Irrational contempt

In another outstanding column in today’s National Post Rex Murphy asks the age-old question, Why do so many people dislike PM Stephen Harper with such visceral passion? – (Vilifying Stephen Harper):

...For, step back a little, make a little space, and you will see that in his personal and domestic conduct, Harper is almost stereotypically Canadian. He’s a mild, unobnoxious, hockey-mad fellow. He doesn’t boast.He shuns the spotlight he could be commanding every day. He keeps his privacy and doesn’t insist, like many public figures, in conducting a soap opera around his position or his family. He’d be the ideal neighbour — he wouldn’t just drop in, too reserved for that (which is great), but I’m sure he’d lend a shovel when needed. Probably even help dig out your car if you were stuck, and take your thanks with a self-conscious smile and reassurance that it was no trouble.

So why is it that people are not content just to disagree with him, to label him simply wrong or misguided but must revile him?

Well Rex, I suspect it’s his quiet competence that drives them crazy and the fact that he has a majority. They are jealous and frustrated.

The lefties just can’t stand being out of power and prospects even for the next election are looking rather bleak at the moment.

It would likely take another coalition attempt to do the job – and that would require discipline, cooperation and a touch of humility – all of which the opposition parties appear to have trouble sustaining.

Or perhaps they could even try coming up with balanced, responsible policies that Canadians could actually support.

But it’s just easier to hate.

 

*   *   *   *

Update

Thanks to iPolitics for including this post in ‘BEST OF THE BLOGS!’

This entry was posted in Canadian economy, Canadian Government, Coalition of losers, CPC majority solution, Global economic crisis, Harper best PM ever, Harper smartest PM ever, PM Stephen Harper. Bookmark the permalink.

91 Responses to Irrational contempt

  1. Nicola T. says:

    The Liberals and the others won’t be happy until some Islamist harms PM Harper or someone in his family. And of course, unless PM Harper steps down, this is the only way they can get an election early (unless there is a Joe Clark type miscounting of votes in the Commons) since the Conservatives would have to pick a new leader and probably shortly after call an election.

    • Joanne says:

      Funny how many on the left criticize the high level of security for our PM. Actually it’s not so funny.

  2. Liz J says:

    The entire opposition have a lot to be jealous of in Stephen Harper. He’s cool and thoughtful, no rapid fire answers from him, they’re well thought out before they pass his lips. This too drives them so crazy, some have even resorted to taking his words out of context to create a tale to fit their agenda.
    He’s such a contrast to what we’ve had with the Chretien and Martin regimes when the BS and gobbledegook flowed freely through an adoring media. If having a solid leader doing a great job leading us through tough times drives the media and the opposition madly jealous we can only assume they’re more interested in their political agendas than what’s best for the country.

  3. Mary T says:

    CBC looking to snare more viewers, listeners and shoppers with “loyalty” program:
    from NNW.
    Perhaps if the cbc quit spreading hate towards our PM, they would get some viewers, and might convert some lefties to the greatness of our PM. Remember the saying, there are none so blind as those that will not see.

  4. Tripper523 says:

    It is an unnatural phenomenon, in my opinion, that a man of the caliber of PM Stephen Harper is “the man THEY love to hate”… To try to understand this ridiculous, illogical, unfounded, vicious, and even, if you will, EVIL attitude, we have to examine who THEY are. To do that with any sincerity, it hurts to even figuratively go there, because we find it is a realm of blackness. The disdain with which the lunatic Left carries their quest of hatred toward Mr. Harper is totally repulsive, so we are reluctant to try to figure out these people. We have a champion in the Prime Minister, as he is the best we seen in many decades. Honour and decency, as has been pointed out many times, are the forté of this top-class statesman, leader, father, and true Canadian. His demeanor and charm, wit, humour, and caring comprise the character we hold dear while “others” despise. Do we chalk it up to JEALOUSY? Is it because THEY see something UNATTAINABLE for THEMselves?? As I say, it is a realm too dark for me to want to explore. Evil is something we try to avoid with all conscientiousness. All I know is, PM Harper is the VERY BEST, and sometimes I guess it simply gets lonely at the TOP. In him, we find the “fruits of the Spirit” on continual display. His is a position the madding crowd loves to target, and they will be relentless as this world gets crazier and crazier…

    • bertie says:

      Where would be today without PM Harper??I would go further in my praise for PM Harper.I would say he is the greatest PM Canada has ever had..He has battled the 3 disloyal opposition parties for 7 years now as well as their trusty sidekicks the CBC and the MSM and has made them look like fools.This is what hurts the MSM,they have tried twisting his words and lying & printing stories that are proven to be false and people just do not believe them anymore.They have destroyed their profession in an attempt to destroy their countries leader.WHY? because he wont let them get away with their childish behavior and rudeness.The Opposition parties try scandal after scandal and are proven wrong each and every time,but their tactics are covered up by the MSM and parliamentary press gallery.All the while our PM Harper is keeping Canada at the front of the G 7 or G20 and is making Canada proud on the world stage.Not by sucking up to the UN or China or the USA,but by gaining the respect of these countries by honest discussions and trade deals that are great for Canada’s economy.Also by being one of the few countries who stands by Israel through thick and thin,PM Harper is seen as a man who can be counted on in good and in bad situations.In other words,in today”s world it is hard to find a leader who does not owe something to someone I/E favors ,and is trusted by most other leaders on the world stage to give clear,honest advice on any position. Is this not what your best friend does,when you are needing some solid advice and guidance..Well we have that in Canada in our Prime Minister.Someone you can count on for tough love when it was needed and will administer when it is needed again.You just have to feel better knowing you have this man is looking after us.Again the greatest Prime Minister Canada has ever had.

