Coyne's take on the Jean fiasco.

[shoop]

From Andrew Coyne's web site.

www.andrewcoyne.com

Coyne's best quotes from this piece.

"She has no record of service to the country, no outstanding accomplishments to her name, no specialized knowledge of law, politics or the constitution. In a crisis, what credibility would she have?"

"This isn't a sales clerk we're hiring. This is supposed to be the position of supreme honour and prestige in the country, one with important symbolic and substantive roles."

As this thing drags out it comes down to that one simple question.

In a crisis, what credibility would she have?"

Think of this nomination what you will, but a tersely-worded three paragraph response to this allegations does not help build her credibility.

[mirror]

Jeez, did you really have to start another thread, your second, on the GG? We now have what is it, five of them going on the same subject. We get your point, your point, your point, your point, your point! You are being to act like The Liberal.

[kimmy]

"She has no record of service to the country, no outstanding accomplishments to her name, no specialized knowledge of law, politics or the constitution. In a crisis, what credibility would she have?"

"This isn't a sales clerk we're hiring. This is supposed to be the position of supreme honour and prestige in the country, one with important symbolic and substantive roles."

Liberal MP Roger Galloway (or, as editorialists have taken to writing, "Liberal" MP Roger Galloway) said something similar:

He said that since the 1950s, the appointment of a governor general has been based, in part, on the person having a discernible record of public service, either through the military or elected office.

"Now, we're reaching into the bag of celebrities in a sort of strange and perverse sense," Gallaway said in an interview yesterday. "It's like flipping through the Quebec version of People magazine and saying, 'Oh, here's an interesting person,' and that's all it's about."

Edmonton Sun

Galloway says that his constituents are mad about this, and Galloway is from Sarnia, not Alberta or rural BC.

-k

[shoop]

Jeez, did you really have to start another thread, your second, on the GG? We now have what is it, five of them going on the same subject. We get your point, your point, your point, your point, your point! You are being to act like The Liberal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not even close pal. This is a legitimate thread. Andrew Coyne is a respected journalist who offers a very frank assessment of his problems with Jean's nomination.

Comparing me to the Liberal is insulting and disrespectful. Pretty hypocritical for a guy who is threatening to run to the moderator upon seeing anything he doesn't like. Please stay on topic. If you have any further personal attacks send me a pm or an email to Greg will ensue.

Oh wait, you were the guy who called me a dickhead, weren't you?

[Leader Circle]

Jeez, did you really have to start another thread, your second, on the GG? We now have what is it, five of them going on the same subject. We get your point, your point, your point, your point, your point! You are being to act like The Liberal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Irony, by definition mirror, "The words ironic, irony, and ironically are sometimes used of events and circumstances that might better be described as simply “coincidental” or “improbable,” in that they suggest no particular lessons about human vanity or folly.", so for you to insult him for making a bunch of posts on one topic is ironic!

How many more posts about Layton can we get? "Layton Overtakes Harper Second Most Popular Leader", "Layton Proposes Export Tax on Oil to US", "Jack Layton", "NDP should focus entirely on the Liberals", just to name a few. So for you to rag on shoop for posting tidbits on the new GG is IRONIC!

Are you afraid someone will steal your title as link & topic starter king?

LOL

[shoop]

Irony, by definition mirror,  "The words ironic, irony, and ironically are sometimes used of events and circumstances that might better be described as simply “coincidental” or “improbable,” in that they suggest no particular lessons about human vanity or folly."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks LC.

btw, too bad you didn't send this to Alanis Morrisette years ago.

[August1991]

Coyne has written two columns in the National Post about the new GG. The first is available to read:

We do not know whether Michaelle Jean is a separatist, or was: we have it on Jean Lapierre's authority that she is not, which strangely does not fill me with confidence. (Her own silence since the controversy arose has not helped.) But the significance of this is not that she is, but that she could be. We have grown so used to treating separatism as a legitimate "option," a political choice like any other, that even now some readers will be thinking the question offensive -- not because the issue is in some doubt, but because it does not matter.

Is it too much to expect that the governor-general of Canada should actually believe in Canada? That she should have a conspicuous record of commitment to the country, passionate and undivided? That she should be unashamed to say, publicly and often, that it should exist?

Coyne -NP 13 Aug 2005

The other is subscriber only:

Let's start by attempting a few analogies. Suppose Prince Charles had chosen for a wife a woman whose idea of a good time was to go down the pub with a few mates from the IRA. Now suppose Charles himself, at one of these gatherings, raised a glass to the cause.

Link for subscribers

IMV, the second is better but both are excellent.

There's also David Frum:

As it is, the Jean appointment is turning into a classic Paul Martin botch-up. First comes the bold, visionary announcement: An agenda for the cities! Redressing the democratic deficit! Canada's first black Governor General! Then comes the cold shock of reality. The Martinites next try to bluff their way through by demanding that Canadians trust them (that's the stage we're at now). Then they're caught lying. Then they call their opponents nasty names, cut dirty deals, and violate constitutional rules all to escape the mess they themselves created by their own weird combination of vanity and fecklessness.

How costly will this botch-up prove? Probably not all that much in the end--Canadians do not take the job of Governor General very seriously. (By contrast, the Australians have chosen a string of excellent GGs. The current Queen's representative is Major General Michael Jeffrey, a former deputy chief of the Australian General Staff, a decorated veteran of Malaya and Vietnam--and incidentally a former head of Australia's counter-terrorism service. General Jeffrey and Daniel Lafond should have a lot to talk about at Commonwealth gatherings.)

AEI link

Paul Martin is leading English Canada down a path. Is this the path it wants to follow?

Maybe I'm wrong but I suspect English Canada would gladly choose another leader, except the alternative is Stephen Harper.