I'll just come right out and say it: any respect I might have had left for John Manley is gone.
Agree or disagree with his comments, but publishing them in an op/ed in a national newspaper just reeks of shameless self-promotion and ego. A phone call to the leader or his staff would have been far more appropriate, and effective. He's supposedly an elder statesman of this party, always mentioned as a possible leadership candidate. What purpose does unleashing a harshly negative public attack on the party you supposedly support serve?
I say supposedly support, because where in the heck has John Manley been the last few years? Certainly not helping a Liberal Party that has needed all hands on deck. He has twice passed on the leadership, in my view not wanting to do the heavy lifting of rebuilding a party to the point of being a contender. Were it a contender, I have no doubt his decision would be different.
I might be more inclined to consider his views had he rolled up his sleeves and gotten involved to help the Liberal Party and its cause these last few years, when it's been in need, instead of merely snipping from the sidelines and then stepping in to kick our leader in the nads when he's down, in order to score some headlines and get a little publicity.
You may be right, John, and you may be wrong. But this was a gutless move. And not Manley at all.
Saturday, December 06, 2008
John not so Manley
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Good on you Jeff. I would be nice to see Rae, Ignatieff and LeBlanc say the same, but I realize they can't.
Why WK is promoting this completely uncritically I have no idea.
Did the Liberal Party ever have a debate on coaltions at a policy convention?
Did the Liberal caucus have any input into the negotiations for the coalition or was it presented as a fait accompli by the small group around Dion?
How can one have a leadership convention is the free speech of Liberals is constricted by a polciy adopted by a departing and defeated leader?
A leadership campaign requires that Liberals be able to speak openly and honestly about all policies, and not feel constrained by the last desparate actions of the last leader.
http://www.trueprogressivedemocrat.blogspot.com/Saturday, December 6, 2008
The Last Liberal NDP Coaltion
In the words of Madame Celine Dion:
"I Finished Crying In The Instant That You Left
And I Can't Remember Where Or When Or How
And I Banished Every Memory
You And I
Had Ever Made
But When You Touch Me Like This
And You Hold Me Like That
I Just Have To Admit That It's All Coming Back To Me
When I Touch You Like This And I Hold You Like That
It's So Hard To Believe
But It's All Coming Back To Me
It's All Coming Back
It's All Coming Back To Me Now"
Yes IT IS ALL COMING BACK TO ME NOW. David Peterson percolating in the Fitness Institute Hot Tub for a full year after being Premier of Ontario. The cutest hottest Liberal ever going from skinny Elvis to fat Elvis, worn down and wrecked. In fact just about everything started to suck almost at exact moment Peterson agreed to do a deal with, you know "the NDP".
Well to be honest I never much cared for Manley. So this statement did nothing to change that opinion. I believe I am not the only one that feels that way either. He could never have run for leader because he has little or no grassroots support.
I agree that Mr. Dion needs to go, but I wouldn't put it in an op-ed in a national paper.
I've never been a fan of Manley. I have too much trouble looking into his eyes. Seriously... People look at that sort of thing. There are certain facial features that speak to a person's integrity, or sincerity. It doesn't have to mean anything - usually doesn't, but many people are cognizant of it.
Manley has been too "cozy" "palin' around with the Reformers". I couldn't trust him to be a true moderate and centrist. Besides, he is a "cruel temptress" having worked up (some) Liberal's hopes of his running, only to flee at the last moment.
No, Manley should just keep his mouth shut and stay "retired".
I would be nice to see Rae, Ignatieff and LeBlanc say the same, but I realize they can't.
If they know what's good for them, they will. Especially Ignatieff, who's already on thin ice when it comes to continentalism and and neoconservativism.
right on, Jeff. Manley pisses me off for the same reasosn you state.
"Did the Liberal Party ever have a debate on coaltions at a policy convention?
Did the Liberal caucus have any input into the negotiations for the coalition or was it presented as a fait accompli by the small group around Dion?"
I don't know, did Harper consult with anyone back in 2004? I'll tell you one thing, when I voted Liberal in this election I sure as heck didn't authorize them to work with the Conservatives. Why would I after being told for the last few years that I'm not a real Canadian, a thief, etc. If the Conservatives want to alienate vast segments of the population (Quebecers, urban voters)
Hit the button too fast...
If the Conservatives want to alienate vast segments of the population (Quebecers, urban voters) they can do it without my support, implicit or otherwise.
I've never been a fan of Manley. I have too much trouble looking into his eyes. Seriously... People look at that sort of thing. There are certain facial features that speak to a person's integrity, or sincerity.
Hey, why don't you put that in an ad? I can just see it now . . .
Jeff, you approved that. Didn't it make you stop and say "hmm, I wonder if that isn't just a little hypocritical?" Sorry, there's that word again.
Hey... I'm just saying they appear "cold". I've made the same comments about Harper's eyes. Maybe right-leaning people have similar characteristics in this regard? The "evil eye", I mean?
There is a good comment posted on John Manley's G&M article today.
Post a Comment