Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW
He also offers his thoughtful perspective of Stephen Harper’s last 10 years in his recent eBook, The Harper Decade.

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Mme Krieber regrets

by Paul Wells on Saturday, November 21, 2009 8:48pm - 197 Comments

The wife of Stéphane Dion posts, and then removes, a Facebook update that won’t get her the best seat at the next Liberal Christmas party:

The Liberal party is in a free fall, and it won’t recover. Like all the liberal parties in Europe, it will become a poor little thing at the mercy of ephemeral coalitions. For having refused the historic coalition that could have placed it at the head of the left, it will be punished by history. Well, I was convinced the moment Paul Martin treated Jean Chrétien so cavalierly. That moment signalled the death of our party. If the elites of Toronto had been more alert, humble and realistic, Stephane was ready to take all the time and the hits to rebuild that party. But they couldn’t accept 26 per cent, now we’re at 23 per cent.

The time has arrived to make a choice. I don’t want the Conservatives to continue changing my country. They are in the process, slowly, just like any dictatorship, of changing the world. Torture doesn’t exist, corruption is a point of view. Do we really have the right leader to discuss these issues? Can someone really write all these insanities and make us believe he’s simply changed his mind? To justify violence, he must have really given it serious thought. Otherwise, that’s very dangerous. What guarantee would there be that he wouldn’t change his mind again? …

That sound from the Dion household is a voice counselling alertness, humility and realism. And they said irony was dead.

Tags: Janine Krieber, Stéphane Dion

More by Paul Wells

Anonymous

Which one of Paul's heads is talking now?

Any guesses?
http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

This is unfair!

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

You don't know what you speak about. Do you think it's easy to make Facebook updates?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I disagree with Mme. Krieber. The LPC will someday recover. It will rise, Phoenix-like, from its ashes.

This might take a short time, or it might take a very, very long time. It all depends on decisions that have yet to be made.

Mike R

Yes, just like the Liberal Party of the United Kingdom. It's only a matter of time (decades, centuries) before they return to power.

hosertohoosier

The UK Liberals were destroyed when poor people got the right to vote, and so Socialists won in their constituencies. Canada doesn't have enough socialists, and our left is too poorly organized for that to happen.

Mike R

Well, true enough, it is always dangerous to argue from analogy. The circumstances of the current Liberal party in this country are not the same as the UK liberals. But they would also be mistaken to assume that parties are immortal or their return to power is ever guaranteed. They were successful for a very long time, but just as the Social Credit party disappeared in BC and Alberta, it is equally possible for the federal Liberals to cease to have any reason to exist. If they cease to be seen as a road to power those who supported them as a vehicle to government will look elsewhere. I agree the "left", if by that you mean the NDP is an unlikely alternative. So it may take a while for a real alternative to the Tories to develop.
On the other hand, the disappearance of the Liberals would violate one of Mr. Well's rules of politics – that the least interesting result is always the most likely (I'm sure I'm paraphrasing badly). So it probably won't happen.

http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

Mike R. You make a good point. I have watched young people in Ottawa gravitate to the Liberal Party in droves over the past 40 years for no other reason than because it was their belief it ws the best way to advance a career in politics by being part of the "natural governing party". Once this veneer is removed a large part of the attraction of the Liberal Party disappears overnight. In the short run lots of young twenty somethings may be very happy to shift to the NDP, which appears to be having a real resurgence in BC right now.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

The UK Liberals were destroyed when poor people got the right to vote…

No. Poor Britons were voting long before the 1920's, lad.

jarrid

There are more one-line zingers in that letter than you can shake a stick at. All of them are worth analyzing.

But to me the paragraph that sticks out the most is the concluding one where she muses about walking over to the NDP.

Clearly, this shows she and Dion have had such discussions. This would be a brilliant stroke for Layton if Dion walked over to the NDP. One thing is for sure, it's not only Dion's wife who won't get a great seat at the Liberal Christmas party. Although I'm not sure that Dion and Krieber will care.

They may be raising their glasses with Layton and Chow down the hall.

http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

I agree that the real news here is the threat to walk to the NDP. Jack won't be able to contain himself.

jarrid

Chantal Hébert says on her "blogue" at l'Actualité entitled "Janine Krieber:1-800-Jack Layton ?" this morning that Ms. Krieber's facebook entry places Dion in a "drole de position".

Until Dion clarifiles matters, such as either bolting from the Liberals or pledging everlasting love to it, speculation will grow.

wilson

Maybe the talks are with Lizzy May?

http://www.maderblog.com David Mader

Sorry, it’s late and I’m full of turkey and I’m getting over a cold, so maybe I’m missing something obvious, but did she really call the Tory government a dictatorship?
http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Will Trudeau-Chretien wing ever get along with Turner-Martin brigade?

It is amazing that Kreiber thinks Liberal party is going to writhe away while NDP/Left (???) is wave to future.

