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, March 29, 2011
Get your Iggy, your Jack, and your Gilles on with "The Coalition Collection"!
The Libs were offering "Iggy Eyebrows" for people who donated online (no, seriously... they really were!!!), and now guess what? The other two Coalition partners have joined in! Get your Layton Mustache now! Get your Gilles hairnet too! Collect all three to complete your "Coalition Collection"!
Shamelessly stolen from Stephen Taylor, the new KING of wearable electoral fashion!
HOW THE COALITION WILL MAKE MICHAEL IGNATIEFF PRIME MINISTER
According to Liberal MP David McGuinty
Here's the scenario... on Election Day, Mr. Harper wins with the most seats, but falls just shy of a Majority. The Governor General asks him to form a Government, to see if he can maintain "the Confidence of the House".
Considering that the Opposition Parties just voted non-Confidence, the likelihood is VERY HIGH that they will NOT grant Mr. Harper the "Confidence of the House".
So what happens in that result? The Governor General will then, according to Constitutional tradition, approach the Leader of the SECOND PLACE party, and ask him to seek the "Confidence of the House" by forming a Government.
That's right folks... THAT'S how the Opposition parties are planning to make Michael Ignatieff the Prime Minister, even if Stephen Harper wins the election without an outright Majority.
Don't believe me? Then listen to Liberal MP David McGuinty, as he lays out that very scenario for CBC's Evan Solomon...
There you have it folks... if Stephen Harper does not win an outright Majority on May 2, the Opposition Parties will ensure that they wrest power, and anoint their anointed Leader, Michael Igantieff, as Prime Minister.
Because don't forget... THE COALITION DEAL IS STILL IN FORCE!!! This was their plan all along... wait until the Budget came down, drop the Government, fight an election campaign, and then take power by ANY MEANS NECESSARY, since they already had the framework in place.
There's only one way they can disprove my theory... for Michael Igantieff to publicly withdraw his signature on the Coalition Accord.
Will the Opposition even ALLOW an election? THE 2008 COALITION ACCORD IS STILL IN FORCE!!!
We all know that the Opposition plans to take down the Harper Government soon after the Budget is released. But here's a scary thought... will the Opposition parties even ALLOW the Canadian public to decide who gets to govern them at the ballot box?
Everyone seems to be forgetting one important detail... the 2008 Opposition Coalition Accord is STILL IN EFFECT. The signed document, which has yet to be revoked by any of the signatory Parties, had an inbuilt expiry date of JUNE 30, 2011!!!
Can anyone tell me what today's date is? That's right, today is March 12, 2011... the Accord is still in force for another three and a half months!
So I guess the big question that Canadians need to ask is will ANY of the Leaders of the Opposition Parties publicly withdraw their support for the Accord before the upcoming confidence votes?
Tories launch pre-emtive strike in hopes of avoiding a spring election
Why are we launching ads now? "Spending our money, so THE OPPOSITION won't spend yours" is probably the best way to sum it up for Joe Canadian.
By launching these attack ads now, we're hoping to drive Ignatieff's numbers down a little further, thus giving the Liberals pause before they decide to bring down the House over the next Budget. By spending a little bit of our own Tory war chest now on these ads, I believe the hope is that we'll help taxpayers avoid spending $350+ MILLION dollars on an unwanted and unnecessary premature election this spring.
How's that for a responsible political Party? We're actually spending a little of OUR OWN MONEY, in order to save taxpayers MILLIONS. The Liberals? They want to blow your money on an election that will change nothing (other than their leader), and to hang on to the MILLIONS they're getting in political subsidies, again from the taxpayer's pockets.
So check out the ads for yourself... and I suppose I should say, "You're Welcome Canada!".
The Right Hon. Stephen Harper has said that campaign finance reform, specifically the removal of the per vote subsidies, will be part of our platform in any upcoming campaign. That oughta get Duceppe and the Bloc searching for ways bend over backwards in order to support us.
For context, think about this figure for a moment... $54 MILLION. That's how much the Opposition Coalition has cost Canadian taxpayers since they blocked the cutting of the subsidy when we first proposed it in 2008.
Here's another figure... $330 MILLION. That's how much an unnecessary election will cost should the Opposition force one upon us.
