Another day, another flip flop, and another blatant lie.
Let me be clear, the electorate does not like being lied to and whatever little credibility Ignatieff had left with ANYONE is now totally shot. Who could possibly trust him after this?
Sunday, June 06, 2010
“Let me be very clear. The Liberal Party would not agree to a coalition. In January we did not support a coalition and we do not support a coalition..
Michael Ignatieff September 2009: “Let me be very clear. The Liberal Party would not agree to a coalition. In January we did not support a coalition and we do not support a coalition today or tomorrow.”
Another day, another flip flop, and another blatant lie.
Let me be clear, the electorate does not like being lied to and whatever little credibility Ignatieff had left with ANYONE is now totally shot. Who could possibly trust him after this?
Another day, another flip flop, and another blatant lie.
Let me be clear, the electorate does not like being lied to and whatever little credibility Ignatieff had left with ANYONE is now totally shot. Who could possibly trust him after this?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Well, let me be very clear that it is Ignatieff who said on GLOBAL NATIONAL that he has to honour his signature on the agreement (coalition). that's how clear I heard.
Duceppe and Layton don't give two beans to anything the liberals say anymore just as long Layton and duceppe get their fair share, are part in running the country that's all.
Duceppe has Quebec to bail out of their deep debt and what better way to do when part of the coalition.
Trust. Ignatieff doesn't have it and never will get it, and this includes within his own party.
"I have a certain credibility on the coalition issue. I could be standing here as the prime minister of Canada, I turned it down, we turned it down in January. I don't think I need to give further proof of my feeling that that's not what Canadians want. I agree with Canadians."
No sir, and I use the term loosely, you have NO credibility on anything.
Okay, I know we're all giddy with excitement on the Tory team, as our future anti-coalition narratives gain more and more credibility. But let's not overplay this, guys.
Especially the CPC war room, if you guys are reading any of this ...
NO POOPING PUFFINS !!!
I don't want to see any faux outrage expressed by Iggy, at being humiliated, disrepsected or whatever. I don't wanna see PM Harper publicly apologizing to these coalition buffoons, because our war room, or a candidate went too far in mocking one of them.
Leave that juvenile stuff to anonymous posters, who can't be tied to the CPC in any way.
My goodness, this "marriage of convenience", arranged by senior party stategists for reluctant partners, seems to have wedding bells and vows attached. I am bemused that anyone can see this marriage lasting much less being fulfilled. Will it be an equal partnership - will there be sharing of resources - will the partners live in the same household? What are the grounds for annulment or divorce? So many questions. Cheers.
No more 'fearmongering' (as Tabloid Taber called it) about a LibDipper coalition.
It is a fact.
First question,
will the French Resistance be part of an Iffy led coalition,
like the 2008 coalition of losers?
After thought - what about the children (sitting MP's and future candidates)? The marriage is already a disaster and they haven't even walked down the aisle. Cheers.
Agree 100% CJ.
But it in now a matter of fact,
and the war room only has to carefully nudge Iffy onto Jack's turf so as to leave no doubt there is no place for the blue Libs in the lefty nest.
That may not even require any effort on the CPC part.
let the games begin!
“The talk of coalition actually, if you're a Liberal, only gives comfort to the Conservatives and the NDP.”
“Talk of coalition (now), it seems to me, is not only a distraction, but I don't think it serves the interests of my party and I actually don't think it serves the interests of the country..."
Moreover, Mr. Ignatieff said he finds all the current talk of coalitions “disrespectful of the voter,”
It hurts us, it is disrespectful to the voter, it is a distraction, but I will talk about it anyway.
Can 1 person be so stupid?
And should such a pairing be in our future, it will be PM Layton, not PM Iggy. Duceppe will see to that.
No one has answered my questions, will they sit as one caucus, have one minister only to answer the questions posed by our side. How many long serving liberals will be pushed to the backbenches to make way for the Pat Martins and Libby Davis, and perhaps even Duceppe.
Regardless the question is out there, if I vote liberal am I voting for Layton as PM.
Further to what MaryT is saying ... I would want to know if any Dippers would be in a coalition cabinet.
No matter which way Iggy answers this, it is going to cause him problems.
As to Iggy playing "the hand Canadian voters deal him" ... how about if we deal him a two-card draw to an inside straight. Give Layton a pair of Jacks, and give PM Harper a full house ... Aces over Kings.
So is Ignegative saying he's tired of propping up Stephen Harpers conservatives and maybe after he loses the next election he'll prop up a Jack Layton government for a year or two ? Damn , Iggys taken the liberals from the big tent party to a tent pole .
Jack Layton has a great opportunity here to advance the NDP and hurt the Liberals, but the lure of that cabinet job will will probably cloud his judgment and he will end up hurting the NDP.
And Jack will insist for a cabinet post for his wife, as well as himself. But, as stated before, the Bloc will be needed for some kind of support and I can see Duceppe insisting that Layton be PM.
Regardless, the coming votes on C9, immigration and the gun bill will be interesting, and to see who turns up at committees as witnesses.
Those wanted posters for Sudras are really childish. But they were posted by young liberals, very young liberals IMHO.
Canadians and Briton both rejected a coalition of losers.
The media are not being clear and have been trying for years twisting the facts about coalition gov't.
The largest party can form a coalition with a smaller party to secure a majority of seats for a specific period of time to work on a mutually agreed agenda.
The examples in Canadian history are not full of examples of losers (2nd-3rd place backed by Separatists)
The Liberals need to win popular support beyond Atlantic Canada.
The NDP clearly are not favoured in any region.
The West overwhelmingly support the CPC Agenda and would be greatly diminished in 2008 fiasco by the three stooges.
Iffy is done as is his party. The pundits are desperate trying to keep them around as a political force.
Iffy spent Dec 2009 till now denying the importance of ideas and reasons to vote liberal.
Not being Harper won't cut it.
Canadians have at least three other parties.
In the US you have two parties.
Liberals don't get it, with NDP, Green, Separatist vote splitting Liberals are not the default choice against the incumbent.
Does anyone really believe that Dion would have quit as leader if the coup had worked and he became the PM.
If the CPC gets a strong minority won't the Libs and NDP still have to rely on the GG to agree to them forming a coalition? That could throw a wrench into the works. It still wouldn't be clear sailing for Iggy and Jack. And Jack's cry for a national pharmacare program would mean a tax increase at a time when the economy is just starting to right itself. Add that to Iggy's call for a national daycare program and even rolling back the corporate tax increase couldn't possibly pay for everything they propose.
Post a Comment