TORONTO – Ontario Liberal legend Elinor Caplan has declared her support for leadership contender Sandra Pupatello.

Caplan, who had previously been associated with Glen Murray, today said she has today enthusiastically joined Team Pupatello.

“She is the best candidate in the race,” said Caplan, a former senior Ontario cabinet minister. “She is the candidate who knows how to beat both PCs and New Democrats. She is the candidate who can win.”

Caplan said that she has known, and worked with, Pupatello for many years. “I respect Sandra very much,” said Caplan. “She is a remarkable person, and an outstanding leader. She is the one who can win in every part of the province. She has never lost an election, in her many years in politics.”

Elinor Caplan, PC, served in the Legislative Assembly of Ontario from 1985 to 1997, and was a Member of Parliament in the Canadian House of Commons from 1997 to 2004. A proud Liberal, she served as a cabinet minister in the provincial government of David Peterson and the federal government of Jean Chrétien.

“Sandra’s a winner!” said Caplan. “I urge all delegates and delegates-to-be to join her team!”

“I’m thrilled that Elinor is joining our team,” said Pupatello. “Her passion, dedication and experience are invaluable. We’re running a great campaign with grassroots support across the province.”

-30-

Comments (0)

Whatever does it mean? Stay tuned!

Comments (0)

Musically, this song is amazing.  Video arresting, too.  Put it on Facebook a few days ago.  Now doing likewise here.

Comments (2)

Personally, I think his move effectively disenfranchises the hundreds of good Liberals who stood up to support him.  Those people have been left in the lurch, and will now likely be forced to become “independents” – meaning they will have precious little chance of being elected anywhere this weekend.

Comments (13)

It’s breaking the law.

It’s not a “democratic protest.” That’s bullshit.

Let there be no mistake: they are breaking the law.

Ontario Liberal leadership candidates who equivocate on this should know they are hereafter being defined by that. You can’t have it both ways: you can’t aspire to be the chief lawmaker and then side with law breaking. Everyone knows who I am talking about.

We either favour the rule of law or we don’t.

My candidate, my Premier, do.

Comments (58)

About a decade ago, I was asked by Izzy Asper to write a column for the Ottawa Citizen.  “You’re a Liberal,” he said over the phone from his beloved Winnipeg.  “They’re too conservative.  I want you to write for them.”

Okay, I said.

After a few months, Citizen editor Scott Anderson – who wanted me always to dish on the Liberals, but never the Conservatives – called to say they were dumping my column.

How come, I said.

“You’re too Liberal,” he said.

That’s what Izzy wanted me to be, I said.  It’s what I am.

“Um, er,” he said.

Anyway.  Once a weasel, always a weasel.  Scott Anderson – conservative fart-catcher – is now fully and inarguably revealed, here.

Somewhere, Izzy is laughing his ass off.

 

Comments (10)

TORONTO – Students looking to spend thousands on post-secondary degrees can now obtain a Richard Ivey School education – where they’ll get to learn principles of Social Credit economics from geniuses like Mike Moffat.

“Just print more money,” says Moffat, who alleges that he is a professor. “It didn’t work for the Alberta Socreds in the thirties, but I think Obama should do it anyway.”

– 30 –

Comments (14)

Here.

Comments (4)

How the left fights the right
The Washington Times (Washington, DC)
Mon Jan 7 2013
Page: B4
Section: COMMENTARY; BOOK REVIEW
Byline: Michael Taube

When it comes to modern politics, the left and right know less about each other now than ever before. That’s a huge tactical error. As Sun Tzu wrote in “The Art of War,” “If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.“

Hence, it’s important to learn how the members of an opposing political ideology think, act and strategize. It will provide some insight in advising candidates, conducting efficient campaigns – and, with hard work and good fortune, winning elections. It will also ensure that good electoral strategies and solid ground games are in place to combat different political parties and candidates.

That’s why Warren Kinsella’s book, “Fight the Right: A Manual for Surviving the Coming Conservative Apocalypse,” is of vital importance for American conservatives and other right-leaning individuals to read, learn and understand.

Mr. Kinsella is a liberal political consultant, political pundit, author and Toronto Sun columnist based in Canada. He’s well known in my country, but isn’t a household name in the United States. His political consulting firm, Daisy Group, probably doesn’t ring a bell with most strategists. So, what does he add to the debate? Plenty. Mr. Kinsella may be a Canadian, but his political style is perfectly suited to the rough-and-tumble world of U.S. politics. He’s an intelligent and talented individual with a vast understanding of Canadian and American politics. He believes in fighting his opponents tooth and nail, and has no fear to go for the jugular. He recognizes that the political arena can either be a genteel environment, or resemble something more akin to a blood sport. He will do what he has to do to achieve victory.

Full disclosure: I’ve known Mr. Kinsella for years, and we get along very well. Our association has puzzled more than a few observers, because we think so differently on so many issues. That’s true: I’m right, and he’s wrong – rather, left. Like many other pundits and columnists, we share a mutual interest in areas like politics, history, strategy and communications. Hence, we’ve always been able to find things to talk about rather than wasting time to find things to fight over.

