Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Hey look: I will anglosphere no evil

by Paul Wells on Friday, December 11, 2009 11:05pm - 21 Comments

From the print edition, my column about an Australian politician and the Canadian politicians who are keeping an eye on him. A few times this week in social settings I was asked how we pick topics for my column. It’s usually the result of a chat between myself and Editor Mark Stevenson, and sometimes the question we bat around is whether we want me in the middle of one of the week’s big debates, or off on the sidelines somewhere looking at something that’s getting less saturation coverage. The answer changes based on my mood, the editors’, and the mix in the rest of the magazine. This is one of those “sidelines” pieces.

Tags: Australian rules, self-promotion

More by Paul Wells

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

Paul, sorry to go off topic on the first comment, but I could have sworn I saw a post by you yesterday providing a historical reference (I believe from 1995) on Parliament's ability to compel the production of documents. I now don't seem to be able to find it anywhere. was I dreaming?

kcm

Try Aarons blog…it's there somewhere.

kcm

It's over on 'The national interest" AW's blog on thursday.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

thank KCM, that was very helpful! And the good news is my faulty memory was only partially faulty/ I don't need to be committed for dreaming about who said what!

Dee

Frankly, I would have preferred another article about Canadian politicians, if you're going to write about that tosser.

Harper has nothing to learn from a politician like Tony Abbott. Unless he wants to be a even more hyper-partisan goon, emphasize his evangelical Christianity and/or his anti-climate-change-science stance. In other words, unless Harper wants to alienate the average Canadian voter even more.

My favourite story about Abbott is when he called an opposing politician (Kelvin Thomson) a "snivelling grub" in the Australian parliament but escaped censure.

In response, the current deputy PM of Australia (but then in opposition), Julia Gillard called Abbott a "snivelling grub" and got tossed out of parliament:

http://tinyurl.com/ybwjb8g

Gillard was quoted as saying about Abbott: "If I have offended grubs I withdraw unconditionally".

When people compare politics in Canada and Australia I just laugh. In many subtle ways our countries are worlds apart, and we have nothing to learn from the likes of Tony Abbott.
http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

I wonder how useful examples of Con parties doing well in other countries are to Cons here. I lived in London and knew a bunch of aussies, they are not like Canadians. Completely different culture, behaviour. So heightening contradictions and taking fight to other parties might not necessarily work here because many, many Canadians seem to get the vapors when they hear something other than liberal shibboleth. I don't believe aussies have gone down the road of socialism as far as Canadians have, they still have some spirit/independence, while Canadians are incapable of looking after themselves and need government to take care of everything.

Also, in his mind Harper might like models that lead to fights but his actions suggest otherwise. Harper has not shown any backbone since becoming PM and has never hesitated to back down from fight.

And I can only imagine how msm would react if Harper called someone a 'toxic bore'. Msm would go bonkers about how rude/angry he was and didn't Harper's mother teach him some manners.

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

"And I can only imagine how msm would react if Harper called someone a 'toxic bore'."

I'm guessing they'd applaud his newfound decency, in light of his history of calling his opponents pedophiles, terrorists, traitors, and accusing them of smearing our soldiers.

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Lets say, arguendo, that I agree with your description of what Harper has called others. Your examples are regular political rhetoric, MPs have been calling each other names like that for decades. I thought 'toxic bore' was different, much more personal, and I believe msm would see it as comment on them as well as Iggy. Many of our msm are liberal and think Iggy is admirable – I am convinced that it would be at least a one week scandal for msm.

How dare Harper call Iggy, a man who taught at Harvard, a bore! It is outrageous.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

right, calling Harper a toxic bore is much more personal then the attacks leveled on Dion by SH and his flacks, not the least of which was the hatched job by Duffy and company.

and no politicians calling opponents pedophiles is not "regular political rhetoric"
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

For the record, I thought the collective angst over wafers and bathroom breaks was stupid. I also thought the "not a leader" campaign was in bounds, as is the "just visiting" angle (I also think the citizens are morons if they base their votes on those sorts of facile one-liners, but that's another matter).

But I do think this politician and his posse of frat boys have repeatedly found a way to lower the bar of base decency and respect in their discourse, and that suggesting one's opponent endorses the rape of babies is perhaps outside the bounds of adult debate.

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

"But I do think this politician and his posse of frat boys have repeatedly found a way to lower the bar of base decency and respect in their discourse"

How high was the bar to start with? I am not referring to you SeanS because you don't seem to be type to lash out at others willy nilly but, being a conservative, I wonder how anyone can think this. For at least fifteen years I have been called Hitler, fascist, sexist, homophobic, racist, xenophobic… etc so I am far from convinced that Harper can lower the bar anymore than it already is.

I think it is disingenuous, to say the least, for Libs/libs to cavil about Cons lowering the discourse.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

I think we need to distinguish popular discourse from what our politicians say "on the record". The world is full of a**holes (liberal, conservative, etc.). But when our representatives stand in our House, I expect a higher standard than one might witness on anonymous blog sites or in coffee shops.

I'm sort of a hybrid libertarian /socialist. So I don't really have a party. And I'm not coming at Harper from any particular partisan angle. Subtract the contempt, and add some vision and talent to the current Conservative party and I might even entertain voting for them.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

suggesting one's opponent endorses the rape of babies is perhaps outside the bounds of adult debate.

Can you provide a link to demonstrate that Harper ever actually said any of this stuff? Because he didn't.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

He called Martin a pedophile sympathizer, no? But ya, perhaps I was pushing things a bit.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

He didn't even go that far. He never said anything of the sort. This all stems from the title of a press release that was issued on June 17, 2004 by some overzealous staffer, and recalled an hour later.

"A Conservative press release bearing the headline "Paul Martin Supports Child Pornography?" was sent to media outlets across the country at 3:30 p.m. EDT Friday and recalled at 4:35 p.m.

So yeah, Sean, you may be guilty of exaggerating a wee bit.
kcm

And the fact that they even thought this was ok,right? Besides if memory serves me right Harper refused to apologize or explain the incident…he was happy to leave the matter hanging. A principled individual would have tried to clear up the confusion. I have no respect for the political instincts of Harper.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

he also intoned that the Bloc were soft on/accepting of pedophilia.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Easy now. Nobody likes an uppity muppet. :)
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Fo' shizzle :)
http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

Whoa. Wait a minute. Are you saying that one cannot interpret the phrase "Paul Martin supports child pornography" to mean that Paul Martin endorses the rape of babies? What exactly, then, was the phrase intended to mean?

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

"But I do think this politician and his posse of frat boys have repeatedly found a way to lower the bar of base decency and respect in their discourse"

How high was the bar to start with? I am not referring to you SeanS because you don't seem to be type to lash out at others willy nilly but, being a conservative, I wonder how anyone can think this. For at least fifteen years I have been called Hitler, fascist, sexist, homophobic, racist … etc so I am far from convinced that Harper can lower the bar anymore than it already is.

I think it is disingenuous, to say the least, for Libs/libs to cavil about Cons lowering the discourse.