Saturday, December 03, 2005

Liberal Debate Strategy

Earlier this week on CTV I watched a slap fight break out Anne Mclellan and Pete Mackay surrounding the conservative announcement of endorsing the creation of an independent office of the director of public prosecutions. An appointed non-government and non partisan prosecutor that has the ability to prosecute the government without the threat of retaliatory coercion.

In light of recent developments in the Canadian government-- the sense of entitlement, rampant pork barreling, corruption and coercion-- the idea is certainly worthy of intellectual consideration. Rational debate is unheralded in Liberal academia. For example X is an intelligent idea as it provides another check on executive and legislative powers or X is an awful plan because the role is doomed to be political in this divisive country and then government will be at the arbitrary gun point of an ideologue, and then Peter could rebuttal…. This would be intelligent debate, but instead there was Anne’s response. “Peter this sounds like an all out attack on the integrity of the RCMP.” Over and over again all we got was the desperate attempt to invoke emotionalism in to the argument. “Peter I can’t believes you would accuse the fine members of the RCMP of overt corruption and lack of integrity.” She refused to debate the idea and appealed for emotion. Anne is smart enough to know that this is incredibly shallow and manipulative. Peter responded several times and further tried to exasperate on the intended consequences of the idea and she refused to accept anything continually retorting about the Conservative hatred for the RCMP. It sickened me to think of a respected member of Canadian government being so intellectual dishonest.

Some other Liberal Clichés-- these all have the intended purpose of preying on voter ignorance by appealing to emotional responses instead of rational discussion based on the merit of an idea. “Conservatives seek to rob women of their rights”-- not true abortion is not even part of a Conservative platform, “The Conservatives are a bunch of robber baron rednecks from Alberta that seek to divide this country”-- strengthening provincial rights would unite this country and besides provincial rights have nothing to do with the imaginary hopeful abandonment of Canada, “they hate homosexuals”-- Harper only intends to put gay marriage to a “free” legislative vote, to have the debate, and once again Conservatives have no desire to ban gay union they simply want it to be called a “civil union”. Then there is the “you hate Canadians and Canada!”-- because we are unhappy with a corrupt and thieving paternalist government means we are uncanadian. This is an all direct attack on thinking and somehow this call for blind allegiance is viewed as “progressive” and “moderate”.

3 Comments:

At 11:30 AM, Anonymous freethinca said...

Just like they are ethically and morally challenged, Liberals are also entitled to be intellectually challenged, aren't they? I wouldn't expect anything more!

 
At 10:50 AM, Anonymous davey said...

I saw the interview. She was rude and interrupting and said it was Peter who interrupted her.
Most telling was the question from Duffy to 3 journalists: one from the G&M, Macdonald from the Montreal Gazette and a woman from Alberta. They were asked to comment on the objectivity of the RCMP and they all quoted Francois Beadoin, Shawinigate or the Airbus investigation as proof the RCMP has become simply a wing of the Liberal party. They used the more correct term RCMP has become politicized".

 
At 6:08 PM, Blogger NL-ExPatriate said...

Very poignant post thanks. Sorry I missed that debate.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home