  5. Richco says:

    Actually the only “people” who don’t like Harper are usually crybaby left-of-centre types who have yet to get over the fact that he won…..and they didn’t. Also, that he’ll win again next federal election.

    They don’t recognize leadership and competence I guess OR have any of that of their own.

    Harper’s done a GREAT job.

    • Winnie says:

      “I love the frothy mouthed vitriol spewed by the confused” really does speak to the level of hate spewed out. Kudos to Rex Murphy for an excellent article.

  6. robins111 says:

    The people I run into that suffer from the toxic, ‘hate Harper Syndrome’ can generally be stuck in the following categories, 1) receive some sort of government funding and fear it’ll be cut, 2) Are boneheaded union types, who blindly follow the leaders rants (often present during dipper rent-a-rallies) 3) Dedicated lefty conspiracy buffs, who see the PM as the anti-christ. There are a few hangers that are anti-Harper, just to stir up, fecal matter, ( notably on university campuses) Media types, as evidenced by the Bobbsy twins.

  7. jon says:

    It’ll get worse for them when he succeeds in winning his 4th consecutive election, even if it happens to be a minority. And unlike the previous 3 Liberal gov’ts under Cretin, doing so while fending off the Media Party as well. Impressive!

  8. Iain says:

    Harper could find a cure for cancer and most lefties along with their media toadies would be demanding a victim impact study on tumors.

  9. fh says:

    I think it can all be chalked up to the fact that most MSM are Liberal supporters…..

  10. Fay says:

    Great post Joanne. I enjoyed the fair and balanced column by Rex Murphy. I give him credit for maintaining his sanity while working for CBC over the years.
    I was surprised to watch Craig Oliver praise Stephen Harper on his decision to green light the nexen deal on Don Martin’s panel yesterday. I noted that CTV gave Robert Fife the report on the Nexen file on last nights National to bash. Craig Oliver was sent to bash the F-35 story. CTV is anti Harper all day every day!

    • Joanne says:

      Thanks Fay. I’m grateful to my little grandson for sleeping in this morning during his sleepover here, or this post likely wouldn’t have happened. I tend to lose my creative mojo after about 10.

      I agree that it’s important to give credit where credit is due regarding MSM. However, the fact that we even feel the need to do so speaks to the rarity of unbiased commentary and reporting.

  11. jon says:

    OT but just wanted to comment on CTV’s attacks on senator Duffy — more so IMO for having joined the conservatives than over the housing allowance controversy. I’m sure if Duffy was appointed by PM Martin years back, representing the Libs in the upper chamber instead of the CP, the story on senators’ housing allowances would still be done but in a more generalized way… and I bet Duffy’s name wouldn’t be mentioned specifically.

    Duffy has been criticized on and off for various things since he left CTV to join the conservatives. What he did in joining the CP is unforgivable to them it would seem. A few year back I remember fmr. CTV reporter Tom Clark (who I believe was still with CTV at the time), taking a shot at Duffy, who was stumping for a local by-election candidate in the maritimes when he said something snarky after the clip of Duffy was run…. (paraphrasing) “That was Mike Duffy, out selling the CP, which is what he does these days”. I remember cringing upon hearing it on PP I think it was, when Clark was hosting it, though I can’t remember exactly… maybe it was Sunday’s QP instead.

    Anyway, does anyone remember a time when Lib senator Jim Munson, a former CTV journalist himself, was ever criticized for anything? Upon further inspection, wasn’t Munson’s move to join the Libs a far worse sin considering that he left a career as a “reporter”? Think about it… before he became a senator, Munson became Cretin’s PR lackey and unlike Duffy, the latter being a guy whose been known for giving a strong opinion or two during his gig on PP, Munson’s job prior to working for Cretin was to strictly stick to reporting and to not give his opinion OR (and this is important) to structure reports in a way in which the same ends up resulting. (often times the way a reporter structures a story — the order of the politicians interviewed in the clips, whose argument is given weight and substance over the other, and which party’s rep gets the last word in the report, which lends more credibility and substance to that party’s position over the others that came before it, often times can affect the way the viewer gets spun.)

    As a senator, Duffy is free to disagree with his own party on legislation submitted to him from the HoC. In that respect, he has some autonomy. In the first job Munson took when he made the leap from journalism to politics, he chose to up that possibly. As a PR flak for Cretin, he submitted a blank check to his boss, accepting a position where he could not disagree with gov’t policy and knew his job was to sell it to the public through the media at all cost. Duffy is not shackled by that constraint and can speak his mind at any time. And worse with Munson, he came over as a reporter, thus rendering his reports from the Hill up until he accepted Cretin’s job offer suspect. And open to valid criticism.

    I may be making a mountain out of a mole hill, but it seems to me at least that Duffy’s fmr. colleagues at CTV have it out for him. Heck, even a couple of nights ago on CTV National News, Duffy was referred generically to as being a former “Ottawa-based journalist” with no mention that he was ever with CTV itself. It’s shameless how they’ve been treating him IMO.

    • robins111 says:

      Methinks Duffy’s great sin, was showing Dion, choking on camera. Their sacred cow got slapped around, and they’ll never forgive him.

    • hollinm says:

      Just to add to your comment. I believe Munson had been laid off by CTV at the time of his appointment. I may be wrong but this is my memory of his appointment. The rest I agree with.

      • Liz J says:

        Don’t recall if Munson was laid off when Chretien tapped him to be his toady, I do recall Munson repeatedly telling us Chretien was the best PM we ever had. Smart move to stoke the old Chretien ego, it proves flattery will get you everywhere, in this case a seat in the Senate.

