The Shotgun Blog
Saturday, August 26, 2006
Liberal counter-attack on Kenney
I have to disagree with conservatives for giving ink to the pretend news story about Jason Kenney's five-minute, off-the-cuff speech at a rally on the Hill that turned out to be organized by a terrorist front.
The differences between this and the Borys Wrzesnewskyj situation are so obvious, it's absurd that the conservative blogosphere has treated it as anything more than the transparent distraction that it is.
Wrzesnewskyj deliberately travelled to Lebanon; he deliberately met with Hezbollah; he deliberately called for negotiations with them; and he deliberately called for their legalization (though he later recanted, under great pressure). This was a thoughtful act on his part, over a long period of time. It wasn't a gaffe or a mis-step or an accident. It was really him.
Kenney, by contrast, popped by a rally on Parliament Hill between meetings, and gave his boilerplate speech on freeing Iran. That the rally was actually organized by a terrorist front, unbeknownst to Kenney, is embarrassing only in that it is a snafu. But that's the point: it's a snafu, not a thoughtful, pre-meditated act on the part of Kenney. It's clearly not his policy to support Iranian terrorists.
Kenney never endorsed the group; never mentioned its name (he didn't know it was behind the rally); he never called for dialogue with it, nor for its legalization. When informed of the identity of the rally organizers, he immediately repudiated them.
There is no comparison here whatsoever. Wrzesnewskyj engaged in a thoughtful, meaningful, planned, sustained moral apology for terrorists. Kenney was tricked into speaking somewhere -- though he still delivered his party line.
I'm rather embarrassed that I've just given this subject so much time, but it's to point out the absurdity that much of the conservative blogosphere has treated this as anything more than the obvious attempt to shift attention off of Wrzesnewskyj. It's akin to treating Joe Volpe credibly when he complained that our Libranos poster was anti-Italian. Uh, nice try, but the public wasn't so easily distracted from Adscam.
Isn't this obviously a desperate attempt to change the subject by a Liberal party clearly at war with itself over foreign affairs?
Posted by Ezra Levant on August 26, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Liberal counter-attack on Kenney:
Just so, Ezra. Well said. Thanks.
Posted by: Vitruvius | 2006-08-26 8:37:34 PM
Ezra, I would have thought you learned by now that politics is rarely about truth. Reading your Sun columns suggests you do know this, as you so often disregard truth to make your points.
Yes, the Kenney appearance at that rally was a supremely dumb move on his part, but it does not rise to the same level as the level of what Wrzesnewskyj did, for precisely the reasons you say. But that is merely the TRUTH of the matter. The POLITICS of the matter is this motto: "When one of your guys is down and being kicked around, try to put one of their guys down and kick him too". The hope is that enough dust gets kicked up so that the general public calls it a draw on this point and moves on. It's called "damage control". And it looks like it worked this time.
The next time someone screws up royally like Wrzesnewskyj, whether it be a Liberal, Conservative, NDPer, or BlocHead, expect the troops alligned with the team whose guy is down to go on the attack and say, "Yeah, but look at THEIR guy!"
Liberals do it. Conservatives do it. Even educated NDPs do it. They all do it. It's called "politics".
Posted by: Mark Logan | 2006-08-26 9:50:48 PM
You cannot handle the fact that some people like truth regardless of the fact that in your world truth has no capital.
Most people will respond to truth if one keeps repeating it. The truth needs no crutch. If it limps, it's a lie.
You and yours can barley walk.
This is not a draw, it's a knock out. You, like all liberals will deny a truth to your graves.
Posted by: Duke | 2006-08-26 10:00:56 PM
Absolutely Ezra, it's comparing apples and hubcaps. He didn't know the group he was speaking to, and in fact had been mislead in that regard. Attempts by his political opponents and by commenters to portray his actions as being equivalent to Wrzsnewskyj's are absurd.
Suggestions that such desperate attempts are just "politics as usual" say far more about the low standards of political discourse among his critics than about Kenney or the Conservative party.
Posted by: EBD | 2006-08-26 10:04:35 PM
Well said, Mr. Levant.
Indeed I believe Mr. Kenney didn't know any thing about the real sponsors of the rally and if he knew, he wouldnt go in the first place.
Let me say that it is MEK/PMOI/NCRI's tactic to invite people to rallies under the cover of human rights abuses in Iran and once prominent individuals and crowd gather, they pull their terrorist like banners to further their agenda.
I don't think Mr. Kenney knew about it and I am glad conservatives are with the people of Iran. That's heart warming.
