@SueAnnLevy in her own words

What's that website again? Blogging Tories in Their Own Words?

(I have a slight problem with the appropriation of voice implicit in the use of the term "Tories" in this context, but I'll let that go for now.)

#Elxn41: emerging theme from the week? Don't know yet

It would be easy to make it all about the expulsions, and the screenings, and the secret files, and the vetting of people on the basis of who they've got pictures of on their Facebook profiles. It's an easy story to write; the bad guys are obvious, the narrative simple, and the shades of meaning very few.

Unfortunately, as Simon points out, that's part of the white noise that helps Harper mask his ugly intentions. Not sure which polls to believe, and whether or not the arrogance and isolation and condescension are really hurting. And as Paul Wells argues, the more we focus on why Harper's so mean to reporters and so afraid of unscripted moments with people who haven't been filtered out by the multi-layered security screen, the less we can focus on other things – health care, aboriginal communities, fiscal policy, corporate-tax cuts, so-called free trade, climate change, our carbon footprint, the tar sands, energy, environment, just to name a few.

All important, yes, but based on what we've seen this week, I'd suggest that our overarching strategy still has to be making this about Harper's character, his aggressively totalitarian impulses, his hyperpartisan bitterness, what his wackjob base wants, and what would be in store for us if he ever got his majority. Ultimately, it's on those terms that we're best able to distinguish him from the opposition (after all, it's not like the Liberals are suddenly going to depart from their pattern of serving the ownership-class agenda).

And we can do that without reducing it to a simplistic two-dimensional story that's easy for the corporate media to digest and twist. That's the message at which we have to keep hammering away.

(Update: one possible suggestion ... )

On @meslin, @nowtoronto, principle and pragmatism

Taking a break from #elxn41 for a minute here.

Toronto tweeters will, I'm sure, have followed the contretemps between Dave Meslin and Now magazine with some interest. A couple of days ago, Meslin finally lost his patience with Now and took exception to their characterization of him as a "seal" because of his willingness to swallow the fish tossed by Rob Ford.

What's worse? The lies, or the insult to our intelligence?

Tough call.

Stephen Harper, surprisingly, isn't addressing questions about the Gestapo-like screening techniques in use at his campaign events.

Maybe it's just me, but I'm going with Door Number Two. I expect a certain amount of disingenuous bullshit during an election, but the inherent contempt for voters and citizens in Harper's duckspeak really goes beyond the pale.

Sent from my mobile device

Aggressively totalitarian: maybe it's not just hyperbole

A recent post suggested that the phrase "aggressively totalitarian" could become this week's meme. At the time, I acknowledged that it might seem a bit over the top. (It might also have too many syllables for the average Harpobot, but that's another issue.)

Three links from fellow progressives lead me to think, however, that it's not just hyperbole.

@MargaretAtwood buries another one

Seriously. This is why Margaret Atwood is, well, Margaret Atwood, and the rest of us just wish we could be.

I suppose it would be bad form to wear such a button without actually getting turfed by the #HarperGestapo, wouldn't it.

The Harper Machine's priorities

Rounding up students who have pics of themselves with Iggy on their Facebook pages: Priority One. Bring the Mounties in if necessary.

Making sure high-ranking officials with access to sensitive information don't have long criminal records and multiple fraud convictions: meh. Whatever.

And don't forget to blame your staff when it blows up in your face.