More from Jeff Sallot available More fromavailable here

If you blinked at all last week you might have missed Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s appointment of a new Supreme Court of Canada justice, Russell Brown — a former law school prof who seems to have harsh opinions of Liberals, Anglicans and at least one Tibetan monk.

In various blog posts Brown has described Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau as “unspeakably awful,” characterized the Anglican Church as a collective of “eco-pagans” and dissed the Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of Tibet’s Buddhists, as “not a nice man”. He posted these comments on a blog at the University of Alberta law school eight years ago, when he was a professor.

If Brown’s Supreme Court appointment notice sailed past your notice, that suits Harper and the Conservatives just fine. Why divert attention from the flood of pre-election announcements being pumped out endlessly by the Tory political machine? What could be more important than bribing key ridings with infrastructure grants?

Fortunately for the rest of us, a couple of reporters were all over the Brown appointment story. Glen McGregor at the Ottawa Citizen and Sean Fine at the Globe and Mail followed up the first-day story with weekend pieces quoting from Brown’s colourful blog posts in 2007 and 2008.

Brown’s jab at Trudeau came during the Liberal leadership contest in 2008; Brown wrote that he hoped to see the Liberals “just fade away by the next campaign” and that, as a result, he was cheering for either Trudeau or Toronto MP Joe Volpe — both “unspeakably awful” in Brown’s non-legal opinion.

In another post, Brown wrote that those who depict Harper as scary political figure with a hidden right-wing agenda were misreading him. “Admittedly,” he added, “I harbour some hope for a hidden agenda, but I doubt it’s going to happen.”

In late 2008, as the Tories were struggling to keep their minority government afloat, Brown wrote there were no legal obstacles to the opposition parties forming a coalition government. “Rather, I think the serious political problem for the proposed coalition is that it is propelling Stéphane Dion into the office of PM.”

At times, Professor Brown spiced his political comments with humour. Writing about news photos of Bob Rae planting a smooch on Michael Ignatieff, Brown wrote: “Maybe Iggy should make a Sexual Harassment in the Workplace Complaint.”

Another time Brown said he hoped Harper would win a majority so he could change election laws to remove “those odious third-party spending limits”. (The Tories won a majority in the subsequent election; the spending limits remain. Justice Brown must be so disappointed.)

The delicious irony is that Russ Brown, the blogging law prof, himself attacked this kind of appointment process as disgraceful. So does that mean he now considers the manner of his own appointment disgraceful? We don’t know. The delicious irony is that Russ Brown, the blogging law prof, himself attacked this kind of appointment process as disgraceful. So does that mean he now considers the manner of his own appointment disgraceful? We don’t know.

Brown’s other targets included the Ontario Liberal government’s “hot air” environmental policies and the “puritanical functionaries” who run human rights commissions.

Turning his attention to things spiritual, Brown wrote that people shouldn’t be fooled by the Dalai Lama’s resemblance to American TV comic Phil Silvers. The Dalai, he said, “is not a nice man”.

As for the Anglican Church, well … Brown suggested that it “seems to have morphed into some deeply weird post-Christian eco-pagan group run by a flaky fringe of the graying Godspell crowd.”

Wow. This guy writes circles around Ezra Levant.

Brown circa 2008 was a man with strong opinions — disdainful of Liberals and skeptical of the Harper Tories’ commitment to radical political change. But what should we make of the fact that some of his blog posts have been scrubbed from the original website, making them harder (but not impossible) to find? Has he changed his views?

We may never get a chance to find out. The Harper government whizzed the appointment process past us in the middle of summer when all of the other official white noise coming from the capital was about how lucky we are that the Tories are sending us baby bonus cheques — buying our votes with our own money.

Now, you may have noticed this: I have opinions. And I would be the last person to deny law profs their opinions.

But wouldn’t it be nice to know if Justice Brown has changed his views over time? I would like to hear him say, for example, that he can set aside personal political views and decide cases on the facts and the law within the structure of our Constitution. He might have a couple of examples he can share from his time on the Alberta bench. And it would be a good idea to hear Brown talk about these things before the House justice committee or some other open parliamentary forum.

Stephen Harper used to think it was a good idea, too. But that was before the Supreme Court nixed one of his judicial appointments from Quebec because the jurist didn’t have all the credentials required by law. By pitching a speedball appointment in the last few days before an election call, Harper has shut down any chance at meaningful discussion.

The delicious irony is that Russ Brown, the blogging law prof, himself attacked this kind of appointment process as disgraceful. He called for a parliamentary review for all senior judicial appointments.

So does that mean he now considers the manner of his own appointment disgraceful? We don’t know. Reporters Fine and McGregor tried to reach Brown last week for comment. He wasn’t taking calls from journalists.

We deserve to know if and when Harper and the PMO learned about Brown’s blog posts. When the Tories first made him a senior judge in Alberta in 2013? When they began vetting him for the Supreme Court? Or when Fine and McGregor published their pieces, a week after the PMO fired off the news release about the appointment?

By botching this appointment process so badly, Harper has put Brown under a cloud he probably doesn’t deserve.

Jeff Sallot is one of Canada’s most experienced and respected political writers. A graduate of the Kent State University journalism school, he shared a Pulitzer Prize with colleagues at The Akron Beacon-Journal for his eyewitness coverage of the massacre of four Kent State students by the Ohio National Guard during an anti-war demonstration. He worked for The Globe and Mail for more than three decades, much of the time as a political journalist based in Ottawa. He started his career in political journalism at The Toronto Star when Pierre Trudeau was prime minister. He taught journalism at Carleton University for seven years until he retired in 2014.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.