About TDH

Archived
Commentaries

Past Projects

FAQ

Links

Contact

What's New

January 31, 2006 - Here's a query that TDH Strategies has been struggling with...is Stephen Harper's ascension to Prime Minister proof that political rebirth is really possible in Canada?

There was a time that Harper's comments about building a firewall around Alberta, about Canada being a second-tier socialistic society, about Asians and immigrants populating western ridings, were thought to be roadblocks to him ever reaching to top of the political mountain.

They said Ontario would never warm to such an extreme western presence. They said that he didn't understand Quebec, and that Quebecers would never vote for a Calgarian. And yet Harper as PM now has nearly half the ridings in Ontario, and 10 seats in Quebec.

So in the case of Allan Rock, will his introduction of the gun registry forever doom him in rural Canada, even though the spiralling of costs really ballooned under Anne McLellan's watch?

Can't Rock, like Harper, take the wind out of his detractors' sails by acknowledging early on that the gun registry - his biggest liability - was well intentioned, but nonetheless a huge mistake?

When Allan Rock took the shackles off of his speeches, when Allan Rock greeted people without the the pretense of a minister, when Allan Rock accomompanied a few supporters to a Tragically Hip concert - he showed flashes of brilliance. He became the kind of politician that people couldn't help but like.

If this website was advising Mr. Rock, we would say this: if you do decide to make a run for leader, the best thing you can do is conduct yourself in a way that no one expects you to. Be natural...call it like you see it...show sincerity and accept responsibility...be willing to publicly accept your flaws. Being human was always Rock's best weapon; adhering to protocol often his achilles heal.

If Rock wants to shake this race up, he must let his ability to blue sky serve as his guide - ideas that people haven't heard before...vision that people forever pine for.

So a parting question to this topic...has New York shown Allan Rock how to shoot from the hip? Could Rock succeed as leader of the Liberal Party of Canada? We'd be interested in our reader's opinions - email TDH Strategies and let us know what you think.

January 30, 2006 - As opposed to listening to someone like Brian Tobin "retire" from politics to spend more time with his family, Frank McKenna's press conference earlier today came across as genuine.

He understood the commitment that would come with winning, and wasn't prepared to give up the next 8 years of his life for that cause. It was refreshing to see someone walk away from a race that most had already considered sewn up.

Now that there is no clear frontrunner, there is all the more reason to allow for ample time before a leadership convention.

January 29, 2006 - DON'T FORGET - TDH Strategies will be appearing on Public Eye Radio with Sean Holman at 7:00pm PST tonight to speak about the current state of the Liberal Party of Canada.

January 29, 2006 - Confirming our information regarding Tom Axworthy is this article detailing the inquiry that he is going to be conducting within the Liberal party. The most encouraging words from Axworthy regarding his upcoming work is this paragraph taken from the Toronto Star op/ed that he penned last Wednesday:

"The mantra of the party must be inclusion. Before the party again flies apart into various leadership coups, Liberals of all stripes, regions and generations should once again learn to work together. The way to do this is not to engage in recrimination, but instead to look at strengthening assets ... The Liberal party now has a time-out from government; it must use this time to include, not exclude, and to think deeply rather than pointing fingers."

TDH Strategies also enjoyed this post-mortem on Paul Martin from Greg Weston's piece in the Ottawa Sun this morning:

"It's almost eerie: Only days after his defeat, it is as though he never existed. No one talks about him. Reporters don't ask for his comment. The chattering classes don't debate his legacy. He's just gone. Lame duck one day. Dead one the next."

Martin was insignificant, but this party certainly isn't. Let's hope that the growing number of voices preaching this and this are being heard by the executive members, who will gather in March to pick an exact date for a Leadership convention.

January 28, 2006 - Here are the highlights of what took place on the Liberal national executive's conference call that occurred on Thursday:

° Paul Martin participated in the discussion

° David Herle accepted blame for the failure of the campaign

° The party is about $4-5 million in debt, a figure that is far lower than most were expecting

° Tom Axworthy has been tasked with writing a post-mortem report on how the campaign went so terribly wrong

° The outgoing caucus and cabinet will meet for the last time next week

° The following week, the new caucus will assemble and choose an interim leader. The early favourite still remains Bill Graham

° The party is obligated to hold a biennial convention (which is separate from the leadership convention) by the spring of 2007

° Most agreed that a leadership convention will likely have to take place in the late fall or in early 2007

° If it is held in October or November, the cutoff for signing up new members will be mid-June

January 27, 2006 - Via Robert Silver, a lawyer in Toronto and a Liberal party member, comes the most sensible and attractive hopes for the Liberal Party of Canada that we have heard to date:

"The only danger with a two staged process (policy convention and then leadership) is that in the current environment, the policy convention would be little more than a big leadership rally. I also think it is important (if the policy conference to be real) for the leader who will have to sell the policies to be known. My personal preference would be to push the leadership campaign to mid-07 (call it May), elect a leader and then have a massive thinkers/policy conference in let's say September/October 07 to help unite and focus the party. That sets the party up for an 08 campaign which is the earliest there will realistically be another election.

That having been said, I am less concerned about timing for the convention and more concerned about the rules governing the actual process itself (delegate selection, membership cut-off), etc. That's what will really determine whether this is an actual race or a coronation."

Like TDH Strategies, Robert is wisely not supporting anyone at the present time.

January 27, 2006 - Everyone in the Liberal party giddy over another leadership campaign should pick up today's Globe and Mail to read the lead editorial. It is bang on, and should be used as a wake-up call.

January 27, 2006 - TDH Strategies will be appearing on Public Eye Radio with Sean Holman this Sunday at 7:00pm PST to speak about the current leadeship craziness that is gripping the Liberal Party of Canada. Please tune in if you have the time.

January 27, 2006 - The leadership hysteria that is dominating the Liberal party at the moment is absolutely ridiculous. Bourque.com is reporting on a couple of new names - Jane Stewart and Sheila Copps - to already go along with Frank McKenna, Michael Ignatieff, Scott Brison, Belinda Stronach, Joe Volpe, Brian Tobin, Gerard Kennedy, Allan Rock, Ken Dryden, Anne McLellan, Martin Cauchon, Denis Corderre and Maurizio Bevilacqua. Ugh.

It is Liberals like this guy who are fanning the flames with errant gossip, which of course needs to be shared with the world.

Wrong. Does anyone in the Liberal party understand anything else but leadership contests anymore? Is that the only thing that this once great institution has come to represent - the struggle for power?

It's enough to turn anyone off the Libeal brand for a long time to come. Speaking with a couple of very high profile Liberals back east confirms to us that not everyone is enthusiastic about the posturing that is front and centre at the moment. We are awaiting word on exactly what went down on the national executive conference call yesterday, and will post news as soon as information becomes available.

Stay tuned to see if the so-called leadership of this party put any kind of stop to this insanity.

January 26, 2006 - The Liberal national executive conference call that TDH alluded to yesterday is indeed occurring as this very moment. If the usual suspects set a date for a leadership convention anytime soon, they will be making a colossal mistake. The last thing that the Liberal party needs right now is to descend into a divisive leadership race before figuring out where we are headed.

Oh, and that rumoured $20 million debt might also be somewhat of a hindrance.

January 26, 2006 - This is just sickening. It is a Canadian tragedy of epic proportions.

January 26, 2006 - TDH Strategies is pleased to hear about this decision.

Harken back to last May, when Beaker was serving as co-chair to the Task Force on the Future of North America. Unfamilliar with this organization? Well, let's introduce our readers once again.

This group is premised around the "deep integration" initiative, which in essence favours the elimination of borders, and reports to the Council on Foreign Affairs (CFA) (one of the most influential think tanks in Washington), the Task Force along with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) and the Mexican Council on Foreign Affairs. Without going into great detail, the task force's sole purpose is to advocate to redefine the citizenry of Canada, the United States and Mexico under the designation of "North Americans," with common interests in everything from trade to security to resource extraction.

