12.12.2010 08:00 AM

From Angelo’s excellent column today

I wonder what/whom these two sentences refers to?  Interesting.

“The present leader is surrounded only by leftovers of the past whose incompetence is rivalled only by their arrogance.  They have betrayed loyalties with their MPs and everyone who has laboured for the party over the years.”

46 Comments

  1. I thought Peter Donolo was going to fix things.

    • Warren says:

      Well, getting to 24 per cent nationally may be a fix.

      If you’re in the NDP, that is.

      • Peter says:

        I think all of the Chretien era guys are overrated . I mean no offense Warren but The LPC went up against a divided right for 4 elections with the liberals maxing out at 38% of the vote .
        It resulted in majorities because of the vote spilt .

        The CPC got more or less the same percentage of votes in the last election but because the 3 left wing parties fought regional battles to prevent a CPC majority Harper came up short .

        But where did that leave the Liberals ? In over 100 ridings the Liberals didn’t even get their $2500 deposit back because they couldn’t get 10% of the vote .

        Frank McKenna warned you guys in his report and the time of the Coalition that it would take a long time to rebuild the Liberal party but instead of listening the LPC reached for the next old guy in line .

        Somebody like Dominic Leblanc may not be all that exciting but at least you’ll know that he’ll be around for the 10 yrs its going to take to come up something that makes sense and to rebuild the party .

        You guys might even like a 1 member 1 vote leadership race .

        • Kevin says:

          Peter, the Liberals “minned” out at 38% during the PC/Reform/CA era (which was three elections, not four). Chretien twice got over 40% of the vote.

  2. Paul R Martin says:

    I do not know enough about the insiders in the Liberal Party to make an accurate guess, but I suspect that he is referring to the Chief of Staff. He also took a well deserved strip out of Justin Trudeau’s hide. I hope for his sake, the younger Trudeau will give Fantino a public apology.

    • Bill says:

      Why apologize for accurately quoting him?

      Just because Angelo says it’s out of context doesn’t mean it is.

      Trudeau won in Papineau, immigrant thick and it was previously Bloc.

      Angelo has no idea how popular Justin is here in Quebec.

      • Namesake says:

        Yeah, I doubt he was misrepresenting Fantino’s views in the least. When Fantino broke radio silence right after the election, he confirmed that, yes, he was very bothered by the way the Charter is used to… bloody hell! … defend accused criminals! ( http://www.canadaviews.ca/2010/12/02/fantino%E2%80%99s-first-act-of-office-attack-the-charter/

        And witness another ex-cop Fantino supporter who doth protest too much, bristling at the idea that he should be criticized for this, and then proceeding to rag the Charter & pinko defense attorneys himself, in exactly the same vein:

        http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/fyi/trudeau-should-listen-and-learn-111714644.html

        • Peter says:

          I think you are missing the point Namesake . The youtube video is one thing . It was a good way of getting out the base who might be conflicted voting against someone who is very popular locally .

          But when he waged war for the better part of a week it freed Fantino to reveal that the Liberals and Ignatif himself had approached him to run first .

          If Fantino’s view’s are so objectioable then why did they ask him to run as a Liberal ?

          Politics is no different than any other warfare , you have to know when to attack and when to withdraw and in this case little Justin Trudeau and his handlers over played their hand .

          • Namesake says:

            well, I agree that the disclosure that the Libs had approached Fantino to run for them first was devastating — that alone could account for the 10,000 drop in vote (I probably would’ve sat it out, esp. w/o any advance disclosure or adequate explanation of that — but think you’re very mistaken about the timeline & what happened there.

            Fantino said most emphatically in the post-election interviews that it WASN’T him who disclosed it, that there’d been an agreement b/w him & the Lib. leadership not to, and that he was angered by the fact that they broke it, which is why he was lashing out, now.

            But it’d be just…. crazy for the Libs TO leak it, since it completely undercut their own candidate & validated Fantino.