  12. Tripper523 says:

    Well-said, everyone!! PM Harper is indeed acting in that capacity of “best friend”, as bertie pointed out. I agree too that he is in fact the “best ever” that we’ve had, the most important, morally-sound, wise, etc., etc., and I’m just grateful to be conscious and coherent enough to appreciate the privilege of having this man at-the-helm in my lifetime. Even the “quiet supporters”, as I recently discovered through a contact out in Calgary, though not “in love” with the PM, are happy that he does not carry any “dirty laundry” with him. Again, another positive attribute to the quality of person that he is, and a true rarity in leadership.

    • bertie says:

      Yes Tripper,I hit 72 this year and have seen some terrible Prime Ministers..I too am glad PM Harper came along in my lifetime.After the likes of Trudeau,Chretien & Martin I was getting pretty down on the people of Canada for electing such idiots. Although we have a great leader in PM Harper,we still have to wonder what in heck is wrong in Ontario to keep electing this fool McGuinty,who is trying to not only destroy Ontario but being Canada”s most populous province is trying to drag Canada down also.Where do the Liberals get these idiots.And now they are resurrecting Trudeau (the pretty pony)..Again thank goodness PM Harper came along when he did

  13. Martin says:

    Irrational contempt for Stephen Harper reached its zenith with the media pictures of him in the baseball cap at the US Open tennis match. This outdid even Gerald Caplan’s vitriolic assaults on CBC’s P&P.

  14. Gabby in QC says:

    Maybe the pathological hatred of Stephen Harper, i.e. the mentally disturbed level of such haters, is a reflection of our times: thanks to Google, everyone’s an instant “expert” and thus a critic having easy access to multiple platforms to express discontent and even poisonous vitriol. Radio talk shows, email, blogs, twitter, facebook, online media forums — they have all created the fantasy that true democracy equals clicking on a “like/dislike” button and signing an “I hate-Harper” petition.

    In times past, the electorate was satisfied to cast a ballot every few years, letting politicians run the country until people grew tired of the party in power. That is no longer the case. Nowadays, both the right and the left claim that grass-roots movements underpin and legitimize their party’s policies. THEIR brand of democracy is supposedly true & legitimate — “participatory democracy”– rather than fraudulent and illegitimate — “representative democracy”. That explains the Occupy movement, Avaaz, ABC strategies, and sundry “stop Harper” movements, as well as the push to change the electoral system from a FPTP system to some form of proportional representation.

    Both sides use phrases like “rule by elites” and “the corridors of power” to denigrate the other side, with the left often championing “public consultation” and both sides laying claim to wanting to cede “power to the people”. To be frank, I cringe when some of my fellow conservatives themselves use some derogatory phrases such as “old white men” and “elites”. I admit I’m old school: I’m OK with ceding power to my government representative, even if at times my world-view doesn’t coincide with his/hers. But I reserve the right to express my disagreement even in the afore-mentioned forums, hopefully based on logical and factual terms. Ultimately, that is what my vote in an election accomplishes.

    In this kind of push-pull atmosphere, the left has blindly ignored the fact that Stephen Harper does not come from a privileged background, like many of his predecessors or his political adversaries did. He truly can lay claim to being from the middle-class. Yes, he does have a political ideology — i.e. a set of ideas he wishes to implement. His ideology simply happens to be one that doesn’t conform to his opponents’ world view, so the easiest way to counter that ideology is to vilify, demonize, and depersonalize him.

    • Sue says:

      Wow we are lucky to have the quality of posting that Gabby always adds to the debate.

    • Joanne says:

      “Yes, he does have a political ideology — i.e. a set of ideas he wishes to implement. His ideology simply happens to be one that doesn’t conform to his opponents’ world view, so the easiest way to counter that ideology is to vilify, demonize, and depersonalize him.”

      Well said Gabby!

  15. Bubba Brown says:

    Harper hatred, big sigh….. yup I encounter it everyday, from people who should know better.
    The Media from the disrespectful little man Mr Milewski whom I did get the opportunity to thank personally for his boosting of our vote numbers.
    Every time he used his brief moment in the spotlight during the election to disrespect our PM our numbers jumped.
    His reaction to that was stunned silence.
    With Kady writing “Friction” in 140 character “bites” it is just projecting.
    The Left is frustrated “their” Canada is changing, so they say.
    I think the average Canadian is becoming more conservative.
    We needed an alternative to the ever vacuous Liberal chapping of lips on the backside of the corrupt UN.
    Climate change? Utter and complete fantasy dressed up as “science”.
    In reality a blackmailing of a few prosperous Western nations, income redistribution at best.
    “The Science is settled” thank you for that Mr Suzuki, who elected y’all to be the Pope of the Greenies, who cannot be wrong or mistaken?
    The list of bellowing monstrosities gifted us by the Left is long includes Multiculturalism, that encourages intolerance.
    HRC’s that undermine human rights, justice systems that are unjust.
    I get it, some people don’t like PM Harper, he does not pander, he will tell you what needs to happen and do it.
    He keeps his campaign promises.
    How refreshing is that?
    An honest straightforward Politician, better attack him with everything from host gate, body bags.
    Vilify him for daring to ask the voters for a majority, remember that?
    PM Harper is a treasure, these are the good old days.
    The Left in this country hates Democracy.
    Whether they call themselves Liberals, NDP-Q, or Green’s they are just varying degrees of socialists.
    They think that vast parasitical schemes which would force redistribution of wealth created by the hard work of some, to others deemed worthy.
    This would be overseen by the Elite who would take a considerable commission for their efforts.
    These “redistributors” are only distinguishable by the speed they wish these changes to occur.
    They hate Democracy but are unable to offer an alternative.
    We must stay involved, keep informed and ever ready for the next election.
    The alternative is not one I wish to contemplate.

