Last week should have been a good week for the PM - he was sideswiped (Video Blog Post)

I think that much of the media frenzy over the comments made by the Conservative MP were just that, frenzy. When one commentator stated that this is why the PM keeps a tight rein on the caucus, because they are knuckledraggers, I felt that was far more editorial commentary than it was news reporting.

What I suggest is causing much of the distance that is growing between the main-stream media and the public is that instead of trusting people to make up their own minds, the media seems to feel they have to spoon feed everyone their pap.

It was a good week for Canada.

James

[updated Mon Apr 07 16:17:53 -0400 2008]

Nik,

I disagree with your position that the Harper leadership needs to discipline this Member of Parliament.

Sixteen years ago, twenty five years ago, or forty years ago - values and opinions regarding many things including the gay members of society were different - plain and simple. Since then society seemingly has changed slowly over time to the point we are at today where for the most part gays are no longer looked down on or discriminated against because of their sexual preference.

To discipline anyone for comments made in the past when those comments would have been echoed by a large portion of society is completely wrong. A little common sense needs to be taken in to when historical comments are brought to light. Remember, this member was elected to parliament by his constituents who are probably well aware of his historical opinion on this matter. The fact that this particular tape has surfaced from that long ago is nothing more than political dirty tricks and American style politics.

As far as reopening the constitution for the purpose of putting one region or ethnic group above any other is wrong and will do more harm than good to the Federalist side and is just wrong. Why would I support anything politically that would allow a constitutional amendment declaring that Quebec is entitled to any type of recognition that my region is not entitled? We are ALL equal and should be treated as such!

Best regards,

[updated Mon Apr 07 16:32:21 -0400 2008]

Since many Canadians, including myself, remain opposed to the extended Afghanistan mission, they would be at best ambivalent about the Prime Minister looking 'statesmanlike' at the NATO meetings. I for one am not cheering that the thousand troops will be supplied. As for Mr. Lukiwski's comments, his remarks were truly ignorant and bigoted. However, I believe that his contrition is genuine. I do not subscribe to the idea of 'once a bigot, always a bigot.' Over time people can learn to change their points of view. As for political fallout, this will do little more than reinforce the idea that the Conservatives have a reactionary agenda waiting in the wings should they form a majority, and getting rid of Mr. Lukiwski will do nothing to change that. This is a only a flare up.

What is far more serious is Mr. Blackburn's musings about re-opening the Constitution in order to entrench Quebec's so-called 'nationhood'. Mr. Nanos speculated that he might be freelancing while Stephen Harper is out of the country. I have my doubts. No minister comments about anything in this country without the green light from the PMO, particularly about something as important as the Constitution. In this case, I think the Conservatives are making a huge mistake if they try this. Another Conservative prime minister tried pandering to separatists and Canadian voters kicked his party in the teeth.

[updated Mon Apr 07 16:35:17 -0400 2008]

This has become typical of Canada and its media. We have a life and death situation going on in Bucharest where Canada is looking for more assistance to fight the Taliban and the PM is appearing on the world stage with all that entails and what do we have?

A blood thirsty media and opposition focusing almost exclusively on comments made by an ordinary citizen made some 16 years ago which I agree were offensive but hardly deserving of the vitrole being expressed by pundits and the media.

The man stands up and apologizes, not once but twice, which everybody agrees was heartfelt and there has been no evidence that his conduct has been anything but exemplary since being elected but that's not good enough. It was a disgusting display of the pack mentality.

People say why don't politicians apologize when they make a mistake. Well now you have the answer. It's just not good enough to apolgize the MP needs to be drawn and quartered on Parliament Hill, thrown out of caucus and explain further what has changed his opinons towards the gay community.

Then we see and hear Bob Fife on CTV calling some Conservatives knuckle draggers and social Conservatives causing trouble in the party. Well in an effort to defend one group he excoriates another group. Remember all those that support these knuckle draggers by inference must be knuckle draggers as well. Bob Fife showd his own biggotry through his news reports. How is this any better than what Lukiwski said? I think there are "knuckle draggers" in all the parties. However, nobody accuses the Liberals or the NDP of having kuckledraggers in their caucuses. Its only the Conservatives that need this tag.

