Filibuster CartoonsTitle: May's stalker (click to view)
Date: April 12, 2011
At the best of times, the Green Party of Canada can be described as an answer to a question no one asked — in the sense that the party offers very little in the way of ideological perspectives or policy proposals that cannot be found in some other mainstream political party. Voters, for their part, seem to agree; despite capturing a rising share of the popular vote across the country, the Greens have yet to elect a single member of any
provincial legislature, let alone the federal parliament. If we need a metric by which to identify "serious" parties, this is not a terribly high standard.
One of the few genuinely controversial news items of this election cycle was the decision of Canada's ominously named "media consortium" to act on this reality, and bar Elizabeth May, the Green leader, from the 2011 televised party leaders' debates. Since they included her last time, the logic that her party was somehow less of a player now than it was in 2008, when it's fortunes were pretty much the same, seemed a bit arbitrary, but not overly arguable when the bigger picture was considered.
Ms. May, of course, would have none of it. Indeed, from the moment the consortium announced their decision, now almost three weeks ago, the Green Party's campaign has focused on little else. The issue was given front page placement on their website, ads on TV were run, Facebook groups and petitions were started, and of course, May herself was on every media outlet in the nation denouncing her own exclusion, usually with the trademark shrillness for which she has become known.
Though the consortium decision is no doubt hard for May to not take personally, that's part of the problem with the Greens — everything about the party is personal. Indeed, the only real coherent principle one can tie to the Green Party is the furthering of Elizabeth May's political career, by any means necessary. How else to explain, for instance, her string of opportunistic carpetbagger candidacies in successive federal elections? She's now run for parliament three times in three different provinces, and each time the location seemed to be chosen based on little more than sheer opportunism; the seats seemed ripe for a Green victory, and clearly no one deserved to be the first Green MP than Ms. May herself. Much more so, than, say, someone who actually lived in the riding or had some ties to the community.
The increasingly depressing vanity of the woman was on further display this week, as she continued to plead, in ever-more frantic terms, for her inclusion in the leaders' debate right up until the debate itself was broadcast a few hours ago. "I'm still waiting for the phone call!" she said yesterday, assuming that her insistent nagging would be enough to convince the media consortium to change their decision, since clearly May-logic trumps all other forms.
When that call never came, May insisted she was going to participate anyway, and announced a plan to live video chat and tweet her answers to the debate questions in real-time. I guess some website, somewhere, hosted this sad spectacle, but I'm not sure for whom exactly — other than Ms. May's ego — this would be considered a useful public service.
If there is an art to losing gracefully, it's clearly one the Greens have yet to master.
CKA Uber 
