Explaining Peter MacKay - Macleans.ca

Explaining Peter MacKay


Kathryn Blaze Carlson profiles the Defence Minister.

Mr. Pearson said he believes that Mr. MacKay’s “hands are tied,” and that if the minister was “free to be less partisan, he would.” He said the minister last year reached out to discuss future military deployments — proving Mr. MacKay’s willingness, he said, to include opposition MPs in his decision-making. “If we were in a different kind of House of Commons, under Brian Mulroney or Joe Clark, for example, I think Peter MacKay would be more in his element,” Mr. Pearson said. “I think he would come into his own.”

Filed under:

Explaining Peter MacKay

  1. Glen Pearson is probably the biggest concern troll out there.

    He's hyper partisan, look as he shrewdly tries to wedge the PC element and the Alliance element apart.

    His calls for civility always boil down to:

    Look how great I am, THOSE the OTHER guy are real dirt bags.

    We need less of Glen Pearson on the hill! He's everything that's wrong in politics today.

    Cats away.

  2. An alternate leader for the CPC? Setting him up for a hammer to the head, I say… Though I do truly believe Mr Glen Pearson is not that devious.

  3. That profile was puzzling. It's almost as if MacKay is pleading for his job should Harper win another term.

  4. Really ?

    You honestly believe that hyper-partisan Glen Pearson doesn't want to do anything he can to ensure a Liberal government gets elected in the next go around ?

    He's just suddenly became a non-politician ?

    Yuck Yuck Cats

  5. Typical of the Cons' inability to consult, collaborate, negotiate, cooperate or enact any other verb that connotes willingness to get along with others in the sandbox.

    Cats, if you really want to see sanctimonious, look in the mirror.

  6. Nobody can trust him after a few PC bagmen ordered him to break his promise to David Orchard and he said "how high?". Harper's plan is most likely to take Pete's daddy's money and political machine, leave the son high and dry. Expect him to be Clementicized within the next few years, whether Harper is PM or not.

  7. Cats away.

    …if only.

  8. "My hyper partisan paranoid world view can only confirm that everyone must be also! "

    Cats Aweigh!

  9. Excellent parody of a paranoid schizophrenic voter – well done! You have perfectly captured the siege mentality, the school yard "I know you are but what am I" intellectual rigour, the descent into irregular capitalization and incoherence as a spray of spittle starts to fly from the lips. A pocket masterpiece – excellent work.

  10. "Clementicized"

    I like that.

    Except Tony is an empty vessel to begin with no? We (former) Peterboroughans (sp?) will fondly remember his turn as Ontario's Minister of Transport when he decided Peterborough had sufficient bus service with Greyhound and actively prevented Trentway-Wagar from competing.

  11. Same with the calls for "civility," cats. They are simply a weak ploy by the left to defuse the right. It won't happen, but boy will they try and try.

  12. Ah yes, so attempting to put a wedge between conservatives and conservatives is not at all partisan; nosireebob. There is no way a liberal ever, ever, EVER could be partisan. It is simply impossible. All liberals only have good intentions at heart so they can never be wrong simply because they intend good.

  13. Just as there is no compromise with the unions in Wisconsin, there can be no compromise with liberalism anywhere. It is simply uncompromisable with reality. Those who steadfastedly stand for the Truth know this. Those who don't continue to remain baffled by such a principled stand.

    Liberalism isn't dead; it was never alive in the first place. Those who try to say that it is "still" alive are ignorant liars, who do not even know they are lying.

  14. "Those who steadfastedly stand for the Truth…."

    What is this capital T Truth? Is it like the Force? Is there anyone (other than you, of course) who steadfastly stands for it?

  15. Cats and a sparrow. What a pair.

  16. It think it's part of the 'Truth, Justice and the American Way' meme in a comic book somewhere.

  17. Wow – a little sensitive about Con solidarity aren't we?

  18. I think Harper abdicated any monopoly on the whole 'principled' business a while ago.

  19. I think Cats just said that.

  20. You sound like a religious fanatic, Ryan.

  21. I think you forgot the <satire> </satire> tags… unless you really believe that… oh, my.

  22. It's like Freedom. You know, Freedom to have the police arrest you without charging you, Freedom to be patted down or strip searched at the airport, Freedom to give up as many rights as "they" choose, all in the name of Freedom.

    Now let's try it with Truth. Truth to have news broadcasters keep you guessing as to whether the news is just made up sh$t or has some basis in reality, Truth by not telling you anything in the first place, Truth by spending close to two years forgetting the little detail about ordering a document altered.

