Ibbitson: A Primary system for Liberal Leadership?

John Ibbitson put forward a radical idea today for renewing the Liberal Party in his Globe & Mail article... how about opening up the Liberal Leadership process to an open and national primary system? And you know what? I honestly think that's a GREAT idea!

Most of my readers will know, of course, that I'm a card-carrying Tory, and that I'm committed to the DESTRUCTION of the Liberal Party of Canada... IN IT'S PRESENT INCARNATION, that is. Fundamentally, on a vast majority of the issues, I actually fall more to the left side of the Conservative Party... other than key SoCon issues of course, but I'm actually a lot more "Red Tory" than most people realize. (for example, most long-time readers will recall that I'm not a big fan of "small government"... I'm more a fan of "SMALLER Government", but do think that the Government should indeed be in charge of more sectors than my Libertarian friends do...)

All that being said, I do believe that Canada needs a true "centrist" option, but one that's NOT powerful enough to be able to form a Government on it's own. I think having a smaller rump of a party, say 20-40 seats, that could be a governing partner on either side of the political spectrum, would be a healthy thing for Canada. The problem is that the current LPC doesn't really care about the issues, they care only about POWER... and as such, spends more time trying to score political points with issues, instead of articulating an actual VISION that keeps the Party consistent. (one of the reasons I hate the current LPC so much is that they have the political consistency of JELLO... wobbly, slippery, and impossible to nail to a wall) So an idea that will force the LPC to actually define a more consistent VISION, even one that changes with the changing of it's leadership, (instead of changing on an issue by issue, week to week basis) could be beneficial to Canadians. (And it might help to end the trend of mindless peons who simply vote Liberal because their families have ALWAYS voted Liberal, because people would actually have to start THINKING before they vote for their "default" family option...)

This idea might actually lead to a true "centrist" Canadian party, instead of a leftist/statist conglomerate of special interest groups that Canadian voters soundly rejected in the last election. Imagine... average voters, who want to have a say but don't want to pay a membership or join a Party, being able to pick the "vision" from a field of candidates that most closely aligns to their own. It would result in LESS power for the special interest groups that currently hold the Liberal Party hostage, and create a more "Canadian" centrist party than currently exists. Because you see, right now the Libs think that only what they deem as "Canadian values" are the only values that are legitimate... this would end that notion, because real CANADIANS, and not special interest groups, would be telling the LPC what "Canadian" values really are.

As a result of that, their platform would be RADICALLY different than their most recent offerings. It would be a more realistic reflection on what Canadians are actually thinking, and not what the various LPC Grand Poobahs try to LECTURE Canadians on how they should think. (by the way... how's that strategy working for you guys these days?) Hey, if the regular Joe Canadian was able to have a say like that, they may even come up with a vision that I'd be willing to vote for! (Of course, I'm talking about when Harper retires after his FOURTH CONSECUTIVE MAJORITY MANDATE!

Of course, you all know why I like Harper so much... clearly RIGHT, but pragmatically so, and as such able to make decisions for the good of the WHOLE COUNRTY, not being held captive to the influence of one or two special interest groups. He lines up with my vision of the country perfectly... someone who's clearly "conservative", but can govern a nation filled with people of ALL political stripes. Yea, I'm hoping he sticks around for a few terms.

But back to the Liberal Party... I actually voted for them in 1997. NOT for the LPC of course, but for my LOCAL candidate. I'd met him a number of times, and he more closely aligned with my vision and values than the "used car salesman" that the Reform had put forward, or the "dead man walking" that the PC's had put forward. (plus there was that whole "get your act together before I vote for you guys" attitiue that I had for both parties on the right back in those days...)

So personally, I'm a fan of Ibbitson's idea. Just imagine with me for a few moments... various candidates with truly differing visions, travelling around the country from province to province, with different provinces voting on different days, weeks apart like in the US primaries. Have two "divisions" of provinces, with the smaller ones slated to go first, and the three most populous ones later in the process, to ensure that the Big Three don't get to decide who the leading candidates are before the rest of the country has had their say. Instead of having set dates within each division, have a randomly assigned order every cycle, so that you don't get a PEI or New Brunswick always going first, and thus avoiding a perpetually and overly important New Hampshire or Iowa primary. This would also ensure that no one of the Big Three gets to set the agenda for the other two, which would certainly NOT be helpful to national unity.

By having such a process in place, and allowing ANY Canadian to have their say, it would not only renew the Liberal Party, but it would have a profound impact on the other parties as well... the Conservative Party would thereby define themselves with a truly "RIGHT" vision, and the NDP would more likely define themselves with a truly "LEFT" vision. Once the votes are cast in the General Election, Canadians will have more clearly indicated where they want the country to go, and opening up the potential for true coalition governments that would likely more accurately reflect the political will of the people.

For the record, it would actually be NICE to have a real CHOICE when it comes to voting... because right now, I don't have much choice at all. If I don't want to vote Conservative, I don't have an option... there's no way I'd give the NDP the keys to 24 Sussex (though I do think you're a nice guy and all Jack...) and I know the current Liberal Party would simply continue their pattern of social destruction that started way back in 1968. (fortunately, I've got it easy these days, with Harper in charge... cause I actually WANT him to be leading the country. As for the next leader? Who knows... a Mike Harris or Bernard Lord sure, but a Kim Campbell, a Jean Charest, or maybe a Libertarian? Not a chance!)

And I'm being serious here guys... this isn't some nefarious post, secretly wishing that they take my advice and completely destroy themselves... this is an honest evaluation of the idea. It's an idea that I'd very likely partake in... and if I don't like the result of the Leadership contest, I've still got the Conservatives as an option! But I think such an idea would offer real CHOICE to Canadian voters, and would allow for an open, honest, and regularly renewed Liberal Party of Canada. Which is, if I'm correct, what they're aiming for this time around. Well, at least that's what many Liberal voters are hoping for... but as for the current crop of Party insiders, I'm not holding my breath.

Pro-life protesters jailed... Shame on Carleton University

A disgusting display of hypocrisy by Carleton University... a place where thug-like tactics of the left are rewarded, and where peaceful and meek protectors of the unborn are thrown into the back of the paddy wagon.

I am privileged to know Nicholas, one of the young men arrested today.

TorStar BUSTED making "edits" to Rob Ford's Wiki page

What that? The left-wing media getting actively involved in trashing a right-wing candidate? Say it ain't so... oops, looks like it is so.

Someone at The Toronto Star has been busted making a number of edits to Rob Ford's personal Wikipedia page, adding a link to a satirical website that posted obscene content mocking the Toronto mayoral front-runner.

