Saturday, September 26, 2009


Dear Michael:

Hopefully, the next letter I will write to you will address you as Dear Mr. Prime Minister.
Alas, we are not there yet.

You’ve had a tough week. It could have been a helluva lot tougher had not the UN and G 20 meetings together with Obama, al-Gadaffi, and Ahmadinejad not squeezed almost everything else off the front pages. Unfortunately, they weren’t able to squeeze it all.

I am going to offer you some sound advice. Yes, I know I come from Alberta, and I know Liberals out here are protected by the game licensing laws, and yes, I know, we have our conventions in phone booths, yada, yada, yada. But out here in Alberta a Liberal has to fight for every vote he gets, and we’ve been doing it for years. Accordingly, we Alberta Liberals have learned a few things along the way that seem for the moment to be forgotten in the greener Liberal pastures of central Canada.

One of the things we have learned is that a political party has got to be united to fight an election campaign. Actually, I thought the Ottawa crowd might have picked up on that after the last three federal elections. Had it not been for the Martin-Chretien internecine warfare we would probably still have power. But it was not to be. Many in the party wanted to slug it out amongst ourselves and they did – often times using every mean trick in the book. And all it got us was one weak minority government and so far almost four years in opposition.

So my first piece of advice is to unite the party. This means giving due respect to tried and true warriors like Martin Cauchon and Stephane Dion. It means that we must honor our people who have contributed to our success and not stand in their way if they are obviously willing and able to contribute more. This also means not foisting an unknown candidate on ridings where there have long been strong and viable party organizations. In short, it means you must strive to keep all of the grass roots happy.

The second piece of advice I have for you is that you must listen and be guided by good advice. The events of this week show that there are lapses of sound advice within your organization. Get good advisors around you and listen to them. Beware of self-serving ward-heelers with their own private agendas and please watch out for power trippers. They can be spotted a mile away, so keep your eyes and ears open, and when you see them, don’t listen to them. They’re trouble.

The third piece of advice I offer you is that you must stop this infernal practice – launched by your predecessors, to be sure – of appointing riding candidates. By appointing candidates, you are losing the advantage of party renewal. If a nomination is contested, new members come into the organization. They are generally excited, energetic, and motivated because of the contest. By appointing candidates you are avoiding the contest and thereby lose its advantages. The other very negative aspect of appointing candidates is that it carries with it the stench of the laying on of hands. As such, it is anti-democratic and always invites harsh criticism and recrimination. Use the power only in very rare circumstances. Otherwise, let democracy take its course.

Finally, remember it is not any of your minions that are the boss. You are the boss. I suspect that one of the reasons for the unseemly battle over Outremont – which went on far too long – was an unwillingness to offend someone who was giving you bad advice. I couldn’t imagine your glorious predecessors like Trudeau or Chretien ever being that sensitive. You have got to put lesser people in their place when they attempt to lead you into a quagmire and if they persist, well, get rid of them.

So that’s it for now. Keep up the good fight and don’t listen to any of the nervous nellies. Just take my advice.

Your Pal,




austin said...

"Had it not been for the Martin-Chretien internecine warfare we would probably still have power. But it was not to be."

Really? If you Liberals think thats why your not still in power you guys got a lot to learn yet.

Darryl Raymaker said...

Austin - That whole battle was for the Conservatives a gift from heaven. And yet, they still haven't been able to put the puck in the net, because they and the Canadian people are not, and will not ever be on the same wave length.

austin said...

Yeah it was a gift but a much smaller one then the fighting between the PCs and the Reforms that gave Chretien his majorities. But my point was that it had more to do with things like adscam.

Darryl Raymaker said...

adscam was not helpful. But a united party would have lessened its impact a great deal.

austin said...

It certainly would of. But I do think it is a matter of time before Harper does something stupid enough to piss off the whole country and the Liberals will be back and on and on it goes.

CanadianSense said...

The decline of the liberal party is not the fault of Dion, or Adscam as a single source issue.