Here are some of the statements included in a report that this group released on March 14, 2005:

"Canada, the United States and Mexico should become a single trading space surrounded by a strong security barrier to ensure North America's prosperity,"

and that

"...the plan should include a three-country border pass with biometric identifiers so people can move around easily."

The task force also wanted to see a joint strategy to protect North American energy supplies (TRANSLATION: cheap energy resources for the Unites States), common defence and security measures (TRANSLATION: no room for Canada to make independent decisions of national importance), and a system of common tariffs on every imaginable product (TRANSLATION: less control for the Canadian government to regulate what goes in and out of the country).

Beaker's justification to all 3 governments to adopt such recommendations? Well, listen to this:

"Manley said the task force wants to challenge Prime Minister Paul Martin, U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox to look beyond details and "think big ... show some vision."

As far as we're concerned, selling yourself and your country down the river for corporate interests isn't exactly the best foundation to run for Prime Minister upon. It's a good thing Beaker figured this out on his own.

January 25, 2006 - Alanis Morissette didn't understand the meaning irony, but this woman certainly does.

January 25, 2006 - 3:00pm PST: Frank McKenna has just resigned as Canada's Ambassador to the U.S.

January 25, 2006 - Fresh off of the grapevine:

Sometime this week, the national Liberal executive will engage in a conference call to a) figure out how to go about instituting an interim leader and b) determine the date of a leadership convention.

There are some interesting internal dynamics emerging. First, many Paul Martin supporters are pushing hard to keep their guy as the interim leader, an idea which is being met with great hostility. Secondly, there is a groundswell of support to get rid of current national director Steve McKinnon for his blatant leanings towards the candidacy of Frank McKenna. Lastly, many are advocating for a policy convention to take place in May or June in advance of a leadership convention, which would likely occur in October or November.

Also, word is that Stephen Harper will ask McKenna to publicly declare his intentions sooner rather than later, placing the burden of making a decision solely on the Ambassodor's shoulders.

January 24, 2006 - It is ironic that the most Prime Ministerial that Paul Martin has looked in ages came in his concession speech of defeat. He wasn't trying hard to be visionary or likeable, nor was he talking about his never ending list of priorities. Rather, he had finally resigned himself to the fact that he has been a complete and utter failure as the leader of this country. It was also very fitting that upon finishing his speech, he scurried off into the basement of the hotel, avoiding reporters' questions to privately reflect on a political career that will easily be forgotten by history.

Now onto some thoughts about last night's results:

° Look for one of Stephen Harper's first announcments after choosing his cabinet to be the revelation that the Liberals left the cupboards bare, and as a result, that there is a $3 billion deficit on the horizon. TDH Strategies wouldn't be surprised to see several spending cancellations as a result.

° Jack Layton looked elated last night, but a sobering second thought will soon bring forth the inevitable question: Was it all worth it? Yes, the NDP has 10 more seats, and his wife Olivia Chow finally got elected. On the other hand, they now have a Conservative government to deal with, and as a result of the seat totals, they will have far less influence than they did under the Liberals. We'd be very surprised to see the NDP match their output from the last parliamentary session.

° It will be fascinating to see how Prime Minister Harper handles Frank McKenna and his current role as Canadian Ambassador to Washington. Of the current crop of rumoured names, McKenna is the biggest threat to Harper in terms of potential Liberal leadership candidates. Mr. Harper was very supportive of McKenna's appointment last year, and thus for several reasons, it would be in his best interests to keep the former New Brunswick premier exactly where he is. If McKenna wants to run for the leadership, Harper would be well advised to let him publicly quit serving his country for personal political gain, and then have him try and explain that to Canadians.

° Although we are ultimately saddened by the temporary end to such a political dynasty, TDH Strategies is relieved and satisfied that we will not have to see the following three faces on television anytime soon: Anne McLellan, Reg Alcock, and Tony Valeri. All three were Paul Martin loyalists that never lived up to the quality or substance of Jean Chretien's top cabinet ministers, and their defeats are absolutely no loss for Canadians.

° TDH Strategies is aware that UN Ambassador Allan Rock has been mulling another run at the Liberal leadership, as his current post is sure to be given to a prominent Conservative in short order. With the exception of Martin's current entrenchment, there is no one in the country that has the kind of remnants of a political leadership organization that Rock still maintains. Assuming that Martin's organization moves laterally to McKenna, Mr. Rock is the only figure that could give the Martin/McKenna monopoly a real battle on the ground.

° It is likely that Harper will appoint Brian Mulroney as a special envoy to the United States for the softwood lumber dispute. If this happens, watch the former PM work out a surprisingly good deal for our interests.

° We're not going to the polls for at least a year. So, with the way things turned out last night, expect procedural gridlock to continue to be a fixture within the House of Commons. Also, get ready for what Question Period can really accomplish. After 12 years in power, the Liberal party in opposition is going to be fantastic.

That's all for now. We'll check in later in the day after all the leaders have given their post-electoral press conferences.

January 23, 2006 - What if, hypothetically speaking, a major BC political figure voted in two ridings and was caught? Final nail in the coffin?

January 23, 2006 - Tired of paying attention to 6 different polling companies and their daily results, TDH Strategies senses that the Conservatives' lead has reduced over the weekend, through no fault of Stephen Harper, nor due to any great campaign tactics engineered by Paul Martin. Rather, the Canadian electorate is still weary of the remnants of the Reform and Canadian Alliance parties, which is still very much a part of the Conservative landscape.

For example, TDH Strategies got an angry email from a reader who thought that our January 20th entry detailing David Sweet's quote about Jesus was completely inaccurate and taken out of context. More specifically, we were asked a couple of direct questions:

"It would be easy enough for me to find a dozen out-of-context quotes and tar a dozen really good Liberal candidates in the same manner, but why bother? Why you picked up on something David explained 2 years ago is beyond me. Is he a committed Christian? Yup. Why this is taken to universally imply pettiness and bigotry is something I just don't understand."

Well, without getting into a debate about the need for separation between Church and State, all TDH will say is that a) there is absolutely nothing that could have been removed from before or after such an offensive quote that could make Sweet's words seem out of context and b) this is a perfect example of the kind of attitudes that will prevent voters from giving the Conservatives a majority, in spite of Harper's reasonable and measured leadership.

Now, while predictions add nothing to the debate, TDH Strategies feels propelled to offer an estimated seat breakdown anyways. So, without any scientific data to back up our numbers, and only a cursory examination of each province, here is how we see tonight coming in:

Conservatives - 127

Liberals - 87

NDP - 31

BQ - 63

This morning, we'll be off to vote after taking some Pepto Bismol in anticipation of our choices (Hedy Fry? Svend Robinson? Ugh), and then will begin writing a victory speech for a young superstar candidate in the GTA. We will also be glued to Newsworld, and might check back in with a post later in the day.

Please do your duty, and get out and vote.

January 23, 2006 - We are praying that money isn't everything when this offer is considered. It's important for the country.

January 20, 2006 - Sometimes campaign volunteers are a welcome sight in a wasteland of apathy. Then, at other times, you wish that you never have to see another one again. This is one of those times.

January 20, 2006 - Back in November, TDH Strategies wrote that Stephen Harper seems to develop a bad case of spontaneous arthritis every time he has his hands around the neck of an opponent. Well, this time his fingers are being pried loose by the wingnuts he seems unable to escape. How do you stand by the candidacy of a man who says this to Christian Week magazine:

"Men are natural influencers, whether we like it or not. There's a particular reason why Jesus called men only. It's not that women aren't co-participators. It's because Jesus knew women would naturally follow."

Combine this with the fact that Harper said his personal views are too complicated to explain regarding abortion, and the fact that he is publicly preparing for what he deems as an abuse of power by the Senate, and the hapless Paul Martin has been handed a real issue with traction over this final weekend of decision-making.

Martin's initial fear mongering that this would be the most extreme right wing government in Canadian history only took on a notion of validity after these kind of comments emerged - meaning that Harper and his gang have just given Martin credibility (a very difficult thing to accomplish these days).

We still want Martin gone, but God help us all if Harper achieves a majority.