Not that I see this as anything new... they just got caught this time.

Time for a new centrist party in Canada?

With Iffy taking a hard left turn, maybe it's time to shake things up a bit... maybe it's time for a new federal Party.

I know, it's just crazy talk, but hear me out on this one... there are a whole lot of socially conservative Liberals who are being systematically pushed out of their own party. Just look at the recent vote on abortion, and Iffy's new orders to vote in favour of keeping the Gun Registry. There are Liberals who know full well that they're going to lose their seats on these two issues alone. I've even been hearing rumblings from supposedly "safe" Liberal seats that their MP's are at risk over their votes in these recent fiascoes.

But I also know full well that there are a few "progressives" who are still with us over here in the Conservative Party of Canada, who have never quite fully integrated within the new Party. Also various activists too, who whine and complain about our positions on various issues, but who hold their nose and vote for us when it comes time at the ballot box.

So, what's the solution? Perhaps it's time for a few of the "Red Tories" and the "Blue Grits" to start talking... perhaps it's time for a new truly "centrist" voice on the political landscape.

Quite frankly, there will probably never be a better time than this to shake up the political landscape in Canada. The creation of a small "centrist" coalition, founded by a core of existing MP's, from both the Liberals and the Conservatives, could shake things up fairly dramatically. They could become the "independents" of the Canadian political landscape, the group to which the other main parties would have to make significant overtures in order to form a Government.

Stop and think about it for a minute, in all seriousness. The Conservatives have no natural allies from which to form a coalition. Likewise neither do the Liberals, due to all the animosity that exists between them and the NDP. The formation of a core centrist "rump", if you will, would allow Canadians to raise their voices on the issues and say "We want something somewhere between both of you guys", which is what I believe a significant amount of Canadians are saying these days.

Of course, I'm not advocating for the formation of a new Party who should make the PMO their goal. What I'm talking about is the formation of a group of MP's who are better able to reflect the views of their constituents, by allowing them to place themselves somewhere ideologically between the two major parties, and allowing them to negotiate on issues between themselves and the other two major parties, thereby allowing them hold some of the cards when it comes time to decide who gets to form the Government after an election.

Yes, it would introduce a degree of uncertainty in our system... but in reality, no more so than currently exists, as I think we're set for a series of minority Parliaments for a number of years to come. I just think that now would be an ideal time for such an initiative to fly, even if it's just a short lived endeavour that lasts only for the next few election cycles. And I think it's something that has a genuine chance to work right now, with the current polarization that's going on within the mainline parties, and the rump of MP's on both sides of the isle that fall somewhere in the middle of all this. I can name off about a dozen MP's who fall into that category, lower profile MP's who could make their mark on the Canadian political system for years to come by pursing such an idea.

My two cents on things. Of course, for the record, I'm not planning on giving up my CPC membership anytime soon... though I certainly would have to give any such new group an honest listen before casting my ballot...

Ignatieff's abortion plank changes the channel, and earns him more critisim

We all are aware of Iggy's crass partisan move(*) this week, a move that was intended to smear Prime Minister Harper and paint him into a box on the divisive issue of abortion.

Well, it looks like this one's really gotten away from him and blown up in his face, first with one of his own MP's rebuking him, and now with several Catholic leaders publicly condemning him for playing politics with the important issue of women's and children's health abroad.

And they don't mince their words either...

Calgary Bishop Fred Henry yesterday called Mr. Ignatieff's proposal "pathetic," while on Thursday Archbishop Thomas Collins of Toronto labelled the Liberal leader's position on abortion and the developing world "sad."

"In light of the many positive contributions that Canada can make to the improvement of maternal and child health, it is astonishing that the leader of the Opposition has issued an official statement advocating contraception and abortion as fundamental elements in addressing this important issue," said Archbishop Collins. "Even those who think that abortion should be allowed do not, however, propose it as a positive contribution to the good of society."

Bishop Henry was even more blunt.

"I thought it was pathetic for a political leader to suggest that abortion is somehow tied to the health of women and children," said Bishop Henry. "It was a particularly crass remark in light of all the orphaned children we now see in Haiti. It was absolutely incredible that he would say that and he is alienating religious people with these comments. This will not win him votes."

Opening up this "Pandora's Box" has also had the effect of forcing him off message for the last few days, because instead of being able to answer questions about other Liberal issues while on the road, he keeps getting hammered with questions from the media about abortion, and about the fallout he's getting over it. He's been forced to react for two days now, instead of being able to put forward the ideas being generated from the various round tables the Liberals are hosting in various cities.

Rule number one... when your opponent is on the ropes, and you have control of the agenda, you DON'T do anything to change the channel. And that's what Ignatieff has gone and done with this one. In trying to score a political cheap shot on Harper, he cleanly missed, and has ended up taking a few blows himself. What's more, is that he's gone and changed the channel for Harper... without Harper even having to say a word on the issue. His caucus has been smart and not put their foot in their mouth, and left Iggy on the stage all by himself on this one... where he's started a fire that he can't seem to put out.

And on that note, I'll say this... thanks for the helping hand Iggy! Oh, don't worry... we'll be surely making use of your remarks in some of those ridings where we were losing support, and where you were starting to make headway. As this one will fire up some of our base that was starting to become apathetic, you just reminded many Canadians of faith why they DON'T want you to become Prime Minister... with an issue that we could never talk about. But you did that for us, so thanks again!


* So much for not using "the politics of division" there guys... wasn't that supposed to be one of you hallmarks Iggy?

Left trying to frep the CTV poll

Heads up everyone, the anti-Prorogue folks are telling all their supporters to frep the CTV poll about Harper's decision to extend the sitting days for Parliament. Let's make sure we keep things honest and even, eh?

Now there's irony for you... these folks get mad at Harper for cutting the number of days Parliament sits short... then they get mad at him for trying to make up for some of those lost days. Just proves that these characters are just "Harper Haters", despite their efforts to appear "non-partisan" and "pro-democracy".

Oh, and don't forget to join the group... Vote for Rod!

Iffy Liberals trying to make hay out of the truth?

While I'm not a fan of his, shall we say, unParliamentary language, I feel it's important to come to the defense of Nova Scotia MP Gerald Keddy today, after his comment about "some" unemployed folks in Halifax.

Okay, firstly, his comment from the Halifax Chronicle Herald...

OTTAWA — If anyone ever stops Nova Scotia farmers from hiring migrant labourers to harvest their crops, they would destroy a lot of businesses because unemployed Nova Scotians don’t want those jobs, says Gerald Keddy, the Conservative MP for South Shore-St. Margarets.