I bet you Harper can't even get his morning cup of coffee exactly how he likes it so he will be surprised to hear that he's a dictator with enough influence to change the world.

http://intensedebate.com/people/canucklehead canucklehead

I wrote this comment at Chuckercanuck and it's too tempting too repeat it :)

"The time for choices is now. I don't want to see the Conservatives continue to change my country. They are, slowly, like any dictatorship, changing the world. … Can someone really write these insanities and lead us to believe that he simply changed his mind?"

She really skirts the edge of a magnificent self parody there.
http://intensedebate.com/people/canucklehead canucklehead

I wrote this comment at Chuckercanuck and it's too tempting too repeat it :)

"The time for choices is now. I don't want to see the Conservatives continue to change my country. They are, slowly, like any dictatorship, changing the world. … Can someone really write these insanities and lead us to believe that he simply changed his mind?"

She really skirts the edge of a magnificent self parody there.

Orson Bean

The Harper-as-dictator stuff is just unbelievably stupid. I don't like Harper myself, but Dion's wife is just being a ninny when she says that. Sore, personality-disordered losers say stuff like that.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Andrew_not_PorC Andrew_not_PorC

Harper is a control freak, and likes to dictate. I don't think it's that much of a stretch, assuming she doesn't mean he's suspended our constitution, and I give her credit for that.

Orson Bean

This has to be the first time in recorded history that a political party and its supporters (the Liberals) in one breath accuse a sitting government of being a "dictatorship", while in the next breath absolutely refuse to trigger an election to remove said dictatorship. Because they're afraid of losing. The people on this planet who actually live under, like, real dictatorships would consider the LPC party line on this one to be beyond pathetic.

http://intensedebate.com/people/canucklehead canucklehead

Liberals say that… I saw it somewhere in the threads here: "Governing while Conservative". How true can you get.

Stephen Harper, doyen of the naive bunch who really seem to care that China is a dictatorship more than a growing economy.

Stephen Harper, who's appeal in Quebec has a *lot* to do with favouring a federalism that respects provincial jurisdiction. In that aspect I think he's really the only national figure who can compete directly with the Bloc.

Stephen Harper, who famously got the underpinnings of his political philosophy from reading classical liberal books like F.A. Hayek's Road to Serfdom in university. Another big reason for his popularity in Quebec, the free market/libertarian Maxime Bernier influence of the party. (Maxime for PM, btw)

Stephen Harper, the temporarily governing Dictator who won the vote.

kcm

"That sound from the Dion household is a voice counselling alertness, humility and realism. And they said irony was dead"

Well it's possible that she could be right about Ignatieff and yet wrong about Dion? I wonder how much this kind of debate is going on within the liberal party? It's normal to a degree…but is her last para really a heartfelt lament for a party whose better angels are now with the NDP? Or is it in fact nothing more than the understandable fury of a loyal life partner, and in effect just sour grapes. Probably not a helpful time to do this.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Probably not a helpful time to do this.

Agreed, and I don't think she really cared. I read it as a very public farewell to the Liberal Party.

Mulletaur

Ah, the bitterness.

Dion was a very stubborn man who showed no sign that he could ever have learned the skills necessary to become a successful leader. Then, after losing badly an election during which he said he would never enter a coalition with the NDP, he entered a coalition with the NDP. He was about to drive the Liberal Party of Canada over a cliff when the Party insisted he step down immediately. If I were Mme Kreiber, I wouldn't be giving people, particularly Liberals, an opportunity to keep drawing attention to her husband's failures.

The death of irony indeed.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Dion was a very stubborn man who showed no sign that he could ever have learned the skills necessary to become a successful leader.

I never thought I'd see the day . Mulletaur, haven't you attacked the Tories many times in the past for saying the exact same thing???

Mulletaur

I don't believe I have attacked the Conservatives for saying exactly those words, but if you can provide links to my previous postings, I will be happy to respond.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I can't, because you refuse to sign up for an IntenseDebate account so that your comment history is available to all.
You win.

Mulletaur

Oh, c'mon CR, make an effort. Macleans has a perfectly adequate search engine.

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Exactly. Can't say I disagree with any of that.
Orson Bean

I agree with M on this. There's always this tendency in Canadian politics for us to look back at political losers like Dion and Joe Clark and assume that they were hard done by — rather than focusing on these men's true and fatal faults. Dion and Clark were both spectacular losers for a reason. Both men were, and are, stubborn, full of pride and capable of being quite petty and vindictive.

Mulletaur

Krieber, rather.
http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

…"The time has arrived to make a choice. I don't want the Conservatives to continue changing my country."

Memo to Mme Krieber. It's my country too and I DO NOT agree with your coalition.

She may be shocked to find out that the Conservatives actually reflect the views of the country's centre better than her husband and his coalition did.

Craig O

Considering how diverse the views of the country are, with no side finding any solid backing from the electorate, it's pretty tough to claim that any party reflects the views of the country (or it's center) very well. Even the Conservatives, the strongest right now, only hit 40% support on very good days, and that's after three years of doing only what would be tolerated by moderate voters.

http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

My point was that the Conservatives reflect the views of the country's centre "better than her husband" did. I do not deny that other views exist, which is a position frequently taken by my Liberal friends..

http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

…the Conservatives actually reflect the views of the country's centre better than her husband…

Perhaps. Certainly, Chrétien and Martin reflected the views of the country's centre better than Harper now does–which never kept Harper and his neo-con colleagues from denouncing the "communism" and "extremism" of the LPC (and, thus, of the Canadian centre which consistently supported it).

