« The continuing crisis | Main | What does this mean for the over-under? »

They made WHO prime minister while I was out??

I agree with about 7½ of Andrew Potter's Ten Points on the Madness.

For the Liberals, they should be careful what they ask for. Under Dion, they have spent the last two years tacking leftward, and are now poised to enter into a coalition with a party whose economic views are not just obsolete, but dangerous. This is very reckless for both the country and for the party’s brand. My views on this have not changed since I wrote a column in the mag a few issues ago about the notion of uniting the left: This coalition could well destroy the Liberal brand.

My views on this have changed: I used to believe that "pro-market Liberals" actually existed. I'm not an unusually gullible sort: I never believed in Santa Claus, for instance. But right this second I have way more reason to believe in Santa than I do in some imaginary corps of tough, business-minded Liberal Party members who believe in wealth creation first and redistribution second. Seriously, is there some screened-off Atlas Shrugged valley they all escaped to in private jets last week? Show me one senior Liberal who has told a reporter "This shit's fucked up" even on deep background in the last seven days. Michael Ignatieff's face was so mask-like when he went on the Sunday talk shows to repeat "Stéphane Dion is the leader of my party", I was viscerally traumatized at the thought that it was going to physically fall off his head.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (5)

Jens Andersen:

According to the _National Post_ yesterday, Ignatieff was dead-set against a coalition. Today he is goose-stepping right along with the rest of the Gang of Three. Is he demonstrating his Lebanon-wobble or did he just discover that a probable E-Z prime-ministership next year beats principle all to hell?

But Jonathan Kay in the _Post_ is likely right: a year of coalition will destroy the Liberal brand. No one in the coalition has a ghost of a plan for the economy, and The Gang of Three would be scarier if they did.

Lord Bob:

Somewhere, R.B. Bennett is looking down on the New Liberal Bloc and yelling "you fools! you fooooools!"

Golson Molden:

I used to believe that "free-market Conservatives" existed.

But face it - if a person working in the Conservative or any other party actually believed in free markets they wouldn't be working in a political party, they'd be out running a business. So by definition, any full time political weiner is exactly that - no more, no less.

And now the Great Carnac will answer the question which is hermetically sealed in this envelope ... The answer is, "Ten years of ever-increasing and futile subsidies for socialist loser provinces and municipalities, bailouts for deadbeat corporations, greater and greater welfare handouts, senseless but politically aggrandizing make-work projects, a weak dollar, zero savings rate and zero private domestic or foreign investment."

The question is (ripping open envelope) ... "What do people get when they look to Ottawa for leadership in a time of economic crisis?"

"The believing mind reaches its perihelion in the so-called Liberals. They believe each and every quack who sets up his booth on the fairgrounds, including the Communists. The Communists have some talents too, but they always stop short of believing in the Liberals."

(H. L. Mencken, "A Book Of Burlesques", reprinted in "A Mencken Chrestomathy", 1949, p. 616)


The point that leaps out at me, and which I don't see being made anywhere, is that it makes sense to "destroy the Liberal brand" - that is, to ruin the reputation of that party and make it unelectable - in certain circumstances. Most obviously, the circumstance in which the Liberals never have to face another election.

The last Liberal government refused to resign when it lost a confidence vote. Does anyone seriously think that, if we once allow the Liberals to take power again, they will ever relinquish it in any circumstances? Do you think a maniacal Marxist like Jack Layton, once given power, intends to yield it to anyone, ever?

This is a genuine coup d'etat. Harper's party finance reform made it easier to get the rank and file on side, but the decision was made by the results of the last election, where it was clear that the Liberals could not expect ever to be elected. The consequence is that elections will therefore be abolished.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on December 2, 2008 2:54 PM.

The previous post in this blog was The continuing crisis.

The next post in this blog is What does this mean for the over-under?.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Powered by
Movable Type 3.35