Canadian politics, Conservatives, Stephen Harper

If I Go There Will Be Trouble….

with apologies to The Clash

Here’s a few names for you.  Richard Hatfield, Kim Campbell and Brian Mulroney.  What’s the significance you ask?  Well, One was flung out of power like a union rep in a Walmart, bringing about a one party legislature in New Brunswick, one learned from his example and skipped town before it happened to him and one got to take the blame and become the PM that saw her party flung out of power like the aforementioned union rep.  Say what you will about Mulroney but he could read the writing on the wall and decided that he wasn’t going to be another Dick Hatfield.  He’ll let Kim Campbell hold that honour instead and more power to her.

Which brings us to Prime Minister Harper, who, with a senate scandal around his neck that looks to get worse before it gets better and more importantly, before the election, may be thinking that Mulroney had the right idea.  Or so John Ivison says and I can see no reason to doubt him.  Like Mulroney, Harper has always been pretty good at reading the wind.  He’d be a fool if he’s not thinking that his political legacy could easily turn into being known as the second Kim Campbell, given recent bi-election results and the press that he and the CPC are getting.  I’m sure that he’s done many other things he’d prefer to be remembered for.  Besides Mike Duffy and the Rob and Doug Ford never-ending  train wreck are the most recognizable conservative faces right now and don’t look to be going away.  Entitled scam artists and substance abusing bullies don’t generate a lot of sympathy and will be remembered in 2015.  I’m pretty sure that Harper would like to be a distant memory by then.

Lighter Things, Stephen Harper

Happy Halloween


Happy Halloween. Or Solstice. Or whatever it is that you call Free Candy Day. For those of you who still haven’t decided on a costume yet I offer this simple, easy to throw together suggestion.  You probably don’t have enough time to make the Death Star accessory  for this year though.

Canadian politics, Conservatives, Justin Trudeau, Liberal, NDP, Stephen Harper, Thomas Mulcair

A (re-)Introduction

We live in interesting, but not unprecedented political times. Darth Harper, the Controller-in-Chief, has done an admiral job of keeping things quiet, but the fruits of his autocratic nature are ripening quickly. The Senate expenditure scandal exposed that he vetted his appointments about as vigorously as John McCain’s campaign committee did when looking at Sarah Palin. And, as we’ve seen in the past, when control freaks get into real trouble, they deal with it by covering the problem up.  In order to make it seem like he didn’t make a mistake in appointing his CTV lapdogs, Harper has been caught either orchestrating or participating in a cover-up. (I’m being as charitable as I can here, obviously.)

Ottawa is starting to get that late-80’s stink when things started to finally stick to Brian Mulroney. You can tell that Harper feels it, public opinion polls express it, the National Post feels it, hell, even the Blogging Tories seem to be beginning to feel it. All that is left is to nominate a woman to be Canada’s second Prime Minister and inevitable fall girl. (Or maybe the end of this government will see the nation’s first gay PM?)

The demise of the Conservative Party is unfortunately not a foregone conclusion, as it still garners an unseemly support in the more self-entitled regions of the country. With an electorate split among three, four, or five parties that can be expected to take a sizable portion of the electorate in any given riding, thirty percent is all you really need in many places.

And what else is different is that it is not the political right that is Balkanized, it’s now the centre and left.

This presents a question: how best to get rid of this government?

In my heart of hearts, I’m a lefty liberal, but the Liberal party has never appealed to me. I’ve always seen them as liberal in name only, more of a financial party with ties to big banks, insurance companies and other people’s money, campaigning on the left and governing in the mushy middle. Because of that, I’ve traditionally voted either Green or NDP, the latter most often. However, having seen our Nova Scotia NDP party turn into an amalgam of all the dull ideas ever thought up by Liberals or Conservatives, party affiliation is less of an issue and more than ever up for grabs.