January 19, 2006 - Everywhere he turns, his own people continue to embarass him. Yesterday it's Buzz, and today it's a morning campaign rally in Oshawa:

"Paul Martin, trying to persuade voters that Harper is an extremist who would clamp down on personal freedoms such as gay marriage and abortion, has been hit by the inability of his own legislators and allies to stay on message.

Minutes after he spoke in Oshawa, local Liberal candidate Judi Longfield told reporters she would vote against gay marriage if Parliament decided to reconsider the matter.

She also said she disagreed with Martin's promise to alter the constitution to make it impossible for Parliament to overturn decisions by the Supreme Court on freedoms such as gay marriage and abortion."

You almost have to feel sorry for the guy.

We said almost.

January 19, 2006 - Has he really changed? That is the question that is asked by Thomas Walkom about Stephen Harper in this Toronto Star column. Now, these types of questions are inevitable, in light of the fact that Harper is just 4 days away from becoming the new Prime Minister of Canada.

And yet, while TDH Strategies will undoubtedly fail to agree with so many of the Conservatives' coming policies and initiatives, and will passionately rally against them in this forum, the personality traits of Stephen Harper as an individual give us more cause for hope than Paul Martin ever has.

We watched a one-on-one interview between Harper and Global National's Kevin Newman last night, where both men took a step away from politics and roamed around the childhood Toronto neighbourhood in which Harper grew up. And there it was, coming through the screen without any filter - a truly genuine man that was comfortable enough not to give Canadians the same tired old lines.

There was no need for precursors like "Let me be very clear..." or "The fact of the matter is...," because the way in which he spoke was instantly believable. He reminisced affectionately about his dearly departed father, he explained how he would respond to the onset of power, he talked about home being anywhere his family was.

By contrast, when Paul Martin awkwardly declares that this is the best cup of coffee anywhere during a campaign stop, or blusters with false bravado about how he loves Canada, there is always a measure of doubt that is directly attributable to the way in which he "speaks from the heart." Maybe that's as a result of never clearly identifying the personal beliefs that guided him as a leader...maybe it's because everything being a priority relegated nothing as important...maybe the manner in which he assumed power was characterized by trampling over people, rules and history without any regard. But regardless, he never allowed himself the opportunity to be a real, tactile person that people could identify with.

In our opinion, Harper's previous stiff, "ice man" image was largely brought about by constantly being told that he was a monster by the media. In fact, watching CBC's The Hour and their Issue Van drive around to get people to spout off about the campaign last night demonstrated that many interviewees who mentioned a fear of Harper weren't able to identify exactly why that was. Negatively pigeonholing someone before they really have a chance to share their being with the country is tantamount to backing an animal into a corner without escape - defence mechanisms kick in.

Make no mistake about the voracity that this website will take on Tory policies that are expected to take a less inclusive, more invidualistic view of people within this country. TDH Strategies is going to have plenty to oppose over the coming years.

The personal characteristics of Stephen Harper, however, aren't expected to be on that list of criticisms.

January 19, 2006 - Paul Martin responds to reporters' questions about how he thinks his campaign has gone so far.

January 18, 2006 - This tactic by the Liberals really isn't Kosher, and indicative of the way that partisan interests currently take precedence over government procedure. How much could they possibly raise in donations from PCO staff members, and whatever that amount may be, why do they think that politicizing the most non-partisan wing of the government is OK? Soliciting donations from any bureaucrat, whose job largely rises and falls with the outcome of this election, is just wrong. But hey, as long as they can run some more accurate ads about their opposition, it makes it all acceptable.

January 18, 2006 - Digging up past quotes by Paul Martin's group of kool-aid drinkers has become so entertaining in light of the way that this election campaign has gone for the government. Today, we take a look at David Herle, and some great lines he fed to the Liberal caucus back in the summer talking about...election readiness (hahahahahaah). Here are some excerpts from a Globe and Mail article from August 25th (use Internet Explorer to view this link):

"Paul Martin's chief strategist told Liberal MPs yesterday they can win a majority government in February by adding seats in the West and Ontario, with or without gains in Quebec. Senior insiders said David Herle, the national Liberal campaign co-chair and the party's pollster, characterized it as a "daunting task" but said "if I pull it off they won't talk about David Smith any more, they'll talk about me."

Oh they're going to talk about you alright...for many years to come.

"[He] really [made us] think we could snatch a majority government without Quebec," said an MP about Mr. Herle's presentation."

Well, current polling ensures that the Tories certainly are supportive of that kind of logic.

"Although Mr. Herle was generally optimistic, he did warn that, "either we win a majority or we could lose entirely."

Well, 50% ain't bad.

"Mr. Herle noted that Paul Martin is a force for them, as he "moves votes."

Yes, he has definitely moved votes this time around. In fact, here's Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan confirming that fact in this article published yesterday:

"It's the national campaign and they've done something they don't like and we have to respond to that and it takes time. I wish I could be out there talking more positively about what we have done."

So with regards to Herle, we want to help out - so is there anyone who needs a pollster with his prediction abilities? The accuracy of his prognostications might be about as reliable as picking lottery numbers, but on the bright side, he is sure to make you feel really good before losing.

January 17, 2006 - To this point, Stephen Harper hadn't scared us during this campaign like his predecessors Preston Manning and Stockwell Day, who never knew the difference between the pulpit and the podium in pontificating public policy. It was beginning to look as though Harper understood that faith in Canada is a private affair that Canadians do not need to hear about from their public representatives.

But now, we're beginning to get very weary of what is on the horizon. This is the first sentence in a New York Times article from last week:

""God bless all of you, God bless Canada!" is the way Stephen Harper finishes every campaign speech as he appears to be heading toward a landslide victory to become prime minister."

Real Liberals are coming back into the fold, and if Harper expects to hold joint cross-border prayer sessions with his buddy George W. Bush, then he'd better be ready to face those who aren't prepared to witness a situation like the Washington Times described in Patrick Basham's puff piece last month:

"Stephen Harper may not receive a better opportunity to gain power and to steer Canada in a more conservative direction. If he and his fellow Conservatives can seize this opportunity to recast the policy debate, it will reveal a great deal about the evolving nature of Canadian political culture."

Canadian political culture hasn't changed...the country just can't take anymore of Paul Martin. Get ready for a fight, Harper.

January 17, 2006 - My how times have changed. These are quotes from an article published in advance of last year's leadership review at the Liberal party's biennial convention:

"I fully expect the prime minister to get at least 80 per cent and I wouldn't be surprised if it was closer to 90." - Paul Szabo, MP for Mississauga-South

"I would be surprised if the vote didn't go 100 per cent." - Sarmite Bulte, MP for Parkdale-High Park, and best friend to lobbyists from the film, music and video game industries.

"I don't hear a whisper or a scintilla of people who want to oppose or unseat the prime minister. It'd be "political suicide" to question Martin's leadership after a scant year of minority government." - John McKay, MP for Scarborough-Guildwood

And these are excerpts from Jim Travers' lastest column in this morning's Toronto Star:

"I don't think there is a single Paul Martin Liberal left," a worried cabinet minister confides over lunch."

"Those Liberals are really leftover Progressive Conservatives. They contributed monster bucks to Martin's leadership and in 2004 voted heavily for Liberals in what until now has been considered the ruling party's impregnable core."

"It's come to that for Liberals who once rode effortlessly to Ottawa on leadership coattails. Today, those coattails are gone and how the ride ends Monday is far from certain."

What people tend to forget is that being a Liberal has never had to do with the outcome of a leadership race, and so those underlings and hanger-ons (including those MPs and Ministers that were so anxious to sack the most successful leader in a generation for their own personal gain) who took a trip on Paul Martin's train deserve everything they get for forgetting why they believed in Liberal values in the first place.

Paul Martin never represented those ideals for thousands of party faithful across the country, and now is the time to not only choose a new leader, but to reform this party into something we can all be proud of once again.

January 16, 2006 - It is really quite fascinating to see the way the effectiveness of a campaign can act as a nearly inpenetrable buffer to details, which we all know is where the devil resides. Take for example the Conservatives' shady ommissions from their economic seal of approval.

