Saturday, August 29, 2015

It is kind of muffled through the beard

But if someone is on record as admiring the legacy of Margaret Thatcher, defends that admiration and then goes on to quack about no deficits now matter what, he is a duck.  An duck at home with the Harper flock which he tried to fly with before he found a home fowling the NDP nest.Recommend this Post

I am Tony Turner!

Posted in solidarity with the real Tony Turner, whose suspension gives another illustration of the need to depose Harper.  Hey Steve, I thought you could "take a punch"?

Recommend this Post

Thursday, August 27, 2015

Decision Time

A part of the sorrow wrought when an incompetent like Stephen Harper rises to a position of power is the destruction the candidate for Calgary South West causes to the careers and reputations of several people within smelling distance of the influence of his regime.  These are people who should know better.  They have fought the good fight their entire lives.  They have been good people by all accounts.  They are entrusted with positions of power and influence but they are subsumed by the wake of corruption and incompetence ploughed by the  Nixonian thug-boat of the Harper government.

There have been several cases in point lately.:

  • Nigel Wright took the stand under oath and presented a very unconvincing case that Harper did not approve of the $90,0000 payment to Duffy.  The conclusion drawn by sentient beings paying attention to the trial was that Wright sacrificed his image as a "choirboy" for Harper.  But Mr. Wright appears to have decided to fall under the Harper Bus.  and that is the fate of a political person.
  • Benjamin Perrin was faced with a very similar conundrum.  He presented starkly different testimony.  He was faced with a decision and made a different choice.  And his reputation seems the brighter for it.
  • Andrew Coyne, a person recently praised on this blog, is Comment Editor at the National Post.  Stating that Post Media is pro-Harper is a given.  So in a way, finding out that an editorial critical of Harper by Margaret Atwood was censored by the Post is not surprising.  But this is an editorial that Andrew Coyne had approved.  Does this not make his position at the National Post untenable?  Mr. Coyne is a smart man and a good and knowledgeable writer.  If he were to resign as a point of principle, he could get work in no time flat.  So it follows that he has less concerns than others for resigning on principle.  How can he retain his position at the Post after having his decision countermanded?  He appears to have chosen to stay on at the Post in a diminished capacity.  At the diminishment of his reputation.  Choices have consequences.
  • The RCMP has a long and glorious past.  But, definitely, since 2006 on, they have been in the Harper bag.  The sandbagging of Martin with the bogus Trust accusation by the Zaccardelli led RCMP was odious enough.  They can try and pass the embarrassing changes to the Musical Ride off as not tied to and directed by the Harper PMO but suspicions remain for good reason. These can be sloughed off.  But Commissioner Paulson has a choice to make. The questions surrounding the RCMP handling of the Duffy affair remain.  This contradiction is very stark.  Does he protect Harper or the integrity of the RCMP.  He has dedicated his career to the RCMP.  Is he going to throw that away to protect the person currently in third place in the polls?
And on and on it goes.  As the dark days of the Harper regime wind down (I hope.  This is no time to relax) numerous people will have their integrity tested as a fall out of the depredations of the Harper Government.  I hope they are all able to live with their decisions.
Recommend this Post

Thursday, August 20, 2015

Andrew Coyne is very witty

I have always found his stance on constitutional matters to be very commendable.  I now add a sense of humour to his credit column after reading this.  Still wouldn't let him anywhere near the economy however.Recommend this Post

Monday, August 17, 2015

Doesn't matter who you are, $32,000 is a lot of money

So if, as testified by Nigel Wright, "Good to go" refers to Harper's approval the Irving Gerstein plan to pay ~$32,000 to Mike Duffy from the Conservative Party bank account, why did Wright pony up for the entire $90,000?  Why did he not top up the amount Harper approved by $58,000 to get to the $90,000?Recommend this Post