Now That's More Like It!

 In an earlier post, I worried that the LPoC might be losing its edge.  Clearly I spoke too soon.  Because Jason Cherniak wants some party functionary I've never heard of to resign, and James Curran wants Jason to resign for wanting that functionary to resign. All over an email asking what LPoC Members might want to discuss at that January convention thingy I'm not going to. 

Yes!  Go Team!  Because if you don't practice on one another, you won't be in shape for 2015.

A Smell Wafts Through The Blogosphere

It's Ezra Levant, and he's calling Irwin Cotler a "porch Jew", 1st on twitter, and then on his blog. Now, Jason Cherniak thinks Kotler is being compared to a lazy black slave that gets on by pleasing his white master (the most obvious definition of the term, given its historical antecedents); Levant is employing ethnic slurs, in other words. And Cherniak's right. Ezra is 1) comparing Kotler to black slaves that might have chosen to serve their white masters as domestics rather than risk a more difficult life in the fields, and 2) implying by analogy with the origonal term that Kotler is not Jewish enough. He makes his commitment to 1) quite clear:

I used the phrase "porch Jew", an anology to the dichotomy between field slaves and house slaves. Cherniak read that as code for a racist anti-black epithet ("p0rch m0nkey") that I have never used in my life.

[...]

Sort of like Uncle Tom, really -- they liked being porch slaves a lot better than being field slaves, so why cause a fuss?

But another thing is, "porch monkey"--the term Cherniak thinks (correctly) that Ezra is riffing on-- is really just a nicer term for the more common "porch nigger", and when you realize that you realize what a dark ugly place Ezra's mind really is. I'm with WK here. Why are the Tories treating this guy as a legitimate spokesperson? Why does the MSM even deal with him? He should be Shaidled off the airwaves.

Tory On Tory Violence: No Youth Wing Blog And Facebook Page Threatened With Lawsuits, Pulled Down

The story about a group of young Conservatives trying to establish a CPoC "youth wing", and a 2nd group of Conservatives (including, apparently, several CPoC staffers) who launched a "No Youth Wing" blog and Facebook site, got some media attention when Susan Delacourt posted on it a week or so ago.

Now--perhaps in the face of legal threats outlined here--both the "No Youth Wing" blog and facebook page have been made to disappear. Furthermore, a 2nd facebook site has been created dedicated to the proposition that the staffers behind the "No Youth Wing" faction should be fired. I see that Cherniak has joined, and now so have I.

Ah, summer in the blogosphere.

Liberal Party Of Canada, You Will Be Getting Some Of My Money

Don't know if I'll join up, but passing OMOV earns you a couple of fins, at least.

PS. maybe Imp can tell us all what Cherniak was on about this time.

NDP Stupidness: This Time Its Provincial

Cheri DiNovo has fired her three Queen’s Park staffers. The Parkdale-High Park MPP zapped them with late night e-mails – sent out on Labour Day, of all days of the year. The next morning she tried to un-fire them, blaming her managerial zeal on drinking too heavily and being affronted when none of them showed at her community BBQ. This was actually the second time that all of DiNovo’s staffers had been canned electronically, and rather than go back to await a third deletion the Parkdale Three have grieved their firings under the very strong caucus collective agreement.

I would remind everyone that I defended this lady against Cherniak and Kinsella and whoever was running the Lib War-Room in that by-election. So apparently I called one wrong. It happens.

But someone should ask Jack Layton: Yo Jack! Is there anyone in the NDP that doesn't abuse substances? And if not, how are you set for dime bags this week?

Only A Party With Money To Burn

...could afford a stunt like this. Not sure how well it will work, myself. Lorrie Goldstein thinks it shows a certain amount of fear on the Tories part:

Clearly, they're worried Dion's carbon tax, whenever he releases it, could appeal to voters concerned about global warming, particularly if the Liberal announcement is backed by environmentalists, economists and business groups stressing it will be effective and "revenue neutral," a claim the Tories mock. You don't put this much effort into attacking someone you don't think is a threat.

But whatever. Ads right at gas pumps. Gangs of young Tories at petrol stations, engaged in guerrilla marketing. (Careful with that. Motorists with a dark sense of humour might just hose 'em down with gasoline and torch 'em for kicks. Not me, obviously.) Is the fact that the website goes out of its way to reference Jason Cherniak personally a sign of the Harper governments all seeing, all knowing nature, or a sign of the fact that they are spending zillions on something really "inside baseball" in nature, and therefore just...don't...get...it?

Fall Election?

Interesting comment from His Nibs yesterday:

Speaking of election, I am still of the view that we Liberals had better be ready to go in the fall. Don't let Harper put out a budget first - that's his plan and we should be trying to throw him off it. Gilles Duceppe has given us an in and we had better not dismiss it out of hand.