The Liberals have spent the past week trumpeting the fact that Stephen Harper's economic numbers just don't add up. Well, take a look at these excerpts from an article in this morning's Globe and Mail:

"An economist hired by the Tories to evaluate the affordability of the party's platform was not given two significant promises to assess."

"Yesterday, he was asked whether the two Tory pledges in question were part of the platform he evaluated. Mr. Darby appeared uncomfortable with the questions, but acknowledged these two promises were not costed in the platform he examined. He noted the Tories have still not priced out those two pledges in the election platform they unveiled last week."

"Asked last night whether this lack of costing is important, Mr. Darby replied: "Ask [them]," he said, referring to the Conservatives."

And yet, when Paul Martin's platform failed to include his wild promise to prevent using the notwithstanding clause, every newspaper in this country was sure to point out the inconsistency.

It is an amazing turn of events that Harper has built up such a political immune system that a major missing detail such as this isn't endlessly associated with a "hidden agenda." The same goes for the Liberal advertisements - some of them tend to be effective, largely because many of them are direct quotes that Harper should have to answer for. They have served to no avail, however, as one crucial tactical error in the release of this blitz has rendered their individual messages completely irrelevent.

Martin's inner circle used to be filled with brilliant strategists - the manner in which they conquered the Liberal Party was a feat that, while without scruples, took years of careful planning, coordination and above all else, execution (in more than one sense of the word). But in the same way that Martin's stellar record as Finance Minister will forever be overshadowed by his insignificant reign as Prime Minister, so too will the once storied political know-how of "the Board," whose infamous internal partisan manoeuvrings have already been forgotten due to running one of the worst election campaigns in Canadian history.

January 15, 2006 - Over at Progressive Bloggers, TDH has been informed that one irate reader has accused this website of being a plant for the Conservatives. In response to such a humourous accusation, we'll be brief.

February will mark TDH's 10th year of activity within politics, and more specifically, involvement with the Liberal Party of Canada. Now, while it is true that we let our membership lapse last year, and haven't been active for the past 2-3 years, our Liberal identification has never waivered.

That being said, a Paul Martin defeat will be the best thing to happen to this party in a long time. He and his supporters have been a cancerous presence within the organization for the better part of a decade, and their conquer and divide tactics and mentality are finally catching up to them.

Like we said last night to a reader, let's first get rid of Martin. Then, we can focus our efforts on returning the party to its former glory.

January 13, 2006 - BREAKING NEWS! From CKNW:

Abbotsford candidate dumped by Liberals

Jan, 13 2006 - 2:10 PM

ABBOTSFORD/CKNW(AM980) - The Liberal candidate in Abbotsford has been dumped by the party because he's been accused of trying to bribe the NDP candidate in his riding.

David Oliver has been asked to stop identifying himself as the Liberal candidate. New Democrat Jeffery Hansen-Carlson has filed a complaint with Elections Canada --claiming Oliver and his campaign manager offered him a job if he agreed to drop out of the race.

First we report on Emerson, now we hear about Oliver. Who's going to be next?

January 13, 2006 - After yesterday's posting, TDH Strategies received three phone calls from Doug Beaton, the 2004 election Campaign Director for the Liberal Party of Canada in British Columbia, Senior Advisor to Minister of Industry David Emerson, and current campaign manager for Mr. Emerson in Vancouver Kingsway.

He stated that the Minister had never sat down with Burnaby-Douglas Conservative candidate George Drazenovic for a meeting in a restaurant, and strongly encouraged us to get in touch with Mr. Drazenovic directly to get the real story (which seemed like odd advice from a Liberal campaign manager with the above-mentioned roles and responsibilities).

So, TDH Strategies did exactly that. Here are the details that were relayed to us, on the record.

First, it must be mentioned that before talking to TDH Strategies, a concerned Mr. Beaton called Drazenovic to find out what was going on with the "rumours" flying around.

In June, Drazenovic was leaving from a visit with his mother (who is currently his campaign manager) in Emerson's riding where she lives, when he saw the Minister exiting a restaurant on Main Street with his family. George pulled his car over, and started up a brief conversation, as both men had become acquainted at an event during the 2004 campaign. Upon hearing that Drazenovic was working for EPOD International Inc., an integrated Energy Services company that produces products which support alternative energy markets, Emerson indicated that the federal government was always on the lookout for new technologies, and that someone from his office would be in touch.

Eventually, Drazenovic received a phone call from Don Stickney, Emerson's constituency assistant. Stickney not only spent time finding out more about Drazenovic's company, but also about the young Conservative's future plans, questioning him as to whether he intended on staying in the private sector, or was thinking about running again. Drazenovic indicated that he was planning to once again take a run at the Conservative nomination for Burnaby-Douglas.

In early September, Beaton called Drazenovic, and set up a meeting at the Ministers Regional Office to discuss possible opportunities for EPOD. This is the office that is run by Bill Cunningham, Drazenovic's Liberal competition in Burnaby-Douglas, and as mentioned yesterday, the man who serves as the Executive Director and Senior Advisor at the Ministers Regional Office, where he oversees the staff for the five Cabinet Ministers from British Columbia - including Doug Beaton.

The meeting took place soon afterwards with Beaton and an Industry Canada bureaucrat, where as relayed by Drazenovic, he was told that the Sustainable Development Technology Canada program would be an ideal fit for a company like his, and that he was strongly encouraged to pursue the application process.

To date, neither EPOD, nor Drazenovic, have chosen to put in such a request for funding.

Question: Why is a senior advisor to Minister David Emerson calling up a Conservative candidate from another riding to talk about "rumours"?

Question: Why did Don Stickney take such an interest in George's political plans for the future?

Question: As the man who runs the Ministers Regional Office, how much influence did Bill Cunningham have over Doug Beaton in strongly encouraging Drazenovic to pursue the funding application process?

Question: Do 5 minute conversations on the street usually get such a thorough response from the Minister's staff, particularly when it comes to potential federal funding support?

These are troubling queries which indicate that the appearance of conflict isn't something that Mr. Emerson's apparatchiks seem very concerned about.

January 12, 2006 - As a follow up to our story below about the dangling of federal grants to Burnaby-Douglas Conservative candidate George Drazenovic, here is what he told the Burnaby Now newspaper in their December 17th issue:

"The problem with governments is they always make these grandiose announcements - such as the Kyoto Accord - but there is little help for going through the system, for filing an offering or paying taxes. You could speculate that the government would help you, but small companies just can't do this. They can't afford it. But I don't think anybody would argue that if you're promoting green energy that a subsidy is a bad thing."

"I know Conservatives in general do not believe subsidies are efficient, but I believe this field is different."

Funny how his views have changed since the last election.

January 12, 2006 - You want a story on how this Paul Martin gang operates? Here goes one that is sure to make your blood boil.

George Drazenovic is a young and bright Tory candidate running in Svend Robinson's old riding for the second time. He pulled in a respectable 12,531 votes last time, competing against the eventual winner Bill Siksay of the NDP who garnered 15,682 votes, and Liberal insider Bill Cunningham, who came in second with 14,748 votes.

As has been reported by other local websites (check out the January 8th post), Drazenovic's campaign has been nowhere up until the past week, forcing the central campaign to step in for complete inactivity. This surprising disinterest struck us as a little suspicious, considering that George was as enthusiastic a candidate as TDH Strategies encountered anywhere in 2004.

Bill Cunningham is one of those Martin kool-aid drinkers with a long history as an organizer within the party. He served for many years as the Liberal Party of Canada's President here in British Columbia, and as soon as Martin took power, secured a nice cushy job as Executive Director and Senior Advisor at the Ministers Regional Office in Vancouver, where he oversaw the staff for the five Cabinet Ministers from British Columbia. As a candidate, Cunningham is getting every possible resource avaiable to him from the central campaign (often to the expense of other less favoured candidates), and has had a steady stream of Cabinet Ministers from across the country coming out to help him.

So what would propel such a formerly excited politcal upstart like Drazenovic to rollover and play dead in the such a winnable election?

