More MSM Harper Bashing: U. S. Style

Just when you thought that only such Canadian organizations like the Toronto Star were being outsourced to produce attack ads, this nice gem by The Nation disabused me of that notion when I read it this morning. Contained within are the same tired phrases employed by Liberals to brand Prime Minister Stephen Harper's reasonable government with the "scary" label. "Christian Right." "Worst excesses of Bush's presidency." "Bellicosity, slash-and-burn attitude." And supporting Israel's legitimate right to self-defense is a big no-no since, as Joel Johannesen over at ProudToBeCanadian so often puts it, that ain't liberal. And of course, trotting out the names of fundamentalists Ralph Reed and Pat Robertson helps multiply the fright factor.

As an American, I'd go for a President Stephen J. Harper over President George W. Bush any day. I consider him to be more of a McCain-North than Bush-Light. Liberals like to complain that Prime Minister Harper is no fan of the Kyoto Protocol. As a conservative environmentalist (yeah, we exist), I accept the scientific consensus that global warming is real and that while we may be on the upswing of a natural cycle, humans are certainly amplifying it at a minimum. Therefore, it is our responsibility (one of our favorite words) to reduce our impact on creation as much as we can. If we really believe that the government that governs the best is the one that governs the least, we should surely apply this principle to our dominion of the planet. But I digress.

Any agreement which does not recognize the problems of China and India's current and projected emissions is fundamentally flawed. This applies to Kyoto. Instead of addressing one of this century's greatest issues in a common-sense manner which engages both emerging powers, it is essentially another redistributionist treaty which will ultimately fail. Harper knows this and is right to favor a "Made in Canada" approach to cutting emissions. 12 y of Liberal government clearly accomplished little, as this little barb demonstrates. While I would charge that the government's plan is not aggressive enough, it is still a step in the right direction and should stimulate the discussion of concrete solutions.

What the article also fails to mention is that the Conservatives were elected earlier this year to replace a party which had been in power for 12 y, developed a sense of entitlement and got mired in a particularly rank combination of scandals and incompetence. Instead of using these similar circumstances to take a justifiable shot at the outgoing GOP majority in Congress, the article demonstrates its bias towards conservatives in all conditions.

Liberals consistently pride themselves on their open mindedness, but this assessment of Harper's performance clearly lacks the objectivity required for a strong argument. Members of both parties, Republican or Democrat, Conservative or Liberal, should be reminded that arguments should be won by facts and not pure rhetoric, as governing from the truth will ultimately deliver maximum benefit to the people.