The McGill study showed the loss of voting blocks, rural, roman catholic, visible minorities and the numerical advantage were responsible.

Changing leaders and adding a few million in the bank won't change the loss of support.

Since Ignatieff has become leader what has the Liberal party introduced as an alternative policy in the HOC?

The NDP and Bloc have no difficulty in trying to add amend the policies.

The Liberals chose to let Harper wear the globabl recession and it backfired.

Voters don't blame them. Same with the Isotopes, H1N1 files.

The Liberals have chosen to chase unsexy comments, bodybags, wafers vs substantive issues.

When are the Liberals are going to act in the best interest of Canada again before their own self interest?

Darryl Raymaker said...

Austin - I'm with you on that. Harper will overplay his hand again. Just as Mulroney couldn't keep his mouth shut, Harper can't avoid taking that extra - usually petty and destructive step - that drives him to the abyss of defeat. It will happen again soon.

CanadianSense - the traditional coalition of minorities, the poor, women and so forth come back to the party because they have no where else to go. Harper's treatment of minorities is woeful as you well know. Women have never liked him much because they don't trust him. Certainly the poor realize that a neocon like Harper will never be their champion.

As far as policy is concerned, there is plenty of time for that. The Liberal Party strong suit has always been policy and I do not see that changing. Timing for its unveiling is an important factor.

As to your final stupid question, the Liberal Party has nothing to be ashamed of in terms of its contribution to the well-being of the nation.

CanadianSense said...

Harper overplayed his hand by forcing the coalition's hand out earlier?

The polls showed the CPC went to 46% in pop through Poll Dec 4, 2009.

The coalition is now firmly divided taking turns trying to avoid facing the polls.

Did you miss those 79 Liberal votes?

The Liberals are happy now acting like the NDP refusing to support any Bill. Reading them first? Nah the Liberals will make great inroads with that strategic decision.

Are you are making stuff up again/rewriting history? The women vote is not longer the Liberals either.

Show me Polls where Liberals are leading in any demographic.

I look forward to that Poll and link.
You can try that scary hidden agenda card again. The Polls and demographics of those voting blocs demostrate your arguement is just hot air.

Lastly you concluded with a personal insult.

The voters see the Liberal are without substance and their press release confirmed it. Sept 25, 2009.

Darryl Raymaker said...

CanadianSense - Harper's attempt to choke off funds from the Opposition parties was a huge mistake and almost cost him the government. He made matters worse by lashing out at the Bloc - who he had tried to do business with earlier.

Women will be with the Grits in the next election because they - and other groups such as the poor and visible minorities - have no other place to go.

And by the way, as old Dief used to say - you probably don't know who he is - "Polls are for dogs."
They also change. So don't count your chickens as they say. What is up today is down tomorrow.

And I'm sorry you took a statement of fact as a personal insult. I mean, if you want to play in this league you have to have a thicker skin than that.

CanadianSense said...

I have no problem attacking each other over policy differences.

Denigrating each other by name calling does not require a thicker skin.

The Political Pay Subsidy was the poison pill to flush out the coalition. All three items were taken off the table but the opposition party leaders decision was preplanned.

In January on the political pay subsidy was NOT introduced for the Liberal Party to break the coalition.

So a small percentage of regular voters confirmed it was about their own pockets.

I don't rely on Polls but ignoring them or suggesting a different reality to the Polls is simply false bravado.

I am not worried about the CPC staying in power. I accept every party tries to win and hold power.

Those voting blocks "have no other place to go"?

Another example of wishful thinking. The Liberal Party is not resonating with anyone outside Quebec. What is the Liberal message?

What do the Liberals stand for?

The regular voter does believe the SPIN anymore.

WK has advised them to drop the hidden agenda attacks.

The Tim Horton's Protest of 5 people, showing up in front of a soybean field.

Attacking the PMO for not being at the UN?

This stuff is doing the opposite. I never voted for the PC party. Was a Liberal until John Nunziata was booted over GST promise.

