Liveblogging the Rae leadership launch: Remind us again, which one is the hare and which is the tortoise?

By kadyomalley - Thursday, November 20, 2008 at 8:11 AM - 14 Comments

Barring another outbreak of incredibly ill-timed technical difficulties, ITQ will be at the National Press Theatre when Bob Rae makes the least surprising announcement in Liberal leadership politics since — well, Michael Ignatieff did the same thing last week.

8:52:44 AM
The press conference hasn’t yet begun, but the Raevolution is already underway, and I swear that’s the last time I will type those words, but I just can’t help myself – just inside the doors of the National Press Theatre, starry-eyed supporters have lined the path by which he will make his entrance. Admittedly, it’s a pretty short path – about fifty feet – which means it doesn’t take that many starry-eyed supporters to do so, but still. It’s on. Or, to quote the slogan emblazoned on the buttons they’re wearing: “Ready to Roll.”

I hope that’s not under embargo. If so, I’ll throw myself on the mercy of the court for unwittingly ruining the surprise.

8:58:56 AM
Ooh, from inside the theatre, we can hear the screams – screams of joy, we assume – which can only mean one thing: Uncle Bob has been spotted, striding purposefully towards destiny. That, or it was a practice scream.

9:00:19 AM
Nope, it was the real thing – the camera crews that has been so patiently – and chillily – awaiting his arrival have now descended upon us.

Sixty seconds. (We get a countdown in the NPT. It builds excitement!)

9:03:04 AM
And here he is! Wearing a grey suit and a tie the very same shade of deep burgandy red as my BlackBerry, he’s announcing his candidacy for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. A shocker!

9:04:58 AM
Also Ready to Roll under a new Raegime: “a real Twenty-First Century economy” – and on that note, he’s fine with his “track record in governing” coming under scrutiny – he doesn’t mind it at all. “I couldn’t hide my record even if I wanted to. Damn that lack of some sort of mass amnesia-inducing technology.” (Note: Last bit may not have been spoken aloud.)

Oh, I kid. He looks fine – he’s actually working off a prepared text, which is unusual for him, and sticking to it pretty closely.

Continue…

Megapundit: Where's our Obama?

By selley - Monday, November 17, 2008 at 1:25 PM - 15 Comments

Must-reads: Rosie DiManno on race statistics; Lawrence Martin on finding a new Speaker; Doug Saunders on waiting for a European Obama; Greg Weston on Jim Prentice’s new job; Jeffrey Simpson on bailing out the Detroit Three; David Frum on the GOP’s bleak future; Don Martin on Elizabeth May.

Change we don’t believe in
Sure, the Liberal party will soon “change.” But neither it nor Canada, the pundits lament, will Change.

Ignatieff vs. Rae vs. LeBlanc is precisely the leadership race the Liberals needed, L. Ian MacDonald opines in the Montreal Gazette. For one thing, he says, “it will keep costs down at a time when the party is broke.” But more to the point, it means “amateur hour is over.” The only two legitimate candidates understand their goal is to “unite the party, fill its campaign coffers, and win the next election,” and nothing else. No young people; no new ideas; no funny business.

The Gazette‘s Don Macpherson also handicaps the race for the leadership, suggesting—weirdly, in our view—that “because of the unfortunate timing of the current leadership race, Ignatieff starts off his second run risking unfavourable comparison with the charismatic [Barack] Obama.” This is particularly true in Quebec, he argues, where election fatigue has set in and there’s nothing remotely novel about Charest vs. Marois vs. Dumont. Fair enough, but who’s Ignatieff up against? Rae and LeBlanc, and then Harper? Which of those three juggernauts is going to out-Obama Iggy?

Continue…

UPDATED: Liberal Leadership NotWatch: Oh, for heaven's sake.

By kadyomalley - Sunday, November 16, 2008 at 12:16 AM - 31 Comments

Seriously, guys, did you even try to work this out over the phone before resorting to passive aggressive press releases? As Colleague Wells points out (in inexplicably teeny tiny text), two of the three of you haven’t even officially joined the race, and I’m honestly not sure if that makes this whole thing more or less ridiculous. Maria Minna Judy Sgro’s suggestion to have y’all flip a coin is starting to sound better and better, although I’m not sure if that works if there are three of you. Rock, paper, scissors, anyone?

