punked Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 So a leader whose party has no platform; who at this point according to polls has lost what ever momentum he had in polls; who now in a recent Macleans interview is found to have trashed his party's Pearsonian peacekeeping traditions; is making a cabinet? And oh yes, he is the Leader of the Opposition, a mere technicality of course. This latest adventure is either exceptionally audacious or the height of that Iggy arrogance that drives so many batty except it seems the great man himself and a few of his sycophants. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/silve...article1223564/ The media seems to be turning a little of the summer will the flood gates open in the fall on the Liberal Leader? I don't think he is doing enough to get a good spin the news that is for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/silve...article1223564/The media seems to be turning a little of the summer will the flood gates open in the fall on the Liberal Leader? I don't think he is doing enough to get a good spin the news that is for sure. I find the reference to Canada's so-called "Pearsonian peacekeeping traditions" even more ridiculous. Canada's real tradition was WWI, and WWII, and Korea. It's so-called "Pearsonian peacekeeping traditions" only started after the Liberals gutted the military. They had no choice but to "peace keep." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 It's just as much of a tradition as our war fighting. Theirs nothing wrong with Canada taking part in either type of mission under the right circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) The media seems to be turning a little of the summer will the flood gates open in the fall on the Liberal Leader? I don't think he is doing enough to get a good spin the news that is for sure. The objective of a leader in any party is to recruit candidates to help it in Parliament. I think any party recruiting candidates is looking to find people who would be ideal for the party and who could serve in cabinet, be it shadow or in government. It isn't arrogant. It is a what the leader is supposed to do. By the way, I don't consider a Tory blogger to be media. He is in the media but he is not a reporter. Edited July 21, 2009 by jdobbin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 I find the reference to Canada's so-called "Pearsonian peacekeeping traditions" even more ridiculous. Canada's real tradition was WWI, and WWII, and Korea. It's so-called "Pearsonian peacekeeping traditions" only started after the Liberals gutted the military. They had no choice but to "peace keep." Agreed. When Pearson came up with the idea we still had a reasonable amount of military resources. We already had had some cuts and we were facing maintenance and upkeep costs in the future. So for those initial peacekeeping missions we still had the capability to mount a respectable military force. Ever since, the Liberals kept cutting and cutting until we can no longer mount any extensive military operation. Other countries want our participation for the political symbolism. Nobody expects that we have the strength to actually DO something! The nadir was in Kosovo. The Serbs outgunned us every time we faced them. Our boys were perhaps the bravest and best trained of anyone there. We just didn't have enough of them, with enough modern equipment. We keep fooling ourselves. We sneer at Americans for emotionally thinking that they are the 'best' yet we do exactly the same thing when we fool ourselves about our military. We puff up with pride while we send them out in artic cammo to Afghanistan! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 Agreed. When Pearson came up with the idea we still had a reasonable amount of military resources. We already had had some cuts and we were facing maintenance and upkeep costs in the future. So for those initial peacekeeping missions we still had the capability to mount a respectable military force.Ever since, the Liberals kept cutting and cutting until we can no longer mount any extensive military operation. Other countries want our participation for the political symbolism. Nobody expects that we have the strength to actually DO something! The nadir was in Kosovo. The Serbs outgunned us every time we faced them. Our boys were perhaps the bravest and best trained of anyone there. We just didn't have enough of them, with enough modern equipment. My friends who did many tours said they outgunned everyone in the region. They had the more modern equipment, not the Communist Serbs, or the various other factions on all sides. Other then that trifle analogy, I agree with your reply., Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 My friends who did many tours said they outgunned everyone in the region. They had the more modern equipment, not the Communist Serbs, or the various other factions on all sides. Other then that trifle analogy, I agree with your reply., I think Iggy is not really forming a cabinet but instead recruiting viable candidates for what will obviously mean a fall election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 and why the hell should they release their platform? Harper didn't release his until a few days before the last election! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 and why the hell should they release their platform? Harper didn't release his until a few days before the last election! To be fair he was running the country I knew what direction Harper wanted to take the country in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_ON Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 To be fair he was running the country I knew what direction Harper wanted to take the country in. That's hardly sufficient, it is a well accepted convention that one does not govern the same way in a minority position as one does in a majority position. Harper stated he wanted a majority but failed to notify us as to why we should grant him one until the 11th hour of the election, even then it was a half assed platform at best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 That's hardly sufficient, it is a well accepted convention that one does not govern the same way in a minority position as one does in a majority position. Harper stated he wanted a majority but failed to notify us as to why we should grant him one until the 11th hour of the election, even then it was a half assed platform at best. Harper still tries to govern as if he had a majority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Harper still tries to govern as if he had a majority. He pretty much does with the Liberals agreeing with him on everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) That's hardly sufficient, it is a well accepted convention that one does not govern the same way in a minority position as one does in a majority position. Harper stated he wanted a majority but failed to notify us as to why we should grant him one until the 11th hour of the election, even then it was a half assed platform at best. Accept it is the accepted convention. In the recent election in NS the conservative party's platform was actually the legislation the government was brought down over. The oppositions job is show us how they would do things differently. They have so far offered nothing. Edited July 22, 2009 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_ON Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Accept it is the accepted convention. In the recent election in NS the conservative party's platform was actually the