Sister Sage's Musings

Posts Tagged ‘Jack Layton’

You all remember  Gary Breitkreuz, right? That yahoo who, through the use of a sock puppet, who is now long gone (naturally), basically threatened to beat Iggy black and blue? Oh yes! Gary Breitkreuz, just a “Good ol’ Boy!” But, unlike Waylon Jennings’ theme to “The Dukes of Hazard”, he really does mean harm, just like the rest of those Harpercons. Well, he just got dumped by NDP MP Charlie Angus, who previously supported Mullet-head Hoeppner’s bill.

We all remember Breitkreuz, the brute sending an email ‘proposition’ to the NDP MP of Timmins-James Bay; that email that pretty well pushed Angus to change his mind. In an odd sort of way, the gun nut, who once advocated for  new regulations that would make it a-okay to carry restricted firearms like hand guns and semi-automatic assault weapons in cars in cities, may well be the one to sink Mullet head Hoeppner’s bill. What an idiotioc redneck!  Brute Breitkreuz probably couldn’t even shoot the broad side of a barn.

According to the Toronto Star, it seems that the other 11 rural NDP MPs have also a distaste for the behavior of the Harpercons as of late.  It seems that they will either change their vote or at the very least, be absent from the day of the vote.

“You’ve got the Conservatives turning off our rural guys,” said Brad Lavigne, national director of the NDP. He added that two “very real options” are available to rural members — stay away or reverse their earlier support for the Conservative bill.

Charlie Angus correctly points out that it’s the Harpercons, themselves, that are portraying rural Canadians as  uneducated hillbillies. Something Angus and his other rural colleagues, I’m sure, wish to dispell.

“The Conservatives are unfortunately creating an impression that rural Canadians are somehow nut jobs, but they are not. For me, at the end of the day, I just don’t want to be standing beside these guys,” Angus said.

“At this point I am going to vote against this bill because I think the Conservatives … are treating Canadians as if they are fools on this.’’

Will the rural NDP MPs take heat for this? Perhaps.  Could they lose their votes to Harpercons? Maybe not. If they can persuade their constituents with the reports from the RCMP showing that the gun registry is not only useful, but also cost efficient.

Also, there must be other things, besides the long gun registry,  these rural NDP MPs can sell to their consituents that would address their other concerns better than the Harpercons ever could. I mean, were they really voted in because they promised to help Stevie spiteful kill the gun registry?  Not likely.  I would think that they were voted in because they convinced their constituents that they were better trusted to look out for their interests than the Harpercons. These NDP MPs should stick with that.

Look at it this way, Jack’s stubbornness at not whipping his caucus to vote against Mullet-head Hoeppner was most certainly not winning him any appreciation from Stevie Spiteful in addition to not winning him and his party any favor with many Canadians, including much of his own base.

“In effect, rhetoric aside, both Coalition leaders intend to keep the wasteful and ineffective $2 billion long-gun registry,’ the Tories say. They conclude that neither the NDP nor the Liberals care about rural voters. “Rural Canada: either its voice is important, or it isn’t.”

Note that the above quote came from an article that was published one day before the little email exchange between Brute Breitkreuz and Charlie Angus was published. At that time, things still looked like those MPs were going along with Mullet-head Hoeppner.

No, Stevie, and the other rednecks, the NDP rural MPs did and still do want their constituents to have a voice in Canada. They just prefer that their constituents have all the correct information before them; the good, the bad and the ugly.   Facts, figures, evidence, truthiness, all inconvenient  pesky details that go against Stevie and his flunkies’ agendas.

Stay  classy, Harpercons! ,Jack Layton and his party were risking  losing urban seats to align himself with the mullet-head she redneck herself and this is the thanks you give him?

No matter, Jack, looks like your MPs are saving you in spite of yourself.  But really, those Harpercons and their own stupidity and redneck ways are what would kill the Mullet-head’s bill in the end. Talk about your ironies.

Well, it’s official now. Jack Layton will not be whipping his caucus into voting against Mullet head Hoeppner’s Bill c-391, the scrapping of the long gun registry which will no doubt, set the precedent for Stevie Spiteful to go the way of no gun control, just like Texas and Arizona. Way to go Jack! Furthermore, Jack doesn’t want Canadians to blame the NDP if c-391 passes.

“In terms of where the fate of the gun registry lies, there’s an enormous Conservative caucus right there that is going to be responsible if this thing is not carried on,” he said. “Let’s be absolutely clear where this initiative is coming from. This is coming directly from Mr. Harper, and it goes way back to the Reform days.”

Hmmm, this kinda sounds familiar. Didn’t Jack and other NDP MPs accuse the Liberals of cowering when propping the Harpercons when they claimed “it was the Harpercons idea”?  This doesn’t come to me as a surprise, though. For sometime now, I’ve had a distrust for Jack Layton and the NDP and have expressed it before.  How, they too, have cozied up to Stevie spiteful in the past.  They are no longer the party of Ed Broadbent.

Layton goes on to say:

Despite the mostly rural NDP MPs who want the registry scrapped, Layton said there is a “very large” contingent in the NDP caucus that wants to keep the registry, albeit changed significantly to decriminalize non-compliance.

Yes, that is true, I’ll give them that. Very much the same way Iggy and the Liberals found most of the shit they either reluctantly voted with or abstained from voting on quite hideous. However, during those days, the Harpercons’ polling numbers were teetering in majority territory despite the stranglehold on Quebec Gilles Duceppe and the Bloc Quebecois hold. We all know how dangerous and unthinkable that would be, especially after the actions of Stevie and his sock puppets and pit bulls as of late.  That is not the case today. Besides, Bill c-391 is not a confidence motion. No one would have gone to an election on this. So, Jack, what is your reasoning behind this then? You’re willing to risk losing a great many urban ridings including whatever inroads you started having in Montreal for the sake of a handful of rural ridings? That makes no sense.  More importantly, you claim to lead the only party that really cares about the needs of Canadians above all, including partisan politics. Shouldn’t the safety of Canadians by means of strong gun control laws fall into that category?  The Bloc Quebecois MPs  for the most part represent rural ridings; hunting country; folks who love their guns just like the rest of rural Canada, yet they,  no doubt are being whipped by Gilles Duceppe, are  going to vote against Mullet head Hoeppner’s bill for the greater good. Why can’t you?

