Electoral Bickering: Gumboot Style

Editor’s Note: crammed into a Canadian apartment – any Canadian apartment, Michelle, Kurt, Theo, and John watched the Canadian Leadership Debate. With laptops everywhere, the correspondents provided cutting-edge, biting and edutaining commentary on pretty much all of the points made by Steve, Jack, Mike, and Gilles. The original piece was about 4,000 words. This is the edited version.

The Panel of Opinioneers

Michelle Burtnyk-Horn – Healthy Public Advocate of Healthy People and Health

Kurt Heinrich – Federal Liberal with a big heart and a pragmatic streak

John Horn – Cynical Libertarian Cascadian Separatist Pirate

Theo Lamb – The undecided youth demographic

Our Rules of Engagement

  1. Kurt Heinrich is the authority on all political knowledge, history, leader profiles, and fact-checking.
  2. Theo can pause the PVR whenever she wants.
  3. We have to use Babelfish Translator to change all of our comments about Gilles Duceppe into French.
  4. No bathroom breaks. Just straight-up politicogging (political blogging).

7:00PM EST – GO!

7:01 – Theo: There are a lot of people wearing yellow ties in the crowd.

Topic 1 – The Economy

7:01 – John: “Here we go again,” says the moderator … man, not an inspiring way to get things started.

7:03 – Theo: Wait a minute, where’s Elizabeth May? Oh right. We failed to allow a leader and a party who earned 8% of the last election’s vote participate in a national leaders debate. #Fail for Canadian broadcasters.

7:04 – Kurt: Gilles Duceppe ouvre la discussion avec la première attaque directe accusant le harpiste des personnes RÉELLEMENT de réponse. Gentil. Comme prévu Duceppe va être le mauvais garçon de la discussion.

7:04 – Michelle: For heaven’s sake, Harper?! Where are you looking?!

7:05 – John: Avec sa passion, Monsieur Duceppe est John Connor au Le Terminateur du Stephen Harper. Littéralement, je pense… Tellement esprit de corps d’un Quebecois passionné.

7:07 – John: Steve, I feel for you. Maybe you can deflect the current threeway attack with some jokes. Try this: “So, a reckless coalition walks into a bar, and the bartender says ‘What can I get for you fellahs?’ and they just starts arguing about whose more communist and then Canada explodes!” ZING!

7:12 – Theo: Thank, Mr. Layton, for bringing up the environment 12 minutes into the debate.

Topic 2 – Canada’s Place in the World

7:12 – Michelle: “Jets, Jails and Corporate Tax Giveaways” – not a bad slogan, Mr. Ignatieff. But can you repeat it like a Harperism for the next three weeks?

7:13 – Kurt: “Let’s tell the truth about jets.” – Stephen Harper

7:14 – John: “’Let’s tell the truth about jets.’ – Stephen Harper” – Kurt Heinrich, 2011

7:15 – John: Mark the time, the debate has broken down into senseless yelling.”

7:18 – Kurt: Layton zings Harper by complaining that he should take some time to read his own press releases.

7: 20 – Theo: This is fascinating to watch, really. Canadians are fairly conflict averse. We work so hard to find consensus and to allow for compromise and peace. To watch four leaders hash it out and not give an inch – it’s all rather un-Canadian. It’s heated and fascinating and uncomfortable and, well, American.

7:22 – John: Theo. Yes. I think that the podium arrangement looks very American, too. But they’re probably made in China.

7:25 – Theo: Who would win in a fight? A vampire or a werewolf? A hammerhead shark-man or a centaur? Jacob or Edward? Jack Layton or Gilles Duceppe?

7:26 – Kurt: Jack Layton just took a cheap shot. Accuses Liberals of ignoring climate change back in the 1990s. C’mon Jack – was it really the Liberals? Or maybe EVERYONE?!

7:28 – John: Agreed. Cheap shot.

7:31 – Michelle: Stephen Harper is now talking about how Canada is a leader on the international stage for the environment. Not sure if that’s the best example.

