Gilles Duceppe in Fantasyland |
A recent example of spin was Dimitri Soudas (Harper's spinmeister) claim that Canada lost the Security Council seat at the United Nations because of opposition leader Michael Igantieff's lack of support. The story was then put out that the loss was an expected consequence of principled policies and was to be expected. At any rate, in a classic spirit of 'sour grapes,' the loss portrayed as no big deal. Hmm.....
That being said, when it comes to spin, nobody beats Gilles Duceppe, who needs no help from professionals. He is the ultimate expert at the fine art of creating an alternative universe, one where everything unfolds according to his plan and where he is a conquering hero.
And so Gilles Duceppe's 'triumphant' conquest of Washington is another masterful performance of taking lemons and turning it into lemonade.
According to Mr. Duceppe, his recent visit included meetings with 'high' officials in the State Department and presentations before two prestigious think tanks, as well as important 'private' meetings with members of the Canadian-American Business Council. A smashing success!
As Lawrence Welk used to say...Wunerful! Wunerful!...
In the Quebec press, ever eager to validate the separatists, the visit to Washington was portrayed as a noteworthy political event, one where the separatist leader was afforded a polite and friendly forum among Washington's movers and shakers.
But reality is somewhat different.
Mr. Duceppe's carefully crafted visit was an abject embarrassment, one where the separatist leader was mercilessly snubbed by those who counted.
Of the almost six hundred elected officials to Congress, not one gave Mr. Duceppe the time of day. No interviews, no lunches, no handshakes and no photo ops.
Notwithstanding Mr. Duceppe's statement that the Obama administration was too busy with mid-term elections to meet with him, the reality is that as well as the congressional snub, there wasn't an any other official, Democrat or Republican who dared meet with the sovereignist leader.
This, one can imagine, after months of desperate attempts to secure meetings with someone, anyone who counts.
For American politicians, Mr. Duceppe is toxic.
The idea of consorting with a French Canadian who advocates the breakup of Canada is about as enticing as attending a birthday celebration in honour of Mahmoud Ahmajinedad at the Iranian embassy.
Among the Washington set, who tend to see the world as black or white, French-Canadian secessionists are viewed just a step above Al-Quaida. The idea of lending support to their cause, by virtue of a meeting is about as likely as Mr. Duceppe landing an audience with the Queen.
Mr. Duceppe's public line, crafted for public consumption back home, was that he was going to Washington to convince politicians to remain neutral in any future negotiation between Quebec and Canada vis-a-vis sovereignty.
While this may sound plausible at home, for Americans it's as ridiculous as your brother-in-law asking you not to choose sides in the upcoming divorce between him and your sister.
Mr. Duceppe's speaking engagement before a think tank, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, was a sad little affair that didn't even make the institute's own web site, where no mention of the speaking engagement was made either before or after the event. See the events calander here.
As for 'prestige,' all is not rosy at the Institute, which has been accused of conflict of interests and of accepting large corporate donations to shape opinion. Link
It begs the question, did Mr. Duceppe pay to speak?
Reading the online accounts of the trip, it's clear that nobody in the Quebec media actually went down with Mr. Duceppe to cover the story and the media relied on Bloc Quebecois press releases and telephone interviews to cobble together a story as best they could.
The only article that seemed to have some first hand information about the speaking engagement was the Toronto Star, which reports that the small audience of less than a couple of dozen people gave Mr. Duceppe a rough ride during questions after the speech.
Mr Duceppe was challenged as to how an independent Quebec could expect to be afforded entry into NAFTA, given America's new protectionist attitude.
"No problem," answered Mr. Duceppe who maintained the rosy fiction that the world will beat a path to the door of an independent Quebec. "Just wait and see."......Ugh!
As for Mr, Duceppe's claim that he attended high level meetings with the State Department, nothing could be more laughable.
Readers should understand that being fobbed off to the State Department for 'meetings' is the ultimate insult reserved for tin-pot dictators and other undesirable foreign diplomats and politicians, deemed unworthy of meeting actual administration officials, even of the lowest order.
Had Mr Duceppe met with Hillary Clinton or even Dr. Arturo Valenzuela, Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere affairs, it would have been newsworthy, but since we didn't hear anything of the sort, it can be safely assumed that Mr. Duceppe met with a low level bureaucrat from the Canadian desk, suckered into taking the meeting by his boss.
What is most telling in this whole affair is that there's not one American official, elected or appointed, nor any State Department bureaucrat who would allow a photo to be taken with Uncle Gilles. Nobody.
And so while Mr. Duceppe weaves the fantasy that he was well-received in Washington and that Americans are listening and open to his message, nothing could be farther form the truth.
