Christian Conservative Christian "Independent"

I'm an evangelical Christian, member of the CPC, but presently & unjustly exiled to wander the political wilderness.
All opinions expressed here are solely my own.

Tuesday, September 01, 2009

Iggy: The $300 Million Dollar Man

So Iggy is gonna do it, and pull the trigger on yet ANOTHER election here in Canada, the FOURTH election in just five years. At a cost of NO LESS than $300,000,000 to the Canadian taxpayer... that's right, THREE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS.

$300 million dollars, just so the Liberals can MAYBE install Iggy as Prime Minister? I can think of a lot of better things we could spend that money on.

"What's the big deal? $300 million dollars to make me
Prime Minister... THAT'S A BARGIN, don't you think?"

Perhaps Iggy didn't read the recent Readers Digest list of "Most Trusted Canadians"... where Prime Minister Stephen Harper ranked #8 on the list. Iggy? Way down at NINETEEN, behind even the likes of Don Cherry and Rick Mercer.

Labels: , , ,


  • At Tue. Sep. 01, 02:50:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Ted Betts said…

    So now you care about $300 million?

    Where was the concern about $300 million back when Harper broke his own promise to hold elections only on fixed dates?

    Or are you saying that the Official Opposition party actually has some sort of duty to not oppose the Conservatives? and pass whatever the heck they want passed?

    Really? C'mon. We live in a Parliamentary democracy, don't you know. If it so important now, all of a sudden, I suppose you could always suggest that Harper tries cancelling Parliament to save his job. Again.

  • At Tue. Sep. 01, 02:53:00 p.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Apparently Ignatieff really wants to be Prime Minister when the world comes to Canada for the olympics and so he doesn't want to wait until spring. Now that is a pompous reason for an election.

  • At Tue. Sep. 01, 02:56:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Joanne (True Blue) said…

    What a day for my blog to be down!

    Probably Iggy didn't want to have to wait until next year when PM Harper could appoint even more Senators and finally have the place somewhat balanced.

  • At Tue. Sep. 01, 03:13:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Leeky Sweek said…


    Canada's dollar fell to its lowest level of the day on Tuesday afternoon after Canada's official opposition Liberal Party said it will no longer support the minority Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

    Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff made the comments in Sudbury, Ontario, during a summer gathering of his Liberal caucus.

    At 1:18 p.m., the Canadian dollar was at C$1.1068 to the U.S. dollar, or 90.35 U.S. cents, down slightly from C$1.1044 to the U.S. dollar, or 90.55 U.S. cents, before comments made by Ignatieff on not supporting the government. The Canadian dollar was at C$1.0950, or 91.32 U.S. cents, at Monday's close.

  • At Tue. Sep. 01, 03:20:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Ted Betts said…

    Here's a little blast from the past for your consideration: snippets from Harper's interview with Evan Soloman just before the end of the 38th Parliament ( when he offered, um, "financial considerations" to Cadman to defeat the Martin Liberals in 2005:

    "First of all, I can’t forget my first responsibility – which is to be the Leader of the Opposition and that’s to provide an alternative government. We’ve always said we’ll support the government when they do things that we can accept … but in general my obligation is to provide an Opposition. It’s the government’s obligation to look really to the third parties to get the support to govern … Well there are lots of things that could bring the government down, but my opposition can not bring the government down. The government can only be brought down because it alienates several parties in the House. And the first obligation in this Parliament, if the government wants to govern, it has to come to Parliament and it has to show that it can get the support of the majority of members, through the Throne Speech, through legislation, and through budget and supply, and the government to this point has made no effort to do that, but that’s its first obligation … We’ll support the government on issues if it’s essential to the country but our primary responsibility is not to prop up the government, our responsibility is to provide an opposition and an alternative government for Parliament and for Canadians. What the government has to do, if it wants to govern for any length of time, is it must appeal primarily to the third parties in the House of Commons to get them to support it."

