Congratulations to Jabba the Duff on finally coming out of the closet. It was always rather a poorly kept secret that Duffy was a Conservative hack in journalists' clothing, but at least now he'll be guaranteed an income till age 75 and a cushy pension thereafter.
But quite aside from Senator Duffy wallowing in pork that was heretofore utilized merely as a topping for his ample servings of poutine, there remains the blatantly obvious flip-floppery of der Führer Stephen Harper stuffing the Senate with 18 patronage appointments after staking a part of his political career on vowing to institute an elected upper chamber. I'm sure we'll hear all the usual Conservative propaganda about how you have to break it in order to fix it, or fix it in order to break it, or something like that. Some see Harper as a "pragmatist". I see him as a man so crazed by the prospect of losing power, that he will throw anyone and anything (including his own ideals) under the bus when the going gets tough. Like atheists, it would seem that there are no Reformers in a foxhole.
15 comments:
"Thanks for the appointment, Stephen. Now, are you going to finish that cheeseburger?"
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, Red Canuck.
My brother tells me that Vancouver is buried in snow, and the airport is closed. Good, you guys deserve it for taking Sundin :)
Like yourself, I took some time to thoughtfully comment on the senate appointments. I hope that you take the time to read them at:
http://retiredeagle2.wordpress.com/2008/12/23/harper-as-a-liberal-in-disguise/
Thanks for your blog post.
rgl
Bowler - And Happy Holidays to you as well! I wasn't aware that YVR was closed...a quick check of their website www.yvr.ca shows that most of the flights are operating, though many are delayed. But you're quite right - Vancouver has a remarkably poor ability to cope with snow. Oh, and I personally think the Sundin signing wasn't a great move by the Canucks, although he may be able to provide them with some much needed post-season scoring.
And don't even get me started about the Raptors... :)
RGL - Heh, my comments re: Duffy weren't exactly 'thoughtful'...but I call 'em like I see 'em. I will stop by your place and have a read.
There is something very perverted and pernicious in all of this. I mean, albeit under the guise of a journalist, the guy screwed us all, making whores of all of us ... and WE (his whores!) get stuck with a bill for his keep till the day he dies?!! The world has truly gone upside down. One can find a small measure of solace in the thought that harpercons, too, will have to chip in to foot that bill!
I love, "no reformist in a foxhole" That is quite brilliant.
Gene - Well, perhaps $130,000 a year is a reasonable price to pay to remove that doughnut from the airwaves...
*weeps*
Acid Reflux - Cheers, mate!
You can actually SEE the rolls of fat growing on the Duff-ster.
Politics aside, I thought there was a weight limit for Canadian senators... surely Duff counts as two senate appointments, right?
Seriously RC - what can I say, except I'm totally unimpressed and dejected at the calibre and breadth of senate selections. Just as bad as Duffy is Wallin. Come on! There must have been a fire sale on hack journalists...
Happy holidays to you and your family!
Anon - Seriously RC - what can I say, except I'm totally unimpressed and dejected at the calibre and breadth of senate selections.
What Duffy's appointment lacked in breadth, it certainly made up for in width. But yes, these senators will be nothing more than ball-lickers for Harper. He needs to go...and soon.
Senate appointments matter to only three classes of people in Canada: pundits, partisans/bloggers, and a large swath of Westerners.
Westerners care about the Senate because they know we’re never going to have the kind of political clout that Ontario and Quebec have due to Central Canada’s larger share of the population, so the triple-e Senate has long been seen as a method of balancing the perceived power imbalance.
Pundits care about the Senate because it’s something they can dissect, discuss and ultimately, ponitificate about what’s right or wrong with the institution as opposed to, you know, running for office and putting their amazing ideas into workable legislation to solve all of Canada’s ills.
Partisans and bloggers care about the Senate because, depending on which side of the partisan fence you’re standing, you can either cheer the eighteen appointments or say that Harper broke yet another promise. That he’s a liar. That he’s got a hidden agenda. That he’s got “666″ tattooed on the back of his head somewhere. Insert partisan snipe here…
Being that I’m non-partisan, I tend to look at the Senate less as a function of our parliamentary democracy and more of an extention of the Prime Minister’s Office. Am I bothered that Mike Duffy was appointed? You bet! I love Mike Duffy and CTV is going to have a helluva time replacing him. I disagree with some opinion columns that are questioning the nature of the relationship between the media and politicians including some that are questioning whether Mike Duffy was a truly unbiased journalist in all his years covering Ottawa. Here’s what I know: I’ve read blogs that accuse Mike Duffy, CTV, hell, the Ottawa Press Gallery for that matter as being pro-Liberal, anti-Liberal, pro-Tory, anti-tory, for years and years. Those complaints generally come about when your party (be it, Liberal, Tory or Dipper) is getting some shitty press coverage more often than not because of some dipshit policy or worse, a scandal your party got itself into and now has the audacity to complain about being exposed for the scandal your party frikin’ created!
