PM Harper will address the country on Monday

[Cloud Cover]

I've seen the man get worked up and really have a go at things. I think he is being restrained by his handlers.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I am mildly offended by the growing use (in too many Western democracies) of human props.  I guess it started some years ago in the US; I suppose it is thought to be good for TV display – adding a ‘human touch’ to a tough subject, etc; I find it tacky – at best.

I thought there were a few good and several half decent lines in Harper’s speech – I think the connection of the ordinary Canadians who were killed on 9/11 to the extraordinary Canadians who are putting their lives on the line in Afghanistan was good.  Given that the speech was on 11 Sep it almost certainly had to connect the dots from 9/11 to 11 Sep 06 in Afghanistan.  That being said I think Harper’s speech suffered from:

• Wooden, maybe even inept delivery; and

• Lack of educational value – I doubt he converted anyone because he did not explain, clearly, simply and compellingly why it is Canada’s vital interests to help the Afghans get a grip on their own country.  He said, roughly: "9/11 was terrible - look at these poor folks; we're in Afghanistan because of 9/11 - we send good, brave young Canadians to fight while their parents and wives wait and worry - look at these folks, too."  Neither very convincing nor very inspiring, I think.

I don’t know whether nature, nurture or handlers are responsible for Harper’s apparent inability to say simple things clearly and directly.  I do think that apparent inability limits his effectiveness and his electoral chances.

 

[cplcaldwell]

Edward Campbell's point "I do think that apparent inability limits his effectiveness and his electoral chances." is interesting.

Many Canadian PM's have been less than charismatic or eloquent. Two that were (from different parties) are controversial and often hated. Pearson by all accounts was hardly a Churchill, yet admired, Diefenbaker was a firebrand, but often held up to ridicule. Chretien, Turner were shopkeepers and Clarke and Campbell don't matter. Just reading history it seems one has to go back to St Laurent to find a well spoken, well thought of PM, without bombast. I guess as a country we're not all that impressed with eloquence or theatrics (seadoo's at noon anyone?)

Yet this is an important issue, the public remains uneasy with Harper, how to dispel the problem? OR in this instance, communicate the message clearly without resorting to chicanery or forcing the guy to be someone he does not appear to be?

It seems a consensus that the address was a fizzle at best and a flop at worst, how to redress this? I tend to agree with Paracowboy , He needs to get into the "why"

How to get into the why?

 

[paracowboy]

the big problem (in this regard) he has is his background: most (I believe every) Prime Ministers have been lawyers - trained in oratory and obfuscation. (Okay, they're professional liars.) He's an economist - trained in making things work efficiently, but with no people skills. He needs to find a mouth-piece that people will like, and that can deliver the lines, while he makes shit work. If it weren't for the "that people will like" part, I'd volunteer.

 

[cplcaldwell]

Rona Ambrose.

No seriously.

Smart, enough media appeal, could pick up the file, little baggage, get her out of Environment and find her, say Parlimentary Secretary to the Privy Council. some Secretary of State posn....heck send her a briefing team and just let her start beaking off on Canada AM!

Seriously......

 

[Magravan]

The left is getting fired up about their position. Like it or not, Layton believes in his point of view, and is willing to voice it loudly and for as many people who will listen... The fact of the matter is, like it or not, we messed with Afghanistan. Had we opted not to bother in the first place, we might have been able to make a case for staying out... Claiming it was Bush's war or whatever else. But we didn't. We went in, and we screwed with the system that was in place.

Afghanistan would not have been great with the Taliban in charge, but at least the people would have been better off than if we pull out now. Leaving the Afghans now would be like having a bunch of 8th grade kids come around and harrass the 5th grade bully on behalf of the Kindergarten student... and then graduating... Revenge, terror... Death... All this awaits the Afghans who chose to stand up for themselves against a regime that they did not support.

We stirred the pot, and because we made the first step, as a Nation deserving of worldwide respect, we owe it to the Afghanistan people to continue this until their harrassers are expelled. We made a commitment, and now it is our responsibility to stick to it despite the difficulty involved.

