WHAT'S NEXT FOR CANADA - OUR VERY OWN REICHSTAG FIRE?

Canada is either at the beginning of or in the middle of – certainly not the end of – the most significant economic crisis since the Great Depression. If ever there was a time for all Canadians to put their collective shoulders to the wheel it is now. If there was ever a time for friend and foe alike to work together to get through tough times it is now. If there was ever a time for political leadership to tell the truth to the Canadian people it is now. If there was ever a time for political leadership to embrace bi-partisanship for positive and sustained cooperation to lick our economic problems it is now.

But what does the Prime Minister do? Literally, none of the above. He unveiled an economic package yesterday that cut spending, failed to deliver any meaningful economic stimulus package, and grossly misrepresented the current and future state of our national finances. See: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.wfiscalparties28/BNStory/politics/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20081128.wfiscalparties28

But what is most contemptible of all, is that he used the occasion to throttle the opposition parties. Included in the economic package are provisions cutting off federal subsidies to political parties. The effect of this proposal is to starve the opposition parties at the same time as the Conservatives are rolling in cash. Even Conservative pals like National Post columnist Don Martin find Harper’s actions appalling. See: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/11/27/don-martin-crossing-the-line-into-fiscal-fantasy.aspx

I’m sure the Prime Minister considers himself a master political strategist. After all, he is always strategizing about something or other to make his opponents look bad. Whether it is crude attack ads well before a campaign against the Leader of the Opposition, silly little animated cartoon ads against political opponents on gas pumps, setting up starving artists as a whipping boy in the midst of a political campaign, or appointing John Manley to head a useless commission on Canada’s role in Afghanistan, his strategizing is always evident. It is also usually always wrong and yields very negative results to his government. Otherwise he would have had his majority.

With this recent attack on the viability of opposition parties Harper has once and for all come out of the closet. He, after all, does not believe in democracy. He believes in a one party state. And he is hell-bent determined to create it. Castro, Mugabe, Stalin and Hitler would have bowed in admiration had they been around to witness yesterday’s attack on Canadian opposition parties. And what is next, the burning of the Canadian Parliament buildings, martial law and government by decree?

The Opposition parties must give Harper the boot, and do it quickly. His panacea for our rough economic times will be a Bennett/Hoover policy of restraint as opposed to what is required – namely, a stimulus. Furthermore, his attacks on democracy have no place in one of the most civilized countries in the world with a well deserved and enviable record of democratic fair play, stability and prosperity.

If I may uncharacteristically use an expression perhaps more suited to the lips of Preston Manning - in the name of God, Harper must be turfed! Now!

GORDON GIBSON JR: MORE DRIVEL FROM THE RIGHT

JUNIOR

If you have a yen for some real bullshit reading today, check the editorial page of today’s Globe and Mail and read Gordon Gibson Jr.’s latest drivel: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080919.wcogibson22/BNStory/politics
By way of review, Gibson is the highly educated (Harvard, London School of Economics) son of one of British Columbia’s great entrepreneurs, Gordon Gibson Sr. Gibson Sr. was born during the gold rush in Dawson City and rose from hardscrabble poverty to become one of the most successful lumber barons in the history of B.C. By the time he died in 1986, he had put together a huge diverse business empire founded on the forest industry including a shipping line, hotels, and radio station. He also sat as a Liberal member of the B.C. Legislature.

Gibson Jr. early in his career was by all reports a bright young man. He was one of the earliest supporters of Pierre Trudeau in the lead up to the leadership campaign in 1968. He so endeared himself to Trudeau that upon Trudeau’s winning the leadership he was hired as the new P.M’s first Executive Assistant.

Thereafter a strong relationship developed between the two. So strong in fact that Gibson Jr. was one of the handful of people who participated in the highly secret marriage ceremony of Pierre and Margaret.

In 1972, young Gibson went home to B.C. to personally test the political waters for himself. In 1974 and 1975 he won two elections to the Legislature and was provincial party leader for a few years before being defeated in 1975.

After 1975, although he emerged politically from time to time as a prominent B.C. provincial Liberal, he wisely shifted his sights on continuing in the tradition of his father in business. He also decided his political future lay more in punditry than electoral politics. Over the years, his opinions, carrying an ostensible view from the west perspective, have been read in several different daily newspapers.

