The Coronation of Bush-lite & Harper-lite

OK … so for once in my life, I actually find myself agreeing with Stephen Harper.

No, hell did not freeze over.

Even though we don’t elect leaders in Canada, we have a tendency of seeing the leader of any party as the personality that we’re collectively voting for. A way to correct this would be to push us towards multi-issue/person voting cards, including the choice of leader, local representative and so on, but that’s a very different and complicated discussion (or is it?).

in that respect, I agree with Stephen Harper who fundamentally opposes the Canadian Coalition because the leader was not ‘elected’ by the people of Canada.

In the last election, the people of Canada had a choice between Jack Layton, Stephen Harper, Elizabeth May and Stephane Dion.  Before Stephen Harper put the locks on the doors of democracy in this country, it was a difficult, but approachable argument with respect to Mr. Dion.

However, Michael Ignatieff was not present in the debates, nor was he representing the Liberal Party of Canada when Canadians went to the booth on October 14, 2008.

He was not a part of the election process, except for when the people of Etobicoke-Lakeshore chose him to be their representative for the last couple of elections.

And it was the caucus of the Liberal Party of Canada that brought him to power after all other candidates were quickly pushed aside (despite saying that they did so voluntarily).

And now, the rest of Canada’s progressive community faces a bit of a dilemma:  do we support someone that was not even elected by the members of the Liberal Party of Canada, nor by the people of Canada, but only by a select few?

Do you support someone that didn’t put his reputation on the line across the country of Canada and commit to promises that he would have to keep after being elected?

I can’t.  Because he wasn’t there.

Nor can I stomach the idea of Michael Ignatieff leading a coalition of progressive voters in Canada.

It’s not that I don’t agree with his politics (which I don’t, since as an example, he would have sent Canadians to Iraq).

It’s that I don’t agree with his methodology and the fact that the Liberals are supporting this methodology in a last desparate gasp to regain what they feel is their god-given right to rule this great country.  The process was completely undemocratic and exposes the truly disgusting and rotten roots of democracy in Canada.

Furthermore, Mr. Ignatieff is on record as telling the people of Canada that they should cast away their beliefs and vote for Liberals in the last election, arguing that it was OUR fault that the vote was being split to the benefit of the Conservatives.  Statistically, true.  Morally:  bankrupt.

How dare he think he can bully me and millions of other Canadians into voting for a bunch of elitists?

I’ve said it many times before and I’ll say it again:  this entire fiasco has done nothing for the Conservatives and Liberals because it shows their sense of disdain for a simple notion called democracy .  Moreso, this and other situations have elevated the brand of Canada’s future-looking parties – the NDP and the Greens – well beyond their wildest expectations.

I can no longer stomach the idea of supporting a coalition because a coalition will work to the will of Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff and not the people of Canada.

After January 27, my hope is that an election is called and that we get a chance to really vote with our minds and our hearts and we ignore the lies of the Harpercrites and the Fiberals.