I'd say he played a major role
Damian Brooks has a point:
OK, Glenn, how about this: find a single prominent Canadian blogger who agrees that Captain Ed "can claim a major role" in producing a Conservative government. Come on, big guy, put your money where your mouth is on this.
Captain Ed's role during the Gomery publication ban in March 2005 was to publish information that would have eventually been made public anyway. He didn't discover the information himself.
Having said that, the timing of the release was important -- if it had languished under a ban for months or longer, it is possible that the impact of the kickback relevations would have been far less. As it was, the ban itself magnified the impact dramatically.
For that we have to be grateful to US bloggers.
Also, the experience energized the Canadian blogosphere, showing that the Canadian political establishment was no more protected from the effect of bloggers than the US.
But does this constitute a "major role" in yesterday's win? That's trickier. Paul Martin called the June 2004 election in order to get a mandate before the worst of the Gomery Inquiry became known. He was rewarded with a minority government.
Jean Brault has not gone to trial yet, so if the ban had not been defied, that knowledge would still be under wraps today. If the ban had not been broken, it's possible that yesterday's election would have been fought without knowledge of the kickbacks, and the Liberals would have done better. On the other hand, maybe if the ban had been in place, the information might have leaked right in the middle of the election.
Or not.
But remember too that the Conservative success in Quebec was due in no small part because of the Liberal collapse as a result of Brault's revelations. Had that information not been made public back in March, the Liberals might have been stronger in Quebec, and the Conservatives would have been frozen out. As it was, the Conservatives had a lot of time to prepare the ground made fertile by the Brault revelations made public by Captain Ed in March 2005.
On the balance, I'd say Captain Ed played a major role. He was a big domino early in a long line of dominos that finished tipping last night.
Are the US bloggers spending too much time on his contribution, making him out to have single-handedly defeated Paul Martin and the Liberals? Sometimes it seems like it, but chalk that up to general ignorance of the most recent events here that played a much more immediate role in the outcome: beer-and-popcorn, the income trust scandal, the military ad, Option Canada.
When all is said and done, the story of this election will be written by Canadian observers and not Americans, and I think they'll be able to strike the right balance.
Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary
Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!
Comments
Well, whatever we think of the Cap's role, I'm sure glad he's done what he's done. Folk like him have been a big help, of that we can be sure!
Posted by: Ian Hugh Clary at January 24, 2006 10:01 AM
So will you change your name to Happy in Great White North ;)
Posted by: Sharon at January 24, 2006 10:15 AM
As in many cases - Canada is behind USA at least 18 months. We just to small. And have not to much to give to world.
Posted by: george at January 24, 2006 10:46 AM
I don't think Cptn. Ed's contribution can be considered less important than any of the series of events contributing to the Liberal defeat.
If our neighbors want to crow about it that's fine with me. As you well know we Canadians have a tendancy to pat ourselves on the back for any percieved successes beyond our own borders.
A big "up" to Cptn. Ed, least of not for his live blogging of last night's results to cirumvent our archaic election laws and keep me from extra hours of agony in the Pacific time zone.
Posted by: Smith's Invisible Hand at January 24, 2006 10:46 AM
I'm a Yank with deep Canadian family roots and graduate level study in political science. This means that I not only know where Canada is; I know more than the average American about your country and have a understanding of how parliamentary democracy works. I've been following Canadian politics for quite some time and was aware of just what the Capt. had done.
I agree that the Capt's role here in the US has been over emphasized, as important as it was in terms of timing. That's mostly because your political "language" and power algorithms are foreign to most of us and requires some study to come up to speed while what the Capt. did was immediately accessible to all of us; transparency and the freeing of information.
So, forgive us our parochialism Instead apply a simple test to find out how deeply the Yank on the other end understands your political scene. Ask them: "In the context of Canadian politics, define Grits." Then go on from there.
Way to go. I believe that, if Harper and the party can operate in an atmosphere of pragmatism and political savvy things will be a lot different next time around. And part of that pragmatism will revolve around the process of scalp taking and coup counting on the Liberals.
It is always a good thing to strike your foe in his lodges; taking some scalps and counting coup. But if he is gone where will you steal tomorrow's ponies?
Posted by: Hungry Valley at January 24, 2006 10:55 AM
The best thing about bloggers is that they disseminate information quickly. Thus in the US presidential election the the blogosphere exposed the CBS letter re Bush's military status as a forgery within hours. If this phenomenon deprives the power players of the ability to time the release of information, it is a small price to pay. Besides given the bias of the mainstream media in both the US and Canada, Conservatives benefit from getting their stories into the market place so that the important ones can percolate to the point where they can't be ignored.
Posted by: Don Jones at January 24, 2006 10:55 AM
I read the longer thread on this, but if he could not bring himself to smile, could not the beaver at least of had a bemused grin for a day or two?
