him look.
Dr Dawg has a post up entitled “No Majority for Harper–Reason #417 “. When I saw it my first thought was “So how come the first 416 aren’t working?”. Hope springs eternal, I guess.
And of course, the usual sniping from another venue. So childish.
September 30, 2008 at 12:35 pm
What I would like people to do, if anything, is by-pass the massive amounts of crapola being doled out and start getting a bit serious about the various issues at stake rather than nit-picking over trivial matters that are utterly inconsequential.
That’s not going to happen until people like Peter lose a lot of money.
September 30, 2008 at 12:41 pm
By the way, the Liberals have not officially used the term “plagiarism” with reference to this issue; not in the press release on their site, in any case. The media is however spinning this as “The Liberals accuse Harper of plagiarism” although that is quite inaccurate.
See how that works?
September 30, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Ti-Guy — The media is however spinning this as “The Liberals accuse Harper of plagiarism” although that is quite inaccurate.
Go liberal media!
Maybe not, but I only looked up a media reference to the story AFTER I had written my post and BEFORE I’d seen anything on TV.
I happen to subscribe to the “liberalvideo” channel on YouTube. It seems reasonable to infer the word “plagiarism” from the the heading:
Stephen Harper copies Australian Prime Minister John Howard
and the text:
In 2003, Stephen Harper and Australian Prime Minister John Howard deliver largely identical speeches urging their nations to join George W. Bush’s Coalition of the Willing to go to war with Iraq.
p.s. When did you become a spinner for the LPC?
September 30, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Oh, indeed it is, quite patently plagiarism. I’m just saying that the Conservatards are dragging up other examples of plagiarism and conflating them all into one big “everyone does it, who cares, it’s no big deal, move along!” and that’s likely what a lot of people…Joe Canadian, for example…are hearing.
p.s. When did you become a spinner for the LPC?
I’m pleased that I’ve resisted the temptation as much as I have. But seriously, you know what I think of the clever use of language as well as the manufacture of consent through the media.
September 30, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Well, I’m not on the ‘inside’ of any political party. I’m just a voter and regular citizen. I told 3 people about this today before they saw the news. All 3 raised their eyebrows and seemed astonished that Harper et al would ever do anything like this. So it is resonating with us regular folks. Those of us who have morals anyway and expect our politicians to care about us enough to not push another country’s agenda down our throats.
For whatever that’s worth.
September 30, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Well, a PhD by the name of Owen Lippert has fallen on his sword over this, so Harpy expects that’ll be the end of that.
Don’t bet on it, my sweet little Anglospheric neocon.
September 30, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Ti-Guy — Do the Libs really want to venture down the abysmal well of “plagiarism”? I gather from just briefly watching a clip in passing on CBC News this morning that the Cons have already hit back alleging that Dion shamelessly lifted material from that most nefarious lefty “enviro-Nazi” Dr. David Suzuki, so where does that whole game lead?
Wasn’t “plagiarism” the knock against Joe Biden back when he ran for president in 1903 (or whenever)?
Regarding the “spinner” charge, I know you appreciate the clever use of language and are fully seized of how consent is manufactured, so I was just a little surprised at your entirely dismissive reaction (i.e., “I’m starting to not really care what you think anymore”) to what I thought was a pretty fair comment on this gambit.
September 30, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Carrie — It’s fair enough. More than fair, in fact. And, as I said, really funny. I’m still smirking over the “Gotcha!” aspect of it, but…
Too little, too late.
It’s very much all hindsight now, but when I said “grist for the fundraising mill” earlier in the comments here, what I should perhaps have more properly articulated at the time was that this line of attack is the cheap, sleazy kind of nonsensical “character assassination” the Libs should have been immediately throwing back at Harper in a tit-for-tat fashion for his defamatory “Not a Leader” campaign waged over the past year and whatever since Dion took over the LPC. That’s all stuff aimed at partisans and people committed to the process, political junkies and those who are really involved… not your casual bystanders.
So the Libs are FINALLY getting on the ball, suddenly waking up after having simply snoozed, meandered and artfully dodged parliamentary bullets for the past year or so. And now we’re all supposed to stand to attention and salute? Well, I don’t fucking think so. That may be good for encouraging the grassroots and bucking up the spirits of delusional diehards, but it doesn’t wash with those like me who are sympathetic to the Liberals, but not altogether brainwashed by their rather insipid message of a “Richer, Fairer, Greener” Canada.