Harper needs to take the opportunity to tell Canadians why. He can be as wooden as he wants, but he needs to at least make the effort. I will respect his decision to make it more about comforting the families of those who died than using it as a call to arms, IF he takes the opportunity to raise the issue on its own in the near future.

Right now, I'm not convinced that Harper isn't going to waffle on the whole issue if the polls indicate that Canadians are not behind this war anymore. He may suck as an orator, but he needs to show us that this is something he believes in.

 

[2 Cdo]

Seems like a lot of nit-picking. I expect it from the members on this site who can't stomach the idea of a leader who accomplishes what he sets out to do versus their "natural governing party" merely paying lip service to everything while accomplishing nothing!

I would much rather have a PM who is "wooden" in his oratory skills but actually LEADS as opposed to Jean"All Style, No Substance" Chretein or Paul"Everything is Our Priority" Martin. Liberal supporters get over it, we finally have a leader who gets things done without the never-ending Royal Commissions, never-ending studies.

I also want to add, are members on this site so shallow that they feel the PM should mention how wonderful the CF is doing in Afghanistan everytime he opens his mouth? Sorry folks, I am confident in the job I do daily and don't require the pat on the back to KNOW I am doing a good job!

Overall I thought he did okay, some of you wouldn't be happy unless he mentioned you personally, and called you the greatest soldier/sailor/airman(woman) in the history of the Canadian Forces!

 

[Rifleman62]

I think that the PM could have shown some emotion. He could not turn his back to the TV cameras to view the special guests. That would have looked terrible to a TV viewer. Also, did you notice the TV camera angle. It was not a eye level, it was higher than his head.,so it did look like he was looking down at the teleprompter. On Global they did a news shot showing the PM speaking. The angle was from the Left, shooting up. The PM looked a lot better. Did the PM get set up by the media? Did his communication staff check the angle? It is too bad a lot of the media just want to distroy SH.

Don Newman - I watch "Politics with Don Newman". He is sly in getting his digs in, but he does.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I also want to add, are members on this site so shallow that they feel the PM should mention how wonderful the CF is doing in Afghanistan everytime he opens his mouth? Sorry folks, I am confident in the job I do daily and don't require the pat on the back to KNOW I am doing a good job!

Thats not what I have seen in this thread,...maybe what you don't get is that without the public's support you [ and the CF] will not be able to continue to allow the "good job" to continue.

Welcome to the world of 30-second news bites.....the masses must continually be swayed or those like J. Layton will sway them for us.

 

[JBP]

Seems like a lot of nit-picking. I expect it from the members on this site who can't stomach the idea of a leader who accomplishes what he sets out to do versus their "natural governing party" merely paying lip service to everything while accomplishing nothing!

I would much rather have a PM who is "wooden" in his oratory skills but actually LEADS as opposed to Jean"All Style, No Substance" Chretein or Paul"Everything is Our Priority" Martin. Liberal supporters get over it, we finally have a leader who gets things done without the never-ending Royal Commissions, never-ending studies.

I also want to add, are members on this site so shallow that they feel the PM should mention how wonderful the CF is doing in Afghanistan everytime he opens his mouth? Sorry folks, I am confident in the job I do daily and don't require the pat on the back to KNOW I am doing a good job!

Overall I thought he did okay, some of you wouldn't be happy unless he mentioned you personally, and called you the greatest soldier/sailor/airman(woman) in the history of the Canadian Forces!

Also, the Prime Minister of Canada (to me, FYI) is suppose to be the embodiment of the Canadian people, he is who we chose by majority to lead us and be our representation to the world at large... Your old school mentality of "Oh we don't need a pat on the back, suck it up and soldier on!" may have been okay 10-15 years ago. And it still swings a big stick now, but like others have said... The POPULACE needs to be convinced, not the Canadian Forces 2Cdo... It is ultimately the populace's choices and mentality that will dictate what and how long and where we'll be going and doing if ANYTHING. It is imperative that the person we chose to be the leader of our entire nation represent himself well and take a real lead by TELLING the people he has chosen to represent that he means business, and why it is we are in Afghanistan. Not just dilly-dally around and try to appease as many as possible but not make a point therefore not piss anyone off!

