Old Dogs Suggest Old Tricks

One of the failings of Paul Martin's fabled "Board" was the prominence of many of charter members. It sometimes seemed as though the Board was more concerned about convincing Canadian of their brilliance than demonstrating their ability to run a country. This tendency contributed to the rather premature end of the 'Golden Age of Paul Martin."

One might think that the rather their spectacular failure would encourage the members of the Board to step back from political life for a time. Yet Scott "Beer and Popcorn" Reid doesn't seem to share any embarrassment in his advice to the Liberals offered in the Toronto Star. His advice will sound a little familiar to anyone who has been listening to Team Martin expound for the last 10 years. And it has much of the weakness of that advice.

Among his advice is that the Liberals need to "Define Harper." This is presented as a fresh new insight as thought the Liberals have up to those point have been gentle with Harper. Anyone who watched TV in the last two election cycles got a big dose of the Liberal version of Stephen Harper. Unfortunately by the second time around the Liberal version of Harper didn't find a lot of believers. The challenge that Scott Reid and many Liberals face is that they genuinely believed that the Prime Minister is on the extreme of Canadian public opinion.

Unfortunately for the Liberals Canadians won't have a to wait for the Liberals to define Harper again. He is systematically building a record on which the public can judge him. Undoubtedly some of his actions will be less popular then others but the Stephen Harper of Scott Reid's mind is unlikely to emerge because that Stephen Harper is simply a fantasy of Mr. Reid's mind. Unless the Liberals come to grips with this reality they may be spending a lot of time on the Opposition side of the House.

The Thrill of the Chase

Since I grew up without a natural hockey team to cheer for and a lack of appetite or serious interest in sports I've always taken the Stanley Cup playoffs a little less seriously than many Canadians. Yet its impossible not to get a little caught up in playoff excitement,

Of course the buzz in the Lower Mainland is pretty quiet since the Canucks couldn't even make it into the playoffs but fortunately I'm non-aligned. I support any Canadian team. Now this could easily become a little awkward as there's a pretty good chance that Calgary and Edmonton will meet in the second round. I'd like to consider a no lose type of situation but I happen to watch most of the games with a bunch of Edmonton fans (in the fanatic sense of the word) who do not accept my theory of nationalistic theory of fandom. They all cheered for Tampa Bay in the 2004 finals out of principle. Regardless it would be nice to see a Canadian team take home the Cup. It would be a nice reminder to Canadians of the benefits of Conservative rule.

Claiming the left or abandoning the center?

As the candidate line up to fight for the leadership of Canada's "Natural Governing Party" there seems to be a strong trend developing everyone is running on the left. From Bob Rae to Gerald Kennedy to Ken Dryden everyone wants to be the "progressive" candidate.

Now of course these Liberals explain they're really above ideology but the reality is that the center right seems to be sorely lacking a candidate in the race. The only candidate who seems to be resisting the rush to the left is Maurizio Belilacqua who while more capable then many candidates isn't high on anyone list of likely winners. (I suppose Joe Volpe is not a candidate of the left either but he's really below ideology.)

Now it seems to be conventional wisdom that the Liberals need to chase NDP voters. Yet as John Ivison points out the numbers don't seem to add up. Simply put the Conservatives won because of voters who switched from the Liberals. Oddly many Liberal supporters seem to insist they should concede the those center-right voters who switched to the Conservatives last time to chase NDP voters.

As a Conservative partisan this scenario leaves me feeling pretty good. There are a significantly number of voters who voted for the Paul Martin Liberals specifically because they thought that the Liberals were relatively competent and understanding of business. In 2006 they stayed with the Liberals due to doubts about Conservative craziness. Yet a Liberal move to the left coupled with a couple years of non-crazed Conservative rule could shake loose a lot of Liberal voters. Ironically the Liberals seem almost intent on allowing Stephen Harper a lot of room to build a new "Natural Governing Party" while the Liberals chase the elusive split left.

Suggested Reading

I don't seem to be capable of consistently updating this blog which likely has been the reason that my readership has remained exceedingly modest. There are a number of reasons for the spareness of posting but the biggest challenge is that I so often lack thoughts that seem worthy of putting on the Internet. Not to say that what I put here is brilliant or even mildly interesting but I am confident that it's groundbreaking compared to what I don't write about.

So rather then try to create another meadering and generic post I thought I'd recommend some places that you should be reading where are you much more likely to find food for your mind. Here's four sites you should be reading:

1. The American Scene: Possibly my favorite blog. Produced by two young conservative thinkers it combines thought-provaking policy discussions with occasionally bursts of absurdity. It often seems like the blogosphere is full of writers who are simply redundent- everyone repeats the party line on every subject. The American Scene offers something very different. Reading it gives us a glimpse into a new type of conservatism which is struggling to be born.

2. First Things: The well known magazine has recently added what amounts to a daily blog on the site. Since Richard John Nehaus has long penned a blog-like column for the magazine it works very well.

