Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Stephen Harper Should Play the Anti-American Card
With a federal election coming up later this year, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s campaign strategy of using wedge issues to separate his principal opponent from Canadian voters while strengthening his bond with conservatives is coming into focus.
Regarding the former, he’s championed the construction of the Victims of Communism memorial in Ottawa, which has elicited shrieks of outrage from the Ottawa intelligentsia (as well as specious excuses from the Liberals). Again, the politics here are designed to separate voters of Polish, Ukrainian, and other Eastern European extraction — and, for that matter, non-European refugees of communism, such as the Cambodians — from the Liberal Party. In the latter mode, he’s commented on Bill C-42 – designed to deregulate gun ownership, as well as rural citizens’ need for guns to defend themselves.
As I have said a number of times before (here and here), another excellent wedge issue Harper might exploit is the Keystone XL pipeline, whose Congressional approval President Obama has recently vetoed. Traditionally, Harper’s Conservative Party has been seen in Canada as the pro-American party due to the Conservative’s natural ideological sympathy with the American system of government. The Liberals have used this to insinuate Conservative disloyalty to Canada. With Keystone XL, however, the roles are reversed: Harper can play the anti-American card against the Liberals, who are forced by their ties to environmentalism, to oppose a project that is indisputably good for the Canadian economy. So far, so good.
What Harper hasn’t done yet — but needs to — is to call President Obama out personally, accuse him anti-Canadianism in his opposition to Keystone XL. As Obama is an icon of the Canadian left, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau will be forced to choose between environmentalism and Obamaism. At that point, Harper and his campaign need to ask the public whether Trudeau is capable of standing up for the Canadian economy, or whether his allegiances to left-wing ideology and foreign leaders disqualifies him from doing that.
Done right, this will leave the Liberals sputtering and speechless. They have never been accused of being too pro-American before.
Published in Foreign Policy, Politics
If he tries to go “anti-American” he’ll be called a racist.
Why not? Everybody else hates us, why not the Canadians?
Excellent. Get on the horn to Mark Steyn – he can make sure this is promoted.
If the hatred is toward the Progressives down here, I’m with’em. If Canada becomes a beacon of Conservativism, more power to them.
Man, I thought you all were going to grab North Dakota or something. Expel the Tampa Bay Rays or at least declare Evan Longoria a persona non grata. “Yankees Go Home” signs when the Yankees hit town – that kind of stuff. The way to convince our President to be more “flexible” is to treat the U.S. with at least as much contempt as he does.
Time for Canada to nuke up.
I have a bad case of leader-envy.
Although, apparently we’re not the only ones with dynasty issues?
Canadian Cincinnatus wrote:
As I have said a number of times before (here and here), another excellent wedge issue Harper might exploit is the Keystone XL pipeline, whose Congressional approval President Obama has recently vetoed. Traditionally, Harper’s Conservative Party has been seen in Canada as the pro-American party due to the Conservative’s natural ideological sympathy with the American system of government.
If my memory serves me correctly, when Obama vetoed the Keystone XL Pipeline legislation he said he saw no reason to approve something that was only good for Canada and didn’t benefit America. A) it would significantly benefit America. B) Even if Obama’s statement were true and only Canada would benefit (we’ll ignore the creation of U.S.A. jobs), why wouldn’t America help out a great friend like Canada?
I grew up in a home where my parents taught us to always help out a friend in need if it was within our power. Why? 1) Do the right thing because it’s right. You don’t need any other reason. That said, 2) if you are there for a friend in need your chances of that friend being there for you in your time of need goes up exponentially. What’s that old saying: “What goes around, comes around.”
Canada as conservative beacon to the United States ….. who woulda thunk it?