So, Jack, why shouldn’t we blame you if the long gun registry is killed? You had no problem blaming the Liberals when the Harpercons passed other insidious motions and legislation when a Harpercon majority was potentially looming.

I also have to ask the question, if the Liberals do come out with more confidence from their bus tour and if the polling numbers for Steve continue to remain weak and those of the Liberals remain stable or even go up some, and they do actually vote against the Harpercons, will the NDP actually cooperate with the Liberals or will they vote with the Harpercons just for the sake (what it seems like) of being contrary to the Liberals?  I often wondered if the Liberals hadn’t voted so often with the Harpercons, would the NDP have stepped in their place and voted along with Steve?

Too bad, Jack, the NDP was a party I used to support wholeheartedly many years ago. But since 2004, I have become increasingly distrustful. I became a reluctant liberal voter,  largely in part because of close polling numbers with the Harpercons but also, my increasing distrust. Now your refusal to whip your caucus to voting against a bill authored by a redneck who sports a mullet has cinched it for me.  You accuse the other federal parties of being partisan.  It’s true that they are. Guess what? You’re no better.

Shit! Is there any way we can get the Liberals and the NDP to cooperate with each other (cooperate, no coalition) to bring down the Harpercons sooner rather than later? Otherwise, we’re going to be stuck in never ending Stevie Spiteful shit.

H/T Cowboys for Social Responsibility & Let Freedom Rain

Both EKOS and the usually Harpercon friendly Ipsos-Reid polls have Harpercon numbers slipping and those of the Liberals rising somewhat bringing them to a near tie with, of course, the Harpercons  hanging on to a slight advantage.  If Steve was really planning to get an election off the ground this fall, his plans for that backfired and now is backing off this idea. In fact, even his rabid pit-bull, John Baird, Steve’s newly minted Government house leader called for more cooperation with the opposition parties on TV last week. Well, logically, every opposition party should come out and say too little too late for that, except their polling numbers don’t permit them to do so.

Frank Graves of EKOS is of the opinion, that in spite of the Liberals’ low numbers, they may well attempt to trigger an election, while John Wright of Ipsos Reid disagrees:

Mr. Wright does not believe there will be an election any time soon because no one can win a majority government at this time. “The reality is that if everybody knows that all you’re going to get is a minority you can take your time.”

The Bloc is just too strong in Quebec to free up seats necessary for either the Conservatives or Liberals to form a majority government, Mr. Wright added.

But Mr. Graves has a different take: “Wow! To be blunt, I was concerned about our poll, as it came in the summer, and it was a pretty abrupt shift,” he told The Globe on Tuesday morning.

“The Ipsos poll suggests that our poll did catch a major shift in voter sentiments. What is remarkable about this shift is that it comes in the midst of the summer, a period when the public are typically blissfully unconcerned with politics. This might suggest that the negative effects of the census decision on the government may be muted to this point.”

If this is true, he said, the chances of a fall election “have now shifted to more likely than not.”

And that is because the opposition could sense that this “new shift for the PM” could represent a “critical mass of frustration within the electorate and in particular a growing fatigue amongst the more educated portion.”

Tricky; very tricky indeed and one where the opposition, particularly the Liberals must tread carefully, given their poll numbers and what happened last year when Iggy attempted to drop the gauntlet and act, well, oppositional. Remember when Iggy said that he was no longer going to be supporting the Harpercons last September? All the Timmy Hortons’ Crowd crying and screaming “I don’t wanna go to the polling stations again!”   Steve launched a poison pill in a ways and means motion that Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe ended up swallowing and Canada was saved from a Harpercon majority.  And remember, Stevie spiteful’s numbers shot up well within majority territory and Iggy’s plummeted.

In fact, since then, there would be a number of times Stevie spiteful’s polling numbers from any given polling firm would hover around majority territory, thus, those who blame the strong presence of the Bloc Quebecois in Quebec for preventing a majority government for either party; their argument falls right there. Majorities are still possible, in spite of the heavy Bloc presence in Quebec. It just simply means that they have to fight harder in Ontario and British Columbia.

What is scary is that some polls in the past year has shown that Canadians want a majority government and more than likely, if they believe one is not possible, good ol’ Canadian trademark apathy will take hold yet again and stay away from the polls, which does contribute to a Harpercon majority as well. It worked for Jean Charest and his Liberals in the Quebec election in 2008. Low turn out largely contributed to his majority.

Iggy could well still be gun shy from last September’s reaction to his dropping the gauntlet.  A few ridings still need candidates. A friend, Pascal Zamprelli is running for the nomination in Jeanne Le Ber in the south west of Montreal, currently held by the Bloc. Of course, Peter Milliken’s will also need to be filled amongst others. They’re going to need to hurry up to fill those nominations.

I believe Steve will also put out a budget this fall. What will he do? Will he attempt to pull the per vote subsidy for political parties again? Will he play Santa Clause? Or will he attempt another hard shift to the right yet again? Perhaps a combination of all of the above, which I find most likely, given his precedent (hello Bill c-9); those poison pills Steve is so well known to serve up.  A frightening thought.

Also, there is the NDP, who more often than not, will do just the opposite of whatever the Liberals do.  If the Liberals support the Harpercons, the NDP go against it and vice-versa.  And of course, the Bloc continue doing their own thing if it plays to the agenda of Quebec’s good according to the vision of Gilles Duceppe or to Quebec sovereignty which is now back on the front burner these days.