It is with some measure of amusement that I am reading Liberal bloggers and commentators trying to slam Harper for “abandoning his base” or for “breaking yet another promise”.
Give me a frikin’ break! Look, voters who are actually paying attention to this are sophisticated enough to know that all political leaders break promises: it’s what they frikin’ do for shit sake! It doesn’t matter whether that leader is a Tory or a Liberal - they all break a promise, usually for political expediency, neccessity or more often than not, for political advantage. With this in mind, kindly shut up about it because nobody is going to punish Harper, and nobody gives a rat’s ass! His base will be there come the next election: why? Because his base ain’t made up of Liberals and Dippers!
I will say this much: it is beyond hypocritical for Liberals (and their supporters) to slam Harper for making the appointments all the while refusing to address the reason he waited three years to appoint Senators. For clarification: you don’t support Senate reform and now you’re pointing your finger at Harper and saying… what? That he’s an asshole because he’s acting just like YOU guys when your party is in power: the Prime Minister of Canada is appointing Senators! Stop the presses because, holy shit, it’s business as usual in Ottawa!
Cripes, what a country, eh?
To quote sage Kinsella:
"Journalists are entitled to have views; they are entitled to receive appointments, too. Anyone who suggests otherwise is just being partisan, or conspiracy theorist, or both.
Again, to my Liberal friends: get over your CTV fixation. It doesn't help your leader, your party, or yourselves"
Well if its any consolation, I heard through the grapevine that one of the conditions of Duffy's appointment was that he has to dress like Randy from Trailer Park Boys
TGV - the triple-e Senate has long been seen as a method of balancing the perceived power imbalance.
As a "westerner", I can honestly say that I've never felt the kind of disenfranchisement you describe. Frankly, I think it's a creation of western politicians with an axe to grind. We all have a voice in our provincial parliaments. I've never been convinced of the need to "balance out" the house with an elected senate. But that's for another discussion...
I tend to look at the Senate less as a function of our parliamentary democracy and more of an extention of the Prime Minister’s Office.
The Senate should most certainly not be an extension of the PMO. It is supposed to be a sober second opinion on legislative matters of the house. If previous PMs have abused it to appoint partisan hacks rather than respected experts in various disciplines, then shame on them. An shame on Harper for doing exactly that, especially when he campaigned on doing just the opposite.
I love Mike Duffy and CTV is going to have a helluva time replacing him.
I don't, and I think a sack of potatoes with a Blackberry would do the trick nicely. :)
and now has the audacity to complain about being exposed for the scandal your party frikin’ created!
What scandal are you talking about? Look, you thought Duffy was unbiased...fine. I happen to disagree, and I think the fact that he has agreed to enter the Senate as a Conservative (rather than insisting on being an Independent) would tend to lend creedence to that notion.
Look, voters who are actually paying attention to this are sophisticated enough to know that all political leaders break promises: it’s what they frikin’ do for shit sake!
Yes. And until they stop, we should continue to call them on every single broken promise. I'm sick and tired of CPC apologists throwing their hands in the air every time Harper lies, and claiming "well, the Liberals did it for years". Enough already. The man campaigned on "transparency, accountability, honesty blah blah blah". So far, he's delivered a highly pernicious, partisan, secretive and dishonest government, all the while throwing his vaunted conservative credentials under the bus. I think it's entirely appropriate to call "bullshit" when I see it.
For clarification: you don’t support Senate reform and now you’re pointing your finger at Harper and saying… what?
I'm not slamming him for making the appointments per se. I'm slamming him for doing so after saying he wouldn't, and for doing it while parliament is prorogued due to non-confidence in the government.
It doesn't help your leader, your party, or yourselves
Wrong again. I happen to find puerile digs about His Rotundulence to be highly cathartic. :)
Great pic. He looks like those bullet-head characters on "Dr. Who" don't you think?
RT - Actually, I never really watched much Dr. Who, so I'm shamefully ignorant about your reference!
Post a Comment