Liberals and Michael plus thirteen

Well it's been quite a while since I've written. I've pretty much taken my ball and run home since the last election. It's mostly been work etc that's taken my time.

Nevertheless, Stephane Dion's wife supposedly went on a bit of a tirade today. Everyone has the right to their opinion. She has some good points because I've always contended that Dion was done in by his own party. The most unencouraging thing about the whole affair though is that the party is airing its dirty laundry. There's bickering for the Tories to see, for the NDP to see, for the Bloc to see, for the Media to see, and most importantly for the people to see.

It's funny being in a party -- you have to make compromises as an individual and as sects within the party because they party will never fully represent all of your views. I'm not a Liberal party insider with the accompanying knowledge, and the difficulty of being in opposition usually brings about similar discontent. This then begs the question, how much are the members of the Liberal party really willing to compromise? They weren't really willing to do so with Dion, and now there are obvious dissensions with Ignatieff as leader. Where Ignatieff has surpassed Dion is that he replaced his inner circle to try and correct the course. Time isn't always that much available in politics, but are the party powers willing to compromise enough to allow the party to correct itself because increasingly it's becoming self evident that the party needs time to strengthen itself. After all, there were 13 years of Liberal rule. This was mostly because of a helluva PM, but the other guys were also in a similar position to the one the Liberals are in now. Do the liberals really need 13 years for the message to sink in?