Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW
He also offers his thoughtful perspective of Stephen Harper’s last 10 years in his recent eBook, The Harper Decade.

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Hey look: a column, and a debate about what it says, if anything

by Paul Wells on Friday, October 23, 2009 4:44pm - 39 Comments

From the print edition, this week’s column, which is about Stephen Harper’s surprise reference to the Supreme Court of Canada on a national securities regulator. An excellent bonus is the debate that then breaks out in the comments board, over whether I’m a threat or just a menace. All sides use direct quotations from the column to prove a bewildering succession of contradictory points of view. That wasn’t the effect I was seeking, but it remains kind of entertaining.

Tags: self-promotion, words that rhyme with Brechtian

More by Paul Wells

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

Feel free to weigh in over there. oh menacing one…
http://intensedebate.com/people/John_Edgar John_Edgar

Shouldn't you be flattered – you write a column about what Stephen Harper is doing and most people are so much more interested in what you think …

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

"All sides use direct quotations from the column to prove a bewildering succession of contradictory points of view. That wasn’t the effect I was seeking, but it remains kind of entertaining."

If there's better evidence that the column was sort of ambiguous, I can't think of what it might be.

I'm still interested to know what Wells meant about Harper weakening the social union and the national vision. It sounds like the beginning of an interesting point (points?), but it just wasn't carried far enough.

anon

Threat vs. Menace. Everything you always wanted in a pundit. And less.

Bubba vs. Butkus?
Teeves

Whoo! Slacker University students for life. At least we slacker students can bother to spend the time to attempt to understand how our country and attempt to influence it with are own views. Anyone who posts on a political form is also likely to cast a vote on election day. We need more Canadians taking an interest!
kcm

…"a bewildering succession of contradictory points of view."

Gosh!… i was just going to go back and correct my spelling as usual…
But this puts a completely different complexion on things. Did i even manage a C??
kcm

Which one of Well's rules did we break? There is only 5 right?
http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

Hmmm….I worked for many years at the corporate administration level of publically traded companies. People don't realize how slow, expensive and frustrating it can be to deal with the provinces separately. For example, if a company wishes to file a prospectus and be a reporting issuer in many provinces, they have to file with each province and each province has their requirements and rules. Time consuming to say the least and expensive and it sure slows things up for investors.

Also, it's interesting that two of the provinces that are so against it are the two that have threatened separtion from Canada and have had, shall we say, conflict of interests/legal problems.

Chretien/Martin were interested in this, but imagine Quebec in the 1995 referendum and Duceppe is going to go berserk if this is approved by the Supreme Court.

I'm not so opposed to it. Canada can't continue dealing with investors as a snail's pace.
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

whether I’m a threat or just a menace.

What's Trudeau's line? I've been called worse things by better people…
http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 robert_mccl6309

If he's both would that make him a threatening menace or a menacing threat?
Mike T.

But all the Federal government can do is make it so you have to do all that at the provincial level, and then AGAIN for the federal regulator.
http://theplaceofbiff.blogspot.com biff

Wells continues to be a riddle wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a mystery, wrapped in a….a….Macleans cover.

Anti-climatic, I know. It just pittered out.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord_Bob

Yeah, we're glad to talk to you too, Paul!
Anon Lib

Threat!
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

The great thing about Wells is that he never hesitates to smack down commenters, both individually and collectively. He can be downright curmudgeonly, in a lovely sort of way.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

Four, plus many many would-have-been-rules-if-I-hadn't-cut-it-off-at-four.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

Gaunilon has a fair point. It isn''t my bestest-ever column.
Lord Kitchener's Own

Menace!
Foreigner

How maudlin.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I'm actually impressed that you know what "maudlin" means.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

You guys don't even need my help. You're self-down-smacking. Or intra-down-smacking.

TedTylerEzro

Paul, you are expecting rationality or even coherency from comments on the internet.

Don't you realize we're just a bunch of slacker university students, the unemployed, and the people who have jobs they can pretty much ignore without repercussions? If we had anything charismatic, profound and important to say we would put it to work for us in making a living.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I'll go with "intra".

kcm

Well thank goodness would-have- been-rules don't count … hey not fair! Which one didn't we break?

kcm

Hmmm, coulda sworn there was 5. Maybe that one was optional or something?

kcm

Yeah, we sorta completed it for him. I don't think he liked our efforts overmuch.
erb

Alberta govt opposes everything Ottawa as a knee jerk reaction pandering to the base. It is just another snafu by our stumble bum premier groping around for something to rally his waning support.
John (The Other)

"That wasn’t the effect I was seeking, but it remains kind of entertaining."

Wrong bait. Dangle the obvious; fish won't bite.

Grow a set Wells.
http://phantomobserver.com PhantomObserver

"Threat or menace?" Sounds like Mr. Wells is planning on doing a little web-slinging for Halloween. ;)
Seriously though, I suspect that the amount of wrangling on Harper's actions dictates that history will make him a PM on the level of a Chretien or Diefenbaker (even a Trudeau), long after he's out of office.
http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

Combine the two and he is a threnace, or is it meat?

kcm

Where i really take issue with Harper is his partisan style. The libel suits; trying to financially hamstring his opponents; the interminal gutter ball labelling of opponents et al., Even at his most contentious Trudeau didn't stoop to such methods. He prefered polemic and persuasion – so do i. But it may well be that Harper will turn out to be the most interesting and transformative PM since Trudeau – but i'm not yet convinced i like where he's going

kcm

…interminable…
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

In other words, you still oppose Harper but you've developed a newfound respect for him.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

What's wrong with being a threat AND a menace? I've spent most of my life endevouring to achieve that combo.
kcm

I think that's fair comment.

http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

I dont know how interesting it is, I don mean that in a bad way….it is an echo of other threads on Harper and other thinkers, see Fearful Symmetry.

But then this also picks up Glen Pearson's confused criticism of Harper, that he is an incrementalist…shock horror….and therfore incapable of doing anything worthwhile, but also a radical and therfore to be feared…..hmm threat and meance.

kcm

I'm very slowly evolving in my view of Harper. Admittedly i started out simply revilling him and still do in some ways. But it's evident now that he is more than a RW thug, he seems to have an agenda. I'm pretty sure i wont like that agenda but i'm beginning to respect the fact that he seems to know what he wants, at least in national terms.

Sometimes Harper seems to be the flip side of the coin to Trudeau. He looks like he has a thought out agenda [ at times] and he doggedly pursues it. It angers me that he doesn't communicate what he intends for us openly, but then in fairness neither did Trudeau. They're/were both sure of what they want and are prepared to ruthlessly impliment it.

It's a bit of an irony really that conservatives who complained that Trudeau shoved his vision of the country down our throats find no incongruity in Harper attempting to do the same. The reality is that neither is probably true for Trudeau or Harper – you have to have some sort of critical mass on your side. [cont]