Posted by: Winston | 2006-08-26 10:23:29 PM
One more thought I am gonna give out here... Does any one believe that most terrorist groups in Canada are hidden allies of the Liberal party of Canada?
Posted by: Winston | 2006-08-26 10:26:24 PM
I'm not sure about "most", Winston --- not that you're wrong, either -- but clearly the Liberals have pandered to certain communities for the sake of riding-by-riding electoral success.
The recent wave of anti-semitism seems a natural extention of the Liberal's anti-Americanism. There has been something of a sticking-the-toe-in-the-water test about the recent behaviour of certain Liberals.
It's all about power and not moral integrity for the Liberals; the nature of (a portion of) their core constituency has been increasingly exposed lately.
Posted by: EBD | 2006-08-26 10:43:37 PM
Since adopting a pro-Israel position the Conservative Party of Canda has been in a freefall among the electorate. SES Research shows that since May the Liberals have gained 8% in Ontario and are now at 42%. In Quebec, the Tories have dropped from 35% to 26%. (http://www.sesresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-F06-T7.pdf) That's 20 seats right there that the Tories will lose next election, minimum.
You can rage, rage, against the dying of the light if it makes you feel better, Ezra, but it's over. Thanks to Harper's spectacular failures in foreign policy the Liberals will be back in power come April. So arguing over whether Kenney should or shouldn't resign for speaking at a terrorist rally is pretty irrelevant at this point.
Posted by: Bob | 2006-08-26 10:46:00 PM
Bob, the Conservatives have "been in freefall" since adopting a "pro-Israel position"? Why you pathetic low-life, are you insinuating that Canadians want their government to adopt an anti-Israel position? Truly the internet is vanity press for the deranged. "Harper's spectacular failures in foreign policy"? Jeezus Murphy... drugs are bad OK?
Posted by: calgarian | 2006-08-26 11:02:35 PM
I know that Tamil Tigers had financial relations with the Libs and now this Hezbollah thing makes me wonder if the terror groups back Liberals because they are not as tough as Conservatives.
May be I am wrong...
Posted by: Winston | 2006-08-26 11:12:13 PM
Well, upon further reflection, Winston, I can't disagree at all with your 10:26:24 post. Terrorist groups operating within our country need cover in order to be efficacious, and in that regard the Liberals, and not the NDP, would obviously be the go-to guys. Terrorist groups, and the communities who support them, certainly KNOW they won't find favour with the Conservatives and Stephen Harper.
Posted by: EBD | 2006-08-26 11:21:54 PM
Ok, here's a hypothesis (I'm not saying I agree with it, it's just a hypothesis, for discussion). EBD mentions that "there has been something of a sticking-the-toe-in-the-water test about the recent behaviour of certain Liberals", and that got me thinking.
I wonder to what degree the Liberals find themselves facing Mr. Mulroney's problem, namely, that they have moved too far to the left of the center isle for their own base in the general electorate? (Not that I have anything against Mr. Mulroney, of course.)
In other words, if the Liberals are facing their own sort of Kim Cambell threat ;-) to what degree are (at least parts of) the Liberal's future leadership sticking their toes in the water of moving back to the center, somewhat perhaps like (from the different vector) Mr. Harper has?
Oh, I dunno', I guess I'm always just imagining a cross between Sun Tzu and Yoda saying "enemy study, angry at do not him".
Posted by: Vitruvius | 2006-08-26 11:45:18 PM
Ezra said "Kenney never endorsed the group; never mentioned its name (he didn't know it was behind the rally); he never called for dialogue with it, nor for its legalization. When informed of the identity of the rally organizers, he immediately repudiated them."
A number of Canadians think it quite unfortunate that the Rt Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada has such a bumbling, fumbling, inept Parliamentary Secretary ... Get real ... Jason Kenney is more worried about trying to save his job that he has to get the big guns to try and blow smoke you know where.
The double standard here is glaring. The Lib and NDP MP's merely suggested that talks occur with a terrorist organization. Kenney actually DID what he accused his opponents of merely suggesting. To even defend him, sir, validates a double standard.
Many of us still believe in things like parliamentary honour (although many here prefer that to be spelled as 'honor').
