In Which The Globe And Mail Continues To Service Its Ideological Master

Were it possible for a corporate entity to be appointed to the Senate, I am sure that The Globe and Mail would now be making its presence felt in the Red Chamber. Ever-constant friend to Stephen Harper, the paper with its cadre of ideological sycophants, John Ibbitson consistently leading that particular pack, has proven itself time and again as the Tory newspaper of record.

The Globe's latest genuflection at the altar of Harper came on Monday in an article written by Konrad Yakabuski entitled Harper hysteria a sign of closed liberal minds. In it, said scribe suggests that we all calm down and see the Harper record in the kind of light that only a true believer could entertain:

Just what it is about the Conservative Leader that sends reasonable people into such fits of hysteria is best examined by historians, or better yet, psychiatrists. But it surely can’t be evidence, for Mr. Harper’s political style is not particularly novel, nor have his reforms been that transformational.

Two words in that paragraph are ample indication of the blinders Yakabuski donned for the premise of this piece: style and reforms. More about that in a moment.

Incredibly, he asserts that Harper largely

governs from the centre, upholding the long Canadian tradition of middle-of-the-road pragmatism.

I guess in order to try to reassure readers that his is not a satirical piece, Yakabuski admits his lord has perhaps made a mistake or two along the way but really, twas nothing:

Yes, the Conservatives have made some questionable policy choices in the name of stroking their base. Killing the long-form census was one. The form had been a long-standing bugaboo among conservatives who felt the state has no business knowing the granular details of their lives. Its demise has inconvenienced some researchers, but it has hardly led to a “subtle darkening of Canadian life.”

But what of all the criticism directed at Harper? Tut, tut. Nothing to see here. Move along:

...because elites in the media and academe have deemed Conservative supporters a less evolved species than the progressive subclass to which they themselves belong, they are beside themselves at the loss of their own influence.

And about the prime minister's obsessive micromanaging?

Autocratic, Stephen Harper? Well, yes, like just about every other successful prime minister from John A. Macdonald to Mackenzie King to Jean Chrétien. The centralization of decision making in the Prime Minister’s Office is a phenomenon much bigger than Mr. Harper and it would take wholesale parliamentary, if not constitutional, reform to reverse the trend.

The Duffy scandal, according to Mr. Yakabuski's bible, is much ado about nothing:

The questions raised at Senator Mike Duffy’s fraud trial about the conduct of Mr. Harper’s closest staff in the PMO, and the Conservative Leader himself, are not flattering. But in the annals of Canadian political scandals – a fairly tame volume to begin with – this is a footnote.

Getting back to his qualifiers of style and reforms, informed readers, of which there appear to be growing numbers, will be aware that much of what Harper has done has nothing to do with legislation. Rogue appointments to the National Energy Board, the muzzling of scientists, the egregious contempt for Parliamentary traditions are just three from a long list of abuses that have been well-chronicled and documented over the years and need no repetition here.

They are all part of the public record.

The Harper base may exult in propaganda organs like the Globe and Mail. All those who embrace critical thinking should feel duly insulted.

More Canaries

My guess is only the willfully ignorant, the profoundly stupid, and the ideologically blind do not realize the environmental peril we are experiencing, one primarily but not exclusively driven by climate change. Monster storms, massive wildfires and record droughts are just three of the more obvious symptoms of a critically ill planet. But it is not hard, if we look just a little beyond melodramatic headlines and visuals, to see that the problem is leaving no ecosystem unscathed. The world's oceans are one such ecosystem, as rising temperatures are wreaking largely unseen havoc.

The latest evidence of earth's fever is the death of 30 whales in the Gulf of Alaska:

Since May 2015, 14 fin whales, 11 humpback whales, one gray whale and four unidentified specimens have been found dead along shorelines in the Gulf of Alaska, nearly half of them in the Kodiak Archipelago. Other dead whales have been reported off the coast of British Columbia, including four humpbacks and one sperm whale.

Labelling it an “unusual mortality event,” the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says the deaths are three times the average for the region, and the fact that little or no trauma has thus far been found on the whales has led to speculation that they are the victims of rising ocean temperatures and a very toxic and extensive consequent algal blooms:

Over the past two years, a large mass of warm water that climatologists have dubbed “the blob” has persisted in the north Pacific, and El Niño 2015 is pushing more warm water into the region.

