Thursday, December 01, 2005

Chretien is a Liberal

I've seen some pretty wild things said about Jean Chretien by other Liberals, including allegations that he is not a true Liberal, and that he has no loyalty to the party.

Chretien was elected in 1963 as a Liberal; one assumes he was a Liberal before that. Frankly, Jean Chretien has been a Liberal for longer than most of today's pundits have been alive. It is insulting to say that a former prime minister, the former leader of his party, is disloyal to the party.

Is he disloyal to Paul Martin? Of course he is - and Paul deserves it. Does anyone honestly believe that you can stage a hostile take-over of a party, usurp the current leader, a sitting prime minister, and not feel some backlash? Perhaps Jean Chretien would be more likely to be helpful if, for example...
  • He hadn't been overthrown in an organized coup by a disloyal cabinet minister
  • His people weren't being vilified and turfed from the party
  • He wasn't being portrayed as persona non grata by the Martin team
Frankly, it's outrageous that people expect Jean Chretien to help, in any way, a man who betrayed him.

Now, my name for this blog is BlueGrit, and there is a reason for that - I am definitely towards the right of the party, and so I supported Martin in general over Chretien. However, I cannot support the way he took over the party, crushed all opposition to him, and essentially purged everyone he didn't like from the party.


At 12/01/2005 7:48 a.m., Blogger James Bowie said...

I like Chretien, but I'm tired of reading that he was "Turfed."

The LPC leader has to, according the the LPC Constitution,hold a leadership review every two years. Chretien wasn't going to hold one. His time was up.

Martin even offered to let him stay longer, so that Chretien could be seen dealing with sponsorship. Turfed? The man was a majority Prime Minister. Nobody could mess with him, if he so chose.

He was an old man who wanted to leave. He was also a great Prime Minister.

At 12/01/2005 10:30 a.m., Blogger HisHighness said...

I have no problem with him trying to screw over Martin. After all Martin basically shoved him out of office before he was ready. But he should be screwing Martin and ONLY Martin, what he's done has screwed the entire party at a time when we had a chance to wipe the plauge that is Conservatism off the face of the electoral map, possibly forever. Taking that chance away from us and placing Canada in danger of having Stephen Harper being our Prime Minister is something I can never forgive him for.

At 12/01/2005 10:30 a.m., Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blue Grit,

if you are referring to the colourful comments of some Liberals regarding the timing of Chretien's Gomery challenge, I couldn't agree more. He and his lawyers had 30 days to challenge the report which came out 30 DAYS AGO! There is no conspiracy to compromise the Liberal campaign here, as some bone-headed journalists like Patrice Roy suggested. I support the leader of the Liberal Party, just as I did 2 years ago, but I think Chretien has every right to challenge a report that tarnishes his legacy.


Alex Himelfarb told Gomery, under oath, that Chretien offered to stay long enough to deal with the AG's report but Martin's team declined.

Ed King

At 12/01/2005 10:46 a.m., Anonymous AlbertaAvenue said...

BS. Chr├ętien only believes himself, and he is a criminal. Adscam was just one of several scandals on his watch. This guy is the dirtiest politician I know.


Post a Comment

<< Home