Well, at least you can't say you didn't see it coming (emphasis added):
Dig up dirt on Liberals, U.S. pollster advises Tory group
OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government should do its best over the coming year to dig up embarrassing information on the former Liberal administration and portray it as corrupt, a prominent U.S. Republican pollster has told an influential group of Conservatives.
Speaking a day after meeting Friday with Harper, Frank Luntz described the Tories as allies of the Republicans and counselled them on how to make their message more attractive to voters.
"Your Liberal government was corrupt," Mr. Luntz told more than 200 members of the Civitas Society. "It was disgusting. The way they wasted your hard-earned tax dollars was a disgrace.
"I want you to leave here committed to insisting that the Conservative government hold that previous Liberal government accountable, that you do oversight, that you do investigation, that you continue doing it for the next year so that every Canadian knows and will never forget and will never allow another government to steal more from them," Mr. Luntz said to applause.
And what's so special about that "next year" timeframe? Oh, right ...
After a year, the Conservatives risk being blamed for anything wrong that comes to light, he warned.
Sort of like how, in the U.S., the Republicans risked being blamed for things that went wrong a year after Bill Clinton left office, right? Oh, wait ...
9 comments:
As I speculated here, there's a growing body of evidence that suggests that HarperCrit is taking his orders (or at least serious coaching) from the Rethuglikans...
I love this. It’s pay back.
I used to tell Canadians, whenever I went to Canada, that Canada is the only country in the world where you’re going to convince people you’re going to get a “Progressive” and a “Conservative” out of the same box. Then somebody in Texas decided that if you can convince Canadians you can get a “Progressive” and a “Conservative” out of the same box, you can convince Americans you can get “Compassion” and a Conservative out of the same box.
Hail Harper.
Oh Seerious One:
The notion of a "Progressive Conservative" actually can work - although the current bunch in the CPC couldn't find a progressive bone in their collective heads.
Going back a few years, we had guys like Peter Lougheed (former Alberta Premier) who were social progressives and fiscally conservative. It seems like an oxymoron, but Lougheed actually achieved quite an impressive balance.
There's a difference between being genuine about trying to achieve a balance, and misrepresenting yourself (which is what Bush does)
Luntz-spin and what to expect from Harper's New Tories:
The significance of the Frank Luntz advice goes beyond the comments he made at this session. Luntz is infamous for his advice to Republicans to lie and distort as part of the Republican "framing" of issues, and election tactics.
Luntz has a handbook – over 100 pages – which is available on the Internet and which each Republican candidate gets and is expected to work through. That handbook is an education in dirty politics, use of half truths, Orwellian newspeak and other tactics, which the Republicans regularly practice in the USA.
Want to bet that handbook is being distributed to New Tory candidates?
If you want to be ahead of the curve in Canadian politics during the next 12 months, read Frank Luntz, and then compare his advice to the public pronouncements of Harper et al. From "universal child care" to "corruption", you will find examples cropping up time after time over the next short while.
The only way to combat this kind of deceptive politicking, is to read Don't Think of an Elephant, an to reframe the issues immediately, before the New Tory newspeak framing takes root in public discourse.
that Canada is the only country in the world where you’re going to convince people you’re going to get a “Progressive” and a “Conservative” out of the same box.
Well, I know it's a difficult concept for people who don't actually understand what the word "progressive" means.
Progressive means "moving on." Not re-visiting or re-opening issues that have been settled or cannot be settled to everyone's satisfaction.
Then again, Americans are still debating the value of apartheid, the value of torture and the value of creationism to scientific inquiry, so I guess on Planet America, nothing is ever settled.
If you missed it, here is a link from late last year when The Daily Show's Samantha Bee interviews Luntz. Crooks and Liars has the link.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/04/19.html
Here's a link to the Luntz Republican Playbook that Cat is referring to.
When I read about Luntz being in Canada, only one question occurred to me: "What's that smell?"
Further to Harper's agenda - his views of conservatives and their mission regarding moral values and their role in politics:
Let Harper speak for himself.
