Ignore the content of the argument, as it is only
Jonathon Kay writing for the national newspaper nobody reads, but the sentiments expressed here are becoming more common on the Right side of the political spectrum: Conservatives are looking for an alternative to the Harper Tories, or at least a reason not to vote, and they are finding hints of it in Ignatieff.
And this is something I am not entirely comfortable with, as I would put myself firmly on the center left of the political spectrum.
But you can't argue with success. And as Kinsella is fond of saying, you can't implement any kind of agenda if you don't win.
10 comments:
Success at what cost? What is hidden from view in this ongoing conflict, is the fact that Israel has been allowing settlers to settle on Palestinian land.
So if we really want a lasting peace, and where Canada should be leading that brokerage, we now are condoning this farce - where might is right.
We should be advocating for a lasting peace. To do this a Palestine homeland needs to be established, and the occupation to end.
It appears the liberals sold their soul for a 100 gold coins, because beneath Iggy's warhawkish & empire lite demeanor, is the hunt for the holy grail - the pot at the end of the rainbow, so to speak. The cupboards are bare.
Fact is - Liberals have been more successful as centre-left/centre-right - why? Because that is what Canadians in the majority are.
janfromthebruce - you are NDP - very left and spend a lot of time bashing Liberals, and yet, you want coalition. You need to get back to work - you are social worker aren't you? Are you working and/or are you doing your stuff on the taxpayer dime?
Canada's position on Israel is only of minor interest to me as I really don't think Canada ever has been a major player in the Israeli Palestinian conflict. The National Post seems to think Israel is one of the most important issues for Canada.
What I am interested in is Ignatieff moving the Liberal party to the right on things that will actually affect Canada (and to some extent the rest of the world - as I said I don't think a statement on Israel is going to affect the world or Canada). What do we know about this - Ignatieff's position on social justice, economic, environmental and other policies which will affect people? I would include foreign policy in this, but Canada's policy for places like Afghanistan are a whole lot more important than Israel.
"It appears the liberals sold their soul for a 100 gold coins, because beneath Iggy's warhawkish & empire lite demeanor, is the hunt for the holy grail - the pot at the end of the rainbow, so to speak. The cupboards are bare."
But, we'll make a deal with the devil, if we can snag a few cabinet posts. Coaltion of the opportunistic?
Well, I may be stupid, but I do feel (7 more days) that Ignatieff, etc. are waiting to hear what Obama's foreign policies will be before committing to anything. Obama said he'll have plenty to say about the Israel/Gaza situation after he has taken oath.
US has influence over the situation, Canada doesn't.
It appears the liberals sold their soul for a 100 gold coins, because beneath Iggy's warhawkish & empire lite demeanor, is the hunt for the holy grail - the pot at the end of the rainbow, so to speak..
Not all Liberals. This can only mean that some other party will be picking up votes...
As Lloyd Axworthy said, in a piece that in retrospect was either very prescient about the coalition or was signaling that it was on the horizon:
Will a leader emerge who is willing to take a chance and be ready to embrace, indeed take a lead in forming, a different kind of political constellation? Or will there be a push by that faction of the party that believes a return to right-of-centre politics will offset the present Conservative advantage.
To this death wish, I am reminded of the comment of Keith Davey, renowned Liberal party organizer, who said that Canadians given a choice will always vote for a real Tory, not a pseudo-Tory in Liberal clothing."
But hey, if the coalition really is dead, speaking as a Dipper I wholeheartedly encourage Liberals to turn away from 70% of the electorate to fight with the Conservatives over the other %30 of it.
Ignore the content of the argument, as it is only Jonathon Kay writing for the national newspaper nobody reads, but the sentiments expressed here are becoming more common on the Right side
I'd rather focus on Jonathan Kay's retarded ramblings. Good Lord, he's awful. His envy of people more successful and talented than he is is pathological. It must discombobulate him even more that his targets never respond to his bilious attacks.
There has been a pattern of the Liberal party talking left and governing right. If Iggy is going to talk right and govern left, that's okay with me.
Hey, I can dream...
I don't think "Right" has any meaning anymore beyond being a synonym for poor socialisation and ignorance. It's one of the few givens these days and it bears repeating.
"Right" isn't a useful concept anymore. Even the few genuine rightists (the ones who, in good faith, prefer solutions that emerge from the actions of individuals as opposed to those that depend on collective behaviour) are irretrievable solipsists.
Post a Comment