![[small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WGczmWu7Wwc/SdCJyy2LN1I/AAAAAAAABWE/ABYCkbJaKaQ/s1600/small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg)
Some Liberals are showing their desperation as the next federal election announcement looms closer. Some scrambling the rumours of coalition governments to be built haphazardly. Something that won’t end well.
Now, there are even rumours of asking Jean Chretien to come back, an even worse idea. For openers, Harpercons and their cheerleaders are already shoving the ghost of ADSCAM down the throat of Iggy who wasn’t even in the country when it all occurred. It’s one thing to honor Chretien with a portrait and rehash the good ol’ days at some overpriced rubber chicken dinner, it’s quite another can of worms to ask him back to lead the Liberals even temporarily. Jim Travers (also mentioned that Alf Apps, the President of the Liberal party is stepping down?? That could definitely change things. Do I dare hope,perhaps for the better?) To best summarize Jim Travers’ latest column as to why the quick fixes of coalition with NDP and/or bringing Chretien back are bad ideas.
Chrétien was arguably his generation’s most shrewdly intuitive politician and at 76 is still impressively vigorous. But retreating to the future would be as risky a Liberal solution as abandoning its brand.
A nostalgic Chrétien honeymoon would soon be cut short by nagging Conservative reminders of his Quebec sponsorship fling. And Liberals seduced by the idea of uniting the political left are forgetting that that their party wins when it controls the policy centre Harper is shifting right.
This brings me back to why I changed my mind about a coalition. The Liberals owned the center because they offered something for everyone. They have always had a mixed bag of MPs the fiscal conservatives, the progressives, centrists and yes, even devout Catholic Socons. They attracted a range of voters from the fiscal conservative voter who also stood for social justice to the those to the left who don’t vote NDP because they know they will never lead. A coalition could gain new voters but there would be a bloodshed to the Harpercon camp. Like corporations looking for political parties to back, Jane and Joe Centrist like winners. Coalition now is admitting defeat.
I had to face a reality that I think Progressives who fear a Harpercon majority as much as I do would do well to face up to. Denial isn’t going to help us any. The fact is that the majority of Canadians are centrist. They always have been. They’re Jane and Joe Centrist who like to hang out Timmy Hortons. They generally don’t like to try thinking for themselves. They are content simply swallowing the kool-aid du jour which of course favours Steve and the Harpercons. They don’t like to think outside the box, nor do they like anyone correcting their info when it is erroneous. That is construed as ‘elitist’ and ‘patronizing’, which is how they view Iggy or most from the Left for that matter. That is thanks largely in part to bombastic wingnut talk radio hosts like Chuckles Adler (remember how we’re latte sipping, quiche eating armchair quarterbacks who don’t care about our country or our troops?). Yes, folks, the majority centrists are shifting rightward. And those are the folks that have to be pandered to (voters that is; don’t get me started on corporations, big oil and banks). Steve (with the invaluable help of corporate media, naturally) knows how brainwash…pander to those folks. Jack to some degree, except his party, no matter how far to the center or even right of center his party goes, will always seem to carry the indelible, grossly misused term, “soshalism”. Iggy can’t seem to make any traction with these people. Odd, because Trudeau was exactly that type of aloof, anti-social intellectual as well but he somehow resonated with the center. I guess this is further evidence of change throughout the generations.
It is that same Timmy’s crowd who reacted violently to the proposed coalition of 2008. They won’t vote for it if they know about it prior to election. When you have Steve using simplistic, sophomoric language like ‘winners’ and ‘losers’, just like high school cliques doing their thinking for them, there is no use proving to them that the coalition was perfectly legal and democratic because each of the coalition members would have mathematically represented the country. Ask your neighbours why they vote for a particular candidate to represent their riding come election day and they will tell you it’s because that MP is in the party of their favourite leader. That is their intent. And intent is more important than fact. No, I daresay more will shift to vote in Harpercon.
My father used to say that the federal party who will win a federal election in Canada always campaigns from the left, even if they govern from the right.
There are those who say that the Liberals not going back to what they stood for in the old days is not a good thing.