legislation the government was brought down over. The oppositions job is show us how they would do things differently. They have so far offered nothing. You're correct, it is the opposition’s job to offer an alternative, but it is also the government’s job to demonstrate the effectiveness of their own policies and how they relate back to the platform. It is also their job to demonstrate how they want to govern in the future. The reality is Ignatieff has learned from the last election. Harper held his platform until the 11th hour so that the opposition would not have time to scrutinize it; all the while the CPC had ample time to come up with plenty of fodder to attack the Liberal platform. This is not the least bit sporting of Mr. Harper but also not terribly surprising either. It's all well and good for the NDP and the Bloc to release their platforms well in advance, they're not Harper's real competition, I know it, and you know it, the CPC and the LPC know it. Mr. Harper changed the rules of the game; Mr. Ignatieff is just choosing to play by them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 (edited) You're correct, it is the opposition’s job to offer an alternative, but it is also the government’s job to demonstrate the effectiveness of their own policies and how they relate back to the platform. It is also their job to demonstrate how they want to govern in the future. The reality is Ignatieff has learned from the last election. Harper held his platform until the 11th hour so that the opposition would not have time to scrutinize it; all the while the CPC had ample time to come up with plenty of fodder to attack the Liberal platform. This is not the least bit sporting of Mr. Harper but also not terribly surprising either. It's all well and good for the NDP and the Bloc to release their platforms well in advance, they're not Harper's real competition, I know it, and you know it, the CPC and the LPC know it. Mr. Harper changed the rules of the game; Mr. Ignatieff is just choosing to play by them. If the Liberals and Conservatives don't put out a platform until the 11th hour it will benefit the Conservatives. Problem is 55% of the country likes the direction of the country and unless the Liberals present a real alternative they wont have a fighting chance. They need somethings though. They need some progressive promises in their platform, whenever they have won they have some (not the whole thing mind you) but some progressive promises usually taken from the NDP, or delivered on the backs of NDP work. They can't have crazy progressive promises like the green shift. They just need something to keep their left and steal 2-3% from the NDP vote. They need to focus on the money. They have economists they know this stuff. Promise a balanced budget, and to reduce the debt. Don't promise tax cuts but pay them lips service like "if we live within our means we see in the future the tax rate to stay steady or be dropped." Don't attack Health Care say it is as Canadian as Hockey. Say you do everything you can to protect it. Talk about more money for our military if that promise is not their you get big heat for your leaders past comments. WIth this he can spin them. Put it out and be ready to spin, otherwise you guys aren't going to win this thing. You have to offer an alternative. Clear differences. Right now my party and I can attack every 5 seconds saying you are the same party as the Conservatives. Unless you offer something different this going to be how you are framed. Edited July 22, 2009 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 He pretty much does with the Liberals agreeing with him on everything. you should enjoy that now, while you can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I find the reference to Canada's so-called "Pearsonian peacekeeping traditions" even more ridiculous. Canada's real tradition was WWI, and WWII, and Korea. Yes, we have a sad tradition of following super-powers into their geo-political quagmires. It's so-called "Pearsonian peacekeeping traditions" only started after the Liberals gutted the military. They had no choice but to "peace keep." Not that I have any love for the Liberals but, wasn't it actually the Tories that started the process of dismantling our offensive military capacity when Diefenbaker acquiesed to American suggestions we shut down the Avro Arrow and a nascent aero-space industry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Yes, we have a sad tradition of following super-powers into their geo-political quagmires. Really? Which super-powers were we following? Which geo-political quagmires? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 The simple truth is that it is Harper that is under the gun, nobody else. He is the one with the most to lose, and he knows it. Right now Iggy can ask and receive anything he wants from Harper, so the logical move is not to put out a platform that Harper can piggyback on, but to offer their own current policies as a way out for Harper to retain power. If Harper doesn't agree then Iggy can pull the plug, saying that even with the opposition cooperating the minority government does not reciprocate, and if he does agree than Iggy can say that it is he that is really running the show. Either way it leaves Harper holding the smelly end of the political stick. Of course the knife cuts both ways, and rest assured Harper will go to school on whatever works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Really? Which super-powers were we following? England for the most part and then the US. Which geo-political quagmires? Two world wars that were predominantly over Europe's in-fighting over the rise and fall of the various empire's within it and abroad. America who can't seem to resist similarily interfering in other people's countries and who've been mucking things up ever since they got into the business. In any case the last thing Canada needs is a cabinet that wants to be a big player in this global stageshow. I really don't hold out much hope for one that won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Yes, we have a sad tradition of following super-powers into their geo-political quagmires.Not that I have any love for the Liberals but, wasn't it actually the Tories that started the process of dismantling our offensive military capacity when Diefenbaker acquiesed to American suggestions we shut down the Avro Arrow and a nascent aero-space industry? Douglas said it best when arguing the Vietnam war. "In Washington they have their hawks and doves and in Ottawa we have our parrots." Funny how it is still true today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 The simple truth is that it is Harper that is under the gun, nobody else. He is the one with the most to lose, and he knows it. Right now Iggy can ask and receive anything he wants from Harper, When has this happened? Never that is what I thought. Iggy has no backbone to do this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 you should enjoy that now, while you can. I don't enjoy it disgusts me as it does many liberals ask yourself why keeps dropping in the polls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 I don't enjoy it disgusts me as it does many liberals ask yourself why keeps dropping in the polls? Why do they all the party leaders drop in the polls? Mostly because they all play games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Why do they all the party leaders drop in the polls? Mostly because they all play games. Finally we agree on something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.