A Scary Liberal With A Hidden Agenda

Finally:

[In a recent speech] Harper reiterated Conservative criticisms that the Liberal plan would simply shift tax dollars out of Canadians' pockets back into federal government coffers, boosting the cost of just about everything.

"It will stop the economic progress of the Canadian middle class dead in its tracks and it will make the cost of living unbearable for fixed income seniors and low-income seniors."

Harper said the Liberal plan doesn't even set a target for emissions reductions.

"Why? Because Dion's carbon tax is not an environmental policy. It is just a wealth redistribution program disguised as an environmental policy."

These are the right buttons to be pushing for the election, as I opined in a recent post. Making noise to appease the Greens will produce zero benefits for the Tories in the next election while pressing the economic implications of the so-called "Green Shift" may even convince a few skeptical environmentalists that the path to protecting the environment has nothing to do with a sharp increase in governmental control over the economy.

Dion's carbon tax plan is simply another Liberal program bent on redistributing money from the middle and upper classes into the black hole that is the Canadian welfare state. If Harper keeps attacking the Green Shift from this angle he won't be leaving 24 Sussex when the dust settles after the next election.

You Can't Beat 'Em At Home, Harper, So Stop Trying

As Prime Minister Stephen Harper helped ring in Quebec City's 400th birthday Thursday, a series of opinion surveys suggested his party has lost key support in the province.

The latest Canadian Press Harris-Decima poll finds that a bruising session in Parliament - along with a perceived values gap on the environment - has cost the Tories crucial ground with Quebec voters and urban women.

CTV.

Harper has been so busy bending over backwards to come off as "serious" about the environment that he's stopped hitting the effective Conservative points that got him this gig in the first place. Bluntly, the Conservatives are not going to win an election on the environment. It's a non-starter. They can't promise enough in the way of government intervention to compete with this Carbon Tax Green Shift nonsense. A successful campaign against an environmentalist will have to focus on good conservative economics.

"All right, Canada. You want a Carbon Tax? Well, here's what it's going to cost you."

I thought Harper had identified this as the strongest point of attack with the series of Tory attack ads that were released after the announcement of Dion's Carbon Tax. But Harper has wasted a lot of time pleading his Green bona fides and, of course, it's sounding perfunctory and half-hearted.

Stick to the economy, Mr. Prime Minister. The Canadian electorate has often been characterized as a fiscally conservative liberal. Know your audience and start fighting with your strong hand again.

Four Reasons Why I Love David Miller

Reason The First:

Because he betrays the illogic of banning fire arms so eloquently.

"I don't think there is any defence for sport shooters anymore, it's a hobby that creates danger to others. Guns are stolen routinely from so-called legal gun owners and it's time we got those guns out of Toronto." -- David Miller

That's right. "So-called" legal gun-owners are the problem with Toronto. I assume he is drawing on heretofore classified evidence showing that most gun crimes in Toronto are perpetrated by legal gun owners and criminals who have stolen registered guns and not by criminals with unregistered fire arms mostly smuggled from the United States as common sense and all previous data has indicated. I'm sure Miller will be happy to show us this new evidence any day now.

I'll allow commenter Edward Kennedy at Free Dominion to demonstrate just how absurd this logic is:

Right on miller, but following this display of intelligence and logic, let us carry this a bit further, since legitimate owners of cars have them stolen, and since the stolen vehicles often cause accidents, there is no room for driving as legitimate automobile owners are responsible for the injuries and deaths caused by the criminals who steal them. Thus, all automobiles must be banned. After all, cars kill people and there is no defence for auto enthusiasts anymore, the activity creates danger to others.

Reason The Second:

Because he undermines every leftist social movement that he embraces by arguing unbelievably illogically for them.

Aside from the previously mentioned movement to ban fire arms in Canada which he has disgraced so thoroughly and consistently, he has also been extremely helpful in undermining the popular global warming movement which seeks to solve "the greatest crisis facing our generation" by replacing our liberal democracy with a green brand of fascism. Particularly, I'm thinking of his frequent chatter about increasing taxes for downtown parking, as well as other such abuses of his extensive taxation powers, in order to strong-arm Torontonians into abandoning modernity to reduce our carbon footprint.


Reason The Third:

Because he has ensured a Conservative come-back in Toronto in the near future.