The unusually warm and calm seas are believed to be behind a series of toxin-producing algae blooms – record-breaking in size and duration – stretching from southern California to the Aleutian Islands. Clams sampled near the town of Sand Point, Alaska were found to have toxin levels more than 80 times what the FDA says is safe for human consumption, said Bruce Wright, a scientist who studies toxic algal blooms for the Aleutian and Pribilof Islands Association. The levels were ten times anything Wright had previously recorded.

All of this suggests we are bearing witness to yet another canary in the coalmine, one of many that all of our major political leaders and a majority of the population will almost certainly continue to ignore.

This And That

The start of a new week inspires me to look back on the one past; thanks to an array of editorial cartoonists, it was a week not kind to our outgoing (one hopes) prime minister:











Government for all Canadians, not just the wealthy, offers this intriguing clip from the past. Keep your eyes on the late Jim Flaherty:

Watch Jim Flaherty's reaction when Steve tells the House of Commons that Nigel Wright didn't tell Ray Novak about the Duffy bribe.

Posted by Government for all Canadians, not just the wealthy on Sunday, August 23, 2015

Lest Angry White Guy be forgotten, The Star's Heather Mallick offers her views in today's edition:

#AngryCon, identified by the Star as “Earl Cowan,” was filmed in a tan suit, white shirt and, on a hot day, undershirt. His hair a limp version of Harper’s, he accessorized with a calculator watch and a Doug Ford for Mayor button, but no wedding ring. If there’s any man who needs a wife, it’s Earl. He has no one to say, “Earl that’s nuts,” which is one reason he watched himself shout in a high-pitched voice that the reporters were “lying pieces of s—t” and then accused them, a propos of nothing, of cheating on their taxes.

And a Star letter-writer has this suggestion on how to deal with the unstable volatile Cowan:

The now known profanities shouter, Earl Cowan, should immediately be investigated by the Canada Revenue Agency because he, in all probability, must have been cheating on his income tax returns. He thinks it’s okay to do that — everybody does that, and Duffy has done nothing wrong.

Satendra Ganjoo, Toronto

Now This Is Getting Ridiculous

Apparently, Stephen Harper feels that Canadians are real whores for tax cuts:

Stephen Harper is kicking off a quiet day on the federal election campaign trial by promising tax relief for service club members.

Harper says members of organizations such the Kiwanis, Lions and Royal Canadian Legion can claim a tax break for their membership fees if the Conservatives are re-elected.

I'm sure that will make the disaffected vets much, much happier.

Angry For Good Reason

Every evening at 6:30, I try to take about 10 minutes to watch NBC Nightly News, the object of my interest not American politics but the apocalyptic imagery of the West Coast wildfires. Every night seems to bring reports of new conflagrations and tragedy, and every night my anger grows, not just for the loss of valuable forests and the consequent release of all of their stored carbon, not just for the loss of hundreds of homes that have often been in families for generations, and not just for the loss of the lives of the brave people putting themselves on the front-lines in often futile attempts to contain these raging conflagrations.



No, my greatest anger is reserved for two groups, one of them being the politicians and their well-heeled enablers who facilitate either outright climate-change denial or, even more insidiously, now acknowledge it but doubt that it is caused by human activity. Hence, no need to change our reliance on fossil fuels or anything else about our earth-altering habits - it's out of our hands, goes the messaging.

The second target for my deep anger is the rest of us. Sure, as a society we may express concern, but as soon as measures are proposed that would constitute concrete action against ever-rising temperatures, outrage ensues. Consider the glee with which Conservative MP Michelle Rempel pounced on Linda McQuaig's recent assertion that much of the tarsands oil may have to be left in the ground if we are to keep the rise in global temperatures under two degrees Celsius. Rempel's Dark Lord and Master, Stephen Harper, quickly joined in the pile-on, saying such a statement shows that the NDP will “wreck our economy” and should never come to power.

But why do you think their triumphalism is so nakedly and unapologetically on offer? It's because they know that whatever veneer of noble intent and purpose we have can be easily pierced by raising the spectre of job loss, tax increases, and disruption of our profligate lifestyles, this, of course, despite the fact that those consequences, and much worse, are coming our way as runaway climate change takes hold.

