Thursday, September 10, 2009

Iggy's response.

A couple of points on Ignatieff's response (in a quickly rushed presser) to the PM expressing what any leader of a national political party desires, a majority government.

This one is a doozy. In response to a question on the party subsidy being eliminated he responded that: That is exactly what produced the crisis in the first place! (exact quote will follow) From the first day of the coalition each and every one of the coup plotters went out of their way to deny that it was the subsidies that caused the crisis, it was the economy they said in unison and brushed off any comments to the contrary. Today Ignatieff finally told us the truth. The opposition parties were only interested in the money that they themselves would lose.

The other point I want to bring up is Ignatieff's comment that the Bloc is not the enemy and that he would not categorize them as separatists. Well Mr. Ignatieff it is too late for that isn't it.

"Micheal Ignatieff: "“I could be sitting here as your prime minister, but I turned it down because I didn’t think it was right for someone who believes in the national unity of my country to make a deal with people who want to split the country up,”

More thoughts: Does anybody believe that the PM did not think that his words would become public? The guy with the video camera might have been a hint. This was a private event but not a top secret meeting with people sworn to secrecy and aside from the M word is there anything else in there that is new or that the PM has not said in the past? The answer is no.

Unlike this guy who likes to pretend and say one thing in public and another in private.

Feel free to comment on Ignatieff's non response to direct questions on a coalition.

Lets get it done. A Conservative majority is possible and we can make it happen.


NorthernRaven said...

I was watching that too over lunch, I couldn't believe he said that the Subsidies were the reason for the crisis. This is going to be a fun campaign.

Ardvark said...

Big surprise the PM wants a majority. Who knew?

Anonymous said...

harper just bashed 62% of the population that didn't vote for him. well done Harper. your time is up in Ottawa!

maryT said...

How about his stmt that there are no socialists in the ndp, and haven't been for 30 yrs.
More people didn't vote for the liberals or the ndp than voted for conservatives. And, if one has to get a majority of votes, lots of those MPs better resign as more voted against them than for them.

Bec said...

"harper just bashed 62% of the population that didn't vote for him."

Which percentage are you? The Liberals, 26%, the NDP's, 17%, the Bloc's 10% or the Greens 4%?

......or ALL OF THE ABOVE?

Case proven, move on!

cantuc said...

Every time Ignegative speaks I don't hear an intellectual , or a university professor . I hear a senile old man trying to explain grade 1 math to a flock of chickens . Like dude , you aren't connecting .

Ardvark said...

An anonymous drive-by that missed.

By the way 100% of the voters in the last election did not vote for a coalition.

gimbol said...

Its really strange seeing this kind of statement from Iggy.
I mean, don't they usually wait for when the wheels fall off the campaign before they throw the "hail mary"? This is the first time I've seen it done before the n/c vote even takes place.

Is WK really advising this guy?

Gayle said...

Maybe the reason Ignatieff is pushing Harper's all for a majority is because he knows most Canadians do not want him to have one. That is the reason he failed to achieve one last time around.

Now, maybe Canadians have changed their minds, but the fact that Harper has been reluctant to publicly ask for a majority in the past two elections suggests he knows people are not eager to give him one, and any talk of his getting a majority sends voters back to the opposition parties.

So it makes sense for Ignatieff to expose Harper's desire for a majority, which goes hand in hand with his attempt to politicize the judiciary (remember when he said people should not fear giving him a majority because the courts would keep him in check?).

By the way, Ignatieff's reference to the Bloc was to point out they have been democratically elected by citizens of the country. They have a right to be in Parliament and should be treated with respect, despite the fact he opposes what they stand for. He also pointed out, quite correctly, that not everyone who votes for the Bloc are separatists.

Again, he is simply highlighting portions of Harper's speech that hurt him. Harper's attack on the coalition, and in particular, his attack on any agreement with the Bloc, cost him dearly in Quebec. Why wouldn't Ignatieff want to highlight Harper's contempt for the voters of that province has not dissipated?

By the way, a liberal blogger has revealed he is the guy who made the tape. So much for that super strategic move by the CPC to secretly tape their own meeting and then arrange to have a mole deliver said tape to the LPC.

Ardvark said...

Gayle, don't you meant that Ignatieff THINKS that most Canadians do not want a conservative majority? Maybe "hopes" would be an even better word.

He is playing the oldest Liberal card in the book.The tired card. In didn't work the last time and I doubt it will work this time.

