Monday, November 24, 2008

My Leadership Candidate

Has received the Order of Canada. Has yours?

Oh. So did his brother. It is a somewhat incestuous group though. The other two candidate's fathers own some space in the O.C.


RuralSandi said...

Hardly think this is important at all - nice for them, but means diddly when it comes to running a country.

Hey, so did Morgentaler - should he be PM?

James Curran said...

What it means, Sandi, is that Bob Rae has done more for Canada than the other two combined. That's what it means Sandi. While the other two have thought about good things to do for Canada, Bob has already done it.

Invoking Morgantaler into the conversation Sandi is not a good argument for Mr. Ignatieff Sandi.

RuralSandi said...

This is like a kid saying my dog is bigger than your dog and my big brother can beat up your brother.

Morgentaler - bad choice I admit as it was the first that came to mind.

My point - there have been many Orders of Canada given - doesn't have a thing to do with PM material.

James Curran said...

Ya? Well my guy was also premier of Canada's largest province. So there!

wilson said...

Kind of a toss up, no?

Iggy with shallow Canadian roots;
Rae with shallow Liberal roots...

Iggy making bad decisions re: Iraq;
Rae making bad decisions re: Ontario...

#3 has the best pedigree.

A BCer in Toronto said...

Oh come on now James.

First of all, what did Sandi say about Ignatieff that led to your comeback? Is she even supporting him? Perhaps I missed that from an earlier thread.

And second of all, do you really want/need to be disparaging Dominic and Michael, and what they have each done for Canada, by saying things like "Bob Rae has done more for Canada than the other two combined" and ""While the other two have thought about good things to do for Canada, Bob has already done it."

Is "my candidate is a better Canadian" really the message you want to be spreading?

I think all three have done a lot for Canada, in different ways. I don't think I need to list their respective bios here, we both know them well enough.

James Curran said...


All three had fathers who were diplomats.

Which one is #3?

Northern PoV said...

Rae's decisions as Premier are debatable - give him credit for building the 407 Hwy for example, on the plus side.

Supporting the Iraq invasion - not debatable (at least in Liberal circles)

James Curran said...

I am simply stating facts Jeff. One candidate has the Order of Canada. Two don't. Fact, not fiction.

And no. Not all Liberals and Canadians do know that Jeff.

And, judging by Sandi's constant vigilence for MI, I would say she is a supporter of his.

roblaw said...

..the "mouth breather" Conservative weighs in.. at the end of the day, the question will probably be whether Liberals want a leader that takes them closer to the left or closer to the right. Dion was clearly more in the middle between Ignatieff and Rae..'re more likely, I suggest, to get elected with Ignatieff, but he has certain policies which perhaps don't sit well with the closet NDP members of the Liberal party.. $.02

A BCer in Toronto said...

James, were you also stating facts when you said "Bob Rae has done more for Canada than the other two combined" and "While the other two have thought about good things to do for Canada, Bob has already done it."?

James Curran said...

Those just may, in fact, be facts. I guess we could chart it just to see.

A.L. said...

"Bob Rae has done more for Canada than the other two combined" sounds an awful lot like the "I have been in the trenches, have taken on my own party... what has Barack Obama done... he's given some great speeches and written two memoirs." That was the line of argument that both John McCain and Hillary Clinton made against Pres.-elect Obama.

Now, you'll say neither Ignatieff nor LeBlanc = Obama, and Rae is certainly no McCain. But, consider the idea that touting accomplishments as pedigree for the leadership of a party and a country sounds to the un/ill-informed as "I deserve it!"

We've seen for some time in Canada and the United States that accomplishment loses when the people are looking for something new (Canada 2006, USA 2006, & 2008).

All I am suggesting is ideas matter in this contest where our survival as a party is at stake. Accomplishments (or baggage) are perhaps less important now.

Keep up the good blog.


sjw said...

I could care less Bob Rae and his brother have obtained the Order of the Bourgeoisie and Ignatieff and Leblanc have (as of yet) not. This is an exercise of juvenile proportions that is a road leading nowhere. Stop it already.

Reid said...

James: Brian Mulroney has an Order of Canada as well. Do you think he's better than Ignatieff and LeBlanc?

The Order of Canada is about who you know and not what you do. Politicians get it at ridiculously high rates because they're in the know.

For every two-bit hack of an actor, NHL bench warmer, or sleaze-ball politician that gets it I can find 1000 Canadians more deserving.

James Curran said...

Nobody said anyone was better than anybody. Not that I can see.

I'm certain Harper will get this award for his great contributions.

Ted said...

Hey Jim: You've come a long way, baby.

- defending Dion "to the death"
- threatening to take on all of those who undermined Dion
- promising to be a part of the grassroots uprising that would make the disloyal ones pay
- focusing on the future and the next generation...

... to not only supporting the co-lead underminer but also...
- putting up a photo of him with Dion as though Rae spent even one day supporting him
- highlighting how much a part of the establishment Rae is (Order of Canada, done more than anyone, his brother and dad both have the Order as well, his dad was a diplomat, etc.) as being now a good thing
- stressing, like John McCain, that he is entitled to the leadership because he's done so much in the past and so much more than his opponents
- the next generation can wait because they haven't accomplished anything yet and the past is all that matters (unless, of course, you take a critical view of what Rae actually DID in the past)

That is a loooong way from:
- thinking Rae doesn't meet the "fiscal prudence test", couldn't bring the party back to the centre, compares to Chretien/Martin in his ability to unite the party and can't take credit for retiring his own debt"
- from grassroots Liberals
- from disgust with the anti-grassroots collusion of the "non-aggression pact" that kept other candidates out of the running (how long did Bob keep to his word on that one anyway? A week?)
- from fight you to the death
- and from Fool me once..."!!

