« Home | How to deal with the Palestinians? Why treat them ... » | Thoughts on the Tory budget... » | Since When Did B.S. Change Colour? » | American kids couldn't find their a$$ with two han... » | There, there, who's my little press? » | Colbert at the Press Corps dinner » | Cherniak on Politics: Let's talk Iran » | Poverty and Tenants' Rights in Nova Scotia » | Neil Young's album online » | Poll reveals that 9% of Americans think that the p... »

Who's second-best?

Although I am not a member of the Liberal Party (I am not a member of any federal party, though my sympathies are pretty obviously left of centre), I have been following the Liberal leadership race with some interest. Partly out of simple love for politicking, partly (morbid?) curiousity, but mainly out of interest to see which road the LPC chooses for its "renewal". The plethora of candidates, for all that they're mostly from the centre of the known universe, have quite a diversity of views and it's going to be interesting to see where this leads.

I have no doubt that the list for December is not yet complete - some will surely jump in and some just as surely leave, but the number of candidates all but guarantees at least two ballots at the convention. That is, if Frank McKenna doesn't change his mind and send the current crop to spend more time on party renewal.

I notice that Cerberus has started to compile a list of blogger endorsements for the Liberal leadership race. I'm not sure if anyone here at the blev want to jump in there or not, we'll have to have a little huddle over beer and wings (as all big decisions should be made - drunk, greasy, and full!), so at least for now we offer our firm neutrality. (That said I know that Dan has always been a big Habs fan and is of an age to remember those halcyon days...)

Anyway, to stave off making a decision that we may not ever make, we've put together a little poll that you can find on the right-hand side of the blog here to see who your second-favorite in the race is.

P.S. I put Ashley MacIsaac's name on the list, though I don't think he's actually officially said he's in. I mean, officially in the only way that the LPC understands - by ponying up some ca$h. I know he responded to some posts some time ago over in KDough's place, but I haven't heard anything since.

For what it's worth (nothing), here are my (kevvyd) quick thoughts on those that I think will definitely be around for a second ballot:

Ken Dryden - He's well-respected and everyone knows his name. He has said nothing to regret and his name is attached to the Liberal daycare program, which will be one of the weapons they are going to be able to use in a coming election. Plus he's written two of the most literate books on sports I have ever read. Like Stephen Harper, he is unexciting as a public speaker, but unlike Harper, he appears to be human and seems to empathize with the "common Joe".

Gerard Kennedy - Kennedy might surprise an awful lot of people. Just reading about him has raised my interest, actually. He is a true lefty-Liberal and former Minister of Education for Ontario, but he will have to make himself visible to the rest of the country which has never heard of him. I have a feeling that the youth wing of the party may very well rally behind him, and if the party as a whole is serious about revival, he is a very strong candidate.

Carolyn Bennet - She has been a very strong voice for women in the Chretien and Martin governments and being a doctor, she will have lots to add to any debate on health care, a topic that can make or break a government. Is she well-enough known and backed in the Liberal party - I simply don't know.

Stephane Dion - A strong anti-sovereignist Quebecker and competent minister for both Chretien and Martin, Dion seemed to sail through the Chretien-Martin War more or less unscathed. After being the environment minister under Martin, he plans to run on environmental issues, which can score points with soft-NDP and some centrist Tories, but might alienate or at best not interest the right-wing of the Liberal party. I think he might make a decent PM, but doubt he'll get the chance this time around.

Michael Ignatieff - Smart, well-known, and a good public speaker. He is going to be haunted by his long written history and can be attacked on many points - his stance on torture and support for the Iraq War have already come up. I don't think he has a great chance, but the Liberal party needs big idea people around.

Bob Rae - No. An argument can be made that he has elevate to "statesman" status, but the argument that he can win over NDP votes has to be paired with the fact that he's going to shed right-wing votes. No.

Ever wonder where Libs come from????? and why they are all second best!!!

Subject: Anthropology and History Lesson

For centuries, humans existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunter/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer & would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in winter.

The two most important events in all of history were the invention
of the wheel, and the invention of beer. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups: Liberals and Conservatives.

Once beer was discovered it required grain, and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early human ancestors were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as "the Conservative movement."

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement. Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as 'girliemen.'

Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish, but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare. Another interesting revolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't "fair" to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, Marines, athletes and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to "govern" the producers and decide how to redistribute the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in later, after the Wild West was tamed, and created a business of trying to get MORE for nothing.

Here ends today's lesson in world history and anthropology:

Most of the contributors here already know how I would vote if I could vote. I am interested only in watching the Liberal Party death spiral it's way to oblivion. Obviously, such a spectacle is much easier to watch if it's entertaining and full of ammunition for the satirists. With these points in mind, and given that Kevvy has asked for our second choices, I am wholeheartedly endorsing young Ashley MacIssac as my second choice. I can think of nothing more entertaining than the possibility of a kilted, wild Cape Bretoner on Parliament Hill, doing away with Robert's Rules of Order as he gleefully urinates on all those who oppose him.

My first choice is Bob Rae. Roughly 0 people from Ontario will vote for a Rae-led national Party, +/- 10%, of course.

as he gleefully urinates on all those who oppose him.

I think he only urinates on people he likes.


Thanks for your cut-and-paste, but I was looking more for intelligent debate.

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link