Toronto is home to a very special political culture. My personal relationships and experience has taught me that most Torontonians vote the way they do based almost entirely on what is fashionable at the time. The vast middle class has consistently voted Liberal in Toronto because it meant they could drive home in their Hybrid cars and smugly chat with their middle class hybrid-driving friends about how morally superior they are for voting for Trudeau's party and for solving the climate crisis in the process.

Miller's reign of terror has made Torontonians reminisce about the good ol' days under Mel Lastman and, even in the most hopelessly fad-voting circles, it is no longer "cool" to vote Liberal. Since Harper has clawed his way towards the center of the political spectrum as quickly as Dion could abandon it, many Torontonians are sure to, although uncomfortably at first, begin posting blue signs on their lawns.


Reason The Fourth:

Because he's a caricature of himself and makes all leftists look silly by association.

Democratic politics has proven to be largely the result of our visceral reactions to the politicians between which we are supposed to choose. Since most Canadians don't have the time or the interest to truly engage with the issues of an election at a normative level, they make decisions based upon which candidate they intuitively prefer.

In 2006, for example, Paul Martin came off as a snake-oil salesman and a rich power-luster and so stolid Liberals couldn't get over his repugnancy enough to cast ballots for him in numbers necessary to win. Martin bled Liberal support like it was his job because he wasn't likeable. Conversely, Harper, although profoundly unexciting, came off as reasonable and dependable and, consequently, he has and will continue to slowly win converts from the centrist and right-leaning Liberal camp.

David Miller is no longer taken seriously by ANYONE. Accordingly, he has made it gloriously uncomfortable to be associated with the left in Toronto.


For all these reasons, I can now say without any trace of sarcasm that I love David Miller.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You've done all Tories inside and outside of Toronto a big favour.

How To Solve Ontario's Economic Crisis

CTV:

Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams says the federal government should do more to help Ontario and Quebec's struggling manufacturing sectors.

"The broad shoulders of Ontario have carried this country for a long, long time," Williams told CTV's Question Period on Sunday.

Well, gee. That's a really sweet sentiment, Mr. Williams. But how do you want the federal government to help? Perhaps you note the great injustice of the present equalization scheme which sees Ontario tax-payers sending $20 billion more to Ottawa than they receive back in transfers or services. So is the answer a greater chunk of the equalization pie?

Absolutely not. The difference would just be made up again through cuts to transfer payments. The only real option is the simplest one: decontrol. The suggestion has been put forward by John Tory but has predictably fallen on deaf ears. The moratorium on the minds of businessmen and women in Ontario is - as it has been for years - strangling the province's economy. What sets the present situation apart from the past is that, given our current economic circumstances, business is no longer fully capable of shouldering the weight of governmental interference.

The government's proper role is the protection of its citizens. If the provincial Liberal government is truly interested in protecting the people of Ontario they will cut taxes and, in Tory's own words, immediately ease the regulatory burden on business.

UPDATE: An article by Lorrie Goldstein in today's Ottawa Sun regarding the Ontario recession. Goldstein emphasizes restraint and responsibility in the McGuinty government's actions moving forward. Absent from the article are any tangible policy solutions whatsoever but it still provides a decent contextualization of the present situation.

My Ultimate Shame: Inspired By A Liberal Political Ad

I'm perfectly aware that it's a Liberal advertisement, thank you very much. But, honestly, it's just about the best Canadian political ad I've ever seen.

Judge for yourself. And feel free to disagree.

H/t Luc Schulz

Dion's Leadership Weak Because of Michael Ignatieff & Rogue Unicorns

The Dion people are starting to get the fear. After a number of Quebecois Grits took shots at him last week, the Liberal "leader" is beginning to feel the fault lines in his support crack into chasms of dissent. And so, as we all knew would happen eventually, the Dion faction is beginning to ask that one really tough question: is it somehow possible to blame this on Michael Ignatieff?

The answer? Yes. Yes, it is.

For starters, Michael Ignatieff's always had those shifty eyes. They're really the eyes of a Dipper, don't you think? Plus, did you ever read "The Lesser Evil"? In his moments of lucidity he sounded like one of those filthy Tories. I'll bet he's working for them. I mean, what's harder to believe? A Liberal completely changed their convictions to win an election or Ignatieff's an undercover agent?

