Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Get Rid of the Bad Liberals

Canadian Cynic makes a good point:

Case in point: the recent national vote on same-sex marriage, during which (despite that vote being an utter waste of time and doomed to failure) 13 Liberals actually voted to re-open the debate. . . . [T]here comes a point when progressives should be getting really freakin' tired of strategically having to support Liberal candidates who act like right-wing wankers.In cases like that, I think it's incumbent on progressives to send a message -- there's a limit to our patience and accommodation. If closet conservatives are caught hanging out in the Liberal party, they should be outed and punished, even if it means some short-term pain.


I agree. The Liberal party is a big tent, but there should be a limit. There should be some basic ideological standards that we require our candidates and MPs to adhere to.

The Liberal Party is the party that brough universal health care and equalization, that decriminalized homosexuality, that brought in the Charter which led to the glorious renaissance in our equality laws, that stopped the Tory attempt to ban abortion, which brought in SSM, the Clarity Act, and which has stood strong against separatism. It is the party of MacKenzie King, of Pearson, of Trudeau.

There simply is no place in the party for people who don't adhere to some basic concepts of social justice and of national unity.

There are plenty of loathesome people currently in the party: Paul Szabo, Dan McTeague spring quickly to mind. Read their speeches on Same Sex Marriage--they sound like Tories. Well, time for them to put their money where their ideas are: Dion should refuse to sign the nomination papers for anyone who does not buy into the Charter and to the Liberal idea of the Just Society. Dion says he wants more women candidates. This will give him a good excuse to install some more.

Sure, the vote last week was one of conscience: but sometimes following your conscience has consequences. This should be one of them.

Happily, in other good news, the Hill Times reports:

Liberal MP Jean Lapierre (Outremont, Que.), however, told The Toronto Star last week that he would not run again.

6 comments:

WestmountLiberal said...

I would gladly lead a charge against our MP from Lac-St-Louis however, as a sitting MP, he has already been nominated for the upcoming election.
I suppose Dion could ask him to stand aside for a woman candidate?

CuriosityCat said...

Tolerance cuts both ways. Even those with bigoted views deserve to be represented in Parliament.

We should be careful about using too fine a comb to separate the wheat from the chaff; one day, those with the combs might come for us ...

Dean P said...

Curiositycat--on two fronts, I disagree. I hate the idea that bad ideas deserve representation as much as good ones. For example, the idea that "Alternate viewpoints" deserve credibility. Holocaust denial is simply not an alternative, equally valid, historical point. Racism is not as valid as nonracism. Naziism is not as valid as hating Nazis. Bigotry simply does not deserve the same respect as tolerance, under the rubric of "other viewpoints are valid."

People accuse some lefties of being relativist. I am not.

Second: Even if it were the case, the Liberal Party does not need to open its doors to bigots. Let bigoted fools vote for bigoted Tory candidates. That's for parties other than the Liberals.

Dean P said...

Westmount--he's been nominated. But Dion could refuse to sign the papers.

While that's slightly antidemocratic, it's a good thing. If everyone who simply was nominated became the candidate, then party affiliations and party platforms become meaningless. Read the defence of the leader's power to refuse to sign the papers or to appoint candidates in Eddie Goldenberg's book--it's very good.

Anonymous said...

Citing Eddie Goldenberg is interesting Dean. This is the guy who complained about Martin attacking Chretien but forgot to inform you newer liberals about the skullduggery by him and Chretien to derail Turner in the 1988 election.

You seem to see all Liberals through the the pinhole of ssm.How narrowminded and intolerant. as for the term "progressive" being bandided about, perhaps you want to spend a little time on that. if following the latest political fad is what you are all about, try the ndp. Its where trendy types like you belong.

Start dealing with real issues we as a Party are going to have to face head on if we are again to earn the voters trust. Goldenberg's latest attempt at revision is a retrograde step backwards. He was probably the reason for the caucus revolt against Chretien by a startling number of your "progressive" MP's.

Liberal fact checker

Dean P said...

Liberal Fact Checker: Are you just a little pissed off the Iggy lost and Martin was a complete failure?