It has been almost a week since Stephen Harper emerged from his far right crypt to endorse Pierre Poilievre, and we still don't know why he did it.
Did he do it to help Poilievre? Did he do it to screw Jean Charest? Or did he do it to help himself, and try to make people believe that the Cons still belong to him?
We may never know the answer, but one thing is for sure.
It was an absolute disaster.
The far-right Con cult had hoped to portray Harper's endorsement, as the closest thing to divine intervention.
With their lardy lord reaching down from the clouds to bless his favourite son, and reassure nervous Cons that a vote for Poilievre is also a vote for Great Leader.
But it all went horribly wrong.
Harper's sudden appearance scared a lot of Canadians, by serving to remind them of the horror of his monstrous years in power.
The cartoonists had a field day...
And the media reviews can only be described as BRUTAL.
Andrew Coyne led the parade of nays and boos, by questioning Harper's dubious credentials.
The Harper Conservatives jettisoned every principle that he or they had ever stood for, from democratic accountability to a strong defence to balanced budgets to free markets. And they still won but a single majority in five attempts. They sold their souls, and got nothing in return; swung for the lowest common denominator, and missed. All that remains of Mr. Harper’s legacy, the sole basis for his reputation as an unbending conservative, is his scowl: a petulant Cheshire cat.
And warning that the ugliness of Pierre Poilievre will be used against him.
There can have been few more polarizing political leaders in recent Canadian political history. And if there is one thing ideally suited to the perennial Liberal strategy of stampeding the left-of-centre vote into the Big L corral, it is a polarizing Tory leader. If the Liberals succeeded at painting such relative milquetoasts as Andrew Scheer and Erin O’Toole as scary, heaven only knows what they will do with Mr. Poilievre.
Two of Harper's former cabinet ministers, Peter Kent and Lawrence Cannon, wondered why he didn't mention Poilievre's "batty" proposals. Like his absurd plan to use bitcoin to fight inflation.
Even though that made it only too clear that just like his hero Harper, he too is no Great Economist Leader.
Harper made no mention either of the far-right extremists Poilievre has been hanging out with...
Even though his sordid flirtation with those uglies could be used one day to charge him with being a terrorist sympathizer.
As for the once very Con friendly Warren Kinsella, he portrayed Poilievre as a loser, and mocked the Con cult's infatuation with Harper.
Ottawa, which is a few square miles surrounded by reality, was buzzing this past week. An aged sullen, miserly misanthrope (Stephen Harper) came out to declare his support for a younger sullen, petulant misanthrope (Pierre Poilievre). Only in Ottawa would that be regarded as news.
Stephen Harper, as Andrew Coyne pointed out in a blistering Globe and Mail column this past week, was essentially a failure.
But of all the darts aimed at Poilievre, this one probably hurt the most...Because now they Canadians everywhere are laughing at him...