If the majority centrists are headed rightward, perhaps the party campaigning from too far left of center would be a bad idea. I think we should just concentrate on at least, slowing this trend somehow.
Another thing is that the blue grits within the liberal party will never sign on to be members of a new coalition with the ‘soshalists’. They would more than likely lose their contituents and would sooner cross the floor to the Harpercons rather than lose them. Steve, salivating more and more by the day over that majority, will welcome them with open arms; more seats he doesn’t have to earn.
So what can be done? As Travers says:
Ending the current panic begins with recognizing that Chrétien’s return is a flat joke and that restoring the party is slow, hard, serious work.
Is Travers saying that we should let the next election yield a Harpercon majority thus leaving the Liberals more time to rebuild? Even many progressives entertain this idea. However, I also say that these progressives are underestimating Steve and his “we’re not going to recognize the place once he’s done it” and that once they get this majority, “all bets are off”. Steve has proven to be a PM like no other we’ve ever seen in history and give him his majority, it will be a totalitarian regime. Furthermore, we can’t assume Steve “de l’action; pas d’election” will even hold elections… he sill surely implement parliamentary reforms…in his favour. If that sounds far fetched, then how about this: he will surely end up doing what he’s been salivating to do for a dog’s age: eliminate that 1.95$/vote subsidy, thus not only opening the flood gates for that corporate influence like U.S. Congress, but would also financially cripple the other parties who would not be able to afford the election campaign war chest without it. Elections would be nothing more than symbolic with Steve always winning anyway.
So the Liberals are all we have as is and as for the rest of us: accept there are no more progressive parties in Canada anymore; not even the NDP with its’ swing to the center nowadays. There are no more progressive parties because the majority of Canadians aren’t all that progressive. There is Harpercon with his evangelicals and cuts to all universal social programs with no doubt, criminalize everything, and corrupt private prisons that cost far more than the long gun registry, permanent war alongside the U.S in the Middle-east or we elect a center liberal party. As far as calling the Liberals “harperlite” , even that is the far lesser of the evils by a longshot.
Yes, the Liberals are also too corporate friendly, but hey, we’re almost like Americans with that Corporate influence over government. Think how much worse things would be without that per vote subsidy.
A few things the Liberals can do and frankly, don’t understand why they don’t do them.
1) why don’t they ask both Jack Layton and Steve about the two of them forming a coalition with each other? The precedent exists from 2004.
2) Steve will tout himself as the hero of the ‘fast improving’ Canadian economy. Why don’t they bring up that it is largely in part to Paul Martin and his strict regulations and that if Steve were given a majority, he would have done everything Georgie and Dickie would have asked/told him to do. I realize that Paul Martin may not be a popular person for the Liberals right now, but it’s time to put personal feelings aside and call a spade a spade; to take credit for the good economic shape we’re in.
3) They’re going to have to find a way to climb out of ADSCAM. It is clear that no matter who leads the party now or in the future is going to keep inheriting this. Even if they paid the money back, I don’t think it would be forgiven that fast. If it were that simple, I think some efforts would have been made by now to put the money back. Again, falls under the heading of no easy answer, but Steve won’t let this go away. Nor will the Bloc Quebecois for that matter. The Liberals are going to have to keep the sponsorship scandal where it belongs; dead and buried and/or in the history books.
Honestly, even the way they are today is far less terrifying than the alternative. Something to think about.
Oh, and those who are thinking of the good ol’ days: Were Canadians ever really that progressive? Think about this one, lyin’ Brian Mulroney won not one but two massive majorities and Ed Broadbent, a much stronger leader than Jack Layton and his NDP still couldn’t break out of third place finish. Something to think about.
Remember this slogan from the November 2009 by-election; a hint at what a Harpercon majority would feel like. Is that a chance we really want to entertain?
I read Travers and did not feel well. As well James Curran was in a snit today, grumbling he doesn’t give a…. if the Liberals have 4o seats next time..all they do is vote with the Government and it is getting to him, because they don’t have enough balls to say no. I am beginning to wonder.
