More on Liberal renewal

Following up on the previous post, for the Liberals to stand out clearly as an alternative, they need to quit fence sitting and take a clear stance on even issues that could alienate some voters.

Not doing so just costs them more, since voters clue in that they are not strong on certain policies but are simply attempting to dodge criticism from certain groups.

Here are f few examples of things that hurt Liberal credibility and pissed of more than a few long time supporters:

Ignatieff gave a good, clear answer on whether or not Canada should export asbestos.

"I'm probably walking right off the cliff into some unexpected public policy bog of which I'm unaware," Ignatieff replied. "But if asbestos is bad for parliamentarians in the Parliament of Canada, it just has to be bad for everybody else. So you have to be right, and our export of this dangerous product overseas has got to stop."

Honest, responsible, right answer.  Unfortunately, he later backtracked on supporting a ban.

Ignatieff's dodge concerning Isreal's over-use of force against Palestinians.  Yes, Israel has a right to defend itself, but its on-going violations of human rights and excessive responses to attacks should be condemned clearly and without softeninng the condemnation.

Concerning the banning of the niqab when dealing with provincial services: if the Liberals as a party intend to support Charest's decision, then make it very, very clear that the ban is only in cases where a serious security concern trumps a woman's right to dress how she wishes.  Some of the arguments put forth in Quebec in trying to justify the ban go contrary to human rights, and do little to help women, muslim women in particular gain autonomy.  Telling a women she can't wear a niqab because it undermines her freedom is nonsense.  In Canada, all women have options, and it is far better to give them access to information and services that will allow them to make their own choices.

Columbia, and human rights:  Can't play both sides on this one.  If the Liberal party wants to stand up for human rights, then they shouldn't promote deals with countries who violate them.  Sure, Canada can have some impact on humman rights through certian partnerships, but let that be part of the deal.  Demand change first, assure themselves that the human rights actions have been taken, then make a deal.  This type of compromise for a buck is costing the Liberals, alienating their base.  Hard core Liberals don't like this kind of compromise on human rights.  Feels dirty.  Is wrong.  Takes away the right to object when others trade rights for dollars.