19

High Praise from High Places


 

While everyone is performing Kremlinology on Harper’s CNN interview, the much more interesting piece on Harper in the WSJ goes a-begging for solid analysis. Written by Mary O’Grady, the paper’s Americas columnist and based on an ed-board meeting Harper did there, it must have resulted in some serious high-fiving in the PMO. Start with the hed and subhed:

A Resolute Ally in the War on Terror
Canadians are with us in Afghanistan. We should be with them on free trade.

How do you like them apples? It gets better (for Harper) from there on in, as the conversation courses over Afghanistan, the future of NATO, US protectionism, and free trade with Columbia. After pushing for ongoing support for the regime in Columbia:

Then he adds what is the cornerstone of Harper foreign policy: “If you don’t support your friends,” he says, looking around the room and turning up the volume every so slightly, “you . . . are . . . not . . . going to have many friends.”

Not bad play at all for a Canadian PM. The article actually reminded me of another opinion piece written in the Journal about another prime minister. In the fall of 2002, Marie-Josee Kravis (wife of Henry, and sort-of Canadian) wrote a scathing piece about Chretien as a very unreliable partner in the war on terror. She also described him as an economic neo-Malthusian and an insecure anti-American.

It was, on the whole, a terribly-argued piece written by a very influential woman in a very influential publication. The headline on the column was “Canada’s Schroeder” and it caused a fair amount of consternation in Canada, because the WSJ at the time was widely acknowledged as the morning read for Washington republicans.

Which leads me to ask: What is the most influential publication in Obama’s Washington? Does anyone have a sense of what papers or magazines (or, heck, blogs) have an influence over the new regime comparable to the one the Journal supposedly had during the Bush years?


 

High Praise from High Places

  1. Whoa Nelly : talk about a warm and fuzzy for Harper from the Journal … no doubt … There are layers of people Harper is addressing his statements here. I love it when my Boy Stevie gets right to the the point esoecially the zinger about your friends and allies .. perfect … works on so many levels. Okay Harper haters where are you where is all the usual semi literate hyper partisan clap trap? Great comments about Afghanistan too -> What would seem to set Mr. Harper apart from numerous other NATO leaders is that he cares deeply about achieving results. But he is no Pollyanna. “We are not going to ‘defeat’ the insurgency. The best we can do is train the Afghans so that they are able to manage the insurgency themselves and create, not a Western liberal democracy, because Afghanistan is not going to look like that any time soon, but at least a government that has some democratic and rule-of-law norms that is moving in a positive direction.”
    -> well said, accurate, true and will drive the harper haters crazy …. perfect ROFL LMAO

    • Okay Harper haters where are you where is all the usual semi literate hyper partisan clap trap?”

      Wayne that comment works on so many levels.Better look to yr own…semi literate hyper partisan clap trap? I’d start with yr spelling – a weakness of my own – and work on up to drawing logical conclusions from faulty premises, that one’s harder. The cut and paste seems to be working for you though!

  2. Mary O’Grady is brilliant, I love her. I often watch WSJ’s 1/2 hour talking heads show on Fox and Mary often talks about Canada. Is she Canadian? Anyway, she’s hard as nails and could be another Thatcher or Frau Nein.

    “What is the most influential publication in Obama’s Washington?”

    I nominate Socialist Worker. Or a more serious suggestion I would say no papers are as left as Obama, even NY Times has chided the admin a few times and it’s only been a month. I think we should look to mags, The New Republic seems to be a big fan so far.

    • Clearly you have not ever worked within earshot of K Street (disclosure: I have). There are no socialists inside the Beltway (unless they have diplomatic plates). There are 15,000 registered lobbyists, contracts to be won, subcontracts to be doled out, and pork in nice dollops that fit neatly into specific congressional districts …

      Once upon a time, I worked on a contract that’s main documents proudly displayed a map of the USA, highlighting the 48 states benefiting from said contract …

      Socialists? Really, turn down the talk radio and read a book … perhaps one written by someone you don’t already agree with …

  3. Certainly Mary O’Grady’s judgment can’t be disputed. She absolutely nailed Sarah Palin — “I think the Democrats have a real problem… she is someone who is like real people in the real world”:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xD0a1K830c

  4. No doubt, Obama reads Macleans.

  5. HEADLINE “Conservative writing for conservatives praises conservatives”

    I don’t care what paper Obama digs, just as long as it’s not the Washington Post.

  6. “Okay Harper haters where are you where is all the usual semi literate hyper partisan clap trap?”

    Wayne that comment works on so many levels.Better look to yr own…semi literate hyper partisan clap trap? I’d start with yr spelling – a weakness of my own – and work on up to drawing logical conclusions from faulty premises, that one’s harder. The cut and paste seems to be working for you though!

    • that’s copy paste : a fine distinction I admit – as to typos I have been hammering keyboards since I started main fram computing in 77 and the result is a form of arthritis that really starts to act up as the day goes by. I apologize for the typo’s and can do better on warm days. My clap trap is rarely semi-literate … it is either illiterate or literate.

      • Oops, sorry bout the arthritis.No need to apologize, certainly not to me anyway. I have a problem distingushing tween literate and illiterate myself. I usually work on the premise that as long as all the essentials are there – verbs, nouns etc it will all sort itself out after the author is dead.

  7. In a weird way the article is right – the previous administration did let down America, especially on the Iraq file.

    We had every responsibility to look them in the eye and say “this will end badly, in abject failure. it will be a disaster. you will pay dearly, and in blood.” Instead we made half-hearted excuses about international efforts.

    That’s what supporting your friends is.

    And how does harper feel about trade being linked with military expeditions, especially after caving on softwood?

  8. I thought the collusion at the end of that article, between Harper and the WSJ editorial board, that Obama saying different things publicly and privately, was a bit much. I suppose hardcore Republicans eat this up – a foreign head of state essentially calling their President a liar when the President is a Democrat, but it seemed in really poor taste and brings back memories of Naftagate.

    • Ummm…. what? Where does Harper call Obama a liar? He said that the President didn’t say anything different than what he has said publicly.

Sign in to comment.