Dion had a Real Plan but included too much. I don't blame him, he was thrown in front of the bus by his rivals who never dismantled their teams.

Dion made many mistakes trusting Iggy. Bob Rae was more loyal and would have never let Harper off the January vote.

I don't know who would have won that campaign but Rae would have worked up the party to fight vs write a book over the holidays.

Darryl Raymaker said...

CommonSense - Get over it. I thought it was a stupid question, okay? Everybody is entitled to an opinion and that was mine and I said so.

I don't know what you mean by the Coalition being 'preplanned' and I suspect you are talking through your hat about that. The Coalition was an act of self defence against a very undemocratic kind of attempted coup d'etat in my view, and the opposition parties had every right to embark upon the course. It was really a crypto-fascist move that had to be stopped. And it was.

Polls can change very abruptly. Ask Kim Campbell about that, or John Turner.

As far as what the party stands for or what is the message, I'll do a blog on this one of these days. Make sure you read it. Time nor space permits me to do it now. Suffice it to say, our legislative record over the years speaks for itself. And don't ask me to explain that one to you. You should know that.

Finally, there is little evidence that anyone in the party undermined Dion. Some party guys may have talked too much from time to time, but the reason we did not pull it off was that Dion just did not make it. It happens. And there should be no recriminations about that.

Bob Rae is an outstanding politician and great Canadian. However, when he ran for the leadership in 06 given his years in the NDP it wasn't his time. As to what happens in the future, As Trudeau used to say, "The universe is unfolding as it should."

Gayle said...

"I have no problem attacking each other over policy differences.

Denigrating each other by name calling does not require a thicker skin."

I seem to recall a lengthy, off topic ranting personal attack on me written by you on a conservative blog, so maybe you should get off your high horse on this one.

"When are the Liberals are going to act in the best interest of Canada again before their own self interest?"

The CPC have been doing this for years now and it seems to be working out OK for them, no? And before you ask - "sexy" policies such as cutting the GST against the advice of virtually every economist in the country, a child tax credit that applies equally to the very rich and very poor (but doing very little for the latter), "tough on crime" policies that were delayed, over and over and over again by the government so they can dishonestly claim they were being held up in the senate or by the LPC, and spending almost all the sti,uus money in CPC held ridins - some of which do not have unemployment issues - are not exactly policies that are better for the country than they are for the CPC.

"Harper overplayed his hand by forcing the coalition's hand out earlier?"

Do you have even the slightest bit of evidence that a) there even was a coalition before Harper's economic statement, and b) Harper knew of it?

You and I both already know that you don't. Harper screwed up royally last December, and the only reason polls went in his favour is because he lied, over and over again, to the public about the true nature of the coalition and its legitimacy. At the same time he kissed his chance at a majority good bye by alienating Quebec. Now he has killed his whole "CPC v the Coalition" good bye.

Darryl Raymaker said...

Bravo Gayle! I agree with everything you said. That's putting the twit in his place!

CanadianSense said...

Gayle you are the perfect example of what is wrong with bloggers.

No site for your vitrol. You visit sites to attack and make personal insults on bloggers. Why not host your own blog with views and allow for debate?

Mr. Janke - your post assumes the CPC have been negotiating in good faith - and they haven't. They continuiously misrepresent the LPC position on EI reform, and Harper's little minions have been outh there since before negotiations began trouncing their made up version of the LPC position at every opportunity. Harper could have avoided an election if he had negotiated in good faith, instead he put the ball squarely in Ignatieff's court.

And you also know perfectly well that Kinsella was referring to the fact that Duceppe's resignation would prevent an election, and not that the fact Duceppe has not resigned is the only reasonn to have an election.

Once again, you have proven nothing but that there is desperation in BT land these days...

My response in that thread are there for review.

You prefer to attack bloggers without any reservation. I have asked on many occassion for Liberal to introduce alternatives as per their responsibility as the loyal opposition.