But seriously, folks. It's the rogue unicorns too. Deadly sharp horns.

"The Future Is Looking Tory Blue"

I don't like Rick Mercer and I've never found him particularly funny. It isn't a lefty thing. I've been known to get a laugh out of Colbert on occasion. But this video's been making the rounds lately and I figured I'd post it for all those who haven't had a chance to watch it yet.



H/t Darryl

Tory Budget 2008: "One Mile Wide & One Inch Deep"

A pretty disappointing budget. I know, I know. I wrote a post talking about the political necessity of middle-of-the-road politicking for Harper right now but it's hard not to feel a little irritated anyway.

The Globe gives a thorough run-down of the budget here.

Dion:

Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion slammed today's Conservative budget as "one mile wide and one inch deep" but said his party would not force a spring election over the document.

"Under the circumstances, I don't see enough in this budget that would justify that we precipitate an election that Canadians do not want for now," Mr. Dion said.

Layton:

"This is a budget that clearly fails the working families of Canada," NDP Leader Jack Layton said.

"In fact, individual taxpayers are going to have to pay 12 per cent more of the cost of government, while corporations will pay 14 per cent less . . . "

"There is nothing here to train the doctors that families need," Mr. Layton said.

"There is nothing to help deal with prescription drug costs that are really tough on families now. There's nothing for affordable housing. It is not a budget that New Democrats can support."

Snore.

So the Tories will continue governing through the spring and the National Newswatch Election Fever Meter has plummeted down to 5% after hovering around 80% or 90% for weeks. I'm beginning to get the feeling Harper's going to make it all the way through his four-year term.

Don't Despair, Tories: The New Conservative Strategy In Afghanistan Is All Part Of The Plan

There have been some major developments in the debate surrounding Canada's role in Afghanistan over the past few days, developments that haven't been all that welcome to a significant number of Conservative bloggers and partisans. The argument has been made - and a strong argument it is - that setting an exit date for a military mission is irresponsible since the goal of the Canadian presence in Kandahar is the achievement of specific tasks; namely, the suppression of the Taliban insurgency and the realization of stability and physical security in the troubled province. Some critics have implied or stated that Harper "blinked first" and that the new plan is a disappointment to Tories who were under the impression that the PM was willing to throw down over the mission.

It's really easy to forget the limitations under which Harper is currently operating. His strong stance on Afghanistan represents a significant shift in Canadian foreign policy and these major political changes are extraordinarily difficult to accomplish with a minority government, no less one as mathematically fragile as Harper's. It's easy to be lulled into a false sense of security considering our current political situation. A divided Liberal opposition headed by an unpopular and bumbling "ivory tower" type has allowed the Tories much more leeway than most minority governments of the past. So it's important to remember that the great triumph of the Harper-led Conservative Party has yet to be achieved; a Conservative majority government. This goal seemed all but impossible in 2004 and exceedingly unlikely in 2006. The new Afghanistan plan is a step towards the attainment of a majority government and, despite our legitimate and principled objections, Harper's decision to compromise must be understood as such.

As Dion drags the Liberals kicking and screaming to the left of the political spectrum (leaving a few centrist and right leaning Liberals feeling disgruntled and betrayed by the once-was-but-no-longer-is "Natural Ruling Party of Canada"), Harper has been given the chance to snag the centrist vote on a lot of crucial issues and, as a result, his popularity has slowly but surely climbed until it has begun to teeter on the cusp of a majority. Although setting an exit date seems like rolling over on Conservative values, managing to extend the mission until 2011 is a political achievement. Harper managed to scare the Liberals into an extension without having to worry too much about triggering an election. It's a testament to his political dexterity that he so skillfully diffused a possible election trigger while coming off as principled but still flexible. Strong on the mission but still cognizant of the political realities of our country.

Harper understands that there are only two real exit strategies for a military operation: victory and defeat. Of course, benchmarks should be set based on the achievement of specific tasks, not on arbitrary and politically-motivated compromises. Presently, however, Canadian voters haven't decided whether they're completely serious about the mission yet. I have no doubt that Harper is dedicated to bringing stability and democracy to Afghanistan and I know that millions of Canadians support him but only a majority in the next federal election will free him to commit to the mission completely.

