Skip to main content

Sorry Coyne they are not the same

Although I am not necessarily a big Ignatieff supporter, in fact I would rather spend an evening with Jack, I have a real problem with the Iggy Liberals are the same as Harper conbots argument put forward regularly around these parts and in particular by Andrew Coyne’s recent article in MacLeans.

This article is being promoted as some sort of insight that the Liberals are faux progressives because they did not vote against Harper’s bills in the past and their new found messaging that Liberals are different than Harper, is not valid or I guess insincere.
From Coyne:
The difference between them and the Conservatives, the Liberals would like you to know, is all about “values.” That is, it’s about “priorities.” I mean to say, it’s about “your Canada” versus “Stephen Harper’s Canada.” 
Sorry Coyne that is good enough for me. The Liberals when they have their act together will turn on a dime, if the polls show that the majority of Canadians are for or against an issue, especially when they are in a minority position and I believe that is a hell of a lot more democratic that the idealogues we currently have in power. 
Although I have been scolded by progressive bloggers in the past for criticizing Coyne, the way I read it, his article is nothing more that a sarcastic, conservative attack ad disguised as a non partisan criticism.


Skinny Dipper said…
You can criticize Coyne all you want. I think if he were reading this post, he would be able to defend himself.

The problem with Ignatieff's Liberals is while on the surface, they opposed many of Harper's government bills; many Liberal MP's caught the parliamentary flu, and abstained from voting against the government. This strange Liberal parliamentary flu has given Harper a de-facto majority in the House of Commons.

If Ignatieff were to become the next prime minister, I think that he would be very autocratic. He practical ideology would probably be more conservative than Stephen Harper's. There would be huge program cuts, and the corporate taxes cuts would likely stay the same. Ignatieff may try to campaign as a progressive democratic liberal. If Ignatieff does become the next prime minister, he will likely make Harper seem like a liberal and possibly a democratic liberal.
WILLY said…
Hi Dipper,

Re picking on Coyne, thank you for that. It was the Lib bloggers that objected when I criticized him last time.

You are 100% correct about “Liberals feigning opposition and then failing to show up” and I as well as others have called them on it as if it really mattered. I rack it up to political survival of a party that has been scrambling to avoid an election and get its house in order, more than a policy choice. Hell the Bloc is getting ready to cut a deal and I don’t think the NDP can walk away 100% pure for the last five years.

I think Ignatieff as a minority prime minister with the NDP holding the balance of power, would seem more conservative than Harper. Conservative in the old Red Tory, Blue Grit or whatever they called it, sense as opposed to a Reformist ideologue that we are dealing with now.

And I also think they would cut deals with other parties to stay in power and on the right side of public opinion. It was always their modus operandi.

In other words since they have less principles than the other parties they would make a better governing party in a minority position.

But that is just what I think.

Popular posts from this blog

Election close call, Omar, Bob and move over Warren

Wow that was a close one:
With the NDP leading in the polls at the beginning of September, I started to prepare myself, for the very first time in my life, to vote for the NDP. Mulcair looked good enough for me, with some of the best lines about Harper's Government during most of his interviews, except that he would always add the phrase, "just like the liberals" to the end of it and I thought, if I'm one of those Harper hating, Liberal voters that you probably need to vote for you, why the hell are you insulting me with this partisan bullshit.


That is the number of Syrian refuges that the Harper government has brought into Canada.

From the Globe and Mail:
However, the government is facing criticism because 2,374 Syrian refugees have so far been settled. Of that number, only 622 - or 26 percent - were assisted by the government. The others were privately sponsored by individuals or non-government. The others were privately sponsored by individuals or non-government organizations. The NDP argues that in addition to private sponsors, the government should immediately accept 10,000 Syrian refugees. Liberal leader Justin Trudeau said the target should be 25,000 government-sponsored refugees, which he estimates would cost Ottawa $100-million.In other words the Harper government that banters around the 10,000 plus refugee number has brought in 622 refugees or about 170 families.

The other 2,352 so called refugees that Harper has allowed to emigrate to Canada consist of wealthy Syrian Christians who paid their own way in, hightailing …

PizzaGate explained

Never heard Bernie speak until after the US election, saw the debates and thought Hillary cleaned Trump's clock. Knew Trump was a prick and couldn't understand how any sane person would vote for him, yet for some reason, I called myself a Bernie guy, didn't trust Hillary and had no idea why.

But, at least I didn't take my gun to a pizza joint to break up a pedophilia ring in the basement and end up getting four years in prison, like Ed Welch from North Carolina.

RollingStone in partnership with the Investigative Fund and the Centre for Investigative Reporting along with five other journalists tracked down the origins and methodologies used to propagate the most successful fake news story of the past election,

A good twenty minute read here.