Asking them to look at the "regular non partisan" voter for traction of their talking points.

The Polls are snap shots in time of what the public think. They agree and don't support the silly games from any party.

Based on those SNAPSHOTS in time what party is leading in ever single file or ballot question?

Which party has recoved 3% from the worst showing in over 100 years?

By all means attack and make fun of bloggers, put up your own site and ask for rebuttals of your talking points.

CanadianSense said...


what policy or fact that I posted did Gayle refute?

You agreed with the revised historical facts version as presented by Liberal Party?

The SNAPSHOTS through Polls by 3rd parties does NOT support your version of history.

So you can keep repeating that version of history. The Polls are accurate and reflect the Canadian Public.

Sadly the defence is to call Canadians stupid because the CPC lied over and over and tricked them.

I don't treat my fellow citizens with disdain. EVERY single time we are asked to return to the Polls we make a decision and I stand behind our democracy regardless of the outcome.

I don't whine when my party loses because of those "nasty tv ads" or big fat lies....

I have never voted for anyone outside the Liberal party federally until GST betrayal. So give your head a real shake.

Nunziata as Independent kept my vote until they finally won through Alan Tonks.

IF the Liberals or NDP present a platform that is realistic and appeals I may switch my vote.

I voted for Bob Rae and did not dump him although his union buddied did over Rae Days.

Who shafted and downloaded billions of costs to the Ontario-NDP in the name of fiscal restraint?

If it easier to slag voters who don't buy the Liberal rewriting of history,than to admit mistakes are being made so be it.

Changing leaders will not fix the problems. The September 25, 2009 reflects everything wrong with the party and it's leadership.

Take a look at the Press Release.

Gayle said...

I take it by your decision to launch into yet another personal attack in lieu of addressing my comments and by your total failure to answer my question that you agree that I am right.

Good to know.

By the way, you are asking bloggers for liberal policy. Most of these bloggers are not liberals. If you legitimately want answers to your questions (and I do not think you do) I suggest you ask the liberal PARTY.

In the mean time, as I said, the CPC have done little for Canada and have built their support based on lies and poor policies.

And yes, we all know the polls are not in the LPC's favour- not sure why you think saying that over and over and over again means anything.

Gayle said...

Err, most of these bloggers are no liberal MP's - and thus are not responsible for creating policy.

CanadianSense said...

Gayle I have said most bloggers take criticism too far. Most voters are not cheerleaders for their parties.

Polls are snapshots in time conducted by 3rd Parties.

Those snapshots indicate your claims about what Canadians think (feel) as reported show a significant disconnect with reality.

You can spin that anyway you want. Bob Rae recently stated the coalition was not unpopular. He also tried to rationalize technical points on who signed what.

Gayle Darryl has the courage to voice his opinions on a blog and be challenged.

Where is your courage? You have time to spend attacking bloggers for their opinion.

Where is your blog to share your version of history?

Darryl Raymaker said...

Well, I'm happy to see my open letter to Ignatieff has stirred up so much interest. Who would have known?

CanadianNonsense - Jesus, you're longwinded. But apart from that, so what that Gayle doesn't have a blog site. Hell, she has engaged you on my blog site, and has beat the hell out of you in the debate.

And I can't understand why you are so mesmerized by the polls. A snapshot does not a political era make. It is a snapshot. There is nothing eternal about it. So the Conservatives are up in the polls at the moment. Tomorrow, or next week, or next month, yada, yada, they will be down. So what?

And this thing you have about Nunziata? You've got to get over him too. I liked John actually. I think the Liberal Party owed him, Copps, Tobin, Malepart, - the Old Rat Pack - a big debt because they pulled the party up by their socks and gave it some self respect - enough to be a highly effective opposition. But John is gone now. Not forgotten, but gone.

Gayle has a good point about Liberal Party policy. I get the press releases everyday about Liberal policy. If you want to read about Liberal policy go to the party's website. You know how to get there don't you? Google 'The liberal Party of Canada' and you will find more policy than you need I am sure to convince you that Liberals have policy.