Gibson Jr. fell out with Trudeau over the great constitution debate of the early eighties that gave rise to the Charter of Rights and the Amending Formula.

As time marched on he became an increasingly right-wing tub thumper. He is now firmly in support of the Reform, Alliance, Tory mishmash of far right wing ideology. So much so that he was appointed as a Fellow of its favorite propaganda machine, the infamous Fraser Institute.

Gibson Jr.’s message today poses the question whether or not it matters who is in power in Ottawa. He theorizes that whoever directs the government “will not move far from the public good. Government may – indeed, will - make mistakes, but public opinion will correct them soon enough.” It is assumed that the piece was designed as a dose of valium for Canadians who have disquiet over a possible Harper majority.

Alas, Gibson Jr. may be good at making money, but he he is sorely deficient in historical knowledge. Otherwise he would have known that it mattered a hell of a lot who came to power in Germany after the national election of November of 1932. Or that in the late thirties in Great Britain it was a matter of great importance who held the reins in the House of Commons as Hitler was gearing up to march across Europe. Or that in the United States in 1964 it mattered who was going to be the Commander in Chief, given that when the dust settled in Viet Nam, more than 60,000 young Americans had become tragic statistics of a lost cause.

He goes on: “The idea is that in a democracy, the general will of the people will govern, and the truly important leaders are not the managers of the day, but rather those in politics, business, religion, and the arts who shape that general will.” As an example, he puts forth the Fraser Institute shibboleth that fellow Fellow Fraserite “ . . . Preston Manning changed the fiscal policy of the government 180 degrees in the 1990s with his insistence on the importance of eliminating the deficit, in effect giving the day’s government permission to do what needed doing. He did this from the Opposition side.”

What utter nonsense! Pierre Trudeau must be spinning in his grave listening to his former Harvard educated trusted advisor drooling out such drivel. Reduction of deficits as a government priority was embraced by many jurisdictions in the west almost simultaneously. Manning had nothing to do with it, save for the rhetoric, which he and countless others of all political stripes were spewing at the same time throughout the western industrialized democracies. Manning was no Messiah on deficit reduction. He was one voice among millions, including Liberals, who were espousing the same cause.

Gibson Jr. knows this. He degrades what little is left of his public reputation as a responsible voice in the body politic by uttering such false banalities. He becomes just a lowly pamphleteer for the right like the rest of his pals in the Fraser Institute.

After waxing poetic about his favorite themes – institutional change, the primary importance of local and provincial governments – he says “The world today is certainly better than ever in my long lifetime, notwithstanding the past week’s financial turmoil.”

If he believes that, Gibson Jr. a child of privilege, is spending far too much time at the Vancouver Club. In fact, the world is in deep trouble – largely as a result of Gibson Jr.’s fellow travelers from the extreme right. Russia and the United States have revived the cold war. The Middle East continues to be a cauldron of real or threatened violence. Pakistan is a basket case. Afghanistan is a dismal failure, with our young men and women dying there for reasons that become less apparent by the day. Commercial greed in the United States requires a bailout by its little people of trillions, causing economic havoc world wide. A woman who aspires to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency of the United States – and may well be come November - has never held a passport.

And Junior - that’s only the beginning!

The world today better than ever? My eye!

MULRONEY MEMOIRS: A BASKET CASE TRIES TO SETTLE OLD SCORES

I had been suffering from writer's block for several days. Feeling guilty. About disappointing my legions of readers. Hemingway used to call it 'black ass.' I was suffering from 'black ass.'

What to write about? Stelmach? Harper? Borrrrrrrrring! Afghanistan? Not boring, but God, if people don't get it about Afghanistan by now, they probably never will. What to write about?

Muldoon to the rescue! I might have continued staring at my computer screen in a state of suspended animation indefinitely were it not for Muldoon (as Canada's 18th Prime Minister is referred to by that splendid rag 'Frank Magazine').

We found out this morning that - oh, hell, let's call him by his real name -Mulroney mustered up the courage to really let the seven year deceased Trudeau have it. According to Mulroney, Trudeau wasn't morally fit to lead because he failed to support the war against Hitler and that he [Trudeau] opposed the draft during the war.