September 30, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Unfortunately, RT, your common sense approach doesn’t seem to be doing very well by your usual readership. In fact, referring to Conservative supporters as “Conservatards” after this pathetic excuse for a story really speaks volumes about their ability to have a rational discussion. See, two weeks left of the campaign and the true colours are shown.
In fact, it’s everything you described a Conservative to be.
I’ll await the big, childish blowout after, complete with insults, names and the likes.
September 30, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Were it Dion who had committed this gaffe one might expect Harper to ask of Dion (during the debate)if it were himself speaking or just something he read in the Economist.
September 30, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Benalbanach — My “point” (such as it was) is simply that we can all get out our fine Google-sharpened tooth combs and play “Gotcha!” till the cows come home, but… Oh wait — the cows are coming home. Never mind.
September 30, 2008 at 2:37 pm
D’you idjits really consider throwing a grenade at your opponent “strategy”?
At the 11th hour there is no such thing as “strategy”. It’s something you do between elections.
September 30, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Grenade-throwing falls into the “tactics” category, I think.
September 30, 2008 at 2:49 pm
It’s something you do between elections.
Actually, you govern between elections, although Harpy’s two-year election campaign (a lot of it at taxpayers’ expense) has blurred that distinction significantly.
This is exactly what you do when it comes to elections. And if some Liberals are getting shaky about it, well too bad.
September 30, 2008 at 2:59 pm
TT — I haven’t had the time or inclination to check the BT board for various posts, but would imagine there’s great smugness spreading far and wide across it. Well, whatever…
If I were you, I’d be wanting to know more than a few things from the Dear Leader on a “going forward basis” as they say in corporate lingo. Like… um, what’s his economic plan for the next five years? Aside from “stay the course” or some such painfully vacuous platitude, that is. What is the government’s plan to deal with the inevitable drop in exports of manufactured goods to the U.S. over the next two years… will they just let our industrial sector fall into the tank and be victims of the “free market” or are they prepared to inject money into it and if so doesn’t that contradict their ideological principles?
I have many, many, questions that the Liberals SHOULD be asking, but unfortunately aren’t.
September 30, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Well I have no idea if this will stick or mark a changing point.
It is however the first time that CTV in Atlantic Canada has carried 3+ minutes of negative publicity about the Conservatives followed by Liberal and Conservative response to the story and a review of Harpers Iraq position.
Its hard for Harper to come out of this looking good.
Now lets see what kind of ball the Con war room throws back.
September 30, 2008 at 3:24 pm
RT, you’re right the Liberals should be asking more questions. They’ve had to spend so much time familiarizing us with Dion and the Green Shift. I’m hoping that now, starting with the debate, the questions will start. I believe Ignatieff started some yesterday.
The one thing this plagiarism thing seems to have done is make people want to hear what the Liberals have to say finally. Up until now, I don’t think they’ve been compelled to listen much. The people I spoke to today are not Liberal supporters. So that’s what I took from all this, that it’s getting people’s attention. It’s about time they can hit back and keep the others on defense instead of being tag team attacked by Conservatives and the NDP.
September 30, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Red, this isn’t “inside the beltway” stuff. I think, seriously, that Canadians get the problem with Harper and this plagiarized speech.
For me, it boils down to the fact that he was hell-bent on sending Canadians to fight in Iraq (in essence, willing to sacrifice Canadian lives), and yet he couldn’t be bothered to write out his own thoughts (or at least sign off on a speech that didn’t rip lines from a speech that had been delivered in the Commons that very week by a visiting foreign dignitary)? And doesn’t it say alot about Harper that on this issue – one which he was so worked up about – he delegated the writing of his penultimate statement on it to a speechwriter? Yeah, I know, speechwriters play a huge role in these things, but Harper the Master Tactician, I would have expected, might have merely submitted a copy for some tweaking and polishing.
I mean, this is really pretty fucked. I can not imagine Martin, Chretien, Mulroney, Trudeau or Clark (God, especially Clark) to plagiarize a speech that rationalizes sending our troops into harms way.
September 30, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Kaplan — Maybe some of my snarkiness stems from the fact that this was identified as being a “defining issue” quite a long time ago by some. I recall having quite in-depth conversations with “Scotian” (another disaffected PC/Tory) and others about this, vowing to make it a signal issue that should never, ever be overlooked. But we were ignored. “Yes, yes, yes… whatever… That’s so yesterday. Hey, look at our cool new Green Shift! Oh, and have we told you about our treatment program for heroin addicts?” Yeah… how’s that all working out for you?