We then see all the pundits coming out talking about how the Conservatives will be hurt by this because of its Reform/Alliance origins and of course the infamous hidden agenda. I think I even heard people talking about the hidden agenda on CTV's Question Period on Sunday. This is really stepping over the line. One man's actions taint a whole party and everybody who supports that party. I don't think so but it fits into the narrative that people want to weave about the Conservative party.

Last time I looked this is suppose to be a free thinking country and because certain people don't believe in homosexuality or have a religious affiliation they are castigated. The media then wonders why in public opinion polls they are considered no better than used car salesmen.

In the meantime the PM went to Bucharest negotiated and did his country proud. He achieved his goals, obtained more help for our troops, made his presence known on the world stage and said that the Canadian government will set its own objectives for Kandahar province rather than Nato. In 2011 the mission will end but the humanitarian, diplomatic and reconstruction efforts will continue beyond 2011,

[updated Mon Apr 07 16:57:43 -0400 2008]

Interesting week ???? Blackburn's comment. if unguarded, will keep him on the backbenches, if he is lucky. If calculated, the comment will likely find ready support in Quebec and that is where the government needs to pick up seats. I believe Ignatieff said something similar in his run for the Liberal leadership. With a staff of 626 (see Vote 2.1---Prime Minister's Ofice), I rather doubt the PMO vetted or would have missed Blackburn's volitile remark so, at this stage, I accept he let something out that was not his position to do so. I believe we have to accept that all sorts of positions / thrusts are discussed IN caucus, as they should be, while some positions are accepted and others are rejected.

Now your other point of a remark made by an adult 16 years ago----apology accepted but something lingers. As one respondent put it, I will make up my own mind without a media prompt. As I said on the last blog topic, I believe an individual's recent history and recent affiliations help one "get the measure of the man" before we follow him (vote for him). "One is known by the friends they keep". I believe a person can reform and change for the better. I have made that point many times on this blog with respect to young offenders in helping the willing ones with education / skills training to get out of the hole they have placed themselves in. However, I rather doubt a bank would rehire a competent former employee who had done his time for swindling the bank----something lingers ! ! !

The issue of homophobia is far from dead, contrary to what we like to think. Out here in Lotus Land, there is a hot court case going on within the Anglican Church outside Victoria with two congregations on the opposite sides of the issue claiming a church building for their own. Homosexuality is not a dead issue with that church group. The issue has mostly gone "underground" in the country but it is very much there.

[updated Mon Apr 07 19:08:39 -0400 2008]

Re-opening now is not a good idea. Only will lead to the resurgance(spelled wrong I know) of the Bloc. And although Quebec leaving Canada would mean a shorter drive to Ont. I don't wish to relive that threat. As for the Lukiwski---its what's been said about the new Conservative party and they say it ain't true but videos don't lie. He should be striped of all duties in parliment. He says he regrets his comment but we all know he only regrets getting caught. We all say dumb things but I find the comments mean spirited.

Now coming down hard on Mr. Lukiwski is(in my opinion) an endorsement of what he said.

[updated Mon Apr 07 20:53:30 -0400 2008]

If only we had tapes of the remarks made by all MPs while partying 17 years ago! Even better if we had tapes of the Parlimentary Press Gallery parties 17 years go; hear they were very raunchy and rough things were said.
We need much less "holier than thou" attitudes from our commentators. "Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone."
Discipline Kukiwski? Nonsense, he has paid a high price already, amid extreme hypocrisy.

[updated Mon Apr 07 21:19:42 -0400 2008]

To answer your questions I'll start with Blackburn. I don't know who he is or what he said. From the context he must have said something re opening the constitution. If it is for only one specific reason and if it led to divisiveness then I'd have concerns. But if it is to make the many changes that I would like to see then I'm all for it. Decisions made in that time and under those circumstances are not what's best for us today. I would revise much of it. We would be very immature if we are not able to withstand the argments that night arise. I think we are educated and tolerant enough to reach a concensus.

