Attack of the Paleo-Libs - War Resister Edition

I've pointed out before that there are plenty of Lib MPs kept in office by party nomination rules which strangle any grassroots organization toward better representation, but positively begging to be dumped in favour of a more progressive alternative - with Alan Tonks featuring prominently in that group.

Now, having actually voted against his partymate's bill to offer amnesty to war resisters, Tonks may have just earned himself the top spot on the list. But given the number of abstentions which caused Gerard Kennedy's cause to fail, it's obvious that there are more than a few Libs still in need of replacement.

The reviews are in - Liberal Supporters Edition

I'll post later to document the reaction from those of us who aren't in the Libs' camp. But to start with, let's take a look at what Libs themselves are saying about their self-sabotaged motion on family planning.

James Curran:

Today Liberals Failed Women

There's something I never thought I'd never hear myself write. To make matters worse, I had to hear our leader say -over and over again- "it's a 25 year policy". Point being, if we feel that strongly about it, why wasn't this causcus (sic) whipped to support our own motion which was non-binding????????????? What a slap in the face to women every where.

Steve V:

Not A Great Moment, Let's Just Say

This (train wreck) sums up today's motion on maternal health from the Liberal perspective. I know, I'm being to (sic) kind.

bigcitylib in response:

By the way, the exploding whale is also an excellent graphic for this kind of situation.

Scott Tribe:

(W)hen you have an important motion going forward in the house and you’re trying to make a point, it is not good planning or foresight to put the motion out there on the House of Commons voting schedule when you don’t have the votes or aren’t sure if you have the votes (consider that even if the 3 Liberals who had voted ‘no’ had abstained instead, we still would have lost the motion by 3 votes).

It may not mean much in the overall scheme of things since the government would have ignored this anyhow.. but it’s rather embarrassing optics.

More to come - at least, assuming the whole mess isn't quietly disappeared by other Lib supporters.

Update: The above may well be all for main posts - as the only other Lib supporter post on the subject looks to completely miss the point. (Yes, "if you want a government that doesn't play politics with such issues and that will unabashedly say yes to family planning support, we all know what we need to do": vote NDP, since one national party can actually be trusted to have some principles in the area.)

But CfSR does offer up another comment worth highlighting:

How the Hell does the Liberal caucus screw up an argument that basicly (sic) comes down to the Harper Tories being more eager to defend George Bush than poor women?

Really. How? And how do we fix the caucus?

Again, though, the better answer looks to be that the Libs are far beyond fixing.

Update II:

HarperBizarro doesn't want to name party names (framing the problem as being with the "opposition" rather than the Libs), but this much seems beyond doubt:

This is not an Ignatieff problem. It is far broader and deeper and older than his leadership.
...
It is time for those who cannot be 100% Liberals to go to another party. It would be preferable to face a majority Tory caucus and be able to stand for progress at all times, than to have to withstand the bullshit of yesterday.

And see also The Scott Ross:

Hours before the vote on a motion calling on the government to include "the full range of reproductive health options” in its international maternal and child health initiative, MP Lise Zarac said in response to the Conservative Party's planned opposition to it, "Once again, the government is putting its socially conservative ideology ahead of the best interests of women and girls."

However as votes were cast, and it was seen that three Liberal MPs opposed the motion as well leading to its defeat, Ms. Zarac must have realized just how social conservatives can be, as they haven't just stuck to their party, they've joined others.

Update III:

Life in Moderation:

How can we, as people of the Western industrialized world (especially as Canadians), continue to claim our progressive knowledge on issues such as health care when working with people in developing nations, when even our own government is stuck in a swamp of decades past. This makes me sick to my stomach.

Shame, especially on those Liberals who either didn't show up for the vote, or abstained from voting.

And an unnamed Lib MP:

Clown city.

Lowering the bar

Truly, I thought that Lib committee members' inexplicable vote along with the Cons and Bloc to keep using public money for asbestos promotion would at least be the party's most embarrassing example of useless opposition for the day.

I stand corrected.

On non-renewal

Remember back when a new leader, accompanied by a flurry of retiring MPs, was supposed to allow the Libs to modernize themselves by replacing the old guard (including the most notorious paleo-Libs) with more progressive candidates?

Suffice it to say that the plan doesn't appear to be working out. And in light of Dion's current stand on nomination immunity, Huron-Bruce Libs and other progressives will be stuck with Steckle-Lite indefinitely if they make the mistake of voting the Libs' new nominee into office.

Fortunately, there is some good news, as the NDP looks to have at least one far more progressive challenger at the ready. And hopefully a strong NDP campaign will both result in a Dipper breakthrough, and force the Libs to themselves demand something better than another wave of the same old reactionaries.