This is from today's Globe & Mail:
”Most people decided to support the NDP candidate. They thought maybe that it was a clear signal about their disagreement with the current government,” said Mr. Dion who, along with many other political leaders is attending a plowing match in this rural Ontario community.
”I just want to say that our policy about Afghanistan is realistic. The one of the NDP is not. We cannot leave tomorrow, whatever the people may think. It would not be responsible for Canada to do so.”
People should remember, he said, that he wants to be Prime Minister of the country some day ”and Mr. Layton will never be Prime Minister of this country.”
I'm sorry but that's it.
9 comments:
Think about it - you can't have it two ways.
NDP are all over Harper for not staying with the Kyoto committment and yet want to break the NATO committment - duh - selective honour of Canada?
When interviewed on TV today - Dion has taken full responsibility for the loss - remember when Harper lost to Martin and disappeared pouting and feeling sorry for himself? Dion is at an event today taking the constant questioning of his failure from the MSM - now, that's a grown up man for you.
Mulcair won because people there like him - as I saw watching -on-the-street interviews in Quebec this morning - not one mention of the NDP policies.
Another issue people seem to be ignoring - Harper is basing his model (which he studied) for federalism on Belgium - that is now collapsing.
I think we should wait before we judge - emotions right after make people crazy.
This is much ado about nothing. Coulon won't be the candidate at the next round. Cauchon will be, and he will kick Mulcair's Layton all the way to Cherniakville.
Let's not forget also that the Bloc vote was critical to mulcair's win. Duceppe has some issues to deal with also. And, behind the scenes, Harper told his candidate, who seemed to be a very solid candidate, to skip forums and all-candidate meetings. In effect, he baled on this riding and likely has some nice reward for the dude. However, apparently he doesn't have the cajones to be an unelected, appointed senator like Merde Fortier, because he foolishly went before the electorate. Instead, he'll probably get some ambassadorship or something.
It's a hit, but I'm still backing Dion.
I don't recall the MsM making the London Centre by-election a leadership issue for Harper, with him running the grand old mayor...
”I just want to say that our policy about Afghanistan is realistic. The one of the NDP is not. We cannot leave tomorrow, whatever the people may think. It would not be responsible for Canada to do so.”
Incoherent and at odd with the facts.
The NDP has said from the beginning that consultation with allies would take place before the pre-2009 withdrawal. "Tomorrow" is nothing but a straw man.
Second, Dion himself is on record as saying that the Afghanistan mission is misguided and ill-conceived: he's said that it isn't working.
If it's not working, how is it "realistic" to keep doing something "misguided" and "ill-conceived" for 18 more months, all while supposedly convincing some other NATO nation to take your place doing the same "misguided" thing after Feb 2009?
Doesn't look very "realistic" to me.
Dion's most recent Afghanistan position (he's had more than one) is muddle-headed, not "realistic," and his Outremont candidate Jocelyn Coulon's attempts to claim that the nature of the mission had changed radically under Harper cannot be reconciled with numerous on-the-record comments from Bill Graham, Ujjal Dosanjh and others, including ones made *well after* the Liberal loss in January of 2006.
Many people in Outremont likely saw through Dion's confusion on Afghanistan, and decided to vote for Mulcair, because his was the party taking the clearest stand that the war is wrong, and Canada must stop participating in it.
It's not Stephane Dion's position on Afghanistan that's the issue. He's right - we can't just leave tomorrow. Our responsibility to our NATO partners can't be chucked the way Layton proposes (even Layton knows that but isn't honest enough to admit it). What troubles me is Dion using Harper's policies to excuse a Liberal loss to the NDP. It seems that didn't prevent Harpo from bagging one Quebec by-election for his party, did it? It wasn't the Taliban that cost the Libs the Outremont riding.
What did you expect him to say? Oh, we ran a really weak campaign, and Mulcair really was a better candidate, and really, I'm not much of a leader, am I?
...get real. He's got to say something sensational to our dumb-downed media.
Take deep breaths.
Well, after all this - today Decima came out with a new poll that shows the CPC and Liberals virtually tied federally - hmm...
They say Harper is not in majority territory at this date.
It's not Stephane Dion's position on Afghanistan that's the issue. He's right - we can't just leave tomorrow. Our responsibility to our NATO partners can't be chucked the way Layton proposes (even Layton knows that but isn't honest enough to admit it).
Actually, Dion's muddle-headed position (and that of the Liberal Party) is the issue, and will be in the future.
"We can't just leave tomorrow" is, frankly, the logical fallacy known as the "straw man": attributing to your opponent a position he doesn't hold and hasn't taken.
(I could bring the word 'honest' into the discussion here, but I'll restrain myself for now.)
As for our 'responsibility to our NATO partners,' how does Stephane Dion square that responsibility with his own stated positions on Canada's activity in Afghanistan:
1) It is ill-conceived, misguided, and isn't working (though he approved it while in cabinet);
2) We must find a NATO partner to replace us in this 'ill-conceived' and 'misguided' work starting in February 2009?
How 'responsible' is it to ask someone else to take your place doing something you yourself have called 'ill-conceived' and 'misguided'?
Please remind us again who has a serious and realistic view of Canada's responsibilities to the people of other nations.
Because it absolutely isn't Stephane Dion, that's for sure.
Stephen - you've put forward some ineresting points. Thanks.
MoS
Post a Comment