Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Fallout of Stephen Harper's Contempt Ruling

As we all know by now -- or at least, those of us who follow Canadian news -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been found in contempt of Parliament, by a committee (this won't be made formal until sometime tomorrow). Specifically, he's been cited for tolerating Bev Oda's forgery and lying, and for hiding the costs of the Conservative "tough on crime" agenda for ages.

But -- of course -- Harper's colleagues and supporters are defiant about it. Rather than do the ethical thing and own up to rather obvious blunders, they're attacking the opposition (see the comments in the linked articles), vilifying the committee (because it was made up mostly by opposition members), saying that Harper is STILL better than the alternatives, and -- wait for it -- attacking Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff's family for "not being real immigrants" and supposedly bringing about the Iron Curtain.

*sighs* Let's get this over with...

  1. Harper has been RATHER OBVIOUSLY lying to the public, been a total control freak, disrupted Parliament, and even broken the law. To look at all he's done and try to claim otherwise, is like trying to tell me -- with a straight face -- that The Queen isn't an old woman.
  2. I know that neo-cons aren't big on things like FACTS AND LOGIC, but the Liberal party is CENTRE-RIGHT (as any look at their policies makes very clear). As for the belly-aching about coalitions (are you fucking kidding me?), not only are they legal and effective in parliamentary democracies (and EXPECTED in minority governments), but Harper himself formed a coalition with those same "socialists and traitors" that his drones put on the same level as terrorists.
  3. So the committee was made up mostly by the opposition -- the opposition makes up the majority in Parliament (another thing that the far-right can't accept). OF COURSE they would take up a lot of committee space. That's how our democracy works.
  4. Furthermore, this begs the question: do Conservatives really think that they should be allowed to investigate themselves? These guys claim to be tough on crime, but from the way they're acting right now, you'd think they'd be fine with Paul Bernardo being the judge in his own murder trial.
  5. I don't pretend to have confidence in Michael Ignatieff or NDP Leader Jack Layton, but when Harper is THE ONLY PRIME MINISTER IN CANADIAN HISTORY TO BE CHARGED WITH CONTEMPT, it's pretty hard to imagine anyone being WORSE than him -- especially when you add his ridiculous financial incompetence to the equation (like the billion dollars wasted on G20 -- more than any world leader has spent on it -- the corporate tax cuts that NEVER stimulate the economy, the billions of dollars spent on the useless CF-35s, spending millions to scrap a census that even most conservatives say we need, etc.).
  6. Do I REALLY need to say something about how stupid and disgusting -- and possibly defamatory -- it is to attack the family of your main opponent? Especially with something as idiotic as saying they're not "real immigrants"? What in the holy mother of fuck does that even MEAN?
  7. And incidentally -- making racist and threatening remarks (eg. wanting to bomb all Liberals and NDPers), is EXACTLY WHY HARPER WILL NEVER WIN A MAJORITY. It's also why people think that you're, well, a bunch of fascist, bigoted, psychopaths.


No comments: