Political Compass

As the US election rumbles into its final 2 weeks, the name-calling from the right has become shriller and stupider than ever. Wingnuts on both sides of the 49th have taken to continually and inaccurately and irritatingly referring to Barack Obama as a "Marxist" and a "Socialist". Therefore, I thought it would be instructive to take a look at where all the parties and candidates, Canadian and USian, stand on the Political Compass.

First, Canada's political parties:

Stephen Harper is to the left of his own party:

Now here's the chart for the US election, with Stephen Harper added to show where he stands in relation to the American candidates. And... whoops! Harpercons take note: Barack Obama is just slightly more Marxist than Stephen Harper (but not nearly as Marxist as the Pope).

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Just go read. (But down the coffee first.)

Yo, Harper

Stephen Harper's probably never been accused of being "too original", but plagiarizing speeches?:

"Prime Minister Stephen Harper essentially plagiarized parts of his March 20, 2003, speech in the House of Commons supporting Canada's participation in the invasion of Iraq from one given two days earlier by then-Australian prime minister John Howard, Liberal Bob Rae charged Tuesday."

LAME-O.

Bad math

With his new proposal to get tough on 14-year-old criminals, Harper's definitely clicked into something that resonates with his pitchfork and flaming torch-wielding base. Nobody seems to really care that a lot of kids make mistakes and do stupid things, and that wrecking their lives by sending them to hardcore prison probably won't result in a better citizen when it's all said and done.

It should be obvious to anyone with two halves to rub together why this is a bad idea, but it seems like a lot of people are okay with it -- "if you don't want to get gang-raped, don't do the crime" is the rationale. What I find curious is that most of these are the same people who were all in favour of raising the age of consent to 16.

So 14 is old enough to get gang-raped in prison, but not old enough to have consensual sex with a 21-year-old girl or boyfriend -- that sound about right? Because to me, something about this doesn't quite compute. But again, maybe it's just me.

Harper's flawed fundamentals

From A Creative Revolution:




(Nice work, guys!)

GST cut to 5% effective midnight

It's New Year's Eve and Harpie's on the Campaign Trail. As reported yesterday, he returned to the scene of his previous GST announcement, an electronics store in Mississauga:

"Harper is to visit the same electronics store on Monday in Mississauga, Ont., where he first unveiled the Conservative party's pledge to reduce the goods and services tax to five per cent from seven per cent over five years."

I just watched the dork Live on TV, where he announced that "2008 will be a Happy New Year for Canadian taxpayers, as the GST will be cut from 7 to 6 to 5%, 3 years ahead of schedule". "From 7 to 6 to 5%" appears to be the operative buzz-phrase, a mantra intoned several times during the presser.

Though a GST cut sounds good, it's mostly optics: in reality it only rewards those who buy the most "big ticket" items. On a purchase of $50, the GST cut saves you a grand total of 50 cents. Wow. An income tax cut would be far more equitable, since it would benefit everyone who works and pays income tax -- we wouldn't have to buy a new car or fridge or stereo system to realize noticeable savings. Back in late 2005, when Harper made the same announcement on the campaign trail, economists agreed:

"If you want tax cuts that are going to promote work, going to promote saving, help us invest more and raise living standards in the future, the GST is not the tax you would go after." Robson said it would be better to cut personal income taxes."

What are the odds of Harper scoring a majority out of this Christmas re-gifting? From 7 to 6 to 5%?

Is it just me

or does Steve need a teeth-cleaning?What's up with that? Picky picky, yes I know. But if I can afford to get my grinders cleaned twice a year surely the PM can. Canada's image is at stake here -- come on Steve, your dentist called, he's ready to deploy the scaler with 15 minutes notice.