    • bertie says:

      Right on the money Bubba.The one thing that still is a mystery to me is WHY IS THE “MSM” against the Conservatives ?.Where are the honest reporters??Who is funding them and writing their stories???And how do they get away with their lies and phony scandals without being sued????But that is for another day..For now a well deserved THANK YOU PM Harper

      • Sandy says:

        Check out my blog Bertie. I now have my old list of journalists and broadcasters conservatives can trust, along with links, on my right sidebar. (www.cruxofthematterblog.wordpress.com)

        At the moment it is 26 in number. I am sure I have forgotten some. Which means, there are likely more fair and balanced or openly conservative than we realize. So, let’s visit their sites and show our support and ignore the rest if we can.

        • Joanne says:

          Interesting list Sandy! I think you are being very generous with the likes of Coyne and Jonathan Kay, but I agree with most of the others. In some respects the perception of trustworthiness is subjective.

          For me John Ivison is one of the best in terms of objectivity.

          Regarding Coyne though, he supported the Liberals in the last election so at least you know where you stand when you read his columns. He doesn’t pretend to be anything else but Liberal.

        • bertie says:

          Thanks Sandy,will do.

          Merry Christmas

  16. Bec says:

    I love being a ‘Harper Groupie’ when I share in that distinction with the mature, thoughtful, well spoken folks above.

    Fantastic comments, brilliant post and a perfect 3 year old grandson who let Grama provide it for us.

  17. wilson says:

    It’s fear/hatred of change. They don’t know what to do to stop it, so they attack the person.
    Pretty basic human response to fear of losing power.

    PMSH is the person who represents that change.
    The Harper-haters hold him to blame for the center of the universe being moved out of downtown Liberal Toronto and Montreal, to the suburbs and the West.

    The hate monger is so obviously not working:
    One elected Reform MP-
    Official Opposition/ uniting the Right-
    minority government-
    increased minority mandate-
    majority without Quebec.
    A base on very firm foundation, deep and wide.
    Incrediable journey for two men, eh!!!! (Manning/Harper)

    Everything was just fine in Liberaland, until Reform/Harper came along.
    Some in the msm and social media go on daily hateful rants about our Prime Minister.
    They are now the extremists, ignored by mainstream Canadians.
    And PMSH has a majority without Quebec.

    The history books will be very kind to our PM. He is a world-class leader.

    • Joanne says:

      It’s fear/hatred of change. They don’t know what to do to stop it, so they attack the person.
      Pretty basic human response to fear of losing power.

      Exactly my thoughts. My sense of it is that it seems to be a response more centered in the amygdala of the brain rather than the cerebral cortex. And it becomes increasingly ingrained. It isn’t rational. And that’s what makes it a bit scary.

  18. bettie says:

    I find the comment section on CBC sites very disturbing… they are hateful and are often outright lies, but they get tons of ‘thumbs up’, and few ‘thumbs down’. Any attempt by anyone to correct misinformation is swarmed by ‘thumbs down’. It has me wondering, who are these people who make up these hateful remarks, and especially the ‘thumbs down’ people. Who is it who takes the time to do this? Could some of them possibly be CBC employees? Or students? Or the unemployed? NDP operatives?

    The opposition doesn’t have much to do compared to the governing party. They have time on their hands. Could they be organizing themselves to be the responders and ‘thumbs down’ people on comment sites of the CBC and Globe and Mail? Outright lies are particularly galling, and they are repeated over and over so that people think it must be true.

    I really like the PM, and am proud of his behaviour. As for the hateful comments, what can be done if anything?

    • Fay says:

      I have often wondered about the comments on CBC also. When I have offered a different point of view, it feels like you are swarmed by opposition. I have often wondered if some of the commenters are even Canadian? It is not the kind of Canadians that I have met across this great country. There is just something not right on the CBC comment section.

      • hollinm says:

        I find the same thing on Aaron Wherry’s blog on McLeans. Anybody who disagrees with them are “shouted” down.

    • jon says:

      “I find the comment section on CBC sites very disturbing… they are hateful and are often outright lies, but they get tons of ‘thumbs up’, and few ‘thumbs down’. Any attempt by anyone to correct misinformation is swarmed by ‘thumbs down’”

      The comments section is exactly how it should be. And no attempt whatsoever should ever be made to “correct” anything . CBC comments sections and polls should be left alone by those on the right. It’s actually better not to try and even things out, to instead leave it to Canadians to see for themselves that the CBC is not the objective, fair and balanced, public broadcaster it claims to be but rather one that attracts a certain, loyal viewing demographic — those on the left and those on the hard left. Harper-haters either way. That’s why I disagree whenever Kate over at SDA says to her readers “A CBC poll needs some help” and encourages those of us on the right to even things out for, what, to send legions of followers to artificially bail the CBC out and show that it’s not as bias as it obviously is? I always ignore her request and disappointed by those who don’t, seemingly not realizing that they’re helping the CBC rather than what they should be doing, which is to leave its loyal followers to destroy its credibility for us.

      Everyone remembers the first U.S. presidential debate and how Obama not only got flattened, but even his own supporters south of the border acknowledged such — angry more with their hero than at Romney for winning. And yet the CBC’s P&P online poll showed that 75% of respondents (approx 3000 total votes) felt that Obama won the debate, revealing just what an intellectually dishonest, misinformed left-wing lot those who love it truly are. And better than any scientific poll, which randomly surveys Canadians without knowing what their political leanings are, CBC’s fans come to the poll rather than the other way around, providing useful analytics for its critics to make their case against them. I enjoyed watching Solomon’s expression, every time he referenced the on-screen poll, leaving the token Republican strategist on the panel — hooked up on the panel — wondering just what kind of program he was on and allowing non-political, average consumers of news to see how out of whack it’s numbers were with every other poll in North America.