Iggy would most certainly want to wait until he thinks Canadians would be willing to vote out the Harpercons; to wait for his numbers to go up further.  His bus tour helped, I think.  Yes, there were critics who felt he was not being himself. But I think those are the same people who may have the ridiculous notion that Iggy won’t even open his front door to pick up the newspaper without putting on a suit and tie first. Whether or not he was himself (let’s face it; on some level, every politician plays a role; uses some form of method acting); he did something every politician should do and that is, going out in the country he wishes to govern and meet the people; real people and to hear their concerns and questions. I’m sure it must have helped him, his party and his confidence on some level, but I don’t think it’s enough for him to want to trigger an election by voting against whatever Stevie spiteful is cooking up next.

Then, there is Stevie spiteful, himself.  If there is no election, he and his flunkies have more time to sell his little utopia with no StatsCan; no census.  Stevie is down right now, but he has a propensity for bouncing back as he has demonstrated in the past.   This makes holding off a federal election a crap shoot. One Stevie could probably win given his numbers are still, however slightly, in his favor.

Progressives out there, whether you’re NDP or Liberal supporters, it’s time for us to take action. Write your MPs (provided of course, you’re not living in Harpercon riding; if so, then try to write the NDP and Liberal candidates if you know who they are; if there are candidates at this time; or write both Iggy and Jack Layton).     Now is the time to vote Steve out of office, or at the very least, reduce his minority significantly.  If Steve needs two or even all three parties to get anything through instead of just one party right now, not only is Steve’s power significantly reduced, but the games of  one opposition party doing something simply because another one isn’t would perhaps cease; it’s not helpful.

Many bitch and moan when the Liberals have propped up the Harpercons, but no one supported them neither, their polling numbers had reflected that. Iggy says that Canadians don’t want an election. When we hear the Timmy’s crowd screaming and whining about going to the polls, it’s hard to ignore.  They are loud, particularly about protecting their own apathy as that whole demonstration against prorogation last winter proved.

So, the only way for us to prove to both Iggy and Jack that we do indeed want an election sooner than later is to write them and their MPs and if we can find their candidate’s emails or find them on Facebook, Twitter or another social networking site to let them know this; to urge them to cooperate with one another (I did say cooperate not coalition); not that usual game where Jack goes and does the opposite of what the Liberals do; but working together toward a common good and vote to bring down whatever bill, motion or budget (most likely this Fall) Steve brings to the table, regardless of how much good there will be in it, because as we all know, there will be poison pills packed into them.  It is time for us to take action.

The group, Canadians Rallying to Unseat Harper is still coming up with ads and raising funds to put these ads in the newspapers.  Keep up the good work!

Catch 22 is also working at unseating Harpercon MPs.

Apathy doesn’t cut it. Waiting for Iggy to go or waiting for better candidates isn’t going to cut it.  Time is a luxury we don’t have and now is our window of opportunity.   Let your MPs know you want an election, NOW!

I guess I could have called this post, let’s juxtapose! But, it’s taken over and over again.

St-Stevie has gone too far this time around  in comparing Libby Davies to a terrorist.  No, really, he did. Read the dismal article if you dare.

“She made statements that could have been made by Hamas, Hezbollah or anybody else with no repercussions from that party whatsoever.”

Smooth move Ex-Lax Stevie! Now, why don’t you go swallow a whole box of ‘em so you can be indisposed of for quite some time and we don’t have to hear you.

I guess Steve wasn’t around when Jack and Mulcair the mouth publicly reprimanded her, opening themselves to much criticism. Or maybe Steve had ol’ Dimitri record it and he played it backwards and understood something far more sinister.

I didn’t hear Davies use words like “Blow Israel up to kingdom come” or the like.  I didn’t hear her saying anything about Israel not having the right to exist.

But Steve has brought McCarthyism to Canada, just as Georgie revived it in the U.S..

Funny how when White supremacist, holocaust denier Marc Lemire wins his section 13 case before the Canadian Human Rights Commission, eveyone, particularly the Harpercon cheerleaders were cheering.  It was as if Lemire achieved the status of unsung cult hero.  OOps! Here’s why, did we also mention that Lemire embraces social conservatism? Ah now I’m catching on here.

Also, we let in a woman who thinks Muslims should be killed and whoever is left over, convert to Christianity, believes that Canada should be grateful the U.S. allows us to share a continent and of course, who can forget, Jews must be perfected and that ‘perfected’ Jews were actually, well, Christian.  Yes, we let that one into our country without a leash.

So Steve, explain this one. Anti-Semitidm is ok for whom exactly? And for whom is it not Ok?  I think many folks would love to hear the answer to that question.

As for her saying that we need to boycott Israel, well, again,  where is their rage for those children starving in Gaza due to an illegal blockade on the part of Israel?

I wonder what would happen if a Harpercon  started publicly slamming Muslims or gays with either factual information or not? Would Steve kick him/her out of caucus? I find it unlikely.  I don’t even think he would make him/her apologize publicly as the NDP did with Libby Davies, that’s for sure.

Again, more posturing from Stevie.

Time to come clean now. The Canadian voters deserve to know what’s going on. For the past few weeks now, we have heard nothing but speculation regarding Jean Chretien and a few other political dinosaurs like Ed Broadbent and Roy Romanow; some speculate even ol’ Joe Who is even involved. Although, I do have trouble believing the latter would be involved in such talks.  Clark really has nothing to gain or lose at this point, although, he was one who resigned following the merger of the now defunct Progressive Conservatives and CRAP; he may have an axe to grind with Steve, but so many years have passed since; long time to be holding grudges and plotting schemes.

James Morton over at Morton’s Musings is tired of things like ‘anonymous sources’ telling the story. He refers to a quote from Norman Spector’s column earlier this afternoon.  Yes, Norman Spector outdid himself yet again. I guess he must not have had much to say as his  little column dealt more with Joel-Denis’s ‘anonymous sources’ over at La Presse (Joel-Denis Bellavance’s column here) confirming to us what Jack Layton basically said on Question Period this morning and what Ira Dubinsky, the strategist for the NDP, said on Tommy Schnurmacher’s political panel on Friday; that Chretien is not having official talks about coalition or merger with Ed Broadbent. These so-called talks were reduced to two old political war buddies chatting over dinner or a drink.