George works as Chief Financial Officer for EPOD International Inc., an integrated Energy Services company that on its website claims to be "the leaders in electric power storage systems for the Distributed Generation, Co-Generation, Wind and Solar Power markets." If you go do a Google search like this or this, you will begin to understand that there are huge amounts of federal grant money, particularly through Kyoto related initatives, for alternative energy projects and technologies. Hell, if a company like Ballard, whose fuel cells have been losing money for the past decade, can get millions from the federal government, just about anyone can.

So here is the scene. In the summer, George receives a call from Don Stickney, Cunningham's campaign manager in 2004, asking him to meet Minister David Emerson for dinner to discuss his company, and ways that the Government of Canada might be able to help out. George accepts, and meets the Minister at a Chinese restaurant on Main St., where Emerson is dining with his wife.

Emerson shows great interest in EPOD, and indicates that he thinks the company would be in line for several federal granting streams, largely originating from within Industry Canada. Drazenovic is told that if something was worked out, and an announcement was made, he would have to be featured prominently at the event.

Let TDH Strategies preface this entry with the fact that we do not have a smoking gun, per se, but we encourage any sceptics to ask Stickney, Drazenovic or Emerson to deny that the meeting ever happened. Secondly, we cannot speculate as to whether any firm promises were made, although Drazenovic's non-existent campaign makes us wonder.

The funniest thing about this whole story? The fact that come January 23rd, the Liberals might not have any Ministers left to give out the grants that Emerson was alluding to.

January 11, 2006 - TDH sources back in Ontario tell us that Michael Ignatieff has been less than complimentary towards Paul Martin and the central campaign team in private conversations to Liberals (including some that took place at his event last night), making his double meaning quotes in the Toronto Star (posted below) all the more suspicious.

January 11, 2006 - If there was absolutely any doubt as to whether Michael Ignatieff's $300 a plate fundraiser last night was a leadership campaign kickoff, and completely unrelated to his current attempt to become an MP, just take a look at these quotes:

"Senior Liberals turned out last night to hear rookie politician Michael Ignatieff warn that Canada is facing a national unity crisis in which "we need troops, warriors and chieftains" ready for the political battle over Quebec."

"Young federalist Quebecers exist but they need a champion...to give them the courage to speak."

"Ignatieff lashed out at Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, warning that he advocates open federalism which "accommodates nationalism in ways that are extremely dangerous to the national unity of Canada."

Hmmmm...it isn't as though Ignatieff's own leader Paul Martin has:

1) just had one of his top advisors face an embarassing incident on national television over a false ad accusing the Tories of wanting to put more armed troops into Canadian cities (see below)

2) told the country that defending Canada was in his DNA and

3) accomodated several nationalists, including his top Quebec lieutenant, into the government.

One gets the feeling that Ignatieff doesn't care too much as to whether he wins in his own riding...so long as Paul Martin loses the election, and essentially, his right to lead the Liberal party.

January 11, 2006 - Speaking of Mike Duffy, this exchange with Liberal "strategist" John Duffy is a classic, and really indicative of the way that the press and the public are getting fed up with the Liberal spin machine of bullshit. This is quite possibly the most entertaining thing we have seen over the entire election campaign.

What idiots like Duffy, Scott "beer and popcorn" Reid, David Herle and the rest of Martin's hit squad have to understand is that their gig is up, and the usual bullying, dirty, underhanded tactics that they have been employing for more than a decade won't be tolerated anymore.

What goes around, comes around, and the look of shock on Duffy's face was priceless. Good riddance.

January 11, 2006 - We have to ask this question, as it has been the topic of discussion since Paul Martin's move of desperation on the notwithstanding clause.

Martin had a good thing going by dragging out Stephen Harper's quotes from his past. Sure, some of them were over a decade old, but in politics, even when you reinvent yourself, you cannot run from your past without having to defend it. The new Liberal ads that we linked to yesterday are centred around Harper's previous political incarnations.

But Martin's secret weapon on Monday night was his pledge to prevent the federal government from ever using the notwithstanding clause.

Question: if you were to go up to 10 people on any street in Canada, how many of them would be able to tell you what the notwithstanding clause was?

Question: if CTV reporter Mike Duffy admits on national television that his daughter, who is a university educated young woman, asked him to explain the notwithstanding clause to her, how many Canadians can really be expected to understand the significance (or insignificance, come to think of it) of Martin's proposal?

Question: who is the genius who thought that this promise was something that was going to resonate with voters, and turn the fortunes of the pathetic Liberal campaign?

Doesn't make any sense from our point of view.

January 10, 2006 - We think it is too little, too late, and ironically, we hear from a reliable source that the Martin campaign team brought in a Chretien guy to design them, but these will be very hard to defend against.

The best way in our opinion? Don't avoid them - Martin has plenty of his own quotes that you can use as examples of how people change. Just take a look our first posting of the day detailing Martin's past statements on the notwithstanding clause, for example.

January 10, 2006 - If there was anything of substance that any of the leaders gave voters to remember last night, this closing statement by Stephen Harper was it:

"My strengths are not spin or passion; I know that you know that. My policies are clear, and my intentions are sincere and straightforward."

This final statement to the voting public is the type of messaging that TDH Strategies has been promoting heavily over the past year:

"Politicians have lost respect because of non-answers, political spin and selfish power grabs. But more than anything, the one aspect about the modern Canadian politician that continues to create distance with the public is the fear of being human.

If you are willing to make mistakes, not always give the perfect answer, and God forbid, even admit fault, then you are much more likely to be supported when you embrace innovation, test out new ideas, assume personal responsibility, and above all, take risks.

These are the true qualities of leadership." - TDH Strategies, September 28, 2005

It is a risk to admit your most glaring faults before a national audience in what may be the most important television performance of your career. It is also a brilliant move, from a purely political point of view.

Paul Martin has spent the entirety of this campaign and the last one telling Canadians that there are deep differences between himself and Mr. Harper. But aside from policy, the most obvious difference is the fact that every emotion that Stephen Harper puts forth is real...is sincere...and is true to the person he is. So he isn't the most exciting guy, or the most charasmatic, or the one that has mastered the art of media manipulation. But last night, he demonstrated that more important than all those "faults" is his willingness to stand on what he believes.

Martin, on the other hand, has never stood for anything, and thus when he allegedly is passionate about national unity, or is angry about personal attacks, it rings entirely false because a) his record doesn't jive with his rhetoric and b) he always comes across as fake and feigned.

Just like Harper said...it always takes something for Martin to take action - he only investigates his government when he is caught; he only stands up for federalism and a strong federal government when Quebec voter support is being dominated by separatists; he only engages with Aboriginals when he is on the verge of an election campaign. So much of what the man does is reactionary, and so many of his resulting "priorities" seem like thinly veiled political bullshit.

Last night, Harper took the attacks of all three leaders, and successfully came across as another viable alternative to form government. He presented measured and reasonable policy for a significant portion of the electorate, really made an impact with his proposals for ethics and accountability in government, and demonstrated a demeanour that was Prime Ministerial. He weathered the storm, and came through relatively unscathed.

Jack Layton had a couple of decent lines, and really did make some strong points about the relationships with lobbyists held by both the Liberals and Conservatives and the Quebec model for daycare. All of it was negated, however, by the way he came across. Most of his time on camera came across as far too scripted, far too comatose, and ultimately, far too irrelevant.

After speaking to several non-politicos watching the debate, the verdict became clear: Jack Layton was begging for votes. He didn't give people a reason to vote for him, but rather only attempted to give Canadians the reasons why they couldn't vote for the two main parties. Even if this debate doesn't make much of a difference in the polls, we figure that Mr. Layton will be lucky to simply hold onto the seats that he currently has.

Gilles Duceppe didn't do anything to harm his chances with his base of support, and made a brilliant attack against the Prime Minister after Martin told the television audience that the Bloc Quebecois couldn't do anything in Ottawa to affect change. He also had a great line about not needing 10,000 inspectors and statisticians in Health Canada, but more nurses and doctors.