      If you want to serve the interests of those who despise the CBC, be an agent provocateur instead and join their loyal fans, posting as many over-the-top, Harper-bashing comments you possibly can come up with. It’s the best approach to destroying their credibility both in the short and long term.

      • jon says:

        Should be “hooked up via satellite” in reference to the token Republican.

        And sorry for the italics… forgot to close with a slash.

      • bettie says:

        Well, you have an interesting view… I wouldn’t go on as an agent provocoteur, however. But yes, what’s the point of doing a ‘thumbs down’ when there are over 1,000 ‘thumbs up’. And I agree with you completely about the CBC poll re the first debate… those ‘thumbs up’ people were just showing their ignorance and bias. Maybe it’s as you, just leave well enough alone.

  19. Bubba Brown says:

    Great comments folks!
    Our Party right or wrong;
    If Right to be kept Right;
    If wrong to be made Right.
    PM Harper is only one man, we elected him.
    What is lost on all the haters and nay-sayers
    is that every attack on our Leader is an attack
    on every single Canadian that votes Conservative.
    we had nearly 6,000,000,000 votes out of 14,000,700,000
    actually cast.
    Puts the boots to the “not a real majority” meme.
    The left of center vote is split three ways, tough nougies.
    They need a Leader, that can speak Canadian, I hope the Libs go for Trudeau retreaded.
    We know he hates the West, messes up “His Canada”
    We are here.
    We are Conservative.
    Our victory was hard fought and fairly won.
    Without Quebec as Gabby pointed out.
    They went with “Bon Jack”.
    Next election they will drop the NDP-Q
    like a crazy girlfriend IMO

    • Gabby in QC says:

      “Without Quebec as Gabby pointed out”
      Respectfully, I think you mean Wilson.
      I don’t enjoy the fact Quebec is staying out of the conservative tent, by and large.

      Part of that is due to the media portrayal of the PM and Conservative policies. Last week, for instance, Parliamentary Press Gallery President Helene Buzzetti once again brought up the old chestnut about the Evangelical Christian Right influencing if not downright determining PM Harper’s position in support of Israel. The source of her contention? Marci McDonald, author of a book purporting to expose the important influence the Christian Right supposedly exerts on the PM’s ideology.

      • Robert M says:

        Strange though isn’t it.Remember the “Book “Stevie Cameron wrote about Brian Mulroney that turned out to be totally false.
        I wonder just how bad this book is?

  20. Joanne says:

    Memo to “Jayme”: I fail to see how your comment is relevant or even coherent. Maybe it’s me but I won’t be publishing it.

  21. Sandy says:

    Excellent column by Murphy. It is one of the reasons I am putting together my list of journalists to read again– remember the one I had during the spring 2011 election campaign.

    Check out my latest tweet re the teachers strike. I would appreciate any help I can get (LOL) having hit on the big guys.

    https://twitter.com/sandycrux/status/277541189169864704

    • Richco says:

      re: list of journalists – Yes! Absolutely necessary IMO to show that there are choices out there that involved good journalists if you with to pay them attention. The opposite is also true.

      Re: teachers’ strike – I’m not on twitter so can’t help you, but I was at a social event in Waterloo yesterday where there was a mix of teachers in attendance. Some older, some younger.

      One common theme in their discussion about it was how pissed off they are that their union is fining them, but also that they’re really starting to be ticked about how their union dues are spent by their union. For the first time EVER I heard more teachers saying that if they didn’t HAVE to be part of the union they’d opt out. That is GREAT news for Hudak who IMO.

      A couple of the teachers taught in the Waterloo board and they shared with the group that their turn at a one-day walk out comes in the week after this up-coming week. Teachers have been asked to move up their Christmas concerts to this coming week because as one teacher put it “all hell’s going to break loose”.

      There is also rumour circulating that the province may lock teachers out. Why? Because they’re THAT desperate to find money. Sandy, one question that needs asking and answering is how much money does the government save every day there’s a strike? A few of the teachers there yesterday said that they wouldn’t put it past the gov’t at all, if they locked the teachers out as a money saving strategy in an effort to cling to power.

      Something else that’s very clear to me in all of this is that the public is NOT on side with the teacher union thugs (not to be confused with actual teachers who feel bound and gagged by their union).

      Locally, something interesting that I’ve noticed, specifically in the local TV reports coming from CTV London on the job actions is that they almost always draw comparison between the Catholic school board (where everything is fine and the kids are happily enjoying extras) with the public board. In fact, CTV actually had Catholic students and staff commenting on how it’s too bad what’s going on in the public schools.

      • Sandy says:

        Excellent news Richco. I am not sure how much money the gov’t saves but it would be fairly significant. However, if the grants have already been forwarded to the school boards, its the boards that would save, not the gov’t. Likely, they would have to give the money back, since they can’t have a surplus. But, in 1997, I remember one board bought debentures, whatever they are, to use for later capital projects. Perhaps someone else can let us know about those issues.

        The journalist list is now up on my sidebar. No doubt I have forgotten some. Just leave me a Contact Form message and I’ll add what I missed.

        Re ETFO’s threats of fines. Good news, they can’t. Read Alan Shanoff’s column in today’s Toronto Sun. (http://www.torontosun.com/2012/12/07/courts-say-no-to-union-fines)Very timely. The courst have already ruled that unions can’t fine their members during strike actions. ETFO bullies have to know that!!! I am going to put a tweet up on that shortly.

        P.S. I am so very glad the rank and file are fed up. Yes, it is good news for Hudak, who is doing very well lately getting his message out. Finally!!!!!!