  23. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

    God i hope Ryan isn't in govt!

    In a very real sense we're all liberals; no liberalism no democracy as we know it.

  24. …or perhaps he's talking about Truth(TM), a patented product of the right-wing noise machine, not to be confused with truth, which at least attempts to consider all relevant information.

    Given his gross misinformation about the Wisconsin labour debacle, I'd guess that relying on Truth(TM) rather than truth is his underlying problem.

  25. Most Canadians support Harper's prison expansion plans.

    Read it and weep. Liberal talking points just torn to shreds.

    I feel bad for the people on this board who thought they had a big GOTCHA by talking about prisons.

    Mark Holland just spat out his soup !!

    Cats away

  26. Nope, i'm looking at you and Glen Pearson.

    Mice day,.

  27. Nope, just glad that a clear majority of Canadians in ever province approve of the CPC prison expansion plans.

    Bad day for Liberals.


  28. The idea that man exists to serve other men is inherently faulty. If individual freedom is not guaranteed, the system will collapse. As you can see now, a nation divided against itself will fall. The past has allowed for the willful ignorance of all us of to allow the system to continue to this point where now, the end result is inevitable. We will all hate each other; we will all take sides. This is written.

    We will hate each other because the right, who had been quiet for too long, is now speaking up against the insurmountable beast. This beast cannot and will not be slain by men. But many men will see the beast coming, as it is right now. There is nothing anyone can do to stop the beast. This is the way it is to be. Just as Jesus was sacrificed, so too may we be; all to save us from sin.

    At this point, if you are not searching for the Truth, start.

  29. Don't bother reading the article: Peter MacKay can be explained in two words: empty suit.

    To summarize the piece:

    – Poor Peter MacKay, everything always happens to him. When he betrayed David Orchard and sold out the PC party, people were so mean!. And even after selling out his own party, he didn't have the respect (or the ear) of the Prime Minister! He would be a much better Defense Minister if only the political environment were different. And when he broke up with Belinda and called her a "dog" in the press, his heart hurt.

    – Random anecdote about him doing something extra-nice for an individual soldier.

    – He's fit and very pretty. Partly for that reason, some people thought he would be selected as NATO Secretary General. He was not selected.

    – He's popular with the soldiers, although even this article admits that's probably mostly due to his riding the wave of military spending, which just happens to be aligned with Conservative electoral strategy.

    – His accomplishments to date? Zilch. He has been a loyal "soldier".

    More like another of Harper's cabinet chair-warmers. What a sad sack.

  30. Only about 26 per cent of Canadians say they would be comfortable with the Conservatives winning a majority after the next election, according to a new poll conducted for The Globe and Mail and CTV by Nanos Research.

  31. LOL is THAT what it is?

    I have no idea what he's on about over Wisconsin, but it sounds like a misplaced envy to me. Bizarre, anyway to think you can just tear up signed contracts for what…300,000 people and get away with it..

  32. We really have to get you into a conversation with Russell Barth.

  33. 82% agree with me, Cats, that the government needs to release their cost estimates. We need the numbers – it's not like we're just buying a bunch of jet fighters.

  34. And I just answered you when you first posted this. Must you bore everyone repeating yourself?

  35. Ahh someone high on Ayn Rand and the Rapture.

    Wacko combos like that do strange things to people.

  36. There was no way Peter MacKay was going to become PM as the Leader of the PC Party.

  37. McKay allowed Harper to hijack the conservative party. It's his loss.

  38. Sure he could.

    At the time he was new, young, personable….gave a barn burner of a speech after he was elected leader….he could have been PM years ago.

  39. He's not that pretty.

  40. Of course under Clark or Mulroney MacKay wouldn't be in government at all. Instead he would be sitting on the opposition benches feebly complaining as Chretien or one of his successors continued to raid the public purse to pay Liberal friends.

    This, no doubt, would serve Pearson (and Wherry) just fine.

  41. Govts in Canada have always gone back and forth. Of course Mackay could have made it.

    And please leave the rhetoric for a campaign. It's bad enough listening to all the hokum for 30 days much less beyond that.

  42. Veracity – good one. What does the JJ stand for – just joking?

  43. It can be difficult to tell who are the ridiculous showboats and who are the secretly capable. Apparently Stockwell Day was quiet and efficient in carrying out duties as public safety minister, no matter what one thought of the agenda.