And who said anything about changing leaders of the Liberal Party? I've heard a lot of talk from red Tories about changing the leadership of the Conservative Party. But these days - finally - the Liberals are together on leadership.

Anyway nonsense, I have trouble following you. But - Thanks for reading my blog and keep those cards and letters coming.

And Gayle - keep up the good work. Don't let the bastards grind you down!

Gayle said...

Darryl - for what it is worth I would not take CS too seriously. Obviously he avoids the tough questions and makes things up instead (for example, when did I say anything about what Canadians think?).

I think what he is trying to say is that since the polls are leaning CPC right now it means that the CPC are not being dishonest. It is a backwards argument. Obviously if Harper thought he could win votes by being honest he would not resort to dishonesty.

Unfortunately for the LPC, Harper has been very successful in his disinformation campaign. They are going to have to try to find a way to counter that.

CanadianSense said...


The Polls are snapshots in time and they reflect the voters are not buying the fairytales from the opposition parties.

(What does that mean?)

Official Poll October 14, 2008.

Dec 4,2008. Coalition support.

Those were snapshots in the voter intention.

Calling the CPC dishonest does not change what the public stated on those dates.

The Liberals in 1993 came to power for many reasons. We voted for a list of policies and promises. The Big Red Book.

You are asking me to get over it?

Can you link me the position of the Liberal Party on theses 4 issues. I have been to the website and can't find anything besides rhetoric.

Isotopes Supply, H1N1, Stimulus Spending, Carbon Capture.


In June 2009 Iggy promised the platform. Can you link it? Why are they holding back ideas?

If those ideas are worthy and they gain support in the HOC why not introduce them?

Why are they refusing to act responsibly in the HOC?

The Role of the Opposition

In Canada, the party with the greatest number of elected representatives that is not the governing party becomes Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition. This party takes the lead in holding the Government accountable for its policies and actions. The leader of this party becomes the leader of the Official Opposition, sitting directly across from the Prime Minister. The duty of the Official Opposition and other opposition parties is to “challenge” government policies and suggest improvements, and present an alternative to the current Government’s policy agenda.

Opposition members have various opportunities to influence the formulation of laws and policies, including the daily Question Period in the House of Commons. The Opposition is allocated 20 “Opposition Days” or “Supply Days” each calendar year when it can propose a motion for debate and criticize the Government on issues of broad national policy. Members of opposition parties also serve on parliamentary committees in both the Senate and the House of Commons.

In the Senate, the Opposition often plays a less partisan role. The Leader of the Opposition in the Senate leads the Opposition in debate, coordinates its daily activities and confers with the Leader of the Government in the Senate on its business. The Leader of the Opposition, like the Leader of the Government, is an ex officio member of all standing committees and helps coordinate party strategy.

Gayle said...

"Calling the CPC dishonest does not change what the public stated on those dates."

Who said it did?

That does not change the fact that Harper lied over and over again during the crisis.

Why do you think he did that?

CanadianSense said...

Gayle you can call the CPC names all you want. The Polls don't support your claims.

Did you find those links regarding the Policies of the Liberals?


No website still?

Gayle said...

You are funny. You have now argued yourself into a corner.

According to you, the fact that people believed Harper's lies means he was not lying.

Wow. And I guess the fact that at one point in time most Americans believed it was OK to keep Africans as slaves means it was, or the fact that most Germans thought Hitler was OK means he was.

Next time I suggest you start relying on facts to support your position.

If you have questions for the liberal party then you should ask the liberal party. I know I am very smart and knowledgable, but really I cannot be expected to know everything. :)

CanadianSense said...

Impressive it only took your 4 posts to bring up slavery and Nazi's when talking about Harper.

Very impressive.

I understand you feel Harper is a dictator and runs a fascist regime controlling the press.

Sadly your are in a minority and your posts reflect the disconnect with reality.

Gayle said...

