57

Four things I enjoyed about the Krieber mani-facebook-o

Scott Feschuk revels in Janine Krieber’s tirade


 

1. The use of the word “dictatorship” to describe the government of Stephen Harper. (Like all dictators, Harper can only be removed from office by military coup or, failing that, a bunch of elected people standing up and asking him politely.)

2. The sheer elegance of its tortured logic. The Liberal party is falling apart. It will not recover. But we must take action now to help it recover. Which it won’t do because the party is dead. It died before our very eyes. Which is why we must now make the choice to save it. (Wait a minute – if we save it now, won’t that make it a … zombie party! One upside: I won’t have disinterred Louis St. Laurent for nothing.)

3. The idea that somewhere upon the Canadian political landscape there is a party that is a bastion of pleasure and happiness, a “party where work ethic and competence are respected and where smiles are real.” Some have interpreted this as a reference to the New Democratic Party but from my experience I’m pretty sure she’s describing the Unicorn Party of the Sparkly Pink Bedroom.

4. Something’s boiling on the stove at Stornoway – and, hang on, the pet rabbit is missing from the backyard!

Bonus fifth thing I enjoyed: The part where she states, “I am starting a serious reflection.” I believe this is meant to be a threat of some kind. Y’all better fall in line or I am going muse about the whole lot of you. You heard me, I am going to contemplate you a new one! As God is my witness I AM GOING TO MULL YOU RIGHT OVER!!


 
Filed under:

Four things I enjoyed about the Krieber mani-facebook-o

  1. That's Liberal logic….every Liberals got it.

    • too bad feschuk isn't original. Hey Scott – you should at least reference Cosh as you rip off his ideas.

  2. And Harper is not only changing Canada, he's changing the entire world!
    Yiks, duck, cover and roll…….

  3. Scott,
    You are needed at the OLO immediately! You write better than the whole lot of them. This is a very funny piece.

  4. Harpers secret and hidden agenda = WORLD DOMINATION! – it's so funny I can't stop laughing and my stomach is starting to hurt. I wonder why the people who like this coalition idea just don't get it – first folks it wasn't the coalition it was =- just having had an election THEN turning around and seeing the formal signing agreement on TV in front the GG"s palace – this is what was unacceptable – had the parties ran on a coalition platform – OR – at least talked about it as an option before the election or something like that – it was the sheer hypocrisy of it all – canadians see right through this right now and all you lefties that keep promoting it are either just blind, deaf or ignorant will only doom the idea if you continue to – now if you wait a year or so then try again maybe .. but as it stands you just don't get it – right now Mrs Dion is turning into harpers best friend – keep up the good work!

    • Do you feel like discussing hypocrisy all across the board, or is it only the flag you wave against your enemies?
      You bring up hypocrisy, and the election, but you skip the whole fixed election thingy? Chuckles…

    • Harpers secret and hidden agenda = WORLD DOMINATION

      What Harper should be aiming for =WORLD minority GOVERNMENT!

  5. My favourite element is the rumour that members of Mr. Dion's STAFF convinced her to take it done. Like, it never even came up in conversation between the Mr and Mrs themselves. I wonder if whats-for-dinner and other negotiations are handled this way!

  6. "The sheer elegance of its tortured logic."

    Krieber is doing her impression of Vicky Pollard – 'No, but yeah, but no …'

    • Jolyon, normally I disagree whole heartedly with everything you say and stand for but I appreciate your quoting of Little Britain.

      • Glad that we could find some common ground.

  7. If anyone should write a book abour 'Going Rogue', it should be her. Doubt whe'll make it to Oprah though…

  8. Mrs. Leftard goes Rat-Dog mad!!!
    Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr……….ROTFL!!

    • While rolling, do try to avoid your own feces…. ;)

  9. If anyone ever needed convincing about what an absolute calamity the alleged "coalition" would have been (not that anyone does), look no further. A "dictator" in a minority Parliament? So we finally catch a glimpse of the kind of vindictive, hysterical, paranoid, dissociative thinking that propelled Stephane Dion's comeback attempt in the desparate days after he lost the 2008 election. And to think that not only did the other two opposition parties go along, but ex-PM Jean Chretien himself was roaming the hallways drumming up support for the idea. What a sad, pathetic, shameful bunch. At the time, it was comical. Apparently they had descended well past comical, and I just hadn't realized it. It would be pitiful if they were worthy of pity.

    • Stop trying to distort democratic values with scare tactics. Stop trying to pass off your political ideas as if they were the only thing valid. Absolutely nothing prohibits parties of making coalitions to govern because each and every single elected representative has the very same legitimacy in government. Political parties are just convenient contructs that make the system work in a smoother fashion. Nowhere does the Constitution make them a prerequisite to govern therefore their existence isn't essential. Canadians didn't "elect a minority Conservative government". Canadians elected their MPs. Those MPs then choose to organize themselves to better govern. The majority of Canadians didn't vote for the Conservatives. Let's all keep that in mind. A coalition which represents a majority of MPs however would be elected by the majority of Canadians.