7:35 – Kurt: Getting feisty when it comes to the auditor general support. Ignatieff literally calling him out asking him “what are you afraid of?”. Harper doesn’t budge. Still in the message box.

7:37 – John: Side note: Remi the cat – to whom Theo Lamb is allergic – just started kissing her…amazing. And, yes, this debate is so repetitive and counterproductive that I was just distracted by a cat kissing a lady. #uninspired

7:38 – Kurt: Stephen Harper talking about climate change is making Theo upset – like the incredible hulk – but red, not green.

7:39 – Michelle: “You gotta know where you’re going if you want to get there” – Jack Layton on Stephen Harper’s response on climate change, followed closely with an accusation that targets have not been set. And need to be.

Topic 3 – Governance

7:42 – Michelle: Harper vs. Ignatieff. The moment everyone is waiting for.

7:47 – Kurt: Iggy busts out some new guns – what’s the deal with you (Steve)  kicking people out of rallies because they are my Facebook friend?

7:54 – Kurt: Shibam – coalition discussion – was Harper planning on forming a coalition over half a decade ago. The  (former coalition) partners (NDP and BLOC) say yes – the PM says no. Michael Ignatieff looks smug. Who’s lying?

7:54 – Michelle: Wow! Gilles Duceppe is hammering Harper.

7:56 – Theo: It should be noted that all four of us have been pretty quiet/slack-jawed at what we’re watching right now between Duceppe and the gang.

7:57 – John: Michael Ignatieff is bi-winning. He’s not saying anything, and Harper’s on the wrong side of a threeway lie-fest with a socialist and Jack Layton about the Delta Hotel in Montreal, inappropriate letters, reckless coalitions, piracy, and great scotch. Jack + Gilles = bi-winning.

8:01 – Kurt: Is contempt of Parliament really the big issue all Canadians care about? Ignatieff is striking me as the leader of a philosophy club, rather than the leader of our country.

Topic 4 – Immigration

8:09 – John: I think that 7.9 million Canadians just went to get snacks and beer while Jack and Gilles talk. Kurt Heinrich: “Why does Gilles Duceppe have 55 seats?!” Michelle: “Why is he there and not Elizabeth May?” John: “Because he has 55 seats.” Theo: “But why does he have 55 seats?”

8:10 – Michelle: Gilles vs. Jack is quite boring.

8:11 – John: Oh, Steve! There you are! Thanks for bringing relevance back into this discussion.

8:13 – Theo: Layton asks Harper: “Why did you cut the immigrant settlement services?” Harper to Layton: “Settlement funding has tripled under this government.” Wait a minute? We need a fact checker – who’s right!?

8:13 – Michelle: Kurt is right.

8:13 – John: Kurt is right.

8:13 – Kurt: I’m totally right.

8:14 – Theo: Okay.

8:15 – John: Chacun continue à indiquer que « il n’est simplement pas vrai » ou ils composent juste les nombres (corrects, $6 milliards de Gilles Duceppe au nombre de GM était étonnant). Avec chaque coup, 4,527 Canadiens se développent cyniques et voeu pour ne pas voter pour quelconque d’entre ces yahoos. Et, oui, j’ai fabriqué ce nombre.

8:16 – Kurt: Gilles Duceppe semble être à son propre ordre du jour bizarre, répétant Bill 101 et attaquant le multiculturalisme à plusieurs reprises. Certainement une discussion/discussion qui ne se relie pas vraiment à la plupart des Canadiens (en dehors de du Québec de toute façon).

8:19 – Theo: Ignatieff on multiculturalism and “confidence” in the two official languages. Nice, Ignatieff.

TOPIC 5: The Justice System

8:21 – Michelle: Ignatieff mentions BC! … in the context of gang violence. Et Duceppe l’apporte de nouveau « au crime interne » dans propre partie de M. Harper’s.

8:21 – Michelle: Ignatieff reaches across the aisle (podium) and talks about how we can learn from Quebec’s young offenders program. Commending other parties hasn’t happened very much, if at all, in this debate so far.

