NO, you May not???

The entire Canadian blogosphere is going crazy over Elizabeth May and her Greens being excluded from the national leaders' debates. The Conservatives, NDP and Bloc--three parties who usually can't agree that the sky is blue--stand united in excluding May from the debates. They told The Consortium this (no word on who, exactly, this Consortium is, nor why they seem to want to bend over backwards to please people they like to slam any other time of year).

Each party leader has his reasons:

• Harper because "it's unfair" to have "two Liberals on stage" 
  

This comment is asinine on so many levels that my asinitious calculator fails to fully chart its asininity. Cheering for one Liberal friend doesn't make May a Liberal in any shape or form (thanks, Catelli, for that link). May's running 306 candidates against Liberals. The Greens will actually steal a fair number of Liberal votes--which is what makes Harper's dismissal all the more puzzling. Wouldn't he want May included, all the better to split the left-wing vote three ways instead of just two?

• Jack Layton (or more properly, one of his MPs, Michael Byers) because "May is the leader of a single issue party".

Like, umm, the Bloc Quebecois? (Personally, I've never understood why they're included in a national leader's debate. Actually, I'll go further: I'm not sure why that party's allowed to exist. Doesn't it seem just a tad, I don't know, treasonous? I know, I know, that's not a word that goes over well in multicultural Canada. But I think it applies...)

Besides, the allegation that May leads a "single issue party is demonstrably false. A quick perusal of their platform will show that yes, the environment is important to them, but they have a policy for everything in that environment, just like the other parties.

• Gilles Duceppe because the Greens lack an elected Member of Parliament

This charge at least has some merit in that it's (a) true and (b) somewhat of a fair point. That May would undoubtedly gain at least one elected Member should she be included is highly relevant to the likes of Layton and (perhaps) Duceppe, but irrelevant to the case at hand...at least until we reform our electoral system to give a party with ten or more percent of the vote some form of representation. That's what's unfair about this whole thing: the Greens are caught in a catch-22. No presence on TV = no seats = no presence on TV.

That Dion, alone among the leaders, would welcome May into the debates elevates my respect for him a notch. (He said he'd be happy if May were there, but won't debate if Harper's not. Well put, sir.)

Elizabeth May, here are some do's and don't's:

DO:

• Fight this exclusion by every means possible. Take them to court, threaten any and all legal action you can...and then follow through.
  
• BE LOUD. Hit every media outlet you can. Get every MP you've got running to blitz their local media. Interview on talk radio; get a bunch of editorials out there, and
• USE THE INTERNET. Your base is primarily young and extremely Net-savvy. Cater to them. Get out the vote.

DON'T:

• Play the sexism card. It's not becoming, and your gender has nothing to do with your exclusion. Trust me on this: Jim Harris, your predecessor, was likewise excluded, and he looked pretty male to me.
• Attack the media. True, they're the ones who ultimately snubbed you, but if you snub them right back you'll lose channels you desperately need.
• Be shrill. Be loud, but not shrill. This is an injustice and you are a victim, but it's not about you or your party: it's about Canadians being deprived of a voice. 

I hope the Greens prevail in this fight. We deserve to hear what they have to say, whether we agree with them or not.