  10. Well the plot may just be thickening here. Chantal Hébert notes on her blog today that the Green Party will be announcing its new deputy-chief for Quebec at a press conference scheduled for tomorrow in Montreal.

    Coincidence? Who knows. I thought she was referring in her facebook text to the NDP in her admittedly cryptic ending paragraph. Could she have been referring to the Greens in such idyllic terms?

    Time will tell.

    • Not a bad thing, maybe she can drive the Greens into the ground the way Dion drive the Libs into the ground. After all, Dion had that oh-so-special relationship with the Greens.

  11. If that's true, then I totally called it! Just like I said – the Unicorn Party of the Sparkly Pink Bedroom.

    • OK, that part I agree with. I mean, we've all seen the Rick Mercer election commercial, right?

  12. I'm sure Macleans has spent more time on this than Harper's angry and dictatorial outburst in Sault-Ste-Marie, where he vowed to teach the majority of Canadians lesson.

    Die faster, news media.

    • Ti-G*y, bitterness is quite unbecoming. You need to learn to let go.

    • 'Harper's angry and dictatorial outburst in Sault-Ste-Marie'

      wasn't that the event that sent CPC numbers into majority territory…?

    • Someone is off his meds.

  13. What I want to know is, why was John Geddes' take on this story removed from Maclean's? This is the link that doesn't work:

    Krieber's outburst: maybe not so crazy after all – John Geddes …
    By John Geddes
    Kreiber is referring to Elizabeth May – who may have obvious advantages to her party by some coalition – but brings 1 million+ votes to the table – which would dramatically rebalance the polling equation – if they were put together with …
    Macleans.ca – http://www2.macleans.ca/

    • I'm wondering what happened to his post as well. I thought Geddes was out to lunch with his conjecture that Madame Krieber was referring to the Green Party in her facebook entry. Now I'm not so sure.

    • I too wanted to re-read Mr­ Geddes' take on this and it had disappeared. Can it be re-installed?

    • I totally want to read this!!!
      Where is it?
      Who is to blame????

    • I was wondering about this too. Perhaps Geddes took it down for some reason.

      • Perhaps Intense Debate was being its usual unpredictable tempestuous self. Perhaps Mr. Geddes reconsidered his arguments and withdrew to reflect some more. Or perhaps he responded to my call for some decency and respect towards a private citizen. My comment to that post:

        Whatever happened to "family is off limits," people? Except for the fact that everybody appears to be celebrating the spectacle of the implosion of the Liberal Party of Canada, why is this even news?

        She is NOT an MP. She is NOT a member of the executive of the party, as far as I am aware (and if she is, the bluster sure hasn't brought that up). She is the WIFE of an MP, who was the former leader. She did NOT call a press conference. There is NO justification for the prominence of her words.

        I know it is waaaaay too late for this, but leave the woman alone. Ignore her, and her Facebook.

        If such is the case, would that others might pay attention, as well.

        • She's likely bolting to the Green Party, as Chantal Hébert's blog implies. That's news. Big news in fact. Bigger news if her husband joins her. But big news in any case.

          • The private citizen's private Facebook musings, that appeared ever so briefly as public, is most definitely NOT news. I refer you back to that "family is off limits" thing.

          • I completely disagree. She obviously put that on there for a reason. If it turns out she's leaving the party to bolt to another party, as she says, this was her kiss-off letter.

            We won't be hearing the last of Ms. Krieber.

        • I have to disagree. If you write an essay on facebook that is open to the public, then I don't see why not comment on it. Clearly the piece was intended for others. I also don't see why it matters if she is an MP or not. There is more to politics than the MPs.
          She wrote it. She published it. She wanted people to read it.

          • Well, then, we disagree. Have fun in the crowd rubbernecking the multicar pileup that is the current LPC. Me, I will be a happy loner over here lamenting that family members of public figures are now somehow fair game. Good luck with the recruitment of the best people to run for office, everyone.

  14. So what was the Coalition, if not a bloodless coup? Dictatorships are impossible for the left. To extend her logic, only Liberals, NDP and BLOC know how to govern benevolently without the consent of the electorate. Only in Canada, eh! Pity. Isn't that too precious. I sincerely hope that she continues with her writing career on Facebook. Cheers.

    • Bloodless coup? You might as well call elections that.

      The only anti-democratic event that occurred last year year was when the GG allowed the PM to shut down Parliament to AVOID a confidence vote. And all you Harpies were fine with that.

      • And how many opportunities have the opposition had to vote non-confidence since? Several.

        And how many such opportunites have the opposition used to vote non-confidence. Zilch.

        • That's their choice.

          God, you're stupid.

          • Ti-G*y, you need to learn to relax and take a deep breath. The Conservatives will likely be in power for another 4 more years. Later this week, (November 28th) we celebrate the motion of non-confidence that brought Paul Martin's government down. The opposition decided that they couldn't support Paul Martin's administration any longer and down in the dustbin of history they went.

