Okay; it may be a solar powered train at dusk but there is no denying that the ranks of Team Libby are growing!
Come join us won't you. You will be glad that you did.*
*Jack would have wanted it that way.
Showing posts with label NDP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NDP. Show all posts
Friday, September 02, 2011
Saturday, May 07, 2011
Did Quebec reject the Bloc to make a coalition easier?
There has been lots written the last couple of days about the collapse of the Bloc and the NDP surge in Quebec and so far I have not read anything that really explains what happened. Did BQ supporters all wake up one day and decide to toss out a party that for years has enjoyed their support because of something Duceppe did or did not do? Were they all taken in by the guy from downtown Toronto with the big smile and equally big spending promises?
While I don't claim to know the answer I do have some thoughts and a possible piece of the puzzle as to why Bloc supporters decided to abandon their party and support the NDP.
The coalition.
Whenever the idea of a coalition has been discussed it has been quite clear that having Bloc MPs as part of any coalition was not to the liking of most Canadians. During the original coalition crisis both the Liberals and NDP were desperately trying to spin that the Bloc were not actually part of the coalition, only that they would be supporting it, and Ignatieff himself had this to say as to why he didn't enter into the deal he had signed: "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,"
Having separatist Bloc MP's either in or supporting a coalition government did not fly in 2008 and was never going to go over well with Canadians. Bloc supporters were as aware of this problem as much as anyone else but what to do about it.
The solution: Drop the Bloc and elect enough NDP MPs so that a coalition would not only be legitimate but it would have a much better chance of being accepted by the rest of Canada.
It makes sense and possibly explains why dedicated separatists tossed their own party and blindly voted for NDP candidates some of which were barely old enough to vote themselves, did not speak French, or have NEVER even been to the riding in which they were running in.
Your thoughts?
While I don't claim to know the answer I do have some thoughts and a possible piece of the puzzle as to why Bloc supporters decided to abandon their party and support the NDP.
The coalition.
Whenever the idea of a coalition has been discussed it has been quite clear that having Bloc MPs as part of any coalition was not to the liking of most Canadians. During the original coalition crisis both the Liberals and NDP were desperately trying to spin that the Bloc were not actually part of the coalition, only that they would be supporting it, and Ignatieff himself had this to say as to why he didn't enter into the deal he had signed: "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,"
Having separatist Bloc MP's either in or supporting a coalition government did not fly in 2008 and was never going to go over well with Canadians. Bloc supporters were as aware of this problem as much as anyone else but what to do about it.
The solution: Drop the Bloc and elect enough NDP MPs so that a coalition would not only be legitimate but it would have a much better chance of being accepted by the rest of Canada.
It makes sense and possibly explains why dedicated separatists tossed their own party and blindly voted for NDP candidates some of which were barely old enough to vote themselves, did not speak French, or have NEVER even been to the riding in which they were running in.
Your thoughts?
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Linda Duncan, call your office.
Linda Duncan, call your office because it looks like someone is using Parliamentary resources for partisan purposes which is, as you know, strictly against the rules.
Update: I have removed the 'it looks like" line from the original post. At first I thought that perhaps the use of the @parl.gc.ca email address might have been a simple error on behalf of the campus NDP, but that is not the case and I now have concrete proof that Linda Duncan's MP office is indeed using that account for the partisan door knocking event(s) outlined below. (see end of post for additional info)
(Please note the contact email address, highlighted by me, in the following email)
Email from the UofA NDP Campus club:
(end)
While I don't know the exact reading of the House Board of Internal Economy's rules on the use of government resources for partisan purposes, I am pretty sure that the organizing of 3 separate and purely partisan door knocking events, using an email account from Duncan's Parliamentary office and on Government of Canada servers, fits into the category of things not allowed.
Time to call your office Linda, because someone there is breaking the rules.
The important info from an email ( on the subject of partisan door knocking) forwarded to me this AM. As with the campus NDP email I have removed all the non relevant personal identifiable information.
Updated: With permission, I have now enclosed the entire email body
(body of email snipped to protect source, but related specifically to the campus email and partisan door knocking and the reply signed by Erica B, acting in the capacity of constituency assistant in Linda Duncan's Edmonton office)
Hi Ron – Terrific! I will plan for three and if not everyone shows that’s OK. I just like to make sure I have enough routes and kits. See you then, Erica
Busted!
Update: I have removed the 'it looks like" line from the original post. At first I thought that perhaps the use of the @parl.gc.ca email address might have been a simple error on behalf of the campus NDP, but that is not the case and I now have concrete proof that Linda Duncan's MP office is indeed using that account for the partisan door knocking event(s) outlined below. (see end of post for additional info)
(Please note the contact email address, highlighted by me, in the following email)
Email from the UofA NDP Campus club:
Subject: U of A Campus NDP Meeting and Volunteer Requests.
Hello fellow campus New Democrats!
The U of A Campus NDP is planning to re-coordinate our efforts to get
New Democrats seen and heard on campus. If you're interested in being
involved in the club, including planning strategy and bringing in
speakers from the provincial and federal NDP, come to our upcoming
meeting:
(snip)
Also, it is quite likely we will have a federal election called in the
next month or two. Help your Edmonton NDP candidates get ready! Here
are some ways you can help get rid of Stephen Harper's Conservatives
and put progressive MPs in their places:
Re-elect Linda Duncan in Edmonton-Strathcona
Upcoming door-knocking sessions (open to everyone, regardless of
experience level):
Canvass in Windsor Park, Saturday February 12, 1pm: Please meet at
home of Mary XXXXXX, one of the coordinators for the Windsor Park
team, XXXXX St
Canvass in Garneau/Strathcona, Sunday February 13, 1pm: Please meet
at the home of Nancy XXXX, Garneau team coordinator, XXXXX,
XXXXXX. The building has visitor parking and there
is also parking on Saskatchewan Drive.
Canvass in King Edward Park, Sunday, February 20, 1pm: Please meet at
the home of Melinda XXXXXX, 8XXX XX Avenue.
For more information or to sign up for any of the above sessions,
contact Erica Bullwinkle at DuncaL1@parl.gc.ca.
(Snip)
Hope to see you soon on the campaign trail with us!
Joel French
U of A Campus NDP
(end)
While I don't know the exact reading of the House Board of Internal Economy's rules on the use of government resources for partisan purposes, I am pretty sure that the organizing of 3 separate and purely partisan door knocking events, using an email account from Duncan's Parliamentary office and on Government of Canada servers, fits into the category of things not allowed.
