“Do you believe Prime Minister Harper is taking the right approach in his dealings with China?”
Poll on this page. Scroll down about 1/4 of the way.
“Another Poll Gone Horribly Wrong” Update
“Do you believe Prime Minister Harper is taking the right approach in his dealings with China?”
Poll on this page. Scroll down about 1/4 of the way.
“Another Poll Gone Horribly Wrong” Update
Related: Ignatieff blasts Harper’s ‘megaphone’ diplomacy with China (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/11/16/ignatieff-china.html)
Money quotes from Iggy:
“Mr. Harper, I think, believes you can go to one of the greatest civilizations on earth, a superpower of the 21st century and give them a little lecture on human rights,”
“But the right way to do that is to lower the megaphone, lower the volume, get into rooms, stand up for our values QUIETLY.” (caps mine)
Who is the liberal now? Damned right we can give “one of the greatest civilizations on earth” a lecture.
“Another spy in Canada, Chinese this time”
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/008165.html
Mark
Ottawa
Wow!!! I am simply amazed! No other way to describe it. A huge number of people, 23,000 plus, who think that Harper is dealing with the Chineese in the proper way, and it all has to do with KATE!!! Kate, you are my hero!!!!!!!!!!!
Jeff, crawl back into your hole and take your Mao Tse Tung doll with you.
Jeff supposedly is “a photographer living in a forest in toronto with babies and a beautiful wife.”
Yet he seems to spend so much time doing nothing useful on the internet.
(that and his toxic attitude and crummy perspective on life, but, hey, that tends to be the left these days)
from CBCpravda “All Liberal , All the time”
Ignatieff blasts Harper’s ‘megaphone’ diplomacy with China
anyway the Igster thinks China is fantastic and CBCpravda obviously agrees.
China snub. Has anyone seen a reference to the actual China/official story ?? It couldn’t have been a media “my sources” plant, could it ??
One thing that puzzles me. Liberal bias in the Canadian Media is a given, but. Why hasn’t a new, at least neutral, media outlet emerged as a counter weight, competition ?? One would think it would have an instant market, no ??
Could one reason be; The media business is an organized one, think (AP) (CP) (Reuters). Look familiar ?? Stories are pooled, not ?? You have to play by the “rules” or remain a small player. Think Western Standard.
Another reason might be; In Canada we have an elephant. Perhaps the CBC and it’s mountain of $Billions is so controling and overwhelming the others simply toe the Pravda line. Speaking of which, traffic at cbcwatch.com has jumped lately.
All liberal/dippers think alike;so they think the mindset they have applies to everyone,(learned that a long time ago).They can’t conceive of anyone actually having morals,they’re minds just don’t work that way.
batb…I heard Craig Oliver last night praising Harper’s stance.I was going to post on it…and today he ‘changed his opinion?’ Unbelievable!!Any one want to guess about ‘why’ the flip-flop?Did somebody give him a little lecture?Was Janey ticked because he didn’t feed her agenda?Someone a little higher up tug him by the ears and straighten him out?
Do people actually take the MSM seriously?Why do we need 10 minutes of their opinion blasted repeatedly over the air,after 2 minutes of news?
Ignore the trolls as Kate says.
Yeah we shouldn’t lecture China.
We should go back to lecturing countries that deserve it like the United States and it’s Mini-Me, Australia.
Harper got us a deal with the US in a couple months that the Liberals couldn’t do in over a decade while at the same time saying, “hands off our Arctic.” He’s the real failure right… roll
Now I see on Bourque’s website that the Chinese Prime Minister (premier ? – whatever) has agreed to meet with Harper after all. Bet your ass he wants to meet with Stephen! Stephen can turn off the tap to our natural resources to them and I for one wishes that he would!
