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

Stephen Harper talking like Stephen Harper

by Aaron Wherry on Wednesday, September 9, 2009 10:21pm - 139 Comments

CBC gets hold of video of the Prime Minister speaking with Conservatives in Sault Ste. Marie. Full tape is here. Somewhat reminiscent of David Akin’s scoop of earlier this year.

Turns out, the Prime Minister seems to desire a majority government. Who knew? Otherwise, it seems to me, Stephen Harper speaking here sounds not all that unlike Stephen Harper speaking everywhere else.

Tags: election, Sault Ste. Marie, Stephen Harper

More by Aaron Wherry

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

I agree. Not sure what's so shocking about this. However, what I'll be watching for is whether they backtrack from it, or fully embrace it. In the past, it would have been the former. Currently, they probably want and need to the latter – eventually.

dan in van

Yah, how's Harper going to backtrack from his own coalition proposal? I was wondering that too Dennse. But a liar will do what a liar will do, and his blind followers will follow…

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

It's not what I wrote, nor is there any coalition proposal of his own. Seriously, how can some of you consider yourselves to be intelligent debaters when you not only try to pull this crap off, but you do it over and over again as though you have thick skulls?

In other words, you have nothing on Harper other than false accusation. No wonder he keeps getting elected.

Old School Liberal

How about his promises: not to tax income trusts, not to appoint unelected senators, not to allow the country to go into deficit, to reign in spending, to have free votes on everything except budgets, to reduce polling contracts (he doubled Martin's high spending on polling), to be accountable and transparent, not to cut and run from Afghanistan, to introduce a gas tax, to allow income splitting on capital gains, to create an Public Appointments Commission, to hold elections on fixed dates, etc etc.

How about on his commitment to democracy: bribes Cadman for his vote, in-and-out scandal, cancelling confidence motions that he promised once he realized he wouldn't win, cancelling Parliament altogether to save his own job, the Calgary university funding, the convention fee debacle, buying off Liddle so he wouldn't run and lying about it (in court no less), etc etc etc.

John W.

Nice to see it all in one place.
Now will some MSM outlet actually do a serious responsible article on what the Harper/Giorno/ Nicholson/Cannon etc team will actually do if they get a majority? And put that all in one place. A documented, informed, non partisan, neutral in tone speculation on what we could pretty well count on if the Harper Party gets a majority.

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

Well, Don Martin is of the beliefthat it's impossible for Harper not to have known that he was being taped, and that he probably doesn't care, either.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

You and your little coalition too dearies.

http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

For you: http://dougsamu.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/harper-w…

http://intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

Not shocking …. but this being delivered "in private" along with the whining about the gun registry and lefty-judges, just validates our very real concerns about hidden agendas.

kudos to the spy who captured this on video!

dwh

…no kidding…it's like the NRA, the bible thumping right & other neo-con phantoms from the late Bush admin. are still
controlling Stevies brain

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

Well, I haven't read anything about judges. But don't Canadians want the gun registry boondoggle scrapped, too?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Because now that the bulk of the money has been spent, we might as well throw away the results, hm?

Conservative economics at play.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Garnet Garnet

Right; after the billions that were blown (and that the public were misled about), the benefits will surely kick in. Why give up now?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Already have. Police chiefs in multiple cities have come out with approval of this thing, saying how it makes the jobs of the police officers safer.

So tell me, exactly how much is too much to save a cop for you?

dan in van

Hey, its not guns that kill cops, but coalitions!
http://intensedebate.com/people/RobertSeymour RobertSeymour

The police support the gun registry because it makes people more dependent on them for their safety. Gun control, much like drug prohibition, is in their self-interest but not the public interest.
http://intensedebate.com/people/RobertSeymour RobertSeymour

Also, these are the same police chiefs who support Tasers. Should we support Tasers too?

I repeat these people have their own interests and their policy positions reflect them. They are not benevolent defenders of the public interest.

We're all imperfect and the police are no exception.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/RobertSeymour RobertSeymour

Also, these are the same police chiefs who support Tasers. Should we support Tasers if the police claim they save lives too?

I repeat these people have their own interests and their policy positions reflect them. They are not benevolent defenders of the public interest.

We're all imperfect and the police are no exception.