September 30, 2008 at 4:23 pm
I recall having quite in-depth conversations with “Scotian” (another disaffected PC/Tory) and others about this, vowing to make it a signal issue that should never, ever be overlooked. But we were ignored. “Yes, yes, yes… whatever… That’s so yesterday. Hey, look at our cool new Green Shift! Oh, and have we told you about our treatment program for heroin addicts?” Yeah… how’s that all working out for you?
Who did all of this? Name names, for God’s sakes.
I can imagine the ditzy Cherniak being so airheaded, but otherwise…
September 30, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I wonder if Dion himself wrote those famous letters to Le Devoir. Someone should ask him – I’d be really curious to know.
September 30, 2008 at 4:30 pm
You may be right that this is too little too late, but the talking heads on Newman gave a slightly different perspective today.
The suggestion was this was sort of the final nail in the coffin for Harper’s much coveted Quebec breakthrough, coming after the YCJA announcement and the arts cuts. I have no idea if this is true, but if so, then there may have been some method to this madness.
Moving on, according to Jane Taber the CPC intend to make much of the Ontario Finance Minister’s comments yesterday. Steve is probably correct that this news at least managed to take that story off the front page – at least for now.
September 30, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Ti-Guy — Don’t be silly. I’m talking in a more general sense about issues that were discussed/debated and responded to or not, and not letters or communiqués written to this or that person.
September 30, 2008 at 5:11 pm
I’m talking in a more general sense about issues that were discussed/debated and responded to or not..
Well, you know me. Specifics and evidence…
September 30, 2008 at 6:19 pm
“Actually, you govern between elections.”
Not if you’re the flippin’ opposition.
Attacking Harper like this is very effective but they had two years to get prepare to show they were truly ready to return to government.
The Liberals can burn the furniture to get through the winter but they shouldn’t delude themselves into believing they’ve discovered a new source of fuel.
September 30, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Not if you’re the flippin’ opposition.
Our government is a Parliamentary system and every elected MP participates in governance. Take a look at committee work, for example.
Maybe you should pay attention to how government actually works, rather than bitching mindlessly about things you don’t care to understand.
September 30, 2008 at 7:13 pm
“Our government is a Parliamentary system and every elected MP participates in governance. Take a look at committee work, for example.”
Oh yes! I forgot; it was 2.5 years of parliamentary committee work that was tying up the Liberal party from preparing a proper election campaign.
Gee… I guess I wasn’t paying attention. D’uh.
September 30, 2008 at 7:51 pm
Oh yes! I forgot; it was 2.5 years of parliamentary committee work that was tying up the Liberal party from preparing a proper election campaign.
For an election that should have only happened next year.
Gee… I guess I wasn’t paying attention. D’uh.
Don’t worry you’re not the only one who hasn’t been paying attention and bitching about things you haven’t bothered thinking about. You’re not alone.
Everyone bilious moron like you is exactly the same.
September 30, 2008 at 7:59 pm
Only the most partisan of pro Tories could fail to see the implications of a Steven Harper mirroring someone’s elses speech on such an important issue as going to war. Indeed it leaves us to wonder who is really speaking when Mr. Harper speaks. It leaves us wondering if he has the ability to excercise due diligence in serious situations and more importantly what is his true voice and bent?
September 30, 2008 at 7:59 pm
[...] mean, Christ, anyone with a computer can see what even partisan Liberals think of this [...]
September 30, 2008 at 8:02 pm
What are you even arguing now? I hope you remember.
Yawn… what a bore.
September 30, 2008 at 8:17 pm
What are you even arguing now? I hope you remember.
Yawn… what a bore.
Ah, go fuck yourself.
September 30, 2008 at 10:11 pm
RT:
To be fair, I don’t recall discussing this specific issue with you, or that Harper plagiarized a key speech from another foreign leader on an issue as important as whether to go to war or not, indeed that he plagiarized his speeches at all (the underlying ideas within them oh yes, that we discussed many many times). I do however remember many discussions regarding how much Harper and his inner circle were ripping from their international right wing compatriots in the US and other nations including Australia, and trying desperately to get this picked up upon by others, so I do understand a certain amount of your sentiment here.