Posted by: leftdog | 2006-08-27 12:23:01 AM
I have watched and listened to Jason Kenny for years. If he says he did not know who that group was you can be sure he did not know - Jason Kenny does not lie. If anyone here knows of a lie he has told I would like to hear about it. It flies in the nature of a person like Jason Kenny to endorse, in any shape or form, a terrorist or communist organization but he would speak to a group of Iranian people if he thought that they were fighting for democracy in their homeland. Jason Kenny would believe, imo, that no nation and it's people should be doomed to live forever with a brutal totalitarian thug as absolute ruler. Canada lost many brave young men in WWII and WWI to liberate people from tyranny. We live in a democratic country where the PEOPLE can get rid of dictators without bloodshed - and most of us would like to help our fellow men/women who live under tyranny to throw the thugs out . We got rid of our batch of thugs who were robbing us and using our money to line the pocket books of their millionare friends (some of those 'friends' had evil agendas - the Mo Strong name comes to mind) in the last election. Here, as in Iran and Iraq, some people support the thugs. We should be asking why they support thugs and why they would not believe that a man with a proven track record as a cheerleader for Freedom would give vocal support to people he was led to believe wanted to oust a dictator.
Posted by: jema54j | 2006-08-27 1:52:23 AM
I hope incoming Foreign Minister Marlene Jennings can fix the mess Peter MacKay has made...
Posted by: Bob | 2006-08-27 2:22:30 AM
If that blabbermouth Jennings ever has anything to do with any ministry of our government we'd need to have a good supply of Gravol and maybe even Imodium.
Not to worry given the collossal quagmire the Libs have themselves in, we won't be suffering any fools in our government's top posts.
We have the 'A-Team' Mister"Bob", eat your heart out and dream on, you have lots of time.
jema54: Mo Strong must be hiding out, haven't heard of him for some time, he may still be in China, let's hope he gets lost for good for the good of all.
Posted by: Liz J | 2006-08-27 6:00:49 AM
jema54 - that is all fine and well. In your opinion, he didn't know who he was speaking to.... I just cannot fathom that kind of ignorance by the man who is supposed to be Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister of Canada!
Don't you understand the implications of what your beliefs say? - this is a black or white matter. Either he is NOT being honest about his knowledge of the group (OR) he is too incompetent to be in the Parl Sec positon.
Which is it? DISHONEST (or) DUMB? Neither is a good option - therefore he MUST resign. This is VERY simple.
Posted by: leftdog | 2006-08-27 7:39:42 AM
As one who understands subleties, I would classify this incident as an honest mistake.
But, I'm sure you've never made one ... since you are perfect and those who do not fit your idea of perfection in your own little universe are losers. That would be the rest of humanity.
Tell me, O Perfect One, who do you respect? Or since all are imperfect, they are all equally bad ... unlike you, of course.
Posted by: Set you free | 2006-08-27 8:39:15 AM
leftdog: It may be difficult for you Leftists to grasp but Liberals have become synonymous with Liars. You would have to be totally out of touch with reality, no matter what your politics, not to make that deduction. They have taken us for fools, we tossed them out and out they will stay for the foreseeable future. The people of Canada are not dumb, we do not like being lied to.
Jason Kenney would not lie, it's not the agenda of the Conservative Party to lie and make up stories to gain political points. This is what we expect from stupid a**holes who have nothing to offer but false accusations, no moral fiber, no sense of decency and no credibility.
That's what's left on the bones of the Liberal Party of Canada, go chew on them and snarl while your at it. Your barking up the wrong tree here.
Posted by: Liz J | 2006-08-27 8:44:27 AM
"Which is it? DISHONEST (or) DUMB? Neither is a good option - therefore he MUST resign. This is VERY simple."
Posted by: leftdog
Sociopaths think that those are they only 2 options. Certainly terrorists do.
Exploiting trust, and our society runs on trust, makes sociopaths think that trustworthy people who have genuine principals are dumb. The wrath of principaled people who have had their trust violated is strong and long lived.
The Liberals think the Canadian people are dumb. They made explicit dishonest policy for a long time based on that premise. The old Liberal shibboleth and only re-election plank , that the conservatives are scary, is now gone. People will remember the Liberals dishonesty.
Posted by: Speller | 2006-08-27 9:13:58 AM
Speller, while you try to deflect attention from Kenney with your ideological pablum, the matter of his double standard still remains. Jason Kenney is either a) Dumb (or) b) Devious.
Look at how you responded to the Kenney matter: you talked about sociopaths, terrorists, exploiting trust and liberals. You should be a hockey goalie because the number of deflections you used in that one post is truly amazing.