"Nova Scotians won’t do it — all those no-good *&#^^#*^&# ["illigitimate children"] sitting on the sidewalk in Halifax that can’t get work," Mr. Keddy said Monday.

Okay, notice how SPECIFIC he is with that comment? He's very specifically talking about the guys who are "sitting on the sidewalk in Halifax that can’t get work". But what's the issue at hand that he's commenting on? He's commenting on the issue of Mexican migrant workers... who are coming into Nova Scotia to do the jobs that the guys "sitting on the sidewalk" are REFUSING TO DO! He's talking about the truly lazy folks, who are most likely sitting there, collecting change and government benefits, while there are perfectly good jobs available for them!

I see them downtown in my area all the time... kids who don't WANT to work, but moan and complain every time someone even remotely threatens a government program that they mooch off of. These kids seriously just sit there all day long, "hanging out", leeching off the system, rather than contributing to it. They're irresponsible, argumentative, and have a "woe is me" martyr's complex. I see them usually gathered in their "spots", and you'll see them there every day without fail. They know the system, they know where to be and when to get the free stuff, and most of them have cell phones and iPods to boot. You'll see them in every Canadian city, part of Trudeau's legacy to our nation. Believe me, it's a CHOICE they've made... which is exactly what Mr. Keddy is taking them to task for!

(for the record... I am NOT talking about those who have mental issues who have fallen through the cracks. I am FULL supportive of programs for them to get them back on their feet, and they certainly need MORE, not LESS, help from all of us!)

So why is the Opposition trying to turn this into political hay? Because that's what they do... they put all their energies into scoring political points, not actually addressing the root issues, like Mr. Keddy was trying to raise with his, shall we say, unfortunately worded comments.

Thoughts? Am I way off base here? Or do you agree with me and see this as a much larger issue that needs to be addressed? We DO have issues of poverty in this country, but I don't count the folks who are choosing to "sit on the sidewalk" and refuse legitimate work as being in need of our help... I want to make sure that the people who REALLY need our help are getting it when they need it! Maybe I'm just cyinical, after all my years working in "the system", and seeing the levels of abuse that are rife within it. We need a serious overhaul, but while the Liberals are still around, willing to turn every single little offhand comment into a huge political scandal, I don't see much hope for real change... do you?

NB Liberals - "NO Canada"?

And Liberals wonder why we think they're "unpatriotic"... everyone remember that little incident back in January where a New Brunswick school principal decided not ban "O Canada" in his school?

Well, it looks like it's now become a festering cancer throughout the New Brunswick school system... according to CFRB's John Moore, 40 New Brunswick schools have now decided to "opt out" of singing "O Canada" in their schools in the morning. On an interesting note that does not bode well for national unity, almost all of these schools are apparently French speaking ones.

Did a little digging, and according to Aaron Wherry at Maclean's, the New Brunswick government supposedly mandated the singing of "O Canada" after that little incident. But according to John Moore this morning on CFRB, that's not happening.

What on earth is the Graham government up to on this one? Was the singing of "O Canada" indeed mandated for all New Brunswick schools this fall? If so, why are they allowing these 40 schools to get away with defying the government's directive?

Here's a great opportunity to prove themselves... if the Liberals in New Brunswick really are as patriotic as they say they are, (hang on, anyone actually have a quote from any NB Liberals on whether or not they actually "Love Canada"?) they can stand up for this great nation of ours and ensure that their schools are continuing to foster a patriotic environment for our kids to grow up in.

I mean, we can all see how unpatriotic Canada is becoming... after all, the Liberals are putting forward an American/Brit for Prime Minister...

YCF efforts ramping up again

Thought we'd heard the last of this... oh well. The YCF is attempting to branch out again, forming an "informal association" of Conservative youth. This time they're targeting individual EDA's, who's leadership might not be as informed about the goals and aims of the YCF's leadership... namely Immanuel. In my opinion, it's just his way of trying to make himself a player, which he's not. (he's actually disliked by many "youth", in part because of some of his antics at the Winnipeg Convention, and in part because many people see his efforts as a veiled attempt to lay the foundation for a "Youth Wing" vote at a future Convention)

And just for the record, so people don't get the impression that I'm just attacking him... he and I have exchanged several messages in the past few months, and during those conversations I advised him on how he could move forward with his ideas, while at the same time ensuring that his efforts weren't construed as an attempt to bring in a "Youth Wing" through the back door. I also clearly advised him that I'd oppose any efforts to continue his campaign in it's current form. Needless to say, he didn't heed my advice. This post is my re-entry into the counter-campaign.

This is the e-mail is currently circulating the around various EDA's. I'd advise all CPC members to ensure that your EDA's Board is warned to ignore it accordingly. I'll definitely be warning all my local boards.

Good day "x",

My name is Immanuel Giulea and I am a young conservative activist from Brossard, QC.

I am writing to you today on behalf of the Young Conservative Forum (YCF). The group was started nearly eight months ago under my leadership. My initiative had the objective to give a voice to young conservatives at the national level. [AH, YOU MEAN LIKE A YOUTH WING?]

The purpose of this letter is to introduce the organization and to explore opportunities for cooperation between your EDA and the Young Conservative Forum.

Today, the YCF has over 500 members on its Facebook group, and with over a dozen MPs, MPPs and other important supporters who are influential conservatives. The YCF aims to fill a void: whereas all provincial conservative like-minded parties have a youth association that allows young people to network, the territories and federal levels do not. [BECAUSE WE CLEARLY SAID WE DON'T WANT OR NEED A YOUTH WING IMMANUEL... YOUTH WINGS ARE JUST SANDBOXES TO KEEP THE KIDS AWAY FROM THE GROWN-UPS TABLE!!!] The current CPC Energy program is only present in about 40 campuses, many of which are not very active, and outside of the campus clubs, no events are organized. This means that over 500 campuses across the country are not represented.

The YCF is built around the concept of a grassroots organization with a bottom-up approach that will empower young conservatives. We are an informal association for young conservatives, not a youth wing. [YEA, RIGHT... SORRY, MOST OF US JUST DON'T BELIEVE YOU WHEN YOU SAY THAT] The mission of the YCF can be defined as to “provide networking, training, political experience, and discussion opportunities for young Canadians interested in advancing the ideals of individual liberty, limited government and free enterprise in Canada”.

More precisely, the YCF has five primary objectives:

- Connect young Canadians aged 30 and under, regardless of their political background (fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, progressive conservatives, small-c conservatives, green conservatives, libertarians, classic liberals and republicans) who want to engage and meet with other like-minded young Canadians.