Time to call your office Linda, because someone there is breaking the rules.
The important info from an email ( on the subject of partisan door knocking) forwarded to me this AM. As with the campus NDP email I have removed all the non relevant personal identifiable information.
Updated: With permission, I have now enclosed the entire email body
Return-Path: (duncal1@parl.gc.ca)
Received: from mailer01.parl.gc.ca ([192.197.82.XXX])
Subject: RE: Sunday Feb 13 Canvass in Garneau/Strathcona
(
Hi Ron – Terrific! I will plan for three and if not everyone shows that’s OK. I just like to make sure I have enough routes and kits. See you then, Erica
Erica Bullwinkle
Constituency Assistant
Linda Duncan, M.P.
Edmonton-Strathcona
780-495-8404
Fax: 780-495-8403
www.lindaduncan.ndp.ca
Busted!
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Maybe now the CBC will cover the Libby Davies story.
Bob Rae has put the CBC in a bad position with his press release today, calling for deputy NDP Libby Davies to step down, because now they will have to cover her disturbing comments which up until this point the CBC have totally ignored. (Note: The National Post appears to be the only MSM outlet to cover Libby's remarks.)
I guess when you have most of your reporters covering KoryVision and typos on web pages, little things like a deputy party leader saying that Israel is not a legitimate state get missed.
More from Libby: 911, Bush did it.
The PM has also called for Davies to be fired but I don't expect that to carry as much weight with the CBC as a Liberal Party press release, which seems to be where the CBC gets most of its stories from.
Related: BC Blue has a couple of interesting tidbits and related links.
Stephen Taylor on the tolerant NDP.
Update: Libby spoke the words in that first video June 5th and this has been covered on the blogs for days now. The CBC did not have any mention of this story up in any form until this afternoon after the PM made his comments in the House.
I guess when you have most of your reporters covering KoryVision and typos on web pages, little things like a deputy party leader saying that Israel is not a legitimate state get missed.
More from Libby: 911, Bush did it.
The PM has also called for Davies to be fired but I don't expect that to carry as much weight with the CBC as a Liberal Party press release, which seems to be where the CBC gets most of its stories from.
Related: BC Blue has a couple of interesting tidbits and related links.
Stephen Taylor on the tolerant NDP.
Update: Libby spoke the words in that first video June 5th and this has been covered on the blogs for days now. The CBC did not have any mention of this story up in any form until this afternoon after the PM made his comments in the House.
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
Kill it, kill it dead.
To borrow a line from my good buddy Scott Reid. The Liberal Party. Kill it, kill it dead.
From the CBC:
From the CBC:
Many Liberal insiders confirmed that discussions between the two parties are not just focused on forming a coalition after an election or co-operation before one, but the creation of a new party.
Friday, June 04, 2010
Kudos to CBC's Evan Solomon
Must see video clip from Thursdays episode of CBC's Power and Politics with Evan Soloman.
IMHO perhaps the best 30 seconds of CBC produced material you have seen all year as host Evan Soloman totally owns NDP MP Pat Martin. (not including sports)
I almost fell out of my chair when Soloman looked at Martin, opened up his arms and said "So maybe......" giving Martin the last second opportunity to come clean and see the hypocrisy of his statements; Martin however never took the very polite cue from Solomon and as a result Martin now looks like a buffoon.
Way to go Evan Soloman! Full kudos for a job well done and an example to others of how to do things.
BLY has more on the interview here and the full episode of P&P is available here. Cue to approx the 1:16:00 mark for the start of the segment and also note how clueless Jack Layton, the guy who may lead the coalition, is about Martin's well publicized remarks.
Update: Ryan Hicks has a blog post up with the entire segment HERE.
Speaking of kudos and the CBC.
Hockey Night in Canada's Ron MacLean helped save a mans life in Philadelphia and deserves a shout out as well for his actions. WTG!
IMHO perhaps the best 30 seconds of CBC produced material you have seen all year as host Evan Soloman totally owns NDP MP Pat Martin. (not including sports)
I almost fell out of my chair when Soloman looked at Martin, opened up his arms and said "So maybe......" giving Martin the last second opportunity to come clean and see the hypocrisy of his statements; Martin however never took the very polite cue from Solomon and as a result Martin now looks like a buffoon.
Way to go Evan Soloman! Full kudos for a job well done and an example to others of how to do things.
BLY has more on the interview here and the full episode of P&P is available here. Cue to approx the 1:16:00 mark for the start of the segment and also note how clueless Jack Layton, the guy who may lead the coalition, is about Martin's well publicized remarks.
Update: Ryan Hicks has a blog post up with the entire segment HERE.
---------------
Speaking of kudos and the CBC.
Hockey Night in Canada's Ron MacLean helped save a mans life in Philadelphia and deserves a shout out as well for his actions. WTG!
Friday, May 07, 2010
A question for Jack Layton
Jack, a hypothetical for you. Would you resign from the NDP caucus if on the day the election writ was dropped you were named in a lawsuit from, well lets just say, a conservative blogger from Alberta as an example?
If not, perhaps you could take Senator Ruth's advice and.....
update: BMO says the lawyers named in the lawsuit (including Shory) are not part of the fraud.
Related: Don't believe me about the law suits Jack, listen to Paul Szabo .
If not, perhaps you could take Senator Ruth's advice and.....
update: BMO says the lawyers named in the lawsuit (including Shory) are not part of the fraud.
Related: Don't believe me about the law suits Jack, listen to Paul Szabo .
Monday, May 03, 2010
Rare Kudos for Jack Layton
I don't do it often here on the blog, but Jack Layton deserves some recognition for displaying some class on the Governor General issue.
Layton, as opposed to Ignatieff, was able to keep his mouth shut, not hold a press conference, and did not feel compelled to abuse the trust placed in him by the PM who reached out and asked Layton for his thoughts on the selection of a new GG.
Way to go Jack, you are hands down a better, and smarter, politician than Ignatieff is or ever will be. You deserve to be in the OLO office more so than the current occupant.
Layton, as opposed to Ignatieff, was able to keep his mouth shut, not hold a press conference, and did not feel compelled to abuse the trust placed in him by the PM who reached out and asked Layton for his thoughts on the selection of a new GG.
Way to go Jack, you are hands down a better, and smarter, politician than Ignatieff is or ever will be. You deserve to be in the OLO office more so than the current occupant.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Jack Layton and the NDP still wooing the Bloc
Jack Layton and the NDP look to still be wooing the Bloc (as possible coalition buddies?) instead of supporting legislation that would increase democracy and add representation to underrepresented Alberta, BC and Ontario.
