Harper as Cave Man?

[jbg]

Harper Derangement Syndrome on the loose (link) !!!!

Excerpts below:

Public opinion, June, 2007 - Harper has not learned to broaden the base

Pollster evaluates public response to Stephen Harper in wake of end of Parliamentary session

by Marc Zwelling, Vector Research

OTTAWA, June 21, 2007: Stephen Harper's aim appears to be to brand the Conservatives as sound managers of the public accounts and cleaner than the former Liberal regime. The Conservatives, unfortunately, have primitive ancestral tendencies; they can't help but huddle together for warmth in the cave of their ultra-conservative ancestors in the defunct Reform Party.

"Ultra-conservative"? Come on. That's on a par with Hedy Fry's cross burnings.

[gc1765]

"Ultra-conservative"? Come on. That's on a par with Hedy Fry's cross burnings.

They are talking about the reform party...which, as far as Canadian politics goes, was about as Conservative as it gets.

[BC_chick]

Dion gets called a communist... so what? Did you happen to take note of the website that was saying that about Harper? It was the equivalent of the Western Standard where Liberals are described pretty much as the spawn of the devil.

Save the theatrical big font for opinion articles from reputable publications which say these things.

[hiti]

Maybe two NASCARs will do it.

[Remiel]

I wonder when those folks who are impressed by their own use of " Harper Derangement Syndrome " and " Bush Derangement Syndrome " will figure out that, according to medical convention, those conditions describe the derangement of Harper and the derangement of Bush, not the alleged derangement of their critics.

[scribblet]

I wonder when those folks who are impressed by their own use of " Harper Derangement Syndrome " and " Bush Derangement Syndrome " will figure out that, according to medical convention, those conditions describe the derangement of Harper and the derangement of Bush, not the alleged derangement of their critics.

No so, it is a derangement suffered by people who have an unreasonable hate on for Bush

Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) is a pejorative political term coined by the American conservative[1] political columnist Charles Krauthammer, a Harvard-trained former psychiatrist, in a 2003 column.[2] It refers to a purported tendency by some to blame President George W. Bush for matters for which he is not responsible. The term is commonly used in newspaper editorials, on talk radio and FOX News, and in the conservative Blogosphere.

Krauthammer defined BDS as "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush".[2] The term reflects a belief that some criticisms of President Bush — for example, a description of President Bush as the greatest current threat to American lives — are of emotional origins rather than based on facts or logic.

[jbg]

I wonder when those folks who are impressed by their own use of " Harper Derangement Syndrome " and " Bush Derangement Syndrome " will figure out that, according to medical convention, those conditions describe the derangement of Harper and the derangement of Bush, not the alleged derangement of their critics.

See Scriblett post one up from this one. But, I submit, anyone that characterizes either Bush or Harper as "far right" is at least severely misguided, if not deranged.

[Shakeyhands]

I wonder when those folks who are impressed by their own use of " Harper Derangement Syndrome " and " Bush Derangement Syndrome " will figure out that, according to medical convention, those conditions describe the derangement of Harper and the derangement of Bush, not the alleged derangement of their critics.

No so, it is a derangement suffered by people who have an unreasonable hate on for Bush

Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) is a pejorative political term coined by the American conservative[1] political columnist Charles Krauthammer, a Harvard-trained former psychiatrist, in a 2003 column.[2] It refers to a purported tendency by some to blame President George W. Bush for matters for which he is not responsible. The term is commonly used in newspaper editorials, on talk radio and FOX News, and in the conservative Blogosphere.

Krauthammer defined BDS as "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush".[2] The term reflects a belief that some criticisms of President Bush — for example, a description of President Bush as the greatest current threat to American lives — are of emotional origins rather than based on facts or logic.

Interesting, what do you deem as a reasonable level of hate then?

[scribblet]

Interesting, what do you deem as a reasonable level of hate then?

I'm not sure that there is a reasonable level of hate, I don't hate anyone, but there's a difference between normal critique seems to turn into rabid fanatascism. (sp)

It could be a psychological defense mechanism known as "displacement".

Unreasoning hatred could be defined as such when the reasoning and number of rants etc. are out of proportion to the reality of the situation. Or, when lack of reason leads people to believe that Bush or the current admin actually blew up the Pentagon and caused umpteen deaths - or

Persons who routinely use terms such as Hitler, dictator, fascist, or Generalissimo" and the like when discussing George W. Bush.

