Wednesday, September 3, 2014

A Prime Minister Hath No Honour In His Own Country



That paraphrase of a famous line from the Bible perhaps sums up the pitiable plight of Stephen Harper, gallant man of the world and fearless foe of evil on the world stage. Despite his indefatigable efforts to denounce the Teutonic tendencies of Vladimir Putin in the Ukraine or stand unreservedly with Israel in its disproportionate responses to Gazan irritants, like the late Rodney Dangerfield, he appears to be unable to secure any respect.

There is, for example, that chronic naysayer at The Toronto Star, Tim Harper, who opines that for all of his tough talk, Mr. Harper has no defining accomplishment on his foreign policy ledger.

But is nothing sacred? Rewarding the prime minister's unyielding support of and service to Israel, B'Nai Brith CEO Frank Dimant has announced his intention to nominate Dear Leader for the Nobel Peace Prize.

He said Mr. Harper has demonstrated international leadership and a clear understanding of the differences between those who “seek to do evil” and their victims.
As a professor of modern Israel studies at Canada Christian College, Dimant qualifies as a nominator under the rules.

Let's just say that the announcement was met with outrage in some Canadian quarters.

But what do the people think about this singular honour possibly being bestowed on Canada's leader? Alas, there is no comfort to be had, apparently, even from one of the perennial cheerleaders of the Harper regime, The Globe and Mail. Here is what two of its readers think:

Re B’nai Brith CEO To Nominate Harper For Nobel Peace Prize (Aug. 30):

Why stop at the Nobel? Let’s nominate Stephen Harper for a Polaris for his music covers; an Emmy for his online TV show and a Governor-General’s award for his hockey book. Make him a trophy – a silver glazed donut on a plinth. It would cost us less than $30.

Clive Robertson, associate professor, art history, Queen’s University, Kingston


I was interested to learn that the CEO is eligible to nominate the PM as a professor at Canada Christian College. As a retired professor previously unaware of this credential, I shall hasten to nominate my miniature schnauzer, Guinness.

Like our PM, Guinness “has consistently spoken out with resolve regarding the safety of people under threat.” I refer to his shrill, predictable barking to defend the Bowd family’s territory from the daily invasion of the postman.


Alan Bowd, professor emeritus of education, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay

Of course, I suppose the Harper crew could simply dismiss such carping as the ranting of 'liberal elites.' Guess they'll have to hope it doesn't spread in 2015.

17 comments:

  1. Canadians have cottoned onto a fraud -- a snake oil salesman -- Lorne. But Harper still hasn't figured out that the the jig is up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's easy for Harper to be deluded, I guess, Owen, when he isolates himself so completely from Canadians in general.

      Delete
  2. I wonder if they think this nomination is going to help him get elected in 2015?
    Have they included this in his 24/7 video? Interesting that the majority in his own country either find this appalling or ridiculous. Maybe he can use this in his next fundraising letter to his base. You know, something like "Elites against our statesman like leader receiving well deserved Nobel Peace Prize"
    Send money!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I suspect your scenario is not far off the mark, Pamela. If you haven't already done so, check out Northern Reflections for the latest paranoid fund-raising salvo from the regime:
      http://nor-re.blogspot.ca/2014/09/how-many-friends-does-he-have-left.html

      Delete
  3. Hahahaha! I'd read Clive Robertson's response on Facebook but seeing it back to back with Prof. Alan Bowd's made my morning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I enjoyed it immensely as well, Beijing. I have a feeling, however, that the response was somewhat different within the offices of the regime.

      Delete
  4. I was thinking about this lately and it occurred to me that very few political leaders in the modern era leave a historical legacy to their nation unless they have made a concerted effort at positive diplomacy. Even Nixon, arguably the most disgraced American leader of all, managed to leave a perceived positive legacy for his positive efforts in China. The more I thought about it the more it seemed that negative, sabre-rattling, leaders consistently fail to leave anything but a bad taste in the mouths of subsequent generations. The only significant exception I was able to think of was Churchill. And, though I have nothing in common with Churchill politically, I acknowledge that he was an exceptional man and the circumstances in which he operated were also exceptional.

    No one with Harper's grandly sweeping political negativity could possibly have a positive national legacy, and I suppose it is only his ego and apparent dissociative disorder that stands in the way of him seeing that instead of leaving a legacy he is sowing the seeds of a catastrophic reputation in the eyes of posterity. And we all know what a cruel mistress posterity can be.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well-stated, Kirby. It is indeed highly doubtful that history will treat the Harper regime's 'legacy' kindly, though he and his ilk may provide useful fodder for psychologists and psychiatrists of the future.

      Delete
    2. Harper psychologically, intellectually and culturally is not of the 21st century. All of Harpers beliefs political or otherwise are steeped in the past. His admiration of Monarchy. His cold war anti-communist rhetoric. His 1950's Leave it to Beaver ideal society view.You can't even connect him to a particular generation. I am a boomer and when I watch and listen to him he is like someone from the 1800's. Ideologically he is completely out of step with the times. Having a legacy requires doing or creating something original, something that has not gone before. He's not even yesterdays man. He's what the Beatles called " A Real Nowhere Man"

      Delete
    3. You have pointed out some intriguing distinctions here, Pamela. A man who claims to have substance, Harper is, upon close examination, plastic and hollow.

      Delete
    4. well if Stephen Harper is a man of the 1800s, at least he is standing up to the current tyrants of the 2100s such as Hamas,ISIS and Putin - I certainly prefer to live in a Harper led Canada than a Trudeau led Canada where like Obama he would be applying moral equivalence to the beheading of two innocent captives and whatever perceived grievances these animals masquerading as humans may conjecture

      Delete
    5. I think you are engaging in a form of absolutism here, Anon. Are the choices really that stark? Do Canadians have to accept and embrace a prime minister who sows domestic hatred, suspicion and divisiveness rather than promote a sense of unity and citizenship, probably the best protections against extremism? Can't we do better than his sorry leadership?

      Delete
    6. Harper does not have to put his money or military where his mouth is.
      I would not consider his megaphone rhetoric as standing up to tyrants such as Hamas,ISIS and Putin. In fact the one thing Harper does not have is courage. If he did he'd face the Canadian people and defend his policies. Instead he hides.

      Delete
  5. I think this draws the public's weary eye to our prime minister, El Bloato. I must scour the ether and find awards for which I can nominate Beelzebub.

    By the way, somewhat off topic, I read a comment in one of our newspapers the other day that struck a chord. The writer mentioned, as an aside, that our prime minister sometimes wears facial cosmetics, in particular lipstick. I too have noted there are times when Harper's face seems "made up" as if to conceal his pasty palor. Ever noticed that?

    Just sort of makes me wonder what he's got in his wardrobe for 'after hours.'

    ReplyDelete
  6. Seriously, Google "does Stephen Harper wear lipstick." I just did and was a bit surprised at the listings. And I think there are times when they doll up his beady little eyes too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I just checked, Mound. Speculation does seem rampant. Could he indeed be our own version of J. Edgar Hoover? Nah - such would at least require an imagination.

      Delete
    2. I kid you not. When I first saw Harper, I thought he looked like a made up corpse. I did'nt know that he may be wearing the make up for real.

      Delete