Tory Dog and Pony Show

When Stephen Harper prorogued parliament a few weeks ago, I thought we were all going to get a break from the dog and pony show in Ottawa, not.
You all know what a dog and pony show is, don't you? That's where someone tries to sell you a dog dressed up as a pony. The seller claims its a pony, and though it appears a little small, it is quite capable of plowing the fields and giving the kids a ride across the barnyard! Then, when you get it home, you find out its good for little more than snapping at the postal worker's heals, eating food scraps, and leaving little piles all over the lawn.
Since the Governor General granted Mr. Harper's Christmas present, at the expense of Canadian taxpayers, he has trotted out his finally dressed up dogs. The pooches are hybrids, Great Danes of sorts, but more akin to Greyhounds, busses not breeds.
These mongrels have been trotted out in two separate bands. One constitutes his "Economic Advisory" committee, their resemblance to real ponies so poor he is letting his good bud, Finance Flaherty, walk them down the kennel path, and his new "Senators", who are fearless, yet once anti-senate leader says will restore the balance in the "upper" house.
All mutt analogies aside, lets look at what the PM has done. In the midst of an economic crisis, perpetrated by billionaire financiers, chubby bankers and land developers, he has marched out a bunch of billionaires, bankers and land developers to save us all!
Then there's the senators. Does anyone out there remember Harper's old plan to do away with the unelected senate? Now he claims this bunch are reformers! Well, if they're really reformers, then why are they accepting appointment and not demanding they be elected?
Is anybody else getting this?
Now, to switch metaphors in mid stream, it appears Mr. Harper is going to stop the bank robbers by putting them in charge of security at the bank! Or, so to speak, throwing our countries economic future to the dogs! On top of that, he's appointing people to the senate who don't believe in the senate. Its like the Vatican appointing a Muslim pope!
Then there's the critters themselves.
First we have Mike Duffy, a St. Bernard of sorts, with a healthy girth, who made his living since I was a teeny bopper, presenting "unbiased" reportage of the goings on in parliament to the Canadian public. This is a guy, who since the days of Mulroney, has told the Canadian people that Ottawa has done right by them. He's been there, in the scrum, since Mulroney sold out the railway deal, opened the borders to "free" trade, and drove this country into debt deeper than his own esophagus. And Duffy has been faithful, like any good dog, the Man's best friend, all along, lapping up the table scraps tossed to him by successive governments for so long, his waistline has earned him the new name, Stuffy. He looks like a big old gelding, but really, he's nothing more than an aging, overfed, corporate mutt.
Then there is Nancy Greene Raine. Once a hero to us all, for propelling herself down a mountainside in France at break neck speed back in the '60s. She claims to have been a "Liberal" in her youth. A liberal recipient of great fanfare. Now she says, because she's older, she's become more "Conservative." Fact is, since she's become a billionaire ski hill developer, she's become more attached to governments that disregard things like "environmental policy" and favour development despite the long term cost. That's the trouble with aging Liberals, they lose their balance while sitting on the fence, and depending how much gold they have stuffed in their pockets, tend to fall off the fence on the right hand side! To be fair, perhaps Mr. Harper misunderstood what the Canadian people were telling him when they said they wanted him to be more "green." Once sleek and fast, Ms. Greene-Raine, has become an aging giant poodle, with failing insight.
Then there's Jimmy Pattison, the billboard king of the Coquihalla. A bulldog in his youth, Pattison is best remembered for two things. One, in true Social Credit pedigree, as a used car salesman who used to fire his least productive salesmen at the end of each month. His other claim to fame was as the CEO for EXPO '86, that big corporate orgy that cost the BC taxpayer nearly 10 years of economic hardship. Yup folks, he's the one who sold us the big beef bone that turned out to be a tainted chicken wing. While he barks a good howl, old Jimmy really is nothing more than a yappy Chihuahua, allowed to tear the stuffing out of the pillows because, when he's busy doing that, at least he's quiet.
The list continues. There are French Poodles, hairless pointers, some pinchers, a Shepherd or two, even a big web footed Newfoundlander, along with the odd mutt, but the point is, while Mr. Harper, and his kennel man Flaherty, want us to believe he's showing us around the stable, but his ponies are not ponies. They're dogs, Conservative lap dogs dressed up in fine saddles with blinders on their eyes. They will, like good pooches, go where directed, fetch what is tossed to them, and sit when instructed to sit.
In short, Mr. Harper's ponies, like all well fed dogs, are out to please only their master. And to anyone who thinks they will do anything but please their master, I have one things to say to you.
"Congratulations, you've just bought a pony! Careful it don't bite you!"