Spector’s column is a typical reminder of how this whole he said/he said coalition/merger talks being speculated all over the media, complete with anonymous sources and hints:

In its Saturday edition, La Presse reports that “Jean Chrétien believes it’s in the interest of the Liberal Party to merge with the NDP and build a party that can defeat the Conservatives in the next election.” Indeed, anonymous Liberal sources told reporter Joel-Denis Bellavance that Mr. Chrétien believes that “merger is the only option – as the right was united.”

See what kind of mess this has all become?

We have Warren Kinsella waving around his affidavits and chatting it up with The Mark News and the CBC. Outgoing President Alf Apps denying. Then another Liberal, John Mraz also coming out with an affidavit, like Warren’s, declaring that Apps indeed engaged in coalition/merger talks with them.

Bellavance’s column basically says that Chretien doesn’t want to “stir things up any more so as not to harm Liberal chances in the next election.”

Layton and Iggy are still vehemently denying coalition/merger talks to this day. Layton even told Jane Taber that he has never given “authorization” for such talks and just for good ol’ modern NDP measure, took the occasion to slam the Liberals.

Then later, yet another column in the Grope & Fail; a joint effort by Gloria Galloway and Daniel Leblanc (he very recently wrote a three part series, attempting to revive ADSCAM) are indeed talking coalition/merger, saying that these talks are still very much alive and kicking, hours after Spector and Bellavance came out with their respective columns.

If anyone would stop to think for a second; the current leaders and MPs of the NDP are still taking shots at the Liberals as often as they ever had. Josee Legault even confirms Mulcair the mouth slammed Iggy on Radio Canada recently.  How do  we come up with merger/coalition are happening?

I am also tired of the he said / she said. I’m sure many Canadians are tired of it and the conflicting media reports are doing nothing more than confusing Canadians.

The only people we haven’t heard from officially that we should be hearing from are these dinosaurs who are supposedly holding these talks. All we’re getting are images of these people meeting in dark corners of restaurants and bars.    In the words of James Morton: “Enough Already!” I won’t speak for Mr Morton, but I say it’s time for Jean Chretien and any other dinosaur he may be chatting it up with to come out from their dark corners and tell Canadians what exactly they’re doing and talking about with each other, if anything?  We’ve heard from Iggy and Layton more than once. It’s time for the dinorsaurs involved to come out, wherever they are.  While it may or may not necessarily be in the best interests of their respective parties (except for Joe Who as the Progressive Conservatives no longer exist); it can’t possibly be worse than the train wreck that is happening now.

Ideally, as I’ve mentioned before, new leadership is needed now; that both Rae and Iggy had to go ASAP and that would be our best shot against a potential Harpercon majority in the next election, surely to happen sooner, rather than later. I still maintain this.  Iggy may still well go over the summer if the chattering doesn’t stop, but Bob Rae would more than likely take over at the very least for the interim.

Either way, it is time for Chretien and his ‘coalition’ buddies (whomever they may be) to come out, come out, wherever they are to set the records straight.

Under normal circumstances, such merger/coalition talks should be secret.  No one would should be discussing them publicly, much less leaking stuff o the media. That would be best, but since this is anything but, a statement of some kind will have to be made.

The big winner from all this rumour, inuendo and chatty behavior is Steve and his puppets and flunkies. He will milk this ambiguity for all it’s worth. Since the dinosaurs aren’t talking; and the media continues speculating;  Canadians are more confused. Once again, St-Stevie to the rescue to explain it all to them in plain English, with his own spin to suit his own ends, naturally. However, voters would say to themselves that only Harpercons can run an ‘honest’ campaign.  Surely, this is not what Chretien would want, as that is why he mused about a coalition/merger in the first place; because he sees it as the only way to beat the Harpercons.  With that in mind, one would think it would be in Chretien’s best interest to give a statement.

Then again, perhaps I’m wrong about all this.  Ideally, these rumours need to be squashed somehow ASAP. That would be the best case scenario, but that would be wishful thinking on my part.

Sidenote: Romanow did talk , but, we still need to hear from the bigger dinosaurs.

Well, it’s now  deny! Deny! Deny! on the part of  not only Alf Apps and Iggy but surprisingly, from Jack Layton as well. Surprising, because given Iggy’s rumour and the chatter that followed, Jack would probably have waited  for his poll numbers to go up as a result of this rumour. And if anyone stopped to think about how ridiculous and far fetched these NDP/Liberal coalitions sound; Jack is still taking shots at the Liberals; they still disagree on pretty much everything to this day.  In fact, like myself, former Liberal party’s  national campaign co-chairman, Mark Marissen in today’s Montreal Gazette wonders which party would Jack Layton really prefer to  see govern: Liberals or Harpercons? To this day NDP supporters lambaste Iggy for not defeating the budget bill yesterday and Liberal supporters are lambasting Jack over his refusal to whip his MPs into voting to keep the long gun registry. I have believed for sometime now that Jack sometimes does or votes for (or against) things simply to contrast the Liberals.

Marissen also explains that the Liberal party, themselves is a ‘coalition’ of sorts as they have a diverse cabinet of right and left candidates and MPs.

And let’s remember that Liberals are already a “coalition” of sorts — a coalition of people who reject rigid dogma and want balanced, fair government.

Think about who Liberals attracted in the past decade: Outside B.C., people such as former NDP premier Bob Rae, and former Conservative MPs Belinda Stronach and Scott Brison.

Liberals know that they succeed when they reach out to both the left and the right.

This theory was proved in British Columbia in 2004 and 2006, when Paul Martin conducted one of the most aggressive candidate recruitment efforts ever, pulling in people such as former NDP premier Ujjal Dosanjh, former Canfor president David Emerson, IWA union president Dave Haggard, native leader Miles Richardson, Conservative MP Keith Martin, and B.C. Liberal minister Gulzar Cheema, and appointing left-wing Vancouver mayor Larry Campbell to the Senate. Some of these people didn’t win their seats, but they demonstrated that Liberals were serious about reaching out in B.C., and more Liberals were elected (with the best B.C. results since 1968) against the national tide.

