Sunday, September 5, 2010

Toronto Star Confirms My Previous Post Was Accurate...

My most recent blog post was in reference to a Bloc MP accusing the PM of propaganda for sending students in Quebec, as well as the rest of the country, letters encouraging them to visit our National Parks. I mentioned the silence of all the opposition leaders, as well as the MSM on the outrageous statements made by the separatist MP. Well, it turns out the Toronto Star has finally ran an editorial on it, but just bashes the PM rather than call any of the other federalist politicians on their silence.

"When Quebec separatists stumble and provide a political gift to the federalist cause, it’s part of the Prime Minister’s job description to make the most of it — not for himself, but for Canada.

So when Bloc Québécois MP Carole Lavalée put her foot in it this week by accusing Ottawa of mounting a federalist propaganda campaign with invitations to students to visit Canada’s national parks for free, Stephen Harper should have been able to hit a home run for the cause of national unity.

Jean Chrétien, Brian Mulroney and Pierre Trudeau would have stepped up to the plate, regardless of their partisan stripes. Separatism may be quiescent in Quebec these days, but this is also a time of political tumult in the province, where the federalist banner is in retreat because of recent stumbles by Liberal Premier Jean Charest. The Parti Québécois seems poised to regain power after the next provincial election.

Against that backdrop, any Canadian PM would move in for the kill and belittle the Bloc for displaying such paranoia over the attraction that Banff’s rugged beauty might hold for the malleable minds of young Quebecers seduced by free admission into national parks.

Harper’s killer instinct, however, is more partisan than patriotic. To be sure, he beat up on the Bloc — but only enough to make the larger, improbable point that Canada’s opposition parties can never be trusted with national unity. The Liberals and New Democrats, Harper argued, have been and always will be in bed with the Bloc and should thus be disqualified from ever wielding power.

The PM seems unable to resist dredging up the abortive Liberal-NDP coalition plan of late 2008, in which the BQ merely agreed not to vote to bring down the government for a specified period — even though Harper had sought a similar understanding when he was opposition leader.

Apart from the partisan pettiness, this is the equivalent of scoring an own goal in soccer. Rather than trying to drag down the opposition, Harper should be using this BQ gift to talk up Canada in Quebec."

As for the Star's praise of Mulroney and Chretien, and their supposed superhero powers against the separatists, I suggest the Star look up the origins of the Bloc, particularly one Lucienne Bouchard for the Mulroney connection. And Chretien's dismissive attitude in the 1995 referendum almost split the country up forever.


Jeff said...

Well done Paulsstuff. In two concluding sentences, you expose the Star's shallow argument.

Again the Star pooh-poohs that a coalition is afoot. Michael Ignatieff is the leader of that coalition, and I'm not letting down my guard for one minute.

Calgary Junkie said...

Any partisan of any party can put a negative spin on anything the other party is doing. It's a piece of cake. The same is true of the media, when they "anyalze" something PM Harper does.

But here's what the Torstar chooses to overlook: It makes sense for PM Harper, other CPC MPs & party spokespersons to bring up the coaltion at just about every opportunity. After all, we are almost two years into a minority gov't, so an election could happen at any time. It takes as much repetition as possible, to get a narrative into the voter consciousness.

So Harper is going to take OFF his "non-partisan PM" hat, and put ON his "campaigning leader of the CPC" hat, a lot more often. He is going to be more provocative as well, poking the coalition stooges with a sharp stick. Why ? So that maybe, just maybe, our mediocre msm will take the bait, and next time Iggy has a scrum, will ask him: "Wow, did you know that the PM just said blah blah blah about a possible coalition. What is your response ?"

The bottom line for us. We want EVERYBODY using the word "coalition" as much as possible, from here on out. Especially Iggy.

Jeff said...

CJ, I agree. And I would add that every reference to Michael Ignatieff, leader of the coalition, refer to his role as leader of the coalition.

paulsstuff said...

I'm guessing that Ignatieff will try and sit on the fence about a possible coalition pending election results. That's why the PM keeps hammering away at it.

If Ignatieff gives a thumbs up to a coalition during the campaign I think the Conservative's get their majority. If he abandons the idea of a coalition during the campaign and then tries to impose one post election, the PM would be be able to go to the GG asking to disolve Parliament and pointing to Ignatieff assuring Canadian's he would not lead a coalition.

Calgary Junkie said...

Most of the commenters over at Libblogs ... er, I mean Macleans, can't figure out WHY Harper is pushing the coalition narrative. Or how it could possibly work, etc. etc.

Sometimes I wonder if these pundits, have watched previous election campaigns. Or noticed the spike in our polling numbers, at the height of the coalition kerfuffle. Or all the video, quotes, pics, etc that we have of all the coalition stooges, which can be packaged in compelling tv ads.

I mean really, what better way to slam your opponent, than by using his own words against him ! I'm just a dumb redneck, but I figure that kind of ad is a heck of a lot more effective than showing soldiers in the street, or having little kids heads explode.

Does anybody, and I mean anybody, think that Iggy, Jack, Gilles and all their MPs and all their spokespersons can stay on ONE simple, coherent, convincing anti-coalition narrative ? It's going to be one humongous mish-mash of unbelievable gobbledygook.

wilson said...

There is NOTHING Iffy can say that will convince Canadians he won't lead a coalition if he loses, and he will lose.

The #1 question will be about the separatists being part of Iffy's coalition.

If he avoids answering,
it's a hidden agenda and all can assume, yes, if that's what it takes to move into 24 Sussex.

And then Quebecers will send even more Bloc MPs to parliament in hopes of a coalition, so as to get more goodies...

wilson said...

Now that Danny is fighting with Quebec,
having Quebec separatists in a coalition government might now be so

And Danny may also have to wonder just how supportive of offshore drilling the 3 stooges would be.

Anonymous said...

Iggy is a slimebag for sure. (real conservative)