Funny how the nature of the "centre" (and its value as a ratifier of political virtue) changes depending on whether it appears to be on your side…

http://intensedebate.com/people/avr avr

Funny how the "centre" does, in fact, keep moving, eh? It's almost like there's no Whig History-esque glorious future consensus, and the ideological spectrum shifts with the zeitgeist…

Dot

I guess there's more than one way to unfriend on Facebook. Less mouse clicks I guess.

Orson Bean

Nice one.

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

That sound from the Dion household is a voice counselling alertness, humility and realism. And they said irony was dead.

Exactly. Where was Krieber when power-hungry Dion wanted to take over the government just a few weeks after he was given 26% support in the election? She was cheering on the coup. Dion got his just desserts.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SamDavies SamDavies

"I guess she's upset she didn't get her chance to become first lady."

Really? Way to dumb it down, and in turn, marginalize anything she is saying.

"power-hungry Dion"

That is such a warped take on things that it is funny.
Dion can be called many things, but a Macbeth like comparison is plain silly, especially when you think about Martin.

But seriously – if you call Dion "power hungry", what should Harper be called?

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Dion is far more power-hungry than Harper has ever been. When you try to take over the government with vote support of 26%, you are a power-monger.

Kaplan

Stephane Dion – now with 26 per cent more power mongering!
http://intensedebate.com/people/SamDavies SamDavies

Sorry – still laughing at your absurd characterization of Dion as a power-monger, based on your dislike of the coalition.
You may as well just say diplomacy is a mere lust for power as well.
Or even say that peacekeeping is a evil means of asserting power over others.
Sure – you can find weak arguments that support this, but it just doesn't really stand.

And love the classic distorted use of stats to back up your thin premise….

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

You call that "stats"? LOL.

Dion is a power-monger. He refused to take advice from his associates. He tried to take over the government immediately after losing an election. The evidence is there.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SamDavies SamDavies

Hmmmmmmm….

Which to believe?
Dion – the buffoon
or
Macdionbeth – the power hungry scourge

Or maybe – just maybe – there is more to it than useless partisan caricatures.

LoL!!! I can't resist from taking some stabs at your dramatic positioning.

"He tried to take over the government" and "He tried to seize control of Canada"

Thank goodness there was a noble and pure hero named Harper who protected us Canadians from this power hungry scourge known as Dion. God bless the purity of such a altruistic leader!!!

GONG!!!!!!
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

It's funny how you refuse to actual debate any of my points. You're not taking stabs at anything, you're going on like a child. There's nothing there.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SamDavies SamDavies

LoL!!! There is nothing to actually debate!

By their nature, ALL politicians are power hungry!
For crying out loud – look at what your beloved and perfect Harper has done to keep the crown.
But in your twisted partisan world, this is OK, because – well – he's the good guy.
I'm totally calling you out on this, and I'm totally mocking you for it!

It's a shame. You do manage to raise an occasional good point, but your narrow minded partisanship pretty much makes it impossible to take you seriously.

A true and honest debate would require you to apply your standards all across the board. You'd have to be willing to call fault with fearless leader, and I just don't see it in you.

So yeah – I'll stick to my main point.
Dion was/is no more power hungry than the guy who is in power right now.
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Sorry Dr. Phil, but I take advice from sane people. You need an anger management class, for starters.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SamDavies SamDavies

Sorry – registering a zero on the anger scale. :(
Laughing and smiling even more now.

Can't help but think about Lady MacDionBeth's FB postings, and wonder if par chance something was lost in translation?

Perhaps when referring to the attempted coalition, she felt remorse and wrote:

"Here's the smell of the blood still: all the
perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little
hand. Oh, oh, oh!"

Out damned spot indeed!

No worries s_c_f – total nonsense on my end, which naturally means you are totally supremely correct. Anyone who questions your ever so obvious bias must be loony!

Then again, perhaps….

"I am but mad north-north-west: when the wind is southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw".

Mike514

Is it just me, or did she echo Coderre's Toronto-centric comment about Iggy and the Liberal party? If so, it makes Coderre's views seem less "rogue" and more mainstream (well, at least very slightly more mainstream). How many other Liberals feel the same way?

Do we really have the right leader to discuss these issues?

That's easy to answer. It's probably why Iggy's been MIA lately. Could he be credible attacking the Tories for overlooking prisoner abuse, given his views on torture?

RayK

I think the most interesting question to watch this coming week–in the wake of Krieber's comments and with Ignatieff presumably going to make his first comments about the growing torture scandal–will be what scrutiny his past writings will (finally) get in the full lighht of day.

