I could talk this morning about Secretary of State Helena Guergis jeopardizing Stephane Dion and Michael Ignatieff’s security and possibly their lives while they were in Afghanistan under news blackout – all in the name of hyper-partisanship (and by extension Stephen Harper and his Conservative strategists in the PMO jeopardizing their lives – because in this control-freak environment they run, no one releases a press statement like this without their knowledge or approval), and I could talk about how hypocritical it makes Guergis look after her past statements of wanting decorum in government, but there are others out there who have ably covered that angle. Instead, I’m going to focus on the fact that this is another playcall out of the Republican playbook that the Conservatives have decided they’re going to employ as a tactic up here. That strategy has been employed before, which is for the Conservatives to try to claim only their party loves and supports the troops, and everyone else are Taliban lovers.
The attempted politicization strategy of the Canadian Armed Forces has been going on for awhile with this bunch, but this latest salvo that comes from Guergis and her Conservative puppet masters is beyond the pale, even for this sorry lot. As others have said, it is usually tin-pot dictators who politicize the army, not Western democracies.
However, because their mentors in the US of A have done it and had success with it in the past, and this sorry Conservative bunch worships the ground George Bush and his strategists walk on, it’s no surprise that they would stoop to new lows in demonizing the Opposition and trying to imply their stance on Afghanistan somehow makes them disloyal or not supportive of our troops.
Oh it’s the old Most Partisan Government In History argument again, is it?
This particular issue aside (it does appear that it was a mistake for Guergis to say anything), it’s utter nonsense to suggest this government is somehow more partisan than its predecessors. The reason it happens to look that way to Liberals is because the shoe is on the other foot now; when it was Liberal governments doing the same thing, Liberals either didn’t notice or didn’t care.
Note that I’m not saying that this is a good thing. I would hope that Harper would hold himself to a higher standard and raise the bar. But he’s not doing anything any worse than any of this Liberal predecessors in terms of "being partisan". And it’s simply jaw-dropping for a Liberal to suggest that it’s the Conservatives who are trying to "monopolize patriotism". This from the party that has for forty years attempted to blur the line between "Canadian values" and "Liberal values" – and accused any conservative politician as being uncanadian by default simply for proposing policies to the right of the Liberals.
Oh, and by claiming that most Conservatives "worship the ground George Bush and his strategists walk on" you basically demonstrate you don’t actually know many Conservatives.
No previous Canadian gov’t has attempted to use "support for the troops" as a wedge issue. It simply has not happened.
This is about as stupid as accusing Dion of Taliban sympathizings when he asked about the treatment of prisoners. (and in case you guys forgot – the Geneva conventions need to be respected as much in self interest (ie supporting OUR troops, should they be captured) as in respecting human dignity).
And it does closely copy the GWBush line, hence we don’t need to know many conservatives (and I for one do know many) to know who you aspire to be.
Guergis said nothing about Mr. Dion’s policy as she knows nothing about foreign affairs. She only knows how to slag. It is a sorry state that this is the type of women the Conservatives put forth.
<i> This particular issue aside…</i>
Shorter Aaron Lee-Wudrick: If we set aside the issue at hand, the issue at hand is blah blah blah the Fiberals are just as bad…
Helena Guergis should be censured for her irresponsible comments.
"Helena Guergis should be censured for her irresponsible comments"
Pot, meet kettle……