Sure it is fair game to bring up the majority statement but considering that every national leaders ultimate goal is a majority government the thought that the PM desires the same is no great surprise.

How come the PM's so called attack on the Bloc hurts him but Ignatieff said basicallythe same thing and seems to be getting a free pass? Strange how that works.

I was not one of those that claimed the CPC leaked the video. My only thoughts on this were that playing it up as some kind of super secret backroom meeting is stretching the truth to the breaking point and that nobody should be surprised that the quotes came out. Most of the people in that room had a camera or some other such device with them and everyone, including the PM, knows what everything he says gets recorded. The spin that what he says in public vs private is just that, because the event was much more public than it as private and much ado about nothing as none of this should be a surprise to anyone.

Jan said...

Stephen Harper did not say the Liberal courts would keep him in check, he said the LIBERAL dominated SENATE would. I think we are all aware that they have delayed, disregarded legislation,so in spite of the outcry over that remark, we know now it was the truth.

Gayle said...

AA - I do not know what Ignatieff knows, thinks or hopes - that is why I used the word "maybe".

I do not think Ignatieff said the same thing as Harper. Ignatieff pointed out that the Bloc is a separatist party, however not everyone who votes for them is a separatist. Although the comment you refer to was certainly unfortunate, and I do not think he should have said it, there is a difference between villifying an opposition party over and over again, and one comment, particularly since Ignatieff has taken pains to note that he would be willing to work with other parties - something Harper clearly refuses to do. That may be why Ignatieff has not been hurt by that comment.

Jan - Harper said that about both the senate and the courts.

CanadianSense said...

The CPC get "everyone" to discuss the Coalition.

The Point of the excercise to get the talking point out.

Did everyone pick it up? Check.

Have the opposition denied the Coalition?

The narrative continues. How many will believe the Liberals will NOT resort to another coalition to regain power?

The "faux" outrage and New Ads will expose the leader for his support of the Coalition.

His credibility will sink. He lied about why he flipped flop. He did not admit he made a mistake signing the accord. He repeats he could have been the PM in January 2009 making the assumption the GG would have asked him to lead the coalition.

He defends his future action by promising NO FORMAL coalition. It will be an agreement with partners.


Ignatieff, who is the front-runner to succeed Dion in an upcoming leadership convention, said the three candidates were "at one" in their belief that "the only leader who can lead us in this context is the duly elected leader of the Liberal party."
"I support the accord because it's fiscally responsible, it provides responsible economic leadership in tough times and it also conserves the basic principles of national unity, equality that our party has always believed in," he said. Dec 1, 2009

Ardvark said...

Gayle, Bob Rae just last weekend called the Bloc separatists 2 times while referring to the coalition saying that it was Mr.Dion who signed an accord "with the separatists" saying that they would provide support to the coalition. So while everyone likes to smear the CPC for calling a spade a spade it would seem the practice is also widespread among the LPC as well. They just seem to get away with it.

Gayle said...

AA - The Bloc is a separatist party - but not everyone who votes for them supports separatism.

No one from the LPC are declaring the Bloc and their voters the enemy.

Sense - if Ignatieff thought it was questionable whether or not the GG would allow the coalition to govern in December, a few weeks after the last election, why would he now suddenly think it would be OK?

This is the problem with that argument. If, as you suggest, the real reason Ignatieff did not go through with the coalition last time was because he did not believe the GG would OK it, then there is no reason for him to plan on a coalition this time. The coalition came about only a few weeks after the last election, and I think it would have been highly doubtful the GG would have dissolved parliament rather than go with the coalition, and if she would have dissolved it then, she will dissolve it the next time too.

By the way, that tape was not leaked, and thus it was not part of some super duper CPC plan to "get everyone talking" about the coalition. Harper has been talking about the coalition for a long time now. It was inevitable it would come up again.

C said...

Two things;

1. Have any of the agreements between the Liberals, NDP and the Bloc actually been canceled? If not, wouldn't that mean that the whole coalition idea is still floating around out there?

2. Atleast now they can't claim that Harper has a "secret agenda", because they now know that it's to win a majority government.

Ardvark said...

Gayle, yet Ignatieff signed it, stood up in front of the country on numerous occasions and endorsed it and the only one who could lead the nation, Stephane Dion.

Sure not everyone that votes for the Bloc is a separatist, but that is the goal of the party. What is really bizarre about the fake outrage over calling separatists separatists is that most of them don't actually mind being called that.

Agreed on the tape, it wasn't a leak or even planned. There was nothing said at that meeting that has not been said before, including the majority comments.