Re Lukiwski (sp?). I would send him back to the backbenches for a while. Maybe bring him back again after a period of time, if his constituents wish to retain him. I'd let them decide. Harper insults me when he tries to tell me that his apology was heartfelt and sincere. Harper or anyone doesn't know what's inside his head (or heart) Only Lukiwski knows that. If I were in his position I would do the same .You would not know if I were being truthful or not. Anyway that's beside the point.
The issue is for Harper to decide. He has to dispell the perception that there are too many in his party who hold the right wing views of the Reform party. It's OK to forgive Lukiwski. We all do.
It's not whether Lukiwski is homophobic or even intolerant (or was then but is different now) We don't know that. It's that he has poor judgement. A mature adult of 40 and in a political position has to know better. It is his judgement that concerns me.
If I were Harper I would send to the backbenches. Then after a period of time call him into my office, ask him some pertinent questiuon to evaluate his judgement. Not questions about this issue but hypothetical, not related to this. just to see how the man thinks. From that I would decide if he is fit to be reinstated.

For political reasons Harper has to show that his party will not tolerate any sign of there's still remants of that kind of thinking. He has to take some negative action just for that reason. Failure to do so will leave a lingering doubt and he will have difficulty picking up his majority

As for Bucharest! It's just a charade. Harper knew long ago what was going to happen He probably wouldn't have gone if he hadn't been assured of that beforehand. Even then it doesn't come close to what's needed. 700 French troops to East Afghanistan. WE don't know how many Americans will be coming to Kandahar or what specifically they will be doing there. Two helicopters from Poland! Sheesh man ! Our troops will be coming home in a month.

What a great statesman! Looks like an effeminate choirboy, totally out of place.

I see that to fulfill the requirements of the Manley report they are now going to do a better job of communicating to the Canadian people. Educate them on the great work we are doing over there. Hee hee hee. Another insult . I and the Canadians I know, know more and the anything the miliyary or the government has ever told or will ever tell us about Afghanistan. Most Canadians rightfully would not believe anything that the government or military tells us.
Of course the media will be conplicit in this, just as the American media was after 9/11.
I thought that our public media (CBC) would be more indepentent. Last night they had Peter McKay on for over 1/2 hours spouting his propaganda. Whenever they have on someone re that subject it's nearly always Louis MacKenzie, Brian Macdonald. David Bercusin, Drapeau, Pellerain or some other military man or rightwing politician. Just go back over the CBC for the last while and see how often they have someone with a different point of view.
If it was independent journalism they would have two of equal stature one for each side of the issue. Anything else is not objective
And of course all newspapers are conservative. They have to be. It's the nature of their business.

[updated Tue Apr 08 08:36:06 -0400 2008]

Lukiwski apologised wholeheartedly. I watched the segment several times, and at no time did I sense any hesitance or prevarication. Very tellingly, Bill Siskay, an openly gay NDP MP noted that Lukiwski apologised to him personnally, and said that he accepted that apology at face value. Mr Lukiwsky will have the opportunity to explain himself to his constituants sooner or later and that is good enough for me.

The Blackburn comments are a different kettle of fish. I read that as an opportunistic pandering to the Quebec nationalist vote. The Conservatives like to say that they only want to stay out of provincial jurisdiction (While at the same time meddling in Ontario politics big time)

The real goal of this government IMO is to eviscerate the Federal government in order to ensure that there can never be a national program for almost anything. (See Tom Flanagan's musings for confirmation)

[updated Tue Apr 08 09:49:55 -0400 2008]

So, Nik. When is your next poll? Are you going to ask about leadership without qualifying the term? I'm especially interested in that.

A good leader has goals reflecting Canadian values, integrity and intelligence. Attracts and retains good people by trusting, empowering and supporting them. Maintains open communications. Is inclusive, respects others, etc.

A bad leader centralizes power and is coercive, manipulative and secretive. Doesn't trust his own mother. Censors everything and attacks detractors. Has a team comprising pit bulls and poodles.

A bad leader is blinded by ideology, regardless of fact situations.

Maybe you can tell where I'm coming from?

[updated Wed Apr 09 07:54:38 -0400 2008]