As for those rumours running fast and loose; what of them?  Warren Kinsella swears in an affidavit that:

…explaining that the party president, Alfred Apps, told him over the phone on May 11, 2010, that there were high-level discussions involving retired NDP politicians such as Ed Broadbent and Roy Romanow.

“I told Mr. Apps the idea sounded risky,” said Kinsella in the affidavit. “He replied: ‘It is a profoundly democratic act and would lead to the creation of a new party.’”

Apps, is of course vehemently denying any of this happened.

Apps, who is also a lawyer at the firm of Fasken Martineau, said he believed the prospect of a coalition in Parliament between opposition parties to seize power was a “crazy idea,” and that a merger “would and could never occur.”

Well, yes, Mr. Apps, I think it’s a safe bet that most would agree with that assessment, but who’s telling the truth here?  It should also be noted that, according to Jim Travers’ article over the week-end, Mr Apps is supposed to step down soon due to  failing to fill its campaign coffers. If  Apps is stepping down soon, what reason would he have to lie about such things?

Warren Kinsella, on the other hand, would seem to have an axe to grind with Iggy.

Oops! Low and behold, it seems that another former Liberal , John Mraz has sworn in another affidavit that:

a second affidavit from another former Liberal, John Mraz, who said Apps told him he was involved in discussions that included not only Chretien and Broadbent, but also former Progressive Conservatives such as Joe Clark.

Apps also rejected the credibility of the second affidavit.

“They are the only two Liberals who ever talked to me about this,” said Apps. “The only information I shared with John Mraz is information that Kinsella shared with me. I again rejected a coalition and laid out all the reasons why a merger (the only other option) made no sense. The reason I discouraged Mraz from writing an article is that I thought it was such a crazy idea, it was not even worth printing.”

I did a quick search about John Mraz to find out what his motivations might be as I’ve never heard the name before.  Other than precious few articles, I couldn’t find anything of substance.

Confused? Wouldn’t blame you if you were!

We have Jack Layton and Iggy who are current leaders of their respective parties vehemently denying coalition talks, when it would appear that the dinosaurs, Broadbent, Romanow,  Chretien, and now according to Mraz’s affidavit, Joe Clark somehow stumbled into the mix. How odd.

I have a feeling that no matter how much both leaders protest, deny and attempt to squash coalition rumours, it is now red meat for the Harpercons.  More than vehement denial is required. There is ambiguity between Mr Apps and Mraz/Kinsella.  Who has more credibility? Not that that would matter to Harpercons and their cheerleaders in the corporate media. Remember, Steve does control the message these days.

Another thing to think about, as I mentioned in a post earlier today, Jean Lapierre has credibility and there doesn’t appear to be any love lost between Warren Kinsella and himself. Lapierre sounded certain in the who and the how of this potential coalition debacle. That can’t be ignored. Lapierre is a journalist and a pundit who seems to have no interest to return to federal politics; he has nothing to lose or gain by what he said this morning.

For the time being, the Liberals should now concentrate on keeping themselves together, rather than getting together with other non relatives.

Big tents are better than complicated schemes. Instead of speculating about coalitions, Liberals need to continue sharpening their strategy and recruiting sensible Canadians from all former political stripes under a Liberal banner. Because Liberals should be governing for everyone, not the left or the right.

That would be something most of us can live with. For those NDP supporters who think the Liberals lean too far to the right, look at it this way, it’s far better than Steve’s sharp right turns as those are your only choices.  The NDP will never govern. Case in point:  the center would rather turn Steve’s sharp right turn as the NDP, no matter how much they attempt to center themselves, they wear the evil, grossly misused title of ‘soshalist’. (OK, it helps that the media is in lockstep with Steve and serving Harpercon kool-aid, but still).

I wished that Canadians were more progressive. I wish for a lot of things, don’t mean we’ll get ‘em and things could get worse; much worse. A Harpercon majority comes to mind.

For those hardcore Harpercon fans, lamenting about the Liberals being too far to the left: get over yourselves! You’ve got Saint Steve to cheer for. If they (Liberals)  were as far left as you think, then why should you care?

I still maintain that both Iggy and Rae should go before the upcoming election. New fresh faces are needed to lead and they exist and can even be made ready.  Be it Trudeau; be it Leblanc or be it someone else: something tells me things can’t be worse than with Rae or Iggy. It would also still be the only way to squash those coalition talks.

It’s also time for Warren Kinsella to move on and for those dinosaurs to continue enjoying retirement.

I’m all read out of blogs and columns over coalition governments. However, I picked up this interesting take by Chantal Hebert, where she not only hints at a Bob Rae/Iggy division.  We hear Iggy and his friends categorically telling Canadians a coalition with anyone is out of the question. We hear of rumours of either Jean Chretien and/or Bob Rae having discussions with Jack Layton over some kind of coalition, agreement, alliance, take your pick.  So which is it? Hebert takes a stab at this by implying both are happening: Bob Rae and his buddies are talking coalition with Jack and the NDP while Iggy and his buddies are categorically ruling out coalitions. 

There is as much private and public speculation about an eventual rapprochement between the Liberals and the NDP as ever, but increasingly it revolves around schemes that would see Ignatieff out of the picture.

And while many of the Liberals who look favourably on new arrangements between their party and the NDP are resigned to having Ignatieff first run a campaign on his own terms, their ranks have been shrinking.

If this is true, could all this be more of an elaborate stunt to throw Iggy out before the next election and saving face at the same time?  An original, yet very complicated idea: get Jack Layton to fire Iggy (in a manner of speaking).

