As one of the most successful NDP premiers, Roy Romanow knows how to win and how to govern. One of his favourite political axioms is “when you are explaining, you are losing.” (H/T to Buckdog)In other words, when you are still fixing the finer points of yesterday’s screw-up, you can't talk about what you need to today.
By that measure, Elizabeth May isn’t winning today.
Her foolish drivel equating Canadian soldiers to “Christian Crusaders” has again demonstrated her rhetorical recklessness and sent supporters and candidates fleeing.
But all eyes are now fixed on Stéphane Dion and his decision to bring May onto the Liberal family in the first place. The scheme was cynically designed to give the weakened Red Team an additional piece of ammunition blasting outwards at the NDP. Instead, since March, May’s cannon has been rolling loose inside the Liberal camp and is now aimed squarely at Dion’s judgment in allying with her.
With the Liberals so divided, how much longer can they afford this distracting charade?
8 comments:
Good post. You're right to reference Romanow for this case-- it's an important message that is too often taken for granted.
Good post. It's been nagging at me for a while that Dion’s arrangement with May is just about Liberals attacking Layton – not Harper.
The people planning the Liberal campaign are worried about Jack. They can’t fight him without pushing soft NDP supporters deeper into the NDP camp. So what do you do?
For all her self-professed squeaky clean "I believe in doing politics differently" hogwash May has been peddling of late, her record is anything but.
The Liberals are masters of sleazy politics. Making a pact with May means letting her do their dirty work against Jack, as well as cover their weak spots (lets recall Dion’s Fossil Award in 2005 for his stellar inaction on the Environment file).
All this "uniting progressives" malarkey is for show. It’s about fighting Jack Layton and the NDP—the only guys standing up to Stephen Harper on the issues that matter to Canadians.
Speaking as someone who has been hard on May in the past, I don't get it. Clearly she was talking about how our troops might be perceived by the people who actually live in that part of the world and she's right: putting mostly white, mostly Christian boots on the ground in Afghanistan plays into the narrative that the Taleban and those like them want to promote.
I can certainly understand why the Conservatives are spinning her remarks the way they are. And I can understand why the more hawkish elements in the Liberal party want to run away from this -- they want Canadian troops in Afghanistan. But I'm not sure why people who oppose the mission are jumping on her for making an argument that bolsters their position.
As a shameless peacenick "dove", I must say that staying on message is the price we pay to get the message across. No you don't get to rant about anything. While you may be able to have a semi-articulate conversation about religious complications with the war in Afghanistan at a pub with your friends, the reality of media, politics and public policy is that things have to be much tighter than that.
May has put her foot in her mouth, and is not conveying the policies that people want to hear from her... Jack is staying on message, keeping people's confidence as a principled leader, and delivering the kind of impact in parliament that we expect of him. I don't intend to over do my appreciation for him-- but full credit to him for doing his job well.
Unless I'm mistaken, you've just congratulated Layton for treating voters like idiots. You talk about messaging like you're one of the Harperettes. I'm going away now. You're just scary.
You are mistaken. See ya.
"sent supporters and candidates fleeing."
Nice try. One supporter who is also a former candidate.
Harper is the problem. Not Elizabeth May. Not Dion. Harper.
I just looked through your January posts. Most of them are anti-Dion anti-Liberal. A couple anti-Green.
The Conservatives are the ones who are disgracing us across the world with their blind allegiance to GWB and their violations of the Geneva Conventions and their cynical non-action on climate change and their lack of accountability/transparency. The Conservatives are the biggest threat to Canadian sovereignty with the SPP. The Conservatives are the ones dismantling and bullying arms length regulators and agencies.
I guess you don't see them as a big problem, though. Dion and May are your preferred targets.
JB
Pogge: Ravijo is right. If a political party has something worth saying (and the good ones do) then they have an obligation to their supporters to say it in a way that's convincing, not reckless, as May has done.
Jimbobby: Everything you say about Harper is right. But none it would be possible if Dion hadn't given Harper a majority government by sitting on his hands.
As to the question of what gets blogged about: Good blogging is about what's interesting. Rejoice that Dion and his running mate are still that.
Post a Comment