2 troll comments plus 11 responses to said troll, plus several ^no feeding trolls^ posts, makes up about 25% of the total comments on this issue. However, the troll does raise an issue that nobody has addressed. Is Kate trying to manipulate a vote? Facts:
1. G&M is left leaning.
2. G&M readers are mostly left leaning.
3. Most voters would therefore be left leaning.
4. Most traffic Kate is steering is right leaning.
5. G&M traffic + Kate traffic = left+right.
We have a combination of both left and right traffic now voting. We don’t know the percentage of the votes. However, it is true that even a heavily weighted percentage, in favour of left or of right, would be a truer representation of actual public opinion than to just gather the votes of one side only. All we need now is a total of voters referred from SDA vs the total votes. How many votes were in before you linked Kate?
langmann, you raise a good point about the Liberals not closing the deal on the softwood. I didn’t hear much about it, but apparently the deal was pretty much already done by Emerson, but the Liberals held it back so they could leverage it for the election.
If this is true, then they have gotten off extremely light in terms of MSM condemnation. The MSM grudgingly gives the conservatives credit for getting the deal done, and often feel it necessary to mention that the deal left “billions” of dollars on the table of Canadian taxpayers money for the USA. The Liberals were willing to leave it all on the table in order to win an election. That shows their true disregard for the taxpayers money they claim to be looking out for. I also hate how the MSM fail to mention that the WTO ruled against Canada in the softwood lumber dispute. It was only the NAFTA ruling that ruled in favour of Canada. So to get 80% of the money being disputed, when there is one ruling for and one against, is a pretty big success in my opinion!
Legally NAFTA trumps WTO, but I guess it’s a handy excuse for the apologists.
If Harper is so concerned about human rights in China, why the hell are we still trading with them? The Commie luvin Libs have been out of power for almost a year now so why haven’t the Cons been doing anything about it? Truth is, Harper will have no influence on Chinese policy, so don’t kid yourself about him riding in there on a white charger. Plus there’s all that money to be made…
Heh. Love that. Almost as much as I love seeing people where “Support Our Troops” t-shirts on my campus, which I just did!
@ pete:
Right you are about NAFTA vs WTO. Like I’ve always said during this thing to the anti-free trade left crowd (which many liberals are in), its the NAFTA that has given us a leg to stand on.
vf, you’ve got the chronology backwards! Last week Oliver was castigating Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government for their stand on human rights in China. Apparently, two days ago, he had changed his mind, and now praises our Prime Minister. Principled pygmie, isn’t he?
Here’s what I wrote on November 10:
[beginning of quote]
I was absolutely shocked by what Craig Oliver and Bob Fife were saying yesterday on Mike Duffy Live with Jane Taber…
The subject was China and Canada, and China’s apparent snub of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Essentially, what these Librano-huggers were saying was that Chretien, Martin, etc. were smart to “only go so far” in criticizing China for its human rights abuses, because the Librano$ understood that next to the U.S., Canada’s next biggest trading partner has to be China.
One of them, I think it was Craig Oliver, actually said that the Conservatives “were serious” about challenging China on its human rights abuses and that this just wouldn’t do. Bob Fife (or Oliver, depending on who made the comment) agreed whole heartedly.
I was watching two news commentators sounding totally like Librano Party members, dissing the Conservatives because they really meant what they said to China about its vile abuses of human rights. According to Oliver and Fife, it’s a total NO-NO to call China to task for these abuses—and the CPC and PM Stephen Harper are naive and, um, between the lines, stupid to do so.
I watched, slack-jawed, as these two useful Canadian idiots declared principles be damned; any compromise on human rights abuses is fine–indeed, necessary–if it means trade for Canada, and not only that: The Librano$ were to be congratulated for giving lip service to Canada’s concern for China’s appalling record on the abuse of human rights, whereas the CPC were to be roundly criticized for being “serious” about Canada’s concern about these abuses… etc.
[end of quote]
So, I wonder why the about face? Craigie feeling the heat? But from where? The public/bloggers, perchance? Now that would be a novel idea…
Anyway you look at it, the partisan, biased, and completely unprincipled MSM should be eating crow right about now. The public’s not buying their crap.
Thanks for that batb…and we can only hope the public’s not buying their crap.How many do you know that weed out the 15 minutes of (MSM talking head pro-Lib)opinion on a 30 second news clip?
yeah, vf, you’ve got a point. Maybe it’s just we alert, observant, and fed up members of the public who do this.