The mouse likes the cat (Harper happy about Obama

Sure he does!
Last week, Canada’s Prime Minister, Steven Harper, made much hullabaloo about how happy he was to see Barack Obama become president-elect of the USA.
Caution: Don’t be fooled again! Mr. Harper is about as happy to see Obama take the presidency as most of us would have been to have Sarah Palin one heartbeat from the Oval Office!
First of all, Stephen Harper is a Conservative, no, a right wing ideologue, who loves the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and is against the whole concept of government funded health care, or anything else. Barack Obama on the other hand, is a moderate Liberal, intent on creating a healthcare system with strong governmental controls. He also wants to renegotiate NAFTA!
Based on those two points alone, Mr. Harper’s assertions, that he is pleased with Obama’s election, is nothing more than polite double speak, the sort we’ve unfortunately come to expect from our leaders.
When we really shine a light on the differences between Harper and Obama, the lie shines through. First, Democrats tend to be more protectionist than their Republican counterparts. As a result, and a rule, Republican administrations tend to be more lenient and cooperative with Canada. Then there is Iraq! Obama wants out of Iraq. Harper argued vehemently in favour of joining the US in Iraq! As large as the issues of healthcare and war are, there are many other differences between how these two leaders see the world. I will not take the time to list them now, it could take weeks.
Perhaps the more important question is not whether Mr. Harper likes Mr. Obama, but what Mr. Obama thinks of Mr. Harper.
Let’s remember, Mr. Harper once called George W. Bush, and his gang of “New World Order” cronies, a “light unto the world.” It wasn’t long ago that former Vice President Al Gore, a Democrat and supporter of Obama, was accusing Mr. Harper of being aided, financially and otherwise, by right wingers and industrialists from the US! Then there is Mr. Harper’s long history of lobbying and support of right wing causes in the US and the world. These are just some of the differences of opinion and belief systems that put Mr. Harper and Mr. Obama in direct conflict with one another. The two, although not direct opposites, are about as similar to one another as dogs are to cats. While they may both have four legs, keen senses of smell, and furry coats, they are not at all alike, and the chances of them getting along, are slim to nonexistent.
And here’s the worst part of it: Mr. Obama is a man who does his homework. He’s going to have a book on Harper, and be well briefed on the Canadian PM’s positions on everything from hot dogs to missile shields. He will understand that Harper is a political adversary, one with a forked tongue and a penchant for low brow politicking. If he is worth his salt at all, then any association he has with Mr. Harper will have, at its core, a foundation of mistrust. The two will have conflicting positions on most issues. For Harper, it will be like dealing with a brighter more communicative, and far more secure in his position, Stephen Dion. For Obama, it will be like dealing with George W. Bush, minus Bush’s colloquial language style.
When it gets down to it, Mr. Obama is not going to like Mr. Harper at all, to the point where his famous ability to reach across the aisle is going to be seriously impaired. Sure Obama will reach out, and do everything he can to work with the Canadian PM, but he’s going be about as comfortable with Harper at the table as Jesus was with Judas at the Last Supper.
The relationship between these two leaders, from the outset, despite the rhetoric, is going be, at best, uncomfortable, and that’s before the issue of the current economic crisis even hits the agenda!
America is in its worst economic crisis since the days of FDR. As a result it will be inwardly protectionist on a level we’ve never witnessed before. Neither men are going to want to see homegrown industry relocating to the other’s domain, and will fight any legislation that has the portent to hurt their own industry. If it comes to a fight, Obama is going to mop up the street with Harper’s pallid pink and abundant flesh.
He is also going to recognize that Mr. Harper’s support here in Canada is at best, soft like his belly. Obama will see Harper for what he really is, a desperate politician fighting for his political life with a minority of support. Tie that in with their political differences, and it will be in Obama’s best interests to frustrate and stymie the Canadian PM at every turn. While they may remain polite in front of the cameras, and across the diplomatic table, in private the relationship is going to be about as amicable the one, nearly 50 years ago, between JFK and Deifenbaker, only worse.
When Mr. Harper said all those nice things about Mr. Obama last week, he was doing what politicians are predisposed to doing, lie through their teeth. He was also doing something else we’ve sadly come to expect from him, trying to hitch a ride on the popularity of the new President’s coat tails. He won’t get far.
In my opinion, Mr. Harper would have been better off to take a hard line. It would have been wiser for him to express his disappointment, and challenge to the new president on his assertion to renegotiate NAFTA, on protectionism, Arctic sovereignty and any number of other issues the two will disagree on. He should have taken an aggressive stand, and made the new President come to him with the olive branch. Instead, he will now be the one who is challenged to back up his rhetoric with action. It is Harper who will now have to come forward bearing the olive branch, which, in very real terms, will be like the mouse going to the cat pleading, “please don’t eat me!”
Truth is, the mouse knows it is trapped, that’s the only reason it is playing nice. The mouse is clever, it knows niceness is its only hope. Trouble is, the new cat is a lot smarter and far more agile than its predecessor.
In the end, Mr. Obama, in true cat fashion, will let the mouse play a while, maybe give it a bat once in a while when it begins to wander out of reach, but when the crunch comes, and it will, that mouse is going to be toast.