CALGARY — Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been ridiculed for being a bully in a scathing editorial by the influential Economist news magazine.
The Economist, a mostly right-leaning British weekly, criticized the Harper government for giving the opposition an opening by being inflexible and claimed the Prime Minister was “intolerant of criticism and dissent.”
The magazine said that during his years as prime minister Harper has “acquired a reputation for playing fast and loose with the rules.”
“Though the prime minister once campaigned as a crusader for accountability and openness, he has acquired the habit of secrecy,” the editorial said.
[More]
Like every other political party and party leader, Harper and the CPC “once campaigned” on a lot of things – and then they got their kick at the can and, like every other political party and party leader, things changed.
So did their supporters who became as tolerant of their party and party leaders dishonesty and double-speak as any Liberal during the Chrétien/Martin years ever was.
Once again the Economist echos the media party’s ‘Harper is a bully’ line for all to see. Earth to media party: If the leader does not demand and receive absolute discipline/cohesion in his party ranks he will not be the leader! Witness Stockwell Day, Stephane Dion, Micheal Ignatieff et al. Strangely enough the media party gave Bully Chretien a pass when he tried to impose even harsher discipline on the general public by strangling a protester. When Bully Trudeau imposed the War Measures Act the media party thought he was a hero even though such passage caused the printing presses at the Lethbridge Herald to be seized.
I was thinking last night when reading this tripe of the old saying “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”
If Cameron was even half the politician and administrator Harper is the UK would be on a roll today but they aren’t are they?
Just my “two cents worth”.
The NDP is, last I heard, up in the polls and people do consider Harper to be a heavy handed authoritarian – yes, both Chretien and Martin (and others), had heavy hands as well, but their actions did not anger Canadians to the degree that Harper is currently angering them.
I was in Iqaluit over the July 1st long week-end and the parade included a well received banner that read “Celebrating Canada – Not Harper”, here in Ottawa people do everything but spit after saying his name these days, and it doesn’t take a lot of looking around the web from other parts of Canada to discover that he’s not exactly beloved by all (or even a slim majority)…. the next election will be an interesting one unless Harper can come up with a way to turn this tide.
– and complaining about socialists and the media party isn’t gonna be enough to accomplish that.
Re: “The NDP is, last I heard, up in the polls…”
Polls? You actually follow polls? After what recently happened in Alberta?
I thought you were smarter than that. Guess not.
You have also seen me say on multiple occassions that the only poll that counts is on election day Jack so I’m not sure why you chose to start skeet shooting at the messenger today.
The point of the comment, as I am sure you are quite aware, is that Harper has a significant image problem that cannot be addressed by a tune on the piano or a cuddly picture with a kitty cat. If he and the CPC machine do not, or cannot, do something about that before the next general election he’s going to find himself sitting in Opposition for that, IMO, brief period of time before he is replaced and toddles off to join his predessers on the lecture circuit and ultimately collect his ever so generious pension.
And guess who is determining that image SL? Surprise surprise surprise why it is the Media Party. Harper could walk on water and the Media Party would accuse him of not being able to swim. Go read Ezra Levant’s article in the Sun today you may find it informative.
Oh come on Joe, it’s not just what you refer to as “the media party” and you know it – or at least you should.
Regardless of what the reasons for it, or whether they are viewed as necessary or not, how many thousands upon thousands of people are unemployed today because of his decisions? How many people did he alienate with his failed intrusive and authoritatian Internet bill backed by ‘stand with us or stand with the child pornographers‘ rhetoric? How many business owners along the border who may have supported him in the last election are going to do a 180 in the next one because he made it easier to spend more Canadian dollars in a foreign country? How many people did he lose with his lavish G20 spending? The authoratarian and heavy handed handling of G20 security? The fighter plane deceptions and double-speek? Bev Oda? The fact that the average Canadian is expected to tighten their belt for the good of the country while funding MP’s golden pension plans? The general over-all lack of accountability?
Like it or not all of this has had a significant and very negative impact on his image – and none of Ezra’s commentary or complaining is gonna change any of that.
You were an easy target.
