Archive for the ‘Liberal’ Category

Post

Prominent Liberal blogger and Dionista calls Liberal Executive “stupid fucking idiots who can’t do their jobs.”

In Canada, Liberal, Politics on October 3, 2007 by Robert Jago Tagged: , ,

A suggested title from Jason Cherniak’s comments. Why not? He said that it’s not quotable but what the hell, here’s the “fucking” quote:

You know what? I’m sick of them. I’m sick of their tactics. I’m sick of their stupidity. I’m sick of their inability to do their jobs. The goddamn National Executive is responsible for PRIVATELY organizing the party. Whoever leaked Jamie Carroll’s memo should have the words “STUPID FUCKING IDIOT” engraved on his or her tombstone.

In December, the Presidents of the Liberal Party will gather in Ottawa for our first President’s Council. At that time, the National Executive is going to have a hell of a lot of questions to answer. We support the leader; not the stupid fucking idiots (i.e. “Whoever leaked Jamie Carroll’s memo”) who can’t do their jobs.

Happy birthday to me. The advantage of swearing is that nobody can quote me.

You know, the Natural Governing Party™ is becoming more entertaining every day. Of course entertainment value isn’t something many people look for in a political party: ethics, competence, responsibility, vision – sure all those things … entertainment value, not so much.

add to del.icio.us add to furl Digg it add to ma.gnolia Stumble It! seed the vine TailRank

Post

Why does the Liberal Party Exist?

In Canada, Liberal on October 3, 2007 by Robert Jago Tagged: ,

Why does the Liberal Party exist? What is their purpose in Canadian politics? Should a political party be kicking out lifelong members because they do not adhere to party policy? What is the purpose of the Liberals? …the Stalinistic removal of a life-long member of the party has proved that the extremists really are in charge. I think it is time for reasonable Liberal supporters to reconsider what their political goal is. [source]

That bit above is plagiarized somewhat from Cherniak – though with one or two small trifling differences.

He wrote it in response to the NDP’s expulsion of one of their members, but it seems to fit for the recent Liberal actions towards their national director.

Dion [pictured above-left] is the Liberal leader we Tories have been dreaming of all these years. I swear, I almost expect to see Dion call a news conference to propose banning the notwithstanding clause (a la Paul Martin).

Below, I’ve excerpted some of the Liberal reaction to the Carroll affair and other current events in their party:

Hopefully some measure of sanity and calm will return with these moves, and the Liberals can stop fighting each other and start concentrating on who the real adversary is – which is Stephen Harper. [source]

Smart guy, of course. Wired in to Dion, the party, but especially the blood sport of public life. He’s the typical youngish, experienced, jaded, talented, hard-ass, hard-ball political 24/7 junkie you want at your elbow when you’re a minister, a leader or a candidate for greatness. Until hours, or minutes, ago, he was in charge of the Liberal Partry. [source]

No-one can say Dion didn”t try he open velvet hand. He’s been criticised for being too naive, too open, too understanding. Well, he took people at their word and he understood the party had no desire for any further anti-democratic, top-down ratfuckery, and it’s against his instincts anyway. He’s by nature very collegial. But now it’s time for the iron fist.  [source]

one has to admit the optics of it were not good, especially given the reputation he had gained from his past statements. Perhaps this will help party unity, but I’m really not sure. [source]

I’m disappointed that Marc Garneau will not run in any riding for the Liberals. But then again in the 2006 election he was not the strongest candidate. [source]

The Liberals need to stop this Top to bottom management style, it’s hurt the party so much and it leaves the wrong impression. This is a party run by the people and not run by one person. [source]

the reality is that the leader is the leader and the party is the party and the leader is the public face of the party. They will both rise or fall together. If you attack one, then you are attacking the other. [source]

Maybe It Is Ignatieff