Since the 2006 first leadership race, Ignatieff views on torture, war and targeted assasination haven't gotten much play outside of the elite political discourse–they're not topics that have dogged him in interviews or at press conferences, for instance. But his answers on these questions have always been confusing and contradictory. I'll be interested to see if his feet are put to the fire in the coming days.

http://intensedebate.com/people/canucklehead canucklehead

I think Ignatieff's views would give him an even stronger contextual postion to criticise. The narrative could easily be: "Here's Iggy, who clearly is not reflexively opposed to "torture" for mooncalf emotionalizing reasons and is willing to think about the issues. If he says this crossed the line – it did." He could even make an appeal to Harper backers inclined to reflexively defend Harper on the issue on those grounds.

kcm

I could see how a clever man could turn it to his advantage, is Ignatieff a clever man though? I guess we'll find out.
http://intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

Good advice, but could MI sell it?
Would it be heard over the braying chorus of hypocrite!?
The only reflection the public will concede to MI involves narcissism
http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

Excellent advice. You need to send in your resumé to Peter Donolo, immediately. There's more tactical intelligence in your short paragraph than I've seen Ignatieff embody during his entire tenure as LPC leader.

http://intensedebate.com/people/canucklehead canucklehead

Thanks! I kindof speak as a Harper guy who could be appealed to. Before he stepped into the fray I was honestly leaning Ignatieff, which was pretty shocking to me. Particularly I was hoping he would favour free speech and take a position against the Human Rights tribunal's speech article which Harper seems to be triangulating on. But it seems to me he's a Liberal now, as opposed to liberal.

Canuckistanian

"who clearly is not reflexively opposed to "torture" for mooncalf emotionalizing reasons and is willing to think about the issues."

OT but, it would be fun to replace "torture" with 'genocide'. "X isn't some bleeding-heart moonbat lefty; he's willing to consider the case for genocide as part of our counter-terror strategy". remember when torture was a 'bad' thing…so nineties' ;-)

RayK

Actually, torture IS still a bad thing. By that I mean that outside the odd circles that some commenters here seem to run in, there aren't many Canadians who don't reflexively know that torture is wrong–if for no other reason than that it's illegal.

Need proof? Ask yourself why the Conservatives are going to the lengths of smearing an heroic Canadian diplomat to distance themselves from these allegations rather than just saying that whatever torture may have gone on it wasn't with the knowledge or approval of any Canadian official? It's because even knowing that torture MIGHT happen is so serious as to be radioactive.
http://intensedebate.com/people/canucklehead canucklehead

heh. Maybe it depends on what the meaning of "" is.

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Like Dion blaming the TV networks, she'll probably blame Facebook.

kcm

Ctv's outing of Dion during the election was pathetic.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

"Outing" is probably the wrong verb to use, because it implies that there was something to be "outed". Was there?

kcm

You're probably right about the verb. I was of course talking about the disgraceful incident with the poorly understood questions.

Mulletaur

Yes, but it earned Puffy his senatorship, so that's okay then. Isn't it ?
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Duffy was based in Ottawa. The interview was done elsewhere, I think it was NS or Manitoba.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

Yes, they should have taken more care to keep his incompetence well hidden. That would have been good journalistic practice…for the CBC.

kcm

Your take on that incident is entirely predictable – for you. It was, if you remember, shown after explictly promising not to air it. How many retakes for Harper's flubs have hit the cutting room floor, for CTV? We'll never know, and i doubt you care.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

This wasn't "flubs", it was basic inability to answer a simple question, or even to understand a simple question, even after multiple attempts to explain it.

It showed that Dion had all the vision and perspicacity of a vacuum cleaner. Say what you will about Harper, this is not one of his shortcomings.
kcm

"It showed that Dion had all the vision and perspicacity of a vacuum cleaner"

Nonesense…it merely showed he had a hearing impediment and bad English…which was his fault.
I'd have less problem with the whole affair if it was clear that CTV would show us similar Harper out- takes, which i highly doubt.
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Your take on the incident is far more predictable.
Anonymous

Uh, sorry but this:

"It was, if you remember, shown after explictly promising not to air it."

…was really the basis for accusing CTV of journalistic malpractice, with which the CSBC concurred.

Read the decision.
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

The CSBC is a patsy a**-k**er to the CRTC. Every decision from them is predictable, it will side with the regulators. And frankly, the promise was made *after* the interview, which means the promise was nothing more than a courtesy, which they later realized to be an abandonment of journalistic integrity.
kcm

Promising not to broadcast and then going back on your word is not unprofessional…RIGHT!!
As for being predictable you really ought to go back to your baby avatar…it suited!
CAPS

"The CSBC is a patsy a**-k**er to the CRTC."

Uh, no. First of all it is the CBSC (Candadian Broadcast Standards council and it is completely a creation of the Private Broadcasters.

Not only did they rule that ATV (and CTV) broke their word in airing the clips but that Steve Murphy exhibited lousy journalistic practices in posing a poorly worded question and not subsequently clarifying it.
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

The CBSC is a creation of the private broadcasters that exists only to appease the CRTC so that they are not regulated more by the CRTC. Like I said, it's a patsy.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

Like Dion blaming the TV networks…

Yeah. Blaming the media is callow and feeble. It's a good thing Harper's never done that.

