Saturday, July 29, 2006

"And if you don't like THOSE principles, hey, I've got others."


The people in charge of the Conservative Party of Canada are clearly learning well from their American masters, especially in the area of pompous, blowhard rhetoric. Catch a couple excerpts from their latest bit of sleaze:

"Our Conservative Prime Minister, Stephen Harper was amongst the first of the world's leaders to take a principled stand on the new turmoil in the Mid-East."

These days, apparently, it's not physically possible to just take a "stand" anymore. No, one must always take a "principled stand" since principled stands are way cooler than regular stands, what with all the principle involved and everything. (It doesn't matter, of course, if the principle is based on ignorance, bigotry or just overwhelming stupidity -- the principle's the thing.)

And as for this delightful bit:

"Since then, leaders the world over have risen to stand with Stephen Harper."

well ... I don't think so, Tim.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

At least the Blogging Tories don't hava a full-fledged Likud party operative on their blogroll, which is more than I can say for the Liberal Party of Canada and Progressive Bloggers:

"Just watching CNN. The ticker reveals that Ariel Sharon's condition has taken a turn for the worst. It's not that this is shocking, it's that I have always maintained hope. Having interned for Ariel Sharon in the Likud Party Office in Israel in 2002 and lieu of the current conflict I can't help but write with an indescribable sense of sadness. My prayers go out to Sharon, our great leader, his family and the people of Israel for stregnth in these difficult times."


If you check the article there is a picture of said Liberal/Progressive blogger cheerfully posing with the Butcher of Sabra and Chatila, Ariel Sharon. Actually, he's kinda leering at her boobies, it's pretty creepy.

michelleoliel.blogspot.com/2006/07/ariel-sharon.html

And not only is she a Liberal blogger, check out this young Likud/Liberal Israeli/Canadian's impressive CV:


"While studying political science at York University, I was employed on a virtually full-time basis, with the Right Honourable Paul Martin’s leadership campaign. Subsequently, I assumed the role of Director of Opposition Watch for the 2004 Federal election until I commenced law school. I have also worked for the Honourable Jim Peterson, Minister for International Trade."


Now, you've spent a fair bit of time over the past couple of years critcizing Conservatives and Harper for being in bed with Bush and the war on terror, which up until this week anyway was an accuation more superficial than substantive IMHO.

Now, we've got an actual Likud operative working at the highest levels of the Liberal Party
of Canada. Who deems it appropriate to refer to Ariel Sharon as "our dear leader".

If the Blogging Tories had a Likud member openly blogging, organizing for the CPC at the highest levels and referring to Sharon as "Dear Leader", what do you suppose the reaction would be? And are you going to address this, or let it go with a wink and a nod?

GoodGrief said...

And your point is what? What does that have to do with the posting in question? No liberal or NDPer or quite frankly CPoCer ever claimed that all their followers were clean as a whistle andf without strange delusions that were not consistent with the party's policies.
For example, I'm not responsible for the fellows who came to install my neighbour's garage and played American right wing radio at megadecibels, with all the profanity, hate, racism and misogyny that was broadcast. I did take to time to go out and advise them to tone down the radio, as we live in a mulitcultural neighbourhood and the radio broadcast was insulting to everyone who was not WASP. By the way, I am a WASP and I found it embarrassing and degrading. I love my neighbours - they've been there for me through all my troubles, and they don't deserve to be denigrated and insulted in their own homes. For whatever tale you can trot out, it can be matched tit for tat, so what is the purpose, particularly when it does not pertain to the topic at hand.

Self delusion is an interesting phenomenum. With a severely depressed person, it consists of believing that one is of no consequence, that they have done some good but mostly failed, that no one would miss them. With the other type of self delusion, it means distorting reality to enhance their own image and those of the people they admire and aspire to be. The depressive will do no harm to anyone else, but untreated will end up in the morgue with a toe tag labeled "Suicide". The other sort will end up justifying any and all acts taken in support of their own stance, and others will end up in the morgue, but never those who instigated and/or supported the actions unleashed by their self delusion, nor any of their families. One is a treatable syndrome - through psychotherapy and chemical intervention. The other is untreatable, because that sort of self delusion will never admit that they are wrong. Guess which belongs to each category.