Re: “The point of the comment, as I am sure you are quite aware, is that Harper has a significant image problem that cannot be addressed by a tune on the piano or a cuddly picture with a kitty cat. ”
Harper has an image problem because of “Trudeau’s Canada” and all that entails but it doesn’t make him wrong. Following your line of thought “let’s go there” and elect the NDP to govern this country. Think about that and what would happen next as the political “lunatics” gained control of our wallets (that would include yours by the way).
If you feel “OK” with that idea “fill your boots”. I beg to differ and I will not give the political fools residing in Quebec one inch regarding Mulcair and “co.”
The man is a Canadian nightmare and it’s far past time to kill off Trudeau and his idiotic ideas forever. Simply look at the EU today or the Soviet Union in times past to understand what “leftism” in Canada represents in our country as they howl for our money.
It’s not brain surgery and I won’t go there.
Short note: My father always hated the sound of dogs howling. To him it signified death and he never, in his lifetime, ever changed that view. I think he was correct.
Exactly where in my line of thought was electing the NDP jack?
Re: “Exactly where in my line of thought was electing the NDP jack?”
You have never said so but by innuendo you suggest same. If I am wrong you are free here to correct that impression.
“Tell us what you really think.”
Consider yourself corrected.
As to what I think about the article you linked that should be obvious – I agree with it. Harper has, IMO, done nothing to help himself or his image, and a whole lot to hurt his chances of holding on to his majority in the next general election.
That is your opinion. I disagree with you — and the article.
Stephen Harper is the brightest PM Canada has ever known (and that takes in all of them).
His “image” as presented by the article is pure “garbage” (likely written by Coyne) and MOST Canadians who read it will not be taken in.
I believe that but we will have to wait to 2o15 to find our if I am correct. I suspect we are.
My view: In no way will Mulcair ever gain power in this country. We have Bob Rae and “Dolton McShifty” to remind us why that is and the many thousands of polls which will appear before that date will not change my mind “one iota”.
They lie.
Goodnight.
So tell me SL where do you get your impression of PM Harper? Did you meet him somewhere? Did you attend caucus? Were you in his cabinet room? Were you his private confidant? If not then how do you get the impression that he is some kind of bully if not from the media party?
People I know who have met him and gotten to know him all say the same thing. He is kind of a shy guy with a brain the size of Canada. He is a bit nerdy but one who has a clear sense of direction and purpose. Fortunately for Canada he has a clear intent of helping Canada and not simply seeking power. He believes what he believes and he has a reason for believing it. His concept of Canada being a Confederation and not Trudeau’s idea of Canada being a Federation has brought peace amongst the provinces. His idea of letting free individuals enter freely into contracts and not Trudeau’s idea of marketing boards and price controls has helped Canada become an economic beacon in this economic twilight the world finds itself in. So while the media party whines and moans about Bully Harper kicking their sacred cows to the curb somehow I just don’t care what the media party thinks anymore. I’ve seen their collusion and fraud and I just don’t take a word they say seriously. If I read in the Globe and Mail that the sun came up this morning I would look out my window to confirm it. If the Toronto Star said it was July 8 today I would check my calender.
Primarily from his, and his party, statements and conduct in the HoC.
As you read the daily news “with jaundiced eye” as I tend to do what would you, in Harper’s shoes, do differently?
Give “Trudeau’s Canada” another reason to howl?
Just asking.
Do you remember what Harper said on May 2nd, 2011 Jack?
That is what he needs to do Jack – his current image has been formed not by that vision but by his, his ministers, his party, his supporters, and his government, continually and publicaly marganilizing, minimizing, and degrading, those who do not agree with him, his party, his policies, and his government.
SL you are showing your delusions again. Governing for all Canadians does not mean that you do nothing while all of Canada sits around trying to reach consensus. Look how well that idea worked for the Occupy twits. Governing for all Canadians simply means that no government should be preventing you from attaining your lawful goals on the basis of where you live or the colour of your skin or what ever else we Canadians can divide ourselves over.
So far I would say that PM Harper has been the most successful PM at ‘governing for all Canadians’ in my life time which goes back to the time of Uncle Louis.
I will give you that point. But it changes nothing.
We have Harper or we can go for Mulcair. I know where my loyalty lies. And it is NOT with my party.