I take special note of Edmonton Strathcona MP Linda Duncan who again tosses the needs of the people of Alberta out the window in order to appease the Bloc and Quebec.
We will remember this Linda.
To those of you in BC and Ontario represented by the NDP you might want to ask them what the hell are they thinking.
Here is what the NDP caucus voted in favour of earlier today.
" That the House denounce the fact that the government seeks to marginalize the Quebec nation by introducing a bill to decrease Quebec’s political weight in the House, and that it affirm that Quebec Members of Parliament, who represent a nation, must hold at least 25 percent of the seats in the House; The House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment of Mr. Laframboise (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel), seconded by Ms. Demers (Laval), — That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the words “in the House” and substituting the following: “and call on the government not to enact any legislation that would reduce Quebec’s current representation in the House of Commons of 24.35% of the seats.”.
Results can be found here.
I take special note of Edmonton Strathcona MP Linda Duncan who again tosses the needs of the people of Alberta out the window in order to appease the Bloc and Quebec.
We will remember this Linda.
To those of you in BC and Ontario represented by the NDP you might want to ask them what the hell are they thinking.
Here is what the NDP caucus voted in favour of earlier today.
" That the House denounce the fact that the government seeks to marginalize the Quebec nation by introducing a bill to decrease Quebec’s political weight in the House, and that it affirm that Quebec Members of Parliament, who represent a nation, must hold at least 25 percent of the seats in the House; The House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment of Mr. Laframboise (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel), seconded by Ms. Demers (Laval), — That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the words “in the House” and substituting the following: “and call on the government not to enact any legislation that would reduce Quebec’s current representation in the House of Commons of 24.35% of the seats.”.
Results can be found here.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Linda Duncan, cry me a river.
"Duncan says she's not sure the people of Edmonton-Strathcona will be happy with Calgary dollars flowing north to try to influence their votes, she said.
But they will take kindly to this, right?
NDP National HQ raising money "to go and interfere" in Edmonton Strathcona.
Also from the Journal story: "Duncan said Hastman was on hand with Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose to hand out $14.8 million to the University of Alberta, also in Duncan's riding." While she was "was excluded from these events and not informed about when the cheques were going to be handed out."
Funny thing that. If you are so popular and are doing such great things for the riding, why didn't the U of A (or the other stakeholders) bother to invite you to these PUBLIC events?
Cry me a river Linda.
BTW I if knew about the U of A presentation as did hundreds of other people, why didn't Duncan? Nothing was secret about any of them.
Related: How Duncan supports her riding. Ms. Duncan voted for an amendment that would eliminate tax incentives for the oil and gas industry to provide funding for a bailout of the forestry industry in Quebec.
Friday, March 12, 2010
And in local news: NDP MP Linda Duncan is upset...
Linda Duncan the NDP MP for Edmonton-Strathcona is upset. She is upset that conservatives in Alberta want to win back her riding and are, gasp, holding fundraisers for the conservative candidate Ryan Hastman. Oh my, those evil conservatives will stop at nothing to target helpless little ol' Linda.
You can read the article here, but there is more to this story than what you read.
First off the article is factually wrong; sort of.
After reading it a few times I was unsure if Calgary-West gave/transferred the money to the Hastman campaign or if it came from a fundraiser. The first part clearly states there was a fundraiser in January, which is correct, but then we get Duncan's comment “I guess they have nothing better to do with their time and money than to go and interfere in other ridings.”, followed up by a comment from an Elections Canada official talking about .."constituency associations aren’t breaking any rules if they transfer cash or raise donations for another riding so long as they comply with federal contribution limits." which leaves me wondering; what really happened?
Here are the facts which have been confirmed by a senior conservative. A fundraiser was held in January specifically for raising money for Edm-Strathcona/Ryan Hastman campaign. The Calgary-West EDA did not, organize it, pay any monies towards it, receive any money from it, or transfer any money to Edm-Strathcona. This was just one of the many political fundraisers that take place almost daily somewhere in Canada; which brings me to the second issue I have.
What in that story is really news, and what prompted its writing?
Was it that the CPC wants to win back the seat? Like that is news to anyone.
Was it because of the issues in Calgary-West? I doubt it because nothing is mentioned in the article on that.
Was it possibly because of Rahim? Again I doubt it since he is not even mentioned and that happened on the 9th, 1 day after the Sun story appeared.
Did the author just decide to do a story on Edmonton-Strathcona out of the Blue? Could be ;)
Was the story fed to the author from either the conservatives, which makes no sense what so ever, or perhaps from the NDP?
I don't know the answers, and perhaps the author would like to drop me a comment or email to clarify, but what I do know is that Linda Duncan is confused about the facts and the NDP sure loves irony.
Remember Duncan's comment from above “I guess they have nothing better to do with their time and money than to go and interfere in other ridings.” because as it turns out that Sun article made its way into a fund-raising email from National NDP HQ. (the same day!)
Yes, NDP HQ is doing what Duncan accused Calgary-West of doing, 'interfering' in Edmonton-Strathcona, and all over a simple fundraiser.
Click on image to enlarge. (the top link goes to the Sun story, the other 2 to a secure donation page)
I like the top line: Have you seen today's story. Today? Damn, that was fast.
Why was this story written again?
You can read the article here, but there is more to this story than what you read.
First off the article is factually wrong; sort of.
After reading it a few times I was unsure if Calgary-West gave/transferred the money to the Hastman campaign or if it came from a fundraiser. The first part clearly states there was a fundraiser in January, which is correct, but then we get Duncan's comment “I guess they have nothing better to do with their time and money than to go and interfere in other ridings.”, followed up by a comment from an Elections Canada official talking about .."constituency associations aren’t breaking any rules if they transfer cash or raise donations for another riding so long as they comply with federal contribution limits." which leaves me wondering; what really happened?
Here are the facts which have been confirmed by a senior conservative. A fundraiser was held in January specifically for raising money for Edm-Strathcona/Ryan Hastman campaign. The Calgary-West EDA did not, organize it, pay any monies towards it, receive any money from it, or transfer any money to Edm-Strathcona. This was just one of the many political fundraisers that take place almost daily somewhere in Canada; which brings me to the second issue I have.
What in that story is really news, and what prompted its writing?