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

He hasn't. Harper may be careful in his dealings with the media, but he has never blamed the media for his troubles. Not like Dion, and not like Stelmach, and various others.

Anonymous

Harper blames media:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/09/26…

"Harper defends Calgary candidate, blames 'gotcha journalism."

(just really the first I grabbed when I googled)

I don't have a problem with politicians blaming the media, by the way. Conservatives, however, are rather selective about when they do and when they don't.

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

Also, how could I forget, the king of the 'blame the media' tactic is Obama, and in his case it's even more deplorable considering how most of the media has been in the tank for him.

Canuckistanian

i thought the undisputed champ of victimhood vis a vis the press was Palin. also, don't you mean "Obamassiah"

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

She's a whiner, for sure.

Did you know that Levi Johnston posed for playgirl and is now a regular on celebrity shows? Totally bizarre. I don't know if this is the media's attempt at sticking it to Palin or if they actually like the guy.

http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

Krieber is completely justified with her comments.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Who would you like to see as the next leader of the Liberal Party?

http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

There was someone who I approved of, who got shafted by the self-acclaimed power brokers of the LPC because they didn't like the fact they they were involved in the anointment.

What's done is done. My choices are clear, and frankly to move to the NDP is beyond stupid with Layton at the helm of that other unprincipled travesty.

Oh…since my previous post was "removed": where I think that Krieber is waaaaay off is that Dion got knifed by the Quebec wing of the LPC, while the "elites of Toronto" stood by and watched. If the Quebec wing was under control (i.e. had given the boot to Coderre), then we probably wouldn't have seen the chicanery we witnessed.

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

There was someone who I approved of

who?

hosertohoosier

Its time for John Manley.

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

It's way too late for that.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

"If the elites of Toronto had been more alert, humble and realistic…"

…then they wouldn't have been Liberals. Or elites. Or possibly even Torontonians.

And if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

kcm

Mindlessly dumping on Toronto elites merely because it makes you feel smug and superior is …well,mindless.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

What if I criticize "Toronto elites" because I think it's valid criticism? Is that allowed?

Or perhaps in your view it's logically impossible for any criticism of "Toronto elites" to be valid?
Who the hell do these rightwing bumpkins think they are – criticizing their Liberal elite betters!

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Let's not forget that the Liberal Party recently experienced a historic internal backlash against the "Toronto Elites"
.
Apparently Coderre's complaints were widely shared, as demonstrated by the awkwardly bloody "Rosedale Purge". Even Aggarwal eventually got the boot, post- org-chart redesign.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

I think the more pertinent question here is, why are we up commenting on a Macleans blog at 3:30 am? Have we no life?

kcm

What if I criticize "Toronto elites" because I think the criticism is valid? Is that allowed – of course.

"Or perhaps in your view it's logically impossible for any criticism of "Toronto elites" to be valid?
Who the hell do these rightwing bumpkins think they are – criticizing their Liberal elite betters!"

Now who's making assumptions?And dealing in tired stereo-types. I just get tired of people mindlessly repeating stereo-types – if you claim it's your own opinion that's fine.

dbk

Liberals are at a 'justify existence' state in politics. Why should they be there, why should they exist? Who do they represent?

I'm not suggesting that the answer is no one, or they shouldn't. But this episode is about who the liberals represent. Do they fight it out with the NDP and Greens for the left, or do they go for the center, fiscal conservative?

They were very successful for years because they represented power, and were able to straddle the center where ever it was at the time. Now they don't represent power.

So who do they represent?

Another thing they could count on was the incompetence or political futility of past PC leaders. Now they have an opponent who is more than happy to see them destroyed and fight elections against the NDP. And has been quite adept at pushing whatever buttons necessary to see that happen.

Some smart guys in Toronto aren't going to do anything. Especially when they are from Toronto, and not so smart.

Derek

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

"They are in the process, slowly, just like any dictatorship, of changing the world. "

And here I thought "change" was good.

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

The word "dictatorship" is showing her craziness.

So if we have dictatorship now, after three years of mintority Conservative government, then the opposite would be continual majority Liberal rule since 1993. I wonder what she would call that?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

"…the opposite would be continual majority Liberal rule since 1993. I wonder what she would call that? "

Democracy in action, of course. The Liberals are Canada's Natural Governing Party you know. They deserve to lead, and anyone who thinks, says, or votes otherwise is clearly a dangerous ideologue, probably uneducated, and certainly well outside the mainstream of Canadian Values.

dbk

Except that from where a great number of Canadians live, the Liberal Party of Canada is nowhere to be seen.

I really don't think that reality has hit home quite yet in the brilliant minds running the party.