André

The only problem with the gun registry is that it's a liberal idea, forcing cons to come up with the most ridiculous crap about the program and cons supporters to eat it all up.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Douglass Douglass

Not this one.

We've already paid for the thing, and it has been proven to be a useful and highly used tool for the police.
http://intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

The police sure don't

anonymoose

they do here in BC!

http://intensedebate.com/people/Douglass Douglass

Speak for yourself.

http://intensedebate.com/people/RobertSeymour RobertSeymour

The gun registry is overall not popular in BC.

anonymoose

Oddly enough, I haveot agree with Wherry. it certainly isn't anything we haven't heard int he last few days through other media outlets. I wonder if Iggy says that he wants a majority in private?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

Real nice fella:

On his claim to be satisfied with a Parliamentary majority: “Let me be clear about this, we need to win a majority in the next election campaign…we need to win a majority…to teach them a lesson.”

· On women, gays and minorities which are helped by a government program: “[They’re] left-wing fringe groups.”

· On gun control: “We are still trying to get rid of that registry…we need a mandate to get that thing passed.”

· On our international allies: “[We don’t poll] the U.N. General Assembly to determine Canada’s foreign policy.”

· On judges: “[They’re] left-wing ideologues.”

Stephen Harper unleashed.

sbt

"On our international allies: “[We don’t poll] the U.N. General Assembly to determine Canada’s foreign policy.”"

When did the U.N. General Assembly become our ally?

Boethius

It's a "coalition" of our allies. And Harper is obviously against coalitions.

sbt

No, the UN General Assembly is not a "coalition" of our allies. Our allies are some of its members, but the entirety of it is not made up of our allies.

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

Wow, look at all those dot dot dots and squared brackets in those so-called quotes. Why is it so hard for you or Kinsella to post actual quotes?

http://intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

Scott (and a few of us) took the time to listen to this clip. I suggest you do too.
Those are the quotes.
Gotcha! ;-)

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

Then why not post actual quotes versus heavily edited ones from hyper-partisan Liberal operative Warren Kinsella?

whha?

Brevity?

Or are you saying you've watched the video, and you feel that the quotes Scott has provided misrepresent or aren't indicative of what the Prime Minister was saying on those topics?

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

Oh, so you prefer brevity to accuracy, do you?

I've watched some of the video. For example, the quote about getting a majority to teach them a lesson is completely chopped up and changed the meaning of the entire passage. Similarly, all the other quotes contain squared brackets and jump over big stretches of words in order to, guess what, change the meaning of the message.

Now, for people who claim to have watched the actual video, and transcribe all the quotes, I wouldn't think it would be that difficult to post what Harper actually said in that meeting. Thanks.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Or… you could do it yourself. What are you, some kind of lazy liberal?
dan in van

Did Harper preface the speech by asking "is this for print?" because he seems to like to go a little commando on his quotes when he thinks no one literate is listening…
Boethius

Changed the meaning, BOLLOX!

He said quite clearly that if the opposition drops him, they need to teach them a lesson. It doesn't get much plainer.
Old School Liberal

What? Do I read this correctly? A Conservative is upset that a bunch of quotations from their leader have been publicised, possibly out of context?

Go tell it to Harper, Dennis. I'm sure they'll be all ears to your whining.

Anon

Did Stephen Taylor tell you to write that?

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

No, did Karl Marx tell you to write that? Next.

dan in van

There's no 'Marx' in liberalism, just like there's no 'I' in Dennse…

http://intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

Ooooooo! That hurt!

http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

Scary Harper returns. It's going to take more than a blue sweater to cover up this ugly side of his personality again.

Vince Clortho

You find that scarey?…..I am surprised you are so easily frightened.

jarrid

I see the Liberal partisan hacks are getting desparate.

Looks like all those "outlier" polls are getting them a little rattled.