That being said, the fact that he cracked open the "Quebec as a nation" argument so prominently means that many federalist voters who were thinking of giving the BQ a protest vote against the Liberals will be reconsidering that course of action. In fact, that speech might have turned more people onto Mr. Harper than it did back into the arms of Mr. Martin.

Overall, by typical debate standards, last night was a good show. The fact that their were no knockout blows, and on the other side of the coin, no major gaffes, means that the polling numbers that put Harper ahead by 8 percentage points just days ago are not likely to move much following these debates.

We have the strong feeling that these are the final weeks of a political legacy.

January 10, 2006 - Before we offer our review of last night's debate, let TDH Strategies state that if we hear the phrase "The fact of the matter is..." or any similar variation one more time, we will throw our television out the window. In fact, this is what we wrote on January 8, 2004 in our 3rd ever entry:

"The Canadian public should get used to the new Prime Ministerial lexicon that will populate evening newscasts and newspaper coverage for years to come."

"Jean Chretien staples like "But for me...," "da proof is da proof and when you have da good proof, it's proven" and "Vive Le Canada" will be sorely missed. In fact, so will the words "poopular" (popular) and "turd" (third). These will be replaced by Paul Martin's "Let me be very clear..." and "The fact of the matter is..."

We get it...you're all about facts. Now shut up already.

Now, with regards to last night's performances, it was definitely a more entertaining spectacle than the first round in Vancouver, and moderator Steve Paikin has to be commended for allowing the leaders to go at one another. That's what it should be about...it is a debate after all.

Paul Martin was doing OK for a while - his attacks on Harper's statements from the past (Canada is a "northern European welfare state," Canada will never has as strong an identity as the U.S.) were strong, he played the personal responsibility card with regards to the sponsorship scandal well, and was effective in arguing that Canadians and Quebecers have the same values.

Then he went crazy:

"The first act of a new Liberal government is going to be to strengthen the charter. We're going to do that by removing, by constitutional means, the possibility for the federal government to use the notwithstanding clause because, quite simply, I think governance says that the courts shouldn't be overturned by politicians."

One word...UNBELIEVABLE.

First, let's revisit history just like Martin did to Stephen Harper:

"My responsibility as Prime Minister, my duty to Canada and to Canadians, is to defend the Charter in its entirety. Not to pick and choose the rights that our laws shall protect and those that are to be ignored. Not to decree those who shall be equal and those who shall not. My duty is to protect the Charter, as some in this House will not." Paul Martin, February 2005, speaking about Bill C-38

TDH guesses that Martin has a different understanding of the word "entirety." But alas, let's continue:

"Prime Minister Paul Martin says he would use the Constitution's notwithstanding clause if the Supreme Court rules that churches must perform gay marriages. "Oh, yes I would," Martin said Thursday on CBC Radio when asked whether he would use the clause." - from CanWest News, Monday, January 12, 2004

Let's forget the fact that he completely contradicted himself on many different levels and say this - there was a very good reason that Pierre Trudeau included the notwithstanding clause into the Charter: the supremacy of the judiciary should not be uneqivocal in every situation. In fact, Stephen Harper's response that he believes in the balance afforded in the current Charter between the courts and parliament is much more reasonable than Martin's sweeping pledge.

Not surprisingly, this isn't even something he can deliver on without the unanimous consent of Parliament and the 10 provincial legislative assemblies. So in essence, he is literally begging the premiers to come out and blow the promise out of the water.

If ever there was an act of desperation on the campaign trail, this was it. Like usual, Martin is opening up a can of worms without any thought or consideration for the consequences of his actions (just like he did with Gomery and the hugely negative impact it has had to federalism in Quebec).

More on the other leaders' performances later in the day.

January 9, 2006 - The television debates tonight will be significant not for the issues or policy that is highlighted, but rather by the focus of attack for each leader. Here is what TDH Strategies is going to be looking out for:

° A poll released this morning by the Strategic Council on behalf of CTV and The Globe and Mail puts the Tories at 37% nationally, as compared to the Liberals' 29%. What is even more interesting are the Tory numbers in Quebec, which have jumped 11 points over the past 2 weeks to 19%, only 2% off of Paul Martin's level of support. Thus, we will be very interested to see the crucial strategic choice from Martin on whether he will focus his efforts characterizing Gilles Duceppe as Canada's biggest threat to the future, or instead attack Stephen Harper on issues that his party is weak on in la belle province, namely Kyoto and same sex marriage.

° Harper is clearly in the lead going into tonight, with most of the momentum being attributed to his campaign. The gloves are going to come off tonight, particularly from the likes of Martin, and therefore it is going to be very telling in how the Conservative leader responds. If TDH were advising ol' blue eyes, we would instruct him to completely avoid the mud slinging that is bound to occur. Rather, look Prime Ministerial, stay above the fray, and continue to offer Canadians tangible deliverables that all Canadians can buy into. People are already looking for changes, and are well past convinced that the Liberals have been in power far too long...so this might very well be Harper's final audition as a safe place that the disenfranchised can park their vote.

°Jack Layton has become an irrelevant force in this election, largely because his pleas to voters to give New Democrats the balance of power have fallen flat. People are already aware that we are headed for a minority government, regardless of which party pulls off the victory. And, as a result, they are well aware that either option is going to be put on a very tight leash after winning. What Layton must do is point out those policies that the NDP champions above both the Liberals and the Conservatives (although with the Liberals' support for same sex marriage, and the Conservatives pledging to invest substantially into green transportation options, those types of issues are quickly dwindling). Jack's only shot tonight is to set up the next 2 weeks by alluding to all the legislation and actions in the House that were accomplished with NDP support. People must view Layton's caucus as indispensable.

° Paul Martin has looked like a defeated man over the past 2 weeks, whether in announcing billions for cleaning up the Great Lakes, or in defending his beleaguered Finance Minister. Never mind whining over new support - tonight, Martin must solidify his own base, both with campaign workers who are fed up, and long-time Liberal voters who are ready to jump. Unless he comes out with some passion, and willingness to show that he still has a fight in him, he is finished.

° Above all else, the 2 ongoing RCMP investigations will be the most tricky to handle, both from the opposition who is salivating with the prospect of pinning the Prime Minister into a corner, and from Martin's point of view, who has been unable to shake the corruption label. This is the most important battleground that will unfold tonight.

Quite frankly, we don't expect fireworks. However, make no mistake about it...this could be a final chance for everyone except for Duceppe to make a lasting impression well into the ballot box. Policy is over - tactics now become everything.

January 9, 2006 - This was our final statement in this morning's interview with Montreal's The New 940 talk radio:

"Paul Martin came to office concerned with power above all else, without any sort of policy or vision for the country - and now it's catching up to him. He is running around like a chicken with his head cut off."

Considering the state of the Liberal campaign, we thought that the image was quite appropriate.

January 7, 2006 - No matter how much we dislike Paul Martin and what he has done to the Liberal party, TDH still won't be without conflicted feelings should the Conservatives win. That being said, we will dance in the streets if this horrible woman loses her seat and we never have to hear that shrill, nails down a blackboard voice again.

January 7, 2006 - Like we said last week, watch out for this investigation - the SEC will be relentless if American investors got screwed, regardless of the weak denials by Scott Reid.

January 6, 2006 - CORRECTION: This will be occurring on Monday, January 9th. For those interested in the voice behind the words, TDH Strategies will be appearing on Montreal's talk radio station The New 940 at 9:13 a.m. EST to offer a little punditry and take the piss out of someone, no doubt.

January 6, 2006 - Here is current Liberal MP for Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca Keith Martin circa 1999-2000, speaking on the health care system as a Reform MP:

"We talk about the basic humanity of health care, and about preserving, maintaining and ensuring that Canadians get the health care they need. However, the cold hard reality is that in 1999 Canadians are not receiving it. We have a two tiered system of health care in Canada today. There are those who receive health care and those who do not. Every tenet of the Canada Health Act is being violated. It is a myth to say that we will support the status quo because the status quo is killing Canadians."