Mr Duceppe would have us believe, that in his painful and broken English, he managed to make palatable, what is an anathema to Americans, an independent, left-wing, French state, smack dab on their northern border.
More spin. More lies. More crapola.
And nobody is prepared to cry out in public, that this emperor has no clothes!
Mississauga Guy said...
ReplyDeleteEmperor? Emperor of what? A bunch of fascist zealots with IQs lower than their shoe sizes! Gilles Duceppe is the antithesis of democracy.
The only thing I read giving me more laughs than this editorial was the one by Howard Galganov this past Saturday, and also a prior one earlier this week.
Galganov's latest rant is idiots should not be allowed to vote, and part two posted yesterday is votes should be unequal. Welfare recipients get a vote worth one point; unemployed people not on welfare, two points; workers, three; self-employed who hire at least one employee, four!
In the prior editorial, Galganov states one should have to pass a "test" (pass mark 10%) on civic matters (in the USA, where Galganov has found (and is fast losing) his new audience. He has also stated Americans should have to be functionally literate in English to vote.
I wrote Galganov back on these occasions, reminding him how Quebec would like to do the exact same thing, so stated by the likes of Marois and Beaudoin. Those two Franco dinosaurs would insist on French proficiency (fluency, really) and some sort of "moral" contract to defend the Quebec Constitution (whatever the hell that is), and all sorts of other gobbledygook conditions.
Parizeau spewed vitriol when the minorities lost him his one chance at the throne of his dreamed-of new country, and said throne was usurped before too long by the half-interested but better orator, Bouchard.
Quebec has its brasseries, its boulangeries and even its poutineries, but between Duceppe and Galganov, they can create a new industry: la buffoonerie political!
In all fairness to Mr. Galganov, I still admire how he took the separatists head-on with no fear and tried to light a fire under the Anglophone minority to get more into activism. There are Anglophone readers of yours who still talk of an English-led political party much like Equality back in 1989. The concept still has merit!
“Mr Duceppe would have us believe, that in his painful and broken English, he managed to make palatable, what is an anathema to Americans, an independent, left-wing, French state, smack dab on their northern border.”
ReplyDeletePlaying devil’s advocate, don’t half of them already think that Canada is a communist country? Wait’ll they find out French people already live here.
“[…] And nobody is prepared to cry out in public, that this emperor has no clothes!”
Nobody’s prepared to say that about the whole separatist movement either, which in my view merits it far more than a single politician.
“Emperor? Emperor of what?”
Delicious! That was my exact reaction! I also agree that given their penchant for morally righteous and absolutist rhetoric, the comparison of separatist politicians to jealous petty royalty is apt.
“Parizeau spewed vitriol when the minorities lost him his one chance at the throne of his dreamed-of new country, and said throne was usurped before too long by the half-interested but better orator, Bouchard.”
Here’s a question for you: do you think Parizeau was more upset by the fact that he lost, or by the fact that Bouchard, the Jesus-like figure responsible for the OUI’s last-minute surge, filled the void he left?
Apparatchik, Mississauga Guy here.
ReplyDeleteIt's a no-brainer. I sincerely believe Parasite was practicing transference and like most small-minded people seeking a scapegoat, primarily blamed the Jews for his referendum loss, just like the rest of the anti-Semitic world blames the Jews for all life's woes.
A few weeks after the 1995 referendum, while on some kind of political junket in Calgary, Parasite specifically and explicitly blamed the Jews, Greeks and Italians for his loss, the loss that quickly usurped him from his one shot in life at political royalty. Of course, had Quebec succeeded in its bid for freedom from one of the best nations on Earth in which to live, his kingdom would be built on currency worth no more than a Zimbabwe dollar (i.e., worthless).
If his fiscal policy wouldn't have drowned Quebec, his rabid racism would have. The minorities would have taken their money and the ethnic vote and leave Quebec high and dry. With almost half of Quebecers not paying taxes, where would Quebec get its revenues? By raising the tax rate on those earning $10,000 (an income below the poverty line) or more? Quebec would have to soak the poor because the rich would drain Quebec in a flash. The brain drain would take care of the rest.
He'd rather transfer the blame on the inert minority that might in protest shout into the wilderness as opposed to being seen as the big, fat sour grape that he is in front of his minions.
Parasite was described as a one-trick pony who in the end could not turn the trick. It's only too bad for him good friend and ally Dr. Camille Laurin, psychologiste, could not invite his friend onto his chaise longue because he was laying in his coffret longue. Eternally may he rest in torment!