  22. Tripper523 says:

    If the PM ever needed a place to go to take a break from that Irrational Contempt polluting the atmosphere these days, a great “feel good zone” called Joanne’s BLUE LIKE YOU would be a highly-recommended source of solace.

  23. ed says:

    As others have noted today, the commentary here by so many has been exceptionally brilliant. Such well written posts, the quality, the insight, it’s purely awesome. What a privilege to throw in my thoughts on BLY now and then!! It’s amazing how well people express themselves on this site. Tripper523, some of your recent posts have been exceptionally written and expressed. I’m in awe of how well so many here express their points of view. Hey, it helps me to be a better writer as well. :-) Actually, I could mention everyone on this site (beginning with Joanne) but it would take some time.

  24. ed says:

    Bubba Brown says:
    December 8, 2012 at 2:59 pm

    “The Media from the disrespectful little man Mr Milewski whom I did get the opportunity to thank personally for his boosting of our vote numbers.”

    Bubba, good for you!! Gee, I’d love that opportunity. I remember having my say with a local leader quite a few years back. It’s amazing how offended they are if you are critical of their work. It gave me quite a laugh.

    I’d love to be up on Parliament Hill and engage some of the turkeys roaming the place. :-)

    PS: keep on with your brilliant writing, just love reading your comments — and, for the laughs, of course. :-)

    • bettie says:

      This summer we took a trip to Nfld, and it happened to be during the NDP convention. At a table not far from us was Irene Mathyssen and two other NDPers. Ms. Mathyssen caught my eye and mouthed something which I didn’t catch. So I went over to her table. Here is some of our conversation:

      Me: I’m sorry I didn’t catch what you said.

      She: I said, ‘How are you?’

      Me: Oh that was the question. Well, I’m well… just landed in Nfld last night. I watch QP, so I recognized you.
      (A little more small talk…)

      Me: I find you are so angry in QP.

      She: Oh, the Conservatives are just terrible.

      Me: Oh… I think they’re doing quite a good job.

      She: No, you should hear the terrible things they say.

      About then, my soup came, and I returned to my table.

      • Jen says:

        Irene the X-Ray vision girl who saw from a long distance through into James Moore’s computer to complain that he was viewing a porn site when in truth he got an email from his girlfriend who sent him a photo of herself in a swimsuit.

        So, I am not surprise what she hears that was never said.

  25. ed says:

    Those who hate PM Stephen Harper do so because he is so good. They see how well he’s doing, morally and otherwise, and when they compare it to their own pitiful lives it bothers them no end. Stephen Harper reflects badly on them. They see themselves in the mirror, in comparison, and they don’t like what they see. They would prefer a leader more like them, inept and corrupt morally and otherwise. Also, isn’t true that too many Canadians (lefties??) do not appreciate their own rising stars?? Paul Anka, for one.

    And, now a song for ?? :-)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeAWESP7THs

  26. Bubba Brown says:

    Whoops! Mea culpa Gabby should have been Wilson as you so rightly pointed out.
    Mr Mildewski would not reply to my specifics on his churlish behavior.
    I did close with the fact that we wanted a voice, we went through Reform to Alliance and finally Conservative.
    We would never have a voice with the Liberals, the latest 2010 musings from J Trudeau on having people from the West actually in Government, is just how they continue to think of us in the West.
    We are unduly influencing Canadian politics, according to Junior Trudeau.
    On the other hand we are concentrating way too much on developing resources according to Mr Muclair, who always seems to me to be one eye brow twitch to exploding like an overinflated balloon.
    Or perhaps a whoopee chushion would be more appropriate, no?
    If only we would go back to J Chretains 60 cent dollar.
    Good times, good times.
    So we went after the corrupt Liberals, Mr Mildewski, you corrupt so called journalists at the CTV and CBC are next.
    No reply ………..which in and of itself is a reply.
    Dean of B.C Blue did verify that the person posting as Mr Mildewski was indeed that person.
    He checked with CBC as I recall.
    All we got from Mr M. was mewling about people “hiding behind aliases” he would not do any other than complain he was being singled out for criticism by anonys.
    Boo frickin’ hoo.
    We as a movement, as a party, as Canadians, have been held up and called knuckle draggers, and worse for longer than I care to remember.
    The criticism of Senator Duffy for showing Mr Dion as totally incompetent in the Queens English, the language of the majority of Canadians, I remember.
    I don’t remember a similar criticism of “news reader” Peter Mandsbridge for springing the Abortion question On Stephen Harper, do you?
    I would like to know, just what Mr Mandsbridge gets for “reading the news”?
    Ed @ 10:11 they are stunned to find someone does not share their POV, they are shocked, shocked!

  27. Tripper523 says:

    Thank-you ed!! I suspect I’m comparatively “new” here but have always appreciated your insights. Quite an illustrious roster on this BLY TEAM, as you and several others consistently demonstrate. With such a great forum and diversity of able contributors, I cannot help but be inspired myself. Writing (keying) can certainly be fun, as well as rewarding, with worthwhile topics to expound upon and superb colleagues with whom to interactively communicate. Cheers to Joanne and ALL commentators…..A toast to the PM and “Weird Al” too… Also to the weasel Mr. Milewsky for his unintentional assistance.☻

  28. Bubba Brown says:

    Well looky here Mr Trudeau has another speech to explain and apologize for, he has a lot of explaining to do.
    His ” viva Quebec libre ” brain farts seem to be frequent.
    His Canada seems to end at Thunder Bay.
    Scroll down and catch the quotes from his little thank you speech to the bloc for supporting the Coalition Coup attempt in 2008.
    Justin Trudeau, long shot with a short resumé
    Liberals could be ‘rolling the dice for a miracle’