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

Most of Harper's musings have been documented but not captured on video.
(His own coalition ploy, speech about Canada being a hopeless socialist basket case etc.)
As we are quickly becoming an illiterate nation, video evidence seems to be required to wake people up to the threat this gang poses to our way of life.
So now we got us some video evidence – albeit a minor piece. Even such a minor piece obviously has you and your ilk rattled. Just imagine what you guys have been talking about, that has leaked out as yet. (cue the ominous music)
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

Most of Harper's musings have been documented but not captured on video.
(His own coalition ploy, speech about Canada being a hopeless socialist basket case etc.)
As we are quickly becoming an illiterate nation, video evidence seems to be required to wake people up to the threat this gang poses to our way of life.
So now we got us some video evidence – albeit a minor piece. Even such a minor piece obviously has you and your ilk rattled. We can just imagine what you guys have been talking about, that has not leaked out as yet. (cue the ominous music)
http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

LOL – and your not a Con partisan hack? LOL

Anon

Ever notice how Harper sounds exactly like every loony right wing crank blasting intemperately online?

Our prime minister is troll.
William

So a few days after Iggy tells his faithful that " His time is up " referring to PM Harper`s team elected only 10 months ago and you are surprised that Harper tells his faithful that a majority will be needed or the Libs will try Coalition 2.

The message is clear for the Libs—-if you can`t suck it up and accept your role as a responsible opposition party and allow the gov`t to govern, then force an unnecessary election, but prepare to be judged by an angry electorate.

Andrew (not P or C)

Dumb rhetoric. In a minority situation, a government that doesn't earn opposition support deserves to fall. That is the role of the opposition.

kcm

Just what i was thinking.
William

And if the electorate perceives the Opp. as not working constructively with the minority gov`t then they may decide that a majority gov`t would work better.

dan in van

Don't know how much more constructive you expect the opposition to be after nearly 4 years… Harper threatened elections whenever he passed wind when in opposition, talked up and wrote to the GG about a coalition of the willing. But then again, he also talked about not taxing income trusts, not raising taxes, not appointing senators, promoting stronger voices for MPs in parliament and respecting the will of the people. Guess he's just a clown in CON clothing…

William

PM Harper realized in 2005 that for the good of the country a corrupt Liberal gov`t should be removed—-the present gov`t is competent, ethical and respected internationally. The Libs are simply making mischief for their own selfish reasons.
voice of reason

A lot of this is simply beating around the bush. The unpleasant reality is that Stephen Harper is a bigotted racist who leads a government of kindred spirits. Only the narrow minded need apply. If you are anything but a gun totting WASP from Alberta dont count on your passport being worth anything.
NoMoreBorders

It's interesting that your username is "voice of reason" when your statement is exactly the opposite. It's morally wrong for you (or anyone else) to choose to make such a false personal attack like this.

A discussion about politics is not a place for your personal vendetta.

shouldIsellyourwheat

The CBC didn't say the Liberal Party gave them this video upfront in the news report, which to me is unethical news reporting.

I don't think it is fair reporting to say that the Liberals were the source of this story, only at the end of the story as a footnote.

http://intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

Whiner!
they disclosed the source AND it was obviously not doctored. what is your problem????

so sorry they don't follow your Con media instructions
Andrew (not P or C)

Does it change what Harper said? Liberals were not the source of the story. Source means origin–that would be Harper, in his own words.

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

No, but it would put the story in a more accurate context, wouldn't it?

In fact, when Conservatives tend to get hold of audio or video of other parties behind closed doors, there's usually a whole lot of hollering and screaming as to how it was obtained, right?

kcm

And what context would that be? It must be a lie, since it came via the cbc and the Liberals.

Harper speaks

[youtube cWaxTotsqrE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWaxTotsqrE youtube]

David_M

edit fail

Calgary Junkie

Good grief. He is clearly wearing his partisan, leader of the Conservative Party hat here. This is the kind of stump style speech ANY leader gives to party faithful. Plus he's testing his lines, seeing the audience reaction, will tweak it all as the election nears.

Now, IF he was wearing his PM of Canada hat, speaking to a general audience, and gave this kind of speech, then that would be inappropriate.

Similarly, if he talked like this to his kids, his wife would proabably
divorce him.

Context and audience are critical considerations.

wilson

And what if Canadians who normally don't hear a Harper stump speech, like it?
At least it gets Canadians thinking of what they want, Iffy and Jack writting cheques (with Gilles and Danny Williams ok) for new hair brained social programs, or getting tough on crime and chaning immigration laws etc……

kcm

Right! It could only be those two scenarios couldn't it? No other possibilities out there huh? If you don't let us govern the socialist and separatists will ruin the country. Oh my bad that is what Harper said. Must be true then!