Was it that the CPC wants to win back the seat? Like that is news to anyone.
Was it because of the issues in Calgary-West? I doubt it because nothing is mentioned in the article on that.
Was it possibly because of Rahim? Again I doubt it since he is not even mentioned and that happened on the 9th, 1 day after the Sun story appeared.
Did the author just decide to do a story on Edmonton-Strathcona out of the Blue? Could be ;)
Was the story fed to the author from either the conservatives, which makes no sense what so ever, or perhaps from the NDP?
I don't know the answers, and perhaps the author would like to drop me a comment or email to clarify, but what I do know is that Linda Duncan is confused about the facts and the NDP sure loves irony.
Remember Duncan's comment from above “I guess they have nothing better to do with their time and money than to go and interfere in other ridings.” because as it turns out that Sun article made its way into a fund-raising email from National NDP HQ. (the same day!)
Yes, NDP HQ is doing what Duncan accused Calgary-West of doing, 'interfering' in Edmonton-Strathcona, and all over a simple fundraiser.
Click on image to enlarge. (the top link goes to the Sun story, the other 2 to a secure donation page)
I like the top line: Have you seen today's story. Today? Damn, that was fast.
Why was this story written again?
Monday, March 01, 2010
Jack Layton, 2 minutes for interference.
Compare and contrast.
While PM Harper was sitting in the stands with Wayne Gretzky cheering on our men's hockey team during the gold medal game at the Olympics, Jack Layton was in Gretzky's Bar in Toronto waiting for the camera to go live so he could get his face on national television; and he was not going to let anyone get in his way. As you can see from the following.
Another video. Look closely at everyone's eyes around Jack, they are looking at the televisions while Jack is looking at the camera. That kind of proves the NDP spin, that Layton was trying to see the TV, is nothing but BS doesn't it.
Stay classy Jack.
I was going to make a separate post on the Olympics but this is as good a place as anywhere to make a few comments.
Some praise and a few failures.
Praise:
VANOC, well done. You managed to pull it all off in-spite of the weather problems and a temperamental hydraulic cauldron arm. (nice touch making light of it in the closing ceremonies)
CTV: while I am not normally full of praise for CTV I have to give credit where credit is due. CTV and the other partners did an outstanding job of covering the games from start to finish and your live coverage was an example to the world of the right way to do things. The only thing that might have made it all better would have been to provided a little bit more in-depth back coverage on our athletes as the American broadcaster NBC did so well with their athletes. Well done CTV,Rogers, TSN,and RDS.
Our athletes: What can I say; you made us all proud with your efforts and accomplishments. 14 gold medals was well beyond anything that we could have expected and you have made a nation proud. You did own the podium!
The Canadian public: What can I say; the enthusiasm and patriotism shown for the games and our athletes deserves full marks, I only hope that this spirit will last longer than the 17 days the games did. We have a lot to be proud of and there is nothing wrong with being proud of this fact.
PM Harper: Thank you for proroguing Parliament and allowing Canadians to enjoy the games without all of the nonsense in Ottawa distracting us on a daily basis. Sure some are going to jump on me for saying this but the country really was better off because of it.
Fails:
The Olympic protesters: A big fail. You took advantage of what this country offers and abused it by breaking windows and other such nonsense. Thankfully it was short lived.
CBC and all the other negative Nellie's who were quick to jump all over the games and our early performance. Peter Mansbridge complaining about not being able to show footage from the games after the CBC had done the same thing for years was the height of hypocrisy and the continued 'all negative all of the time' coverage that the CBC is known for did nothing but harm their reputation. As for all of those mocking the "own the podium" program long before the results were known, you are pathetic, and while I don't expect any of you to admit you were wrong and apologize, it might be nice if the next time you would wait until the results were known before going all negative. (like that will ever happen)
Jack Layton: see above.
While this is not a real fail, I think Loblaws/Superstore might want to re-think promoting their "blue menu" product by tying it to, and claiming it, as a reason for the success of a particular group of athletes when that group of athletes were shut out of the medals. You can't have it both ways here, if you want to claim the product was responsible for the success it must also be responsible for the lack of it as well; but we are Canadian after all so I won't rub it in.
Speaking of corporate sponsorship and advertising, if some company does not jump at the opportunity to get our ice dance team of Virtue and Moir to promote their company they are fools. These 2 are golden in more ways than one and they should be lining up to get these 2 to represent their company.
Updated: Proof positive that some people will believe anything.
http://nexusofassholery.blogspot.com/2010/03/theres-no-reason-why-all-dishonest.html
http://nexusofassholery.blogspot.com/2010/03/just-another-reminder-of-why-hes.html
While PM Harper was sitting in the stands with Wayne Gretzky cheering on our men's hockey team during the gold medal game at the Olympics, Jack Layton was in Gretzky's Bar in Toronto waiting for the camera to go live so he could get his face on national television; and he was not going to let anyone get in his way. As you can see from the following.
Another video. Look closely at everyone's eyes around Jack, they are looking at the televisions while Jack is looking at the camera. That kind of proves the NDP spin, that Layton was trying to see the TV, is nothing but BS doesn't it.
Stay classy Jack.
I was going to make a separate post on the Olympics but this is as good a place as anywhere to make a few comments.
Some praise and a few failures.
Praise:
VANOC, well done. You managed to pull it all off in-spite of the weather problems and a temperamental hydraulic cauldron arm. (nice touch making light of it in the closing ceremonies)
CTV: while I am not normally full of praise for CTV I have to give credit where credit is due. CTV and the other partners did an outstanding job of covering the games from start to finish and your live coverage was an example to the world of the right way to do things. The only thing that might have made it all better would have been to provided a little bit more in-depth back coverage on our athletes as the American broadcaster NBC did so well with their athletes. Well done CTV,Rogers, TSN,and RDS.
Our athletes: What can I say; you made us all proud with your efforts and accomplishments. 14 gold medals was well beyond anything that we could have expected and you have made a nation proud. You did own the podium!
The Canadian public: What can I say; the enthusiasm and patriotism shown for the games and our athletes deserves full marks, I only hope that this spirit will last longer than the 17 days the games did. We have a lot to be proud of and there is nothing wrong with being proud of this fact.
PM Harper: Thank you for proroguing Parliament and allowing Canadians to enjoy the games without all of the nonsense in Ottawa distracting us on a daily basis. Sure some are going to jump on me for saying this but the country really was better off because of it.
Fails:
The Olympic protesters: A big fail. You took advantage of what this country offers and abused it by breaking windows and other such nonsense. Thankfully it was short lived.