    By Greg Weston, CBC News – Posted: Dec 7, 2012 5:40 AM ET – Last Updated: Dec 7, 2012 8:04 AM ET
    Liberal MP and leadership candidate Justin Trudeau has been called both a long-shot and the best shot for the party’s race. (Graham Hughes/Canadian Press)
    The Conservative operatives sipping pints at a capital watering hole laughingly announce they are forming “Tories for Trudeau” to help ensure Justin wins the current federal Liberal leadership race.
    Across the room, a Liberal organizer backing Trudeau’s bid for the Grit crown takes the Conservative gag in stride, but later concedes to me his party is “rolling the dice for a miracle.”
    “I keep telling people in the party that Justin may be a long shot for winning the next election, but he’s the best shot we’ve got, so we need to get behind him.”
    Ordinarily, being considered a long shot by your own supporters, and the best shot for the competition, is not exactly the ringing endorsement one might expect of a candidate for future prime minister.
    Yet, Trudeau continues to draw packed Liberal gatherings across the country, and recent public opinion polls suggest that if an election were held today, ordinary Canadian voters are being wowed in sufficient numbers to put the Liberal Party back in contention for power.
    But what exactly are Canadians being wowed by?
    Pollsters say the apparent popularity of a Trudeau-led Liberal Party may reflect a growing fatigue with the Conservatives, and almost certainly points to unstable NDP support ready to shift camps with little coaxing.
    There’s no question Trudeau’s iconic name, the handsome boyish looks, the often youthful flippancy — it all adds up to star-power and some refreshing relief from the daily growl of attack-dog politics under Stephen Harper and the Conservatives.
    But beyond all that, is Trudeau more than a pretty face?
    Light on gravitas
    The candidate to lead the Liberal Party and possibly the country has never managed anything larger than a school classroom, and his government experience is largely warming the backbenches.
    As for depth and gravitas, he recently gave a revealing interview with CBC Radio host Evan Solomon on The House.
    “I think voters are looking for real people, not spun, sound-bited and massively controlled politicians,” Trudeau said.
    For example, when he once opined in a French-language interview that the country would be better off being run by Quebecers than by Albertans?
    Oh, heavens, no! Trudeau says.
    If you’re looking for real, unspun politicians: “What you need to look at is what someone is actually saying … throughout their speeches, throughout their presentations.”
    Was it a mistake to make the comment in the first place? Solomon asks.
    “Absolutely, because it allowed the Conservatives to … make campaigns out of negativity and the past when I want to talk positive about the future.”
    Most of the major candidates running for the Liberal leadership are in some way trying to distance themselves from the party’s past.
    But Trudeau seems to be trying to distance himself from himself, last week calling the long-gun registry a “failure” that he would not revive, even though he has voted more than a dozen times to save it.
    About that coalition …
    If there is anything he has said on the record that may come back to bite Trudeau in the long run, it is his enthusiasm for the 2008 almost-coalition government.

    It was the day the Liberals inked a deal with the NDP, backed by the unwritten support of the separatist Bloc Québécois, to topple the newly elected minority Conservative government and replace it with a coalition that would have made Stéphane Dion prime minister.

    Trudeau rose in the Commons to make one of his first speeches ever in Parliament, calling the coalition deal a “large, important day of respect and co-operation of which we can all be proud. I would like to congratulate the members of the Bloc for being part of that.”

    Trudeau’s embrace of the ultimately failed coalition is likely already sitting in a Conservative Party file of fodder for future attack ads, should he win the Liberal leadership.

    In the CBC interview, Trudeau was asked if his pretty-boy image was his biggest challenge.

    “No,” said Trudeau. “My biggest challenge is getting people to know everything that I am, and everything that I’m not.”

    In politics, as in life, it’s best to be careful what you wish for LOL
    If he can escape from his “speeches, his presentations, his outright support for the Bloc and Quebec separation.
    He would be a better “escape artist” than Houdini and could be called the “Great Justini”
    Just sayin’

  29. wilson says:

    CTV QP was pretty fair today.
    Opps making a big fuss over F35 numbers…
    taking the cost out to 42 years is almost foolish.
    Lets take the cost of running the CBC out 42 years, that’s over $43 Billion,
    not including adjusting for 4 decades of increased costs!

    Dippers and Libs keep reminding the media this was the issue that brought down the Harper Govt with a ‘contempt of Parliament’ ruling.
    ….. and Canadians answer was to give our Prime Minister a majority govt without Quebec. Perhaps the Opps should rethink their strategies.

  30. Bubba Brown says:

    I am thinking that the opposition is finding that things are indeed changing in Canada.
    here is an example of walking the talk;
    Historic MP Pension Reform Bill Receives Royal Assent, November 1, 2012, Ottawa
    A historic bill to reform the MP pension plan received Royal Assent today, underscoring the Government of Canada’s commitment to respecting taxpayers’ dollars and increased accountability. The Pension Reform Act amends the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act so that MPs will pay 50 per cent of the pension plan’s cost, up from the current 14 per cent. The age at which MPs can retire with an unreduced pension will also rise from 55 to 65, as of January 1, 2016. The reforms are expected to save taxpayers approximately $29 million by 2017.
    With this and the gradual paring down of the 1.78$ per vote subsidy things are indeed changing.
    This is what a majority Government looks like acting in the interests of all Canadians.

  31. Sue says:

    Such a pleasure to happen upon Joannes site after seeing the teaser on BT. With the likes of our long time favourites and newer participants, I just have to applaud and thank wilson, Gabby, Richco, Sandy, Jon?, and Bubba.
    And then there was berties homily to PM Harper. Beauty of a comment!