Persons who never had any problem with former President Bill Clinton attending Sunday worship services with Bible in hand, but who see in George W. Bush the man who would be Grand Mufti of the USA.

or this from dailykos

"I want to claw George Bush's eyes out with my bare hands. I want to take Cheney's bottom lip and pull it up over his head and drown him. I want to take Rice's $1000 shoes and pound the heals into Dick Cheney's heart. I want Rice to be stripped of all her income and get shoved into the Astrodome, peniless and defenseless... with the rest of her Brothers and Sisters. I want Rumsfeld just airlifted over the Atlantic and dumped. I want Grover Norquist drowned in a bathtub. Better yet, I want Grover drowned via a massive "swirlee" (head in toilet... flush)." Lode Runner on DailyKos

[margrace]

I wonder when those folks who are impressed by their own use of " Harper Derangement Syndrome " and " Bush Derangement Syndrome " will figure out that, according to medical convention, those conditions describe the derangement of Harper and the derangement of Bush, not the alleged derangement of their critics.

See Scriblett post one up from this one. But, I submit, anyone that characterizes either Bush or Harper as "far right" is at least severely misguided, if not deranged.

Interesting you are based in New York but you certainly promote the Reform/Conservative party line. It is one thing to be interested in Canadian politics as a lot of Canadians are of American politics but it is another thing to be so strongly in the old reform camp.

[Michael Bluth]

See Scriblett post one up from this one. But, I submit, anyone that characterizes either Bush or Harper as "far right" is at least severely misguided, if not deranged.

Interesting you are based in New York but you certainly promote the Reform/Conservative party line. It is one thing to be interested in Canadian politics as a lot of Canadians are of American politics but it is another thing to be so strongly in the old reform camp.

So it's only "refrormers" who don't believe Harper is far right?

Are there really that many Canadians with HDS?

[Who's Doing What?]

So what is the mental illness labelled onto those who believe the Harper can do no wrong?

Headuphisassitis?

Conservativeblindfaithatosis?

Lemmingstothecliffatonia?

[Mad_Michael]

or this from dailykos

"I want to claw George Bush's eyes out with my bare hands. I want to take Cheney's bottom lip and pull it up over his head and drown him. I want to take Rice's $1000 shoes and pound the heals into Dick Cheney's heart. I want Rice to be stripped of all her income and get shoved into the Astrodome, peniless and defenseless... with the rest of her Brothers and Sisters. I want Rumsfeld just airlifted over the Atlantic and dumped. I want Grover Norquist drowned in a bathtub. Better yet, I want Grover drowned via a massive "swirlee" (head in toilet... flush)." Lode Runner on DailyKos

Are you asserting that this is a front page blog post? Or is it actually just some comment left by some reader?

Reader's comments are not properly attributed to the Blog itself.

[Fortunata]

Save the theatrical big font for opinion articles from reputable publications which say these things.

Small man big font syndrome?

[Topaz]

Question, where would Harper be IF the former PC's started up again? How many of his party former PC'ers would stay with him? Would McKAY??

[jbg]

Interesting you are based in New York but you certainly promote the Reform/Conservative party line. It is one thing to be interested in Canadian politics as a lot of Canadians are of American politics but it is another thing to be so strongly in the old reform camp.

Do you really believe that the populist, anti-American, Hugo Chavez type rhetoric of Trudeau/Chretien/Martin helped your country? And how does my living my entire non-college/law school life in the NYC area make any difference?

[jbg]

or this from dailykos

"I want to claw George Bush's eyes out with my bare hands. I want to take Cheney's bottom lip and pull it up over his head and drown him. I want to take Rice's $1000 shoes and pound the heals into Dick Cheney's heart. I want Rice to be stripped of all her income and get shoved into the Astrodome, peniless and defenseless... with the rest of her Brothers and Sisters. I want Rumsfeld just airlifted over the Atlantic and dumped. I want Grover Norquist drowned in a bathtub. Better yet, I want Grover drowned via a massive "swirlee" (head in toilet... flush)." Lode Runner on DailyKos

Are you asserting that this is a front page blog post? Or is it actually just some comment left by some reader?

Reader's comments are not properly attributed to the Blog itself.