            Which begs the q.: who DID leak it, just days before the election (it broke on the Friday Nov 26, just before the 29th election, via the usual pipeline, the Taber Pass):
            http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/michael-ignatieff-courted-julian-fantino-but-was-rebuffed/article1814660/

            As that article shows, the Conservatives expressed mock indignation, but indicated they DID know about it, which, um, certainly makes it look like Mr. ‘My Lips Are Sealed’ Fantino told them, and they passed it on to Gossip Girl on the eve of the vote, when it got max. exposure after being raised in QP & carried on the nightly news.

          • hugger says:

            To wit Trudeau’s Father might have responded, I didn’t send Fantino an invitation.

            As I said below, young Trudeau needs to stand his ground. When you are right, that’s all that matters and Fantino doesn’t have the high ground here. All he brought is hug a thug one liners. Some MP that will make. Some Cabinet minister.

            Dumb it down, dumb it down
            I don’t care if my pants are on the ground.

            Centre left politicians and pundits talk too much, write too much, self analyze too much, but at present, they can’t be accused of excess in appealing to those who are less aware.

        • Paul R Martin says:

          Le petite Trudeau deliberately tried to smear Fantino and instead proceeded to shoot himself in the mouth. Justin is not ready for prime time.

          • Namesake says:

            Hey, if there’s any ‘smearing’ going on, there, it was done by Fantino & the Con. staffers writing his material.

            So, “A smear campaign, smear tactic or simply smear is a metaphor for activity that can harm an individual or group’s reputation by conflation with a stigmatized group… [and] is related to the concepts of propaganda, media bias, yellow journalism, and other falsehood-related terms.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smear_campaign

            And what did Justin do? He _quoted_ Fantino, directly from his book: “Who has reaped the greatest benefit from the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? I would argue that, if it isn’t common criminals, then it must be the Hells Angels.” And he went on to defend the importance and value of the Charter of us all.
            http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20101126/vaughan-byelection-trudeau-fantino-101126/20101126?hub=TorontoNewHome

            Did he associate him with an unsavoury or stigmatized group? Um, no: he just portrayed him for what he was, a hard-core law & order type — which is a virtue, for Conservative supporters.

            Was that a falsehood or misrepresentation? Um, no. Fantino didn’t try to disavow or explain away the quote: he reaffirmed his complaint that, “In some cases, the Charter has been exploited and the rulings that have followed have, in fact, benefited some criminals, absolutely.”

            http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/breakingnews/new-tory-mp-julian-fantino-under-fire-for-saying-charter-has-helped-criminals-111222009.html

            In contrast, what did Fantino & his prepared statements do? He associated the Liberals & their beloved Charter with criminals, and sniffed that “I don’t need any lectures on law and order from a novice member of the ‘hug-a-thug’ Ignatieff party” — where ‘hug-a-thug’ is clearly a smear-job term of disparagement.

      • MJH says:

        Trudeau is a commited very rich socialist so it is no wonder Quebec loves him!!

        • Peter says:

          My guess is namesake is that maybe a high level Liberal knew about it and put it out there to sabotage Iggy . It wouldn’t be the first time a Liberal did some thing like that . I trust Fantino more than any of these back stabbing senior Liberals .

          • Paul R Martin says:

            Very interesting comment Peter. There have been times when I have wondered if Namesake was Justin Trudeau. Regardless of who he is, I think that Trudeau’s attack on Fantino is symptomatic of the difficulty Liberals have in gaining traction with the voting public. It seems to me, that far too many Liberals have resorted to name calling at the expense of policy. So far, the Liberal Party has offered voters very little of a positive nature.

  3. Bill says:

    Wow, Angelo writes another negative article on the LPC.

    Hey, in other breaking news….it’s Sunday!

    • JStanton says:

      You are choosing to miss the point. It’s not a “negative” article if it exposes the facts and provides logical analysis. And it’s not about the LPC per se, but rather the actions and inaction of its leadership.

      That the truth appears pejorative is not the fault of the columnist. Perhaps you should reevaluate why the LPC causes such indifference amongst Canadians, since the Martinite coup d’etat.

      • Bill says:

        There is no logical analysis, just more venom from Angelo.

