Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Cauchon; and tough choices.

Choices choices.

It must be tough being a Liberal strategist these days.

Do you keep supporting the judgment of a guy who you had your doubts about in the past and who now is proving to be a political disaster in part because he is making decisions like this.

Or do you call it as you see it and come out on side with the judgment of your old boss , support his former Quebec Lieutenant and tell your new boss that this is a mistake.


What to do, what to do.



Update: Ignatieff the uniter in action.

11 comments:

Bec said...

None of us have ever doubted the obvious, IGnegative has no business in politics but this policy absolutely, takes the cake.

You know, as things have played out in the Liberal party the last 5or so years I can't help but think that the Trudeau/Chretien legacy should be altered.
It should be, no Liberal with scruples need apply.

I have to say though, this is an exceptional event to have a sideline seat at.
The mere fact that IGnegative, allowed himself to participate in the unseating of a female Liberal in his current riding, only to do the opposite now is deliciously ironic.
Had this occurred in another Province, it may have gone unnoticed but it didn't and now he will be decimated. As he should be.

roblaw said...

Good post AA.

So, Michael is sort of telling us (well, at this point, not even "us", but Liberals) that "you're too stupid or biased to elect the most competent candidate, whether it's a man or a woman, so I'm going to give you MY choice of candidate. I taught at Harvard you know, so, I know what's best."

It's such a glaring example of his pompous, condescending attitude.

To him, I guess we're truly just, "herbivorian boyscouts".. who, not having been lucky enough to have been able to "escape" Canada for half our lives, and to attend the "proper" schools, really, don't have the right to exercise our democratic choices.

Thankfully we have Michael to make our choices for us.

roblaw said...

..didn't someone once compare him to Kim Il Jong?

Ardvark said...

Ignatieff was parachuted into his own riding by the backroom Liberal elite and he was anointed as party leader by those same backroom Liberal; is it any wonder why he thinks that picking and choosing Liberal candidates against the wishes of the people in the ridings is the thing to do.

As for the Liberal strategist, I expect nothing but silence.

His old boss must be so proud.

Brrr said...

What the...

They're not holding riding association meetings for the nominations?

What?

Why would those members put up with that?

bocanut said...

Codere has leadership ambitions?
That's funny.

Ardvark said...

These words still ring true: "I objected to the manner in which his supporters trampled on democracy in a Toronto riding – literally locking out opponents.

And what is going on in Outremont today is different how?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I was wondering the same thing about WK. He is uncharacteristically silent on the controversy in Outremont.

wilson said...

Perhaps more digging down in the Kinsella memory hole, will tell us why.

Ardvark said...

The silence is telling.

Joanne I added the link to Calgary Grit you posted at your place to the post.

gimbol said...

I get this feeling that there is some plan at work within the LPC to ditch the kook fringe and establishment types that have been fighting over the throne for many years.
Iggy is the last vestige of the Martin legacy, and K is one of hte Chretien hanger's on that cut and run when things got too hot over adscam. Too much tinfoil, but the spidey sense is saying this is too much of a perfect storm to not think Kinsella got hoodwinked into being Iggy's top advisor.
They want Iggy gone, and they want to settle an old score with Kinsella at the same time by discrediting him completely.

Why does a lawyer need a part-time job?