I don't really have a problem with Time Canada naming Stephen Harper Canada's Newsmaker of the Year. The guy has made an impact on the national scene being the PM and all. But why bolster their choice with Conservative talking points and gross factual errors? Here's why he was chosen accroding to the magazine:
Contributing editor Stephen Handelman writes that the prime minister who was "once dismissed as a doctrinaire backroom tactician with no experience in government has emerged as a warrior in power."The magazine says Mr. Harper defied conventional wisdom about how to lead a minority government.
It says he slashed more than $1-billion worth of federal programs, reshuffled the federal bureaucracy, and reopened the wounds of the national unity debate by supporting Quebec's right to declare itself a “nation.”
At the same time, Time says, he has introduced a new standard of accountability for federal politicians, stewarded Canada's first major deployment of troops to a combat theatre in five decades and, for good measure, negotiated an end to a long-simmering trade wrangle with the U.S. over softwood exports.
"A warrior in power"? Are they joking? The guy has emerged has a petty wanker who is willing to deny Christmas party invitations to reporters he doesn't like in his ongoing project to de-legitimize the media.
He has cemented his extremist right wing ideological street cred by slashing public spending on programs that worked well, and served the most vulnerable elements of our society.
The Accountability Act is an absolute joke that makes things worse than they were before.
As for Afghanistan, for better or worse, it was the Liberals who sent our troops over there, not Harper.
And the softwood lumber deal? Let's just say calling it a sell out would be generous.
So sure, Harper is the newsmaker of the year. But for exactly the opposite reasons touted by Time Canada.
They got the pick right, but the bylines are oh so biased.
I guess Time Canada got Christmas invitations.
Stephen Harper: warrior princess? Well, we know how he looks in tight leather ... could be.
He has indeed defied convertional wisdom. He has in fact defied wisdom, commen sense, and intellegence.
The comment omitted this little gem ... "If Mr. Harper wins the majority he craves, in the election expected some time next year, he may yet turn out to be the most transformational leader since Trudeau.”
The G&M also omitted it from their print edition. I wonder why.
Yeti, I suggest before you comment on the intelligence of Canada's PM, you should learn to spell it.
Yes Steve's in great company with Adolf Hitler (1938) Joseph Stalin (1939 and 1942) and Allyatollah Khomeni (1979). In the U.S. edition over the last 70 years more often than not it has either been the serving president, a business figure, a group ( people under 25, the american soldier (twice since 1950) middle americans etc etc). As always when they pick someone as popularly reviled as Harper is becoming, Time will usually point out that they chose the person because they made a lot of news, not because they are worthy of Man-of-the-Year accolades. Clearly Time has its collective head up it collective ass when it comes to these things.
"he may yet turn out to be the most transformational leader since Trudeau.”
I guess dismantling 40 years worth of social safety net and presiding over the breakup of the country when Quebec separates and the rest of Canada is annexed by the U.S. would qualify as "most transformational" but not in a good way.
Time has never claimed being person of the year is a good thing. In reality, it's about the person who has "for better or worse, has most influenced events in the preceding year." That's why Hitler won once and Osama should have won in 1999. See the Wikipedia article for a good synopsis.
"I am so smart, I am so smart
s-m-r-t. s-m-r...s-m-a-r-t."
Homer Simpson
Also a very transformational influence.
Just because we spent money on programs, does not mean the programs work well. And rarely does the money filter down to the most vulnerable elements of our society.
Isn't Harper a peach!! This man is right wing of Gengis Khan.
Concerning the Federal Accountability Act, you may be interested in seeing the complete analysis of what the Act does and does not do, and how the Conservatives failed to include more than 20 measures they promised to include in the Act, and the ethics complaint Democracy Watch has filed about the broken promises -- all at: http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsDec1206.html
Just because we spent money on programs, does not mean the programs work well. And rarely does the money filter down to the most vulnerable elements of our society.
Well, that exhaustive argument has certainly convinced me. Take a well-earned break from your tireless investigation and exposition of the details of the programs in question; clearly, you have worked yourself to the bone itself.
And he must get credit for his very recent conversion on his own road to Damascus. Where only days ago he was preaching the denialist line that AGW (climate warming) was a "so called" matter, he now suddenly pronounces that it is a serious matter that must be attended to. We have not been favored with an account of how and when the blinding light came to him, as it came to Paul (Saul). But it must have come somewhere between Calgary where it is still "so called" and Ottawa "it is a serious question". Will he now withdraw the "Clean" air act explaining that it was just an early draft. Will he leave off discussion with Layton on renaming it the"healthy" air act. Will he ask his staff to fetch a copy of the Can. Environmental Protection act to find out what it is about. Will he at least get a copy of the Dick and Jane Reader (No.3) so that he can learn to point and talk at the same time. Stay tuned.