As noted below, I agreed with some of Apps’ criticisms – the focus on past glories, for instance, the fratricidal tribalism – but not all of it.

In the link, Jordan fights back, passionately, and attracts an interesting commenter.

My view is Soviet, frankly: samo kritika is never a bad thing. It leads to better self-awareness and, hopefully, remedial action. And redemption.

Comments (13)

I have many views on this subject, but I’ll keep them to myself, for now.

What do you think? A good idea?

Comments (82)

I actually agree with some of the things Alf Apps says.

Wow. The apocalypse is imminent.

Comments (19)

In which I follow Peter C. Newman, who is a tough act to follow.  Also tough: commenting on his book when RANDOM HOUSE WHO IS MY PUBLISHER TOO hasn’t even sent it to me, Scott Sellers.  Scott, who works at Random House and is MY FRIEND.  Allegedly.

Charles, who isn’t nearly as nasty as some progressives might think, makes me laugh.

Comments (8)

…not a happy headline for her. Meanwhile, Mulcair says his party hates Quebec.

Somewhere, Brian Topp is smiling.

Comments (4)

A virus has infected my Hotmail account – first time that’s happened in a decade of using it.

My apologies to all who have been bugged by this.

Comments (7)

It’s a wordy slogan, to be sure, but we’d get a comfortable majority with it. And, unless I’m wrong, Ms. Horwath would be leader of the Opposition. Not Mr. Hudak.

His exchange a short while ago with reporters, which was something to see:

Reporter: You’d vote against it as it stands right now, if there’s no amendment you’d vote against it as a caucus?

Hudak: That’s right.

…

Reporter: Tim, make it clear, if you vote down a Throne Speech, does that trigger an election? Make it clear to the voters.

Hudak: Well you know what? It depends on the other parties and how they vote…But you’re asking me, you know, can I support…

Reporter: I’m not asking you if you support it. I know you don’t support it. But, if you vote down a Throne Speech, does that automatically trigger an election?

Hudak: It depends on how the other parties vote…But you know, you’re asking a very simple question…

…

Reporter: Tim, technically if the NDP votes against this Throne Speech and so does your caucus, are you bringing down the government? Is it a confidence vote? I mean…

Hudak: You know what? [Inaudible.]

…

Reporter: If you vote against the throne speech, the government has the chance to fall. Is that a chance you are willing to take right now?

Hudak: You know what, what, it’s up to Dalton McGuinty to respond to us…

Reporter: No, it’s up to you, you’re the one voting against it.

Hudak: You know, I told you…

Reporter: You don’t need to take that chance right now?

Hudak: I told you where our votes are parked.

Comments (12)

Good thing they didn’t do it!

Sigh.

Comments (7)

Last week, Michael Ignatieff was heard from again.

Now that he has returned to the cloistered corridors of academe, we should be getting used to the publication of his occasional essays, one supposes. But it’s still odd — unnerving, even — to turn on one’s computer, and see an Ignatieff think piece flash across the screen. It’s weird.

Ex-party leaders generally follow a well-worn path, you see: They retire to a generous pension, they hang out at a law firm, they get paid scads of money to give speeches which are neither controversial nor newsworthy, and then they write their memoirs. They don’t look like they have anything to prove because, well, they don’t.

Former Liberal Party leader Ignatieff is a notable exception. Since leaving public life — and since taking up a fellowship at the University of Toronto’s Massey College, where he teaches political science — Ignatieff has published essays about politics, and he has maintained contact with many of his supporters from his first run at the Liberal leadership, in 2006.

Comments (14)

…to speak to a poli sci class at my alma mater.

Maybe I’ll pop by the Hill later and frighten some people.

Comments (0)