UPDATE: Well, more of a crosspost-with-a-little-bit-extra, really – but I think it’s interesting, anyway. I just posted the following to the comment thread over at Inkless:

It seems to be two of the three not-yet-official candidates who want to open the debate to the media; as far as I know, it wasn’t an issue for us until we found out about it through a press release by Bob Rae. By coincidence, however, the question of the “closed-door debate” actually did come up on Friday, courtesy of a Conservative-supporting commenter who demanded to know why we weren’t reporting *that* instead of focusing on the lockdown in Winnipeg. I’m starting to wonder whether this whole controversy didn’t spring, fully formed, from the head of a clearly-too-smart-for-the-War-Room Tory strategist (I’d say ‘operative’ but that has a pejorative slant, and it really would be very clever) who found out about the LPCO meeting and realized that this could be used to blunt criticism of the convention protocol.  

A quick search of Google News suggests that the story broke late yesterday night, but the comment in question was actually posted on Friday evening, which would tend to back up my theory that the controversy – or, at least, the coverage thereof – was helped along by Conservatives attempting to mute the complaints over closed doors at the convention, or at least the Liberal press release that went out that condemned the PM as the “master of the muzzle”.  I’d be curious to see if anyone can track down any posts or comments within the greater political blogosphere that went out before the Canadian Press report hit the wire – aside, of course, from the Inkless post, which appeared a few hours earlier. 

Not, I should note, that I’m suggesting that it wasn’t a spectacularly bad move on the part of the LPCO to stick to their initial decision to shut the press out of Sunday’s debate, even after two of the three candidates involved agreed to open it up to the media. That was just stupid. If the Conservatives were able to use friendly partisan bloggers and commenters to goad Rae’s campaign into putting out a press release, thereby launching the story into the headlines,  well … good for them.

Megapundit: Concentrating the mind, wonderfully

By selley - Friday, November 14, 2008 at 2:16 PM - 19 Comments

Must-reads: Jeffrey Simpson on Michael Ignatieff.

Do you have him in plebeian?
Perhaps Michael Ignatieff could try saying “duh,” every now and again.

All of today’s pundits agree that the member for Etobicoke–Lakeshore is the clear early frontrunner in the Liberal leadership race, and all agree he’s in better shape than last time around. Nevertheless, they offer up the following insults/cheap shots/digs:

• “egalitarian enough to talk down to anyone” (John Ivison, National Post)

• “comes across, despite his best efforts not to, as a minor member of foreign nobility”; “his drawl, his practiced movements, the admonishing frown, the pained grimace, invite that politically-deadly label: snob” (Susan Riley, Ottawa Citizen);

• “has some of the ‘to the manor born’ about him” (Jeffrey Simpson, The Globe and Mail).

Remarkable. Do people actually see this in Igantieff, or do they simply imagine other, less cultured people seeing it in him? Because he’s always struck us as about as sober, intelligent and genuine as politicians get in this country. And Riley, in particular, nearly made coffee shoot through our noses when she conceded, after all this snob-talk, that “to be part of an intellectual elite, or artistic elite, should be considered an accomplishment, not a barrier to political success.” Madam, what the hell?

Ivison’s column is far more balanced, we should stress, but Simpson’s is the best of the Ignatieff-themed material today, in our view. His weakness, Simpson argues, is on the economy. “If for whatever reason, the public begins to turn against the Conservatives for their (mis)management of the economy, will a former university professor and writer reassure them?” But the three things that held him back two years ago—Iraq, accusations of hubris over his sudden return to the motherland, and advocating Quebec nationhood—have all either faded into the mists of time or (in the case of the latter, for better or for worse) made him look prescient. It’s tough to see Bob Rae making up the gap.
Continue…

"Michael Ignatieff to Make Announcement"? Whatever could it be?

By kadyomalley - Wednesday, November 12, 2008 at 1:45 PM - 7 Comments

Oh, come on, let’s pretend there’s a scintilla of suspense, shall we? Spoilers take all the fun out of it. (Oh, and before anyone asks, of course ITQ will be there, liveblogberry at the ready):

Michael Ignatieff, Member of Parliament for Etobicoke-Lakeshore, will make an announcement regarding the Liberal Party of Canada’s Leadership race. The Liberal Party of Canada will hold a Leadership Convention at the Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre from April 30 to May 3, 2009.

