Rick Mercer Liberal Song

[scribblet]

Rick Mercer Liberal Song you have to watch this LOL

[Slim MacSquinty]

Stephan and his cronies are making Joe Clarke look like Clint Eastwood, standing tall.

What is really quite amazing is the buy he seems to get in the media, when the Liberal cabinet was shuffling out of the house after the budget speech they were all towing the same "it's not a good time for Canada to have an election". No one took them to task as to the real motivation;

Then they finally got around to interviewing D. Smith the campaign chairman, he was honest (or foolishly candid) enough to say its not a good time for the Liberal party. I suppose this may qualify as a freudian slip as the Liberals have always been of the opinion that what's good for the Liberal party is good for Canada.

[windyman]

Stephan and his cronies are making Joe Clarke look like Clint Eastwood, standing tall.

What is really quite amazing is the buy he seems to get in the media, when the Liberal cabinet was shuffling out of the house after the budget speech they were all towing the same "it's not a good time for Canada to have an election". No one took them to task as to the real motivation;

Then they finally got around to interviewing D. Smith the campaign chairman, he was honest (or foolishly candid) enough to say its not a good time for the Liberal party. I suppose this may qualify as a freudian slip as the Liberals have always been of the opinion that what's good for the Liberal party is good for Canada.

Harper's been a recessive conservative who has 0 amount of ethics. Look at Cadman, the nuclear fiasco, the wheat board barley issue, and you will see the lack of leadership provided by Harper.

[August1991]

Rick Mercer Liberal Song you have to watch this LOL

Very good!

The sad thing is that the Liberals might conclude that the problem is the leader or their mistaken tactics. The Liberal problem is much deeper. The Liberals stand for nothing. The Warren Kinsellas and Jason Cherniaks have taken over the Liberals and such people have no substance and no coherent opinion about anything. They only know how to be partisan.

[jbg]

Very good!

The sad thing is that the Liberals might conclude that the problem is the leader or their mistaken tactics. The Liberal problem is much deeper. The Liberals stand for nothing. The Warren Kinsellas and Jason Cherniaks have taken over the Liberals and such people have no substance and no coherent opinion about anything. They only know how to be partisan.

I have excerpted below a New York Times Op-Ed (link to article) by David Frum, a Canadian, who, in my view, correctly defines the LPOC as a "brokerage party". August, I believe this reflects your thoughts. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Unlike their supposed analogues, the Democrats in the United States or Great Britain's Labor Party, Canada's Liberals are not a party built around certain policies and principles. They are instead what political scientists call a brokerage party, similar to the old Italian Christian Democrats or India's Congress Party: a political entity without fixed principles or policies that exploits the power of the central state to bribe or bully incompatible constituencies to join together to share the spoils of government.

As countries modernize, they tend to leave brokerage parties behind. Very belatedly, that moment of maturity may now be arriving in Canada. Americans may lose their illusions about my native country; Canadians will gain true multiparty democracy and accountability in government. It's an exchange that is long past due.

[Topaz]

I have excerpted below a New York Times Op-Ed (link to article) by David Frum, a Canadian, who, in my view, correctly defines the LPOC as a "brokerage party". August, I believe this reflects your thoughts. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Frum was also the writer of the state of the union address for Bush that had the "axis of evil" part for Iraq, Iran, N.Korea.

[jbg]

Frum was also the writer of the state of the union address for Bush that had the "axis of evil" part for Iraq, Iran, N.Korea.

And????????

[Slim MacSquinty]

Harper's been a recessive conservative who has 0 amount of ethics. Look at Cadman, the nuclear fiasco, the wheat board barley issue, and you will see the lack of leadership provided by Harper.

I wouldn't have bothered to reply to your rehashing of invented issues, until I read your pea-brained tag line.

First off it's offensive, second it displays your utter lack of knowledge. Only on the last point can I offer you the least bit of help.