3. Let It Bleed: My favorite Canadian politcal blog. No one slices and dices the logic of the Canadian left more incesively.

4. Mark Steyn: There's a reason why Mark Steyn seems so omnicpresent online. It's because when he's at the top of his game there's virtually no writer on earth who can combine humour, a sense of history and big ideas along with occasional show tunes like Mark Steyn.

TV Picks

The grand 400 channel universe is pretty much here but sadly it seems to simply consist of many more channels with nothing worthwhile on. However it does make channel surfing much more enjoyable since one can spend a fair amount of time flicking through the channels before absolutely determining that nothing interesting is on.

That being said there is some quality TV still being made. Here's some of my recommended shows:

- The West Wing: I am rather ideological in my viewing tastes but even I have to admit the West Wing can be brilliant. I just recently watch the 2nd and 3rd series on DVD and I'm pretty much convinced that Aaron Sorkin is a genius. The politics of the show are often simplistic. The conservative characters are generally charicatures and losers but the show has far too much brilliance to be ignored.

- How I Met Your Mother: Probably my favourite new comedy. It's a fairly typical sitcom with a slightly conservative message about young adults who (mostly) are actually trying to grow up. Plus its very funny.

- Arrested Development: It's now off the air which is too bad. Arrested Development is consistently out there but hilarious. It combines all types of humour in such a sophfisticated manner that it's hard not to appreciate it.

- Scrubs: Like Arrested Development it has a strong sense of the absurd but Scrubs has a much warmer heart.

- Veronica Mars: I've always had a soft spot for mysteries and Veronica Mars girl detective is combines mysteries with an fairly acute look at teenage life.

Fear and Loathing in the Blogosphere

Recently the Washington Post decided to shake things up by hiring a conservative blogger. The reaction was likely a little more intense then they had expected. Seemingly the entire leftwing of the blogosphere rose up in outrage. The thought that the Post would give a blog to a conservative writer was too much for many. It took very little time for things to turn ugly. Ben Domenech was accused of being a racist and many other highly dubious and disturbing things. The response lacked any pretense of a civil debate. The left had simply decided that Domenech must be destroyed.

Unfortunately for the young writer he had already sown the seeds of his own destruction. In their attempts to bring him down a few bloggers find past writings which bore striking evidence of plagiarism. Soon hundreds of people were pouring through his old articles and several questionable examples were found. Domenech resigned from the Washington Post and admitted that he had made some bad decisions in his past.

And what have we learned from all this? Nothing good. Despite what some would claim Domenech's plagiarism is not a statement on the conservative movement or the Republicans but more on how easy it is for writers to get lazy. There have been numerous plagiarism scandals in recent years involving people from across the political spectrum. The advances in the Internet and search engines will make it increasingly easy to uncover plagiarism while the vast reams of writing out there will continue to tempt writers struggling to come of with prose.

The more concerning part of this story is the intensity and hatred of those who opposed the blog in the beginning. Uncovering plagiarism was simply a means to an end. That end was to force Domenech out of the Post. While Domenech was obviously particularly provocative as a conservative activist who has worked for several Republicans it's not like former political staff never cross over into the media.

Yet the furious nature of the attacks are indicative of the increasingly politicalized nature of the media and culture. Many on the left simply do not wish to see any conservative appear to gain ground in the media. To be fair many conservatives are just as willing to close themselves off from critical voices. Yet if we continue to drift apart conducting politics will grow increasingly challenging. It may seem a little novel but perhaps we should start asking for a little civility in the blogosphere.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Despite the fact the I've had a week to adjust to the idea of Prime Minister Stephen Harper the words still seem a little surreal. It's not that I'm quacking in fear of what scary neo-conservative ideas Harper will try to introduce. It's more that having spent a great deal of time and effort in the past four years working towards this day it's still hard to believe that it has come.

It was not that long ago that I was in Ottawa in the summer of 2003. In some encounters with various members of the then Leader of the Canadian Alliance entourage I was given the general plan as to how Harper would deal with Paul Martin. In short the logic was that Martin was a lock to get 200+ seats. The only saving grace for the Alliance was that the Progressive Conservatives would be even more devastated than the Alliance. After Martin had effectively devastated both parties the Alliance would rise from the ruins. In an election or two or three.

At least one person disagreed- Stephen Harper. In fact he had already started the process that would lead to a merger of the two opposition parties. He then proceeded to run a fairly masterful leader campaign followed by a less masterful election campaign.

The time that followed the 2004 election gave plenty of opportunities for the doubters to find examples as to why Stephen Harper would never be Prime Minister. And yet in a week Stephen Harper will be sworn in as the next Prime Minister of Canada. Will his term be a success? I don't think that anyone knows yet. However he has already accomplished so much more than he was ever expected to. It takes a bold person to bet against him now.