Was that challenge Layton launched to Iggy to vote down c-9 a part of that game? A hint of a step to remove Iggy?  After all, Jack was surely smart enough to know that Iggy wouldn’ t fall for that. It would make more sense in a more odd sort of way than simply saying Steve would cave as he would least want an election with the upcoming G20/G8 summits, which should be obvious that that’s hogwash.  Granted, pre G8/G20 is less than an ideal time for Steve to go to an election, he is in permanent election campaign mode 24/7.  He would do it if necessary.

A strange way of doing things that won’t end well by any stretch of the imagination. The first thing that comes to mind is…then what? So Iggy’s gone. Whether the intent is to really go forward with a coalition with each other or simply a deal for Jack to help the Liberals to get rid of Iggy before the next election, the problem still  far from solved.

Liberals internal divisions between the Left of center MPs and the Blue grits which seemed to compliment each other well in the past now seem irreconcialable.  Imagine adding a smaller party whose favourite sport as of late is to snipe at the lot of them in the media?

Then there’s the upcoming vote on Bill c-391. Jack as to this day hasn’t offered any alternatives to keep the registry as Iggy has, nor does it look like he will whip his MPs into voting against the bill. Talk about your wedge issues!   If Jack continues on that path regarding gun control; how will he and the Liberals ever be able to form any agreement? Jack will have proven that he wouldn’t be able to play well with Liberals. It also further proves my predictions that he will sooner get into bed with Steve.

Sidenote: I have one observation to make though. With all that coalition talk and speculation regarding the NDP and the Liberals; with or without Iggy;  how can anyone who actually pays attention to radio and tv shows with political panels not notice how much  the NDP snipes at the Liberals just as much, if not more than at the Harpercons?   With that observation, how do so many columnists, bloggers and pundits overlook this endless sniping at the Liberals on the part of the NDP?

 Another observation would be that the NDP has shifted more toward the center.  They were never “soshalists” as Steve portrayed them to be to the captivated Timmy’s crowd; they are far less so now. After all, if the NDP managed to score rural and western seats, it wasn’t by being hard core left wing social democrats. They proved this when twelve voted with the Harpercons last time to scrap the registry.

It appears that this will be the topic of conversation this summer along with the freedom flotilla.

Personally, I still think the left of center parties should merge outright, but sadly, as time goes further along and the NDP keeps sniping at the Liberals, I don’t see that happening anytime soon. Nor a coalition for that matter.

Another thing the staunch promoters of coalition are overlooking is that bill c-391 which the Liberals will be whipped into voting against and Layton still on the fence without even a proposed modification to the Long Gun Registry like Iggy did. It looks like Layton won’t be whipping his MPs and if that’s the case, I think the fate of that coalition will have been sealed.

Even polls being taken to decide who would best lead such a coalition or merger of the NDP and the Liberals. One thing is certain though, it seems most are of the agreement that the Bloc Quebecois should not be included this time around. That’s ok, with the active push for Quebec sovereignty these days, I don’t think Gilles Duceppe is interested in former any kind of long term agreement with federalist parties.

Jeff Jedras of BC er in Toronto, I think he has the best idea to date. If only these parties actually paid attention.

One serious problem to a coalition is putting this together before an election which would put off many of the majority centrists and send them to Steve’s camp or do they do it after an election which, after December 2008, got such a violent response. Would they warm up to the idea without the Bloc? Or without Stephane Dion at the helm? Maybe, but is that a chance we wish to take?

Another problem will always be the Timmy’s crowd; Jane and Joe Centrist who are content to swallow the kool-aid du jour. As I have pointed out many times before, they don’t understand our parliamentary system. They are content to remain this way.  When they vote, their intent is to vote for the party their favourite leader is running regardless who the MP representing their riding may be. We could tell them differently, but it won’t matter. Most vote with the aim of seeing their favourite leader as PM. No matter how a coalition would be presented, they would still see it as undemocratic.

As for the merger, well,  many more could easily switch to Harpercon camp; remember, like in the U.S., soshalism is a very dirty and scary word  here in Canada.

There would also be quite a bit of turn around from both the Liberals and the NDP should they either merge or form a coalition. Many will either cross to the Harpercons or sit as independents or leave politics. The latter being the lesser of the evils. As it is, on the whole, no proposed merger or coalition under any leader would produce an overwhelming majority as the parties are now. Needless to say, it wouldn’t survive the bloodshed from both parties.

I agree with Jeff on this one. Every party campaign for themselves and have candidates running in every riding as they usually do, but never flat out state no coalition or agreement during the election campaigns.  That would indeed insult the intelligence of voters. They hear those rumours and many rumours in politics end up being true in some form or another.  The voters will no doubt have that ‘will they or won’t they’ scenario on their minds at the ballot box.

However, as I’ve stated above, it will largely depend on how that whole c-391 debacle ends.

This is indeed one of those Damned if they do; damned if they don’t kind of moments.  While I agree with Jeff’s piece above, allowing the status quo to continue really does up the risk for a Harpercon majority.  Yesterday, Chantal Hebert writes that history is repeating itself. She makes the paralell between Layton’s surge in popularity and the election result of 1988.   I fear that she could be right on this one.

NDP strategists have apparently concluded that it is time to move in for the kill against a weakened Liberal party. Last weekend, Layton dared Ignatieff to try to force the government to split the budget bill before it is allowed to pass and Harper’s minority regime is allowed to survive.

To position the NDP as the only effective national opposition vehicle to the Conservatives, Layton is drawing new, deeper lines in the Liberal/NDP sand.

As in 1988, the next federal campaign and the potential advent of a Conservative majority could be a watershed for the country.

On this, the NDP and the Liberals are in agreement. But as in the days of the free trade debate it does seem it is all they will agree on between now and the next campaign.

Broadbent’s 1988 campaign was both his finest and his most counter-productive hour. A remake is now in the works.

The truth is, Jack doesn’t seem to care and in fact, would go to bed with the Harpercons. It came close once upon a time. Jack really seemed to have no problem going to bed with Steve in order to oust Paul Martin. He could easily do it again.His party has noticeably been turning rightward themselves as of late.

