Dedicated, two.

Comments (2)

Comments (47)

Golly, it sure seems like all that stuff they told us – you know, that there were only one or two “casual” chats between Messrs. Rae and Cannon, and that there were no backroom deals – was, well, bullshit, wasn’t it?

Sgt. Rae, at your service.

UPDATE: From a friend with deep Grit caucus connections: “Rae to Jerusalem. Smitherman to Ottawa. All’s well that ends well.”

Comments (23)

Okay, I’m sorry, but I have a total man crush on this guy [full disclosure: whose caucus I’ve given comms advice].  When I read this (highlighted) Tweet last night, I literally burst out laughing.  It got a lot of media attention, too.

Peeps, indeed.  Hilarious.

Comments (3)

“…by even making the suggestion in the first place, the Liberals can’t speak out against the idea of the extension without coming across as a bunch of waffling wimps.

Which, of course, they are.”

That’s a pretty representative sample of opinion on the Liberal blogosphere, these days. Grits seem to be very, very unhappy with the Afghanistan result.

Messr. Rae and Ignatieff’s volte-face – on ending the war, on Canada’s foreign policy, on ratification in Parliament – has clearly left many Liberal partisans enraged. They are certainly filling my inbox with that sort of sentiment. All of the various tribes – Dionistas, Martinites, Chretienites, even Ignatieff and Rae enthusiasts – seem to be seriously pissed off. I certainly am.

Now, most Liberals aren’t as foolish as Yours Truly, of course, and prefer to make their criticisms anonymously (for now). Having experienced how the current OLO deals with disagreement, I can certainly understand that.

For my column in this Sunday’s Sun, then, I want to provide readers with a sense of the mood in the Liberal Party of Canada in the wake of the Rae-Ignatieff reversal. So if you spot a Liberal blogger/Twitterer/whateverer giving voice to that – pro or con – I’d be grateful if you’d point me in their direction, in comments or by email.

I may be wrong about Liberals being mad at Messrs. Ignatieff and Rae, but I don’t think so. Your help would be gratefully received, either way.

UPDATE: That didn’t take long.  I’ve already received a snotty email from Jason Cherniak, declaring that I should no longer refer to myself as a Liberal (to wit: “at some point don’t you think you should stop claiming to be a Liberal…?”).  Ah, Jason: you just never change, do you?  Next up: they’ll start calling Queen’s Park.  Just watch.

UPDATED: Get a load of this: Jason, a Liberal official, has sent me an “Informal Libel Notice” (whatever that is) for, apparently, calling his snotty note snotty, and for revealing that he no longer wants me to “claim” that I am a Liberal.  I’ve told him to beat it.

Comments (75)

The Conservatives and the Liberals reversal on this untidy democracy business has been so profound, in fact, you almost half-expect their MPs to all be wearing neck braces as they return to work this week. This is political whiplash on a grand scale, folks.

It’s also bizarre. There is nothing that Stephen Harper loves more than lobbing policy hand grenades at the Liberal caucus, and watching them dance. On gun control, on abortion, on almost any issue, Grit disunity makes Harper happier than a flea at a dog show.

So why, then, is he now giving the Grits a break?

Comments (24)

I hum ‘Stars and Stripes Forever’ whilst Monte looks on, awestruck.

Clippage here, at about the 1:45 mark.

Comments (5)

I’ve been asked to go on a CBC panel, tonight, to discuss Tony Blair’s comments to Evan Solomon – to wit, that the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. are really just about a struggle within Islam, modernity vs. fundamentalist extremism, etc.

I’m no expert on that subject, but I do know from my Irish Catholic experience that if these conflicts are really about faith – and not oil, or treasure,  or power, or strategic position – then we are well and truly screwed for about, say, 1,000 years.  That’s usually how long these deity-driven things take to peter out (thus my preoccupation with the separation of church and state, BTW).

Evan interviewing Blair is here.

What thinkest thou, smart commenters?

Comments (20)

Fences. Great pop tune, and  a with you-won’t-forget-it chorus, too.  Don’t play it at work while your boss is hovering nearby.

Comments (5)

…and he’s right.  It will be.

A quick recap:

• The Conservative caucus is wholly in favour of keeping the war going in Afghanistan.  If given the chance, they’d all vote that way.
• The NDP and the Bloc are opposed, and want Parliament to stick by its resolution to get Canadian troops out by July 2011.  If given the chance, they’d all vote against continuing the war.
• The Liberals are split.  Their leader and their foreign affairs critic have inexplicably decided to side with the government, and said so without consulting with caucus.  Meanwhile, a majority of Grit partisans and an indeterminate number of MPs – if my inbox is any indication – seem to feel as the NDP and the Bloc do.
• Stephen Harper – who is most happy when Liberals are in disarray – never, ever misses a chance to embarrass them.  So why isn’t he embarrassing them?
• Well, it could be because Harper knows that if there’s a vote, he might lose it, and he’ll look plenty foolish in front of his NATO colleagues.
• Embarrass the Liberals, but lose the vote.  Or, avoid a vote, but in so doing, avoid international embarrassment.

Interesting, yes.  That’s accurate.

It would also be accurate to say it’s pathetic, too.

Comments (33)