  44. Maybe years in the future, with an incredible stroke of luck.

  45. I am intrigued and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

  46. Being among the best looking 50 MPs isn't that impressive.

  47. No, back then. He'll never do it now. We know too much about him.

    And the PC party is no more.

  48. Thanks for that. I'm rather honoured to appear in the same frame as Glen Pearson, a hardworking MP whose integrity the clowns across the aisle can't begin to match.

  49. Here is an approximately two page document that compares liberalism and conservatism.

    I'm pretty sure that this is much closer to the "definition" of liberalism that Ryan is working from. You may (almost certainly will) disagree with the definitions, but it should help you better understand your foe.

  50. I could never figure out quite why I liked Glen Pearson.

    But if he drives cats as screechy as water in a real cat's ears, then Glen Pearson is quite alright in my books and I don't need another reason.

  51. What about in Nfld after Toews' little hissy fit on Tuesday?

  52. You just proved my point.

    Its Glen Pearson vs Conservatives.

    That's the definition of a hyper-partisan.

    Dissapointed Cats.

  53. Those two things, if toned down by half, actually make the basis for a very good government.

    Thanks for the sarcasm kids, but everybody is fine,

    even if they aint a Liberalll.


  54. Nope…sorry, Cats. That's YOUR definition of a hyper-partisan. Which counts for nothing. Because you're…um…a cat.

    Now, leave me alone…you're becoming a nuisance.

  55. Ayn Rand and the Rapture are total opposites….and while her books are real, the Rapture is nonsense.

  56. Mmmm whackdoodles.

    Make something up, promote it as truth….bound to find a few suckers.

  57. Thx. Your right i disagree – vehemently. The author has no idea what liberalism is or its relationship to conservatism, and often confuses it with socialism, progressivism[whatever that is] and state authoritarianism. The whole piece falls just short of propaganda. If the author is any kind of figure of influence in the US, then all i can say is their politics is a whole lot sicker than i had believed possible. Good to know what your foe is thinking.

  58. Both are extreme but toned down by half and merged through a dialectic process you arrive at a level of understanding known as:


  59. tjcook – the only 'sad sack' is you – typical liberal shill – screw up & misrepresent details so maybe some will believe it.
    fortunately most do not look at things in such a negative way – I get the impression you are jealous.

  60. Ryan states – "The idea that man exists to serve other men is inherently faulty."

    How about – Men and women exist to help one another. This does not mean that individual freedom is not possible only that it is limited to "do no harm to others". Of course finding that balance is the trick and needs all of us to be engaged and willing to compromise.

  61. Dredging up the 'ol "alliance" v. "pc party".

    You know the other side is desperate when they're using points that are years past their due date.

    In addition to desperation, it seems there may be a touch of projection going on. The reality is, Harper's support with his base has been consistently rock solid. Whereas Iggy, who was hand picked by a liberal elite, not the grass roots, and who's current lurch to the left is in part be because of his neo-conservative hawkish views, must be particularly concerned how much of the Liberal base will come out and hold their nose to vote for a man forced upon them, and who doesn't necessarily reflect their ideals.

  62. "…ignorant liars, who do not even know they are lying."

    Interesting philosophical question: Is it possible for one not to know that they are lying? You can unwittingly tell a falsehood, but lying implies the willful act of speaking an untruth. Doesn't it?

  63. …merged through a dialectic process…

    Please explain this process…it sounds like it could be useful in many situations.

  64. Speaking an untruth is a lie; once and always.

    Lying doesn't have to imply willfulness. In the end, it is still a lie. Maybe not entirely at the fault of who is saying it, but the end result is the same.

  65. You mean like Adscam?

  66. That phrasing also caught my eye….

    Instead of the more prevalent definition of ignorant, I'd wager he was going for the less common usage (ie rude).

  67. Hmmmm, maybe not….

  68. "…when they're using points that are years past their due date"

    like, um, maybe, Adscam?

  69. Very helpful EeOar, insomuch as it does describe what "Ryan" feels is implied by liberalism. I found myself identifying much more closely with the strands of liberalism found in the wiki article, including social liberalism and social market liberalism. Both of which, I believe, the CPC woudl have a very hard time disassciating itself from, apart form the label.

  70. A lie, at its core, is a lie. However, I think the act of LYING absolutely has to imply willfulness. If I pass on misinformation that I reasonably believe to be true, that does not make me a liar. I may be spreading a lie — if it was a piece of misinformation that was willfully put 'out there' by a liar — but that does not make me a liar (and you called those who believe in liberalism to be 'ignorant liars'. They may be ignorant, but if they believe what they are saying to be true, they are not liars).