- Foster involvement of the next generation of conservatives by assisting and facilitating Party/EDA/Campus events;

- Attract and educate young Canadians about conservatism. Train and mobilize those interested in gaining political experience;

- Raise awareness of conservative principles. Counter the left-wing bias on campuses and in the mainstream media by promoting discussions and debate amongst young conservative activists;

- Portray a positive image of the conservative brand:
- friendly of entrepreneurs/businesses, local artists, amateur athletes;
- promote environmental stewardship;
- promote foreign policy based on the belief that Canada has an active role to play in international relations;
- individual liberties and personal responsibilities belong in the hands of individuals, not those of the state.

In closing, we would like to emphasize that the YCF would like to become a partner with the EDA in their role “to encourage the participation and recruitment of youth”. We therefore respectfully ask if your EDA Board would consider and be willing to support the initiatives of the YCF. If you have EDA members under the age of 30 who would like to get more involved in the political process, could you please refer them to the Young Conservative Forum.

[AND CHECK THIS LITTLE BIT OUT...] The YCF is not an affiliated organization of the Conservative Party of Canada because the constitution does not allow for a youth organization, and creating one would require a constitutional amendment. [OH, SO YOU'D SUPPORT THE FORMATION OF A YOUTH WING IF THE CONSTITUTION ALLOWED IT? YEA, I THOUGHT SO...] We do not seek to have such an amendment made.

There are currently two events planned that fit our mission.

- The first one is a panel discussion about the “Future of conservatism in Canada”, this event takes place at Café République in Montreal (1200 Peel St). Similar events will take place in Calgary and Toronto in early 2010, and others will follow in the spring. These events fall under the objective to “raise awareness about conservative principles”.

- The second event hosts Satya Das, awarding-winning journalist and author of “Green Oil” which discusses how the oil sands can become the foundation of a green economy in Canada. This event falls under the objective to “Portray a positive image of the conservative brand”, specifically “promote environmental stewardship”.

If you would like to attend either of these events, please visit http://ycforum.eventbrite.com/ or send an email to info.ycf.jfc@gmail.com.

I once again wish to thank you for your time and consideration,

Immanuel Giulea
Founder and Contact for Quebec

I'll say it again... NO YOUTH WING. So long as this idea stays in it's little sandbox, it's fine, but I still think it's an undercover effort to lay the foundation for a youth wing.

Of COURSE I'm going to comment on this one

From today's Toronto Sun: "Loss of faith in Grits: Study"

As I have been saying for some time now, the way that the Liberal Party of Canada treats people of faith IS DISGUSTING. Though I once supported one of their candidates in the 1997 election, it's unlikely that I could ever do so again, because that Party HATES, truely hates, people of faith. To them, if you are a person of faith, you are to be ridiculed and marginalized, at any and all costs. To them, our opinion is irrelevant... not only is it irrelevant, to them, it's a great big bullzye for them to shoot at relentlessly.

Take, for example, the SSM debate... which was the beginning of the end of supporting the Liberals for people of faith. While many of us understood that accomodation needed to be made via civil unions of something of that nature, the Liberal Party of Canada decided instead to pit one group of Canadians against another, and said it was an all or nothing proposition. They ignored repeated calls for dialouge and compromise, and rammed their agenda down the throats of faith groups.

And the unintended consequences we tried to warn them about are now becoming a reality. What's that, polygamy is right around the corner you say? Can't be true, the Liberals said that would never happen. And this is just the tip of the iceberg of the "unintended consequences"...

Either way, Elizabeth Thompson is bang on in this article... THIS LOSS OF SUPPORT IS 100% THIER OWN FAULT.

Loss of faith in Grits: Study
Party's support dips among evangelical Christians
By ELIZABETH THOMPSON, NATIONAL BUREAU
24th September 2009

The Liberal Party was once the most popular political party with Canada's millions of evangelical Christians but has lost much of that support to the Conservatives and the New Democrats, a new study says.

And it is largely its own fault.

"It's depressing as hell," Liberal MP John McKay said. "It shows a voting trend which is not favourable to my party and I think we have some repair work to do."

McKay, who is also an evangelical Christian, said Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff is taking the findings of the study seriously and is trying to repair relations with Canada's estimated 3.5-4 million Evangelical Christians.

The study, by Don Hutchinson and Rick Hiemstra of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, tracked the voting patterns of Canada's evangelical Christians from 1996 to 2008. Among the things they found was that there is a lot of difference between the way evangelical Christians vote in the United States and in Canada.

For one, Canada's evangelicals don't vote in a monolithic block for one single party. Secondly, while the most popular party with evangelicals is currently the Conservatives, the second most popular party is the NDP.

SOCIAL JUSTICE

The Liberals used to be a natural home for evangelical Christians, who care about issues such as social justice. In 1996, the Liberals were by far the most popular party with evangelical Christians in every region except the West, where the Reform Party was slightly more popular.

However, those voters began to move away from the Liberals after the party denigrated and marginalized them, the study says.

"Each time Canadians went to the federal polls in 2004, 2006 and 2008, the Liberals only managed to hold on to roughly half of the evangelical voters they had at the previous election," says the report.

"When evangelical voters left, they generally went to the Conservatives and the NDP, in a 2 to 1 ratio."

The fact so many evangelicals turned to the NDP and the Green Party leads the authors to conclude that it wasn't as much the policy positions adopted by the Liberals but the way the Liberals treated evangelical Christians.

In 2006, moral issues were a priority for about 25% of evangelicals when it came to deciding how to vote. The study found 75% cited other issues such as the economy, health care and cleaning up corruption as being the priority.

ELIZABETH.THOMPSON@SUNMEDIA.CA

OPIRG-UofT loves George Galloway

Wow, the more I find out about these OPIRG guys, the more I want to shine a few million candles worth of daylight on their antics.

First it was the UofG's rigging of the OPIRG-Guelph nominations... then the attempt at Queen's to remove a Tory from their ASM. Now, it's the UofT's turn.

The OPIRG over at the U of T are mounting an effort (including the standard "disinformation", to be polite) to protest the denial of entry to Canada of British MP George "Hamas" Galloway.

Sorry guys, but first of all, it wasn't Kenney who made the call, it was the buracrats. Kenney DOES have to power to overturn that call, but he isn't, and for that I'm glad... because Canada does not support those who support terrorists.

Hamas is a banned organization in Canada, and Galloway is a known supporter and fundraiser for them. Hamas supports the continued use of terror, therefore, if you support Hamas, and are intending to attend fundraisers while here in Canada, why on earth would you think we'd let him in?

