Angry in the Great White North

A column today by Angelo Persichilli highlights the problem facing the Liberals:

"We must elect a leader able to defeat Stephen Harper" is the most common comment from federal Liberals now that they have officially started the process of choosing their fourth leader in five years; and the keyword for most of them is "electability." In selecting their next leader, the Liberals want to anoint the next prime minister. This was clear during the conversations I had with many of them last Sunday at the meeting of the Ontario branch of the party in Mississauga, and this week in Ottawa at the debut of the new Parliament.

Elect a leader able to defeat Stephen Harper.

When you think about it, these Liberals are essentially allowing themselves to be defined in terms of the Conservative Party, and in particular, by Stephen Harper.

Have the Liberals slipped into thinking of themselves, and publicly describing themselves, as the anti-Conservatives?

It is quite the change from the "natural governing party".

Indeed, how can you natural anything if you are just a reflection of something else?

This goes to the root of the Liberal Party's problem with the vision thing. 

What is the Liberal Party?

We don't really know?

When will you know?

When we find the guy able to beat Stephen Harper.  Whoever he is, and whatever he believes in, is what we will agree to believe in.  You'll know as soon as we know.

And that's the Liberal Party?

Well, it will be until the Conservatives select a different leader.  Then we'll be whatever we need to be to beat that guy.

See what I mean?