8:22 – Theo: I agree, Michelle. It was nice to see Ignatieff reach out, recognize and commend something another leader supports. That’s a Canadian move. Trademark.

8: 27 – Theo/John/Kurt/Michelle: HASHTAG FAIL!

8:27 – Theo: Failing of the hashtag! Layton wins one from the Millennials!

8:32 – Michelle: What does the number of women in parliament have to do with the justice system?

8:33 -Michelle: GUN REGISTRY! I would have thought this would have come up earlier.

8:33 – John: Great saying about guns. It goes like this: Actually, guns do kill people.

8:33 – Kurt: Why is it such a big deal for “farmers and rural Canadians” to register their guns? Yeah, I get it Harper – it’s a pain that they’re affected by gun violence in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal, but really, police are all saying that this is an effective program. Why can’t they keep it?

8:34 – Michelle: Agreed, Kurt. I like how Ignatieff brought up the police’s stance on the matter. Their opinion probably counts a bit.

Topic 6 – Health Care

8:37 – John: Wow. No friggin’ question about the environment. Amazing. #EPICFAIL to everyone involved in this fiasco – you’re at the top of the list, CBC producers.

8:37 – Theo: I agree, John. I wonder what the thinking was behind that decision. Do they think the public is fatigued by environmental issues? Okay, now I’m eager to turn to Facebook and Twitter and check out the reaction, there.

8:39 – John: FACT: Stephen Harper has never been on a bandwagon in his life.

8:43 – Michelle: Privatization. Harpers talks about how the provinces aren’t experimenting with privatization … but they are with “alternative service delivery”. What exactly is the difference?

8:59 – Kurt: It was a dog pile. Everyone hammered at Stephen Harper for a good 2 hours. Tough stuff. But in the end I have to say Harper was able to own his own (in an aloof sort of way). And Ignatieff stood out as a strong almost folksy sort of way.

9:00PM EST – Did Democracy Win?

Michelle: Yes, democracy won. Interesting how democracy was a key point raised again and again throughout the debate. According to some candidates, an alternative term might be ’bickering’. So at the end of the day, either bickering or democracy won.

Kurt: Yeah – because four leaders with different viewpoints fought it out and if we weren’t in a democracy it wouldn’t happen like that.

Theo: Sure – four leaders were given opportunities to represent their party’s issues on six different topics; Canadian viewers can now decide for themselves. Time to vote!

John: Always – and that’s the problem; meaningful environmental reforms – which roll out over decades, not four-year-terms – can only be driven through by a charismatic, nature-loving dictatorship … or Johnism.

Speak English, you lot vs. No English, please

Hell, I like Germany’s conservatives. Now, don’t misinterpret me here. I like those guys, because they’re always good for a laugh. Well, I gotta admit, they kinda changed. As I pointed out in my article about “Gay Germany”, we’ve got a female chancellor now, and our foreign secretary is openly gay. Hussa! The only problem is, they are Angela Merkel and Guido Westerwelle.

Why do Germany’s conservatives figure in a blog dealing with community you say? Well, they recently discovered the topic of language, as in English being the most important foreign language. And language makes or breaks community. After conservatives complained for decades about “anglicisms”, i.e. words imported from English to German, Guenther Oettinger, former premier of German federal province Baden-Wuerttemberg, now EU-superintendent for Energy in Brussels, likes to point out, that English is THE language. In the vid that follows, he concludes that “English is the language of the workplace of the future, whether you work in an office, or in a factory.” He doesn’t say it, but it’s clear that he likes to imply: “You lot better all improve your English. Or you’ll be job-hunting soon.” Contrast it for yourself with Oettinger’s English, as he gives an official speech in his newly acquired function as a high-ranking EU-official.

