Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« "a libertarian cul-de-sac" | Main | Is there anything Google can't do? »

Friday, October 15, 2010

Scary Harper

Hi there kids! It's October! The weather is getting colder, the leaves are changing and Halloween is fast approaching. Are you excited? So am I! And so is Uncle Steve! But grown-ups call him the Right Honourable Stephen Joseph Harper, Prime Minister of Canada. You can call him Uncle Steve, just not to his face, or within earshot. He gets kind of mad when you do that. Or when you try to hug him. Anyway, Uncle Steve has a story for you all today. It's about an evil monster. You hate monsters, right? Well, so does Uncle Steve. This monster has a special name, it's called "Coalition."

Prime Minister Stephen Harper came out swinging last night, slamming the "opposition coalition" and singling out Edmonton Strathcona NDP MP Linda Duncan in a fiery speech to local party faithful.


"It's hard for some of us to get our heads around where these guys are coming from on some of these issues," he said.

The Tories are trying to pass laws that will put more criminals behind bars, Harper explained. "White-collar criminals, pedophiles, bank robbers, violent offenders. The opposition doesn't agree with that. They have people they want to put behind bars: people who don't fill out the long-form census."

Wow kids. The "Coalition" sounds really nasty! And the long-form census sounds like a lot of bad, icky homework. Thankfully Uncle Steve said we didn't have to do it anymore, unless we really wanted to. But your teachers, and assorted bureaucrats, can still give you lots of homework.

Now some grown-ups don't like Uncle Steve. They say that he keeps talking about the "Coalition" only to distract voters, like your parents, from his rampant fiscal incontinence. People who say that are Liberal-loving-socialist-traitors, which means they are very bad people. If Uncle Steve stops being Prime Minister, then the bad monster "Coalition" will come to power. So because of that we all have to hope really, really hard that Uncle Steve is Prime Minster forever and ever.


Posted by Richard Anderson on October 15, 2010 | Permalink


his rampant fiscal incontinence.........
Posted by PUBLIUS on October 15, 2010

Not perfect by a long shot, but I have a hard time believing we would be better positioned under the Liberals or NDP.

Posted by: peterj | 2010-10-15 11:05:21 AM

This whole "coalition is evil" thing is starting to wear a bit thin. It got the troops fired up once, but as time goes on it is bound to have less and less effect, especially since a Tory majority government seems no more likely than it did a year ago.

The main roadblock to a Tory majority (or anyone else's) is the predominance of the Bloc in Quebec. Ranting about the evil of a coalition won't change that.

I have a bold suggestion for Harper: start taking the Bloc seriously. Demonizing them isn't going to make them go away. And buying off the sovereigntist vote with a new hockey arena will only further alienate your already disgruntled core supporters in the rest of Canada.

As part of taking the Bloc seriously, the government of Canada should announce that should a sovereigntist government win power in Quebec, they would immediately enter into formal negotiations regarding the scope and nature of an independent Quebec. If that were the case, then a substantial number of Bloc seats might fall into the hands of the Tories, giving them a majority that they could use to actually implement a small "c" conservative agenda.

As for actual independence for Quebec, this could take many years to negotiate in any event. In the meantime, why not harness those desires to advance a truly conservative agenda?

Posted by: Dennis | 2010-10-15 11:17:53 AM

I'm sorry, Publius; was there supposed to be some sort of narrative in that post? Is it my imagination, or are the WS scribblers in an uncommonly emotional mood lately?

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2010-10-15 2:09:06 PM

I suggest that the coalition is scary that any attempt to whitewash it is wasted. We can thank the coalition for forcing government bailouts, preventing the defunding of useless programs and the retention of the long gun registry for just a start. The fact that the CPC is not our ideal and in fact has disappointed many in several areas does not change the coalition into Snowwhite.

Posted by: Alain | 2010-10-15 2:50:28 PM

I've posted my rant from (Canada records biggest deficit in history) here as well as the two pieces jointly inspired me.

It took decades to sink us into the present day socialist/statist mire. Getting out will not be easy and will not be quick.

We are so short sighted these days...