"We are also not taking into consideration a brick wall that we will slam into. A lot of people will be hurt. That brick wall is our demographics. In the next 20 years our population over the age of 65 will double. As our population ages so too do our demands increase on programs such as pensions, health care and other services. Yet there is no debate. There is only deafening silence on what we should be doing to prepare for the future and to deal with our needs in health care and the demographic changes that are going to be imposed upon our pension system."

We post these statements because on Tuesday, Mr. Martin refused to join Prime Minister Paul Martin in Victoria for his health care funding announcement because of "philosophical differences" with his leader's approach to health care.

For the record, while we have always believed that as a physician, Keith Martin has consistently flirted a little too closely with private care options, TDH Strategies is in complete agreement when he speaks about this silence that is emanating from the government on reforming health care. As has been pontificated on this site before, it is going to take bravery and vision to properly buffer our health care system against that demographic brick wall referred to above.

That being said, Paul Martin obviously has a different take on what the solutions to health care are - essentially, throwing money down the black hole of rising costs is what he feels comfortable doing. Fair enough.

But Martin's no-show is indicative of a larger philosophy that Mr. Dithers and his cabal have instilled into the Liberal party. That is, when it comes to the big tent philosophy, it isn't ideology, belief systems or past political incarnations that will determine one's eligibility to be welcomed into the fold. Rather, anyone willing to chug Paul Martin's kool-aid becomes an ideal candidate/soldier/loyalist.

As this article in the Toronto Star so aptly points out, "Yes" men form the majority of the group who have brought Paul Martin to this point in history. And, they are all united by one defining characteristic: the cult of power:

"No one in the Prime Minister's inner circle can command the respect of the bureaucracy, rein in Martin's excesses or see beyond the next opinion poll."

"...good trench warriors seldom make effective managers."

"...party leaders...pick aides in their own image. What they need instead are people who can fill the gaps in their skills, recognize their faults and compensate for the weaknesses."

"A gifted lieutenant does not assure a prime minister a place in posterity."

Exactly. Brute force can never be mistaken for political finesse, and eventually, those without vision will be relegated to irrelvancy.

This post ends with the same question that many of us have been asking for years: "Paul Martin, what do you stand for?"

Unfortunately, we still have no answer.

January 5, 2006 - The 100 Huntley Street Election Tour is coming soon to a town near you!

Anyone who has ever watched morning television in this country is familliar with the evangelical Christian ministry 100 Huntley Street and its founder David Mainse, pictured below:

Mainse, who according to the show's website is now referred to as the "Minister of Evangelism and Social Action," does not actually appear on the show anymore, and is now replaced by various family members. Rather, Mainse beams in from time to time over the phone, with his voice presented as a divine intervention imparting wisdom.

After handing a mysterious letter to Stephen Harper at a campaign rally in early December, Mainse is now conducting a tour of cities and communities across the country, encouraging people to go and vote for "candidates who reflect Christian values, believe in marriage, and are guided by their faith," as was described in a phone call with Mainse's personal secretary this morning.

Last night Mainse hit Montreal, and he has already held rallies in Halifax, St. John and Winnipeg. This coming week, he will be appearing in Saskatoon, Regina and Calgary.

While careful not to officially endorse any one party, Mainse is lashing out against those MPs who voted for Bill C-38, which gave legal recognition to gay marriage last summer.

Harper had better pray that Mainse keeps his electioneering to a low profile, as the Conservative leader's shift to the centre-right has gone relatively smoothly - so far, at least.

January 5, 2006 - Pierre Bourque is one of this country's most respected information sources, and as this website can attest to, a link on his Bourque.com page means that thousands upon thousands of Canada's top decision-makers are going read the respective content behind the URL.

In light of his power, this image that Bourque is using to describe the Martin Liberals can only be considered a major sign of the times.

This opinion seems to be in line with some the telling aspects of the Grit campaign at the moment. Here is an accounting on one of the VoyForums message threads of the ever-evolving story on the RCMP probe into the income trusts leak:

"At the beginnning Goodale's answer was - only he (Goodale) knew, it was a very very small group.

A day later Goodale's answer was - only he (Goodale)and key people in Finance knew, it was a very very small group.

A day later Goodale's answer was - only he (Goodale), key people in Finance and the Prime Minister knew, it was a very very small group.

A day later Goodale's answer was - only he (Goodale), key people in Finance, the Prime Minister and key people in PMO knew, it was a very very small group.

A day later Goodale's answer was - only he (Goodale), key people in Finance, the Prime Minister, key people in PMO and two other Ministers knew, it was a very very small group.

....and they tell two people and they tell two people and they tell two people....

Paul Martin also did a complete 180 yesterday (much like his Senior Minister from British Columbia) by offering an apology for the Chinese head tax - something that was outright refused by Minister of State for Multiculturalism Raymond Chan, as it was previously deemed to be a legally dangerous precedent (individual compensation is still being refused...for the moment).

There is also word that Martin was supposed to release his campaign platform in Winnipeg this week, although that decision was apparently scrapped due to the internal campaign braintrust believing that there is too many distractions for anyone to take notice. How a policy declaration will be delivered over the next couple of weeks, and what form that document might take, is currently creating huge battles between party strategists, as has been relayed to TDH.

Even if someone still isn't convinced of what is happening, consider this: When the Conservatives, who have for many years had no traction in Quebec, pull dead even with the Liberals, while at the same time shaving off votes from the BQ, a major shift can officially and comfortably be determined.

Martin's chances seem to be running out, and in light of the limiting television debate format for the upcoming broadcast, and in consideration of Martin's "deer in the headlights" type of glazed campaigning that is now clearly apparent, it looks more and more that short of Stephen Harper harkening back to his days of building a firewall around Alberta, Martin will fulfill his destiny as the second coming of John Turner.

January 4, 2006 - Dissention is starting to brew within the BC caucus over the head tax redress issue.

After TDH Strategies initially wrote our accounting of how the file was mishandled by Minister of State for Multiculturalism Raymond Chan on December 9th, we received an email from Kevin Grandia, Senior Advisor to Mr. Chan. Obviously frustrated by our post, Grandia used selective facts to try and "correct" our information. Amongst the spin that was provided was this point:

"The CCNC may not support the government stance on protecting taxpayers from unlimited financial and legal liability, many other national and provincial organizations do. To name a few: SUCCESS, the Chinese Benevolent Association of Canada, the Chinese Freemasons of Canada, the Chinese Cultural Centre of Greater Vancouver, the Chinese Cultural Centre of Greater Toronto, the Montreal Chinese Cultural Centre."

From this, TDH Strategies was supposed to presume that there had been widespread consultation before a decision had been made.

Not so according to Minister of Health Ujjal Dosanjh, however. From the Globe and Mail:

"I was given to understand there was significant consultation and broad consensus. What I'm led to believe now is there is a need for broader consultation and broader consensus. I believe an apology has to be part of that."

As posted yesterday, Minister of Industry David Emerson flip-flopped on his position, from complete silence to rebelling against the decision of his own Prime Minister:

"If we haven't got it right, let's look at it and see if we can improve it. I'm certainly hearing different opinions and getting different advice. I'm getting new information and I'm willing to shift my ground."

Meanwhile, Raymond Chan is still resisting his two more senior cabinet colleagues by unequivocally shutting the door on offering the apology.

Paul Martin said this to the Globe in response to the shifting views of his Ministers:

"I am in deep sorrow over the head-tax history."

There could very well be an organized effort by the Chinese community at the polls to punish those Liberal candidates that sit on the wrong side of this issue, and unless the Liberals get their shit together, Martin et al. are going to have a lot more history to hang their heads in sorrow over.

January 4, 2006 - A little late, but just found out about the mugging of Pierre Pettigrew last week in a Montreal subway station.

Which of course begs the question, where was Bruno Labonté, Pettigrew's ministerial chauffeur, who doubles as Pettigrew's "personal security adviser" where he provides "advice and liaising with local police authorities and officials on the ground" on foreign trips. In fact, as previously described by Pettigrew's chief of staff, Francis LeBlanc, Labonté "has some responsibilities that are not on his official job description."

Might Bruno have got angry at his companion...er boss...for taking the metro?

January 4, 2006 - If placed in the position of any of these families, we wouldn't know how to control our rage at a mistake like this. This is so tragic.