It is with my country (video) and Harper is entirely correct. He know what he faces and the “lefty” screams signify nothing at all.
He “ignores” “lefty” outrage, as he should. Canada is back and I care not what Mulcair and the NDP, Bob Rae and the Liberals mutter. Nor the weepings of the PQ in Quebec. I know better and I suspect you do also.
Goodnight “again”.
Ditto, Joe. I have a long time very trusted friend who has had more than one opportunity to discuss various national issues in depth with PMSH. He has told me more than once that the PM is absolutely nothing like the person the media portrays him to be. My friend describes PMSH as a very down to earth extremely personable and very likable fella. I will take his opinion over that of the legions of mealy mouthed journalists out there who wouldn’t know what a person of good character looked or sounded like if their life depended on it. By the way….good tips to follow on the weather and date.
An old high school chum of mine wrote a letter to PM Harper regarding the Wheat Board. My friend is a farmer from Central Alberta. A few days later my friend gets a letter back asking him to come to Ottawa to discuss the matter with the PM. Of course my buddy hopped the next flight out of Calgary and had a full and frank discussion with the PM and a few of his advisers. Some time later my friend got a phone call from the PM asking him if he would like to be in the visitor’s gallery when the CWB finally lost its monopoly. Once again my friend flew to Ottawa witnessed what most Western Canadian farmers had been hoping for for decades and then attended a post Wheat Board monopoly gathering hosted by the PM. Needless to say my friend who until then was pretty politically inactive is now the biggest Harper booster around. According to him PM Harper is the most gracious man he has ever met. Not only did the PM ask buddy to meet with him he actually listened.
As to the NDP being high in the polls factor in that a great deal of these percentages are because of Québec giving the NDP disproportionate numbers: Take Québec out of the national numbers, in the ROC alone the numbers for the NDP as probably much lower.
If the NDP won all 78 Québec seats and scored 90% of the vote their ROC percentages of probably 25% or lower won’t win them that many extra seats, and one doesn’t need Québec anymore to win a majority and with the new seats probably mostly going to the Conservatives who can get a Majority with a low National %.
And this if the vote was tomorrow ! In 3 years anything can happen so current polls are very useless.
I will agree with stageleft to the degree that Harper has to start getting positive messages out, explain his policies and try to convince people that they are good policies. ( Note: Although I agree with a great deal of Conservative policies that doesn’t mean I agree with everything or don’t occasionally lament some stupid shooting oneself in the foot by some in Cabinet or some bad decisions ).
MSM or ” The Media Party ” are an obstacle to getting the message through, even when it’s a good one, and there is a certain double standard about the way Conservative screw-ups are reported versus the way massive Liberal screw-ups/corruption where reported at the time they where in power.
Oh, and if the Conservative do something good don’t expect reading it on the front page.
Stage, I think you know very well what spin and misinformation is all about. So does the MSM. And they are getting desperately shameless.
Yeah, sure as stageleft seems to think, and may be partially correct, in a very cynical way that all political Parties are corrupt, misleading and very partizan ( Sort of the definition of political party.
): The Media can show equally a lack of honesty, be partizan, petty, jealous, spiteful and SHAMELESS, they are just as fallible as any other group of humans ! ( And disappoint ! ).
Not that we shouldn’t be idealistic and wish for better, it is unrealistic to expect perfection and reject any Party because it fails to be perfect: So bringing up failures in ethics is fair enough, what isn’t fair or useful is to condemn completely for partial failures due to humans being humans !
In fact ward I do know what spin and misinformation is about – you see, Sun Media is on my regular reading list as well, and they are most certainly not what one could reasonably call the last bastion of unbiased media either
Sun Media biased ? Maybe: But call it counter balance or counter spin to most of the rest of the Media: Ideally all Media would be fair and neutral, at least with the hard news, editorial opinion can be legitimately biased as long as it’s done as clearly labelled as being opinion.
Too many times one read a News Article main body of text that contradicts the tone and first impression given by a ” biased ” front page headline title even when the article is itself unbiased. ( The journalist writing the news story having no control over the headline writer’s spin ! ).