Derek

Craig O

Well, I guess we know now who wears the pants in that relationship…

I think she's right about the current problems with the LPC and especially with Ignatieff in particular, but I don't think the situation is quite as dire. The political pendulum always swings and sooner or later, it'll swing back to the left and (perhaps not at the same time) to the Liberals – and with any luck, by then someone with a little more substance will be at the helm of the party.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Well, I guess we know now who wears the pants in that relationship…

That seems rather sexist to me. Mme. Krieber has every right to speak her mind, just as her husband does. It's a shame that her honest and poignant outrage was so quickly stifled by her party (though I get the feeling that it won't be her party much longer).

Craig O

Heh, I thought about putting an "excuse the sexism" side-note in the comment, but I figured most people would get that I'm just making fun of Dion's weak persona.

I'm not implying that Mme. Krieber doesn't have the right to speak her mind – I'm glad she did and I largely agree with her comments.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Andrew_not_PorC Andrew_not_PorC

Yeah, the guy who passionately argued the Non side in the last referendum is a weak personality. Some people only see the accent and the geekishness….

Anon Liberal

"That sound from the Dion household is a voice counselling alertness, humility and realism. And they said irony was dead."
————————————

Ah the "Dion household". Nice way to get in a glancing shot.

catherine

I suppose that term is only used for the wife, aka chattel.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

Because when a woman writes about "the death of our party," because it rejected what "Stéphane" wanted to do, laments that it wouldn't listen even though "we" told Liberals loud and clear what Ignatieff was like, and when the entire substance of her post is a meditation on her husband's line of work, it's sexist for somebody else to mention who she's married to.

phil

Everybody knows "who she's married to". You implied that she was speaking for the "Dion household". Do you have a partner at home Paul?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

One who makes public declarations about the inner politics of my workplace, denigrating my bosses and musing aloud that all would be run better if only I were in charge? No. You?

phil

Actually, yes. Sigh.
http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

If your boss and inner politics were crapping on you at every opportunity, even so far as to push you out despite your long service to the party and to Parliament, and where everyone who did not know you was given an image of you based on a caricature?

My wife would be pissed, and Krieber as an intelligent woman is entitled to break.
Anonymiss

If my husband were having that much trouble in his job, I would privately encourage him to make a change according to his needs, not indiscreetly telegraph to all and sundry a viewpoint that would damage not only his reputation with his bosses and colleagues, but also make it difficult for him to maneuver himself to a better position. If my husband were a public figure, discretion would be even more important, because the level of scrutiny is even greater. In such a situation, the overall welfare of my husband would trump any egocentric need to "express my opinion," an assertion which I think is besides the point. So long as my husband knows what I think, why would there be a need to broadcast it to everyone?

I think Ms. Krieber is at the very least naive if she thinks she can speak her mind in such a public forum and not have it reflect upon her husband—aside from the fact that she contradicts herself enough times so as to render her statement nonsensical. It seems also to indicate a general unawareness of optics and what is politics if not a constant assessing of how to present one's ideas in the best possible framing? I would argue the Liberals have had an ongoing problem with this notion of optics, and how to work them to their advantage; Canucklehead refers to this quite adeptly a few postings up the chain here…
http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

Sophistry is useful when it doesn't involve oneself personally, eh? I am not so bold to be able to claim that I could sit back and suck it in. Maybe you have less of a spine than I.

Frankly, I don't see the contradictions that you and others claim to exist…pointing out the irony of history is fair game.

The social-conservatives mobilized and finagled its way into "reform-light" by exploiting opportunists within the PC party, and jettisoned the "progressive" portion not only in name but in perspective. There is a continuing shift away from the Canada defined over the past 30 years and it is far easier to destroy and deconstruct it than to continue to build on it. Unless the progressive part of Canadians refuse to regroup and ally themselves, the Canada that was built over the past 30 years will be dead.

Some people may actually applaud this change, but I don't, and it seems that Krieber does not as well.
Mr. Irrelevant

Honestly on the big issues I see the Conservatives in almost every way carrying on with Canadian governance as defined over the last 30 years, as evidenced by the fact that the parties are in accord on almost all of these. Their attempts to expand free trade are an evolution of a policy that was once controversial but is now essentially settled. On Afghanistan… well, I'd say not contributing in Iraq II was the isolated incident. Management of the federation? Nationalist gestures to Quebec, cutting cheques to the provinces. Tiptoing around desirable ideas like looser interprovincial trade and a national securities regulator that will never really get done. Same old same old.
Mr. Irrelevant

Relations with the US have become nothing more than the government pursuing our interest in increased trade and open borders and the opposition saying they're not doing it right. There is no further debate on exactly what our interests are on this file. The environment? I guess this government talks a worse game but has made some minor achievements despite infuriating environmentalists on the big problems, in which case they differ from their predecessors in tone only.

I like some of these developments more than others. You can probably tell that I'd prefer a government that would do more to infuriate you, so if you want to rebut persuasively, it would really cheer me up.