In an article headed Rediscovering The Right Agenda, published only 3 years ago (remember Harper saying he has stayed true to his core? This is his core), in June 2003 (see website of Christian Coalition International Canada (Inc.) www.ccicinc.org, Harper makes these points:
• conservatives are in a fight against liberalism;
• the non-conservatives have descended into "nihilism" due to their support of moral relativism;
• conservatives have to ensure a return of our society to conservative values, including clear right and wrong answers to ethical and political questions;
• conservatives are under attack by liberalism, which some tribunals such as rights agencies, have as their aim "the actual banning of conservative views";
• conservatives must bring in more and deeper tax cuts, and eliminate corporate subsidies and industrial-development schemes (take that, Maritimers!);
• conservatives in Canada must put "hard power" (troops) behind the moral right of our society in its clash with those other societies whose values differ from ours and who are our enemies;
• clear right and wrong answers have a place in protecting the family;
• conservatives must give greater place to social conservatism in politics.
Are these summaries of his ideology correct? Read the article yourself, and read some of these extracts:
• What is the challenger per Harper?
"The real challenge is therefore not economic, but the social agenda of the modern Left. Its system of moral relativism, moral neutrality and moral equivalency is beginning to dominate its intellectual debate and public-policy objectives."
• Why are liberals wrong, per Harper?
"This descent into nihilism should not be surprising because moral relativism simply cannot be sustained as a guiding philosophy. It leads to silliness such as moral neutrality on the use of marijuana or harder drugs mixed with its random moral crusades on tobacco. It explains the lack of moral censure on personal foibles of all kinds, extenuating even criminal behaviour with moral outrage at bourgeois society, which is then tangentially blamed for deviant behaviour. On the moral standing of the person, it leads to views ranging from radical responsibility-free individualism, to tribalism in the form of group rights."
• Where is this headed, per Harper (and what do you think this view means with regard to appointments to tribunals, use of notwithstanding clause, appointment of judges etc)?
"The logical end of this thinking is the actual banning of conservative views, which some legislators and "rights" commissions openly contemplate."
• Are we in for deeper tax cuts, ala Bush – per Harper?
"There is, of course, much more to be done in economic policy. We do need deeper and broader tax cuts, further reductions in debt, further deregulation and privatization, and especially the elimination of corporate subsidies and industrial-development schemes. In large measure, however, the public arguments for doing so have already been won. Conservatives have to more than modern liberals in a hurry."
• Where is the battleground (and what does this mean will preoccupy a Harper majority government)?
"The truth of the matter is that the real agenda and the defining issues have shifted from economic issues to social values, so conservatives must do the same."
• What steps must conservatives take regarding protecting the family, per Harper?
"This same argument applies equally to a range of issues involving the family (all omitted from the Throne Speech), such as banning child pornography, raising the age of sexual consent, providing choice in education and strengthening the institution of marriage. All of these items are key to a conservative agenda."
• How about moral questions in our foreign affairs?
"... the emerging debates on foreign affairs should be fought on moral grounds. Current challenges in dealing with terrorism and its sponsors, as well as the emerging debate on the goals of the U.S. as the sole superpower, will be well served by conservative insights on preserving historic values and moral insights on right and wrong."
And:
"Conservatives must take the moral stand, with our allies, in favour of the fundamental values of our society, including democracy, free enterprise and individual freedom. This moral stand should not just give us the right to stand with our allies, but the duty to do so and the responsibility to put "hard power" behind our international commitments."
• How important are "baby steps" (incrementalism) in achieving these conservative values, per Harper (and what does this forecast for the way in which Harper will govern)?
"Rebalancing the conservative agenda will require careful political judgment. First, the issues must be chosen carefully....Second, we must realize that real gains are inevitably incremental... conservatives should be satisfied if the agenda is moving in the right direction, even if slowly."
• Can conservatives attract Liberals, per Harper (what about Quebeckers?)?
"Many traditional Liberal voters, especially those from key ethnic and immigrant communities, will be attracted to a party with strong traditional views of values and family. This is similar to the phenomenon of the "Reagan Democrats" in the United States, who were so important in the development of that conservative coalition."
Welcome to this conservative revolutionary, whose heroes are Bush, Reagan, Thatcher, Frank Luntz ....
Post a Comment