Friday, April 19, 2013

Harper Hypocrisy on Full Display

In his column this morning, The Star's Tim Harper points out something that I think many of us are all too aware of: Stephen Harper is a hypocrite. There really is no other way to describe the despicable partisanship that permeates our Prime Minister's deformed soul, most recently on display in London when he took the opportunity to exploit the tragedy of the Boston Marathon deaths and grievous injuries from a terrorist bombing.

As Tim Harper tartly observes, the usual protocol of not criticizing one's own country while abroad depends on who’s talking. There is one rule for Stephen Harper and another rule for everyone else.

The columnist reminds us of how Tom Mulcair, during his recent trip to Washington, offered some trenchant criticism when responding to questions by Canadian reporters:

When Mulcair questioned Canada’s commitment to fighting climate change, raising the Conservative decision to abandon Kyoto and its inability to meet its Copenhagen greenhouse gas emission targets, the government went apoplectic.

Mulcair was accused of “trash talking’’ Canada, killing Canadian jobs, ignoring Canadian interests, refusing to, as Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver put it, “leave politics at the border.”

Yet, of course, while in London on Wednesday to attend the Thatcher funeral, Harper refused to 'leave politics at the border'; even though he was not even asked by reporters about Justin Trudeau's remarks to Peter Mansbridge, our national disgrace launched into a broadside against him in an attempt to score a few political points.

While most of us were taught to show some respect when death and serious injury occurs, apparently Stephen Harper sees such occurrences as opportunities to promote his political 'brand,' one that, I sincerely hope, is becoming increasingly odious to more and more Canadians.


  1. Obviously, Lorne, Harper did not take what I assume is every mother's advice: "If you can't say anything nice, say nothing at all."

    What is truly disturbing is that he's gone far by bad mouthing anyone and everyone -- except for Maggie Thatcher.

    1. No doubt, Owen, that Maggie ranks very high in Harper's pantheon of 'saints,' probably right next to Niccolo Michiavelli.

  2. It's not Harper's hypocrisy that troubles me, Lorne. He's an unprincipled, deceitful, secretive bully. Hypocrisy is his second nature. What gets me are all those in his cabinet and his caucus and his party who make him possible, who empower him and who, ultimately, place Harper's constant assault on Canadian democracy ahead of their country and people. Without the steadfast and resolute support of these people, Harper's hypocrisy and all his other excesses and abuses would be impossible.

    1. A point well-taken, Mound. Harper's bullying is, in fact the subject of some Star letters in this morning's edition, which I took the liberty of reproducing a short time ago in a new blog post.

      All of Harper's enablers that you mention here do call into question the quality of the people who run for office under his banner; instead of advancing the Conservative 'brand,' they have in fact deeply debased it, and have put on national display some of the worst that human nature is capable of.

  3. Lorne, there's nothing particularly "conservative" about them. They simply claim that mantle by being on the farthestmost right fringe of Canada's Parliamentary spectrum.

    We know what Conservatism as laid down by Burke and clarified by people like Lincoln and T. Roosevelt is supposed to be and that in no way resembles the extreme rightwing politics practiced by Harper's party and his Republican counterparts to the south.

    I have always visualized political belief as a circle with totalitarianism at the top and democracy at the bottom. At the bottom one has liberalism in the centre with conservatism to its immediate right and socialism to its immediate left. As right and left draw further away from the bottom, democracy, they turn increasingly authoritarian until, eventually, they morph into some form of totalitarianism. The further out they get the more ideologically bound they become.

    Today's conservatism has trespassed into the range of authoritarianism. That is borne out by the submissiveness of Harper's enablers who put their ruler ahead of our country and people.

  4. It is easy to forget, Mound, in these very polarized times, the truth of what you state. Certainly in my lifetime, Conservativism has moved into the realm you describe, both in Canada and the U.S. Having just seen the film Lincoln, I was reminded of how different the Republican Party was at one time to what it has devolved into today.


I seem to be having problems receiving comments right now, so if you have sent something, know that I am not ignoring you.