However, I would like to wait until the Auditor General has her say on the Government’s money spent to create jobs..that should be good.
ck Reply:
June 5th, 2010 at 11:08 PM
They vote with the government because they know that everything with Steve is a confidence motion and frankly, I think they must see that a the next election is potentially a 3 times a charm kind of thing for Steve. Steve could well get his majority and that means we’re stuck with him for an extremely long time, as I’m convinced, that the slogan on the video below the post;; “de l’action; pas d’election”.
If not, at the very least, he will remove the 1.95$/vote subsidy, thus financially paralyzing the other parties as it will become the exact fiasco as in U.S. congress. In fact, count on it. Bills will be passed solely at the whims of the corporations who sponsored the government in an election campaign and such. If folks are bitching at our scandals now. Just wait what happens if the per vote subsidy is taken. Elections would be nothing more than acts of symbolism to let folk know they’re pretending to run a democracy.
Something has to give, but a coalition with Jack, a) I just don’t see it; Layton is more friendly to Steve these days and B) the blue grits will surely cross to the harpercons
We just have too high expectations quite frankly. Many left of center or claiming to be refuse to allow their hatred for Iggy to get in the way of all. He isn’t ideal, but he is certainly far less an evil choice than Steve, but it doesn’t seem to be good enough.
We want Iggy to jump through hoops and throw daggers at STeve, but we also know that won’t translate into votes in the Liberals favour should an election be called, now will it?
I don’t like where our side is going sometimes, it’s like Iggy better jump through hoops and get a make over and save the world or I will allow Steve his majority kind of thing.
We may bitch at the status quo but if we allow Steve his majority, we’re going to be referring to today’s situation we bitched about as the good ol’ days.
I also heard that Craig Oliver has been hinting that Chretien may well make a comeback. I hope not as leader for the same reason as Jim Travers, but also no one is thinking here.
Situation is completely different now than then. For one, Chretien’s majorities were only at 37%; numbers Steve is coasting with most of the time. He also never ran against the newly formed Harpercons.
Ck – I’ve noticed you tend to be a little dismissive, to say the least, of “Jane & Joe Centrist” aka “the Timmy’s crowd”: once upon a time, they were the Liberal Party’s main constituency. I have often pondered over what’s happened to working class support for leftward parties — maybe they no longer feel welcome among people who condescend to them?
Just a thought.
ck Reply:
June 7th, 2010 at 6:56 AM
But that’s who they are…and that is the truth about them.
Many a progressive blogger or certain journalists go on about “We vote in a parliament, not government”; fat lot of good facts do, it seems….most really do vote fore their primeminister when they vote. They really do think that.
It is also true that the media which once upon a time used to be more balanced and used to carry the message that Steve goes to the far right and that it was bad. That very same media now feed them things like Evangelism is a great thing and necessary.
Know why they’re more pro-life? Easy, remember an article not that long ago with StatsCan figures revealing not only immigratin going up but a far lower birth rate and that projections in 2031 revealed that in major urban centers, whites would become a minority. Then we had that buffoon from the last fetus festival in Ottawa telling the media that 3, 000 000 babies have been killed since 1969 and that we need each and everyone of those babies from now on. Then we hear their hero, Mark Steyn, talk of the decline of western civilization because of low birth rate because we’re too lazy to bother.
Don’t care, most are racist and do believe not all are created equal.
No, I’m not more dismissive, if anything I remind folks of who we must all pander to, and it ain’t pretty. Many of the progressive bloggers I find are more dismissive of them because they really believe or they force themselves to believe most Canadians understand parliament and democracy and are progressive. Couldn’t be further from the truth.
It’s just too bad my husband and I are too old to be employable elsewhere in the world; we would leave Canada.
And now, American health care is coming to Canada. The polls now reflect more than half of CAnadians want it, not even realizing that most of those very same people voting along with it, won’t even qualify for private health insurance nor will be able to access health care again.
Ck “they really believe or they force themselves to believe most Canadians understand parliament and democracy and are progressive. Couldn’t be further from the truth.”
If that’s true, then aren’t most Canadians just getting what they want in a Conservative government? And if so, why is it incumbent upon progressives to force a political agenda that the majority of Canadians (ie. Jane & Joe) don’t want?