But we're ready... so are Canadians. I think they're getting sick of this never ending election cycle, and are ready for us to make our case for four years of good Conservative government and Conservative economic stability.
Okay, I got by far the weirdest "Recommended Pages" suggestion from Facebook today... Facebook suggested that since I "like" Jack Layton's page (which is no secret, I respect the guy) that I might want to consider "liking" Michael Ignatieff's fan page. Why? Here's precicely what it said...
You catch that? "Many who like Jack Layton like him". Isn't that interesting... many of Jack Layton's fans are also Michael Ignatieff fans. So it wouldn't be a stretch to suggest that NDP supporters are also Liberal supporters, would it not?
Of course, this little screen shot helps verify something that we've all know for a long time... that NDP supporters are also CBC supporters. I mean, it's not like NDPers would bother to listen if it wasn't left leaning...
Liberal MP: "The prorogation rallies were hijacked by the NDP"
Well, thanks to Liberal MP John Cannis (Scarborough Centre) for confirming today in the House what I'd said quite some time ago... that the "grassroots" anti-prorogation rallies were nothing more than a partisan SHAM.
His quote today, as relayed by a friend on the Hill:
"The prorogation rallies were hijacked by the NDP... the rallies DID NOT represent the will of Canadians."
(exact quote from Hansard to be posted when available)
And the media fell for it... hook, line, and sinker. One of the many reasons Canadians want a new media outlet like SunTVNews!
Looks like today's Opposition Day motion from the Liberals has gone and opened up a whole can of worms for themselves... that's the second Opposition Day in a row that's gone badly for them... I'm sure we all recall their pro-abortion motion fiasco?
Congrats guys... good job on reminding Canadians that you're not even close to being ready for prime time.
The National Post's Jonathan Kay put out a GREAT blog post yesterday, advocating a position that I've been advocating for years... that the Liberal Party of Canada MUST DIE.
I've long said that for the sake of the nation, the Liberal Party must be destroyed. They are the single greatest roadblock to any real political discussion, debate, and dialogue in this great nation. Any time a real idea is brought forward by any other Party, they're always the first to spin it negatively for their own political gain. We can't even talk about a lot of issues here in Canada, because we know the Liberals will do everything in their power to paint us with the "Scary Conservative" mantra.
I've also advocated this position because I've noticed, over the years, the same thing as Mr. Kay... that when you ask a Liberal WHY they're a Liberal, you'll get some fluffy pie-in-the-sky answer, or a bogus "my family has always been Liberals" response, as opposed to any real statement on policy. Or something along the lines of "I vote Liberal to stop the Conservatives". I have ONLY EVER ONCE had a real policy discussion with one Liberal supporter (with a guy who's not even a Liberal member) on why he supports the Liberal Party of Canada. (that would be you, Mr. J.A... aka "Sir L") But most of the time, it's just some nonsensical, vague and useless answer... much like the Liberal Party itself, I suppose.
Anyway, fantastic piece of journalism... I highly recommend giving it a read.
Four and a half years ago, in the run-up to the 2006 federal election, then-Senator Jerry Grafstein wrote a letter to this newspaper declaring as follows: “The Grafstein family has voted in every federal election for the Liberal party in the last 75 years, and we intend to so again with renewed enthusiasm in this election.”
Think about that for a moment. At various times over the last 75 years, depending on who has been in charge, the Liberal Party has been the party of protectionism, of free trade, of war, of peace, of indulging Quebec, of confronting Quebec, of Bay Street, of the poor, of Washington, of anti-Americanism, of Trudeauvian socialism, of ruthless 1990s-era austerity. Yet throughout it all, the Grafstein clan has mechanically checked the box for the Liberal Party. The Liberals could run a monkey draped with a Liberal sash, apparently, and the Grafsteins would just keep ticking the box so long as the monkey endorsed monkey bilingualism and monkey equalization.
Grafstein is hardly alone. There are many others like him scattered around Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto and points in between — veteran Liberal grandees who simply could never imagine voting for any other party. For these people, the Liberal Party isn’t a set of people and policies, it’s a cherished flag you salute.
This Liberal fetish for self-veneration has been around so long in this country that we have lost track of how weird it is. When justifying their party affiliation, Conservatives, NDP, Bloc Québécois and even Greens typically will recite a set of reasonably specific policy positions and values. The same is true, in the United States, of Democrats and Republicans. With Liberals, on the other hand, you tend to get empty clichés and historical references built around the tautology that the Liberals are great because they are the party of greatness.