That’s the problem with Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s cradle-to-grave nanny state: He zombified a few generations of Canadians and programmed them to blindly, and no-questions-asked, buy the Liberal brand.
And too many of these zombies have ended up in the MSM. Hey, that’s the only way you can get in… Have you noticed that at CTV, they have a reporter called Murray Oliver. Now do you think this guy’s related somehow to Craig Oliver? What are the chances? I’d love to know.
Sad Canada.
God bless Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the CPC!!
How can a poll go ‘horribly wrong’? The poll was an honest question. Now if the question was “Is Stephen Harper doing the right thing by being weasely in dealing with the Chinese?”, I can understand misapprehensions. But I’m thinking that you are starting to see ghosts behind every door Kate.
Do any of you who “have never been more proud” of your Harper due to his China posturing not see the incredible irony that his approach is so similar to the Greenpeace approach on the environment, which is to seek to grandstand about complex issues in a public forum when constructive engagement would produce mcuh better results?
As an environmentally conscious individual who cringes at Greenpeace stunt politics, I would have thought that many of you who are also likely critical of that style of approach would find uncomfortable similarities in Harper’s and their approaches.
Canada has the opportunity to play an important and highly constructive role in improving the situation in China for the benefit of China, its citizens and the rest of the world (including Canada) and it is not best served by public granstanding.
Those of you that regularly interact with the outside world across other cultures should understand that.
Linking Harper’s ‘approach’ with Greenpeace. Now I think I’ve heard it all.
“Canada has the opportunity to play an important and highly constructive role in improving the situation in China…”
Right, and that is?
No plan, but nuanced poll dancing Liberal ‘grandstanding’ at it’s best.
It’s time to thin out the herd.
“Canada has the opportunity to play an important and highly constructive role in improving the situation in China for the benefit of China, its citizens and the rest of the world (including Canada) and it is not best served by public granstanding.”
Do go own. Or is your rhetoric as empty as Harper’s. And yes, I would see the irony if I didn’t think Greenpeace’s grandstanding worked. They managed to get the environment on the news. And if it’s on the news people talk about. Just like we’re doing right now. If Harper hadn’t used “megaphone diplomacy”, this post wouldn’t exist, we wouldn’t be talking about how best to advance human rights, and we wouldn’t have been reminded that a Canadian citizen is sitting in a Chinese prison. We’d talk about something else and then you know what happens. Nothing.
Alex, I’m not aware that Prime Minister Stephen Harper actually used “megaphone diplomacy.” He’s accused of that by Michael Ignatieff, who is, BTW and in case you were unaware of it, PMSH’s political opponent.
The Prime Minister did not use “megaphone diplomacy,” he merely took a principled stand and stated the CPC’s, and most Canadians’, view of China’s abysmal record on human rights and made it clear that the Canadian delegation is not willing to sweep the incarceration of a Canadian citizen under the carpet in order to do–in the Librano vernacular–business as usual.
This post wouldn’t exist but for the Librano$’ and the MSM’s appalling double standard: rake the “naive” Prime Minister Harper and the CPC over the coals for being principled in their taking China to task over their human rights abuses, while praising the Librano$ for being “sophisticated” and “understanding” that you have to pay lip service to the Chinese in order to reap the financial rewards of trade with them–most of the money going into Liberals’ and their friends’ pockets and not those of ordinary Canadians.
Blather on, Alex, blah, blah, blah. You’ve lost me…
More:
“Try to find the Chinese spy story/Liberals yet to fawn on China for rights progress”
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/008172.html
Mark
Ottawa
“Blather on, Alex, blah, blah, blah. You’ve lost me…”
I clearly did. You can call it “megaphone diplomacy” or not. It’s irrelevant. The post exists because Harper took an interview on a plane saying he wanted to talk to China about Human Rights (and rightfully so by the way). That put everything in motion. He said it, everyone’s talking about it, and that’s a good thing for human rights. That was my point to the commenter who said Harper shouldn’t have said it.
Anyone here read Don Martin’s piece in the National Post? Go over to National Newswatch for it.
I don’t know how this pathetic excuse for a journalist could write such a biased piece of crap.