That is also why people like Thomas Mulcair and Justin Trudeau limit their references to climate change to platitudinous generalities.

Said Mr. Mulcair recently:

At a time when world leaders are negotiating new targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Mr. Mulcair said he wants to represent Canada in December when decisions are made in Paris.

“Nothing would make me more proud than to be there in December, as Prime Minister of Canada, to participate in the conference on climate change, to declare loud and clear that Canada will work with the world and not against the planet,” he said.

Note the similar stance taken by Trudeau:

He would take the premiers with him to the Paris climate-change summit in December. By April 2016, he would hold a first minister’s conference to forge a consensus on emissions-reduction targets. He would commit “targeted federal funding” to help provinces reduce their emissions.

Their timidity, of course, is predicated on the same boldness that galvanizes the Harperites: the knowledge that people are all for addressing climate change, as long as it doesn't impinge upon their lifestyle choices and economic statuses.

In the days of widespread church attendance, Sundays were devoted to uplifting messages, and in that regard my post falls far short. However, I will end on a positive note. One of the few things that keeps me from complete despair is the knowledge that there are those among us who are willing to put everything at risk, even their very lives, in service of their fellow humans. The above-mentioned firefighters are sterling proof of that. Now, if only the rest of us could awaken that noble potential ....

Go On, Make Her Day

You'll understand the relevance of my post's title when you get to the end of the following video, about the efforts of 81-year-old Doreen Routley, a former steadfast Conservative, to convince people not to vote for Stephen Harper in October. I shudder to ponder what expletives Angry White Guy would hurl at her.


And as a supplement, you may wish to check out some Star readers' reactions to the revelations emerging from the Mike Duffy trial, a few of which I reproduce below:

To help Canadians suspend disbelief and to enter his imaginary world, the next three Senate appointments by the Prime Minister will be: the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny and the Boogey Man. Together, they will enhance our benefits and scare those who threaten us.
Chuck Simmons, Pickering

We’ve seen this movie before. A network of senior political operatives scrambles to cover up an unravelling embarrassment in order to insulate their boss whose abuse of power created the problem in the first place.

After Watergate was exposed, Richard Nixon won the largest majority in U.S. history. It was only later that the wheels came off.

We can only hope it doesn’t take as long for us to be rid of our tyrant and his gang of democracy suppressors.

Dermot P. Nolan, Hamilton

The Duffy trial can aptly be renamed “Wruffygate” due to its profound effect on the federal election campaign. The mounting email evidence and testimony leaves us with two clear conclusions.

Either Stephen Harper knew all along about Wright’s activities. Occam’s razor favours this explanation. Almost nothing happens in the Party of One without Harper’s knowledge.
Or his many underlings were too afraid of their dictatorial leader to tell him what Nigel Wright was doing to extricate Mike Duffy from his dilemma. We have seen this before when Saddam’s underlings were too afraid of him to relate how few weapons he actually had. The resulting electronic chatter fooled U.S. intelligence into thinking he had “weapons of mass destruction.”

Either way, the scandal has derailed Harper’s branding. During the Macleans debate, he simply stuck to his party line, largely ignoring the criticisms of the progressive party leaders. Now he has to answer persistent questions about the Duffy trial evidence. Canadian voters are getting a true picture of the inner workings of the ruling Conservatives.

Donald A. Fraser, Waterloo

Your Morning Smile

Pinocchio, Snow White and Superman are out for a stroll in town one day.
As they walk, they came across a sign:
"Beauty contest for the most beautiful woman in the world."
"I am entering," said Snow White.
After half an hour she comes out and they ask her,
"Well, how did you do?"
" First Place ," said Snow White.
They continue walking and they see a sign:
"Contest for the strongest man in the world."
"I'm entering," says Superman.
After half an hour he returns and they ask him,
"How did you make out?"
" First Place ," answers Superman. "Did you ever doubt?"
They continue walking when they see a sign:
"Contest! Who is the greatest liar in the world?"
Pinocchio says "this is mine."
Half an hour later, he returns with tears in his eyes.
"What happened?" they asked.
"Who the hell is STEPHEN HARPER?" asked Pinocchio.