Next to librarians working on Parliament Hill, they could be most subversive group in the land, battle-ready what with their knowledge of the outdoors and all that binocular experience.
This week, Dean Beeby of the CBC reported that the Harper government’s revenue collectors have put a small group of nature lovers on notice that the CRA is watching them.
The revenuers have apparently found evidence of partisan “political activity” on the bird-watchers’ website. If it continues, the CRA warns, these nature agitators could be facing further action, including a “future audit.”
Canada’s political dialogue is headed straight for the gutter and that’s exactly where Stephen Harper wants it. And it is getting worse.
This week, the National Citizens Coalition, (NCC) those ideological shock troops of the Conservative Party of Canada who pass themselves off as non-partisan, launched a campaign against you-know-who.
Just Say No to Justin. Such a familiar ring, yes? Just Say no to Drugs. Just Say No to Pre-Marital Sex. So far no one has said Just Say No to Rock ‘n Roll, but be patient, it’s an election year.
The phrase championed by former first lady Nancy Reagan during her husband’s presidency was part of the war on various nouns declared by Ronald Reagan. The War on Drugs continues to be a great success – for the drug cartels. Nancy Reagan’s bumper sticker homilies were Republican, rhetorical and ridiculous then and remain so now.
Still, they are being aped by the NCC, Just Say No to Justin, connecting him subliminally to drugs and recreational sex. This is third-party spending at its worst. First, the ad is poisonously misleading. The NCC wants people to laugh at their claim that Trudeau said the budget will balance itself, the same criticism the Harper government has made.
Except that’s not what Trudeau said and the kindly character assassins over at the NCC know that. Their specialty is not the truth, but the lethal half-truth reduced to a jugular-slashing epigram. What did Trudeau really say? He suggested that if you foster a vibrant economy, the budget will balance itself. Prosperity, not turning the government over to sharp-penciled accountants, is the best way to right the ship. Not so daft at all.
And then there is the small fact that there is no election. It could be a year away if the PM keeps to his own scheduled election legislation. So why call in the artillery now?
Easy-peazy. The Tories are tired of looking at Justin’s backside in the polls. They want his image of freshness and hope degraded. Their own slipshod and false attacks have gone over like Steve’s rockstar imitations. Time to call in the pros, those ‘non-partisans’ over at the NCC.
Remember, there are no constraints on spending limits outside the writ period, so this anti-Trudeau campaign can be as deep as the pockets of those who pay for it. In a good year, the NCC can raise $2 million in contributions.
Back in the days when Stephen Harper was putting up knee-capping billboards aimed at destroying individual politicians as head of the NCC, (the job he landed after bolting the Reform party in 1997) he was battling in court so that third party groups like the NCC could spend as much as they wanted during a campaign.
In 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against Steve and the NCC. The jurists wisely found that spending limits leveled the playing field at election time; otherwise, money, and money alone, would determine who got heard and who didn’t. You know – the way it is the United States.
In the Excited States, it is nothing for the Koch brothers to throw $300 million into Republican campaign coffers in a presidential election year. Big Republican money is currently involved in buying back the Senate, though the dubious last days of Obama have lowered the price.
Nor, as our political discourse heads for the gutter, is there any relief for Trudeau in the media. As author Donald Gutstein has written, “Canadian news reporting and commentary today is controlled by a handful of wealthy families and corporations — a group he calls the “Gang of Seven”.
In his new book, Harperism, Gutstein writes that newspaper columnists and editorial writers shore up the interests of their owners — the same people who support Harper.
They do this in part by “parroting” reports from neo-liberal think tanks like the Fraser Institute, the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and the Montreal Economic Institute. Unlike the bird-watchers, these fine institutions are, apparently, non-partisan. No, really. Communicators are at a high premium, but only if they find the Kool-Aid agreeable.
Gutstein’s reflections on Canada’s right-wing media monopolies were made in 2006. With Quebecor’s fire sale of Sun Media newspapers and websites to Postmedia, the concentration of corporate ownership has only worsened, affecting the diversity and balance of coverage even more. Gutstein notes that many of the executives in the media business are also members of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, not known to be supporters of Karl Marx.
Perhaps that partially explains why everything Trudeau does these days earns him a stick in the eye. He did an interview recently that was fluffier than a poodle after a blow dry. You know, the old “balance-the-baby trick” (harder than it looks), and the standard cheesecake shots.
But hey, it was Chatelaine magazine. They do the glamour thing. Justin and the missus obliged the magazine’s editors and the next thing you know there’s a piece in the National Post by Robyn Urback laughing at the Chatelaine piece. She said that it was insulting, patronizing, and stagey!
Ms. Urback is a fine writer and it may have been all three. But I think some people would wonder that if being “stagey” is grounds for condemnation, where are all the condemnatory pieces on the Prime Minister’s ludicrous exercise in ego-liberation that goes under the name 24/7? Not even Chairman Mao starred in his own news show.
Nor is PM’s twitter movie about a day in the life of the Great One an item for pay TV.
And who can forget the Harper Christmas Card, featuring Loreen holding Charlie the Chinchilla — a greeting card that instantly shot to fame on awkwardfamilyphotos.com. As for “insulting” and “patronizing”, how about Harper’s treatment of Chief Theresa Spence, Helena Guergis, or Linda Keen?
And have you noticed the number of stories appearing in the ‘mainstream media’ about the need for the opposition parties to lay out their election platforms. Steve has herded much of the media to exactly the place he wants them: scrutinizing the opposition parties over what they might do if elected.
That is surely better than having them scrutinize what he and the Conservatives have done over the past decade. It is by all means fair to ask Thomas Mulcair or Justin Trudeau about their policies and ideas. But it is inexcusable not to ask if Stephen Harper has earned the keys to the kingdom based on his record in office, which includes scandal, deception and serial blundering.
Here’s what we need. Instead of the deceptions of marketing and bumper-sticker slagging, instead of robocalls and media management and photo-ops, we need to get Canada’s leaders on television in a series of debates where voters can actually see what’s inside their heads.
We need to see the prime minister square off against Thomas Mulcair for two hours where the engagement is real, not gummed up by interrupting media hosts. As TV debates now stand, they look like group therapy sessions gone horribly wrong.
We need to have Justin Trudeau and Stephen Harper face-off to see if Justin is really the muffin the Tories say he is and if Steve can really walk on water.
We need to give Elizabeth May an equal public platform to see who has the issues right, including the environment — the Green Party’s leader or the prime minister who seems to have something against fresh water.
Failing that, and given Steve’s otherwise general bellicosity, he could just duck under the ropes and go three rounds with Justin Trudeau.
Now there’s an item for pay TV.
Original Article
Source: ipolitics.ca/
Author: Michael Harris
No comments:
Post a Comment