Consider:

1) Bad news out of Afghanistan, prompting Mr. Duceppe to issue threats.
2) Dumb moves on the part of John Baird et al over the Kyoto Law, the issue on which they are weakest, causing all of the opposition parties to issue threats.
3) A burgeoning police scandal.
4) A burgeoning funding scandal.
5) A greater acceptance among the Canadian people and the Liberal Party of Stephane Dion. His English is a little better, and people are more used to hearing it.
6) A demoralized Tory base, as witnessed by the number of Tory bloggers who are throwing in the towel.

The only thing I would be worried about is the Lib's financial state. But if Jason is making pro-election-type noises, I am sure they have been cleared by the higher echelons.

Cherniak On MMP

From Jason's post this morning:

If history is any lesson, political parties tend to do well in Canada when they tend towards the centre of the spectrum and voters believe that they have competent leadership. Federally, the Liberal Party has been the most successful at this. In Ontario, the Progressive Conservatives have tended to be the party of choice since WWII. With the MMP system, however, the Ontario PCs would not have had so many majorities. Instead, they would have likely governed with the support of the Liberal Party. I suspect that the government itself would have been similar, but there might have been more negotiation involved and even a few coalition governments.

Would that have been better? It would have shared power more broadly, but I am not certain that it would have really affected the general policy direction of Ontario. If anything, it might have left the politicians bickering more loudly. I also believe it would have allowed the government to avoid taking "credit" for some policies on the argument that the opposition was to blame. Would that have given Ontario a better political system from 1943 - 1985? I'm not so sure. Ultimately, I believe that the buck needs to stop somewhere. Otherwise, nobody is clearly responsible for making the decisions and voters will have a tough time knowing who to hold responsible when something goes wrong.

As I noted in Jason's comments this morning, I think he underestimates the potential of MMP to effect government policy. For example, I doubt that Mike Harris could have done nearly as much damage to Ontario under MMP. The radical edges of his government would have been softened via negotiation. Toronto would have never have been amalgamated; there wouldn't have been a teacher's strike every twenty-five minutes.

So majorities are governments are fine if they function as upholders of the Canadian or Ontario or whatever consensus: if they function under the Bill Davis rather than Mike Harris paradigm. What MMP does, theoretically, is de-fangs radicals by forcing them into coalitions or a minority government situation. And I would be happy to make the next Bob Rae (in his old, economically clueless incarnation) impossible if I knew their would be no more Mike Harrises

Kudos All Around

Jason Cherniak takes a lot of crap, and god knows that much of the time he deserves it, but clearly this little on-line gimmick of his can be judged to have been a resounding success. A bunch of cut-rate Youtube videos trashing the Tories are getting almost as much MSM coverage as the original Tory ads themselves.

Congrats to Jason and to the various auteurs.

How Long Before Kinsella Shows Up and Denounces Someone?

Having read both Cherniak's post and McClelland's original post, I would say that McClelland eventually did the right thing when he put the boots to arthurdecco. It is also ironic (a point Cherniak seems to miss) that the intent of McClelland's piece was to expose some anti-Semitic remarks made by Rev. Ted Pike of the National Prayer Network.

Mitigating factors aside, it is clear that anti-Semitic remarks were made in the comments section of McClellands blog, some (arguably) by McClelland himself. Since my understanding is that McLelland is to the Blogging Dippers what Cherniak is to Liblogs (roughly speaking, McLelland "owns" the site), demanding that he step down is like demanding that the stars fall from the sky. There's no point to it. I would, however, suggest to McClelland that he offer something in the line of an apology. Everyone says dumb things occasionally (or allows them to be said in one's presence), and the best thing to do is own up and move on.

And if you do feel like slagging off some ethnic or national group, pick a relatively powerless one, like the Ystonians. There aren't many around, and most of those that are look like they grew up next to Chernobyl. They're reedier than the English! So if you see any you can usually out-run them and, failing that, they can't throw much of a punch.

The thing I'd like to know is: where's that conflict buzzard Kinsella? Shouldn't he be flapping around making free with the denunciations?

How Much Is That Headline On The Website?

Yesterday, Jason Cherniak might have got Bourqued!* In the midst of a post offering "Constructive Criticism" of Stephane Dion and his Liberal team, Jason suggested that Michael Ignatieff should "stop asking the PM questions" during question period. Whether this is good advice or not is beside the point (I disagree with it, but won't argue that here). Suddenly, however, comments were appearing on this blog and elsewhere to the effect that Jason had ignited a Liberal Civil War! Even better, a headline appeared on Bourque's Newswatch: DION BACKER [ie. Cherniak], RIDING PREZ CALLS FOR IGGY QUESTION BAN!

Since Bourque is best known for selling headlines, the news value of his site is dubious at best. In fact, the only interesting thing to ask about this particular header is: did someone pay for it, and if so who, and (most importantly) if so, for how much?

Because if you can't beat him, why not join him? I'd pay money to have selected headlines appear on Bourque's Newswatch. How about something like "Harper Enters Third Trimester".

* Bourqued: to be the subject of a bought, usually negative headline on Pierre Bourque's website