I read Thwap’s (Thwap’s Schoolyard) post today regarding his distaste for Iggy and the Liberals. He leaves the impression that the Stevie and Iggy aren’t that much different as he refers to Iggy as ‘Harper-lite’, particularly if he becomes prime-minister as well as predicting that a minority would be the best they can hope for. He is not alone and posts like his as well as the lack of activity and formation of splinter groups on Facebook from the CAPP movement, only serve to remind us that not only the left of center parties are divided, but so are those left and center-left voters.
Thwap (and others like him) leave us with a sense that there is (almost anyway) no point in changing the status quo as the Liberals and N.D.P. wouldn’t bring great change. Many would also believe that the Liberals would simply bring more of the same as before: kind of like Chretien – Martin the sequel.
Well, first of all, the very fact that 1000s of Canadians got out of their apathy to come out in the dead of winter to protest prorogation was a miracle. Like with anything else, change has to start and begin with the voters themselves. A great start would be if more Canadians got out and voted than the pitiful 59% last time. I remember hearing callers on CJAD making such arrogant statements like, ‘I don’t vote because none of them deserve my vote’. That is a cop-out, not a statement. If that was really the callers’ sentiment, go out to the poll and reject the ballot. It makes a far stronger statement than simply staying home.
Before then, yes, in spite of Stevie’s lower numbers from his dastardly deeds as of late, Iggy’s don’t really go up that high, do they? In part because many have the same view as Thwap. I also had one co-worker say she doesn’t trust Iggy enough to vote for him and doesn’t believe Stevie would take that sharp hairpin turn to the right if unleashed with a majority.
Well, for those who think like my co-worker, here are reminders as to what Stevie is really like and what he said years ago. He has not changed his spots and hints had been dropping to prove as much. Why is that ha hard to believe?
I’ve never been a fan of Iggy’s and anyone who has been following me knows that I think he shouldn’t be leading the Liberal party, but he’s there and changing leaders in the Liberal party would be a disaster right now. A Liberal minority would at the very least be a step in the right direction as Stevie would surely be pressured by his own party to resign. We’re stuck with Iggy. Let’s make the best with him. At least under an Iggy gov’t, we can count on certain things like abortion remaining legal, same-sex marriage remaining, He won’t turn Canada into that Evangelical Bush-Palinish sub culture and certainly wouldn’t have all of those evangelical ministers in his cabinet. Yes, there have been anti-same sex marriage pro-life Liberals who squawk from time to time, but as a whole, Liberals don’t operate with an Evangelical agenda.
While Iggy may have lived in the U.S. for many years and even like a lot of the American political system, I seriously doubt he would be in so far as to copy Bush-era America.
The best case scenario though, is the coalition between Liberals, N.D.P. and Greens; a merger would be better, but coalition would be a great start for the reasons mentioned here. In fact, as I have pointed out in The Game Has Changed…Canada is Ready For a Coalition, we are not only ready for a coalition; it is our savior.
As Fern Hill of Dammit Janet pointed out, the political experiment with these Facebook groups has proven successful and is undergoing another test. The test of tests…fundraising. Fundraising for advertising to unseat Stevie. What would be even better is since we are supposed to be a grassroots movement, we should be the ones creating the ads. Most of us with this same goal have some talent in some form or another. It would also no doubt be cheaper. As for fundraising: please give: our country depends on it. You can donate either by checque or by paypal.
Not only should we lobby to have Stevie unseated, we must lobby the opposition parties to form a coalition.We should also perhaps create our own ad-campaign to this effect.
Would there be any major change? Well, not right away. These opposition parties would go back to being partisan but we only need them for one election. Already, that would be a great measure to make Stevie go away. A coalition would also provide the much needed time Jack Layton may need to recover from his illness or if his health fails to the point he could no longer lead the N.D.P., they could take the time to find a new leader. A coaltion would also provide the Liberals time to find and groom another leader, rather than throw Bob Rae into the ring, simply because he’s there. I think most can agree that having Rae lead the Liberals would be suicide as he wouldn’t get the votes in Quebec or Ontario.
Any major changes to legislation like new prorogation rules or items like senate and electoral reforms or anything else we want our government to do would have to come from lobbying from the voters themselves.
However, first things first: let’s concentrate on getting rid of Stevie and his nasty evangelical friends and lobby for that coalition. That also means accepting Iggy at least for the short term.
Getting a new leader for the Liberals and ranting about disliking Iggy right now will not get rid of Stevie, in fact, a divided opposition is how Stevie’s numbers remain up. And allowing Stevie to remain will only sink us further into that George W Bush vortex. Given that slogan on by-election sign in Hochelaga last November (video of action; no election in French), one has to wonder if Stevie is planning a totalitarian regime if let loose with a majority.
Yosemite Stevie — What Stevie would look like after a majority
Need I say more?
Let’s start by getting Stevie unseated and that starts with going to the polls come election day. Any real change further down would be up to the voters themselves to hold our governments accountable. Remember that picture of Stevie saying “I prorogue because you let me”. And it’s true. We did allow him to steamroll over us. Let’s put an end to this.
In order to appeal to a wide range of people I wonder if you don’t need to make public the names of the people who will have access to this money, for what things they are authorized to use it and an open method for accountability. It’s scarey sending off one’s hard-earned money to a Facebook group comprised of people you don’t know very well. Thanks.
ck Reply:
February 16th, 2010 at 9:53 PM
That is a good question, hysperia. Actually, it was Fern Hill of Dammit Janet that first blogged about this fundraiser: here are the links: What would you do to Unseat Stephen Harper? and again, she posted today: Feet on the Street? Check Pay to Play? We’ll See..
You can also check this web site:
As mentioned in my post though, most of us have some talent and some resources of some kind to come up with our own ads. I would love to see or hear what ordinary citizens can come up with without the trappings of overpriced PR firms and ad agencies.