LibertasPost

I attended the Munk Debate on climate change a couple of weeks ago, and the person who surprised me most was Elizabeth May.

She surprised me in a bad way. I expected that she would debate as an adult, as a political figure, as an activist.

Even though I don't agree with her about many issues (though believe it or not I am with her on some), I expected sage behaviour out of her.

I don't know why -- I guess after her hectoring performance in the federal election debates I though she may have learned something, but she has only got worse. Watching her was like watching the incarnation of every sexist male cliche about why women can't do politics. She was personal, childish, emotional. And when I say "emotional" I don't mean in a good way.

I think it is possible, even desirable, to be emotional in a good way. She was emotional in an embarrassing manner. She spent much of the evening lobbing personal attacks at her opponents, in particular Bjorn Lomborg, on whom she was fixated. It was painfully obvious that she is jealous of him and resentful of his success.

At one point she got in an exchange with him where she got so hysterical (yes, that word is the best one to describe her at that point) that the sound people in the back had to turn off her mic!

In spite of repeated, polite requests from the moderator for her to stop talking, she wouldn't, to the point that someone in the audience (who sounded like Stephen LeDrew to me) shouted out, "Be quiet, Ms. May!"

She was condescending in the extreme. At one point she made a reference to Nigel Lawson and Lomborg's "nice little books." She referred to Lord Lawson -- in a dismissive tone -- as a "journalist" and two seconds later to George Monbiot as a "wonderful Guardian journalist."

Oh please. Get some manners. Speaking of Monbiot, I felt quite sorry for him. I did not find his arguments convincing (at least not in regards climate change, though they did convince me much of African culture is f**ked), but he stayed classy and had to be mortified at having been paired up with May.

The saddest part was how she kept dropping names, trying to make herself sound important.

She actually used, as an "argument," that she had met "the Minister for Poverty Alleviation from Lesotho" (yes, this is what she said) and that he apparently told her Lomborg was wrong!

So there! Can you believe it? A completely juvenile argument -- anyone can say, "Well I met so-and-so, and they said you're wrong!" Hell, Lord Lawson, who was in Margaret Thatcher's cabinet, could certainly have dropped some names. He didn't. But I gather he's not a mass of insecurity, as, sadly, is our Ms. May.

The most telling thing about the evening was that she alienated the audience (and she and Monbiot lost the debate, soundly) -- a good U of T/NDP/Green/Annex crowd, her people.

Crossposted at Begin Each Day As If It Were on Purpose