I wonder how the student body of U of T feels about their monies being used to support a terrorist supporter... doesn't matter how you feel about Israel, the fact that Hamas is a terrorist organization, and is directly responsible for killing people, is beyond dispute.

Humm, U of T student fees being used to support those who support murderers... wonder how they feel about that. Brought to you by the OPIRG-Toronto.

And when it comes to the OPIRG, I'm just getting warmed up... the e-mails are starting to come in.

University of Guelph's CSA successful in rigging OPIRG Guelph Board elections

Congratulations to the leftists at the University of Guelph's CSA for their successful rigging of the Guelph OPIRG Board elections!

According to their website, the nomination deadline for candidates for the OPIRG Guelph's Board is now TOMORROW... after they were successful in getting the deadline for nominations extended in an effort to ensure that several conservative leaning students are blocked from joining the Board.

Problem is... someone within their own ranks didn't agree with the CSA's dictatorial tactics, and published their panicked e-mail plotting for the whole world to see.

As promised... the evidence of electoral tampering by members of Guelph's CSA!
(NOTE: as I understand, each of the original recipients of this e-mail were contacted, and several indicated they had no part in this scandal... as such, their names have been removed from the offending e-mail to protect their innocence)

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "Claire Whitehead" (clairemw6@gmail.com)
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 3:50:48 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Fwd: URGENT! Conservative Take Over of OPIRG-Guelph

Hello,

Please read below this really messed up news regarding OPIRG-Guelph, an organization that does amazing work on campus and in the community.

I'm leaving Guelph in May, or else you better believe I'd be trying to get on the board. If it's at all feasible for you, please consider running for the OPIRG board (when word comes that the deadline has been extended, I can pass it along); it's a lot less intimidating than it might sound. Whether or not you'll consider running, please PLEASE pass this message along to folks you think should know.

RL [Robyn Letson]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Cailey Campbell (csaexternal@gmail.com)
Date: Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 6:44 PM
Subject: Fwd: URGENT! Conservative Take Over of OPIRG-Guelph
To: Robyn Letson (robynletson@gmail.com), (NAME REMOVED) , Eduardo Huesca (ehuesca@uoguelph.ca), Sarah Ayton (sayton@uoguelph.ca), Zoe Barrett-Wood (zoebarrettwood@gmail.com), Arthur Churchyard (Arthur.Churchyard[at]gmail.com), Scott Gilbert (E-MAIL REMOVED AS PER SCOTT'S REQUEST), dmartins@uoguelph.ca, (NAME REMOVED)

Hey!

So, I'm not sure if many of you have seen this article http://ryersonfreepress.ca/site/?p=745&preview=true but what happened in Waterloo is now happening if Guelph. Today 4 members of the Guelph Campus Conservatives submitted nomination forms for the OPIRG Board elections. This is a move to compromise OPIRG and defund the organization. If you know of ANY student who could run in the OPIRG Board election or ANY community member who could fill the two community seats please, please, please send them this email or get them to contact Marnie at opirgorc@gmail.com. The nominations forms were due today, hence the 4 conservatives submitted them today, but the deadline for nomination will hopefully be extended again. I will let you know when the deadline is extended. The nomination forms can be found here.

http://www.opirgguelph.org/index.php?mode=2&linkID=1&l=0&page=0

If you can help at all please, please do! OPIRG is so important to this campus!

Arden

--
Arden Hagedorn
Local Affairs Commissioner
Central Student Association
UC 274 | University of Guelph
--
csalocal@uoguelph.ca
519.824.4120 x 54407
--
csaonline.ca || thecannon.ca


--
Arden Hagedorn
Local Affairs Commissioner
Central Student Association
UC 274 | University of Guelph
--
csalocal@uoguelph.ca
519.824.4120 x 54407
--
csaonline.ca || thecannon.ca


--
Cailey Campbell
External Commissioner
Central Student Association
UC 274 | University of Guelph
--
csaext@uoguelph.ca
519.824.4120 x 58328
--
csaonline.ca || thecannon.ca


--
Robyn L.
robynletson@gmail.com
www.praxismetaxisadidassneakers.blogspot.com

What's this? Members of the U of Guelph's CSA attempting to interfere in the elections of the OPIRG Board? And using official CSA titles, positions and resources to boot? Surely there's a rule or two against that sort of unethical behaviour, right?

Interestingly enough, it's not the first time one of the aforementioned parties has been linked to underhanded electoral tactics...

Whether or not it's against the rules, it looks like they were successful in rigging the vote by getting the nomination date moved, after it had already passed, in order to allow them to find more left-leaning, or rather, more suitable candidates for their Board... I came into possession of this follow-up e-mail, sent today by someone within the OPIRG...

----- Forwarded Message -----From: "Marnie - OPIRG-Guelph ORC" (opirgorc@gmail.com)
To: (CANDIDATES NAMES REMOVED)
Sent: Monday, 23 March, 2009 12:48:56 GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Notice: Change of Date for elections & Nomination period extended

Hello candidates,

This email is to inform you that the OPIRG Board has made a decision to extend the Board Nomination period to Tuesday March 24th at 5pm and that the elections will now be taking place on Tuesday March 31st. I am in the process of updating our web site and other notices to reflect this.

Marnie

Marnie Eves
Organization & Research Coordinator
OPIRG Guelph
www.opirgguelph.org
1 Trent Lane,
University of Guelph
Guelph ON
N1G 2W1
519-824-2091

Interesting, don't you think? Several conservative leaning candidates apply for the positions within the previously approved time frame, the CSA panics, and then uses their influence to get the dates moved to allow them to find other "hand picked" candidates... or at least, according to the above panicked e-mails, a couple warm bodies who can fill the chairs, who are more likely to vote in accordance with the CSA's wishes.

Welcome to campus politics folks... leftist style!

Thing is, as I said before, it's not the first time one of these names has been linked to electoral fraud... a sharp eyed source sent me this link from a couple years back, from the U of Guelph's CSA run "The Canon" website no less... "Elections Make Us Crazy"

The highlights...

That was to be the only spell of tranquility in the seven-hour meeting, as tempers immediately flared up when the matter of elections began to be discussed. At the heart of the matter was an e-mail circulated about External Commissioner candidate Romesh Hettiarachchi. While the e-mail did not explicitly call for voting against Hettiarachchi or in favour of Cailey Campbell, his only rival in the race, Hettiarachchi felt that the email was nothing short of character assassination and was severely detrimental to his chances in the election and to his career beyond this university. Campbell was ultimately elected with a 221-vote margin over Hettiarachchi.

