« Home | Michael Coren Sitting on Pity Pot - Poor Baby » | NDP Overwhelming Adopt 'Out of Afghanistan' Policy » | Harper Will Address the Nation -Special Broadcast ... » | Harper More Loyal to ExxonMobil Canada than to New... » | NDP Says Abolish the Senate - Premier McGuinty Agrees » | Harper Asks Jason Kenney To Meet with Dalai Lama » | Canadians Uncertain about Harper - Angus Reid Poll » | Jason Kenney Story Covered by Iranian Media » | smalldeadcannibals » | Senate Reform - Harper’s Smokescreen Issue » 

Sunday, September 10, 2006 

Liberals on Afghanistan - A Deafening Silence

When it comes to the War in Afghanistan, Canadians have no doubt where the Conservative Party stands. After this weekends convention in Quebec City, they certainly are aware of New Democratic Party policy on the matter. But what is this silence, this deafening silence that is coming from the Liberal Party of Canada??

Should I be surprised? I was raised in Saskatchewan where the Liberal party has been a rump third party for the last 35 years. Decades go by without even one Liberal representative in the provincial legislature. With the absence of provincial Libs to observe, we are left to base our impressions of Liberal policy on the federal party wing only. Out here, it is well known political saw that Liberals sound like New Democrats when they are in Opposition and then govern like Tories when in power.

Ladies and gentlemen of Liberal persuasion, your silence on Afghanistan is deafening. Fence sitting on an issue as important as Canada's mission in Afghanistan is no longer acceptable.

Without a clear united policy and articulation of that commitment, you run the risk of being accused, at best, of political expediency or at worst, fear of the issue.

VOTE for this story on Progressive Bloggers

(-Photo of Liberal Policy Convention courtesy of Fotosearch-)

And here is a 'Prairie Flip'em the Bird' to the gentleman who posts on the blogsite know as 'The Sir Robert Bond Papers' for his little gutter snipe opinion entitled 'Dipocrits'. That should receive a nomination for 'worst hit and run' blog posting of the year.

BUD, you have performed a classic Liberal 'dipsy doodle' - you have attacked the NDP and completely ignored the essential question being asked in this thread. What is Liberal Party policy on the Canadian mission in Afghainistan; and while we are on it, where do each of the Liberal leadership hopefuls stand on whatever it is that passes for Liberal policy on the matter???

I think it's fair to ask what each leadership candidate's position on Afghanistan is (especially since I need to know this in helping to determine who I'll vote for come next election...) but perhaps it's less fair, right now, to ask what the "Party's" position is.

Won't "the party's" position be shaped by the leader? Is it not possible that a Bob Rae Liberal party might have a different position on Afghanistan than a Michael Ignatieff Liberal party?

Again, the leadership candidates should be vocal, and clear about their position, so that Liberals (I'm not one btw...) can make an informed decision about what kind of party they want to have moving forward. But it doesn't seem fair to me to attack the leaderless Liberals for not having a "unified position" in the middle of a leadership race. If all Liberals feel the same, what's the point in having a convention? They should just draw names out of a hat.

It is certainly incumbent upon the leadership candidates to be open and honest about their positions on such an important issue. But decrying a lack of a "united position" in any party in the middle of a race to choose a new leader seems a bit silly to me.

It IS a fair criticism of the Lib Party. For the last couple of days, I have watched New Democrats being attacked by Liberals for the policy on Afghanistan, when you and I both know that there are a number of Liberals who share that policy.

I see this as the Liberal Party trying to play both sides of the street, and yet have the call to attack the NDP.

Case in point is the drive by snipe committed by this gutless twerp!@!
Liberal Hit and Run Artist

Yes, but the NDP have a leader (with 92% support apparently) and have ratified their Afghanistan position in a public convention vote.

If there are people who share the NDP position in the Liberal party who are nevertheless criticizing said position, by all means attack that. But there are plenty in the Liberal party who think it's an asinine position too. Until they choose a leader, it seems to me the party could end up going either way.

As I said, leadership candidates must be clear about their stance, and everyone should feel free to attack them, either way. But comparing a party with no leader (and therefore no unified position) to a party with a leader who has the overwhelming support of his party, and his party's ratification of its Afghanistan position seems disingenuous at best.

One of my two dearly departed old Grandmothers was a life long Liberal ( the other a stalwart old CCF'er).

The Liberal Grandma always called New Democrats 'Liberals in a hurry'. Perhaps she was correct.

Fault me not for believing that the current Lib leadership race is taking FAR too long to accomplish. The issues of the day require leadership, and I am anxious for the final debate.

Post a Comment

Follow leftdog on Twitter

About Me



  • -Carmichael-
  • Things I Read

    • -Canadian Political Viewpoints-
    • -ZAG-
    • -Next Year Country-
    • -Huffington Post: Canada-
    • -Let Freedom Rain-
    • -Informed On Information-
    • -Wellington Post-NDP-
    • -Trapped In A Whirlpool-
    • -Larry Hubich's Blog-
    • -ROGERISM-
    • -Leftdog's Daily KOS Blog Page-
    • -Dipper Chick
    • -Ideagist -
    • -Al Barger's MORETHINGS.COM-
    • -Canadian Cynic-
    • Saskatchewan Progressive Bloggers
    • My Zimbio
      Top Stories
    • Blogarama - The Blog Directory
    • Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites
      View blog authority
    • Display Pagerank
    • Canada's NDP
Powered by Blogger
and Blogger Templates