The next election is for me above all about getting rid of Darth Harper and his gang. That might mean hitching up to the momentum of the newly rejuvenated Liberal Party, or maybe backing the federal NDP, for whom Thomas Mulcair has done an admiral job (in my opinion) as Opposition Leader. I haven’t got a sense yet what the Young Trudeau actually believes in, so I’m hesitant. I know he’s in favour of marijuana legalization, but that tells me only that he wants to get out (and win) the young vote in the next election.  It’s a throw-away promise that will be put off and put off as one more important issue after another come up. I’d like to know where he stands on those important issues. Issues like the dramatically increasing wealth disparity, global warming, corporate taxation, fiscal policy, etc. I’m all for legalizing pot, but a promise of it is not enough to win my vote.  (A bag of weed on election day, well that’s another story…)

I’m open for convincing in almost any direction (almost!) and am hoping these pages will provide some guidance.

Conservatives, Stephen Harper, Sun TV

I’m coining a new word

Well, a new hyphenated word, really.


This refers to someone who knows how to communicate to his or her political base, and forms all of their communication and political maneuvering around the whims of said base, no matter how wrong or uninformed that communication or politics happens to be. Harper is of course a shining example of this, but I’m sure it can be applied to any Conservative when they speak against, well, anything that would/could be considered bad by the base. Rob Anders on drug rehabilitation, for example. Any Teabagger Republican anytime they open their mouths (I’m not sure if they are base-whispering, or if they really are as stupid as they seem. It’s a tough call.). Various attacks on unnamed immigrants, especially those of non-European stock. Uninformed screeds about why those Aboriginal peoples just can’t govern themselves. You get the idea.

Of course, this all gets thrust into an uncomfortable light with the claims that Mike Duffy made this week. Specifically:

“It’s not about what you did,” he quoted Harper as saying. “It’s about the perception of what you did that’s been created in the media. The rules are inexplicable to our base.”


Canadian politics, Conservative Criminal Activity, Conservatives, Stephen Harper

It’s Just a Small Change

We’re trying to start this blog up again. To that end here’s a quick proposal. I propose that in light of recent Senate scandal allegations, and frankly, everything else we know about Stephen Harper’s behaviour, that the title of Prime Minister be changed to Darth for the duration of the Reform Party CPC’s time in office.  All in favour say aye.

Stephen Harper

Harper is entitled to his entitlements

Harper showed up to TD Garden with a significant security detail of eight to 10 people. Wearing suit jacket and collared shirt, he sat 12 rows back of the ice near the blue-line. He chatted with fans near his seats and posed for pictures, smiling and waving.

Harper flew to Boston last night with a security detail of 8-10 people, his daughter Rachel, and his BFF Heritage Minister James Moore. His spokesthingy claims that the Prime Minister paid for his own tickets at $1000 per piece (for 7 rows up behind the blue line, no less). He also claims that Harper will repay the cost of a commercial airline ticket to make up for the use of the Challenger jet. Pricing the cost of three tickets for an overnight trip to Boston at Air Canada, I find that I can book three overnight tickets for $2351 if I plan far enough in advance. The Challenger Jet costs $11,000 per hour to run. Ottawa and Boston are 312 miles apart, and the jet flies at an impressive 487 mph. Assuming 20 minutes for taxiing, take-off, landing, and taxiing again, it’s a 58 minute trip, each way. Let’s round to an hour. The cost of the flight will be ~$22,000 dollars. So there’s a bit of a repayment difference here of about $19,649 (assuming $2351 is the number re-payed by the PM).

But that’s nothing. According to Peter Kent:

“He’s representing Canada,” Kent said.
“It is a major sporting event. Certainly, for many Canadians it’s the equivalent to the final hockey game in Olympic competition and the prime minister has made the commitment that he’s paying his own way.”

In other words: Austerity for thee, but not for me.

Canadian politics, Republicans, Stephen Harper, United States

Newsflash: Canadian politicians under the influence!

Of foreigners!!!!111!!one

I say it’s about time CSIS started investigating the clear connections between Stephen Harper and the American Republican Party. Moving Canada towards the failed policies of George Bush, both on domestic and foreign affairs, is tantamount to treason! Good to see that CSIS is not taking this clear influence peddling by forces south of the border laying down.

That is what Fadden was referring to, right? CSIS wouldn’t turn a blind eye to such high-level influence peddling just to put a scare in us over less important provincial and municipal politicians who may or may not be of certain non-white ethnicities, would they?