December 09, 2006

Bill Graham's Not Pulling Any Punches

H/T to Dymaxion World;

Graham must be getting serious with his dislike for the Cons tactics. On Thursday

Bill Graham compared the Cons to Joseph Goebbels because Graham believes that the Cons are sticking to false lines about the Liberals. Of course, the Cons are a little more than ticked. And who wouldn't be? Who wants to be compared to one of the worst group of people in history? Yet this begs the question. "Is it really reprehensible, if it's true?"

There are several things that I can recall off the top of my head that the Cons have consistently lied about:

1) One of Flaherty's favourite lies is that the average Canadian is taxed around 50%. He has repeated this many times, despite it being out right wrong. The average Canadian is only taxed approximately 33%-35%.

2) Harper and Ambrose's constant assertion that there wasn't any environmental plan prior to the Cons getting into power. In fact there was a failed commitment and then an actual program put in place shortly before the election was held. This program was immediately trashed by the Cons after taking power.

3) Ambrose has also been known to toss out the claim that the former Liberal government spent $100 million on carbon credits. In fact, no such thing happened.

4) Baird is fond of blaming the Liberal Senate for intentionally holding-up the passing of the Accountability Act, for partisan reasons, despite it's apparent poor wording and some of the changes being unreasonable or unrealistic. He did this rather than acknowledging that there were issues with the submitted version and that there were some Conservative senators that also had concern. It's interesting that the fixed-up version that was given back to him got his seal of approval and he has also stated that it is an improvement from the original.

Part of Goebbel's propaganda was to say a lie so often that it eventually is taken for truth. This is what Graham accused the Cons of doing. While the comparison may leave some people with a poor taste in their mouth, it does get the point across. And as I asked above, 'Is it really reprehensible, if it's true?"

As a side note, I don't think the Cons should get too concerned over hearing Nazi comparisons. Their Republican counterparts are quite fond of using the comparison for a whole host of people. If anything, it's a mode of recognition with them. You know you must have gotten the Republicans' attention when they've compared you to some aspect of the Nazis. So really in this case, the Cons should should feel proud that they've got the Liberals taking them seriously.

7 comments:

Paul Vincent said...

I think its a rare moment where I defend Conservatives. Most Canadians do get taxed about half of their money if you take into account all the different sorts of taxes they pay. If you only count income tax yeah its about 30% on average. However if you take into account business taxes, capital gains taxes, GST/PST/HST, and the such it should come to about 50%. Its more of an estimate than an actual number.

Secondly the Liberals did not have a plan that improved the environment. We know that their plan was to cut emissions and the emissions went up, is that an "plan for the environment" or political deception? The claim by the Conservatives is that when they got into office they had this massive problem with these increasing emissions. They claimed that the Liberals had no plan to fix this problem other than to purchase carbon credits.... the Liberals have denied the part about the carbon credits.

On the fourth one I'm not so sure if that's even a lie. I mean, the senate did in fact hold up the accountability act... so no treachery there. Had he not accepted the improvements it would have held it up even more... which would have actually been contradictory. The way you have it setup it does not seem that Baird could have done anything that wouldn't make him a Nazi propagandist.

Kyle said...

I had troubles finding it, but when Flaherty first made the claim about the 50% tax rate during the election, it was refuted by CBC's Reality Check and others, and even more recently the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives both pegged the total tax burden on the average Canadian around 35%.

The Liberals at first said they had a plan, which wasn't really anything more than a verbal commitment. That is what had failed to do anything. Shortly before the election was called the Liberals did implement a plan but it didn't really take effect due to the election being called.

As for Baird, he accused the Liberal Senate of intentionally holding up for partisan reasons. Maybe I should have been more clear on that. He didn't ever say that it was being held up because it needed to be fixed or that the Conservative senators also had concerns. So yes, when I accuse him of continuously giving a pure partisan spin on the hold-up, it was because he did and did so repeatedly.

Adam said...

"Yet this begs the question. Is it really reprehensible, if it's true?"

Then why all the outrage over the Belinda dog comment?

Kyle said...

While I really shouldn't dignify the comment with any kind of response...

Your comparison between the two comments isn't even valid. Graham's comment was an observation on a particular strategy of the Cons and then comparing it to a method employed by Goebbels. McKay's comment was a direct attack on a person; no comparison was presented. Graham wasn't calling the Cons, Nazis or calling any specific member Goebbels.

Adam said...

I think that invoking anything to do with the Nazi's, on top of proving that you have lost an argument, is (to say the least) highly inflammatory. Any point that he may have been trying to make is lost in the fact that he chose to attempt to compare the Conservative party to the Party which perpetrated the holocaust. At the very least, it was terrible judgment. If what he was trying to say is what you have gone and said in your post, he easily could have done so without invoking Godwin's Law.

Highly ironic too given the outing of the very classy flyer which was going around the Liberal convention warning of Rae's connections to Jewish people.

I'm not trying to defend MacKay, what he did was wrong and he should have apologized- if it was indeed him that implied BS was a dog. I just wish that your partisanship wasn't so blind, and that you would admit that it is wrong to use such inflammatory words in the House of Commons.

Kyle said...

Comparing people to the Nazis is nothing new for anyone, especially the right. The Republicans do it on a regular basis. A clue that you might be on the Republican radar is when they've made that comparison. Comparing someone's action to a propaganda tactic perfected by a prominent member of the Nazi party is pretty much a compliment compared to the usual comparison that right wingers throw out.

But that said. You are right, comparing anyone to the Nazis in general is in bad taste. I'll admit that. Is there someone else he could have used?

I don't think I've ever been accused of pure partisanship before. Well I am strongly (and proudly) on the left, I haven't ever been one to keep from criticizing the party I belong to (Liberals) or the one I was with (NDP) whether or not I was member at the time or not.

Adam said...

Aren't you Canadian? Who cares what the Republicans do. And admitting that your party is taking after the Republicans is a no-no in Canadian politics too by the way!

"But that said. You are right, comparing anyone to the Nazis in general is in bad taste. I'll admit that. Is there someone else he could have used?"

Thank you, I love those words "you are right" :) I am not sure if there is there is another analogy. Frankly, why does he need to use an analogy?

"I am strongly (and proudly) on the left,"
I won't hold that against you :)

I haven't ever been one to keep from criticizing the party I belong to (Liberals) or the one I was with (NDP) whether or not I was member at the time or not."


If that is the case (and I am not overly familiar with your blog so I will take your word for it) then you dropped the ball on this particular occasion.

Quotes from people smarter than me...

"If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich" ~ JFK

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. " ~ Martin Luther King Jr.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. " ~ Benjamin Franklin

"First it is necessary to stand on your own two feet. But the minute a man finds himself in that position, the next thing he should do is reach out his arms. " ~ Kristin Hunter

"When you're a mayor and you have a problem you blame the provincial government. If you are provincial government and you have a problem you blame the federal government. We don't blame the Queen any more, so once in a while we might blame the Americans." ~ Jean Chretien

"Which is ideology? Which not? You shall know them by their assertion of truth, their contempt for considered reflection, and their fear of debate." ~ John Ralston Saul

"It is undoubtedly easier to believe in absolutes, follow blindly, mouth received wisdom. But that is self-betrayal." ~ John Ralston Saul

"Everybody dies, Tracey. Someone's carrying a bullet for you right now, doesn't even know it. The trick is to die of old age before it finds you." ~ Cpt. Malcolm Reynolds (Firefly, Episode 12)

Google