However, I do not share it in this case. Indeed, I think the timing on this may turn out to have been better than one would think right now, depending on how this plays in Quebec on top of the other missteps of Harper there, and it also has the potential to make people wonder what other important policies does Harper take his cue from foreigners from including Canadian economic policy. I mean really, the idea that he ripped off this much of a speech verbatim from Howard was all the mistake of yet another flunky (despite Harper’s long standing and well known control freak tendencies as well as his ability to write his own speeches on important issues, things like war supposedly being in that category at least in most people’s minds) that he was totally unaware of stretches credulity yet again (especially given his well known links to Howard and using his methods in many of his political operations over the past several years as reported on many times in the national media even bragged by from some senior CPCers in the past as I recall), and there is a point at which even the average voter’s credulity goes “snap”.
This may be it, and having it come in the day before the debates may set the stage for further planting the concept that Harper’s so called made in Canada approach to governing is actually made elsewhere like in the USA and Australia under right wing governments in the mind of the voters. I don’t know, you could be correct in it’s significance in the end, I don’t dispute that, but then unlike Harper I never claimed to be unable to make mistakes/errors in my evaluations and thinking, and I can also unlike Harper admit to it when it happens.
BTW, I am not precisely a disaffected PCPC/Tory, that is a misconception. I was about to formally join the PCPC under McKay (but then the leaks of the secret negotiations with Harper and the CA came to light so I waited and was horrified at what happened next and how dishonestly and dishonourably it was done) because I was concerned with the imbalance of the Liberals at that time looking to be able to replicate federally what the Cons have done in Alberta given the clear disaster that was the Canadian Alliance and it’s unacceptable (again, because of Harper and his coterie) view of governing. Up to that point I had never joined any federal party (and to this day have not) and tended to be a centrist pragmatic voter that would flip between Liberal, PCPC, and even a couple of times NDP (because I respected the local candidate and didn’t find the leader too objectionable, unlike Layton whom I loathe and despise only a bit less than Harper, although I don’t see him as out to destroy the fundamentals of this nation unlike Harper, my feelings are for his incredibly hypocritical selling out of the NDP core principles for Liberal seat votes as you may recall from my many comments about it on your first blog incarnation) voting in the federal and Provincial elections.
What I am is someone dedicated to the defeat AND discrediting of Harper, his Calgary School/Straussian ideology, and his approach to governing this country, because as you well know I see it as a wholesale foreign import from the worst aspects of the US system, radical GOPers/Strausians (aka Dick Cheney’s crowd who used GWB to put their theories of governance into action with the predictable results we see nowadays from foreign policy to economic disasters) in particular and inherently damaging/destructive to our Canadian traditions and Parliamentary structure of government. So in this sense my opposition to Harper is rooted in my conservative beliefs that Canadian policy should be developed with a Canadian centric premise and first and foremost designed with Canadian interests at heart and that those Canadian traditions and institutions be respected, especially in things like our laws particularly but not exclusively our election laws, something Harper and his CPC clearly do not do, as underscored by this speech issue today as well as the Cadman bribery attempt, Grewal fraud and cover-up, the in and out ad campaign in 2006, etc.
I am truly ABC so long as the Harper CPC exists, even if Harper is deposed until I see his approach to politics and ideology also deposed and discredited from that party I will fight it, because I love what Canada has developed into and cherish it deeply despite its many imperfections. For me, the Libs winning would do that more than anything else, in no small part because of how weak Dion has been sold by Harper to the nation and to his fellow CPCers and would almost certainly in the case of losing to Dion (especially if somehow he got a majority no matter how slim) trigger calls for his ouster and hopefully also to his way of approaching governing both from an ideological and practical/structural perspective. Harper acts as if he is head of State as well as government in a Republican form of government, which is inherently destructive within a Parliamentary structure such as ours, especially in conjunction with how heavily and completely Harper will employ “the noble lie” to gain/hold power.
P.S.
Sorry to hear about your current marital difficulties and the attendent problems it has caused you. If I were in a position to offer financial aid I would have, but as you know I am not so all I can offer you is my moral support in your time of difficulty. Take care and be well my friend.
September 30, 2008 at 10:23 pm
If you think this made the Liberals look desperate, I highly recommend checking out their brand spankin’ new ads.
I’ll give you a hint:
Bush.
September 30, 2008 at 10:35 pm
I’ll give you a hint:
Ooh, let me guess. I features the Liberals claiming trapezoids are really rhomboids.
September 30, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Yeah I saw it.
Love it. Harper is Bush. But who is advertising this?
Therefore…..
vote Liberal? or NDP! No I think it was Green.. unless you’re in Quebec where it would be best to vote Bloc.
