Irony, Oh Irony

Now that the Harper government is now negotiating with the Taliban, will the Blogging Tories issue a formal apology to Jack Layton for smearing him for years? Hint, I am not holding my breath.

Recommend this Post

Bravo Warren Kinsella

For slapping at the right wing morons who are attacking the CBC. Unfortunately, I don't expect showing up the Post as being hypocritical on this issue will silence the Blogging Tories. To them it is perfectly ok for the Tories to be fed stuff from the Post, because the Post is privately owned ( a line the Post editorial faithfully parrots). They firmly believe that the CBC, since it is public must be seen to be "non-partisan", which is code for must always report the government line (well the Harper government line at least) without question or comment. In other words, the CBC is to become Tass (at least until the next Liberal government, when it will be expected to slice up the new boys without mercy).

Recommend this Post

We Have Always Been At War With East Asia Watch

In which Tory-friendly columnists now say that dictatorial rule by the Prime Minister is okie dokie (as long as the "quality" of government doesn't suffer), even though that contradicts what the Tories (in their various iterations) themselves were saying for the past 13 years.

Here is one small example of past Tory complaints, from Mr. Jay Hill, who is now I believe, a minor player in the court of His Psychotic Majesty (from just a couple of years ago):

I would argue that the concentration of power in the Office of the Prime Minister, which is at the root of much of our democratic deficit, has grown not lessened under this Prime Minister's watch.

The multitudes of government powers that ultimately rest with the Prime Minister are staggering. The exclusive monopoly over the central powers of government have even led the current Prime Minister himself, in his address to law students at Osgoode Hall in the fall of 2002, to state that the essence of power in Ottawa was “who you know in the PMO”.

This leads me to the recent appointment of the Prime Minister's friend Glen Murray to chair the round table on the environment and economy. Despite a rejection from the environment committee and the House, Glen Murray continues in office. The opinion of the House is of no consequence. It is “who you know in the PMO”.

His recent choices to fill the vacancies in the Senate were a slap in the face to the people of Alberta who elected their senators. The opinion of the people of Alberta is obviously not important to the Liberal Party. Again, it was “who you know in the PMO”.

“Who you know in the PMO” has to go.

I guess that last sentence is no longer operative in this newish government.

And here is one from Mr. Stockwell Day warning of the toxic nature of too much power concentrated in the hands of one man:

Mr. Speaker, the power consolidated in the Prime Minister's Office would be a dream for anyone who wants total power. The Prime Minister can and does appoint the Governor General who is also the commander in chief of the armed forces, all lieutenant governors, senators, Supreme Court judges, Federal Court judges, the cabinet, key positions on regulatory agencies and the heads of major boards and commissions. That is a dream for anyone who is seeking power.

Lord Acton said that power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Therefore, it is no surprise that judgment is corrupted when one has that much power. I am not even putting a moral tinge to it, just judgment itself.

To put my question in context, I attended the Summit of the Americas with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. There were emerging democracies throughout Central and South America and there are those who have been dictators who would like to cling to power. They see Canada as having a system where one person has a huge amount of power and also does not put out information on billions of dollars being spent. It is a deterrent to emerging democracies. It is an incentive for those who want to consolidate power all in one office. Here is the clincher. One person raised the issue at the Summit of the Americas of the corruption in Canada. That was a very embarrassing moment for me.

Has the member considered or has he heard at committee if the Liberals have considered the effect of maintaining this air of secrecy, maintaining this level of power? Have the Liberals considered the effect not just on Canada's reputation, but on emerging democracies and those who would try to consolidate power? Have they thought about that?

I'll bet Mr. Day doesn't ask these questions out loud, anymore.

Recommend this Post

Realism, Not Wishful Thinking

If only the Blogging Tories would stop spitting on Jack Layton and actually listen to the people who know what is going on in Afghanistan. People like Rory Stewart:

"I see little interest on the part of the Afghan army or police to fight the Taliban in the south of Afghanistan," says Rory Stewart, a writer and former British foreign office official who now heads a charity called Turquoise Mountain dedicated to helping artisans in and around Kabul. "The Afghan government may want to keep out the Taliban, but they clearly lack either the capacity or the power to do it."... Stewart believes the most realistic way forward could be to allow a decentralized form of government in which Taliban, and other deeply conservative elements, would play a role if they were accepted by people in the regions.

"We may be forced to reconsider our theory of state-building, which is based on a centralized bureaucracy. But the Afghan government doesn't have the ability to run the country that way. The alternative would be to look to the villages, which have been running things their own way for 25 years because there was no real government."...

"The diversity of the country is enormous, and it's little understood in the West. Some people want freedom from torture, but not freedom of the press. Others believe sharia law is crucial. There are those who want minority rights, but not minority rule, and more prosperity but not market reform. And there are many who are more in sympathy with the Taliban than with foreign troops. We need a policy that's built on realism, not wishful thinking." Toronto Star. Toronto, Ont.: Apr 14, 2007. pg. A.18

It is easy to shut your cerebral cortex down and spew hate toward Jack Layton (and no I don't agree with the party's position on Afghanistan). Try turning it on, for a change and give some thought to the realities of Afghanistan. The time for telling yourselves fairy tales about creating the Switzerland of Central Asia (and hiding behind jingoism) is over.

Recommend this Post