Date: Thursday, November 13, 2008

Time: 11:00 a.m.

Place: National Press Theatre 150 Wellington St., Ottawa

Megapundit: Canada—still not a serious country

By selley - Tuesday, November 11, 2008 at 3:42 PM - 4 Comments

‘Round Ottawa
Pundits take on the tanking economy, the woebegone Liberal party, and the tragedy of Canada’s portrait gallery.

The Globe and Mail’s Jeffrey Simpson suggests the Liberals may be hoping “to improve their fortunes” in British Columbia by holding their May convention in Vancouver, provides no evidence to support this suggestion, and then explains what just about everyone could have figured out for themselves based on very recent precedent: it won’t work. This bit of weirdness leads into a handicapping of the leadership race among the B.C. delegates, in which Simpson has Michael Ignatieff ahead of Bob Rae by virtue of having “signed up the largest number of big-name … organizers.” He also predicts this will be the last delegated convention in Canadian history.

The Toronto Star’s James Travers applauds the prime minister’s and the premiers’ willingness to embrace “job-generating infrastructure spending,” and suggests numerous other economy-boosting measures they might consider in their newfound spirit of collegiality: hiking E.I. benefits, “declar[ing] a sales tax holiday to stimulate comatose retail sales” or harmonizing provincial and federal sales taxes. But that newfound spirit is the most important point, Travers argues, in the tough times ahead. “If not much else good, the financial crisis is at least creating preconditions necessary for closer co-operation.”

Continue…

Not with a bang but a barrage of logistical details: Liveblogging the (official) launch of Liberal Leadership 2.0

By kadyomalley - Sunday, November 9, 2008 at 12:30 PM - 22 Comments

We already know that the Liberal convention will go ahead next May in Vancouver as originally scheduled, with a $90,000 entry fee for leadership candidates and a $1.5 million cap on spending. So what else is there to decide?

According to yesterday’s release, the party still has to “establish membership rules, construct several committees and make key appointments intended to ensure the success of the Leadership contest and Convention” which is why ITQ will be spending her Sunday afternoon at the Lord Elgin, waiting for the national executive to wrap up their meeting. Check back around 1pm for full coverage.

12:30:08 PM
Greetings from the depths of an altogether too comfy couch in the lobby of the Lord Elgin, where the combination of soothing chamber music and a roaring fire is threatening to inspire an impromptu – and most untimely – afternoon nap. As usual, I’m early, which means that the press conference itself will probably be late; that’s pretty much how it usually works – if I’m early, they’re late and vice versa. Well, except for events involving the PM, which are invariably late.

We’re here, as noted above, to find out the finer details of the Liberal leadership convention that will be held next May, and by we, I mean the media, although I haven’t actually seen any other reporters yet. The evidence of their presence is all around — satellite trucks, tripods, cameras and, of course, miles and miles of cable, which are scattered through the lobby, seemingly unattended; a ghost scrum.

At least there’s a Starbucks nearby – of course there is, right? – that is still selling pumpkin scones.

12:44:17 PM
Well, apparently, I’m even earlier than I thought — the press conference has been bumped until 1:30. All the more time to enjoy the scones!

Continue…

Pack your bags, Liberal leadership hopefuls – You're going to Vancouver!

By kadyomalley - Saturday, November 8, 2008 at 4:17 PM - 27 Comments

Liberal Party President Doug Ferguson Announces Location and Terms of the next Leadership Convention

OTTAWA – Liberal Party President Doug Ferguson today announced that the National Executive has chosen Vancouver as the site of the next Liberal Leadership Convention. The Convention will be held at the Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre from April 30, 2009 to May 3, 2009.

“After careful review of all viable options, I am proud to announce that Liberal delegates will choose the next Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada in beautiful British Columbia,” said Mr. Ferguson.

Mr. Ferguson also commented on the importance of highlighting the national scope of the Liberal Party of Canada. This decision, it is hoped, will energize our grassroots in a region of the country which has never hosted a Liberal Leadership Convention.