When it comes to conservatives, there’s no question Mr. Kinsella has strong opinions about his rivals. He’s had conservative friends, colleagues, employees – and even married one. He feels conservatives are “fine, as dinner companions or even life companions,” and doesn’t believe they are all “evil,” but they “cannot be trusted with power.” He even vigorously points out significant differences between conservatives and liberals on issues like abortion, the economy, education, gun control, global warming and the war on terror. All of these political descriptions are fine in love, war and politics. It’s part of the way information and misinformation are funneled to the general public.

Alas, Mr. Kinsella often falls into the trap of believing myths about conservatism’s true meaning – and has acquired a skewed vision. For instance, he feels conservatives are good at “masking their intentions … it’s hard to pin them down; it’s hard to see who they truly are.” He subscribes to George Lakoff’s controversial thesis in “The Political Mind“: “In conservative thought, people are born bad – greedy and unscrupulous. To maximize their self-interest, they need to learn discipline, to follow the rules and obey laws. [The system] rewards those who acquire such discipline and punishes those who do not.” While President Obama “may call himself a Democrat,” he has “shown the instincts of a Republican, a conservative.”

Yet the author has learned lessons from conservatives, including Canada’s Conservative government. He respects their success in winning over the electorate “by being smart,” even if the results drive him nuts. In Mr. Kinsella’s view, “conservatives have quite literally burglarized the liberal homestead, and made off with populist values and symbol-laden language. Because, make no mistake: While liberals and progressives slept, conservatives did indeed break in and swipe the recipe to the political secret sauce.”

Hence, Mr. Kinsella wants to “Fight the Right” and bring progressives back to their former glory. He speaks fondly of the days of former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and President Bill Clinton, when progressives ruled the roost. He examines successful strategies run by a diverse group of conservatives, including Canadian political consultant Patrick Muttart and U.S. pollster Frank Luntz. He details personal conversations with James Carville, Mike McCurry and even President Gerald Ford to analyze the left-right divide. He has crafted a strategy to revitalize the left.

Will it work? That remains to be seen. However, if Mr. Kinsella’s call to arms in “Fight the Right” succeeds, there will once again be a need to fight the left for the hearts and minds of voters.

Michael Taube is a former speechwriter for Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and a columnist with The Washington Times.

+++++

FIGHT THE RIGHT: A MANUAL FOR SURVIVING THE COMING CONSERVATIVE APOCALYPSEBy Warren KinsellaRandom House Canada, $22.95, 277 pages

 

 

Comments (10)

 

You might call it the Hamlet Principle.

You know, from William Shakespeare’s play of that name.  Act 3, scene 2, wherein Hamlet’s mother famously observes that another character “doth protest too much, methinks.”

Not “protest” in the modern context, although that sort of protest is relevant here, too.  No, in the Shakespearean era, “protest” meant as an affirmation, or an avowal.

Thus, the Hamlet Principle can be seen at work in a decidedly modern psychodrama, between Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence, on the one side, and all of Canadian conservatism, on the other.  Chief Spence is on a hunger strike, protesting the way in which the Conservative government treats First Nations.

And Conservatives, meanwhile, can lately be observed claiming – over and over and over – that Chief Spence is a liar and a fraud and a criminal, and even that she isn’t really on a hunger strike at all.  This is where the “they doth protest too much” part comes in.

Because, the more that Conservatives bray and screech that they don’t care about Chief Spence’s truly brilliant campaign, the more Canadians suspect that they do.  The more that these Cons insult her – calling her every name they can conjure up, including “c**t” on a Sun News web page – the more that they look, well, scared.

Yes, scared.  With every hateful, spit-flecked epithet they lob at her – with the cacophony of conservative columnists, and the cyber-sewer of commenters who follow them – Conservatives sound undeniably worried about what Chief Spence is achieving.

Because, make no mistake, she is achieving plenty.  She is attracting attention to her cause.  Famous people are trekking to her tiny tent, located on a miss-it-if-you-blink bit of rock between Ottawa and Hull. International media are writing about her, and the grassroots Idle No More movement. Canadians are paying attention.

She is not doing any of this with showy Greenpeace-style media stunts, or demonstrations that massively inconvenience average citizens.  She is not committing any acts of terror.  She is simply saying she will not eat until she gets to meet with the Prime Minister.  That’s it.

If you pay any attention to conservatives, however, you would think Chief Spence is worse than Hitler, and that her hunger strike is a declaration of war.  Against her, the full force of the Conservative government’s army of propagandists have been deployed.  She has been called some of the most disgusting things imaginable, but she has not responded in kind.  Instead, she has been almost Ghandi-like in her dignity.

If Chief Spence is truly a threat – and, with her weakened body, and her failing voice, it is hard to see how she could threaten anyone – then Conservatives have pursued a genuinely idiotic strategy against her.  Instead of making her infamous, they have made her famous.

Instead of ignoring her, they have revealed themselves to be obsessed by her.  Instead of simply meeting with her, and making it a one-day story, their pig-headed stubbornness has made Chief Spence a folk hero who will be remembered for years to come.

Like I say, it’s the Hamlet Principle.  When they doth protest too much, you can always be reasonably assured that they’re a bunch of goddamned liars.

 

Comments (165)