  32. fh says:

    O/T kudos to National Post
    http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/12/07/graphic-abortion-in-canada-almost-100000-documented-terminations-in-2009/
    this blows a big hole in the justification for abortion
    abortion is IS big BIG business and has nothing to do with rape

  33. fh says:

    we need to continue to keep vigil over our beliefs as they can be hijacked
    “beware of People bearing gifts”
    http://german.about.com/library/blidioms_greeks.htm

  34. Jen says:

    For those who have no idea what ‘fully’ goes on in this field including myself, view this video:
    Alberta Oil Sands: about
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UGx5_2IYZ4Y#at=13

  35. Jen says:

    Close to the end listen to the environments point of view.

  36. Liz J says:

    How long before Maudie Barlow and her so-called “Council of Canadians” get laughed/tossed out of court on their Socialist butts? They may be Canadians but they are better described a Leftist/Socialist Canadians. They are trying to interfere with the results of the election because they simply can’t stand having their own kind out of power. For them democracy is a one way street, they either gain power or they attempt to steal it.

    • Goody says:

      I just watched question period and heard that the council of canadians is being funded by Unions to take the govt. to court for the Robocalls.One union is Cupe can’t remember the other one.

  37. Bubba Brown says:

    The Unions have seen the MP’s pension get a little more realistic methinks that sent a cool draft up their kilts.
    A very simple way of funding the new fighter planes would be just move the Billion+ a year over from the CBC to the Royal Canadian Air Force.
    After all we could depend on them to defend us the CBC won’t do that.
    Curious though why is Maude and her kouncil going after the Government the only person to be found guiltyof misleading phone calls and fined was a Liberal.
    Seems to me there was a NDP MP Pat Martin being sued for slander for remarks he made about Robo call, what is happening there.
    He was looking for donations last I heard.
    If these people spent as much time actually looking to improve the lot of ordinary Canadians as they spend creating controversy, we would all be much better off.

  38. Gabby in QC says:

    About those planes … there’s a lot of controversy and criticism that could have been avoided if there had been better communications about the actual cost of the F-35s.

    Critics have thrown around all sorts of astronomical figures about the supposedly soaring costs of the planes: $9B, $14B, $25B, $29B, with the latest estimated cost hitting a staggering $45B+. But the government has never countered forcefully enough with some facts, primarily that the estimates of those soaring costs are based on a different number of years basis. The CBC has a helpful web page illustrating just that:
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/04/12/f-f35-cost-estimates.html

    The latest estimate of $45B+ is based on a 42-year life cycle cost of buying 65 new fighter jets (from the Dec. 7 NP Full Comment by John Ivison) whereas the initial $9B cost quoted by the government was for 65 planes, apparently without operating costs included in that figure. The PBO’s guesstimates were based on a 30-year life cycle and the DND figures are apparently based on a 20-year cycle. No wonder there are such differences in the estimated cost!

    From another CBC web page …
    http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2012-2013/2012/09/timeline-f-35-canadas-biggest-air-defence-purchase-ever.html
    “June 19, 2008 – DND releases its Canada First Defence Strategy. The document states for the first time that the government wants to buy “next generation” fighter aircraft to replace the aging F-18s. It also states for the first time that it will need 65 aircraft and establishes a budget of $9 billion to buy the aircraft. …”
    BUT
    A budget of CDN$16 billion is established to operate and sustain the F-35 for 20 years. …”
    AND then there’s the PBO’s guesstimates
    “March 10, 2011: Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page releases estimates that put total purchase and sustainment costs for buying and sustaining 65 F-35s at US$29.3 billion over 30 years. …”

    So, keeping that kind of information from the general public allows the opposition to keep hollering that the cost is soaring out of control. No one, including the government, has made it clear to the general public that those estimates include different things (planes only or training & operational costs included) and are for different life cycles for the F-35s.

    • Joanne says:

      Gabby we need you to be official PMO spokesperson!

      Just kidding of course but communications always seem to be the problem with this party and this government.

      • Gabby in QC says:

        Well, maybe I just don’t understand the behind-the-scene strategies, whatever those are. Maybe creating doubt is part of a strategy? Maybe it’s a startegy to keep the opposition hopping mad? Maybe it was a valid way to go in the past … you know, the proverbial trial balloons?

        But nowadays, with the immediacy of social media and the constant demands for more “transparency” and public consultation, with a decidedly hostile media, you’d think the government would try a different kind of strategy: simply laying bare the basic facts before the public.

        Don’t you think that the public would understand the difference between a 20-year “mortgage” (DND operational costs), a 30-year mortgage (PBO numbers), or a 42-year life-cycle (KPGM numbers) if that info. were clearly enunciated?

        Also, the opposition keeps bleating about having a competition to choose the aircraft. Does the public realize there WAS a competition dating back to 1996?
        From the CBC web page I previously linked to
        http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2012-2013/2012/09/timeline-f-35-canadas-biggest-air-defence-purchase-ever.html:
        “November 16, 1996: The US Defense Department announces it has chosen US aerospace companies Boeing and Lockheed Martin to compete to come up with the best design for the Joint Strike Fighter.
        AND
        “October 26, 2001: The US Department of Defense selects Lockheed Martin over Boeing as the winner of its design competition for the Joint Strike Fighter.”

        Other countries, among them Canada UNDER THE LIBERALS, decided to participate in the development and possible purchase of that plane, the one chosen by the US, so there was no need for a competitive process to be held in Canada. If Canada signed on to the development of the aircraft, hoping to get contracts for its aerospace industry UNDER THE LIBERALS, why would Canada now need to hold a competition for an aircraft to replace the CF-18s?

        ARRRGH!!!

  39. Pingback: Communication Conundrum | Blue Like You

Comments are closed.