CBC and all the other negative Nellie's who were quick to jump all over the games and our early performance. Peter Mansbridge complaining about not being able to show footage from the games after the CBC had done the same thing for years was the height of hypocrisy and the continued 'all negative all of the time' coverage that the CBC is known for did nothing but harm their reputation. As for all of those mocking the "own the podium" program long before the results were known, you are pathetic, and while I don't expect any of you to admit you were wrong and apologize, it might be nice if the next time you would wait until the results were known before going all negative. (like that will ever happen)
Jack Layton: see above.
While this is not a real fail, I think Loblaws/Superstore might want to re-think promoting their "blue menu" product by tying it to, and claiming it, as a reason for the success of a particular group of athletes when that group of athletes were shut out of the medals. You can't have it both ways here, if you want to claim the product was responsible for the success it must also be responsible for the lack of it as well; but we are Canadian after all so I won't rub it in.
Speaking of corporate sponsorship and advertising, if some company does not jump at the opportunity to get our ice dance team of Virtue and Moir to promote their company they are fools. These 2 are golden in more ways than one and they should be lining up to get these 2 to represent their company.
Updated: Proof positive that some people will believe anything.
http://nexusofassholery.blogspot.com/2010/03/theres-no-reason-why-all-dishonest.html
http://nexusofassholery.blogspot.com/2010/03/just-another-reminder-of-why-hes.html
Monday, February 01, 2010
Will the "it's an attack on democracy" opposition do the democratic thing?
After all the yelling and playing outraged for the cameras is over and everyone is back to work, will the opposition parties do the democratic thing and vote unanimously to bring back any Bills that may have been stopped due to prorogation?
I would think the answer would be an obvious yes considering that the stoppage of Bills is one of the things that they claim to be so outraged over and is a major talking point, but as we all know, what the opposition says and what they actually do are often 2 very different things.
Will the Bloc and the NDP make Parliament work by voting to unanimously bring back bills that they may have originally voted against?
Will the Liberal position change yet again?
Will the MSM even notice?
We have to wait and see but it should be interesting to watch and see if the opposition actually practices what they have been preaching for the last month or if it really was nothing more than grandstanding.
I would think the answer would be an obvious yes considering that the stoppage of Bills is one of the things that they claim to be so outraged over and is a major talking point, but as we all know, what the opposition says and what they actually do are often 2 very different things.
Will the Bloc and the NDP make Parliament work by voting to unanimously bring back bills that they may have originally voted against?
Will the Liberal position change yet again?
Will the MSM even notice?
We have to wait and see but it should be interesting to watch and see if the opposition actually practices what they have been preaching for the last month or if it really was nothing more than grandstanding.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
The Coalition reunites?
Thwarted in late 2008 by PM Harper's legitimate use of prorogation, which saved this country from permanent divisions and possibly even from being torn apart, the coalition looks to have reunited again in 2010 in an attempt to remove the only obstacle that prevented them from seizing power in 2008 and installing failed Liberal leader Stephane Dion as our Prime Minister, Jack Layton into cabinet, Elizabeth May into the Senate, and given separatist Gilles Duceppe a de facto veto over government business.
Think about that for a minute. If either of the current NDP or Liberal proposals to limit the PM's right to prorogue Parliament had been in place in 2008; that very coalition would have been unstoppable and would have formed government against the wishes of a large majority of Canadians who had recently re-elected the Conservatives with an even stronger mandate.
Now you can call me cynical but from where I sit the only possible reason that I can see that the opposition would want to make these very short sighted changes, which could severely limit a PM from acting on behalf of the nation on some yet unseen crisis in the future, is that they are making plans for a coalition redux, and this time they are making sure in advance that nothing is going to get in their way.
Not convinced? Take a look at the some of the strange things that have taken place over the last couple of weeks.
Jack Layton said that he was not going to take part in the Liberal photo op in Ottawa on the 25th, but when the day did arrive Jack was there smiling as always for the ever present cameras.
Michael Ignatieff stated that he supported the power of prorogation, but come the 25th of January he totally flip flopped and proposed limits. (Ok, Ignatieff flip flopping is not that strange, in fact it is the norm, but the timing of it makes the decision very suspect.)
Jack Layton stands by and watches the Liberals basically steal the NDP idea and says nothing about it, other than that he is going to consult with the other parties on the issue. ( FYI: This is what happened the last time Layton consulted the other parties.)
BTW, we already have mechanism to deal with accountability and government abuse in Canada. It is called an election, and I suggest that if Layton and Ignatieff are really that concerned that they stop pandering to the cameras, stop the rhetoric, and do the only real democratic thing by voting the government down and then go to the people of Canada in an election.
We shall see just how concerned they really are come March, but I would not be holding my breath.
Think about that for a minute. If either of the current NDP or Liberal proposals to limit the PM's right to prorogue Parliament had been in place in 2008; that very coalition would have been unstoppable and would have formed government against the wishes of a large majority of Canadians who had recently re-elected the Conservatives with an even stronger mandate.
Now you can call me cynical but from where I sit the only possible reason that I can see that the opposition would want to make these very short sighted changes, which could severely limit a PM from acting on behalf of the nation on some yet unseen crisis in the future, is that they are making plans for a coalition redux, and this time they are making sure in advance that nothing is going to get in their way.
Not convinced? Take a look at the some of the strange things that have taken place over the last couple of weeks.
Jack Layton said that he was not going to take part in the Liberal photo op in Ottawa on the 25th, but when the day did arrive Jack was there smiling as always for the ever present cameras.
Michael Ignatieff stated that he supported the power of prorogation, but come the 25th of January he totally flip flopped and proposed limits. (Ok, Ignatieff flip flopping is not that strange, in fact it is the norm, but the timing of it makes the decision very suspect.)
Jack Layton stands by and watches the Liberals basically steal the NDP idea and says nothing about it, other than that he is going to consult with the other parties on the issue. ( FYI: This is what happened the last time Layton consulted the other parties.)
BTW, we already have mechanism to deal with accountability and government abuse in Canada. It is called an election, and I suggest that if Layton and Ignatieff are really that concerned that they stop pandering to the cameras, stop the rhetoric, and do the only real democratic thing by voting the government down and then go to the people of Canada in an election.
We shall see just how concerned they really are come March, but I would not be holding my breath.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Prorogation Day in Canada.