  • At Tue. Sep. 01, 04:10:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    Ted, last year, Parliament HAD ground to a halt, so I could understand the need for an election... clear the air, and let the people decide. THEY MADE THEIR DECISION PRETTY CLEAR WHEN THEY TOLD YOUR PARTY TO SHOVE OFF. Now, Parliament HAS been working fairly effectively, that is when YOUR party isn't solely looking out for their own best interests, and has been "getting things done". Any election now only serves one purpose... YOUR LEADER'S DESIRE TO BECOME PRIME MINISTER.

    So, I'll repeat what the voters said last October... SHOVE OFF.

  • At Tue. Sep. 01, 07:10:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Jerry Prager said…

    For the majority of Canadians who voted in the last election (the one that Harper foisted upon us in violation of his tern law so that he wouldn't have to face odious comparisons to Obama if a Canadian vote came after the Dems won) the Con option is our last choice: we don't like Stephen Harper, his social authoritarian streak, the way he thinks, the way he acts, the way he makes us feel, we want him gone, and this time, he will be gone, just the way the majority wants. Because the conservative party is our last choice: we don't like anything about your party or its policies, everyone else we can stand.

  • At Wed. Sep. 02, 07:44:00 a.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    This Harper gov't has been lying to Canadian public since they took office. It's time they were shown the door,

  • At Wed. Sep. 02, 09:36:00 a.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "Parliament HAD ground to a halt..."

    No it hadn't. The Conservatives just couldn't work with others and were being devious and obstructionist.

    Stop lying, Christian Conservative. It's so sinful.

  • At Wed. Sep. 02, 10:12:00 a.m. EDT, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    You obviously weren't paying attention to the Committees, where the Opposition parties were using every trick in the book to block the Conservatives from, you know, actually GOVERNING. Maybe that's why Canadians gave us a STRONGER MANDATE?

    Only a Liberal would view the truth as a lie.

  • At Wed. Sep. 02, 10:20:00 a.m. EDT, Blogger Ted Betts said…


    Be honest now.

    Harper was very very clear about fixed election dates. He expressly stated many times that the only time there should be an election was on a fixed date or when the government lost a confidence motion in Parliament. Period. He wanted a fixed election date so the PM could not call an election on a whim as it was undemocratic and unfair to other parties. He broke that promise and flip flopped, again, on a fundamental principle of his.

    The whole "dysfunctional" issue was a complete lie. First, it was no more nor less dysfunctional in the spring when Harper was claiming his government was "getting things done". Second, he literally wrote the book on how to make committees dysfunctional, a 200+ manual on how to prevent committees from working that he sent to all Conservative committee members. So it is a bit much to create dysfunction and then claim because of your own dysfunction you have to have an election.

    As for the stronger mandate? Comparing Harper to Dion, yeah, more people said Harper than said Dion. But was it stronger? Technically, yes, but Harper received fewer votes than in 2006 and he received the lowest support ever from Canadians as a whole with only 22% of Canadians supporting him. That is lower than any other government in our entire history.

    Is that really an endorsement of Harper breaking is promise, his law and abandoning his own principle? Is that how you think a democracy really should work?

  • At Wed. Sep. 02, 10:43:00 a.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "You obviously weren't paying attention to the Committees, where the Opposition parties were using every trick in the book to block the Conservatives"

    Yeah, it was those damn Liberals, New Democrats and BQ members who actually created a manual on how to disrupt committees for their members, right?, wait it wasn't. It was the Conservatives.

  • At Wed. Sep. 02, 12:39:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Marc Bernard said…

    CC, you should try a career in stand up comedy. Your misplaced righteous indignation is hilarious.

  • At Wed. Sep. 02, 08:38:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Jerry Prager said…

    CC, I applaud you for opening up you comments, but also advise you to re-examine your profile statement faith before politics, because your politics precede your faith, just like most American- Christians, who are Americans first and Christians second, Canadian Christianity is much more subtle than the American evangelism that has apparently shaped most of your convictions.


Post a Comment

<< Home