It was from DailyKos blog itself (link). Many of these people think that, because the US was under Democratic administration (often quite successfully) from 1932 to 1968, with a minor Eisenhower break (think Joe Clark), that the Dems are the "natural governing party", just as people looking at the Liberal regime from 1921-32, 1936-57, 1963-1979, 1980-1984, and 1993-2006 think of the Liberals as the "natural governing party". Any interruption with leaders having measurably differing philosophies triggers the "derangement".

[Fortunata]

McKay should stay with Steve; no-one will trust him again not to sell out. I hope another PC party rises from the dust; a progressive unifying party that hasn't been a proponent of doing away with Health Care, that wants to keep Canada as one country instead of federations; who you are not afraid that they will hop on the next war that the USA creates because they are "threatened". A party that really believes in fiscal responsibility and working for the people instead of the next election, that will not pander to Quebec for the votes, who does not count ridings to get to sleep. I hate the fact that people call the Steve party Tories because they are not.

[Michael Bluth]

Many of these people think that, because the US was under Democratic administration (often quite successfully) from 1932 to 1968, with a minor Eisenhower break (think Joe Clark), that the Dems are the "natural governing party", just as people looking at the Liberal regime from 1921-32, 1936-57, 1963-1979, 1980-1984, and 1993-2006 think of the Liberals as the "natural governing party". Any interruption with leaders having measurably differing philosophies triggers the "derangement".

Things definitely changed.

It is healthy for democracy to not have a party think of itself as the "natural governing" anything.

A Conservative majority in the next election and no more talk of that for a long, long time.

[jdobbin]

Do you really believe that the populist, anti-American, Hugo Chavez type rhetoric of Trudeau/Chretien/Martin helped your country?

A lot has happened during all those years. The Constitution was repatriated, a Charter of Rights was written, Canada was admitted to the G7, the deficit was eliminated and GDP growth was strong.

You make it sound as if Canada is Iraq. You think the U.S. is about to invade?

[Michael Bluth]

Do you really believe that the populist, anti-American, Hugo Chavez type rhetoric of Trudeau/Chretien/Martin helped your country?

A lot has happened during all those years. The Constitution was repatriated, a Charter of Rights was written, Canada was admitted to the G7, the deficit was eliminated and GDP growth was strong.

You make it sound as if Canada is Iraq. You think the U.S. is about to invade?

What a terribly false analogy?

Is that truly your line. If somebody dares to question the Trudeau liberal years they are arguing that Canada should be living under mortal fear of the US?

[Fortunata]

The truth is that the average Canadian doesn't care two hoots about what is happening in the USA. They may be aware of what is going on there but it is not a topic around the breakfast table. jbg continually harps on the anti-Americanism here, a comment or a few over the course of years by government officials (that nobody even pays attention to) seems to play awful big in his mind yet ignoring the fact that we get lambasted by USA officials continually but that doesn't seem to get his attention. So it seems ok for his country but not ok for this country. Double standard, hypocrisy - call it whatever but he seems to be pretty preoccupied by it.

[jdobbin]

It was from DailyKos blog itself (link). Many of these people think that, because the US was under Democratic administration (often quite successfully) from 1932 to 1968, with a minor Eisenhower break (think Joe Clark), that the Dems are the "natural governing party", just as people looking at the Liberal regime from 1921-32, 1936-57, 1963-1979, 1980-1984, and 1993-2006 think of the Liberals as the "natural governing party". Any interruption with leaders having measurably differing philosophies triggers the "derangement".

Congress went back to the Democrats at the mid-terms. A little bit too far to tell about the presidential election but I'd say Bush is weighing down his party like an anchor. It is hard to conceive of a Republican who will somehow be able to rise above this and *not* alienate the Republican base.

The natural order would seem to be about to be restored.

As far as Canada goes, it was Harper himself who was partly responsible for the destruction of the right in Canada for almost a decade. He still falls short of a majority according to every poll despite the boosterism of the right here.

Some, as yourself, think that Dion will self-destruct in an election because of his English. If Harper felt that way, he would have called a spring election. It could go either way right now.

The natural order of government is not so much as divine right of power for the Liberals as the right wing's divine ways of alienating the voters.

[hiti]

The natural order of government is not so much as divine right of power for the Liberals as the right wing's divine ways of alienating the voters.

That is so true.

As for anti-Americanism... it is more like anti-bush.

[jbg]

A Conservative majority in the next election and no more talk of that for a long, long time.

Why didn't that change with the 1984 tub-thumper of a majority that Mulroney got?