Anon Liberal

I'm saying if you want to get in (another) shot at Dion why don't you wait until HE says something and not his wife, who clearly has a mind of her own and may conceivably view things from a different perspective than her husband.

phil

Clearly Mr. Wells would not tolerate such a situation.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I'm in an earlier time zone. What's your excuse? ;-)
hosertohoosier

Iggy knifed Dion in the back constantly as leader. It is only fair that Dion pay back the favour. Actually what I would consider doing if I were Dion is joining the Green Party. That'd show Iggy. Plus Dion would be a shoe-in as Green leader.
hosertohoosier

Iggy knifed Dion in the back constantly as leader. It is only fair that Dion pay back the favour. Actually what I would consider doing if I were Dion is joining the Green Party. That'd show Iggy. Plus Dion would be a shoe-in as Green leader.

Mulletaur

Only bitter losers do such things. Like members of the former Reform Party who split from the Progressive Conservatives.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

…or members of the former, hopeless Canadian Alliance who took over the Progressive Conservatives in order to acquire a respectable brand name.

http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

Hah~! Just need someone who can chew gum while lying through their teeth signing a paper napkin.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

Paging Peter MacKay! Paging Peter MacKay!

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

He could introduce the Green Green Shift! New and improved!

Dot

Can he sing? Got a campaign song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5IABqwVO2U

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Heh.

http://intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

Here we are contemplating the death of the Liberal Party as we know it.
After Brian Mulroney, the Conservative party was dead in the water – 2 seats.
After the Chretien dynasty, now the Liberals are sliding into the abyss.
Things are looking pretty good for Team Harper- lets say a two term majority. What then? Will the CPC then collapse?
What I'm wondering: is it us? Divorce is an accepted reality; so you find a new mate and move on. Will it become the norm for a party to rule long enough to wear out it's welcome, followed by a messy "separation", the rise of another party, and then repeat? Has it always been this way?
I've always thought that we need at least 2 strong parties, as the competition keeps them sharp and responsive.

This is not a slight against SH. He has shrewdly and doggedly rebuilt and will now reap the fruit, but will the next wave always be built on the ashes of the former?

Out There

The Liberals might well be dying, and the Conservatives might – just might – be able to obtain a majority if they can manage to pretend to be moderate long enough (stay on message, stay on message, stay on message) to convince enough Canadians in swing ridings to vote for them. But the Conservatives won't be able to hold power unless they actually become more competent at governing.

A Conservative majority would likely do all it can to cripple their opposition – reduce public funding, stack the Senate, keep their propaganda machine going at full speed – but, because Canada is a democracry, it cannot eliminate oppositon parties and turn Canada into a one-party state. Sooner or later, the Conservatives would have to defend their record in office to the electorate.

If they spend their entire time in office politicking and handing out favours to their friends, they'll be removed from office. If they ignore the difficult problems that need to be solved and attempt to curry favour with voters by creating legislation that panders to narrow special interests, they'll be removed from office too. I only hope that any damage the Conservatives do is not long-lasting.
http://nottawa.blogspot.com Mark

I actually don't think Liberals are dying, we've deluded ourselves for over a decade while on life support.

For the entirety of the 1990s, Liberals could get elected quite easily in this country – at a federal level – by reminding Canadians who we were not. There was an endless list of foils that covered off nearly every region and demographic. We started out by not being Brian Mulroney, and then not Preston Manning or Lucien Bouchard. The provinces provided us an endless set of politicians to 'not be' – Parizeau the Separatist, Harris the NeoCo, Glen Clarke the failed socialist, Ralph Klein the… Ralph Klein.

Then, one by one, the bogeymen vanished. The Conservatives were united, the Liberals took over Queen's Park, and the separatists' grip on Quebec's government was loosened.

The 15 years of monsters under the bed has ended. The Liberals will win the next election if, and only if, they show Canadians what they are and want to be, as opposed to what they are against. The alternative is to simply wait around for the tories to become unliked.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SamDavies SamDavies

Not certain if I agree with this.
I think the party is in fact dying because it just can't overcome various internal divisions.
I can't agree more with Krieber that this all can be traced back to the knife-play of Martin and his crew.
The internal strife within the party is ripe for the plucking, and Harper is slowly picking away.

In order to survive, the Liberal party needs to reinvent itself, and that will only be possible once they are crushed.
Hard times and clear defeat would help develop common purpose and loyalty….

http://nottawa.blogspot.com Mark

Ok Sam – if you are going to trot that out, please connect the dots. 'Trace it back', so to speak.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SamDavies SamDavies

I won't lie to you – I have zero insider information!!!
Paying attention to politics is a guilty pleasure that I indulge on occasion.

Back during the Chretien days, Martin was way too Macbeth-ish.
You can even toss some Lear in there if you wish!
I know it really rubbed me the wrong way at the time.
I found it immensely distasteful the way Martin and his peeps lusted for the crown,
even though the king was still alive and still wearing it.

I'm sure there are others who are better versed with the factions that existed at the time.
And the fact is, their inability to work cohesively together back then has resonated into the future.
The Liberals were fortunate that the Cons were a mess after Mulroney, but such is no longer the case.
In order to defeat Harper, they need to be stronger than ever, which simply isn't the case.