Sorry, buddy, but as you say facts is facts and if you want to make this election about the past instead of the present and the future and about issues and priorities and policies, then it's a sad day for grassroots Liberals and ordinary Canadians.

No one is entitled to the leadership just because they have served the country well and done good things in the past. The Republicans made that mistake in 1993, 1997 and especially with McCain in 2008. And none of the candidates are better leadership candidates than the others just because of some awards some insiders gave him up in Ottawa. He has served the country in the past well, including serving multiple parties well, and he deserves our highest praise for that. If that's all he's got then we need waaay more brother.

What Ottawa doles out to its own is not going to win the hearts of grassroots Liberals or of Canadians.

James Curran said...

No one is entitled to leadership because a bunch of guys flew down to Cambridge and told him he would be leader either Ted.

Wow Ted. I guess we're gonna have to dig up a bunch of anti-Iggy stuff that his current supporters wrote in 2006.

And to question my contribution to the grassroots Ted. While I was raising money, signing members, sitting on committees, campaigning in by-elections, what were others doing sitting on the sideline still bitter over leadership?

The grassroots were thrown aside when the caucus decided not to support its leader for a second election. The grassroots were thrown aside when membership rules to riding associations were changed yet again last year unbeknownst to most. The grassroots continues to get thrown aside by those entitled to their entitlements.

I'm being forced to choose and I have chosen. I'm going to go with the guy with the most experience for the job. That would be Mr. Rae.

And now the idea is to compare Rae to McCain and Iggy to Obama Ted? Wow. Good strategy.

As for the undermining of the leader. I watched as Iggy's supporters gave anonymous interviews in Outremount and on the hill. Here's a hint, if you want to give an anonymous interview, you shouldn't do it in a room full of Liberals.

I wathced as AL continued to recruit for MI at every Liberal function over the past two years. Team MI NEVER stopped campaigning. So as long as we're going to begin the who did what game, I'll take my own word for what happened where, since I have never stopped being involved daily as a party member. Currently I'm involved in One Member One Vote to assist in the fight for the grassroots. Something Bob believes in a great deal.

And while many chose to sit out on the sidelines for two or more years while those of us continued to work hard, cheap shots seem to come pretty easy.

So let the games begin. I guess I'll start blogging comments from surrent MI supporters that were derogatory toward MI back in 2006.

Ted said...

Out of interest and curiosity, here are some other people who are not Michael Ignatieff and Dominic LeBlanc (i.e. Officers of the Order of Canada):

Deborah Gray, first elected member of the Reform Party

Steve Nash, basketball player in the US

Kim Campbell, shortest PM tenure in the 20th Century

Peter Mansbridge, loyal Liberal for years (according to the Tories at least)

Frank McKenna, now there would have been a leader with solid credentials

Boutros Boutros-Ghali, a fine and loyal Canadian

Stephen Lewis, one of Bob's predecessors

Queen Elizabeth, but only an Officer and not a Companion

Jean Beliveau, at least with him we would do well in Quebec for a change

Ted said...

Hey - just havin' a bit of fun Jim. No offence intended. I just thought it was a little odd way of supporting your candidate to flash his establishment credentials and an odd and unfortunate way to put down Michael and Dominic in the same post in that way. Especially Dominic actually.

I didn't say Michael's organizers weren't organizing. I'm also just a little surprised that you were so angry with Bob and his organizers and Michael and his organizers and now supporting the underminer-in-chief, and even put up a picture of Bob and Stephane as though Bob wasn't planning every day since December 2006 on how to get rid of him.

Feel free to post whatever you want on this blog - it's yours afterall - including what some supporters of Michael said all of 2 years ago. And let those quoted answer, or not, for what they wrote. I'm sure someone might even be interested.

Ah well.

RuralSandi said...

Hey - don't forget Conrad Black folks - they haven't taken his Order away yet have they?

This whole combative chip on the shoulder thing is what is bothering me.

Ya, I'm leaning towards Ignatieff and looking at LeBlanc as well.

When reading Lawrence Martin's article today = there is no way Rae is about renewal. It's the same old, same old - John Rae, Power Corp., etc.

James Curran said...

First Morgantaler and now a convicted felon Sandi? Really? Bob deserves that.

As for candidates in this race with no Power Corp. Ties? There are none. And, as I said, John Rae also holds the Order of Canada. Not sure what he ever did to you though.

3 straight majority governments under Chretien is with the large assistance of brother John and the likes of Goldenberg.

Not that victory has anything to do with the future of this party.
Anyway, ya might wanna research the connections everyone has to Power Corp. Even Mulroney and McKay were tied to them.

James Curran said...

Here's a Conrad comparison though.

Ted said...

Have to agree with Jim a bit, RuralSandi. Bob is not the right leader for the Liberals especially in these times, but he has more than earned his Order of Canada and the Order of Canada is a very great honour. He's done more for his OC than many on that list of recipients. We don't have to disparage the man and his service just because he shouldn't be leader of the party.

Having said that, however, having the Order of Canada is not a better reason to choose him over Michael or Dominic. No one deserves or is entitled to the leadership just because of who they are or what they did in the past. That is no way to renew the party.

burlivespipe said...

Wow, an interesting exercise this was. Good thing kid gloves were handy;^)
As a Rae delegate in '06, but someone still weighing his options for '09, i'm thinking its a tad early to be playing 'my daddy is bigger than your daddy.' No doubt Rae has deserved his OoC. I know how hard it is to get it, too, having spent a couple of years and plenty of $ trying to get one for Glenn Ford (unsuccessfully, i might add) a handful of years ago. Here's betting all three involved will have their day with the GG. I'm betting the next leader of the Liberal party will have one, either before or after their term as leader...