For the love of God, please tell me that we, the tax payers, didn't pay for this nonsense.
ReplyDeleteMississauga Guy, here Paris Guy is here again: J'ai déjà assisté à une conférence de M. Duceppe à Ottawa. C'est un très bon orateur. Et oui, la souveraineté, ça se prépare sur la scène internationale ! ''Ça ne peut pas pas toujours ne pas arriver ! (dixit Miron)''
ReplyDeleteNow that les petits (et insignifiants) québécois have their own saint, they should ask the Vatican to consider Duceppe's particular case of life sa(nt)ity... They might be having another saint so they can feel themselves more downtrodden than they are... Quel dégoût !
ReplyDeleteGilles Duceppe is certainly a fraud.
ReplyDeleteBut, the Canadian Media needs to call him out on it. I remember his appearance on the CBC's "The Hour" show. The liar indicated that there was no request of either party in Quebec to recount the contested votes in the last referendum that occurred in mainly ethnic parts of Chomedy. But, what George Stumpo...los, didn't call him on was that both the PQ & Quebec Liberals stopped this recount. The ballots were even ordered by a court to be destroyed because a certain amount of time had passed since the vote. He should have been called out on national TV for his half truths and distortions.
Here is something else to think about. Concerning how Quebec will finance its mess. Well, always on the backs of others. Here is a new twist, ala "The Hudson Bay Company" of old. This company was a British government company created to act as a colonizer using business. The company was controlled by the government, and the natives had no say on it's operation. They couldn't even buy a share and show up to a shareholder meeting to voice their point of views.
Well Quebec now is trying to do the same with Hydro-Quebec,and the SAQ. Provincial crown corporations, controlled by the elected politicians of Quebec expanding into other provinces, and effectively applying the politics on Quebec on others. And can anybody even buy a share in these corporations. No!
Hydro-Quebec tried to buy into New Brunswick and thus strangle PEI & NS. That failed because the voters in NB had more brains than their politicians. Now, the SAQ is attempting to operate outside of Quebec. Basically, apply the politics of Quebec onto other provinces through the use of Provincial Crown Corporations. Any provincial government that allows this will pay a major price. If they are smart, they will not allow any crown corporation from another province to operate in their province. Only Federal ,and ones own provincial crown corporation should be allowed to operate. Just look at what Hydro-Quebec has to Newfoundland Labrador. This is basically another type of taking money from the rest of Canada so that Quebec politicians can finance their Nationalist policies. Got a budget problem, plunder the rest of Canada.
Let that swirl through your heads a bit.
Gilles Duceppe is a desperate and politically irrelevant barnacle clinging to his position by his dirty finger nails. He is a petty, bitter, and delusional politician who many people find to be downright boring and embarrassing. In other words, he is the perfect man to represent the Quebecois nationalist clowns. As long a Gilles is free to roam and speak, we have nothing to worry about; he is doing our work for us.
ReplyDeleteParis Guy dit: Ce que je ressens en lisant la plupart des commentaires, c'est du racisme à peine voilé et carrément improductif. Je pense notamment au commentaire de l'anonyme October 18, 2010 9:59 AM. Y-a-t-il plus insignifiant, en effet ? Peut importe ce que vous pensez, la question nationale n'est pas réglée et elle est inévitable voir : À la question: «Croyez-vous qu'il soit possible pour un parti politique au pouvoir à Québec de gouverner en évacuant complètement la question de la place du Québec dans le Canada de son agenda politique?», 58 % des Québécois (61 % des francophones), ont répondu «Non, c'est impossible». Sondage Léger Marketing- Le Devoir http://www.legermarketing.com/documents/POL/1010181FR.pdf
ReplyDeleteEt que dire du fédéralisme qui ne se renouvelle aucunement depuis plus de vingt ans. Pourquoi une constitution jamais ratifiée devrait s'imposer au Québec ? Pourquoi le reste du Canada ne négocie pas de bonne foi ? Relent de colonialisme ?
Chénier dit: Je suis d'accord avec ce qu'affirme Benoît Pelletier, ardent fédéraliste ''Pour moi, le Québec, c'est aussi une nation qui choisit de participer de son plein gré au grand projet canadien et qui tient encore à être reconnue pour ce qu'elle est par le reste du Canada. Voilà pourquoi je promeus la reconnaissance de la spécificité du Québec à l'intérieur du pays et l'inscription de cette dernière dans la Constitution. La motivation première de ma carrière politique est l'affirmation et la reconnaissance du Québec comme nation.''Livre «Une certaine idée du Québec», publié aux Presses de l'Université Laval
ReplyDelete“Now that les petits (et insignifiants) québécois have their own saint, they should ask the Vatican to consider Duceppe's particular case of life sa(nt)ity... They might be having another saint so they can feel themselves more downtrodden than they are... Quel dégoût !”
