Stephen Harper is truly a pathetic facsimile for a leader. In yesterday’s National Post article entitled “It's been two years, where will he go now?", we are privileged to learn about Stephen Harper’s self assessment of his two years in office and the unchartered nature of where he is headed, with the statement:
"Along the way, we've made the occasional mistake, but experience is a great teacher," Mr. Harper admitted. "We've listened. We've learned. We've grown. We have tacked and weaved in the face of wind and storm, but our final destination -- a better Canada for all of us -- remains the same."
To which Don Martin appropriately responded: "Okay, yuck."
As for "tacked and weaved", I wholeheartedly beg to differ, as I think Harper’s mantra and modus operandi is better summed up by Lie Conceal Fabricate. And I’m not just talking about the scandalous income trust treatment afforded by his back handed government.
Evidently Don Martin of the National Post is having a serious rethink about just how alive today the income trust betrayal is in the minds of voters.
On December 31, 2007 Don Martin tried to fly the lead balloon idea in reference to Jim Flaherty that Flaherty “seems to have finally put the income trust flip-flop behind him.”
More realistically, Don Martin yesterday pointed out that:
“The five priorities of the 2006 election, spliced into 170 Blue Book promises, have largely been met with only the odd flip-flop, the most spectacular being when the government reversed its position and opted to tax income trusts.”
Again, I beg to differ.
What Don Martin and all Canadians need to realize is that the income trust issue is about so much more than income trusts and about whether a government should have the right to summarily “raid seniors nest eggs” to the tune of $35 billion. The income trust issue is about whether we as Canadians have a transparent and accountable government as we were promised and as we should demand at the very minimum.
The central rationale for braking the income trust issue is the unproven allegation that income trusts cause tax leakage. Seldom is proof for the central tenet of a major policy so readily available and so easily discerned.
So where is it? Where is the proof of tax leakage? Where is the transparency derived from 18 pages of blacked out documents? Where is the accountability for this policy’s many adverse outcomes, apart from Flaherty’s reprehensible plea of “It’s not my fault”?
Apart from Diane Francis and occasional others, where is the press? As one example of the press' co-joined indifference: is the press not even remotely aroused by the fact that the government demanded that the 18 blacked out pages issued under the Access to Information Act be returned immediately?
Democracy should not be thought of as the default mode that societies like Canada revert to in the absence of ongoing scrutiny and vigilance by its citizens. Whereas plutocracies are.
That is the ultimate destination of the short journey on which Stephen Harper is taking Canadians when he is “tacking and weaving” and allowing an embedded plutocracy to take hold unfettered in this country that for lack of better definition goes by the name of Corporate Canada’s Controlling Elite (CCCE).
What’s their common modus operandi and jelly bean mentality?:
Answer: Lie Conceal Fabricate.
To quote Don Martin: “Okay, yuck”
To quote Diane Francis: “Prove the case or drop the tax”
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Posted by Fillibluster at 9:39 AM