And how did I know you were going to deliberately mischaracterize my comments?

Because your points have been soundly defeated - so you resort to lies once again.

Nice try though.

Darryl Raymaker said...

Gee, I wish someone would comment on my advice to Iggy!

Gayle said...

I will.

I am not sure we can judge Ignatieff on this Cauchon thing because we do not have all the facts. What we do have is speculation.

How do we know that the candidate slated for Outremont was not wooed with the promise of that riding? As I understand Cauchon took a long time to make up his mind, and since the LPC have been pushing for an election they need candidates and cannot wait around indefinately for him to do so.

If the candidate had not been promised Outremont then Ignatieff should never have allowed this to go on the way he did. I know he owes Coderre (according to one blog I read Coderre was overheard by that blogger sabotaging Dion as an "anonymous liberal"), but loyalty to an MP whose great contribution to your cause was his disloyalty to your predeceasor is just kind of stupid.

If I were to give Ignatieff advice it would be to lose Coderre, and recognize that if he beneffited by his people undermining Dion he better be prepared to deal with the people who will benefit by underining him.

I agree about not appointing candidates, though for every rule there should be exceptions. Outremont is not one place where an exception should be made.

CanadianSense said...

RE: Your open letter.

The party is not united, NFLD MP budget split was the first sign. Leaks were greatly reduced in the first few months. Since the June 2009 meltdown they have increased.

Warren Kinsella has promised to bring out chainsaw looking for that pesky liberal.

Bob Rae made his statement after the boss made his view known.

Cauchon told the boss to stuff it, my riding or nothing after the boss made his decision.

Denis Coderre was hung out to dry by the boss as the revolt became public.

Dion was tougher, go figure. He threw out a long standing liberal for breaking ranks in a budget vote that had millions for his riding.

Darryl Raymaker said...


Either you are smoking something, or you are just communicatively challenged. I don't know what planet you reside on??


I have no idea who wooed who(m)? But obviously communications with Cauchon - a former highly successful Outremont MP who served the country well as a justice minister and is well respected - and the leader's representatives left something to be desired. We don't have to judge fault at this point because the right decision was taken. However, we can say, "Ask yourself why this happened? Why didn't we know this could happen? Who has been talking to Cauchon, anyway? Anybody? If not, why not? When was the last time anybody talked to Cauchon? What's wrong with Cauchon?"

And by the way, a party leader owes nothing to anyone. He is not there to serve his buddies who screw up, regardless of how loyal the screwors has been to him. It's not the guy who screws up who goes down in history. It is the party leader. And the good old boy who did the party leader a good turn in the past is not the boss. He's a member of the party leader's team - not his own team.

Bosses have to be aware that people who have their own strong personal agendas or people with a strong propensity to power trip, are better shunned than listened to.

CanadianSense said...


clearly you believe in lost causes so your insight into the lame duck leader is not without reservation deeply flawed.

Cauchon and Coderre will be running for the next leadership convention. Cauchon rejected the Iggy's decision.

Iggy and Coderre are both in trouble.

Darryl Raymaker said...


Its time to close up the bar.
You'll feel better in the morning.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of Ignatieff, have you seen this attack ad against him that popped up the other week?

Darryl Raymaker said...

Susannah - The transition from academia to realpolitik is not easy. One of the pitfalls is that what an academic may muse and speculate about during his years of academic freedom may come back to haunt him when he enters public life.

Harper has his share of outrageous statements made while in the service of the National Citizen's Coalition as well as musingAs in the early stages of Reform/Alliance. They are all over the Internet. My hope is that our ad people will not shirk from fighting fire with fire.

As far as Iggy is concerned, when he says that he is a civil libertarian in the tradition of Pierre Trudeau, I believe him.

The stuff that the Harperites are using against him are the musings of an academic, while an academic. Although the stuff is not positive, matched up against the Harper stuff, it will be a wash in any campaign.

DivaRachel said...

Canadian Sense: can you provide a link?