Of course, Campbell was never directly implicated in that 2007 scandal, but it certainly doesn't help her image when she's been caught red-handed trying to interfere in this one.

There's likely a whole lot more to come, so stay tuned... I'll post more as my sources gather more information on this growing scandal.

Warren and Liberal bloggers attack Muslim Canadians

Take their argument to it's logical conclusion... anyone who believes in "the Creation myth", as the majority of the Muslim world does, is ineligable to hold a Cabinet portfolio in Canada, at least according to Warren Kinsella along with many other Liberal bloggers.

They haven't said that in so many words, mind you, but in their attempts to once again attack a Conservative Cabinet Minister, who happens to be a Christian, that's exactly what they've done. If a belief in "Creation" is a litmus test for Cabinet-ineligability here in Canada, then you can pretty much rule out a large chunk of Canada's Muslim population.

From Wikipedia:

Creation Myth - Islam
The creation narrative of Islam is split among many verses in the Qur'an. This narrative is similar to the Judeo-Christian accounts of creation. According to the Qur'an, the skies and the earth were joined together as one "unit of creation", after which they were "cloved asunder".[18]

The Qur'an states that the process of creation took 6 days or epochs (depending on the interpretation).

What's even more sad is that they don't even realize that they're also saying that a good percentage of the Jewish population is also automaticly ineligable to hold public office in this great country of ours.

Hello? What is this, 1930's Germany? And the Liberals claim their "friends" of the Jews? I think not, when they so openly riducule the Jewish Holy Book, the Torah.

Why is it that Liberals seem to so vehemently hate Christians? Or anyone of faith for that matter?

This might get me on board against the CHRC

I've been one of the bloggers reluctant to get on board against the Canadian Human Rights Commissions, and their out to lunch Ontario counterparts. The reason is that I'm actually more in agreement with Warren Kinsella on this file... yes, they need to be reformed, but way back when they stuck working within their original mandate, it was a useful forum to fight discrimination. For the record, when the vote in Winnipeg took place about striking down Section 13, I intentionally made sure I was out of the room.

However, if this case gets any traction, you better believe that I'll jump on board the bandwagon seeking to kill the Ontario Human Rights Tribunals once and for all.

I'm sorry DUDE but when you applied for membership, you we're a man... or, at least, still a man. We can get into all the symantic debates about attempted gender swapping all you want, but this guy was PRE-OPERATIVE... which means there's absolutely no doubt about what gender he was at the time. And he was trying to get membership to a women's only gym, including the changerooms? How do all you women feel about that? That's right... a guy wanted the right to change with you.

This one better be thrown right out the window, PRONTO. I'll be making a few phone calls about this one.

By the way, if anyone's interested... this one is post #2000 for this wii little blog.

Liblogs in full blown REVOLT

We all knew this was coming... with the installation, instead of of the election, of Michael Ignatieff as the new Liberal leader, and then the imposition of the "official" Iggy/Liberal viewpoint by Jason on the Liblogs, things have now erupted into a full blown revolt. (Interesting tidbit... isn't it interesting how many former Rae supporters, or at least left-leaning Liberals, are a part of this little "rebellion"?)

There's been a number of their better known and respected bloggers who have tended their "resignation" from the Liberal aggregator, and a new aggregator has popped up, called Liberals ONLINE. It's pretty basic at the moment, but they're apparently working on it.

Sorta takes me back to, oh, I dunno, the "conservative" movement here in Canada of the 1990's.

Here's just a few posts from "former" Libloggers...

James Curran:
Ignatieff/Harper/Canada Offside with the Rest of the World
LiberalsONLINE.ca (intro post for the new aggregator)
For #*$&*@ Sake Michael! SAY SOMETHING!!!

The Mound of Sound: (who's now renamed his blog, "The Disaffected Lib")
Attention Liberals - This Remind You of Anyone?
Warning - may be offensive to Liberal ears

Ledaro:
Liberal Party - Then and Now

James C. Morton:
Good bye to Libloggs

Constant Vigilance:
Ignatieff - Trudeau follow-up or The Iggy Conundrum

U of Guelph students continue to attack Gen. Hiller

These photos just in from my contacts at the U of Guelph... even after their vicious article attacking retired Gen. Rick Hiller was removed from the UofG's website thecannon.ca (the replacement note from the operating committee is rather interesting, posted below), a small group of extremist students at the University are continuing their personal attacks on Mr. Hiller, subjecting the institution to further shame and criticism, such as David Akin's public and scathing one from late last week.

It seems a group of students have just unfurled this banner in the U of Guelph's student commons...


But I'd like to draw your attention to the following photo, because it appears my contacts have identified one of the other masterminds behind this shameful display... former Guelph Communist candidate Drew Garvie.



My contacts have let me know that instead of just letting this issue go, the group responsible for these disgusting attacks on the General are continuing their vicious attacks by reading their pulled article in public over a megaphone. Guess it's a good thing I posted the original article in full.

REPLACEMENT POSTING AT THECANNON.CA

Editorial: Rick Hillier Editorial
by The Cannon Operating Committee

Jan 11, 2009 - The Rick Hillier editorial written by Scott Gilbert and posted on The Cannon Friday, January 9 has been removed while The Cannon operating committee investigates its appropriateness. As with other writing that appears on this website, this editorial does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Central Student Association and the Guelph Campus Co-op who jointly administer The Cannon.

UPDATE: Well I've obviously got the attention of the protesters at the UofG... some interesting Google searches wound their way to my blog this afternoon.

Hey guys... sup.

Gen. Hiller called a "War Monger" by U of G's "thecanon.ca" editor

First, it was the UoG's CSA attempt to ban a pro-life student group... for which they got shredded in the local and national media. Now, they calling retired General Rick Hillier A WAR MONGER.

Yes, you read that correctly... Scott Gilbert, one of the editors of thecanon.ca (the CSA sanctioned and supported online portal of the UofG's undergraduate body) wrote an article yesterday, decrying the University's decision to honour him with the Lincoln Alexander Outstanding Leader Award on January 13th.

One of the University of Guelph's former students, who was at one time the Editor-in-Chief of the student paper there, the Ontarion, has come out and said that the article is "absolutely shameful", is "beyond the pale", is "a hateful and vicious smear", is a "vicious attack on Canada's former chief of defence staff", is "monstrous libel", and that he was "saddened and ashamed" as an alumni to see it published.