In addition to the date and location of the Convention, the National Executive has set the entry fee for Leadership candidates at $90,000 and the spending limit at $1.5 million. A levy of 10% will also be imposed on directed donations. As an added measure, a rebate option will be available to candidates according to their ability to raise funds for the Victory Fund, a grassroots fundraising initiative of the Liberal Party of Canada.

“The decisions made today were made in the best interest of the Liberal Party of Canada,” said Mr. Ferguson. “Though our work continues this weekend, I take pride in our Executive’s ability to arrive at these crucial decisions quickly and respectfully. I look forward to the same spirit of cooperation in what promises to be an historic and exciting Leadership race.”

Megapundit: Unscrambling the egg, vexedly

By selley - Monday, November 3, 2008 at 4:09 PM - 9 Comments

WEEKEND ROUNDUP

Must-reads: Rex Murphy on the Martin memoirs; Haroon Siddiqui on Barack Obama; Gary Mason on Robert Dziekanski; Jeffrey Simpson on the Tories in Quebec; Chantal Hébert on Iggy’s chances; Robert Fulford on gambling; Randall Denley on frugality.

The fat lady, or the choir of angels?
Canadian pundits have apparently never heard of the jinx.

The Globe and Mail’s John Ibbitson attempts to explain the historical significance of Barack Obama, who isn’t just black, but potentially the first “northern liberal” president since John F. Kennedy. “His victory would acknowledge an ongoing reformation of the republic: the halting, inconstant but unmistakable breaking down of barriers; the political debut of a new generation; the transformation of whole regions of the nation,” Ibbitson argues. It would embarrass “those skeptics who believe [the United States] is a failing giant.” Heck, he’s already “re-enfranchised African Americans” and “convinced Latinos to submerge racial suspicions toward African Americans and join them in common cause,” and he hasn’t even won!

The Toronto Star’s Haroon Siddiqui recaps all the indignities Obama has faced from various Republicans determined to make his race and his purported Islamic faith defining issues among the rednecks. And he suggests it was Colin Powell’s powerful endorsement, during which he asked why a young Muslim shouldn’t (hypothetically) aspire to be President, that really highlighted the meaning of the campaign. “By just being who he is,” Siddiqui concludes, he “has put fellow Americans on an irreversible journey to national reconciliation.”

Continue…

And then there were two? (Special 100% Vancouver South recount speculation-free post!)

By kadyomalley - Tuesday, October 28, 2008 at 6:10 PM - 56 Comments

First Dominic LeBlanc, now … David McGuinty? National Newswatch lays out the circumstantial evidence here.

Megapundit: Sticking it to the Ayatollah

By selley - Monday, October 27, 2008 at 2:35 PM - 29 Comments

WEEKEND ROUNDUP

Must-reads: Daphne Bramham on Nazanin Afshin-Jam; David Olive and Greg Weston on tough economic times; Scott Taylor, off to the Caucasus; Haroon Siddiqui on the Iacobucci inquiry; Dan Gardner on ending the oil addiction; Barbara Yaffe on Bloc Québécois fundraising.

About those election promises…
Prepare to be disappointed for your own good.

The Toronto Star‘s David Olive observes the “awkwardly choreographed dance” currently being performed by the prime minister and the provincial premiers on the matter of deficit financing, whether it’s necessary and who should be blamed for it if it is. “It’s not just that if a swimming pool somewhere has to be closed next year, the premiers want Ottawa to wear it,” he writes. “They also want Ottawa to speed up its spending on job-creating infrastructure projects for which the premiers and territorial leaders could claim some credit when the unemployed start pounding on the doors of legislatures from Charlottetown to Victoria.”

So long as deficits are short term and exist only when times demand them, The Globe and Mail‘s Jeffrey Simpson says there’s nothing inherently wrong with them. But as a habit, they’re a ruinous addiction that’s incredibly hard to break. Consult Hansard from the 1980s and you’ll find “Liberal and NDP MPs … predicting that any attempts at fiscal prudence would result in tens of thousands of people becoming unemployed, communities being crushed, grim fates awaiting millions of vulnerable people,” says Simpson. As such, it would behove the Tories to ditch as many useless, costly election promises as they can—he suggests the two-cent cut to the diesel excise tax and the $5,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers—before they’re forced to ditch the one about never running a deficit.