January 4, 2006 - In consideration of this article in the Globe and Mail, and these numbers which have just been released, TDH Strategies would be very interested in speaking to the aforementioned organizers for Frank McKenna.

Embracing the "Liberal In Exile" designation trademarked by our buddy Warren Kinsella, we have to admit that Frank has caught our eye and earned our admiration since assuming the job in Washington.

January 4, 2006 - The rigours of an election campaign seem to cause widespread memory loss, and the effects were quite apparent yesterday.

First, Liberal spokesperson Ken Polk told the Vancouver Sun that Paul Martin has restored "the representative and deliberative role of MPs" by allowing them to vote "more freely than ever before." Polk also said committees have been given more influence to shape legislation and Supreme Court appointments.

On June 23rd, the Liberals passed a budget amended by billions in new spending by limiting debate on Bill C-48 to one hour through a rare procedural tactic. Liberal House Leader Count Chocula invoked closure in the House of Commons only 6 days into Mr. Martin's tenure as Prime Minister, and has employed it steadily ever since. Paul Martin did not deliver on the frequency of free votes that he promised, demanding party discipline on an issue such as the continuation of funding for the gun registry, for example. Chocula continually moved or took away opposition days to prop up the minority government for as long as possible. Former Winnipeg Mayor and failed Liberal candidate Glen Murray was given a $40,000 assignment to chair the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, even though the House of Commons Environment Committee, after a hearing, voted against Murray's appointment, as did the House of Commons, after voting on party lines.

No need to continue.

Then, at a campaign stop to partake in a little ice fishing, BQ leader Gilles Duceppe faced an embarassing situation when the host (who was the event organizer of an ice fishing festival) said this to reporters:

"I want him to go back and do something to make sure that regional festivals like ours get some money."

Ouch.

Duceppe has rallied against "le scandale des commandites" for almost two years now. In fact, his stinging criticism of the sponsorship program is the sole reason for the Bloc's huge resurgence in la belle province. Quote:

"The Liberal Party said it wanted to promote federalism. But in reality the Liberals tried to buy the soul of Quebecers."

So how does he end up responding to the festival organizer's comments?:

"Programs to assist these events, they should ensure that events like this one, this fishing festival, can qualify without the bureaucratic steps that prevent people from benefiting."

But wait...it gets better. When asked what he thought about the display of Canadian flags as a part of these monies, Duceppe said he was OK with it, as long as there weren't too many:

"Between having one Canadian flag and 1,000 Canadian flags, there's quite a difference. Exactly 999."

This is the man who oversees a caucus which includes Andre Bellavance, the Bloc MP for Richmond-Arthabaska, refused to hand out Canadian flags to war veterans in his riding. A man who at one time hammered the government for spending money on populating the province with symbols associated with Canada. A man who has seen other members of his caucus refuse to send Canadian flags to constituents upon receiving requests.

Yet now, when a BQ voter wants a little cash, flags with a maple leaf and a reconstituted sponsorship program are alright with Duceppe.

Electioneering Amnesia - a terrible ailment that effects thousands of Canadian politicians once ever four years.

For just five minutes of your time, you can mark a ballot and help these wayward souls find their way back to reality.

January 3, 2006 - Interesting timing for Minister David Emerson to call for an official apology for the Chinese head tax.

This story on the front page of the Vancouver Metro newspaper details Mr. Emerson telling the local chinese daily Ming Pao last Thursday that he was going to lobby hard for an official apology from the Government of Canada.

This of course comes on the heels of a blog entry (scroll down to his December 5 post) by Liberal Party of Canada (BC) president Jamie Elmhirst detailing Emerson's public comments that Jack Layton had a "boiled dog's head smile." Elmhirst referenced the phrase as a rough translation of an old Cantonese idiom, and in an interview opined that it was "hardly a vicious comment as far as I'm concerned."

Isn't it funny how previously when Minister of State for Multiculturalism Raymond Chan refused to offer an apology, and instead filtered redress funds through an organization that he was personally linked to (if you are unaware of the controversy, you MUST read TDH Straegies' commentary from Decmeber 9), Emerson as the Senior Minister for British Columbia was silent.

His newfound willingness to "be a pain in the neck to the establishment" on behalf of those lobbying for the apology wouldn't have anything to do with an angry Chinese population in his riding (a whopping 42% of the total) combined with a strong challenge by NDP candidate and former provincial Cabinet Minister Ian Waddell, now could it?

January 3, 2006 - Just got an excited email from a former Ministerial staffer who watched some old videotapes from the 2000 federal election campaign over the weekend. In his reminiscing, he happened on one CBC roundtable with each of the four major parties' pundits.

The Liberals were represented by our buddy Warren Kinsella, the Canadian Alliance used former Preston Manning advisor Rick Anderson as their mouthpiece, and the NDP had some woman we have never heard of.

The pundit speaking on behalf of the Bloc Québécois? None other than Paul Martin's Quebec political lieutenant and current Minister of Transport...everyone's favourite federalist...Jean Lapierre:

"Mr. Speaker, I just saw the Honourable Member for Shefford rise. I must tell him that, if his party did not force an early election, we could talk in greater detail about his bill and all the others. However, you cannot have your cake and eat it too."

"It is hypocritical of him to rise today to ask that a bill be passed, when he himself wants the House to be dissolved on Monday evening." - Jean Lapierre, November 24, 2005

OK, fine...but by the same logic, what do you call it everytime you speak on behalf of Canada?

"The leader of the Bloc can think only of creating an army for the Republic of Quebec or recruiting spies." - Jean Lapierre, October 31, 2005

Hmmmm...interesting. You're well placed to be considered one of those recruits, non?

January 3, 2006 - In politics, ambiguity and overconfidence are killers. So with everyone going absolutely bonkers over the latest Ipsos-Reid polling (a little prematurely if you ask us), TDH presents readers with a tale of two leaders - one who finally understands these pratfalls, and another who is looking and sounding more clueless everyday.

Here are statements that were made by Stephen Harper during a campaign rally in Niagara Falls on June 16, 2004:

"I've consulted people on transition and will be continuing those consultations over the next few days. I've always had some reserve plans. As things keep looking up, we'll obviously expand on those consultations and make some announcements as it's appropriate."

"We're headed towards a national majority and I think we're getting closer to that all the time."

This was on the heels of a poll conducted by former Liberal Michael Marzolini, who at the time had just released numbers indicating a 5 point lead for the Conservatives. Of course now we all know how wrong Stephen Harper was.

Well, that was then, and this is now.

Here is Stephen Harper from a rally in Toronto yesterday:

"If you don't have a clear idea of where you want to go, you probably won't get much done. This is one of the Martin government's greatest weaknesses."

Smart...very smart. He then engineered political simplicity at its finest by outlining his top 5 priorities - issues which were easy to grasp and delivered within the framework of a hopeful, not arrogant, political leader:

"A new Conservative government will quickly begin negotiations with provinces on fixing the fiscal imbalance..."

A Conservative government will crack down on crime..."

He has set the right tone by killing two birds with one stone - a) he can no longer be accused of a hidden agenda, because he has been completely forthright on where he believes the country should head b) he understands that his vision must be spoken from the point of view of a candidate that is far from sure of the outcome of the election.

On the other end of the campaign, this is the best that Paul Martin can come up with apparently:

"Mr. Harper does not believe there is an activist role in government supporting the common good. I do."

Sorry, but what exactly does that mean? These are the kinds of declarations (classifying the statement that way is a bit of a stretch, quite frankly) that give the Tories the ammunition for a brilliant compilation of war room research such as this. That first quote especially hurts.

Telling people what you believe, even if it isn't all-inclusive, or God forbid, popular, takes guts.

But then again, from the very early days of directing the coup on Jean Chretien, where he refused to take responsibility for the underhanded practices of his operatives, to his disappointing inability to take a firm stand on Quebec, which has welcomed separatists into the government, Paul Martin has never really shown any testicular fortitude.

Ambiguity, arrogance, and cowardice - doesn't exactly sound like a winning combination from where we stand.