Perhaps you've heard his name before... it's David Aiken. Yes, that David Aiken, of CanWest Global, formerly of CTV.

I wonder how the University of Guelph's Chancellor feels about all this... none other than newly minted Senator Pamela Wallin.

I think the CSA has really stepped in it this time.

(and just so no one makes a dumb comment, this kid is indeed a "loony lefty", as he was the Communist candidate in Guelph in the 05/06 election... look it up)

UPDATE: Full text of the disgusting article posted below, just in case, I don't know, it somehow "disappears":

Editorial: U of G to Honour War Monger
by Scott Gilbert

Jan 9, 2009 - "Retired Canadian general and chief of defence staff Rick Hillier will receive the Lincoln Alexander Outstanding Leader Award on Jan. 13 from the University of Guelph's College of Management and Economics (CME)."

When I read this earlier today I nearly pissed myself. The press release was baffling and showed an utter disregard for human rights - a poor reflection on our university. Let me explain.

Hillier is being honoured for "his exceptional abilities as a communicator with soldiers, the public and the media..."

Exceptional abilities as a communicator? Rick Hillier is the source of the infamous linguistic rampage of a nature you wouldn't even expect from George W. Bush. In 2005 he spoke about the role of Canada's Armed Forces in Afghanistan. The CTV News website quotes him as saying: "We're not the public service of Canada," he said. "We're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people." Really? Whatever happened to Canada's role as peacekeeper? Why is it our job to "kill people" in Afghanistan? What about due process, or the right to a fair trial?

As absurd as this already was, he went on to say the role of Canada's JTF-2 soldiers in Afghanistan was to join the fight against "detestable murderers and scumbags". How eloquent of him - just the kind of terminology sure to help our image abroad in these difficult times.

Then in 2007 the Globe and Mail exposed the debacle of prisoner transfers. This is when, under the oversight of Hillier and O'Connor, Canadian soldiers where transferring some of the prisoners they captured over to Afghan forces where they were subsequently tortured. The Globe's Graeme Smith wrote: "Afghans detained by Canadian soldiers and sent to Kandahar's notorious jails say they were beaten, whipped, starved, frozen, choked and subjected to electric shocks during interrogation."

One of these prisoners, Mahmad Gul, 33, said he was interrogated for three days by Afghan police in May of 2006. He said Canadians told him to ‘Give them real information, or they will do more bad things to you,' and said that although it was the Afghan police actually doing the dirty work, the Canadian soldiers who visited him between beatings had surely heard his screams. Reminiscent of Abu Ghraib?

Now this award is going to someone who supposedly demonstrated "exceptional abilities as a communicator with...the public and the media..."

What did the media think of him during the prisoner transfer scandal? Well, at the time there were numerous calls for the resignation of Hillier and O'Connor from both political parties and many public advocacy groups, including the well-respected Council of Canadians. The Toronto Star's usually very conservative columnist Rosie Dimanno wrote an article with the subtitle "[Hillier] defends decision to hand over captured Taliban as 'right thing to do'". At the end of this piece that looks at the gaffes of Canada's Armed Forces over prisoner abuse, she writes:

"Asked if his own leadership should be put into question as a result of this imbroglio, the general responded: 'Well, that wouldn't be a question to ask me, would it? You'd have to ask the men and women that I lead. And you'd have to ask my Prime Minister, of course.'

The answer is self-evident."

Sounds like even the Star approved a call for his resignation. Is he really the effective communicator the university is honouring him for?

And I love the quote Maclean's ran in 2008. "Asked early this year about a gaffe by a Harper staffer on the delicate subject of Afghan prisoner transfers, Hillier, who was on a winter holiday in the Dominican Republic when it happened, remarked, 'I was on my third rum and Coke, and I really didn't give a damn.'" Surely the words of an exceptional leader and someone devoted to advocacy, collaboration, and scholarship.

Hillier also faces a legal challenge from Amnesty International and the BC Civil Liberties Union (Amnesty International Canada and British Columbia Civil Liberties Association v. Chief of Defence Staff for the Canadian Armed Forces, General Rick J. Hillier, Minister of National Defence and Attorney General of Canada)

In the case, they argue "that transfers of these detainees violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Canada’s international human rights obligations not to transfer detainees when there is a high probability of torture or ill treatment." The case is against Rick Hillier himself.

Another Globe and Mail article contains the following quotes from "Human rights experts and university professors Michael Byers and Amir Attaran"

"In the current circumstances, they said, Canadian Forces members are complicit in the alleged torture that is inflicted on prisoners of war in Afghan prisons.

'Under international law, you are prohibited from transferring to torture. You are prohibited from facilitating torture in any way,' said Mr. Byers, who teaches international law and politics at the University of British Columbia.

'We're not simply speaking about the criminal responsibility of individual Canadian soldiers. We're speaking also of command responsibility, of criminal responsibility that continues up the chain of command, to any superior officer who knew of the risk of torture and who ordered or allowed our soldiers to transfer detainees nevertheless,' he said."

It really is a shame that Rick Hillier of all people has been chosen for this award. There are so many people in Canada far more deserving of such a prestigious award and with much better track records. For the U of G to praise this guy shows a lack of critical thinking, poor moral judgment and tells the world how complicit we are in activities that violate countless international laws and multi-national conventions. Not exactly the "moral conscience of society" that U of G president Alastair Summerlee touts this institution as being.

Pro-Life group tossed by University of Guelph's Student Association... without ANY warning

In a stunning and unannounced attack on freedom of speech, the University of Guelph's Campus Students Association tried to secretly revoke club status last week for Life Choice, the campus pro-life group. Without any prior notification, the CSA brought forward a motion to revoke Life Choice's official club status last week.

Unfortunately for the pro-abortion members of the CSA, their undemocratic actions have not gone unnoticed... and their inappropriate actions have even been called out by the Student paper, the Ontarian.

Regardless of opinion on whether or not Life Choice is in the wrong with the Life Fair or the CSA made the right decision in not approving their club status, the way things were done were out of line.

Members of Life Choice didn't know that any of this was going down. They were not contacted prior to last Wednesday's Board meeting to be made aware that their club status was in question. They were not formally informed that there was an issue to begin with. They were not invited to the meeting to state their case. They were essentially not given an ounce of chance. It wasn't until Friday that CSA Finance and Human Resources Commissioner sent the group an email to tell them they no longer had CSA club status.

While it can be speculated that the CSA was limiting free speech by not accrediting Life Choice, it can definitely be said that the CSA was in fact limiting free speech by not allowing Life Choice to speak prior to this vote. Even if the CSA was not going to give Life Choice the chance to talk, the group should have been informed of the business that questioned the life of their club. This conduct was simply unfair and anti-democratic on the part of the student government.