Harper speaks

Oh, so he was wearing his party leader hat, so we should discount it? Because context and audience are important.

I'll remember that the next time a Conservative talking-head or tv ad butchers a quote from an Ignatieff academic paper totally out of context. But he was wearing his academic hat, not his opposition leader hat! He was speaking to academics! Context and audience are critical considerations!

Calgary Junkie

"he was wearing his party leader hat, so we should discount it? Because context and audience are important. "

Did I say "discount" ? I think "cut the guy some slack" is about what I'm trying to convey.

When Iggy proclaimed "Mr Harper, you're time is up", I didn't say to myself "THAT'S not how a PM-in waiting is supposed to talk". He is obviously wearing his "leader of the LPC" hat. I factor that in, and plus his audience is his caucus–he's pumping them up, girding them for the battles ahead, that kind of stuff. Just like Harper is pumping up party faithful, party workers, urge them to work hard, and so on. Stump-style speeches are like that.

It's no big deal to me that Iggy is talking to his caucus that way. But then I don't hate Iggy with the passion that some on here hate Harper.

http://intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

The simple truth is that those of us who do not like the man are simply not convinced he is genuine. I personally feel that he is a manipulative purveyor of half truths, with a vision for a Canada that I do not share.
Given that, there is great temptation to tear off his sweater vest and unmask him whenever given the chance.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

I do not like the man and do not believe he is genuine. I personally feel that he is a manipulative purveyor of half truths, with a vision for a Canada that I do not share.
Given that, there is great temptation to tear off his sweater vest and unmask him whenever given the chance.I suspect I am not alone in this regard.

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

A context in which the motivation for taping and distributing the video is given.

Jethro

What does the motivation for taping Harper have anything to do with what Harper said (which is the actual story)

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

Oh, so it didn't matter when Grewal did it?

Quite frankly, it's not a big deal, because I don't think the tape is that big a deal. Just commenting on how the video could have been described better in the CBC piece. That's all. That they did eventually provide the source is a good thing, of course.

kcm

That's not at all what you inferred. As i said, in your world if it came from the cbc or Liberals it must be untrue. And Grewal was accused, if memory serves right, of doctoring the tape.
Old School Liberal

In that case, you had Grewal and the Conservatives doctoring the tape. So the source mattered.

Here it is straight to video, unedited.

What a whiner.

Always trying to take the attention off of Harper.

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

And, for that matter, I though Canadians took pride in setting an independent foreign policy, didn't they?

dan in van

They do. Can you tell Harper to stop letting Karl Rove do ours for us?

http://twitter.com/ICU8it @ICU8it

Gee, Aaron! I guess he's a real human being just like the rest of us.. BIG Scoop, man!
jax

I would personally like to pick stephen harpers brain and try to fully understand the reasoning behind his motivation and thoughts. Much like the states we tend to be a least 4 years behind, Harper is our bush, when will we get our obama? As a scary left wing liberal who wishes to see equality for all and a real solution to climate change i think that what we should be looking at is how we can make ecology just as important as economy because when it comes down to it without ecology we have absolutely nothing. Gun registry is also an important tool, i think that in order to own a gun you should be responsible for what can happen through it's uses. Responsibilty, accountability, and respect for others to me is not a conservative agenda.

Calgary Junkie

Why do you need Harper to do all that stuff ? You've got your champion in Ignatieff. All you gotta do now is find a way to get him into power.

dan in van

Well the idea is to use democracy, put forth the issues and policies to the public and let them decide. Unfortunately, your Uncle Fester believes only veiled threats and scary stories (you do realize that he proposed a coalition of his group, the socialists and the separatists when it was a Liberal minority, don't you? My guess is he'll return to that argument if he finishes second next time, too) to sell his slop.

http://secondthots.blogspot.com Dennis

Well, it's why we have a democracy, and why Canadians seem more content with our prime minister than you do.
Marc

Aaron Wherry, fear mongering, card carrying member of the Liberal Party. At the very least, you should post that you hold a party membership, this way the public can see your views are partial and you're not a true journalist.