Is it just me, or does he simply not get half of what he’s obviously just reading out from his script? Like the old Die Krupps-Song: “I open my mouth, words come out – that make no sense to a stranger’s ear…”

Whereever I go on the planet, I’m met with the expectation that Germans usually do well in English. It seems to be something almost like a trait that sticks to us. And I guess everyone in Germany now is proficient in English to some degree. At least in West-Germany, since we were lucky enough to have been occupied mainly by the US and the British after the war. (I guess I don’t need to explain here that the so called “German Democratic Republic” in the East was just a Soviet satellite state, essentially a dictatorship as bad as the Third Reich, with the only differences being a) they didn’t start a world war and b) they didn’t gas millions of dissidents – the body count up to 1989 is still in the hundreds, though – mainly because of all those East Germans trying to make a run for the West that were shot at the border).

But, where was I going with this? Oh yeah, we’re good at English. All but our new, neo-liberal turbo-capitalistic foreign secretary Guido Westerwelle. Look how well he did when talking to a BBC-reporter:

I could’ve handled this from anyone assigned to the new cabinet… After all, we’re in Germany, fair enough. But for crying out loud, this guy was ALREADY APPOINTED OR NEW FOREIGN SECRETARY…! So you see, these guys are fun. So much fun, they inspired the German Green Party to this witty reply, a message to our friends from the BBC:

So… we Germans are inclined towards English, yes, and it’s had a great influence on our collective, cultural space in the 65 years that have passed since the unconditional surrender of the last Reich aka Nazi Germany in 1945. However, I don’t see either how our own language would be endangered by this fact (enriched being the right term, I guess) or how English would become the “exclusive language” of working environments in Germany in the future (a ridiculous idea from Oettinger, unless you’re a top-manager). Yet most of all, I don’t see how we’re going to manage with a foreign secretary who refuses to speak any English. What do other Gumbooteers make of this? Is it cool for a Minister of Foreign Affairs / Foreign Secretary to refuse to speak the lingua franca of the world? Or is it just a pile of horse-hockey to be upset about this?

Go Mikhail Go!

That’s certainly not what the Canadian Border Services are saying, nor what the Conservative government is saying either. But it is what me, many of my friends, and many liberal and NDP politicians are saying. Most importantly, it’s what the church community that’s sheltering Mikhail Lennikov is certainly saying.

In case you haven’t caught the news recently, Lennikov is currently hunkered down in Vancouver’s First Lutheran Church off Kingsway. He’s seeking asylum from deportation by the Canadian government who want to give him the boot forworking as a KGB contractor in the 1980s. According the government, anyone who’s admitted to espionage against Canada or Canadians is subject to deportation.

According to First Lutheran Reverend Richard Hergesheimerm, his church was renovated several months ago to install a shower and make a livable space for Lennikov. They knew what the result of Lennikov’s appeals would be and set about to get ready to get ready for the long haul. When asked about the church’s desicsion to provide sancuary Hergesheimer replied “We know that what we’re doing with sanctuary is illegal. We know that. But it’s not wrong. We think were doing the right thing.”

Lennikov’s persecution and the desicsion to support his asylum has been fueled by a great deal of anger among the church’s 225 congregants.

It’s a reaction Hergesheimer hasn’t seen before. All of the sudden elderly women are writing to their politicians for the first time in their lives in support of a former KGB agent who is a member of their congregation.

“This has made people very angry. Angry at what they see is an injustice,” said Hergesheimer.

It’s an injustice that Lennikov doesn’t deserve. He has been a contributing member of his new home for decades. He’s a longtime congregationalist (an attribute hardly identified with hardcore KGB agents) and he’s got a wife and son who are settled and happily living here. He was not James Bonding about the country killing CSIS agents. He provided Japanese translation services. Too boot, if we send him back to Russia, he’ll hardly be heralded by his countrymen as hero. Instead he’ll have to start all over again – without his family – and that’s if he doesn’t find himself tossed in prison (as he says is likely). How does any of this make sense? Since when is the specific rule of law and lack of compassion of the Conservatives overrule common sense? Wait, don’t answer that question.

Let’s hope the conservatives come to their senses and realize they are persecuting a decent and contributing member of our society.