Somehow Stephen Harper has managed to go negative and bland at the same time. Did anyone even know that was possible?

It's actually more muddled than bland. A bunch sentences strung together, clearly meant to call the Liberals rotten bastards, but never actually making that, or any other point.

Harper cedes the debate with his first sentence:

You see, Team Martin wants to frame the debate as a question of whether his government will be accountable. Harper's question grants that premise -- instead of pounding Martin on whether the Liberals have indeed been accountable.

Following on, Harper proceeds to waste one third of his air time answering this ridiculous rhetorical question, with other ridiculous rhetorical questions:

The first two questions are clearly meant to imply that no government can simple wake up one morning and decide to become accountable. OK, but then Harper abruptly turns, pondering -- with Sophoclean wisdom -- the real reason a government suddenly might decide to become accountable.

Now he's off the damn point: a government can't just decide to become accountable. You just said so Stephen! That was the whole point of the two preceeding sentences!

Normally this kind of rhetorical "sharp turn" is meant to reveal the shocking truth, the hidden motives behind political actions. But here, Harper's phrasiology only serves to imply that Liberals have indeed become accountable, but only because voters forced them to. Again, Harper needs stay focused: the Liberals are not now -- nor were they ever -- accountable.

Just then, like a contortionist on crystal meth, Harper bends yet again -- finally getting to the point he should have been making all along: "when a government has to decide to become accountable it's time to demand a higher stantard of government." Geez, took you long enough!

This is his one line explaining why voters should "demand better", and even then he starts it off mealy mouthed, declaring confidently that "I believe... yada, yada, yada".

Even Harper's word choice is dull. "Accountability" is the Liberal's word. How about "take responisibility"; At least that doesn't sound like the word an accountant would use.

Finally, after 27 seconds of weak knees, Stephen Harper caps off with the incongruously confident, not to mention formal, "My name, is Stephen Harper".

Pitiful.

So let's help Stephen out:

I wish I were a Conservative. Allowing yourself to be a shameless demagogue really makes this stuff a lot easier. (But, of course, these guys still manage to fuck it up.)