        His cry that Fantino’s words were taken out of context is ridiculous. Out of context when read by whom?

        I’ll take the PM’s mentor on this one “It doesn’t have to be true, just plausible”.

        • Windsurfer says:

          A quick scan of Angelo’s article in this morning’s Toronto Star had DEFEATIST scrawled across his words.

          Like, if someone here can inform us all who this guy is and how much influence he carries, it would be helpful.

          If he’s just a blowhard, I can dismiss him. But if he’s the policy-shaper, then I guess he’s close to the grassroots voice of the Italian-Canadian citizen.

          But just remember that his part of the paper will go out in the BlueBox on Wednesday so that’s about the length of his relevance… to me.

          Anyone else?

          • James Curran says:

            The liberal party has slowly and increasingly forgotten about the Italian community and its significance. With the Martinis all but gone, a new generation of young Canadian Italians have not been promoted in the party. The Conservative Party however has recognized their significance in cities like Toronto, Thunder Bay, Hamilton, Niagara, Montreal etc. They’ve also made HUGE gains in the Indo communities of Mississauga and Brampton. We are no longer the party of the immigrant. It’s a coin toss now.

  4. Steve says:

    This column should really cause some discomfort to the four people who still take this guy seriously.

  5. Peter says:

    The youtube video of Justin 2 days before the vote was one thing but using Justin to continue the attack and to downplay the Conservative victory the next week was terrible.

    As some one who knocked on doors for Fantino I found this line in the article as being more significant .

    “The Liberals have milked the ethnic cow for two decades and now, in the new millennium, they believe nothing has changed.”

    This I think will be the final undoing of the Liberals and force them to really change . A Conservative majority would be the best for everybody including the Liberals because it would force a revolution in the party .

    Instead of looking for the next cheap and quick way of getting back into powr leadership wise , you could have a proper debate complete with a 1 person 1 vote leadership race .

  6. mississaugapeter says:

    No one in the Liberal Party except JC (not James Curran) or The Dauphin could have called out Ignatieff (without a significant backlash) on his right wing policies of spending billions of Canadian tax payer dollars (that have still not been collected) on extending a failed Afghanistan mission and purchasing planes.

    Unfortuantely, JT (not Justin Timberlake) has bought in to The Dauphin role that Ignatieff has given him, and isn’t prepared to boldly represent the views of the majority of Canadians – out of Afghanistan, what the hell are we spending $21B on war planes for?

    Unfortunately, no one except those expelled from the loop (WK) have the guts to criticize the Liberal leadership which is no longer in the centre, but has actually moved right of centre.

    • Bill says:

      You can’t pick one item (A-stan) to have the LPC shifting right.

      Is Harper now a socialist since he has a huge deficit and bought GM?

    • Namesake says:

      m.p. also seems to have curiously selective attention to or recognition of the Libs’ position on the F-35 jets: they’re hardly in lock-step with the Cons — they’ve criticized & questioned it almost daily in the House, & issued at least 27 releases to the effect that the sole-source deal should be scrapped post-haste, and a proper review should be done of our current & projected needs & the best deal to go forward on this.

      (just enter: f-35 jets, at:
      http://www.liberal.ca/?s=%20&submit=Search

      • MJH says:

        Liberals suggested they knew of a source for $6 billion. Unbelievably nieve for 65 fighters and 40 years of maintenance!! They are making fools of themselves!

      • mississaugapeter says:

        Namesake,

        The only thing the releases focus on are the need for a tendering process.

        There is no mention that $B should not be spent on war planes.

        There is no mention that money would be wiser spent on Ignatieff’s home-care initiative, poverty, or lowering the deficit.

        The Liberal Party of Pearson, Trudeau, Turner, Chretien, Dion, that I belong to, would never spend $B on unnecessary war planes.

        • mississaugapeter says:

          Sorry, I forgot Martin. The Liberal Party of Martin would never have spend $B for war planes if we were in a deficit.

          • Namesake says:

            Come on, considering that we only replace our fleet of jet fighters, what, every 50 years or so, those are pretty easy — but irrelevant — claims to make.