The most common is the one about the Liberals being “the party of Laurier” — as if the party affiliation of someone who’s been dead for almost a century should have the slightest bearing on how anyone today should vote. It’s the equivalent of an American Republican describing the GOP as “the party of Taft,” or a Democrat declaring his fealty to the “Party of Wilson.”
The Liberals’ treacly love affair with themselves wasn’t a problem in the Trudeau era, when the country truly did hunger for the sort of large-scale national projects that played to the party’s grandiose sense of holy ordainment. Nor was it a problem in the 1990s, when the opposition had fractured into regional constituencies, and the Liberals could declare themselves a “natural governing party.” But now that the right has united, and the taste for Trudeuvia has evaporated, Liberal self-love has sabotaged the party in two major ways:
1. It has made Liberals existentially incompetent at the act of opposition, since the role itself is seen as an insult to the natural order of the universe. Toronto Star columnist Thomas Walkom (with whom I normally disagree) nailed this point when he recently wrote that “the Liberals don’t take the role of opposition seriously. Desperate for power, they are unwilling to do anything to spark an election until they are reasonably sure of winning it.”
2. Like a college football coach who believes he can plug any quarterback into a pre-existing offensive “system,” Liberals have come to believe that any stiff — even Stéphane Dion — can ride to victory on the strength of the Liberal brand. In this regard, the selection of Michael Ignatieff — a man who hadn’t lived in Canada since 1978, the era of the Bee Gees and Grease— was an act of stunning arrogance that would be unimaginable for any other major Western political party.
Many Liberals who want to dump Ignatieff speak of passing the torch to a new generation of young Liberals. The problem with this is that most young Liberals I know already have internalized their party’s trademark self-regard as God’s Chosen Party. It’s what drew these student-council types into the party in the first place, in fact: the promise of running the country without the hard work of proposing new ideas.
All of which brings me to the prospect of a Liberal-NDP merger. The move makes sense from a purely arithmetic perspective: One party is better than two. But more importantly, destroying the Liberal brand also would be a great strategy for saving the party’s grandees from their own self-destructive hubris. It doesn’t matter what you call the new entity — just make sure that, at the end of the day, something called the “Liberal party” no longer exists as a vessel for vapid self-hagiography.
Liberals should welcome their own party’s funeral. As things stand, many of the lifelong Liberals I know walk around in a state of unspoken shame because their party isn’t fulfilling the divine destiny of the “party of Laurier.” Surely it must be someone’s fault, they suppose — and so they cast about for internal enemies, attacking one another in a whirlwind of panic and bickering. Getting rid of the Liberal brand actually would be liberating for these people: They could finally reawaken to the idea of politics as an exchange of ideas, rather than a sentimental, backward-looking marketing exercise.
(clip from the UofG debate during the 2008 election)
Also came across this one, where he seeks to "clarify" his previous comment... but just reiterates his desire to see the Libs and NDP unite.
And just for fun, you might remember this one that was circulating during the previous Liberal/NDP coup attempt... with all his flip-flopping on this one, who knows WHERE he stands today...
Love him or hate him, Warren Kinsella is one of the better political minds here in Canada. And he proves it once again today, with a good analysis of Ignatieff's options regarding a possible coalition with the NDP.
Not too much you can argue with here, at least on his analysis of what would be best for the Liberal Party of Canada.
Finally found the video for the Harper/Cameron press conference where he made that statement, thanks to CPAC. Skip to the 16:23 mark of the video.
"In the end, I think the verdict of public opinion was pretty clear... which is that losers don't get to form coalitions... winners are the ones who get to form governments"
Rae makes his move against Iffy, proposes new Liberal-NDP Accord
Bob Rae, former NDP MP, former NDP Premier of Ontario, now turned Liberal MP, has posted some thoughts musing about a new Federal Liberal-NDP coalition, on the 25th anniversary of his Ontario Liberal-NDP Accord, which toppled the Progressive Conservative Government of Frank Miller.
Bob Rae says there’s no rule preventing the Liberals and the NDP from ganging up and toppling a newly elected Tory government: He’s done it before and now he’s hinting it may happen again.