He chides David Emerson by describing him as a “Liberal turncoat”, yet he is no doubt proud of himself in writing a whole book on the other political turncoat from last year.
He describes Harper as being hypocritical because he had a meeting with Putin in July and that the PM didn’t have the nerve to bring up that the Russians were were caught spying on us. Don failed to mention that the alleged spy was just caught within the last few days. Perhaps he is suggesting that Harper should have already known about it back in July.
Martin could not find it in himself to find one positive thing to say about this issue, and that I find truly hard to believe.
Unless of course he has on of those famous hidden agendas. Let’s see now, isn’t he a part of the Ottawa Press Gallery and didn’t they get snubbed by the PMO. I don’t think that I have seen him write a single positive piece on the PM since that time. Is this his form of payback?
Or maybe he would like to see the Liberals back in power, and that might them help give Belinda a higher profile in the Canadian political scene. This could then serve to light a fire under the sales of his book on Belinda (currently sitting a #11,212 in sales on the Amazon.ca sales sales list – TRUE).
I know, both of my speculations were pathetic excuses as to what could be motivating Don, but I think one could agree that they were written in a similar spirit (and with possibly more logic) as his article.
John: Martin is just another self-important hack, who tries to portray himself as a bit of a regular lad from the West without the airs of many of his colleagues. Which is an air in itself.
Mark
Ottawa
John:
Don Martin is a comedian in his own mind,always making with the funnies but really not funny which makes him a bit of a joke.
We have to figure what is fact and what is opinion when we read any of the scribes, they don’t always make it clear.
What sort of fool would write a book about Belinda!
Love to hear how that one’s selling.
Liz J:
I meant it when I wrote it…Don’s book on Belinda is listed at #11,212 on the Amazon.ca sales list.
As a comparison, Mark Steyn’s is at #3.
Thanks for clarifying your position, Alex. But I’m still confused. You asked in your post “Or is your rhetoric as empty as Harper’s[?]”
On the one hand, you seem to be congratulating Prime Minister Harper for saying what he did (I understand that on the plane, Chinese officials contacted him), and on the other, you accuse him of empty rhetoric.
Which one is it?
BATB,
A bit of sarcasm. Conservatives say they made a principled stand, Opposition claims it’s empty rhetoric, canadian’s critical post was full of empty rhetoric. Made sense in my twisted mind.
Here we have a cdn PM working to free a cdn citizen in a foreign jail, and he is being lambasted for it. On the other hand, he was lambasted for doing nothing for another supposed cdn, confessed terrorist, in a foreign jail by the name of Arar. Guess you have to be a muslim to get respect in the msm, confessed terrorist or not.
Thanks, Alex. Sometimes it’s difficult to figure out what’s sarcastic and what’s not; body language helps when we’re talking to someone, making it obvious we’re being sarcastic…
That you were being sacrcastic makes sense. Thanks for clarifying that.
How about a poll with the following question.
Should cdn book stores ban the sale of OJs book and sell Steyns book. Apparently cdn book retailers are getting ready to sell OJs book. Which would you prefer to read. Message to all Albertans that plan to vote on Nov 25 for a new premier. I wonder how many of you are aware of the bombshell mentioned at a leadership forum re Dinning. He donated 5000. to Paul Martins campaign last Jan. He did not deny it. I thought there was a limit on contributions by individuals.
If the past week was considered diplomacy our current PM has lost his way in trying to deal with Asia or any part or it, including China which is most of it. Some one should tell him to phone Lee Kuan Yew arrange a visit to Singapore. Ask SM Lee what to do. Lee is probably the only person on the planet who can be invited to visit by the Governments of China and Formosa at the same time, as well as lecturing the Chinese on how to conduct their domestic policies according to the five principal rules—I think it is five–of the Confucian regime. Otherwise, by the time Canadians have replaced Harper with Dion, it may take five or six years to get back on track and make a buck there.
How’s human right situation in China right now? You’d better to go there to see in person. What a big lie that China executes Falun Gong prisoners then sell their organs! I don’t believe it! I was from China and I hated CPP, but I have admit the current human right situation is better than ever!