Posted by: Alan at January 24, 2006 11:26 AM
A fitting description of Captain Ed is he was a catalyst. Clear and simple. You can look it up.
Posted by: georgew at January 24, 2006 11:27 AM
while i cannot comment of the great issues in this election i can offer one anecdote contributing to the liberal's fall. the remark by a liberal politico, (was it martin himself?) that the liberals were "canada's natural governing party" in effect saying "no others need apply." that statement made a canadian friend of mine so angry that she went straightway down to the local conservative shop and volunteered to help any way she could. i have no doubt she was not the only one offended by that arrogant, presumptous and condescending statement, and in the event even the relatively few votes that might have been lost by the liberals were ones they desperately needed. from just over the border, in vermont, i'll wish my neighbors good luck and hope your new government treats you with a bit more respect than the outgoing mob did.
Posted by: "gunner" at January 24, 2006 11:39 AM
Our take (trackbacks broken):
Glenn Reynolds, Captain Ed, & Elephants
Georgew...good word, "catalyst"
Posted by: The Wild Duck at January 24, 2006 11:47 AM
If it weren't for the Captain, I wonder aloud how bad this country would be right now, probably another Liberal government.
Posted by: tomax at January 24, 2006 12:04 PM
Thanks also to Lost Budgie, and SDA, and yes of course to Steve here at Angry.
Interesting news, looking for work?
http://www.recruitingsite.com/csbsites/oag/en/careers.asp
Posted by: tomax at January 24, 2006 12:05 PM
...is it me, or does the sun look brighter this morning?
Posted by: tomax at January 24, 2006 12:09 PM
For what it's worth: I am an American blogger, though hardly as prominent as Captain Ed or the Instapundit, and in my analysis, I gave all the credit to Canadians, specifically the politicians who put the Conservative Party together and the the voters who -- this time -- resisted the appeals to fear.
Here's my
post, for those who are interested. (And if I made any mistakes, please let me know.)
Posted by: Jim Miller at January 24, 2006 12:16 PM
Hey Steve
I would like to congratulate you on your efforts to keep us all blogged up.I would also give you a huge attaboy on the David Smith file.I have no doubt that your intrepid inquiries led to a goodly number of votes going to Lawrence Cannon and away from Mr Smith.
Congrats!
Posted by: ian at January 24, 2006 12:41 PM
Give credit where credit is due. 'Captain' not only provided this vital information at a critical time for Canadians so that canadians could rally their outrage and courage, 'Captain' also provided cogent political analysis and context which had been missing in our own 'national'punditry.
Canadians also comment on US affairs and many Americans welcome a fresh 'outsiders' perspective.
The kind of nationalist myopia that feels psychologically threatened by US commentary about Canadian affairs is a frail sense of nationalism indeed.
Posted by: brock at January 24, 2006 02:51 PM
I think you guys should quantify what a prominent "Canadian" blogger is? Who is the greatest? I don't think your servers were swamped last night by Canadians like Captain's Quarters were.
We in Canada owe more to Captain's Quarters than any other blog... period. The coming days will show who has legs. Issues will be raised and everyone will be at Captain's Quarters, checking in. That will not be the case at many other "Canadian" blogs. They will go into hibernation.
Next to Captain's Quarters, we need to thank Small Dead Animals, MKBraaten and yourself. By the way Steve, don't cheapen your "brand" by picking fights that you can't win.
Posted by: Canucklehead at January 24, 2006 06:12 PM
Having observed the goings on north of the 49th pretty much since the beginning of the Gomery inquiry and following it at CQ, here and other places there is one clear point that defines what Ed Morrisy did. That was to make the happenings during the hearings public information from a position where there was freedom to legally publicize the information. He did not cause the recent political termoil in Canada, the government did, but what he did do was remove the cloak of secrecy surrounding the Gomery hearings.
It might be a good idea for your new government to prioritize passing legislation that allows for transparency during such investigations, but that's just my opinion and we know what opinions are similar to.
Posted by: dave at January 24, 2006 06:56 PM
Or you could write a second-rate poem about Captain Ed and the election, and maybe that'd get you a column in the National Post, Angry? What rhymes with Minnesota?
Posted by: andycanuck at January 24, 2006 10:24 PM
When confronted with info re Canada such as today's Wall Street Journal Opinion page, "Canadian Warm Front", I ALWAYS take a look at AGWN to get the Canadian perspective. The blog is pertinent and fact-laden. Related comments contain enough additional facts, some with surprising emotion, to be interesting reads on their own. I wasn't aware of 'Captain Ed' until reading about him here. BTW, what is "Grits."
Posted by: Iowavette at January 25, 2006 12:56 PM
The Captain had a major role in getting the testimony of an inside source at the Gomery hearings and broadcasts said sources opinions on various Gomery matters. I think its major within the Blogosphere. And the story of the election will be written by both American and Canadian observers.
Posted by: Richard Cook at January 25, 2006 05:26 PM
 
|
|