Harper is still in the process of wooing Canadians. The Conservative election victory in 2006 was partly due to an ideological shift in the Canadian electorate, partly due to a well-run campaign, and partly due to a broken and unpopular Liberal party. He has made good use of his two years in office by playing tough with the divided Liberals while slowly consolidating his reputation and convincing Canadians that he deserves to be Prime Minister. We need to let him take his political victories where he can. Changing the political face of a country is a slow process and the concessions our Prime Minister is making are politically necessary.

So let's call the new Afghanistan plan what it really is. This was not a victory for Dion's Liberals; it was Harper's first major move on the campaign trail. He's shooting for a majority government and I'm not alone in thinking that there's a pretty damn good chance he'll pull it off.

Existential Crisis Of The Day: Apparently, Not All Liberals Are Idiots

I just don't know what's going on anymore. When Dion won the Liberal leadership I was happy. I was comfortable. I was safe in the knowledge that Dion's Liberals would jump into bed with the Greens or NDP (or both) and immediately abandon the center allowing the Tories to squeaze a majority government out of the Canadian electorate in no time flat. But lately I've been experiencing the strangest sense of disequilibrium and I think I've finally founds its source. Particularly since Keith Martin defended free speech last week - or "Nazi rights" as many in the leftarded blogosphere have begun to call them - it has become all too clear that not all Liberal MPs are idiots. And it's thrown my world into chaos.

The Chronicle Herald has the story:

Robert Thibault is among a small group of MPs pushing Liberal Leader Stephane Dion behind closed doors to take a more hawkish position on Afghanistan, sources say.

Mr. Thibault won West Nova by only 512 votes in the last election, and his riding is home to 14 Wing Greenwood, the largest airbase on the East Coast.

In a free vote in 2006, along with all the other Liberal MPs in Nova Scotia, Mr. Thibault voted to extend the deployment of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan until February 2009. Most Liberal MPs voted against extending the mission.

This week, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced that this spring he will hold a confidence vote in the House on extending the Afghan mission once again, meaning Canada could be plunged into an election if the motion is defeated.

Mr. Dion has refused to change the Liberal party’s position, resisting pressure from Conservatives and commentators who suggest he should endorse the extension, suggested by John Manley’s expert panel. Mr. Dion wants Canadian troops to stay in Afghanistan but step back from the lead role in combat in Kandahar province.

In a Liberal caucus meeting Wednesday, Etobicoke North MP Roy Cullen is reported to have urged Mr. Dion to change the Liberal position on Afghanistan. British Columbia MP Keith Martin — a former Reformer whose riding includes the Esquimalt navy base — has called on Mr. Dion to allow a free vote on the motion and has released a position paper that endorses Canada staying in a combat role.

On Thursday, Le Journal de Montreal reported that Mr. Thibault stands with Mr. Cullen and Mr. Martin, something confirmed by another source.

On Thursday, Mr. Thibault wouldn’t say whether that’s true.

"I never comment on what goes on within caucus and I don’t know where Le Journal de Montreal got those things," he said.

Mr. Thibault hopes that Mr. Dion and Mr. Harper can reach a compromise.

"I think there may be some way that we can work towards reconciliation of our position with the Conservative government," he said.

In question period Thursday, Mr. Harper said: "The choice for all parties in this House will be clear: to support the military mission or not to support it."

Mr. Thibault wouldn’t say whether he might abstain from voting if he disagrees with the party’s position, as Mr. Martin has suggested he may do.

My best to Roy Cullen, Robert Thibault, and, of course, my new favourite Liberal MP Keith Martin. I hope they manage to have their voices heard within their party.

Michael Ignatieff: Canada Needs To Develop Its Military Capabilities & Assert Itself Internationally

That's what we've been saying all along!

Thank God Ignatieff didn't win the Liberal leadership because he's a much stronger leader than Dion is.

The Star Phoenix has the story:

Even as his party calls for Canada to pull back from combat missions in Afghanistan in 2009, prominent Liberal MP Michael Ignatieff said Friday that Canada must be increasingly assertive in the international arena -- and back it up with a strong military -- if it hopes to solve big problems in Afghanistan and other troubled nations.
"We must not wait for the United States to build the kind of multilateral world we want. We musn't hesitate to use our leverage," he said to an over-full lecture hall at the University of Alberta's law centre. "We can't be a country that gives people little lectures. We have to take a stand and back it up with the proper investments."