Jack smells power getting closer to his finger tips. And he obviously doesn’t care if Steve gets his majority. He might even help them get that majority by going to bed with him.

If the Liberals were smart; here’s what they could hammer at Steve and at Jack. They could ask them continuously if they would go to bed with each other sometime down the road following the next election or even sometime before. Curious to see how Steve and his flunkies like Andrew and Dimitri spin this one. They could bring back that letter Steve wrote to then GG Adrienne Clarkson.

The added bonus is that it does force Jack to come clean with his intentions.   His party ideals or a crack at cabinet?

Coalitions and mergers are Steve’s biggest fear. With his need for only one party to keep him afloat on a case by case basis, he has succeeded in his divide and conquer games with the opposition parties.  Clearly, these are no longer the days of Trudeau and Broadbent where they were able to find common ground and work together with some kind of arrangement.

Make no mistake, Jack’s little challenge to Iggy regarding Bill c-9 was not about uniting the opposition against Steve during a time Steve would least like an election. No, that was about Jack trying to score again. Steve’s always willing and ready for an election, even during G8/G20 season.

Lastly, time to stop the  fantasizing about coalitions/mergers  or new Liberal leaders to take over. We are not doing ourselves any favours like this. The best thing is to really look at reality. Reality is that the NDP and the Liberals are pitted against each other more and more and will get worse if Jack doesn’t help scrap Bill C-391.

Even if the NDP were to achieve opposition party status; that would more than likely mean a Harpercon majority.

Another reality is Iggy is the Liberal leader and he ain’t goin’ until he loses an election, but that unfortunately means Steve wins once again and this time, could well be a majority.  The Timmy’s crowd want a majority and will welcome a totalitarian theocracy if it means not interrupting time with Timmy to go to the polls.

To whine about two undesirable choices  or lesser of the two evils solves nothing.  Steve has proven to be and continues to prove that he is a Prime minister like nothing we’ve ever seen.

Yes, unfortunately, corporations are behind the political parties; nothing anyone can do about that for the time being.  There are many people would like to see changed, but honestly, we have lived without things like ‘proportional’ representation for years; we’ll survive again. Perhaps something to work on at a later time, but none of these reforms many want to see  will ever see the light of day  with a Harpercon majority; guaranteed.

It is also high time we stopped comparing ourselves to Britain.  Apples and oranges. Also, it seems that our center is further to the right than Britain’s is. We’re too Americanized.

Well, well, the NDP are getting closer to Harpercon mentality, aren’t they? As retired History professor and broadcaster and sometimes contributor here at  SSM, Graeme Decarie pointed out, the NDP no longer stand for much, do they? But I disagree, they are no longer gentle even.

In addition to doing everything possible to contradict the Liberals, including supporting Harpercons, he no longer seems to be an adament supporter of our health care system. It was disappointing to see that Jack Layton, who once upon a time joined liberals like Ujjal Dosangh, going to the U.S. to defend our health care system, basically, shut the fuck up when Charest announced proposed that 25$ user fee everytime we use the health care system.

After watching MP Megan Leslie on Question Period crying about how heartbreaking it is to see diviseness in the house of commons over gun control and even musing about long gun registry (by extension, gun control; because, with those Harpercons, it never ends at just one cut; they throw the baby out with the bath water; wait and see, Harpercons will turn our streets very much like in the U.S.,) not being such a good idea. I (as well as others, I’m sure) got the idea that Leslie was blaming the Liberal camp as she was looking at Kirsty Duncan’s screen rather than at Twiggy-Mullet-head Hoeppner when she was ranting. Megan, you should find it more heartbreaking that Brother Steve wants to endager us by eliminating gun control. Remember another thing he does well; slow-cooking the frog.

Now, it’s confirmed by notable absences by NDP MPs So, NDP starts to resemble Steve more and more (minus the theocracy; give that time) as we further approach ourselves to that American way of life of walking the streets, armed with a gun. It’s one thing for Jack to allow his MPs to vote their conscience; it’s quite another to be completely indifferent to the matter of gun control.  Also,  unlike Iggy, Jack didn’t even offer any alternatives or propose modifications to the long gun registry.

Ever since the British elections and their novelty coalition, I read more and more suggesting a Harpercon-NDP partnership rather than a Liberal-NDP partnership: something I’ve mentioned for years, a vibe I’ve had for awhile now.  

Jack has steered his party more toward the center, that much has been quite obvious; whether it was because Jack still thinks he can be PM or he did it simply to annoy the Liberals,  is definitely a hint of something to come.

In addition to not supporting gun control or the Canada Health Act, I don’t hear him jumping up at Question Period to hammer the Harpercons over the head with the cuts to all those programs and funding for for groups like Bible translators and Youth For Christ the way Gilles Duceppe did.

Furthermore, I wonder why  we criticize the Liberals for  trying to avoid either having Steve or they, themselves, trigger and election over the Detainee document issue, yet not as many are criticizing the NDP for doing the same.

I have observed that trend of critiques: when the NDP plays ball with Harpercons, they’re applauded for trying to work with Parliament: when the Liberals do it, it’s considered whimpy. If  Iggy and the Liberals suffer from Battered woman’s syndrome as a few bloggers have put it, the NDP are enablers.

Even Norman Spector’s column yesterday indicated that Jack Layton wasn’t able to find a dance partner, indicating to me he would get into bed with anybody who could lift him to cabinet. However, more and more, it looks less and less that it would be with the Liberals, leading me and no doubt others to wonder if Jack’s relationship with Steve would be my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

Remember how violently most Canadians reacted to that proposed coalition in 2009? I suspect that is why Iggy won’t go down that road. He  notices the pattern of the Harpercon cheerleaders in the media give  him and/or his party a beating everytime they try something.  It’s why he backs away.  Many would remember even many Liberal and NDP supporters not even going along with that coalition. Yes, different circumstances, nobody wanted Stephane Dion as prime minister; guess what? The same number don’t appear to want Iggy as prime minister neither.