Maybe? You can call it counter spin or counter balance, or any number of other things, but Sun Media is biased towards the current PM and his government and carries a heavy negative bias towards other party leaders and parties.
Ideally the media would give us the facts, but that is not what Canadians (or indeed western society) seem to want. The more centre/left based majority want their political beliefs validated via the media and that’s what they pay to read/watch.
One can easily argue, and IMO be correct in doing so, that a Canadian news network with a heavy right leaning bias was absolutely inevitable as a result of a primarily centre/left-biased existing media – one cannot reasonably argue that QMI/Sun is providing unbiased, just the facts, Canadian political news coverage.
The fact is that the political right wants their political beliefs validated every bit as much as anyone else – that’s what they will pay for, and that’s what QMI/Sun is giving them.
Sun Media bias seems to be ” up front ” bias as opposed to the CBC ” bingo caller’s “, for example, insisting that they have no bias and are always 100% fair: ( Maybe
), Just take it as a personal quirk that I prefer maybes to absolutes in my use of language.
Now, back to the general subject of the Conservatives, Harper, conservative comment, conservative inclined media etc …..
I just get the impression that you expect perfection from the Conservative side and any slips in ethics or bias/partisanship taints the entire conservative side of the dialogue: How in the World could any political Party ever meet your satisfaction as being ” Pure of heart “.
Slips in ethics, big or small are legitimate to criticize but in that case hold the Left to the same high level of ” perfection “.
Just my opinion, but in general your comments always turn to how disappointed you are of the Conservatives and how we should be equally disappointed with them as if the Conservatives have zero wiggle room for error(s) and should be infallible ….. and any fails just mean they are as bad as the Left !
The Economist article seems like a puff piece. Mr.Harper is probably one of the best politicians that this country has ever seen. His “bullying” is nothing more than exercising the full extent of his political powers. The Liberals did that for years and all we saw were yawns from the infatuated MSM.
This is politics. These aren’t a bunch of boy scouts debating the best way to start a fire after a rain. I don’t agree with every Conservative policy and I disagree with some of their tactics, but I have to wonder why we seem to be so obsessed with someone “bullying” politicians while the citizens themselves are willing to take so much bullying from the Progressives ? If we want to discuss bullying, how about we discuss McGuinty’s Green Act? How about we discuss Redford’s unilateral abrogation of property rights in Alberta? How about we discuss the myriad of individual freedoms that have been denied by governments with no authority other than they have the power to do so, in other words, tyranny. Why is all of that not worthy of discussion but being an astute Conservative politician advancing Conservative policy is worthy of a derisive editorial in an international publication ?
The Economist a right wing publication? Bullshit.
Actually, if you follow the last bunch of PM’s you would find that they have been very diligently working at concentrating power in the PMO, what Harper is doing is only what others before him have done – he’s just, as others in their time did, taking it to greater levels.
That is, IMO, a partisan impression because you see me being critical of your party – that fact is that I do not expect perfection, I do expect honesty and integrity.
Again, I am not looking for perfection. I am looking for honesty and integrity. When I was blogging I was criticized by the politically left as being a closet Harper-CON because I do hold all of them to the same standard – and they all consistantly fail as they lack both honesty and integrity.
As I have often said, the only difference is the colour of their ties.
O.K., fair enough, they all disappoint, and yes I do wish for better from my side.
( Well, spin sort of implies that the arguments are false and dishonest, and spin can certainly be dishonest and one sided and slanted to support one’s position. But it can also be honestly held debating points using all the tools in the debating tool box to best advantage: A knife fight with words one could say )
I can see and sympathize that when you criticize the Left they considerers you as Right Wing.
Anyway an interesting discussion.
Considering over the years that SL has consistently slagged the right more than the left I think Jeans criticism is accurate.
As for the media the problem isn’t the left or right slant its the lockstep thinking that occurs. As old leftist radio personality used to say, “If everyone thinks the same then no one is thinking at all”. Personally I find it very very difficult to get a rightist perspective in the MSM.
Sometimes it’s difficult to decide which end of our political spectrum is the most offensive, authoritarian, and undemocratic, Joe – since it’s your end of the spectrum that is currently in power just what did you expect?