All the readership is asking for, aside from the Kinsellas, Reids, Taylors and Jankes out there, is for real, non-partial journalism….seems like it's a dead breed.

kcm

Where's he fear mongering? He just gave us the tape.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

You want they should all pretend the tape doesn't exist? And it was CBC who broke the story, so are they in the bag for the Libs too?

dan in van

I guess we're suppose to pretend until Harper slaps a court order to have it hidden behind a legal curtain, like his other faux pas… Fortunately for you in your current flop-sweat, the tape doesn't reveal anything that many of us (because you do realize 65% of the people didn't vote for him last time, right?) didn't know. So chill, it can't be all that bad. Besides, no doubt the CON war room has a sleeper agent in the press ready to pluck Ignatieff's eyebrows come the 11th hour…

Anon

That's all wingnuts have; lies and character assassination.

Seriously?

Really, I don't know what the problem here is. When Stephen does un-conservative things out of necessity, he's branded as a bloodless traitor to his own ideology. When Stephen actually speaks his mind and/or acts on his conservative principles, he's branded as a bloodless demagogue. Just let the guy speak, crunch the numbers on his economic platform, give the guy a little grace (I mean… come on… the alternative is Iggy? Seriously?), and move on here.

dan in van

Exactly. Now its just up to the hounded and scared CON supporter to figure out which Harper lie is the right one — is it the coalition-seeking, anti-senate appointing, less-is-more stuffed shirt, or the excessively spending, continuously campaigning, entitlement creating anti-parliament so-called leader who loves kittens?
Calgary Junkie

"give the guy a little grace "

Exactly. The anti-Harper crowd is taking their nitpicking way too far.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Is it ironic, or more properly poetic justice, that Harper was crowing about the tapes he had on Iggy during question period?
Seriously?

Really, I don't care if you vote for him. Maybe you're a social and economic liberal, and that's okay. In a civil society, you can respectfully say "I disagree" and invite intelligent discussion on the issues. Yes, I know that isn't what Stephen is doing in his attack ads (or Iggy, Layton, and Duceppe in theirs). But Politics is a different game, and realistically that's just how you win votes. For the rest of us, we can hold a fair discussion on the issues.

Who's up for a good discussion on the pros and cons of fiscal conservatism? Anybody?

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Is there a new party I hadn't heard about?
tobyornottoby

Okay, here's one: Have we ever actually tried fiscal conservatism in Canada? Or do we just have parties that claim they are?

Mulroney goverment ran up spending, defificts and tax cuts, so that wouldn't count. Martin reduced the deficit by cutting transfer payments and infrastructure investment, so I suppose that could count, except he also continued corproate subsidies and tax loopholes, and allowed the Bronfmans to take their money away while the rest of us paid taxes.

Seriously, who would we point to? Frank McKenna in New Brunswick?

Alberta has been liquidating public resources to keep taxes low. That's fiscally unsustainable.
Devine was a spend and sell Conservative. Ran up the bill and taxes. Maybe Tommy Douglas was more conservative?
Mike Harris was a bull in the china shop Conservative, hardly responsible to just plug ug up the works to make people mad at the government (especially since the bill still comes due). Bill Davis/Blue Machine before that was more like the McGuinty govt.
http://intensedebate.com/people/DerekPearce DerekPearce

Ah but there's the rub: there are many of us (who are mocked for seeing bogeymen) who care not a whit whether the Tories or Grits are in power, pracitising fiscal conservatism or not, because fiscal conservatism will always be secondary. It's social conservatism that gives us the heebie jeebies. Yes yes yes, "hidden agenda" appears to be a tired old cliche but it's still, after the PM's had almost 4 years in power, the first thing that comes to mind. His lack of majority has been a safeguard for us. Now, seeing as Harper himself is willing to compromise many principles *as long as he has a minority*, this concern may seem paranoid. But the Tories (and these new Tories are not like the old PCs), will be full of populist anti-minority wedge issue legislation should they get a majority.

And yes yes, the Grits had Tom Wappel and Roseanne Skoke among others– but they were the fringe of the Liberal party and never influenced the agenda. How can those of us who absolutely want a rock solid, waterproof, bomb-proof guarantee that stuff like abortion or same sex marriage won't be revisited under a CPC majority, be assured that our paramount issues are safe? Sorry, we can argue about money and the economy until Canada's a 67th-rate broke economy– we DONT care about money issues as long as these other social issues aren't somehow guaranteed not to be touched by a Tory majority government. And that's why we'll have minorities for a long long long time to come.