So every vote the Conservatives lose with this ad campaign the Liberals gain 1/3 a vote in english Canada and 1/4 a vote in Quebec.
September 30, 2008 at 11:17 pm
I’d be happy if okhropir rumiani and his retarded cohort even knew what “Centre Block” referred to.
…no cheating with teh google, tard-o.
September 30, 2008 at 11:22 pm
Yawn… Ho hum. At least racist conservative trolls aren’t boring. Try again, dullard.
September 30, 2008 at 11:24 pm
Unlike the racist “God-knows-what” Ti-guy.
September 30, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Oh, and who exactly is my cohort? Other than everyone who finds you to be a troll?
September 30, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Are you schizophrenic, okhropir rumiani?
It’s a serious question.
September 30, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Are you a racist Ti-Guy?
September 30, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Oh, would you both Fuck off?
Especially you Ti-Guy.
October 1, 2008 at 12:03 am
Especially you Ti-Guy.
Who the hell’s this moron?
October 1, 2008 at 2:48 am
http://postedat.wordpress.com/2008/10/01/let-us-all-stop-electing-liars-or-the-alcoholics/
October 1, 2008 at 6:28 am
It doesn’t matter what the Tories do to put out this fire. They’ve been severely damaged on the world stage with this embarrassment.
How does Canada look internationally when the Foreign Affairs Minsiter is messing with a person tied to organized crime, he wanted to destroy secret documents (according to his lady friend’s book) and now the PM is either delivering someone elses speeches or, worse yet, getting his talking points directly from the White House.
Just look at how this is playing internationally and tell me any world leader will have respect for Canada with Mr. Harper at the helm.
ITN – United Kingdom: Canada’s PM under plagiarism cloud
Irish Times – Ireland: Canadian PM’s speech on Iraq war plagiarized
BBC News: Canada’s PM faces plagiarism charge
TVNZ – New Zealand: Canada PM’s writer found plagiarizing
eTaiwan News – Taiwan: Canada’s opposition party says PM plagiarized
ABC – Australia: Canadian PM accused of stealing Howard speech
Melbourne Herald Sun – Australia: PM ‘plagiarised’ Howard’s speech
Sydney Morning Herald – Australia: Plagiarism: a plague in both your houses
Press TV – Iran: Canada Tories admit copying speech
Xinhua – China: Canadian PM accused of plagiarizing Australian PM’s Iraq speech
United Press International: Tories admit plagiarism; strategist quits
October 1, 2008 at 8:34 am
Thank you, Myles, for citing those headlines. I guess it’s only Canadians who don’t think a Canadian Prime Minister (when he was Leader of the Opposition) delivering an Australian Prime Minister’s speech is any big deal.
October 1, 2008 at 11:01 am
Jason Cherniak said, “I do agree that the problem is not “plagiarism”. The problem is that he didn’t even care enough to form his own policy on this important issue.
I agree but I would go further by adding that another aspect worth retaining from this incident is its relevance to that fact that Harper espouses a secret ultra reform right-wing Bush agenda, i.e. sending Canadian troops to Iraq.
October 1, 2008 at 12:14 pm
It’s not that secret. Feeding the military-industrial complex makes money for a lot of people. It made perfect economic sense for Harper to support the invasion.
October 1, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Where is the debate on the issues, folks?…
This whole plagiarism non-issue is still being talked about – by bloggers and the media, but not by ordinary Canadians who are more interested in the issues, such as the economy and how to get taxes down in this country. The media, and certain blogge…
October 2, 2008 at 8:24 am
RT:
I agree that the whole “plagiarism” is a non-issue – if only because it goes to show that all neocons use the same mendacious talking points and fallacies to “get their way”. Nothing new here, of course.
However, it is quite germaine to keep pointing out such reprehensible behavior to voters, which inevitably leads to disastrous policies/decisions (e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, economy, etc.), in order to expose the conservatives/republicans/neocons for what they truly are.
Hence, pushing the “Bush link” remains one of the points that must be hammered through and true. This is not “old”, this is directly à propos to virtually all current issues at hand in order to rightly discredit the ideology, philosophy and consequently demonstrated disastrous policies of conservatives/republicans/neocons – regardless however much *they* think that such a strategy is “lame”.
Because *they* largely run on “character” and fearmongering, and considering their usual mendacious tactics, the electorate must be reminded constantly of the demonstarted consequences of the application of their ideology.
In a better world, there would be no need to go to such lenghts in order to point out the obvious. But considering the current state of our democracies, especially with regards to voter (dis-, mis-, non-)information on the issues …
All that being said, it would be quite helpful to have more effective and appropriate opposition to this ideology.