            I don’t know any credible political party who says we shouldn’t have ANY jet fighters to protect our country, if only from hijacked or bomb-bearing planes bearing down on urban centres. And the CF-18’s are certainly going to have to be replaced within the next, what, 19 years, which is what they’ve been refurbished up to (at most). And as the present gov’t is at pains to point out, even with the F-35 purchase as it stands, there won’t be any actual payments made until another 4 or 5 years, at which point we’ll (theoretically) be back into balanced budgets again (we’ll still be billions in DEBT, of course, but we were even back in the 60s when the Libs first ordered the CF-18s).

            If the Libs were to run on “We’ll never buy another war plane again as long as there are poor people in this country” they’d never get back into gov’t. When has that EVER been an LPC policy?

          • mississaugapeter says:

            Namesake, are you trying to rewrite history?

            You say: “we?ll still be billions in DEBT, of course, but we were even back in the 60s when the Libs first ordered the CF-18s”

            First, in the 1960’s, the only time Liberals ran an operational deficit was in Pearson’s first year in office 1963-1964

            Second, the CF-18s never existed in the 1960’s. They were ordered in the late 1970’s

          • Namesake says:

            well, right, I mis-remembered/spoke/wrote about it being the CF-18’s we first ordered in the 60s… it was things like the CF-101 Voodoo, CF-5 Freedom Fighter, and the CF-104 we were buying back then

            http://www.joebaugher.com/navy_fighters/f18_12.html
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CF-101_Voodoo
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CF-5
            http://rcaf.com/Archives/archivesDetail.php?The-CF-104-for-Canada-10
            http://www.canadianmilitary.page.tl/Aircraft.htm

            But on the other pt., I was referring to DEBT, i.e., “Accumulated deficit,” which we’ve had at least $15-B of & counting since ’61

            http://www.fin.gc.ca/frt-trf/2010/frt-trf-1001-eng.asp#tbl1

    • James Curran says:

      There’s no need for JT to call out Ignatieff. He knows Iggy’s a dead man walking and it’s time for JT to play it up for the next generation of Liberal Youth. That is the flaw in Angelo’s article. Trudeau is gaining more and more camera time and the push is on now for the “next leadership”. Angelo misses that point completely.

      And, yes, had I been in caucus M. Peter you know I would’ve had something to say to my leader about the Afghan extension and a revolt would have been in the making.

  7. hugger says:

    I disagree with what the author of this piece is saying Mr. K. He is promoting self promotion over loyalty and standing up for ones beliefs. Being a friend of convenience instead of someone who will take the risk of giving their support for something they believe in.

    If there is one specific thing wrong within the LIberal party these days, maybe it is exactly what the author here is advocating.

    I will use Assange as example, largely because he is contemporary. The more the establishment try to bring him down with the massive weight of their influence, the more of a folk hero they make him. You were right in your article in the Sun though, he is worth far more to them alive than dead.

    His value as a long term straw man far outweighs the short term satisfaction that seeing his cold dead corpse spinning at the end of a virtual rope would bring.

    I don’t think one iota less of Justin Trudeau for his efforts in Toronto / Vaughan, if anything I admire him for taking a stand, even if it was for something currently seen as a losing cause. Investing in future political capital should be considered here. If Ford for example turns out to be the stumble bum so many of you pundits predict, which side would it have been best to have backed? Who gets to stroke their mustache then?

    The keys to the kingdom are to be found in the hearts and minds of grassroot Canadians. Those who make the substantial political contributions largely go where the tide of sentiment is going, and the hearts and minds are waiting for honorable and reasoned representation to show up. Something I learned the hard way when I was young was, always head for the high ground if you can.

    The jist of the rest of his article could just as easily apply to the CPC, perhaps moreso.

    Persichilli assumes that this Trudeau has a large public presence beyond that which his name brings, and I don’t think he really does. Maybe in the circle of the politically interested and involved, but as far as the general public goes, I don’t think so. He has to make forays into public eye in order to establish a personal presence. A little bruising is to be expected. Even a new great hope has to have some preliminary bouts before he goes for the heavyweight championship of da woild.