Mulroney was obviously smarting from Trudeau having called those who supported Meech Lake and the Charlottetown Accord names. For those who must be reminded or who have forgotten about what Meech Lake and the Charlottetown Accord were, these were basically constitutional bribes of power advanced by Mulroney and his Federal government to the Quebec separatist government to sign the constitution. Trudeau had called Mulroney and his ilk 'weaklings,' 'cowards,' 'snivellers,' and 'eunuchs.' Trudeau had said this in the inimitable understated way he said such things when he became pissed at weaklings, cowards, snivellers and eunuchs, who for their own aggrandizement, personal and otherwise, tried to turn Quebec into a province quite unlike the others.

As always, whenever Muldoon speaks, two things happen. First, you remember what a basket case he was and is, and secondly, you learn something new.

As to the basket case Mulroney, his outburst reminded us of his penchant for self-destructive over statement and exaggeration, his unrelenting passion for a glowing place in history that he believes is owed to him, and his holding his bete noir Trudeau responsible for the death of his pet constitutional proposals which, in his mind, would have stopped the separatists in their tracks and led him to time immemorial fame and glory.

The facts are these.

Mulroney's big mouth - his penchant for self-destructive over statement and exaggeration - consistently got him into trouble while he was in office (recall him telling the reporter that a good politician had to know when to 'roll the dice,' to win, and he had won Meech Lake by 'rolling the dice' at the right time - saying this, when he hadn't yet won Meech Lake, which he went on to lose).

Mulroney's unrelenting passion for a glowing place in history led to his constant preening and mugging before the cameras, and more blarney than the Canadian people could ultimately stomach, all of which was instrumental in the destruction of the Progressive Conservative Party.

And finally, there is no doubt that Trudeau fought effectively against Meech Lake and the Charlottetown Accords. But to credit Trudeau alone for their defeat - when they were rejected by every region of the country, is to give the great man far too much political credit. In fact, the Canadian people had figured out for themselves that Meech and Charlottetown were power bribes to Quebec that would make that province different and more powerful than the others. And so Canadians rejected them. By the way, Stephen Harper seems to have learned something from the Mulroney experience with Quebec. He is not bribing Quebec with power. He's doing it in the old-fashioned way - with money - as witness his last Budget.

So much for the basket case. Now what have we learned? We learned or at least were reminded that Mulroney still believes - and probably others of the now-defunct Progressive Conservatives - that Trudeau brought down Meech and Charlottetown.

If this is so, then by implication Trudeau's attack also led to the Tories defeat at the polls in 1993, because clearly, the nation's revulsion at Meech and Charlottetown was a major reason for the Tory debacle. And it was this debacle - the grotesque Tory defeat in 1993 that left them with two seats - that destroyed the Tory Party. And so it follows, if it was Trudeau who defeated Meech and Charlottetown, then it was he who destroyed the Tory party. Thus, according to this school of thought, Pierre Trudeau's effectiveness as a national leader did not end in 1984 when he left office. No, it carried on through 1993 and therefore, not only were Stanfield and Clark his victims. So were Mulroney and Kim Campbell.

Like Samson, Trudeau slew them all. If I may carry the biblical analogy a bit further, it can be fairly said that he slew Mulroney and Campbell with the jaw bone of an ass!

Wow! What a career! Of biblical proportions! 25 years of beating up and finally destroying the Tories! Longer than Mackenzie King!

One final comment. Mulroney says that Trudeau wasn't morally fit to lead, because as a young man in his very early twenties he did not support the war against Hitler nor the draft. Well, what about the moral fitness of a leader who accepts $300,000 is cash delivered to him in 3 instalments in quiet hotel rooms by an unsavoury businessman who for years has been fawning over him in order to get contracts for his clients?

FAST EDDIE AND THE QUESTION OF 'CHARACTER'

Jim Silye is a friend of mine. More than thirty years ago he plied his trade with the Calgary Stampeders in the CFL as one of the best punt return men in the business. He was fast and he was fearless. And he took a lot of punishment, including hits to most of his body. And his head.

