"In the Star's view, the Liberals remain the better choice."

I know, I know, who expected otherwise, right?

That the hub of Liberal-friendly media in Ontario has come out and endorsed the Liberals is hardly reason for comment, everyone knew it was coming. It is worth commenting though, when their editorial contains snippets such as these:

After 12 years of Liberal rule in Ottawa, Canadians seem poised for a change. Every poll suggests the Conservatives under Stephen Harper will form the government after Monday's election. That is a tribute to how far Canada's conservatives have come since Preston Manning founded the Western-based Reform party in 1987.

I love how the Reform party is still painted as the father of the Conservatives. I've never voted Reform in my life, and wouldn't if they existed today. What about the Party of Sir John Eh? Not worth a mention?

Many Canadians are disenchanted with Paul Martin's hesitant, lacklustre leadership over the past 26 months and remain angry about the sponsorship scandal. Even some Liberals feel the party might benefit from a stint in opposition, to renew its leadership, sharpen its vision and ideas and reconnect with the electorate. Win or lose, the Liberals need to clean house and rebuild. But that is not voters' concern on election day.

The record of the government? The stagnation? The corruption? The need for a vision? It's NOT THE VOTERS' CONCERN ON ELECTION DAY? What the hell are we voting for then? This paper has taken arrogance to a new level.

At root, his $75 billion platform for change constrains Ottawa's freedom to fund any national objective by imposing hefty tax cuts and by shuffling more cash to parents instead of starting a national daycare network. That hollowing out of Ottawa defines the Conservative agenda.

I have, and will continue to resent that Ottawa knows what's best for me. Not to mention the fact that the Liberal plan is so under funded it will never fly.

But on a wide range of issues about which the Star cares deeply, the Liberal vision and program come out ahead. And Martin himself has gotten a lot right since the June 2004 election, even hobbled by a minority.

Care to show examples of what they've got "right"? Their budget was manhandled by the NDP, was that "right"? They campaigned saying they'd improve U.S. relations and then proceeded to bait them at every turn. Was that "right"?

For Canadians who believe in progressive, activist government, the Liberals are a better choice than the Conservatives. They would take a more resolutely Canadian stance on the world scene.

And there you have it. "a more resolutely Canadian stance". Only the Liberals can "speak for Canada". They're not speaking for me. They're not speaking for the people that will elect a Conservative government on Monday either.

In closing, allow me to point out one more thing:

The Liberals remain better placed in Quebec to speak for Canada.

I bet you didn't know that. I bet Quebecers don't know that either. Hence their "misguided" move to the Tories. Puleeeze!

GL