If you were to consider the amount of ink used by the media on tomorrows "Prorogation day in Canada" one might actually believe that it will turn out to be more popular than "Hockey Night in Canada. That of course is wrong, but give credit to the MSM in this country for trying to promote something for them to cover during the traditional slow period in Ottawa that comes with the winter break.
I don't even want to hazard a guess as to what type of numbers we will see tomorrow but regardless of how many do show up, I think it is a pretty safe bet they can be broken down into the following groups:
The largest contingent of the 'protesters' will be your hard core Harper haters made up of mostly lefties who despise the PM and would complain that he is taking away jobs from doctors if he discovered the cure for cancer. This group is always a guarantee to show up at anything anti-conservative.
The next largest group would be the partisans aligned with specific political parties.
Many Greens can be expected to show up and in some cases they have even gone so far as to take part in the organization of this so called "NON PARTISAN" event.
The NDP will be out in force, which is to be expected, but at least Jack Layton has a plan; as unconstitutional as it may be. (Note to Iggy: Your coalition buddy is setting you up with his motion.) This group may be large as unions have money to organize and bus in the "grassroots".
The Liberals: Yes it is expected that many Liberals will be out for partisan gain trying to pull the wool over the eyes of Canadians by looking like they are against prorogation even though LPC policy says otherwise and their leader, Micheal Ignatieff, has stated he is in favour of keeping it.
Ignatieff it turns out was very much in favour of the PM proroguing the first time he did it back in 2008. For the MSM who just read that and have their doubts, please feel free to stick a microphone Ignatieff's way and ask him yourself. It would be hard for him to say that he was not in favour of it in 2008 when he has described the coalition as something so divisive that it would have caused a "permanent division" to Canadian society. You want something to cover MSM; just ask Iggy that question and watch him squirm.
All of the above combined will make up the bulk of the numbers that we see tomorrow; my guess is that they will make up about 90% of those in attendance, but one must also remember that most of these people would never vote conservative in the first place.
Of the remaining numbers, the one group that we should be concerned about is the small number that will attend, who are not there with a particular partisan axe to grind, that are honestly upset over the PM proroguing. This group can be divided into 2 sub groups with the first being the ones that are just sick of seeing politicians not working for any reason, and the other being the ones who have been convinced by the media that this prorogation is not a routine event and that it is an affront to democracy. There is no convincing the first bunch, they think all politicians are lazy, but I do believe that if the others learn the facts about prorogation being a much used, legal, and indeed a constitutional power I think the damage will be minimal. Do they really want to open up the constitution to take away this power? I doubt it very much that many do.
As for the small amount of those in attendance tomorrow who did not make it into the above groupings; their numbers will be made up mostly of media people and a handful of guys there just because they want to score with some dipper chick that was already planing to attend. The first group is potentially dangerous, while the second may very well turn out to be Conservative voters sometime in the future.
There you have it. Some honest analysis of the numbers that I doubt you will see anywhere in the MSM. Not because they are unable to do so, but rather because it is dangerous for the media to analyze the news that they themselves have shaped and intensely promoted for weeks now. The old adage applies: Don't become the story.
Oh and I have to add a quick thought on the detainee red herring we keep hearing about. In the end, the already 3 years old detainee story is going to turn out the same way the other so called "game changers" such as Chuck Cadman, in and out financing, H1N1, wafergate, and a host of others have turned out to be. Nothing more than Liberal games and smear.
For fun: A couple of bonus questions to ask the anti-prorogation types.
Asking any Liberal why they are there if their party and Iggy supports prorogation is an obvious one but if you want some real fun try asking the following.
Last year during the coalition crisis did you claim legitimacy for the coalition because of the constitution? If so, why are you now against that same constitution and the legitimacy of prorogation? Is there anything else you want to change in our constitution while we are opening it up?
And lastly please have a safe Prorogation Day in Canada and enjoy the wall to wall MSM coverage.
From The Ottawa Citizen and Susan Riley of all people :
I don't even want to hazard a guess as to what type of numbers we will see tomorrow but regardless of how many do show up, I think it is a pretty safe bet they can be broken down into the following groups:
The largest contingent of the 'protesters' will be your hard core Harper haters made up of mostly lefties who despise the PM and would complain that he is taking away jobs from doctors if he discovered the cure for cancer. This group is always a guarantee to show up at anything anti-conservative.
The next largest group would be the partisans aligned with specific political parties.
Many Greens can be expected to show up and in some cases they have even gone so far as to take part in the organization of this so called "NON PARTISAN" event.
The NDP will be out in force, which is to be expected, but at least Jack Layton has a plan; as unconstitutional as it may be. (Note to Iggy: Your coalition buddy is setting you up with his motion.) This group may be large as unions have money to organize and bus in the "grassroots".
The Liberals: Yes it is expected that many Liberals will be out for partisan gain trying to pull the wool over the eyes of Canadians by looking like they are against prorogation even though LPC policy says otherwise and their leader, Micheal Ignatieff, has stated he is in favour of keeping it.
Ignatieff it turns out was very much in favour of the PM proroguing the first time he did it back in 2008. For the MSM who just read that and have their doubts, please feel free to stick a microphone Ignatieff's way and ask him yourself. It would be hard for him to say that he was not in favour of it in 2008 when he has described the coalition as something so divisive that it would have caused a "permanent division" to Canadian society. You want something to cover MSM; just ask Iggy that question and watch him squirm.
All of the above combined will make up the bulk of the numbers that we see tomorrow; my guess is that they will make up about 90% of those in attendance, but one must also remember that most of these people would never vote conservative in the first place.
Of the remaining numbers, the one group that we should be concerned about is the small number that will attend, who are not there with a particular partisan axe to grind, that are honestly upset over the PM proroguing. This group can be divided into 2 sub groups with the first being the ones that are just sick of seeing politicians not working for any reason, and the other being the ones who have been convinced by the media that this prorogation is not a routine event and that it is an affront to democracy. There is no convincing the first bunch, they think all politicians are lazy, but I do believe that if the others learn the facts about prorogation being a much used, legal, and indeed a constitutional power I think the damage will be minimal. Do they really want to open up the constitution to take away this power? I doubt it very much that many do.
As for the small amount of those in attendance tomorrow who did not make it into the above groupings; their numbers will be made up mostly of media people and a handful of guys there just because they want to score with some dipper chick that was already planing to attend. The first group is potentially dangerous, while the second may very well turn out to be Conservative voters sometime in the future.
