How dare we Liberals cry foul?
To Ms Tintor, Mr Wells, and Mr McIver, it seems even your own allies are getting a little tired of your ugly tactics. Andrew Coyne, a blogger so Conservative (the capital 'C' is intentional) he has earned a link on Mr McIver's site (just above the Western Standard), posted an article decrying Tory attack ads. Thank you, Mr Coyne, for reaffirming the fading notion that at least some Tories have the capacity for independent thought.
According to the Tories, the Liberals "don't care about real issues" because all we do is demand apologies. Well, I just pulled up the Liberal Party's website and I see nothing that attacks the Tories or demands apologies from them. In contrast, I also pulled up the Conservative Party's website and one of the top four stories is titled "Stephane Dion has a lot of explaining to do," while the top link on the right side of the page reads "Not a Leader" (that's Toryspeak for "Stephane Dion"). Incredibly, there are exactly two pictures of Stephen Harper on the Tory homepage. How many of Stephane Dion? Two! I'm confused, which party doesn't care about real policy? And those are the official media mouths! I don't even need to talk about the blogs. Tintor, Wells, McIver, and surely others I haven't the stomach to bother reading (I get my fill of partisan propoganda while sifting through American newspapers for international news), all seem to be wearing blinders that render them incapable of looking beyond Liberal reaction to Conservative attacks.
I know I'm not going to convince any androids (read: Conservatives) that the Liberal Party actually cares about policy, so I'm not going to go any further on that. What I'll do instead is expose the Conservative game plan. Mr McIver did the same to the (alleged) Liberal game plan, so I shall respond in kind. Without further preface, here is the Conservative game plan:
- say mean things about the Liberals until they react
- make fun of the Liberals for reacting
- tell mommy
(The last step hasn't been called into action yet, but it will once the Tories realize the first two steps are transparent and annoying.)
If you're wondering why I chose to use such juvenile language as "say mean things" and "make fun of", it's because I borrowed this plan from an assignment I did in grade 3 about how bullies act. Sorry.
Here's a simple message to the hypocrites (read: Conservatives):
Stop telling us that personal attacks are the norm in politics. Even if
you're correct, and they are the norm, does that make it right? Of course
not. Stop telling us that the Liberals don't care about real policy,
because doing so is hypocritical (that is to say, doing so
is to focus on Liberals and values while ignoring real policy!).
If you want the Liberals to focus on real policy, try doing it yourself.
Instead of calling us panzies and cry babies, tell us our policy (for example)
on Afghanistan is faulty (and it might be, as Mr McIver notes, it can sometimes
be difficult to nail down Dion's policies). Or better yet, tell us your
policy!Thank you.
There are so many inconsistencies with your blog posting that I don't even have the energy (nor the time, since we are leaving shortly for the Easter weekend) to diabolically tear your argument a part. Although, I will make three brief comments:
ReplyDelete1) Funny how you call all Conservatives "androids" and "lacking of independent thought", while at the same time, you are the first person to tow the Liberal party line? Why the double standard? I would theorize that you also lack independent thought, since you are just like me (a die-hard partisan). Any attempt to explain otherwise would be fool-hardy.
2) Every political party is in full election mode. That's life. We're in a minority. And might I remind you again that for the first two weeks after Mr. Dion became leader, all we (read: Canadians) heard was how Canada desparately needed the Liberals in power, and how "we" (rather, the Liberals) need an election right away to fulfill that necessity. So, if you buy into the Conservative rhetoric, then the Tories are simply gearing up for what Mr. Dion has said he wanted. Unless he's changed his mind. In that case, I'm not surprised!