Although Obama constitutes such aprtly, his stance on Afghanistan, as one example, still smacks of good old militarism as a solution to everything.
In Canada, the failed leadership of Dion (regardless of his impressive performance at last night’s debate), along with the overall lack of specific/detailed solutions offered by Layton, not emboldened Harper to govern as a *majority* government, but may yet furthermore allow Harper to win an actual majority.
All in all – we are in trouble and will remain so for years to come.
Unless the LPC gets its act together with an effective leader and/or the NDP gets more pragmatic and specific with its platform …
Of course – a better informed electorate would constitute the best solution to begin with …
October 2, 2008 at 8:28 am
(reposting because of too many typos – sorry about that)
RT:
I agree that the whole “plagiarism” is a non-issue – if only because it goes to show that all neocons use the same mendacious talking points and fallacies to “get their way”. Nothing new here, of course.
However, it is quite germaine to keep pointing out such reprehensible behavior to voters, which inevitably leads to disastrous policies/decisions (e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, economy, etc.), in order to expose the conservatives/republicans/neocons for what they truly are.
Hence, pushing the “Bush link” remains one of the points that must be hammered through and true. This is not “old”, this is directly à propos to virtually all current issues at hand in order to rightly discredit said ideology, philosophy and consequently demonstrated disastrous policies of conservatives/republicans/neocons – regardless however much *they* think that such a strategy is “lame”.
Because *they* largely run on “character” and fearmongering, and considering their usual mendacious tactics, the electorate must be reminded constantly of the demonstrated consequences of the application of their ideology.
In a better world, there would be no need to go to such lenghts in order to point out the obvious. But considering the current state of our democracies, especially with regards to voter (dis-, mis-, non-)information on the issues …
All that being said, it would be quite helpful to have more effective and appropriate opposition to this ideology.
Although Obama constitutes such partly, his stance on Afghanistan, as one example, still smacks of good old militarism as a solution to everything.
In Canada, the failed leadership of Dion (regardless of his impressive performance at last night’s debate), along with the overall lack of specific/detailed solutions offered by Layton, not only emboldened Harper to govern as a *majority* government, but may yet furthermore allow Harper to win an actual majority.
All in all – we are in trouble and will remain so for years to come.
Unless the LPC gets its act together with an effective leader and/or the NDP gets more pragmatic and specific with its platform.
Of course – a better informed electorate would constitute the best solution to begin with …
October 2, 2008 at 8:32 am
The Liberals have always been a party of pragmatic moderation but they’ve allowed the Harper “Conservatives” to steal that mantle away from them while attempting to woo the more left-wing of the electorate.
October 2, 2008 at 9:06 am
Hmm …
It has never been my understanding that “left-wing” and “pragmatism” are somehow mutually exclusive concepts …
October 2, 2008 at 9:33 am
There’s an interesting discussion on pragmatism from the first chapter of The Harper Record (‘Understanding Stephen Harper’ by Steve Patten….I can’t copy and paste, since it’s a secure .pdf, but the whole book is downloadable free of charge, or chapter-by-chapter), about how pragmatism takes different forms in Canadian governance….from doing what is simply correct or best practice for any given situation to pragmatism aimed at achieving political goals, such as winning elections.
Harper’s pragmatism is entirely political, manifested by his retail politics and his targeting of widely divergent interest groups to come together for a brief period, after which he abandons their interests altogether.
October 2, 2008 at 9:20 pm
“Harper’s pragmatism is entirely political, manifested by his retail politics and his targeting of widely divergent interest groups to come together for a brief period, after which he abandons their interests altogether.”
Agreed.
October 3, 2008 at 8:44 am
What, precisely, is uninformed opinion worth? And how frightening is it that any political staffer with so little integrity should have been informing and helping to shape the policy platform of the guy who wanted to be – and is – and hopes to remain – our prime minister? Harper was Leader of the Opposition at the time – that’s not an irrelevant position in our political system. I couldn’t disagree with you more about the significance of this issue and the way it reflects not just on Harper, but on the Liberals, the NDP and us as Canadians. Here’s my post on the subject: http://now-when.blogspot.com/2008/10/im-sorry-were-too-busy-to-create-our.html
October 3, 2008 at 9:43 pm
[...] know, I know, it’s really hard to digest, but Red Tory actually makes sense today in light of the moronic accusations of “plagiarism” against [...]