There you have it. Some honest analysis of the numbers that I doubt you will see anywhere in the MSM. Not because they are unable to do so, but rather because it is dangerous for the media to analyze the news that they themselves have shaped and intensely promoted for weeks now. The old adage applies: Don't become the story.
Oh and I have to add a quick thought on the detainee red herring we keep hearing about. In the end, the already 3 years old detainee story is going to turn out the same way the other so called "game changers" such as Chuck Cadman, in and out financing, H1N1, wafergate, and a host of others have turned out to be. Nothing more than Liberal games and smear.
For fun: A couple of bonus questions to ask the anti-prorogation types.
Asking any Liberal why they are there if their party and Iggy supports prorogation is an obvious one but if you want some real fun try asking the following.
Last year during the coalition crisis did you claim legitimacy for the coalition because of the constitution? If so, why are you now against that same constitution and the legitimacy of prorogation? Is there anything else you want to change in our constitution while we are opening it up?
And lastly please have a safe Prorogation Day in Canada and enjoy the wall to wall MSM coverage.
From The Ottawa Citizen and Susan Riley of all people :
He (Ignatieff) encouraged anti-prorogation organizers in a Facebook posting this week, and confirmed he will be attending Saturday's protest in Ottawa, but refuses to back Jack Layton's call for legislation limiting future use of prorogation. When asked to define his political values, he paused then replied: "I'm passionate about freedom." So was George W. Bush.
On the pressing issue of looming deficits, he told reporters it isn't his problem, it's Harper's problem -- and he, Ignatieff, isn't about to help his rival out of the swamp. (Never mind what happens to the rest of us, I guess.)
He continues to answer questions with questions, urge patience and promise a bold new vision any time now. He sounds like Karlheinz Schreiber: wait until next week, then the true story will emerge.
Iggy being compared to KHS. Classic!
ht BLY .
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Alberta Ardvark: Doing the NDP's Job for them.
What should be front and center on the NDP's web site.
Stephen Harper on prorogation: “the government is going to take advantage of this time – we need the time – to look carefully at our agenda, to continue to deliver the economic measures that are being delivered here and elsewhere across there country as part of the economic action plan. We also need time to re-examine our agenda, to prepare for the next year in Parliament, and to prepare for a very different economy going forward.”
Michael Ignatieff on prorogation: "Prorogation is part of our constitutional system...." “Mr. Ignatieff said there is a legitimate time to shut down Parliament when a government has gone through its legislative program, and it’s time to 'reset.'"
PM Harper and Michael Ignatieff. I can't see a difference. Can you see a difference?
Stephen Harper on prorogation: “the government is going to take advantage of this time – we need the time – to look carefully at our agenda, to continue to deliver the economic measures that are being delivered here and elsewhere across there country as part of the economic action plan. We also need time to re-examine our agenda, to prepare for the next year in Parliament, and to prepare for a very different economy going forward.”
Michael Ignatieff on prorogation: "Prorogation is part of our constitutional system...." “Mr. Ignatieff said there is a legitimate time to shut down Parliament when a government has gone through its legislative program, and it’s time to 'reset.'"
PM Harper and Michael Ignatieff. I can't see a difference. Can you see a difference?
------------------
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
BC Opposition MP's want the evil Stephen Harper to do their bidding.
Liberal Joyce Murray (Vancouver Quadra) and New Democrat Libby Davies (Vancouver East) want the PM to contact International Olympic Committee president Jacques Rogge and personally intervene, where the PM has no business getting involved, to resolve a dispute over the exclusion of female ski jumpers at next month's Winter Olympics.
Yes, these 2 MP's, one a Liberal and the other an NDP, want the Prime Minister of Canada to abuse his power, over step his bounds, and bully the International Olympic Committee on how to run their OWN event, on something that the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled in favour of the IOC on.
These are the same people who have already looked foolish with the FALSE claims that the logo chosen by the Canadian Olympic Committee was influenced by the CPC, and also claimed, and again were proven wrong, that the route for the torch relay was also politically motivated.
Some days you just have to wonder just what is going on in the minds of the opposition in this country. Actually it is not 'some days' but everyday that these fools are in front of the press with their latest that make you wonder.
Yes, these 2 MP's, one a Liberal and the other an NDP, want the Prime Minister of Canada to abuse his power, over step his bounds, and bully the International Olympic Committee on how to run their OWN event, on something that the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled in favour of the IOC on.
These are the same people who have already looked foolish with the FALSE claims that the logo chosen by the Canadian Olympic Committee was influenced by the CPC, and also claimed, and again were proven wrong, that the route for the torch relay was also politically motivated.
Some days you just have to wonder just what is going on in the minds of the opposition in this country. Actually it is not 'some days' but everyday that these fools are in front of the press with their latest that make you wonder.
Monday, November 02, 2009
Somebody is getting nervous in Edmonton Strathcona
Is Linda Duncan, the NDP MP for Edmonton-Strathcona, getting nervous?
Here is a sign that she is: from the Edmonton Journal a few weeks back. More distressing, she said, is that Ryan Hastman, the Conservative nominee in Edmonton Strathcona, did appear at a number of funding announcements in the riding over the summer. "I find it really inappropriate," she said. "I am the elected official for this riding, whether they like it or not. I have been duly elected. In protocol, it would be the appropriate thing to simply invite me."
Taking shots in the press at your main political opponent, in this case Conservative Party candidate Ryan Hastman, is a good sign that Ms. Duncan has at a minimum been paying attention to the competition.
Since his nomination win back in June of this year, Ryan has been going door to door almost non stop meeting the constituents of Edm_Strathcona. He has already knocked on 1000's of doors and he plans do knock on many more before any possible upcoming election. I went door knocking with Ryan back when the weather was much more pleasant than it is today and I can tell you first hand the he is getting noticed and making a very favorable impression on the ground. The impression I got that night was that the MP previous to Duncan, and Duncan herself were 'not very active' in the riding and they appreciated being able to talk with Hastman.
Her complaint that Ryan Hastman attending some funding announcements is somehow inappropriate is laughable when you consider that she also said the following"To tell you the truth, I've noticed that I am attracting a lot of money to my riding," she said. "We had a very nice, sizable grant to the Fringe, grants to Kings University, Newman College, LRT expansion and so forth." Duncan, though, was critical of the way the grants have been handed out, calling the various infrastructure plans "political slush funds. Nice try. Duncan wants to be able to claim credit in attracting money into the riding but also is maintaining that infrastructure plans are just"Political slush funds". You can't have it both ways , pick one Linda. Oh, and having Ryan Hastman, or any other resident of Edmonton Strathcona for that matter, attend a public announcement is neither distressing or inappropriate.
