Monday, November 23, 2009

Jaundiced Eyes

Personally, I don't think there is much that's particularly noteworthy or insightful to take from Jane Krieber's jaundiced commentary. I notice others, with their own agendas, are seizing on her comments, as though some enlightened prophecy. Please. I understand why Krieber's words are being used to support various biases, but the CONVENIENT lack of context renders the validity meaningless.

Here's a novel idea. Maybe if your husband could have produced a video that didn't make an amateur You Tube presentation look like a relative IMAX, the coalition might have got off the ground. Maybe if the horrendous visual was delivered on TIME, as a nation waited to hear from the next PM, the coalition might have had a chance. MAYBE, if your husband didn't lead the Liberals to the worst defeat in it's history, the idea of a coalition might have generated the CREDIBILITY it needed to FLY. I have one word for the poetic musing from Krieber, WHINY.

Liberals are basically ignoring this story, and really its predictive quality, as well as the useless bitterness, validates any silence. However, it's the revisionism that is being bastardized by others, that deserves comment. Stephane Dion did JACK SQUAT to reform and rebuild the Liberal Party. Only after we were soundly defeated, did the idea even reach the backburner. I know for a fact, many that went to Dion at the convention, seeing him as a vehicle for reform, were ENTIRELY DISAPPOINTED, Dion was OLD SCHOOL to the bone. Let's call a spade a spade shall we, without the romanticized rearview mirror routine.

The Liberal Party is in great trouble. Wow, that's news. The only part missing, it was a relatively worse DISASTER when your husband had the helm. Leaving aside an IPSOS REID poll, any other INTERNAL measure shows the Liberals in better shape than they were under Ignatieff's predessor. Membership, fundraising, organization, strength of team, all the nuts an bolts are a positive, contrasted with the PAST. Let's keep it real, all factors taken into account.

On the "grassroots" front, seems to me the only reason Stephane finished third on the first ballot, was because he enjoyed more support from the ELITES than Kennedy did. Yes, that's right, for all this grassroot crap being bandied about, it was superdelegates that put Dion into motion, and it was the loyalty Kennedy enjoyed from HIS delegates, which put it all together. This grassroots stuff has reached mythical proportions, when in reality my view of the rank and file was always UNEASE overall, with Dion at the helm. As an aside, one could argue the Liberal Party had no TRUE grassroots in 2006, in any sense of the word.

In many ways Stephane Dion got a raw deal. I think he would have made a fantastic Prime Minister, and Canada is the lesser that he lost to Harper. HOWEVER, the fact remains that Dion didn't RESONATE, not only with Canadians, but with Liberal members (the supposed grassroots Kreiber champions). For whatever reason, his approach didn't instill confidence, his paranoid team that kept everyone at bay, his stubborness, these factors all contributed to his short tenure. If the confidence did exist amongst the rank and file, and NO not just the elites, then he could have survived the WORST showing in history. Dion didn't, and for ONCE I'd like to see somebody take some responsibility, rather than blaming shadows. Dion blew it during the coalition debate, I've never been so EMBARRASSED than I was, waiting for the clowns to deliver that horrific tape. It was so symbolic of so many things, that SHIT never happens to a credible team and leader, for such a momentus event.

Jane Kreiber is bitter. I'm so shocked. There are many lessons the Liberals need to learn, but the advice from the disjointed loyal wife of a former leader, isn't something I take seriously or inject my own bias onto. Whatever, given the source.


Robert said...

In hindsight, I think telegraphing the coalition through an announcement etc, was a mistake; they tipped their hands too soon.

Catching the Conservatives off-guard would have been better, the outcome a fait accompli.

Steve V said...

You're probably right. And, maybe having the most basic of political instinct, to realize a photo-op with GILLES DUCEPPE, might not have been a good call.

Steve V said...

Just for the record, after the last election I fought for Dion to stay on, even corresponded to Krieber to express support.

Francesco said...


Your analysis is bang on. Her rant on Friday afternoon was nothing more or less than "sour grapes" and a bit revisionist history!!!

Gayle said...

Most liberals are ignoring her comments because they recognize the post was influenced by her emotional attachment to her husband, which is only natural.

With the greatest of respect Steve, I dpnt think a post that appears to be attacking her and her husband is necessary.

Ignatieff had to know that if he failed in his leadership, his own actions would come back to haunt him. Living by the sword and all that....

Frankly I think he's lucky he has not faced more of this.

Time to let sleeping dogs lie. Time to move on. Someone has to be big enough to let it go.

Steve V said...

"Someone has to be big enough to let it go."


Gayle, you seem to take the view that her commentary is valid, but any RETORT unnecessary. She threw out a bunch of revisionist nonsense, I'm merely addressing. I've always liked her, and thought the Libs would have done well to give her a higher profile. That said, I see no reason to bite my tongue, while someone else is entitled to spew. Your comment isn't fair.

Steve V said...


I also find your perspective a bit inconsistent, given the constant criticism on public infighting. Why the omission here, and maybe you need to see how your own relativism is bias driven.

Gayle said...

Steve. - I never said her comment was valid. I do not think it is. I do think it can be written off as an emotional response to what happened to the man she loves.

I do not see the merit in dragging this out. Someone has to let it go. If she can't, the rest of you will have to.

Steve V said...

I understand what you're saying on the "let it go front". I don't sense any backlash within the party at all, which speaks volumes. I'm just addressing a few things which need to be pointed out. It's just a blog ;)

Jeff Jedras said...

There are valid points within her post, and there are invalid ones. Obviously we know her biases, and we can judge her comments through them appropriately.

I have no desire to rehash the past and re-open old wounds. We know what we have to do, and either we'll do it or we won't. Only time will tell on that count.

But if I start to read people unfairly bashing Stephane Dion, or, as I've begun to see in some of the Kreiber coverage, anonymously bashing her and Stephane in an attempt to discredit them and their commentary, then I'm going to get off the bench and fight back with all the middling power of my keyboard against such unmitigated bullshit.

I don't think such a course would be particularly helpful for the party so I'm not inclined to do so, but I will, if necessary.

Let's keep the focus on the present. As I said, we know what the problems are, and they go deeper than the last four leaders. Michael has the job now. He has taken some corrective action and freshened the team. Either it will work or it won't. But now it's up to him.

And it's up to us.

Steve V said...

"But if I start to read people unfairly bashing Stephane Dion"

I don't think I've done that here, it's a valid perspective of the record.

Anonymous said...

Hey Steve,

I haven't commented as much lately, and imagine most everyone is done with this topic. But I wanted to point out your reaction to this was - not surprisingly ;) - pretty much identical to mind. I immediately thought of the botched response video as well.

Hope you're doing well. Was the fishing good last week? ;)

Steve V said...

Had a great time.

Hope you're doing well, and writing lots ;)