    If I could offer advice to young Trudeau I would say let the hens peck, but stand your ground. Be informed, take positions and don’t flip flop all over the place. And don’t do like the CPC and lie about most everything they ever said or wrote. Show the People honor and dignity. They will remember those things and soon forget which Party asked Fantino first.

    My 2 cents worth. When I get to a buck, send a cheque. I’m part Scot.

    • James Curran says:

      “Persichilli assumes that this Trudeau has a large public presence beyond that which his name brings, and I don’t think he really does. ”

      You’d be wrong. He’s a rock star. With a rock star following. And when the Liberal Party falls to under 50 seats…and they will….he will be the only one left standing that can pull this puppy out of the fire. I’m sick of hearing how every leadership candidate is the next Trudeau. We have the next Trudeau already. It’s just a matter of when not why.

      • hugger says:

        But James, you are one of the politically interested and involved. Not just a regular member of the general public. That is the point I was trying to make. Justin Trudeau is just a name to most of the general public at this point. The Son of a famous Prime Minister and he has to make his own mark.

        If I may, I would liken this to lyrics from a Hank Williams Jr. tune. ” I am standing in the shadow of a very famous man”.

        Not a easy place from which to establish one’s own identity..

  8. MJH says:

    Very accurate analysis of the Liberal Party. Angelo is right on!!

  9. MJH says:

    Libs believe they can replace fighters for $6 billion. Unbelievably nieve for 65 fighters and 40 years of maintenance.

    Very embarrassing for the Party

    • Namesake says:

      Why? those aren’t the yet-to-be-finished White Elephants being talked about, there: it’s the been-around-since-the 80s Gripens, whose MANUFACTURER pitched that price last week when he testified to the Defense Committee

      “Antony Ogilvie with Saab said they could supply Canada with 65 upgraded Gripens, with 40 years of maintenance costs included, for under $6 billion.” http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/12/07/16464096.html

      So, if they put it in writing and are prepared to eat the costs on the maintenance, what’s so absurd about that?

      A report comparing the ‘real’ estimated prices of a variety of fighter aircraft in 2006 put the price of each delivered Gripon at about $70-M (U.S., of course, but, hey, we’re pretty much at par now); http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/FighterCostFinalJuly06.pdf

      but given the big JSF strong-arming push, their prices have come down, such that they recently offered 24 to Romania for $1.3 billion, which translates to a little over $54-M each, which includes the training, support, logistics (which are also included in the $9B portion of out F-35 purchase), but not the ongoing maintenance.

      http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4597773

      So, if the same deal’s on the table for us, that’s about $3.6-B for the planes (65 X $155M), leaving around $2.4-B for the maintenance: $60-M per year. (Er, not incl. taxes).

      I dunno if any of this includes munitions, or not. But the point is, the ‘flyway’ cost of these Gripens is less than HALF of the F-35s. That’s indisputable, and not at all naive: you can practically go buy one off the lot for that, right now.

      • Namesake says:

        p.s., maybe SAAB has cottoned onto the fact that we only really use these planes mainly for the stupid airshows where we crash & total one of them every couple years, and so are counting on the maintenace costs dwindling accordingly.

  10. I guess Bob Rae will be the next old guy.

  11. Peter says:

    The F 35 fighter jet was not sole-sourced .

    The original prototype that competed with the prototype from boeing was developed , in part , with the Liberals , 3 branches of the U.S. military and a number of other countries giving money for the development of this jet .

    This was done because each new generation of fighter jet is much more expensive than the last .

    There will be 3500 of these jets built with the possibility of up to 1500 more orders.

    Canada has been promised to get at least as much business and investment from this deal as we pay out .

    The public does not know the history of how this procurement was done and are only hearing about it now because the government is placing its order . The Liberals are taking advantage of this lack of knowledge and are playing politics by saying they would “review ” the deal .

    Australia is governed by a left wing coalition government and they placed their order with very few objections from anybody .

    The GAO in the states released an interm report of this process a couple of years ago and they were satisfied that this type of process could be very useful in keeping development costs down for other system

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*