So what do you think. Is Linda Duncan getting nervous?
I believe she is, but if I am wrong and she isn't, she should be. With Hastman's work ethic, a dedicated team backing him up, and the ability to run a fully funded campaign, Linda Duncan is going to be in for quite the battle when ever the writ is dropped. That she can count on.
Here is a sign that she is: from the Edmonton Journal a few weeks back. More distressing, she said, is that Ryan Hastman, the Conservative nominee in Edmonton Strathcona, did appear at a number of funding announcements in the riding over the summer. "I find it really inappropriate," she said. "I am the elected official for this riding, whether they like it or not. I have been duly elected. In protocol, it would be the appropriate thing to simply invite me."
Taking shots in the press at your main political opponent, in this case Conservative Party candidate Ryan Hastman, is a good sign that Ms. Duncan has at a minimum been paying attention to the competition.
Since his nomination win back in June of this year, Ryan has been going door to door almost non stop meeting the constituents of Edm_Strathcona. He has already knocked on 1000's of doors and he plans do knock on many more before any possible upcoming election. I went door knocking with Ryan back when the weather was much more pleasant than it is today and I can tell you first hand the he is getting noticed and making a very favorable impression on the ground. The impression I got that night was that the MP previous to Duncan, and Duncan herself were 'not very active' in the riding and they appreciated being able to talk with Hastman.
Her complaint that Ryan Hastman attending some funding announcements is somehow inappropriate is laughable when you consider that she also said the following"To tell you the truth, I've noticed that I am attracting a lot of money to my riding," she said. "We had a very nice, sizable grant to the Fringe, grants to Kings University, Newman College, LRT expansion and so forth." Duncan, though, was critical of the way the grants have been handed out, calling the various infrastructure plans "political slush funds. Nice try. Duncan wants to be able to claim credit in attracting money into the riding but also is maintaining that infrastructure plans are just"Political slush funds". You can't have it both ways , pick one Linda. Oh, and having Ryan Hastman, or any other resident of Edmonton Strathcona for that matter, attend a public announcement is neither distressing or inappropriate.
So what do you think. Is Linda Duncan getting nervous?
I believe she is, but if I am wrong and she isn't, she should be. With Hastman's work ethic, a dedicated team backing him up, and the ability to run a fully funded campaign, Linda Duncan is going to be in for quite the battle when ever the writ is dropped. That she can count on.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Cauchon vs. Mulcair
New poll up on the sidebar: Who will win in Outremont, Thomas Mulcair or Martin Cauchon?
So please vote and feel free to drop a comment below and tell us why you voted the way you did.
So please vote and feel free to drop a comment below and tell us why you voted the way you did.
--------------------------------------
My personal thoughts are that Mulcair gets re-elected. I know this goes against the thinking of lots of Liberals out there who now believe that Outremont is in the bag with the return of Cauchon, but I think that is more wishful thinking rather than based on anything factual.
Here are a couple of reasons why.
First off Mulcair already has the job of MP in Outremont and the power of incumbency should never be underestimated. This will be diminished somewhat by the fact that Cauchon was once the MP for the riding, but not enough to neutralize it completely. Advantage Mulcair.
Mulcair has to be considered a star candidate more so than Cauchon would be. Mulcair is the only NDP member from Quebec, which makes him very high profile no matter what, and there is
a strong chance that he may be end up as the next leader of the NDP. While some have suggested that Cauchon himself may be working towards the leadership of the LPC, that is not something that can really be used to his advantage in a campaign without causing problems and ruffling the feathers of current leader Michael Ignatieff. We all know that this is probably Jack Layton's kick at the cat and it is no secret Mulcair wants the job, and while Cauchon may want the leaders job as well, there is no way he or his people can touch the subject with a 10ft poll come election time without negative repercussions. Advantage Mulcair.
The last and perhaps the biggest reason that I see for a Mulcair victory is the baggage factor. Mulcair will be traveling light in an election while Cauchon comes with more than a Samsonite sales rep. The past is going to be inescapable for team Cauchon and no matter how hard they try to make the past a non issue, it will be, and you can bet that both the NDP and the press are going to make sure of that. Big advantage Mulcair.
What do you think?
Update: Speaking of baggage....
Here are a couple of reasons why.
First off Mulcair already has the job of MP in Outremont and the power of incumbency should never be underestimated. This will be diminished somewhat by the fact that Cauchon was once the MP for the riding, but not enough to neutralize it completely. Advantage Mulcair.
Mulcair has to be considered a star candidate more so than Cauchon would be. Mulcair is the only NDP member from Quebec, which makes him very high profile no matter what, and there is
a strong chance that he may be end up as the next leader of the NDP. While some have suggested that Cauchon himself may be working towards the leadership of the LPC, that is not something that can really be used to his advantage in a campaign without causing problems and ruffling the feathers of current leader Michael Ignatieff. We all know that this is probably Jack Layton's kick at the cat and it is no secret Mulcair wants the job, and while Cauchon may want the leaders job as well, there is no way he or his people can touch the subject with a 10ft poll come election time without negative repercussions. Advantage Mulcair.
The last and perhaps the biggest reason that I see for a Mulcair victory is the baggage factor. Mulcair will be traveling light in an election while Cauchon comes with more than a Samsonite sales rep. The past is going to be inescapable for team Cauchon and no matter how hard they try to make the past a non issue, it will be, and you can bet that both the NDP and the press are going to make sure of that. Big advantage Mulcair.
What do you think?
Update: Speaking of baggage....
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Jack Layton is proud of this.
Here is something to think about the next time you are sitting around the kitchen table.
Jack Layton boasts that the he and the NDP are proud of the fact that their party is NOT making parliament work. Jack Layton: "Look at the record – 79 times in succession it hasn't been the NDP that Mr. Harper has counted on to get support,"
Keep up the good work Jack. Keep showing Canadians exactly why they should not be voting for ideologues who would rather play games for their support base than try to work for the good of the country.
Jack Layton boasts that the he and the NDP are proud of the fact that their party is NOT making parliament work. Jack Layton: "Look at the record – 79 times in succession it hasn't been the NDP that Mr. Harper has counted on to get support,"
Keep up the good work Jack. Keep showing Canadians exactly why they should not be voting for ideologues who would rather play games for their support base than try to work for the good of the country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