3. The Tory strategy of focusing on Mr. Dion is a rehash of the Liberal strategy of focusing on Mr. Harper. You will say "even if we did it, it's still not right", but then again, you can use that for anything the Tories to that mimicks the Liberals. Not very original, I say. The Tory strategy is to focus on the incredible lack of leadership ability that Mr. Dion has displayed; the Liberals will be sure to play up the "Mr. Harper as a bad, American, pro-Republican, right-wing neoconservative, abortion-hating, anti-gay-marriage, throw-us-back-to-the-middle-ages Tory", which is what we were told in 2004 and 2006. I don't complain about that. It's politics. You won't hear my demand apologies or launch a lawsuit of that. But before Mr. Dion (and yourself) try to claim that somehow Mr. Harper is a demon, perhaps you should realize that you did THE EXACT SAME THING as we are doing now, and until I hear a "I'm Sorry" and "We were wrong", anything you say will be merely hyprocitical.
I eagerly await your apologize so we can both put this behind us.
Rebuttal:
ReplyDelete1) Did you actually comment on anything I said in this article?
2) You've decided, I see, to attack my logic and my Party's past behaviour. You have not, however, decided to refute anything I actually said.
These two things tell me you have nothing to counter my opinion. Because I'm right. Try again after the weekend Pat.
Thanks for being a loyal reader!
And Happy Easter! (Don't suppose Easter is in Sarnia?)
I'm now thinking my initial response to your comment was somewhat unfair, so I shall expand.
ReplyDelete1) I admit, calling you androids and suggesting you are lacking of independent thought may be a bit harsh, but I read a lot of the same ideas coming from a diverse cross-section of Tories, so it is difficult for me to think otherwise. You suggest that I too am an android laking independent thought, and if that be the case (I don't think it is, but perhaps my self perception is a little off) I give you full permission to call me an android lacking independent thought. I will not be offended by the truth.
2)I don't recall mentioning the election or threat of one in this post. In fact, I just did a keyword search of the post to be certain and I was told by IE that the word election doesn't appear anywhere in the post (neither do campaign or vote). Therefore, I'm not really sure where this comment is coming from.
3) I appreciate your explanation of why the Tories are focusing on Mr Dion, but that's not really what I was getting at. By noting that Dion's picture appears as often as Harper's on the Conservative homepage, I was simply noting that it would seem, at least at first glance, that the Tories are the ones not worrying about real issues. It wasn't a judgement call, I wasn't chastising the Tories for focusing on Dion. If that's how they want to play ball, then so be it. What I was doing was noting how the Tories (specifically Ms Tintor, who explicitly made the claim, and Mr Wells, who commented that it was "bang on") deride the Liberals for something they themselves are at least equally (probably more) guilty of doing. That is immediate, current hypocrisy. Everytime you tell me the Liberals are hypocrites, you point to something Paul Martin or Jean Chretien (or even Wilfrid Laurier?) did. Point to something Stephane Dion is doing. Point to something current. I'm sure you can, so do it! Once you show me how our current words and actions prove us hypocrites, I'll start to take the accusation seriously.
So there's a more honest response to your comments. I felt my initial response was rash and showed a lack of respect for you, and you of course know I have a great deal of respect for you. Consider this an apology.
Having said that, I still think you ran around my argument with your comment, and I think that shows you're not sure how to attack it straight on. I take that to suggest that my article was either "bang on" or very poorly written (at least to the extent that its intended point was unclear).
Here I go commenting on my own post yet again. I just can't seem to get everything I want to say out all at once.
ReplyDeleteI went back and read my article again and I now see where your comment about the election came from. I did link to Andrew Coyne's article which hinted somewhat about the Tory pre-election campaign. I was more interested in Coyne's comments about the Tory attack ads, but if you took from my linking to it that I was commenting on Tory advanced campaigning, I suppose that's my fault.
What I took from Coyne's article was that the Conservatives are focusing on Dion and his values, rather than actual policy. Again, it was my authorship skills that left this unclear.
Yawn!
ReplyDeleteYou lost me at the "past behaviour" part of comment #2.. so, in the absence of reading it myself (again, for the forth time), I will simply say "I agree".. but not really agree, but you get my point that I reserve the right to disagree should the earlier agreement be proved to be erroneous....
I agree to your terms.
ReplyDelete