Ignatieff, a former Harvard professor who now serves as the Liberal opposition's deputy leader, gave a 30-minute speech that tackled issues ranging from economic policy and border security to Darfur and education spending.

His overriding message was that Canada matters more than ever on the world stage, a position that requires us to adopt the unaccustomed approach of "banging on the table."

But it can't be just talk, he added, noting Canada has made a commitment through the United Nations to protect people targeted in genocidal massacres and other areas of violence.

"And you can't protect people just with blue berets and a sidearm" Ignatieff said, picking as an example how peacekeeping forces failed to stop the Rwandan genocide. "It requires -- and this is the difficult bit for Canada -- it requires military capability."

Ignatieff's appearance was arranged through the University of Alberta's Institute for U.S. Policy Studies, a group headed up by former Liberal deputy prime minister Anne McLellan. Although Ignatieff is currently serving in Parliament, he called his speech "an academic lecture" rather than a partisan political event.

There had been some curiosity about whether local members of the federal Conservative Party would show up to question Ignatieff about his "flip-flops" on Canada's mission in Afghanistan. An Alberta Tory had sent an e-mail to riding presidents asking that Conservatives attend the lunchtime session to provide "a skeptical, questioning audience for this hypocrite."
No such inflammatory exchange developed during the event, even though Ignatieff touched on Afghanistan at several points in the speech and the subsequent question-and-answer session.

He did not take a strong position on whether the mission should continue long-term, saying Canadians were troubled by the military involvement and calling for a parliamentary debate. He also praised the recently completed Manley report, agreeing with its message that Canada needs to get more support from its NATO allies.

UPDATE: Patrick Ross has the transcript from the Ignatieff speech here.

Human Rights Chief Louise Arbour Backs Plan To Eliminate Israeli State

Darcey's got the story over at Dust My Broom.

You remember Louise Arbour, don't you? She's the United Nations high commissioner for human rights and a former Supreme Court of Canada judge. Arbour has recently thrown her support behind "a major pan-Arab human rights charter" that calls for the destruction of the Israeli state.

The Ottawa Citizen reports:

While the document demands respect for a host of internationally recognized human rights, its references to Zionism concern leading human rights activist groups, including Amnesty International, International Commission of Jurists and UN Watch.

The charter's preamble speaks of "rejecting all forms of racism and Zionism," alleging they violate human rights and threaten international peace and security.

Article 2 of the 53-article document says "all forms of racism, Zionism and foreign occupation and domination" should be "condemned and efforts must be deployed for their elimination."

"These provisions cannot be dismissed as harmless rhetoric," says a letter UN Watch sent Monday to Ms. Arbour asking her for a "clarification" of her support for the charter.

Got to love those Liberal-appointed Supreme Court justices.

Harper's Conservatives Jump 7 Points Since December

I've begun to feel guilty about covering the US primaries so extensively of late at the expense of Canadian updates. My lapse in Canadian material was partially the result of a slow period in Canadian politics and partially the result of an exciting and infuriating period in US politics. But with Canadian parliament resuming January 28, it's as good a time as any to take stock of the political landscape in Canada. Especially since Stephane Dion was talking so very tough before Christmas:

It was only a little more than a month ago, in Montreal, when Dion told Liberal riding presidents to be ready for the plug to be pulled on Harper's government as soon as possible.

Ah, but now our Mr. Dion has dropped his truculent charade and resumed the whiny, sulking persona we're all so familiar with. This transformation was helped, I'm sure, by a recent Canadian poll which gave Mr. Dion good reason to pause before toppling the popular Harper government.

A poll released yesterday may offer a clue: it suggests the Conservatives leaped to a sizeable lead in public opinion over the holidays.

The Harris-Decima poll indicates the Tories jumped seven percentage points since late December, putting them at 37 per cent support compared to the Liberals' 30 per cent. The NDP is at 13 per cent.

The survey of 1,000 Canadians was done Jan. 3 to 6 and is considered accurate to within 3.1 percentage points, 19 times in 20.

Dion's new strategy, it would seem, is to wait it out until the budget in March. With the Conservative government's steady support, the Liberals can only hope Harper grows bold enough with his next budget to alienate a chunk of his moderate supporters.

This February will mark Harper's second year in office.