Sunday, March 27, 2011

Liberals Now Admit Coalition Is Still On. Over Too You Andrew Coyne!

H/T frmgrl at Joanne's blog

H/T JDot


maryT said...

Watching the Count on cpac, what a shame seems to be his theme. Does he ever have anyone behind him that is not in his caucus. All he did was run down the PM, using very ignorant words. Doesn't say anything the liberals will do, but says he has been the worst PM for Que.
Looks like he is trying to conduct some orchestra. His body language and facial expression tell us a lot, and not a lot of sincere support from Dion, Pablo and other liberal MPs. When will they campaign in their own riding. Has the date for Pablo's trial been set yet.

maryT said...

Why does Duceppe get so much air time outside of Quebec, we could care less.
Leaders debate on SunTv, no lizzie and no duceppe except a one on one with him in Quebec.

JDot said...

Andrew got David Mcguinty's word tho..

What say you Coyne?

paulsstuff said...

Looks like David McGuinty's word is about the same as his brothers. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Less than zero.

maryT said...

Now the PM is on, and the enthusiasm for him is real, not phoney like with Iggy. Much bigger crowd also by the sound of it.

paulsstuff said...

Ignatieff had a room of 100 people in Quebec today. We have more than that coming to my grandaughters second birthday party next week.

Fay said...

CBC evening news has BOB RAE on the ease Canadians fears over the coalition.
No sign of the clip of McGuinty.

AToryNOMore said...

I think this is all part of a grand plan to ensnare Harper.

Thats when I think politiziation goes ot the window and the parliamentary scholars will weigh in during the election and provide the history about our parliamentary traditions.

England presently has a conservative coalition government.

Canada was founded by a Liberal-Conservative coalition.

Sir John A MacDonald was a Liberal-Conservative Prime Minister at the time of Confederation, not a Conservative.

Aside from the political spin th question will be does Harper recognize the history, convention of the parliamentary tradition or not?

paulsstuff said...

Actually, I kind of agree with you. My thinking is Liberals have given up winning even a minority, and realize denouncing a coalition and then doing the exact opposite would be political suicide.

So they just called an audible. Embrace the idea of a coalition and hope Canadians accept it. Day 2 and they have already conceded the election. Probably don't want to use there one last hope at power.

AToryNoMore said...

I think its more designed to show the public the difference, from partisan and political compared to parliamentary tradition.

It will be, in my view, which is merely a guess, historians that will weigh in on major news and public affairs programs.

The Liberals are hoping to cash in on the conservatives that are upset, and the necessity to grab the NDP vote.

gimbol said...

There is nothing unlawful about a coalition. The problem of course is that coalitions tend to be governments that are reactive, and mostly to those groups that scream the loudest, and threaten the most. They can also fall if one of the supporting parties fails to get its lolly.
The thing about the 2008 deal is that it set the bar. We have only a part in our parliamentary custom that would allow a coalition, yet its more of a nuclear option that you would likely only get one chance to do. A government would only last as long as the agreement held, and if not successful, that leader would be planning their retirement.
A coalition of the NDP, the Bloc and liberals would be held together well if the liberals where smart enough never to sign any agreement, or put any conditions in writing, lest they actually have to honour them later (ref promise to scrap GST).
Here's Iggy's problem. The NDP know, and the BLoc know, as do their supporters, that should Iggy not get enough seats, he will be coming to them. Duceppe even admitted it. That 2008 document is going to be the template for a future agreement. Even if Iggy doesn't want a coalition, he will be forced to accept one.
The only thing that will end this saga, is a tory majority.

Dave B. said...

Everyone is questioning if a coalition is legal or not. Let's quit arguing over that and just agree that it is legal. The Canadian voter will accept that it is legal, however, the thought of the Bloc being part of it will scare the bejeebers out of any sane person and they'll understand that they need to vote Conservative.

AToryNoMore said...

Ottawa Citizen

Harper's coalition criticism backfires as past comes back to haunt him.

AToryNoMore said...

Harper's coalition criticism backfires as past comes back to haunt him

Read more:

AToryNoMore said...

Toronto Star

Harper’s coalition attacks come back to haunt him

AToryNoMore said...

Coalition video?

Jen said...

Most definetly, the coalition is on and will remain so until June,2011.

Duceppe, will not nor will I if I were in his shoes give up on the idea of the coalition.
Duceppe knows that the liberals are not trustworthy, they have lied stolen from the public refusing to give back the money and of course the adscam is the crowning point for Duceppe to hold on to the liberals to use the for his own pleasure; that is: to 'bail out Quebec'

The msm can spin this all they want that there is no coalition but for Duceppe there is.
I know it, you know it.
The msm are in coalition of their own:
coalition helps coalition

Jen said...

What would canada be like under a "separatist marxist (Duceppe), socialist(Layton) and with the most corrupt party in canadian history (LPOC) and the socialist msm the fourth coalition partner?"

Jen said...

maryT said...
Why does Duceppe get so much air time outside of Quebec,

Because Mary, Duceppe is partner in the liberal coalition as is NDP layton.
If I was the Greens, I would park it in the liberal red camp demanding my fair share of the price like Duceppe is or else I will spread the liberals as well as the media's corruption to kingdom come.

Clown Party said...

Jen said: "What would canada be like under a "separatist marxist (Duceppe), socialist(Layton) and with the most corrupt party in canadian history (LPOC) and the socialist msm the fourth coalition partner?"

Canada is a country of two main regions, there might be three.

We have the Maritimes on the East coast. We have Central Canada - Ontario and Quebec. We have the Western Provinces. If the “Coalition of Losers” decides to do as they suggest, why not divide Canada. We have North and South Korea; East and West Pakistan; and why not East and West Canada? Anything from the Western part of Canada is evil to Ontario and Quebec – except for the transfer payments [of which 90% go to Quebec - who hate Alberta’s “dirty oil.”]

Western separation would be strong if the LIEberals, Black-mail Party and the Non-Democratic Party decided they could do this; take over of a freshly voted in party? If the “coalition of Losers” decided to do that, then the foreign investors would pull out of Canada knowing they would immediately pay more taxes and Canada’s economic position would fall as fast as Spain. Does the “Coalition of Losers” only look at their small part of the world and not see what they are actually doing to Canada? The worst part is, the Maritimes is just starting to get out of their problems because of off-shore oil. They would be forced to stay with Central Canada, sad – very sad. I do not think there would be an exodus to Central Canada, rather from Central Canada to the West.

The above is only speculation, yet I fear that Western Canada would not accept the “Coalition of Losers” to rule over them. In the past the motto was; “We do not want out, we want in.” I am sure if it were not for the Reform Party, the separatists’ would have succeeded. This time it might be a different story and the dismantle of a great country. It is up to the voters in Central Canada to decide what kind of country they want: a whole Canada or separate Canada.

Now be sure to vote.

Clown Party.