How did the current world financial crisis come into being? How many think it was all Bush's fault? Greenspan? Bernanke? What about Clinton & Barney Frank? How many think the borrowing/spending & speculations of millions of homeowners had something to do with it as well? How many think the problem is fixed & we can all go back to RE speculating and spending the wealth effect?

a good primer: Why the Meltdown Should Have Surprised No One Mises Media: Friday, March 13, 2009 by Peter Schiff mises.org/MediaPlayer.aspx?Id=4004

If the 3 Stooges coalition of the socialists, statists & separatists were in power would our discussions focus on the merits of their Austrian school economic policies?

For all their many faults, I believe Harper & Co are buying us time. Time to grow up; get our personal situations in order, get better educated and get involved. If enough Canadians rediscover the value of smaller government we would see more political progress towards that end.

Happy friday!

Posted by: Ron | 2010-10-15 6:06:10 PM

What unbelievable denial. The Conservatives and "buying us time" and talk of them and Austrian economics as if there is some realtionship?
Have you read a budget in the last 30 years? The Conservatives have the worst record, even including the Trudeau that they make a career out of complaining about but whom they emulate in so many ways. Compared to Chretien they are downright socialists.
Conservatives, what a bunch of blind partisans.

Posted by: Mr. Smith | 2010-10-18 8:49:26 AM

Dear Mr. Smith, one of the things I enjoy about Liberals is their ability to avoid questions & deploy spin in place of dialogue.

You asked one question, have I read a budget in the last 30 years... I have not read them all, I tend to cover off the highlights & focus on areas of interest & concern. No doubt you have them all in your library for quick reference along with your copies of Hayek & von Mises' collected works.

Your spin; suggesting I said the Conservatives were following Austrian School economics is outstanding. I thought it was clear to all the Conservatives, with the 3 stooges urgings, are being quite Keynesian, I simply asked if the 3 Stooges were in power did any one really believe they would be Austrian... Congrats! I'm sure Iggy has already reached out & asked you to join his team of deep thinkers.

WRT my questions, I noticed you weren't able to respond to any of them.

Posted by: Ron | 2010-10-18 10:27:25 AM

Thanks for confirming that you have not studied the budgets the way that is required to understand the historical trends, but that was obvious.
Thanks also for a good belly laugh, trying to shift the discussion by calling me a Liberal ...ROTFLMFAO

Posted by: Mr. Smith | 2010-10-18 10:36:35 AM

My mistake, you seemed so much in love with them.

Great dialogue.

Posted by: Ron | 2010-10-18 10:42:58 AM

Smith, I've studied them to the extent that some of the worst ones were brought in under Liberals. If you can bring up the past with Chretien, I can bring it up with Trudeau. Also, the Conservative party of today is not the Progressive-Conservative party of the 1980s and earlier, and Michael Ignatieff is not Jean Chretien. So if you've quite finished comparing apples and oranges, the adults in this forum would like to do some debating, thank you.

Ron, Smith doesn't respond to questions. That would require an acknowledgement on his part that his intellect is not alone in the Universe.

Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2010-10-18 10:45:38 AM

Well let's bring up Trudeau.
If you compare Trudeau to Mulroney you'll see that Mulroney got worse, much worse, on spending and deficit than Trudeau and he was immediately after Trudeau.
Chretien then took the worst deficit in Canada' history which was the result of 9 years of Conservative majority and made it a large surplus, by simply not increasing spending and letting the economy grow. Compared to the larger possibilities he was a poor PM, but compared to the Conservatives he was a genius on economics.
Then Harper came along and has tried to equal Mulroney's record for deficit and destroyed the restraint that would have been so easy to continue. By some measures he has beat it and has the record for deficit, by some measures he has not.
That Iggy is not Chretien is irrelevant as we don't know what Iggy or Dion would have done, and only have an inkling of Martin. We do know what the others did. We do know that Harper promised to massively increase spending to get elected in 2006, doubling even the NDPs promises for increased spending and all of these are much worse than Trudeau's legacy.
Now what were you saying about Trudeau?

Posted by: Mr. Smith | 2010-10-18 1:54:40 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.