Parliament delayed is Parliament denied

Parliament was supposed to resume sitting in less than 2 weeks (September 17), and oh my my, there'll be some wild-and-woolly Question Periods once that happens. But not so fast! Yesterday Harper announced he'll delay the return of parliament by a month, to October 16:

"Prime Minister Stephen Harper put the rumours to rest and announced Tuesday afternoon that he will delay the return of Parliament until Oct. 16 and begin a new session with a speech from the throne. Rumours have been swirling around Parliament Hill in recent weeks that Harper was considering proroguing Parliament. The House of Commons was scheduled to resume Sept. 17.

By delivering a speech from the throne, Harper could engineer the defeat of his own minority government because it requires a vote of confidence in the Commons."

A Christmas election campaign? Fine, an election campaign might be an even better time to talk about this and this. Oh yeah, and this, because quite frankly I have trouble believing it when a Bush-humping little sycophant like Harper says this. Especially when he's spending all kinds of our money like that. Election? Bring it!

Profiles in Cognitive Dissonance

Harper says "Canada hasn't been this united since 1967"???

"EDMONTON (CP) - Prime Minister Stephen Harper says it's been 40 years since Canada has been as united as it stands today and he credits his government's popularity in Quebec." (...)

"The prime minister also told the crowd that his government has introduced a bill that would give Alberta five extra seats in the Commons to reflect its growing population."

"...Harper said he wants to make it impossible for 'the Liberals and the NDP to ever wage another campaign against the West.'"

Excuse me? Canada hasn't been this united? Harper's purposely made deeper and wider divides among Canadians than any PM I can remember, and my memory goes back to Pearson. Even conservatives can't agree about Harper.

More and more, Harper seems to be following the playbook of his friends in the white house. If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually believe it. Now who was it that said that first?

Word of the day: "ordinary"

Everyone else has had a go at this topic today, I might as well put in my 2 centavos.

And the topic is: Ordinary. Having failed to make Canadians really really love him for his scintillating personality, PM Harper is trying a new strategy: make us love him because he's "ordinary" -- the "Tim Horton's Prime Minister" -- unlike Stephane Dion, who is "not ordinary" -- the "Starbucks Opposition Leader" perhaps.

It worked for Georgie Bush during the 2004 election campaign. Remember all the right-wing shit spewed about that latte-swilling liberal elitist (and war hero) John Kerry? Dubya's ordinariness somehow trumped Kerry's distinguished military service (as opposed to Georgie McAwol's military service "lite"). "Ordinary" plays well in the "heartland", and Harper's looking to cement his place in Canadian history as one of our great "ordinary" guys. Sounds inspiring or what? In that spirit, the July issue of Chatelaine is running one article each on Harper and Dion -- Harper's a celebration of his and his family's ordinariness and the other a piece on Dion's wife, Janine Krieber, a PHD who's anything but ordinary.

The wankosphere was quick to seize on the Krieber article, suggesting that her strength and intelligence, not to mention her last name (channelling 1977), might be negatives for Dion out in the vast wasteland of Canadian ordinariness. Some suggest that ordinary Canadians won't be able to identify with how Krieber supposedly "rules the Krieber-Dion roost", even *gasp* buying Dion's boxers for him. Extraordinary! Except that it's not, and any woman who's been hooked up with a guy for any length of time knows how ordinary this really is. I was the official gauchie-buyer for both of my exes, it just came with the territory. For the last one in particular it wasn't an act of kindness as much as an environmental necessity; left to his own devices he'd wear out (abuse?) his underwear until it was literally hanging off him in tattered shreds stuck together with duct tape. He'd only buy new undies when he ran out of duct tape, and even then they wouldn't be "new" new -- he'd get used ones at Value Village. (So wrong.)

Bottom (haha) line: the wifely buying of spousal underwear is extremely ordinary. I'm amused at the intimation that it means Dion's too pussy and not "ordinary" enough to be a leader. If anything, the fact that gauchie-buying is his wife's gig shows that Dion is very ordinary. On the other hand, if Harper won't even allow Laureen to buy his boxers, he's even more of a control freak than we thought.