However an NDP and Harpercon merger, well, Harpercon cheerleaders  would love it because it would strengthen their numbers and NDP supporters would seem to think that they will be able to keep Steve moderate.  Problem with that thinking is that it wouldn’t happen quite that way.

The idea of a Jack Layton-Brother Steve ‘partnership’ (more like hostile take-over…but anyway) also just seems more feasable than a Liberal/NDP partnership, simply because at this time, Steve has the best shot to hang onto power.  Jack might see that getting into bed with Steve is his best chance at cabinet posts for his party. Given what we have either learned or have forgotten with the elections in Britain, we have learned that even if the Liberals under any leader win a minority, Steve has every right to continue as PM and to form the government.  That would be the only circumstance I would see Steve welcoming Jack. Unlike Trudeau and Martin who gracefully stepped down after losing to minority parliaments,  I don’t see Steve with his King mentality wanting to throw the towel in that quickly.  No, he will do what he does best; a hostile take over.

If  the next election yields him another minority, but a weakened one, he will still need a party to be in bed with; lock, stock and barrel.

NDP supporters who would perhaps welcome a partnership with the Harpercons should be careful what they wish for. Steve will be able to get his theocracy at full-throttle. Remember before Reform merged with Progressive Conservative:  Steve predicted this merger and he also said that Progressive Conservative was not going to win.  That, alone  should determine that the NDP would disappear.

Jack, I see where your choice would be leading to; be very careful.  Yes, Layton will get into bed with another party, the question is which one. Unless there is some miracle and Layton is all of a sudden playing nicely with the Liberals and MPs like Mulcair the mouth can stop slamming the liberals for five minutes while either on the big tv screen or on the radio, I see this becoming more of a Harpercon hostile take over.

Questions I keep asking myself as of late.

I have heard many talk of Iggy resembling Brother Steve, only a lighter version. However, what about the NDP, here?

Everytime we see or hear Thomas Mulcair talk, he can’t seem to resist slamming the Liberals at every turn. I think he slams them as often as the Harpercons, perhaps even more?

It seems to me, more and more, Layton would rather get into bed with Harper than agree on much of anything with the Liberals, let alone form a coalition with them. Hell, Laytong must be smart enough to know that his own party will never ever govern.

One thing that seems to be lost in the memory hole amongst both the right and the left is that the Bloc and Yes, the “socialist” NDP were ready to topple the Paul Martin Liberals in 2004. Here is the letter to refresh our memories:

As leaders of the opposition parties, we are well aware that, given the Liberal minority government, you could be asked by the Prime Minister to dissolve the 38th Parliament at any time should the House of Commons fail to support some part of the government’s program. We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority. Your attention to this matter is appreciated. Gilles Duceppe, Jack Layton and Stephen Harper, September 9, 2004

Layton basically brought down the Paul Martin Liberals because Martin had refused an all out ban on private health care. Ok, great! But did Layton honestly think that Stephen “Let’s scrap the Canada Health Act” and “Time to allow market experimentation” Harper wasn’t going to ban private health care??   While Liberals may well have been and still are today, divided over the Americanization of our health care; the Harpercons are pretty much in line with their puppet master on this one.

Recently, when Charest introduced that proposed ‘user fee’ every time we use the health care system,  Layton, who was supposed to be a staunch defender of the Canada health act and universal health care; the medicare party, didn’t even speak up. Neither he, nor Mulcair, his Quebec man responded until after Iggy clarified his position on the issue.

Since Brother Steve came into power, we hear more about meetings between Jack and Steve far more often than Iggy and Steve or Gilles and Steve.

Jack too, has voted  on motions to keep Steve afloat. At first,  I thought it was because if  the NDP didn’t vote along with Steve,  there was the risk of a Harpercon majority.  Now, I wonder…

Sometimes I wonder if Jack simply has an axe to grind with the Liberals more than he does with Steve? To me, it seems he does or doesn’t do certain things, simply because he wants to be different from the Liberals. Remember when we wrote our MPs to go back to work when Steve shut down parliament this past winter? The Liberals did go back to Ottawa to work; the NDP pretty much refusted to do the same thing.

Just before prorogation, Layton was in a private meeting neither Iggy nor Gilles were invited to. Yes, Jack could well have been trying to negotiate to  get rid of the corporate tax breaks, but what else could there have been? The cancellation of thes corporate tax breaks never happened.

Now, the NDP has decided to pull out of the Guergis/Jaffer parliamentary committee.  Something Pat Martin just yesterday on Question Period was all gung ho about. Today, he’s just as adamently against it, supposedly after speaking with Layton. What happened? And why?

While I still don’t believe this scandal goes outside the circle of Mr & Mrs Guergis, and doesn’t involve any other ministry or Harpercon MP, this isn’t about them anymore, this about Steve and how he mismanages a situation.  How he is all secretive. Even when a situation reveals nothing to write home about,  Steve goes into his arrogant secretive mode, just like the way he does everything else.

I have always said that Iggy should step away and concentrate on other matters, however, given the NDP’s propensity for supporting Harpercons since the Paul Martin Liberal government, I can’t help but wonder what their motivation is besides looking at more important issues.

I have also said the opposition should keep an eye on the situation as well, in case there is something damning. Harper is in his paranoid control freakish mode for a reason.  Does the NDP plan to keep away from this entirely?

No, sadly enough, a Liberal /NDP coalition ain’t happening  anytime soon. However,  I believe the NDP should share responsibility for that.

I can’t help but wonder if they would rather get into bed with the Harpercons rather than the Liberals if push came to shove.

I’m not the biggest fan of the Liberals other than to say they’re needed to unseat Brother Steve, my priority of all. In fact, I always preferred what the NDP stood for, support for the working class; the kitchen table instead of the boardroom and all that, but lately, I have to wonder what is motivating them, knowing that they will never get into power. I only wish they shared the same views as I did of unseating Brother Steve, even if that means finding common ground and working with the Liberals.