IMO, it’s a little more complex than “Canadians are too dumb to know what’s good for them”. Canada has always been predominantly centrist: red tories, blue liberals, sometimes progressive, sometimes conservative, depending on the issue. What we are not is an extreme right or extreme left country, and we don’t tolerate being governed from either position. That doesn’t make us stupid, just moderate, and I don’t think there’s anything fundamentally wrong with that.
I guess what I find disturbing is the middle class migration away from the Liberals, when the middle class used to be the LPC base. And I wonder if it’s because they sense condescension towards them and the issues they care about.
ck Reply:
June 7th, 2010 at 10:55 PM
Many folks voted for Hitler way back too…and we know how that turned out…
Under Steve, we are going backward, we’re losing what really matters like our social programs. We let Steve loose with a majority, you know what he will do….resign myself to a Harpercon majority means people like my father die and husband will die prematurely. Perhaps even me (still trying to figure out my health issues).
Homelessness would go up. Misery would go up.
Where I work, we take care of troubled kids and provide assistance to families, it is a government agency. Steve would have all of our centers and those like us across Canada shut down and young offenders serving hard time.
How about evangelical rule? Charles McVety pulling strings along with big oil and such; not very good for Atheists…or other religions…would be downright unliveable.
And it would be too late to do anything about it.
And don’t be fooled: “de l”action; pas d’election” slogan in November 2009 was no copywriting stupidity. It will start by removing the 1.95$/vote subsidy; none of the other parties will be able to compete. If Steve ever did have an election; it would be nothing more than an act of symbolism to at least show folks they’re pretending to run a democracy.
Folks didn’t want to compare steve to Hitler. Well, Steve resembles more of a cross between Georgie & General Augusto Pinochet without the military junta.
He is already controlling the media. If he weren’t, all that evangelical stuff, recriminlizaing Homosexuality, stripping women’s reproductive rights by recriminalizng abortion, stripping of our social programs in favour of overpriced photops by fake lakes would be unacceptable.
are you honestly comfortable with all that?
Oh yeah, and apparently, they are voting for an extreme, JJ, they’voting for Steve who is to the extreme right; makes GW Bush look like a rampant socialist
ck – “are you honestly comfortable with all that?”
Er… maybe I didn’t make myself clear. I wasn’t talking about what I’m comfortable with, but rather the reality of Canada’s political landscape. What you want or what I want isn’t necessarily what everyone wants.
“Oh yeah, and apparently, they are voting for an extreme, JJ, they’voting for Steve who is to the extreme right”
I disagree that they’re voting for Harper because he’s extreme — more like in spite of it, if he’s even “extreme” at all, which thus far he doesn’t seem to be (some of the knuckledraggers in his caucus notwithstanding). The only reason Harper is doing as well as he is, is because he’s been able to appeal to the centre (how much of this is real and how much is political posturing is debatable). Extreme right wingers do not like Harper any more than we do — read Free Dominion sometime, they hate him so much they’re thinking about forming their own party, LOL.
Oh well, this is certainly an election year so Jane & Joe Centrist will finally have their say and we’ll see what happens.
ck Reply:
June 8th, 2010 at 1:36 PM
like I said, give him a majority and we won’t recognize the place. The links are all over the place too. Buckdog and Thor from Riding the Porcelain bus have even posted links and quotes from the real Steve. Don’t be fooled, he would implement each and everything he always said he dreamed to do to Canada and then some.
As for Jane and Joe Centrist, if Steve gets his majority and I think it will be three times a charm for him, thanks to that coalition talk, a theory of mine will have been proven correct; that I held high hopes that most Canadians wouldn’t embrace the evangelical “libertarians” (no longer an oxy moron it would seem), and that Harpercon media did effectively do their job.
Americanized health care in Canada and Evangelicals having a hand at ruling us seemed unthinkable not that long ago, and now the media keeps spoonfeeding that that is all a good thing. Lorrie Goldstein actually published 2 articles saying social conservatism of the Christian Right is actually a good thing and effectively selling social justice as evul. He, like others also sell that all must be pushed out of the way to make way for greed. Greed is supposed to lead to where?
Our generation taught us that greed was one of the worst character traits in a person and those were universal values: Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Atheist values taught us that greed was horribly wrong.