ReplyDelete+
« du racisme à peine voilé et carrément improductif. Je pense notamment au commentaire de l'anonyme October 18, 2010 9:59 AM. »
Très raciste; je suis tout à fait d’accord avec toi. Mais je crois qu’il ne s’agisse que d’un commentaire d’un francophone qui essaie d’être provocateur en se « dissimulant » en anglais. ‘case of life sa(nt)ity’ n’est même pas de l’anglais. ‘having another saint’ est un autre calque direct du français. ‘so they can feel themselves more downtrodden’ également. Je trouve tout aussi regrettable que des « trolls » francophones se voient dans l’obligation de venir commenter d’une façon tellement immature et contreproductive de façon à ne pas participer d’une façon mature au débat.
“If they are smart, they will not allow any crown corporation from another province to operate in their province.”
Before we start getting dogmatic, what do the constitutional law people have to say about this?
“Just look at what Hydro-Quebec has to Newfoundland Labrador”
Massive pownage, as the kids are saying it now. I can debate both sides of this one but won’t.
« Et que dire du fédéralisme qui ne se renouvelle aucunement depuis plus de vingt ans. Pourquoi une constitution jamais ratifiée devrait s'imposer au Québec ? Pourquoi le reste du Canada ne négocie pas de bonne foi ? Relent de colonialisme ? »
La triste vérité c’est que les deux projets stagnent car ils carburent au dogmatisme fatigué. Le séparatisme plait de moins en moins car on se rend compte que les acquis des canadiens-français d’antan ont amené un semblant d’équilibre à une situation autrefois manifestement injuste. Fini les conditions de tiers monde pour les francophones.
La bonne foi est la première victime dans toute négociation où un rapport de force polarisant semble être la fin plutôt que le moyen. C’est malheureusement la nature du régime politique pervers qui s’est installé, d’un bord comme de l’autre, de tordre la réalité pour qu’elle nous traumatise au point où on en est rendu aujourd’hui. Constitution? Droit de véto? Come on! On n’a vraiment pas besoin de manifester un complexe de supériorité par rapport aux autres provinces. On est peut être la meilleure, mais justifier l’éteinte (ou la limitation) des droits des autres dans le simple but de « protéger » ou « sauvegarder » les nôtres me parait trop simpliste pour être la bonne solution. Je crois que le jour où les Québécois nationalistes croient qu’ils ont eux aussi droit d’employer l’adjectif « Canadien » pour se décrire sera le début de la fin de nos débats idiots qui semblent aujourd’hui interminables. Ce jour-là, à mon avis, marquera également le début de la vraie émancipation des Québécois francophones.
"...Mais je crois qu’il ne s’agisse que d’un commentaire d’un francophone..."
ReplyDeleteOu allophone?
merci
Cher Apparatchik, je ne suis pas un de VOUS, je fais partie des AUTRES, comme vous les appelez avec dédain.
ReplyDeleteMon commentaire est raciste? Peut-être, je l'admets, mais l'attitude que VOUS québécois montrez envers LES AUTRES est quelque chose du jamais vu. Cessez de vous comporter de victimes persécutées par les méchants anglais et allophones et ouvrez-vous au monde qui n'est pas seulement le Québéc (which a province, not a nation, by the way)
Editor,
ReplyDeleteThe Toronto Star link from your piece takes me to LaPresse and their (rather benign) account of Duceppe’s trip.
If there were only less than a couple of dozen people in the audience (around 20, I suppose), why hasn’t anyone from the English media taken a photo of it and splashed on the front page? One picture would be worth a thousand words: in a country of 300 million, Gilles drew no more than 20 people. Why is the English media so placated?
And why hasn’t the French media sent a reporter with Duceppe to get the true scoop of his trip? Or, alternatively, relegated the story to the back page? It doesn’t make any sense to make it front (or even second) page news if you don’t even bother to send a reporter to Washington for a day to get a real-time account of the visit.
Relying on BQ’s accounts of Duceppe’s trip is reminiscent of the reliance of the US media on the White House in regards to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. We all know how that panned out in the end.
The priority of the media in liberal democracies is to be first and foremost skeptical of politicians and political parties. Not to pander to them and base their reporting on spinster accounts.
@ADSKI
ReplyDeleteI've repaired the link, which to my knowledge is the only story actually quoting people who were in room during the speech.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/876260--quebec-will-win-battle-for-independence-duceppe-tells-washington