    Speaking an untruth is not a lie if you believe the untruth to be true. I could tell my wife that our dinner party is at 6 p.m. Unbeknownst to me, however, the time of that party has changed to 7:30 p.m. Does that make me a liar? I'm just ignorant of the truth.

  71. lol

  72. I know I was going with the definition of 'having a lack of knowledge or understanding of a subject', kind of like I'm ignorant when it comes to quantum physics. I wasn't going for the "Gottabesaid's constant belching and flatulence at last night's staff party was really ignorant" definition.

    (But for the record, it was the guy next to me.)

  73. TJ's probably a little harsh in his assessment of the article, but his general thrust is correct. It's a puff piece, with the downsides minimized and what little strengths there are played out as much as possible.

    For instance, it refers to MacKay's betrayal of the PC's as an "albatross", almost suggesting that the fact Orchard would be quick to remind far and wide about his betrayal is undeserved, and should simply be forgotten about. Personally, I disagree.

  74. For sure.

    But the simplistic labels are ever so much more useful when the goal is to rally people to a cause. Taking the time to agree on definitions, to examine differences to verify their validity and so on won't contribute to that endeavour.

  75. Hell, National Energy Program!

  76. "Poor Peter MacKay, everything always happens to him."

    This has been MacKay's shtick for years. He looked sad and forlorn when Belinda Stronach dumped the lad. The media reacted to the non-story and he liked the reaction…. so why not try variations of the 'sad' theme whenever the little boy needs to raise his media profile…?

    Ahhhhh, poor little peter. LOL

  77. Except the funds stolen from taxpayers CONTINUE to be held. To this day.

    Sorry, but until that wound is cleaned out it will continue to fester.

  78. I am honestly in awe of your powers of rationalization. You rock Chet.

  79. Well sadly on that point I'm guilty of using the Pacific Scandal from time to time.

  80. So.. what exactly does "The idea that man exists to serve other men is inherently faulty" toned down by half look like? "The idea that man exists to serve other men half the time is inherently faulty"?

  81. Wonder what the repayment would be on that, with 140 years of interest?

  82. And Sir John A still has that money….

  83. umm…were you following politics that closely 10 years ago?

    After the Joe Clark debacle — the PC Party was nothing more than a regional rump centered in Atlantic Canada. It had decisively lost the West. It had decisively lost Quebec. It had decisively lost principled conservatives. Its former provincial allies were distancing themselves from it. And the party leaadership (especially under Clark) spent most of their time attacking the Canadian Alliance as opposed to the Liberals (with whom the Clark agreed on most issues). Some people (usually red tories from Atlantic Canada or Toronto) underestimate just how decisively most of the conservative base had broken with the party — a party that they now viewed as little different than the Liberals.

    Most importantly the Party was almost bankrupt — it’s institutional donors had abandoned it since the late 1990s — and it lacked the grassroots fundraising base that the Alliance inherited from Reform. IT lacked an identity — it lacked a solid voter base — it lacked money — only its brand continued to have any real value.

    This is not to say the Alliance didn’t have its own problems. It did. The Alliance electoral ceiling wasn’t much higher than Reform’s. It was also largely a regional party. It was still largely toxic in Atlantic Canada and Quebec, as well as in a wide swath of the Ontario electorate who, otherwise, could be counted on as liberal-conservative switchers. It, also, was not going to form government in its current incarnation.

    But to compared to the PCs the Alliance was positively rosy. The Alliance merged because it had reached it’s growth ceiling and otherwise they could not form government. The PCs merged because otherwise they faced oblivion.

    MacKay should be saluted for making a selfless decision to save the political legacy of his party at the expense of his own leadership

  84. MacKay should be saluted for making a selfless decision to save the political legacy of his party at the expense of no longer receiving Christmas cards from David Orchard.


  85. Alive or dead, at least one can't hear them anymore.

  86. I was PC for 30 years.

  87. Works for me!

  88. They last got a Federal vote out of me in 1988.

    As far as I am concerned the Federal PC Party richly deserved what they got in 1993.

    The Liberals deserved similar in 2006.

  89. Enjoy your deck chair on the Titanic

  90. I remember that more than 90 per cent of Conservative party members voted with Pter to merge with Reform. I remember Liberals claiming he said "you have her now" when asked where his dog was. Liberals here sure are afraid of him.