Continue…

Megapundit: The wrong side of the Rubicon

By selley - Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 2:39 PM - 1 Comment

Must-reads: Haroon Siddiqui on the Iacobucci inquiry; John Ibbitson, lost in Wyoming; Murray Campbell and John Ivison on Ontario’s deficit.

Please welcome Jim Prentice, Minister of Everything
So many portfolios, so few competent people to staff them.

The Toronto Star‘s James Travers advises the Prime Minister to worry less about Quebec in making his new Cabinet and worry more about “managing what’s happening in the United States”—i.e., the financial crisis and the impending challenges and opportunities of a Barack Obama presidency. Harper “needs broad foreign affairs shoulders to help carry the Atlas load of change and crises,” for example—that’s some classic Travers prose right there!—and those shoulders, he says, belong to Jim Prentice. He expects Lawrence Cannon to replace Prentice at Industry, David Emerson to be dispatched to Washington as ambassador “to explain to Washington Democrats why protectionism may be good short-term politics but a lousy way to advance the long-term interests of either country” (which strikes us as a fine idea) and Jim Flaherty to remain at finance, where he can “absorb the inevitable blame for hard times.” (We have no problem with that, either.)

Sun Media’s Greg Weston expects few fireworks in the Cabinet shuffle. He has Prentice staying at Industry “to deal with the growing upheaval in the manufacturing sector, including the possible demise of the auto industry as we know it,” and he thinks Cannon would be ideal for Foreign Affairs except that “he will likely be Harper’s lieutenant for Quebec,” which is “a full-time job in itself.” That leaves… holy Hannah, Stockwell Day? Oh, come on!

Continue…

Megapundit: The age of meritocracy

By selley - Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 1:57 PM - 26 Comments

Must-reads: Dan Gardner on the end of capitalism; Don Martin and Janet Bagnall on gender politics.

The long and winding road
From racial politics to gender politics to regional politics to carbon taxation to the resurrection of the Liberal party.

Why, George Jonas asks in the National Post, would Barack Obama declare himself honoured and humbled at the support of Colin Powell when, “in theory, [he] stands against everything Powell has stood for, from party affiliation to policy”? Because “these days descent trumps ideas,” he answers—yes, he’s going there, and unencumbered by any evidence we can detect. “In periods of tribal reversion it matters less, say, that Powell, a Republican, has been pivotal to an Iraq policy that Obama, a Democrat, has been running and railing against, than that they’re both African-Americans.” Actually, scratch that, he does have evidence—only it’s to the contrary, namely his “fascination” with John McCain’s loss of momentum among women even after he brought Sarah Palin aboard.

Janet Bagnall‘s latest philippic in the Montreal Gazette against the Palin phenomenon is one of the more coherent arguments we’ve read that her selection wasn’t just an isolated and regrettable political incident but an actual step backwards for women in politics. If, as has been suggested, “her real appeal was her malleability”—if she offered herself to the GOP as “an empty vessel into which America’s most right-wing conservatives have poured their tired old policies”—then her candidacy can legitimately be seen as a victory for “unreconstructed tokenism.” If she didn’t, of course, then the whole argument kind of falls apart. And, frankly, we still don’t see any logical reason Palin should impact the fortunes of accomplished, capable women in politics.

Continue…

Megapundit: Begin the wooing of Frank McKenna

By selley - Tuesday, October 21, 2008 at 1:51 PM - 19 Comments

Must-reads: None. Okay, maybe James Travers.

Did somebody order a hero?
It will take more than bellyfire to lead the Liberal party.

Stéphane Dion’s decision to stay on pending a leadership convention is “a gobsmackingly bad move,” Don Martin declares in the Calgary Herald, predicting he’ll make an easy target for “gloating Conservatives across the Commons aisle while economic issues, which are hardly his forte, dominate parliamentary debate.” Dion may finally realize that “federal politics makes mincemeat of honest, high-road sincerity,” but he doesn’t yet seem to accept his own culpability in the Liberal collapse, says Martin. Given two years to “invigorate the Liberal fundraising operation,” “gel with his caucus and install a solid staff organization,” and “frame the Liberals in the centre with rational mainstream policies,” he did none of those things. The idea that he could help them do so as a “lameduck loser” is, therefore, laughable.