First off ethics; even the lawyer who has authored two books on Mulroney's scandals admitted on the CBC that Harper was the most ethical national leader this country has had in a generation.

Cadman; himself denied incentives were offered except with electoral expense, no insurance policy could have been purchased for a terminal cancer patient, quite ridiculous.

Numerous nuclear experts have revisited the risk calculations and confirmed they were wildly overstated (by as much as 100X). The head of the commission was over zealous and needed to be reigned in, job done crisis averted.

The conservatives do not believe in nationalized industries, if you're in America you should understand how that is contrary to capitalist principles and has more in common with socialist governments (say like the Nazi's).

You indeed are a windy man.

[eyeball]

I'd say the Liberals are more venal than the Conservatives but both are equally authoritarian which by far is the most important characteristic they share.

I truly do hope the Liberals are a party who's time has come and gone. I just hope the NDP and Greens can get over their slight differences and fill the oppositional niche that's opened up. That and the development of regional parties like the Bloc should ensure that neither the Conservatives or the Liberals will ever come to dominate Canada again.

[August1991]

I have excerpted below a New York Times Op-Ed (link to article) by David Frum, a Canadian, who, in my view, correctly defines the LPOC as a "brokerage party". August, I believe this reflects your thoughts. Correct me if I'm wrong.

While I generally agree with David Frum, he's not saying anything new. It is a common argment to say that the Liberals are the Party of Power. At least since King, they have managed to broker religious differences, then language differences and now regional differences. Trudeau (once an NDP socialist) said explicitly that he wished to use the Liberal Party's ability to broker power to change Canada. (That's why he joined the Liberals in 1964 and then sought its leadership in 1968. He wanted to exploit the Liberal ability to exercise power.)

Well, Trudeau stood for something. On some issues, he was absolutely adamant. So too was Pearson. And even this brokerage business, in a country such as Canada, is no small matter. As I have argued often - regionalism, not ideology, drive Canadian politics.

Since Trudeau, the federal Liberal Party has reverted to being the party of King but without his acumen. It has only a pretense of orthodoxy, and even a weak talent for power. People like Warren Kinsella are PR guys, and it appears that they now control the Liberal Party. (It is ironic that Warren Kinsella is not involved directly in federal Liberal politics but WK wannabes are there.)

Frum:

Many Americans see Canada as a kind of utopian alternative to the United States: a North American democracy with socialized medicine, same-sex marriage, empty prisons, strict gun laws and no troops in Iraq.

What they don't see is how precarious political support for this alternative utopia has become among Canadian voters in recent years. From World War II until the 1980's, Liberal power rested on two political facts: its dominance in French-speaking Quebec and its popularity in the immigrant communities of urban Ontario.

...

As countries modernize, they tend to leave brokerage parties behind. Very belatedly, that moment of maturity may now be arriving in Canada. Americans may lose their illusions about my native country; Canadians will gain true multiparty democracy and accountability in government. It's an exchange that is long past due.

I'm not so sure about this conclusion of political maturity and brokerage parties. Democratic politics is the art of the possible. (I certainly agree with Frum's basic message to American readers. Canada's "utopia" is a peculiar accident, and it's no utopia at all. Canadians are taxed, wasted and poor.)

I happen to think that a party like the Liberals just doesn't work well in modern Canada. Chretien succeeded because he had weak opposition (Day) and McGuinty won for the same reason (Tory). In Quebec, where politics matter, McGuinty or Chretien would go nowhere. They are PR driven politicians without substance.

We are moving into a world where substance has become image. Voters want something solid. A slippery Mackenzie King has to pretend to have gravitus.

Edited March 3, 2008 by August1991

[jbg]

We are moving into a world where substance has become image. Voters want something solid. A slippery Mackenzie King has to pretend to have gravitus.

I hope you're right because if we elect Obama.....

As far as leaving brokerage parties behind I agree with Frum. Brokerage parties transition from authoritarian situations, i.e. post-war Italy and Germany into a truly vigorous debate about ideas.