"The McGill study showed the loss of voting blocks, rural, roman catholic, visible minorities and the numerical advantage were responsible."

Darryl Raymaker said...

Hey Diva - I loved the photo!

But I wouldn't worry about the link - even if there was one. When Pearson lost to Dief big time our support went down and I'm sure we were down in all areas of support. Same is true when Turner bit the dust to Mulroney. And it has been true in the last few years of being in oppostion.

But the question is, when we make a comeback with leadership that is embraced by the voters, where is our traditional base going to go? The Conservatives? The Conservatives remain a narrow-minded, narrow based bunch of neocons. The ND's - who never have a chance to win? The the Quixotic Greens? I don't think so. Most Canadians are fundamentally liberal and the Liberal Party is the vehicle that bests represents their point of view. Our people will be back. Regardless of whether or not a McGill Study exists. You can say you heard it here first.

CanadianSense said...


Here is the link:

I may not be voting Liberal atm but I won't use Dion as a scapegoat why I no longer support the Liberal Party.

The Party has many issues that are more important than current sabre rattling strategy.

Darryl Raymaker said...

CanadianSense - What did you think of Coderre's performance yesterday?

CanadianSense said...

Darry R.

Thank you for the question.

This is a NO win situation, going forward. Heads needs to ROLL. (NFLD revolt was the first sign)

Bob Rae and his team are undermining the leader in public.

Iggy made several mistakes,but we both know a leader must have the "final" say in the public domain.

Bob took his position AFTER the boss made his position known publicly.

If you are not loyal to a unified message from the leader there is no unity.

Coderre, Cauchon and Rae have declared their leadership by going public with the decision of their leader.

Coderre was thrown under the bus and needed to resign, but he chose to attack than retire quietly in a diminished capacity.

Cauchon did not accept the final decision of Iggy.

Call a meeting and purge any dissenters who are not loyal and refuse to keep internal dissent behind closed doors.

It is time for Iggy to use the AXE and put down his pen.

How many MP's in the NDP/CPC go against the leader in public?

Darryl Raymaker said...

CanadianSense - I agree with some of what you say but not all. Coderre was a divisive force and was likely to be more divisive as time went on. Iggy made a mistake by having him in the position in the first place and once appointed it was only a matter of time before Coderre started to throw his ample weight around to cause further division - or - to maintain the divisions that were in the party since the Martin Chretien donnybrook.

However, I think Iggy did the right thing by overruling Coderre. It took a little time but he did the right thing. Iggy is the boss, not Coderre, and he showed it.

I think your assessment of divisions between Iggy and Rae are much exaggerated. Iggy will get over this rough patch and will emerge stronger without the Coderre millstone.

CanadianSense said...

The lessons of "Garth Turner" should be taken seriously.

The Liberals ran into trouble when their party allowed their power struggles to hit the front page.

Bad News: 24/7 Media sleaze cycle is reporting what?

MI is in trouble within his Quebec Party. It does NOT have to be true but plausible? (Remember that line?)

The next few days, week the leader will lose "capital" and become damaged because of the handling of the situation.

Can you imagine as a lawyer in a trial presenting your side to a jury and your own team of lawyers, stand up, interrupt you and make statements that undermine your case?

If a MP has a problem they share it inside the caucus and the leader makes a final decision.

In public, you only have one chance to brand Micheal Ignatieff as a PM in waiting.

This effort from within his party may be preplanned, I don't know.

The MP's can NOT undercut or second guess his decisions in the public.

I am NOT involved in any political party.

I have never voted for the PC party.

I don't recommend calling us former liberals names. (Many bloggers call us conbots)

Bob Rae/John Nunziata were my democratic choices.

If you remember Harper and Reform were also against the Ottawa Bubble parties including B.M.

office said...

Microsoft Office 2010
Office 2010
Microsoft Office 2007
Office 2007
Microsoft Office
Office 2007 key
Office 2007 download
Office 2007 Professional
Microsoft outlook
Microsoft outlook 2010