Dion – the Edward Blake of his time – not only had to face a strong opponent, but pretty much was marginalized by his own party members. I can't even imagine all the scheming that likely went on during his tenure, especially during and after the coalition gov't time-frame. Liberal party insiders weren't exactly bending over backwards to help eliminate his election debts – they left him hanging.

Enter Iggy, and the same mess is still there. Perhaps Donolo will be able to work miracles, and whip things into shape, but I'm not so certain. It just doesn't seem like everyone is on-board for the same reasons, other than the desire to regain power. On its own, the stitching holds together, but when pressure is applied, the threads seemingly rip apart….
http://intensedebate.com/people/ChrisInKW ChrisInKW

The fact that Iggy successfully put Chrétienites and Martinites working together is telling.
http://nottawa.blogspot.com Mark

"inability to work cohesively together"?
That's bullsh*t. Their ability to work together was in large part what delivered three successive majorities, and a competent government with a stirling fiscal record.
As for "needing to be stronger than ever to beat Harper", that's precisely the conclusion of the argument I [posted above with which you purport to disagree.
The reason "everyone" doesn't seem "on-board for the same reasons", that's precisely the premise of the argument I posted with which you purport to disagree.
The Liberal Party from 1993-2004 didn't need to agree on anything. They just had to sell themselves as better and different than a cast of political characters across the country that were more polarizing than them.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SamDavies SamDavies

Apologies Mark…

My original reply was meant to go elsewhere.
Multitasking, whilst reading and commenting – duh on me.
When I re-read, I erroneously jumped your first sentence.

Totally agree with what you posted.
As it stands, Harper doesn't need to do much to hurt the Liberals.
They are seemingly their own worst enemies.

"inability to work cohesively together" was referring to the highly visible splintering during the 3rd term.

hosertohoosier

Harper is constantly castigated for his difficulties in getting a majority government, but one positive aspect of that for him is that he has a fairly workable team. Mulroney and, to a lesser degree, Chretien, won majorities by uniting groups of people that were unlikely to remain friends in the long-term. Paul Martin accelerated those tendencies during his own interregnum.

The fewer the people you have inside your tent, the more pie there is to go around for all and the easier it is to keep everybody happy.
even flow

Boethius's Wheel.

[youtube 66gmYLtJJuc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66gmYLtJJuc youtube]

"Inconstancy is my essence, says the wheel. Rise up on my spokes if you like but do complain when you are caste back down into the depths…

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

Unbelievable! I certainly expected the Tories to do everything under the sun to divert the attention of the media from potential war crime charges.

Who would have believed that it would be the Liberals doing the job for them?

The Prime Minister of Canada might have made his country complicit in the torture of prisoners yet the citizens of this country cannot rely on its official opposition to hold his feet to the fire. Why? Because the idiots are too busy fighting each other.

This BS alone makes me want to vote NDP at the next election!!

http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

"This BS alone makes me want to vote NDP at the next election!! "

You and a few other LPC supporters. Jack may be thanking his lucky stars that he had the gonads to say no to the siren call from Mr "Your Time is Up" in September. It may have been the wisest strategy move he ever made.
Style

"The Prime Minister of Canada might have made his country complicit in the torture of prisoners yet Canadians cannot rely on its official opposition to hold his feet to the fire. Why?"

"Torture doesn't exist, corruption is a point of view. (Is Ignatieff) really..the right leader to discuss these issues? Can someone really write all these insanities and make us believe he's simply changed his mind? To justify violence, he must have really given it serious thought. Otherwise, that's very dangerous. What guarantee would there be that he wouldn't change his mind again? The party base understood all of this and Canadian citizens are in the process of understanding. Ignatieff's supporters didn't do their homework. They didn't read his books, didn't consult his colleagues."

How do you hold the government accountable for actions you've condoned? Or for policies your party initiated?

wilson

'How do you hold the government accountable for actions you've condoned? Or for policies your party initiated? '

Liberals are flexible.

kcm

That's intersting since both the libs and le cons defended the 2005 agreement. Keep on spinning…sooner or later you'll bump into the truth…accidentally of course.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

"How do you hold the government accountable for actions you've condoned? Or for policies your party initiated? "

I supposed the same way Harper has been able to do a volte-face on countless policies and got the press and voters to buy that he was genuine, perhaps?

Style

Accepting that you have substantive examples of this, Harper actually implemented the policies, which was pretty persuasive evidence that he genuinely intended to implement them. What will Ignatieff do to convince people he's disavowed his own views and previous Liberal policy?

kcm

What previous liberal policy? Stop spinning!

Style

What were the Liberals doing with detainees in Afghanistan?

kcm

Far as i know until 2005 there was a different command stucure. The US called the shots. No doubt there will be enough blame to go around…however right now we are dealing with allegations of a cover up.
Style

We were talking about why the Liberals aren't holding the Conservatives accountable for making Canada complicit in torture. The notion that there is a cover-up is a bit silly – nobody was advertising the pre-2006 allegations of torture either.
wilson

over to the US until Dec 2005,
then Dec, Jan , Feb 2006 hand over to Afghan prisons (to be tortured Colvin says)