Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

The UnCanadian Activities Committee

by Aaron Wherry on Thursday, December 11, 2008 9:38am - 32 Comments

In case you were worried that this government was feeling chastened by the events of these last two weeks, CBC aired a clip last night of Pierre Poilievre, the Prime Minister’s parliamentary secretary, referring to the coalition earlier in the day as both “undemocratic” and “unCanadian.”

In other news, the Prime Minister placed a call last night to Michael Ignatieff, the prospective leader of that undemocratic, unCanadian coalition. Sources suggest Mr. Harper sought to personally register his objection to Mr. Ignatieff’s undemocratic, unCanadian activities. Any suggestion that the Prime Minister would be interested in working constructively with an undemocratic, unCanadian scoundrel such as Michael Ignatieff is false, misleading and probably also unCanadian.

Tags: coalition government, Michael Ignatieff, pierre poilievre, Stephen Harper

More by Aaron Wherry

Sean Stokholm

I listened to Ignatieff on The Current this morning. His version of the conversation with Harper suggested that Harper asked for Ignatieff’s input for the upcoming budget (i.e., “tell me what your demands are to make it passable”), and that Ignatieff flatly refused to get drawn in that way (show us first, and we’ll let know when it’s put to a vote).
kody

“Chastened” by events of the past week

You mean taking a stand on wildly popular positions that resonates with everyday Canadians (getting rid of direct funding to parties),

against a coalition that the vast majority of Canadians staunchly dissapproved of?

You mean those events?

The same events that brought the CPC to historic highs in public support and dropped the Libs support to the realm of political disaster?

One could argue that only a highly partisan leftist, blinded by their ideology and corresponding visceral dislike of one’s political opponent, would conclude that the events of last week would cause the CPC to be “chastened”.

One would also be correct in so arguing.
Sean Stokholm

Well kody, if you agree with your own argument, then that’s good enough for me.
kody

BTW, commenters on the right are having a fabulous time watching the left leaning media ignore the latest polls (as well as the corresponding specific examples of public rage against the coalition and public displays of support for Harper).

“News” organizations ignoring reality because they don’t like the results of that reality – why its sounds like a recipe for disaster to an entity who’s stock in trade is providing the public with all the unvarnished facts.

Did I mention the downfall of the Tribune Co., the L.A.Times along with the NY Times (papers notorious for not printing what they don’t like politically) lately? Tribune going bankrupt and the NYT mortgaging its landholdings to keep its “news” organization [such as it is] afloat. Ouch.
Jean Proulx

Just let him be Sean. He wants us to think last week was some kind of shining moment for Harper and his minions. I wonder if he even believes his own BS?
Jean Proulx

Kody – This kind of shit worked for Karl Rove…for a while. Then it kind of blew up in the Neocons’s faces didn’t it? And also this is Canada. Like 70% of us would have voted for Obama if we had the chance. So keep it up dude. It will only make it sweeter when you get your asses soundly kicked.
Dije

Well the “undemocratic” and “unCanadian” appointed senate is due to get well stocked with Conservatives by the end of the year.

Once upon a time, Harper would never do such a thing because his base would rally and foam at the mouth over such actions. But much like the minority-must-rule-over-the-majority movement, I suspect there are no tenants left of the Conservative base that Harper can’t sellout quickly enough.
kody

Yes Sean,

it’s just me in my little bubble. The last spate of polls were not real. In fact I created them in my basement (with a team of dastardly conservative operatives that is).

One more note to my left leaning friends here:

Your partners in the media are doing you no favours. The aging actress who’s talents have left her years ago, does not need someone telling her she’s marvelous and excitedly applauding her to go on stage. It doesn’t make the actress any more appealing, it only slightly delays the inevitable and makes the inevitable far far worse when it comes.

There are a number of reasons why the Liberals fail to renew, and instead try to rush back to power – but an important one is that their cheerleaders in the media keep telling them they’re fabulous and stageworthy. Don’t blame them though, they can’t help it. They’ve grown up loving the actress and can’t see her flaws.
kody

Dije,

Yes, much better for Harper to continue to appoint Liberals so that the already overwhelming number of Liberals in that chamber get even more one sided.

Because as we know, Canadians today favour the Liberal party over the CPC by a margin of over 5 or 6 to 1 and that chamber must reflect the will of Canadians, after all.
kody

Jean,

after this comment I will no longer respond, as your name calling is contemptable (though sadly typical),

but perhaps you havent been paying attention, but Obama’s appointments/selections and policies as of late appear to largely mirror Bush’s. In terms of comparative ideology, one could argue the Obama elect (as opposed to Obama the far left saviour in the primaries) is positioned to the right of the CPC.
Sean Stokholm

kody,

Agreed about the polls. The coalition is a non-starter with many/most Canadians.

But if you don’t think Harper ought to be minimally chastened and cautious at this point, I’d suggest you’re indulging in a bit of fantasy yourself.

Dion is gone. The free ride Harper has enjoyed is over. Without endorsing Ignatieff, I think we can agree that he’s going to be a stronger presence – one that cannot so easily be minimized with not-a-leader rhetoric.
Jean Proulx

Oh! My name-calling is contemptible! I have wounded the delicate sensibilities of a member of the puffin patrol. Suddenly attacks and name-calling are MEAN and BENEATH YOU. Ha! Get used to getting smacked around Dick Cheney. There’s plenty more where this came from.
archangel

Kody,

So long — and don’t trip over your tongue on the way out.
Average Conservative Reader

Cripes, Aaron, the Liberal party can defend itself, it doesn’t need you and 95% of the media defending them every time a junior cabinet secretary says something that nobody even paid attention to in the first place. I know we call you an outright Liberal often, but this one is out of bounds even by your standards.