His speech did have some very good points in it, but being charasmatic is part of being a great leader. A leader who speaks passionately about what he says he believs and stands for can really galvanize a crowd and show them he means business. Unfortunately, he wasn't charasmatic during this speech and as many others mentioned, I think his speech had a neutral effect on said audience.

Effective reaction to enemy fire? - No need, the enemy fired a round 100meters off target! Keep on trucking boys! That's what I mean... This little speech didn't do much good...

 

[Edward Campbell]

Seems like a lot of nit-picking. I expect it from the members on this site who can't stomach the idea of a leader who accomplishes what he sets out to do versus their "natural governing party" merely paying lip service to everything while accomplishing nothing!

I would much rather have a PM who is "wooden" in his oratory skills but actually LEADS as opposed to Jean"All Style, No Substance" Chretein or Paul"Everything is Our Priority" Martin. Liberal supporters get over it, we finally have a leader who gets things done without the never-ending Royal Commissions, never-ending studies.

...

Sadly we live in a TV - moving towards IP - information era.  An overwhelming majority of Canadians get most of what passes for information from their TV set - filtered, sometimes cleverly, by various hack, flacks, bagmen, spin-doctors and journalists.  Style has, ever since the Kennedy-Nixon TV debate, overtaken substance; style matters; political parties are 'selling sizzle, not steak.'

Re: the natural governing party: I stopped voting Liberal in the mid '60s - when, I believe that once great party veered so off the Canadian track as to be, essentially, un-Canadian, maybe even anti-Canadian.  I want Stephen Harper to win the next election.  Even though I disagree with some of his policies I remain a Conservative Party supporter - but not a mindless, uncritical cheerleader.  When, as with the recent speech, I think Harper makes a mistake then as a thinking Tory I say so.  I think Harper blew a good chance.

I'm not skilled at communications (PR and propaganda delivery) but I do understand that the medium shapes the message.

 

[2 Cdo]

Thats not what I have seen in this thread,...maybe what you don't get is that without the public's support you [ and the CF] will not be able to continue to allow the "good job" to continue.

Welcome to the world of 30-second news bites.....the masses must continually be swayed or those like J. Layton will sway them for us.

I fully understand about the public support. I just have a problem with people who whine constantly about the PM, those are the ones I was addressing. Maybe you didn't "get it".

As for you R031 Pte Joe, the idea of "suck it up and soldier on" is not old school. It is your job as a soldier, maybe when you get a little more time in and experience you will understand.  :

 

[Cloud Cover]

I fully understand about the public support. I just have a problem with people who whine constantly about the PM, those are the ones I was addressing. Maybe you didn't "get it".

No Prime Minister should ever get a blank cheque when it comes to war.  This is a government that was elected on the basis of transparency and accountability, and not just in the fiscal sense. I just have a problem with people who whine constantly about people who dare to criticize the PM - any PM.

 

[scoutfinch]

I just have a problem with people who whine constantly about people who dare to criticize the PM - any PM.

Well said. 

The only thing worse are people blinded by the political spectrum.  It doesn't matter whether Harper is Liberal/Conservative/NDP... if he is failing to communicate to the Canadian people why we are in Afghanistan, then it should be noted so that it can be corrected. 

This is not about partisan politics or whether I like Harper.  It is about a mission being in jeopardy because our leader is not getting the message across to those that really matter rather than just preaching to the choir.

This Board is becoming very politically polarized -- to its detriment.  Let's be realistic.  Harper and the Conservatives aren't flawless.  There is nothing wrong with identifying downfalls if they can be corrected to the benefit of the CF.  Why does this constitute such a problem for people here?

 

[cplcaldwell]

+1

 

[2 Cdo]

Wow, just a few folks getting wound up because I didn't jump on the "bash Harper" bandwagon.

I just have a problem with people who whine constantly about people who dare to criticize the PM - any PM.

Don't actually recall "whining constantly" about criticizing the PM, merely made a statement.

The only thing worse are people blinded by the political spectrum.

You're kidding right, you are definitely in the anti-Harper camp.