The Montreal Gazette‘s Don Macpherson speculates that Dion may be hanging on in anticipation of pulling a Trudeau—i.e., announcing his impending departure, engineering the defeat of the government and then marching to an improbable victory in the 41st general election. If that is indeed his intention, Macpherson advises he be disavowed of it at the party’s earliest convenience. His caucus has neither the money nor the patience to brook such shenanigans, and the various contenders for the crown—Macpherson has Michael Ignatieff as the favourite—would surely lead their troops in revolt.

Continue…

The end of a dionysty? Liveblogging the Liberal Leader's first post-election press conference

By kadyomalley - Monday, October 20, 2008 at 12:55 PM - 134 Comments

1:39:40 PM
Oh my goodness, y’all, it’s a good thing I got here early, because not only is the place filling up quickly – there are more than a dozen of us here already, including Colleague Wherry – but this is the premiere appearance of the newly refurbished National Press Theatre! Which – actually looks a lot like the oldly unrefurbished NPT, as it turns out, although there are two new flatscreen TVs boasting a stylized Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery logo. Other than that, the consensus is that it looks pretty much exactly the same as when we last saw it, but I’m sure the difference, though subtle, is well worth whatever we spent on it.

1:43:44 PM
“If he doesn’t resign, I hope they don’t pan to me,” says one reporter; it is a sentiment shared by all. Not to mention the fact that a twist like that would instantly render this the world’s most awkward press conference. Oh, and democracy. I’m sure it would have some impact on the world outside this room, too.

It’s a bit of a first-day-at-school feeling in the audience — for a lot of journalists who were on tour, this is the first time they’ve seen the rest of us — all of the rest of us — in nearly two months. It’s nice, really. I’ve missed us.

1:47:02 PM
Outside, I should mention, there is a mid-sized contingent of camera crews awaiting the arrival of the man of the hour, and shivering – or stoically refusing to shiver – in the unseasonably brisk autumn air.

1:48:40 PM
Hey, it’s the president of the press gallery at the mic – that would be Richard Brennan of the Toronto Star – with bad news: the plan is for Dion to give an opening statement of “ten to twelve minutes” – and – the kicker, which does not go over at all well – is that he’s only taking four questions: two English and two French. The obligatory grumbling breaks out, but is quickly subsumed by frantic brainstorming on what to ask.

Continue…

Megapundit: Gerard Kennedy ruins it for everyone

By selley - Friday, September 19, 2008 at 2:19 PM - 13 Comments

Must-reads: Colby Cosh on the economic meltdown; Chantal Hébert on Gerard Kennedy’s big mistake; John Robson on Elections Canada’s censors; Rosie DiManno on Jeremy Hinzman.

Wayne Easter’s revenge
Why can’t the Harperites shut up and play nice?

The Calgary Herald‘s Don Martin believes the Liberals got off lucky yesterday with Gerry Ritz’s gallows humour dominating the news instead of whatever Stephen Harper, who recently described a $9-billion promise as “mind-boggling,” might have said about Stéphane Dion’s $70-billion infrastructure plan. In these trying financial times, Martin suggests we’re less in the mood for twelve-figure “vote-buying tactics” than we are for modest measures like, er, cracking down on banana-flavoured cigarillos. Lehman Brothers and AIG be damned, we’d respond—we want good roads and kids not to smoke, and we won’t be convinced it’s not possible!

Sun Media’s Greg Weston summarizes Harper’s response to the Ritz crackup as follows: “While [he] may have insulted and otherwise upset the families of 17 Canadians killed by tainted meat under his watch, that ‘should not detract from the good work that he has done,’”. (We’re not sure you can really “insult” someone in a private conversation to which he or she isn’t party, and suspect whichever bureaucrat leaked the conversation probably took far longer away from his or her job to do so than Ritz did to make his off-colour jokes. But never mind.) In any case, says Weston, each of these ongoing Tory gaffes and the ensuing apologies “likely negates a dozen of Harper’s homey sweater ads,” and not only do they throw the campaign off-message, they force Harper to actually “praise the public service” in hopes of plugging any future leaks. Gross! Like kissing your sister!

Continue…