A coalition that contains 50 MPs who want to break up Canada into non-contiguous pieces is, by definition, un-Canadian. A surprise coalition in which the leader repeatedly denied during the election he would form a coalition is, by definition, undemocratic. Socialists need to understand there are meaningful consequences, such as being affixed fair and accurate labels that they may not be comfortable with, for their actions, such as forming a coalition with MPs dedicated to the breakup of Canada. That’s how we roll in “real” Canada.

It’s not that you are hurting our feelings by being a Liberal shill, it’s more a question of aesthetics. It’s a very ugly spectacle watching the corporate media play footsies with the socialist bloc that wants to cause such massive and irreparable damage to my nation’s economy and budget; I believe the Germans call this a gammelfleischparty, or “spoiled meat party” . Be prettier!
kody

“so long”

folks seem to be confused with the notion of not elevating that which deserves to remain in the gutter,

with succumbing to political shout downs.

Oh, my no, no, no. I’ll be here to comment. Winning arguements with logic, facts, and yes dry wit, for some time to come. If others choose to make their points by childish insults that’s their perrogative.

We all know that name calling and insults are extremely effective rhetorical tools and are a sure sign one is winning and argument, so by all means keep up the good work. I’m sure your “team” is proud of you.
John.K

” I’ll be here to comment. Winning arguements with logic, facts, and yes dry wit, for some time to come”

Won’t that be a pleasant change!
Jesse A

I get your point Kody: the latest poll had the Tories way up and the media did not report it etc etc etc.
But I have to ask you: in the context of the polling and how the questions were asked (coalition etc.) and all the protests do you really think that the numbers are levels of support for Harper, or perhaps they show opposition to the proposed coalition?
Talking to people I don’t get the feeling (very scientific, I know) that people are pro-Harper per-se. They just don’t like the idea of the govt. changing in this manner way. When asked if they support the govt. they say yes, but not because they are suddenly going to vote Tory. They just are pro-status-quo. That doesn’t suddenly mean Harper is popular. Just that he happens to be the status-que.
I think that when most people (and media) look at the numbers and what is going on they get that. The polls don’t necessarily suggest that 49% of the population is about to vote Tory just that that many people don’t want change. Maybe that explains why you saw the discussion in the media regarding the polling and protests saying “Canada hates coalition” instead of “Canada loves Harper now.”
Construct this as media bias if you want. But I would have to disagree.
Concern troll

I’m concerned that this youthful asshat may be giving people the wrong impression of the CPC as it enters the renewed and renovated new era of cooperation with the opposition parties.

That would be a shame, as it could lead to support for the replacement of Harper’s minority government by an undemocratic government supported by the majority of elected MPs, who are unCanadian.
http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

“the Prime Minister’s parliamentary secretary, referring to the coalition earlier in the day as both “undemocratic” and “unCanadian.”

I don’t agree with any side deciding who/what is Canadian but the Libs have been pulling this kind of thing for years. It’s always Canadians support …. whatever the latest policy the Libs are trying to sell with the implication being that you aren’t a Canadian, or you’re a bad Canadian, if you don’t support the Kelowna Accord or somesuch. And when a coalition has a party dedicated to the break up of the country, it isn’t exactly a pro-Canada coalition.

And whether the coalition is democratic or not, it depends on what democratic means.
John D

Is there anything more important than winning to partisans? It seems hard to believe that an even-remotely decent human being would not feel bad about single-handedly bringing Canadian political dialogue deeper into the gutter than it already is when they only payoff is ‘good polling numbers.’ Of course I am naive and no one has ever accused the likes of Poilievre of being remotely decent human beings.
Sisyphus

Meanwhile, back in the world and in the headlines :-

- Canada trails the world ( except Saudi Arabia ) in climate change policy

- Canada ranks last in child care services among 25 developed countries

- Corporate welfare costs $182B over last 12 years, * Warning* Fraser Institute report, apply salt to taste

- Supreme court to rule ( Thursday) on legality of using EI surplus to fund general account spending
Sisyphus

The EI ruling is in !!
http://canadianmalcontent.net/ Blair

Since we seem to be talking about polls here (didn’t Harper say that he wouldn’t rule by the polls?) how come Kody hasn’t mentioned the poll, before Ignatieff got the leadership, that having him as leader would put the Liberals within 5 points of the Conservatives and severely cut into Harper’s numbers?

While we’re at it, perhaps we could use a poll about how Canadians feel about a PM appointing unelected senators under a prorogation procured to avoid a confidence vote?
Sisyphus

Oh, well….
http://csriess@shaw.ca Johnny Canuck

The public doesn’t really know Iggy, but it is safe to say that the more he speaks the less they will think of him. The man suffers from “foot-in-mouth” disease and reminds me of Paul Martin in that his answer to a direct question is usually to talk in circles and avoid directly answering a question altogether. O, and did I mention he appears to be trying the Paul Martin ideology of being all things to all people, everything is a top priority.