« I like 'em and I'm going to smoke 'em | Main | They'll probably never make it »

He's not Trudeau. He just plays him on TV

Hanging around on the net late in the day? If you're quick you can catch a preview of my Tuesday Post column (written in a late-night burst of energy) about Michael Ignatieff and his influences.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (11)

M. Gregoire:

Monolithicity? Monolithicitude?

Monolithitivity, maybe?




I don't see what you'd find "contemptable" about the maitre d' accusation. Take Mulroney: During Meech, all he did was go from one Premier to the other eliciting requests, not really making any suggestions or anything. I don't see what about it would be mean to wait staff.


You rather obviously remember and know nothing about Meech Lake, Atlantic Ty. Mulroney certainly had an agenda of his own, and quite a reasonable one, too.


Problem being, his entire agenda was to get the government of Quebec to sign the constitution on that government's terms. Mulroney himself was the most centralist of the ProgCons until his ol' buddy Lucien and the separatists started knocking.


You don't know what you're talking about, boy.


I know exactly what I'm talking about. Why else was it called the "Quebec Round?"


I should make clear, I'm not even saying it's a bad thing. Mulroney's demeanour during negotiations was a very defensible position. Coming into contact with Bourassa, the time period, being a Quebecker and recognizing the problems inherent in the situation, and having a very different governing caucus than anticipated would all be justifiable routes for changing his philosophy.

But, considering this from my original point, I don't see how Trudeau's metaphor can be seen as contemptuous. Perhaps provincial rights advocates saw Mulroney serving as a maitre d' as justice/pennance for the confrontational approach previous, or even how the state of affairs in Canada should be.


AtlanticTy, not sure you're getting Colby's point. Sneering that someone is acting like a maitre'd is an inherently snobbish thing to say. He could have called Joe Clark a slave to the provinces or their subordinate but he chose a nasty metaphor that says a lot about the lifestyle PET had growing up and how he treats people.
It's independent of whether decentralization or centralization is a good or bad thing intellectually.

keith c:

sorry, the last anonymous comment was actually me.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on February 9, 2009 5:35 PM.

The previous post in this blog was I like 'em and I'm going to smoke 'em.

The next post in this blog is They'll probably never make it.

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

Powered by
Movable Type 3.35