Which may explain why, when he first went into politics, he joined the Reform Party. He was elected as the Reform MP for Calgary Centre in 1993. He did not run in 1997, but returned in 2000 to run (and lose) in the Federal Election in Calgary West as a Progressive Conservative - an odd switch given that in those bleak days for the PCs under the second coming of Joe Clark, most of the switching was taking place away from the Tories towards the Reform/Alliance (for which 'RA' is a convenient acronym).

Jim took another kamikaze foray into politics in 2004 when he ran in an Alberta Senate Election - again, as a Progressive Conservative. The Federal PCs were still highly unpopular in Alberta at the time with the still clear memories of Mulroney, the GST, Meech Lake and the Charlottetown Accord, still etched in the minds of the body politic. Silye went down to defeat once again.

Since then, Jim has stayed away from public life and, like the writer, restricts himself to being an observer of the passing parade. Is he plotting a switch to Social Credit? That would seem a natural step for him, given his early deft move from the RA to the Tories. Or is he planning on joining the new Federal Tories (to be consistent, now that we have the Reform/Alliance/Tory amalgamation the appropriate anacronym is 'RAT.')? Is Jim going to join the RATs? No one knows.

But what we do know is that Jim is a cheerleader for new Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach. You see, Jim received a complementary copy of my first blog article 'Dead Fish' from me, as did the rest of my personal Email contact list. Rising to the bait, Jim then burdened my many friends and admirers on that list with a 'Reply to all', challenging my conclusion that Eddie was on his way out, and indeed, invoking the Premier's virtues of 'character, conviction, and commitment',suggesting further that these were "were qualities unknown, unfamiliar and unpracticed by many Liberal politicians that we both know."

The second part of his statement I can hardly quibble with, except that the adjective 'Liberal,' for the sake of accuracy, should have been deleted. Both Jim and I know plenty of politicians from all parties lacking 'character, conviction and commitment.'

The qualities of 'conviction' and 'commitment,' can be found in men and women, both good and evil. One can't deny that Adolph Hitler, Idi Amin and Pol Pot had 'conviction' and 'commitment.' They were not good qualities. Those qualities are positive and good only if combined with 'character' and by that both Jim and I would mean 'good character,' so that the whole bundle means good, positive leadership, as we Canadians understand it in a democratic sense.

Which brings me to Fast Eddie Stelmach's character as he has begun to reveal it to the people of Alberta. The most recent clue of his true nature is the scheme to sell intimate access to the Premier, to rich Albertans who wish to put up $5000 to his Party's coffers. Upon hearing of the scheme, Albertans, Oppostion parties and the news media expressed outrage - both at the cost, and more importantly the concept. I mean, selling intimacy is rather poorly regarded, even with our society's more permissive outlook on human behaviour. I mean, that's what hookers do.

Stelmach got the message and backtracked, scrapping the scheme. He lamented that the outrage was 'a bit of a perception' and claimed not to have paid a whole lot of attention to what was happening. But is he returning the $5000 chunks already received? No, thank you very much. He will keep the money anyway. That's Eddie the politician. A man of principle, right?

Another example of the real Eddie came during a courtesy visit of the Leader of the Federal Liberal Party Stephane Dion to the Premier's office in Edmonton earlier in the week. By all reports, they had a pleasant meeting and discussed some issues. However, when Dion was about to leave, the Preem refused to pose for a picture with his guest. That's Eddie the Statesman.

He's already showed his true colors by booting out from his Cabinet many urban MLA's who happened to support Jim Dinning in the Leadership Contest, and transferring power to his rural pals. That's Eddie the magnanimous healer.

And he joined the lynch mob on the hapless Harvey Cenaiko who tried to do the Premier's family a good deed by promoting his son within the Alberta Sheriff's organization. Instead of just refusing the helping hand, he made a big deal of it press-wise, rubbing poor Harvey's nose in it after he'd already been turfed from cabinet, thus deep-sixing Harvey's political career forever. That's Eddie the Party Loyalist.

So, to my friend Jim Silye, that is the 'character' of which you speak. 'Character' is the trait that separates good leadership from bad, courage from cowardice, loyalty from betrayal, statesmanship from pettiness. Albertans are waking up to see that the Tory mobs have elected a man who appears thusfar to be wholly deficient in 'character' . . . unless its the character of a weasel.