            As to the GG's actions in December 2008, it allowed the Liberals to get rid of the inept Mr. Dion, so it appears to have been win-win all around.

            The important thing is that Canadians approved..

    • Fern, stop trying to distort democratic values with scare tactics. Stop trying to pass off your political ideas as if they were the only thing valid. Absolutely nothing prohibits parties of making coalitions to govern because each and every single elected representative has the very same legitimacy in government. Political parties are just convenient contructs that make the system work in a smoother fashion. Nowhere does the Constitution make them a prerequisite to govern therefore their existence isn't essential. Canadians didn't "elect a minority Conservative government". Canadians elected their MPs. Those MPs then choose to organize themselves to better govern. The majority of Canadians didn't vote for the Conservatives. Let's all keep that in mind. A coalition which represents a majority of MPs however would be elected by the majority of Canadians.

  15. beauty – Liberals banging up on Liberals. Gads, one would think it's get old, but it never does.

  16. "What I want to know is, why was John Geddes' take on this story removed from Maclean's? This is the link that doesn't work: "

    Ah, shaping the news again, eh Macleans?

    Like I said, die faster.

  17. Your post is silly and totally unsupported by the text Krieber's letter.

    1. Krieber doesn't claim the Harper government is just like a dictatorship; she refers specifically to their ability to "chang[e] the world"–which I take to mean change the frame of reference in the public debate. You can agree or disagree with that point, but it has nothing to do with your point.

    2. I think it's pretty that Krieber ISN'T suggesting people chnage the party. She's suggesting people leave it.

    3. I think it's clear that Krieber's referring to the constant back stabbing that seems to go on in the Liberal Party and she specifically that she "might not be dreaming".

    4. Huh?

    5. I think you're the only person reading this as a threat.

    • RayK – I don't usually respond to people who don't get a simple Fatal Attraction reference but…

      "I don't want to see the Conservatives continue to change my country. They are, slowly, like any dictatorship, changing the world."

      • I assume point four, then, is that Krieber is behaving like a jilted lover–one dumped by the Liberal Party and, presumably, Michael Douglas, err, Ignatieff. Fair enough, but I don't think it holds up. Krieber's substantive arguments fair far to well to be dismissed so quickly.

        The liberal parties in Europe really HAVE been squeezed out by a robust left/right debate; the Liberal Party of Canada HAS fallen to 23%/24% under Michael Ignatieff; the Liberals ARE now as low in the polls as they were post-coalition (but don't have the political advantage of being in power to show for it); the Chretien-Martin in fighting DID play a huge role in getting them where they are today; the "Toronto elites" HAVE been convinced all along that they could take the quick route back to power rather than taking the hits necessary to truly rebuild the party; Ignatieff really HAS written disturbing things about torture that diminish his credibility in taking on the government during the current debate; Ignatieff really DOESN'T have a record; and the Liberal Party has got more back-stabbing going on than any other party in Canadian politics.

      • As to the quote re: dictatorship, Krieber should have probably written "like a dictatorship" rather than "like any dictatorship", but the point is obviously not that they have somehow seized power but–rather–that they are "changing the world". I also think that "comme n'importe quelle dictature" loses something in the translation. More in the vein of "like some two bit dictatorship", than the literal meaning.

        As to Krieber's underlying point, since the Conservatives are obviously not changing "the world", per se, I can only assume that she means the public discourse–i.e. the world as we preceive it. That certainly seems like an odd critique to me, but my point is only that what Krieber was saying had nothing to do with whether the Conservatives were holding office at the barrel of a gun.

  18. You're making even less sense than usual.

  19. well clearly if you and cosh both dismiss Kreiber's rant then you both are saying the exact same thing…. that is the beauty of not reading… details are irrelevant.

  20. I just noticed this now but what's with the photos of Kiebler on this post and Cosh's. Krieber looks like she's anointing someone. Does la presidente think she is Pope as well?

  21. Madame Kreiber is not an immigrant.. Her father was originally from Austria but Madame was born in Québec.

  22. I loved it because it further buries the Liberal Party – it died when Paul Martin was named leader – now we just have to wait for the Tories to complete the job on their party so we will be forced to choose SOMEONE ELSE!

  23. Excuse me? Crazy Lizzie is going to bring 1 million plus votes to the table? Sorry, after she burned her own candidates and encourages people to vote Liberal at the end of the last campaign she ended up with less than a million votes. All that so she could get a Senate appointment for the rest of her useless life and a seat in cabinet. Of course that's been her modus operandi since the seventies. Throw friends and colleagues overboard in her constant attempt at self agrandisement. That's why she had to flee to the West Coast. She couldn't get elected dog catcher on this end of the country. Can you imagine, her and the nutty professor running the country, propped up by the another bunch that want to destroy it. Douceppe would have had Dion signing the seperation agreement before he realized what was going on.

Sign in to comment.