To read the CSA's letter to the student body, check here.

Anyway, even the Editors of the Guelph Mercury are chiming in on this issue... and it's not in favour of the CSA's decision:

U of G association made a bad choice
October 27, 2008
The Guelph Mercury

For an ostensibly "pro-choice" entity, the Central Student Association at the University of Guelph has made an incredibly ill-advised choice in pulling the accreditation of a campus anti-abortion club.

Life Choice to set to appeal the decision Wednesday before the student association's board of directors. This will provide the association the chance to save face, do the proper thing and return the club's student group status.

The revocation of Life Choice's accreditation flows from a "Life Fair" the club held on campus last spring where anti-abortion -- or as the club would obviously prefer, "pro-life" -- speakers addressed the audience, and signs and images that are all too familiar to those who are acquainted with this particular point of view were displayed.

In the minds of the board of governors of the student association -- the governing body for clubs such as Life Choice -- the presentation evidently conflicted with sections of the association's policy manual, which on the matter of birth control, family planning and abortion is decidedly "pro-choice."

Strangely, in addressing the "fundamental right of all women to control their bodies," the policy maintains that it favours "freedom of choice (in) choosing one's stance in the matter of abortion."

Through its action, the student association's board has signalled that "freedom of choice" in this instance is limited to just one side of the extremely controversial debate about abortion -- and that's not the anti-abortion side.

Another section of the policy that board members may have thought they were protecting is one stating "women have the right to an educational environment free of advertisements, entertainment, programming and/or materials which promote violence against women, sexual stereotyping and discrimination."

Can a presentation that contains graphic imagery in a campaign that in essence is designed to outlaw abortion in this country be construed as "violence against women"?

It only can be so construed by devaluing such reprehensible societal scourges as physical and sexual violence and assaults against women and children.

The decertification of the Life Choice club comes down to another issue of freedom, and that, of course, is freedom of speech.

Universities, of all institutions in society, must be forums for debate and the free flow of ideas, however contentious and controversial. Since the late 1960s, there has been a narrowing of opinions on far too many North American and European campuses, and the narrowing in large part has come from so-called liberal or progressive elements at these institutions.

The most appropriate action for those who oppose a particular point of view is to engage and challenge those who advocate such positions in open dialogue and debate.

Silencing those with whom you disagree, particularly at the university level, is an affront to freedom of expression and academic freedom.

A friend of mine will be attending the appeal on Wednesday, so stay tuned for more.

Guelph Liberal supporters continue the negative attacks

Well, yesterday Steve Valeriote (Frank's relative) was calling Guelph Conservative candidate Gloria Kovach a "trained seal". Now another Liberal supporter is calling her a Harper "sock puppet"! Will these negative attacks never end? The following graphic was created by one of the Liberal supporters:


I'll repeat what I said yesterday... the people of Guelph know Gloria way better than these immature Liberal bloggers do. Will Frank distance himself from these negative attacks... or is he happy to just let them continue?

The citizens of Guelph know Gloria as the devoted 17 year veteran of City Council. They've seen her serving the nation as former President of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. They've watched her as she's represented their City, and this great nation, on various trade and humanitarian missions overseas. And they watched her in recent months leading the charge against a proposed massive 6.5% municipal tax hike for the 2009 budget.

Are these Liberal bloggers saying that Harper's been pulling her strings all these years? Yea... their juvenile little antics just don't hold water.

So tell Frank Valeriote's Liberals what you think of these negative attacks... show your support for Gloria Kovach by attending their campaign launch this Thursday, or if you can't attend, throw a donation her way.

UPDATE: Even good old Jason Cherniak piled on today, with this comment: "Gloria Kovach - the only president of the FCM to be fired. What a candidate!"

Well, I'm glad you bring that subject up Jason... the Guelph Mercury is still poking around on that issue, looking for the answers that have never been given on why Kovach was removed, without cause, from her post as FCM President. A statement was issued several months after her removal, indicating that her removal had nothing to do with her performance while serving as President. That leaves only one reason for her removal... political interference. Dion's office finally issued a denial last week, (I'm not convinced, however) but the FCM still has not come clean with what exactly happened. Until the FCM finally admits why they had her removed, a dark cloud still hangs over that supposedly non-partisan organization.

And just for the record, Jason... some have suggested she was removed because of her intentions to run for Parliament. We know that can't possibly be the reason, because your own MP Byron Wilfert did the exact same thing when he was FCM President, right Jason?

Which leaves only one possible reason... political interference.

Liberals Angry at May-Dion Deal

There's a pretty good rule of thumb when it comes to certian news stories... when the Toronto Star prints something negative about the Liberal Party of Canada, there is absolutely no room for doubt that the story is true!

They're known around here as "The Red Star", after all.

When there are Liberals saying things like this, you know there are problems in the Liberal HQ...

"Cuzner said the party now risks losing some of the 10,000 people who voted Liberal in Central Nova in the last election, and possibly some party loyalists who are essential to running election campaigns.

A Liberal strategist, speaking on condition of anonymity, said there is widespread anger at the deal in caucus, which Liberals feel could be used against them in a federal election. The strategist said the decision was another strike against Dion, whose leadership has come into question in recent months.

"The only reason this was not the final straw is because of the threat of an election," the strategist said.

Ray Heard, former communications director to Liberal prime minister John Turner, was one of the few to publicly express his anger with Dion, saying he would support party members who believe Dion should be forced out.

The deal with May "denigrates the tradition that the Liberals are a national party," he said in an email to the Toronto Star.

"Both (Liberal MPs) Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae are eminently qualified to succeed him before the next election and I cannot fault their supporters for plotting to dump him before it's too late."

- - - - - -

Central Nova Liberal riding president Allan Armsworthy said he would give no advice to party loyalists who will find themselves without signs to post or doors to knock on when the next federal election rolls around. It will be up to each person to decide what they want to do and who they want to support.

"Some will probably be working for the Green Party as you'll probably see some former Conservatives and some former NDP working," he said."

As I already pointed out today, there's some discussion amongst Libloggers about all this, and it's not all supportive of the move. There's actually some really good thoughts over at Fuddle Duddle that you might want to check out, about the 10,000 some odd Liberal supporters who have now been orphaned in Central Nova, and the larger implications across the nation for Liberal supporters.

It's going to be an interesting week... especially if the writ gets dropped, as some people think it will. Of course, I'm still out on this one... but if it happens, I'm ready to go.