In a brief memoir posted this week on his website, the former Ontario NDP leader and premier delivers a shot across the bow as he looks back 25 years to an agreement he negotiated with the Liberals at Queen’s Park.
Of course he doesn't come out say it, but the thought must be running around in the mind of many Liberals who are thinking about a coalition after the next election... "And who better to lead such a coalition than someone who's been in BOTH parties, and who brought down TWO Conservative governments in the 70's and 80's?"
That's right folks... Rae has just put another knife in Iffy's back.
P.S. - Anyone else get the impression that the media is trying to soften up the ground with Canadians on the idea of a coalition? I think it's worth worrying about, if the media is starting to again openly campaign on the idea on behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada.
Despite how much they try and avoid talking about it, the reality is never far below the surface... if the can't beat us, they'll just join forces.
For now, it's just in Alberta. Not likely going to happen anytime soon in BC. But who knows what might happen nationally if Harper wins another minority after the next election?
CBC's Heather Mallick calling for an Opposition coalition
I guess Heather Mallik's ignorance of Canada shows what happens when you spend to many years out of the country...
Hey Heather, Canadians pretty clearly rejected the very idea of a left-wing coalition back in December of 2008, back when the CPC was polling around, oh what was it, about 41%? Oh, right, you weren't here for that... my bad.
You've got to LOVE this left-wing drivil from her poisioned pen...
Canada has a Conservative minority government right now that does have a core belief. It's that Canadians deserve a good stomping, all of them. Conservatives can't stand people, particularly if they're female, or second-generation Canadian, or educated, or principled, or not from Alberta, which is the home of the hard-right belly-bulging middle-aged Tory male. Watch them at the G8, ostensibly fighting for women's health internationally while blocking abortions for raped Congolese.
Harper cannot get a real majority. If the centre-right Liberals and the centre-left New Democrats would form a coalition, Harper would be toast and we'd get started on what we need: national day care, TGV trains, an economic strategy, a green strategy, oh a strategy for anything, a plan is all we seek.
Instead we hang.
Sound familiar? Yep, that pretty much sounds like the "culture war" strategy that the CBC is employing on behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada... as recommended by Frank Graves. No wonder she's still working for the CBC.
UPDATE: Finally settled on my new name for her... "Hate'n Malice", cause that seems to be all that ever comes out of her mouth. Her mouth, and pretty much every mouthpiece of the Left, whenever they're talking about anyone who disagrees with their ideology.
With the Opposition recently banding together to pass a motion restricting the use of "ten percenters", which they said was an effort to save the taxpayer millions of dollars, the Tories have indicated that they're perfectly willing to go along with the Opposition's idea... IF they're willing to also eliminate the political subsidy.
Just try backing out of that one now guys. I think the Canadian public will support BOTH of these measures, and will link them together as both being "wasteful spending" that should be eliminated. Thanks for your help once again!
An interesting article from the Globe and Mail about an upcoming book entitled "How We Almost Gave the Tories the Boot", by Brian Topp, one of the coalition "insiders" from the NDP... think I'll have to pick up a copy myself.
Those "Non-Partisan" rallies? Organizers get BUSTED
Sorry to all of the genuine "non-partisans" who participated in last month's anti-prorogue rallies... but it looks like you've been sold a very partisan bill of goods.
Someone has done a very thorough investigation into the partisan political links of rally organizers, and has come up with the hard evidence that most of us BTers have suspected all along... that the VAST majority of these rallies were in fact organized by hard-core Liberal and NDP partisans, with a not so "hidden agenda" of attacking the Harper government.
That's right folks... these rallies weren't about "democracy" or "non-partisanship". Turns out that they were nothing more than a partisanly organized political stunt to score points. AND THEY DELIBERATELY USED YOU MANY OF YOU TO DO IT.
Humm, Liberals and Dippers, working together in an effort to attack the Conservatives. Is this just another pre-cursor to what Mr. Harper warned us about... are they trying to revive the coalition?
I'm a Born-Again Christian, redeemed by the shed blood of the risen and eternal Lord Jesus Christ. My wife and I are both active in our local church, where our life's focus is on giving all Glory to Jesus Christ, on missions, the preservation of Biblical truth, and the strengthening believers everywhere.
Christian "Independent"