Posted by: leftdog | 2006-08-27 9:45:40 AM
I don't need to deflect attention from Mr. Kenney. The Canadian people are not dumb, they have been hustled by the Liberal confidence crew but now know their trust has been violated by the Liberals. They are no longer afraid of the conservatives.
What will the Liberal election plank be? We're the Liberals and we're not dumb, we're dishonest. Good on ya.
Posted by: Speller | 2006-08-27 9:56:18 AM
Speller said, "They are no longer afraid of the conservatives." HUH!!!
Yea that is why your Tory party has only 36% of Canadians supporting them - down 9 points in Quebec. Your optimism is admirable. Enjoy your little stint in power because it will be short lived. Your boy Harpo has had a chance to improve his fortunes but I venture to say to you that as a result of the war, your cheezy 1 cent tax cut and crap like what we see from Kenney - you are not climbing towards a majority. I fully believe that Canadians would rather have fragmented liberals then have angry tories. Enjoy -
Posted by: leftdog | 2006-08-27 10:07:38 AM
Not a leg to stand on no matter how you spin it leftdog, your masters of spin are spun out. That includes the MSM, we have them on notice and on the defensive. No more fabrications, no more skewing the facts to manipulate opinion.
Nothing left but grasping at a few short straws of no consequence or substance.
Bottom line: The people of Canada have awakened from a long hibernation and see the picture clearly and it aint pretty.
Posted by: Liz J | 2006-08-27 10:21:11 AM
enjoy your brief moment in the sun - 36%??? Sheesh!
Posted by: leftdog | 2006-08-27 10:50:49 AM
All reasonable perspectives should be debated, but there's no need to respond to commenters such as leftdog. His comments are inane, vindictive and weak; just step over his little droppings.
Go to members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm
Posted by: EBD | 2006-08-27 10:59:13 AM
One does not need to be dumb to be duped. Nor is one devious is one is found in the company of monsters.
Jason Kenney was duped. He is a busy many and all busy people occasionally make errors.
It is only those who do nothing that never make mistakes.
I suggest Left Dog does very little and by his rants, has little of offer in the way of intelligent debate.
He is a graduate of the Pee Wee Herman school of "I know you are, but what am I" and of the long standing debating methods of. R2 R-not.
Do not engage fools like Left Dog, that is like trying to resolve infinity. There are no parameters within which idiots like Left Dog will debate in so you have an infinite number of meaningless touches.
Best method to deal with LD is to completely ignore him or tell him to F**ck Off then completely ignore him ... the choice is yours.
Posted by: Duke | 2006-08-27 2:01:19 PM
Nor is one devious is one is found in the company of monsters.
Sorry, that should read
Nor is one necessarily devious is one is found unwittingly in the company of monsters.
Posted by: Duke | 2006-08-27 2:04:00 PM
36% ??? and you are 'excited' ??? (see that means 64% Hate you!) - enjoy the brief stint at 24 Sussex. Kenney just shortened your political life expectancy.
Posted by: leftdog | 2006-08-27 2:26:03 PM
That's a nice start with no election on the horizon, Chretien got a majority with only 32% in 97.
Before an election I'm sure some Liberal skeletons will be on full view, now that the CPC is on the government side of the Access to Information firewall.
Posted by: Speller | 2006-08-27 4:25:13 PM
Speller: Careful with the word firewall, the dogs will pick up on it, grasping at straws, remember?
Posted by: Liz J | 2006-08-27 5:16:24 PM
That leftdog never fails to disappoint.
He has shown his fangs.
He is angry and HE HATE ME and all others who stand for individual liberty.
Good on ya, Speller ... I knew cretin got in with about 33%, but the fact, yes the fact, he got a majority kinda's like the fire hydrant p**sing back on the dog.
I like it.
I guess lefty never lets the facts get in the way of a good hate-on.
Although Euroweenies cower in fear of such bullies, we'll let the truth stand on its own in this case.
Yet another Truthophobic outed! Good job!
Posted by: Set you free | 2006-08-27 9:04:57 PM
Did I use the word bullies?
I meant Brownshirts.
Posted by: Set you free | 2006-08-27 9:07:41 PM
The big problem for all the progressive voters and their progressive parties is quite simply that there are too few of the former and too many of the latter.
And there's no Stephen Harper in their midst to unite them and lead them into battle. All those tactical victories--the last one being Belinda's floor-crossing--now amount to nothing.
Looks good on 'em to be going into the next battle with little more than IOU's from the MSM.
Posted by: Calgary Junkie | 2006-08-28 8:19:04 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.