Wednesday, November 17, 2010

RAT

I think we can all agree, partisanship aside, there is nothing worse than a RAT. The Liberals have been plagued by anonymous sources, "senior" Liberals, and they've done harm to the party over the years. Sometimes people should step forward and challenge, I have no qualms with this type of "dissent". However, this column by Jane Taber represents the ultimate betrayal. To actually name individual MP's who expressed an opinion, inside a closed door meeting, is just pure and utter crap:
Several Liberals, including Toronto MPs Rob Oliphant and Gerard Kennedy, spoke about their displeasure with the way in which the decision was handled, the source said. At least one Quebec MP also spoke out against the process.

Another MP told The Globe he came to the Liberal Party to “have a voice,” adding that he was “very, very displeased with how this was handled.” Many MPs first heard about the Liberal position in the media.

“They were furious,” the caucus insider said. “The general consensus ... was that Harper has pulled the rug out from underneath Michael and that Michael should have been prepared.”

The source noted, however, that Mr. Oliphant did say that at the end of the day he supported the leader, but he believes the Liberal position could be a “tough sell” for him in his riding.

You know what's funny? I agree with everything in the piece, the way the Liberal brass has handled this Afghan file is ridiculous. If I was an MP, I'd be furious too, the lack of consultation simply insulting. I'm proud that Kennedy rose up and questioned this process, good on ya Gerard! However, I shouldn't know what Kennedy said behind closed doors, during a private meeting, wherein MP's should have the freedom to speak their minds. That a fellow MP would leave this meeting and run to Jane Taber, well, I'd move heaven and earth to find out who and TURF them from caucus immediately.

We know have a situation where MP's can't even debate, without the fear of the RAT outing their concerns by NAME. What a coward, what a cad, what a low life, that doesn't deserve to be part of any "team", or any party I want to associate with. Again, no matter your affiliation, we should all decry this betrayal. A general comment on a raucus meeting, I have no problem with, but to out these MP's....wow.

RAT

UPDATE:

Wow, everyone just running to the press with names. Sheesh.


.

5 comments:

900ft Jesus said...

that's low.

Maybe the only way for the Liberals to deal with this now is to have an open debate. Better that, showing they are at least trying to come to a consensus while respecting voters' input than let this go on to be used as a weapon portraying them as seriously divided and disorganized.

I agree - what was said in closed meetings should have stayed there, but with these cowardly leaks, might as well turn it around by a show of open debate.

Steve V said...

You can argue that the leadership has brought this story upon themselves. You can't just hide away dissenters, avoid a vote, one way or another everything will come out. Where I lose this story is the actually names, the detail is extraordinary. It's just a betrayal of your colleagues.

I'd also add, some simple math, positions on this issue, you can narrow down who the source is, and from there, well...

Anya said...

Whomever is directing Michael has it all wrong.I wrote Ignatieff a letter and 4 of my friends did and I do not think it did any good,.... anymore than what the Caucus had to say. Who is running this party? I have heard of it Harper-lite, which I do not appreciate..there should have been a vote about Afghanistan.Michael has a great deal to learn and this did not help him!!

liberazzi said...

Can anyone explain to me how the Liberal Party differs from the Cons in any substantive way?! I am glad that Gerard and Borys stood up for what they believed in, and it should not be a secret. We are going to win by being a progressive force, that would appeal to Green and Dip supporters, not trying to siphon off the knuckle draggers on the right. The best thing to happen to the Libs would to be Turnerized, unfortunately I cant stand Harper. However, what's the difference? What's the difference!

Jerry Prager said...

The great tragedy of modern liberalism is that it refuses to be liberal, it is stuck in a corporatist rut, the same as the American democrats, toadies of big business, while a plurality of progressives sits on the sidelines longing for leadership. Ignatieff needs to step down, there needs to a leadership race, and we need to get rid of the Harpercon fascisti.