Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like, but I can’t help being left with a very uneasy feeling after hearing Michael Ignatieff utter these words:
“What I’ve learned from Canadians in 2009 is they didn’t want an election,” Mr. Ignatieff said. “What they want is an alternative to the Harper government.”
So how do you logically attempt to give Canadians an ‘alternative’ without having an election?
And Jack doesn’t say the e-word at all, according to the Globe column above. He just muses about wanting to “make Parliament work”.
Mmmm…
Do you trust these guys?
Fellow Canadians, please do not allow yourselves to become complacent.
I am really tired of them all using the phrase “what Canadians want”. How do they know what we want. I would love an election and a majority government.
I have never, for one minute believed the Coalition dead. In my opinion Mr. Ignatieff has done or said nothing to make be believe otherwise.
The Coalition is very much in play and the snake is still in the grass.
That snake in the grass is none other than Bob Rae, who I believe is the continual cheerleader for a Coalition.
I think your spidey senses are accurate Joanne – the oppositions and the Waffle can’t be trusted.
My hope is that Stephen Harper’s played out this chess move in his head and has a contingency plan tucked away somewhere.
By the way Don Martin has a nice column out this morning re: the fed. PC and Reform merger and it’s place in the changing face of Ottawa.
You only need to get nervous if Gilles Duceppe starts making noise about needing an alternative. Remember that a coalition simply cannot work without accommodating the Bloc, and both Layton and Ignatieff know what will happen if they try this again.
I don’t think you are alone in analyzing that statement the way in which you have, most of the commenter’s at the Globe did too.
His new Chief, I don’t ever recall denouncing it and that guys old boss, was a definite supporter if not architect of the 2008 agreement.
So either Iggy is speaking double speak again or there is something very stinky brewing that requires close attention.
P.S. How do you give Canadians an alternative without an election? Hidden agenda to try and pull a fast one on the gov’t when they’re least expecting it. BC Blue’s post on this(which you link) is very good.
Iffy, the Puffin, is hatching Part II of the Separatist Coalition.
What would the Separatist Coalition have done in this instance?
(That’s a rhetorical question.)
…-
Family flees ‘horrific’ abuse
A seven-year-old Pakistani girl and her family have been given asylum in Canada after reports the child was raped and left to die when her Christian father refused to convert to Islam.
The identities of Baby Neeha and her family are being protected by immigration officials, said human rights lawyer Chantal Desloges and One Free World International, a church that was instrumental in getting the family here.
The family arrived in Canada on Dec. 12 after a three-year battle by organizers to spirit them out of danger in Pakistan.
They are living in the Mississauga area and will be visited next month by Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, who was so touched by the family’s plight that he doled out a ministerial permit, of which he has only issued two.
Church founder Rev. Majed El Shafie said the family of seven have been hiding from extremists in Pakistan for about three years.
Baby Neeha, at the age of 21/2, was raped by the son of her father’s employer and left to die by the roadside, he said. No one was arrested for the crime.
“These horrific events took place because her father, who was Christian, refused to give in to pressure from his Muslim employer to convert to Islam,” El Shafie said.
The family went underground in Pakistan to hide from Muslim extremists who were seeking revenge for their non-conversion, he said.
“The family has lived for years in hiding and in constant fear of being discovered by the employer’s family or Islamic extremists,” El Shafie said. “We are thrilled that she’s finally in Canada.”
Organizers said the case touched Kenney who decided to help the family.
“This case truly broke his heart and he (Kenney) considers himself lucky to have it within his powers to intervene,” Kenney’s spokesman Alykhan Velshi said yesterday. “Fortunately, they are now safely in Canada.”
Kenney found out about the family’s plight six months ago, Velshi said.
“He personally issued a special ministerial permit,” he said. “There were significant difficulties in getting them out of Pakistan.”
The family can now apply for permanent residency on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, Velshi said.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2416888/posts
I’d like an alternative to the Harper minority government. That would be a Harper majority government.
Contributors to this blog have raised the issue of spin and bias re: media reporting.
I encourage you to read today’s National Post editorial entitled “A Free Press” which very nicely speaks to the issue of just how “free” the press can be, whether factual or not.
“Beverley McLachlin writes in an unanimous ruling, it’s sometimes in the public interest to grant immunity to untrue statements made in good faith.”
Get that? It’s ok for the press to make untrue statements and get away with it “in good faith”, so the next time the MSM or PPG stretches the truth and we hop to outrage and concern the courts have spoken. It’s ok.
Maybe Michael Ignatieff wants us to become Americans? His admiration for the United States, his own views of transforming us into an Empire Lite is well documented.
He was ashamed of Canada and it bogus peacekeeping reputation. Only the US and Britain did not ‘give it away’. (Hospitals, Schools and Roads over human rights of an international citizen)
http://www.youtube.com/user/CanadianSense#p/a/u/6/wwDLjXb6FCM
Phantom, I think Gilles would go along with anything that would give an advantage to Quebec while undermining Canadian unity.
As for Layton, what’s he got to lose?
And if Iffy really is controlled by Bob Rae, well, ’nuff said.
It’s Iffy just being iffy….rebuild? or unite the left?
decisions decisions……
It’s amazing to watch the once supremely powerful LPC wrestle with killing their party and becoming just a fraction of a coalition. truly amazing.
“As for Layton, what’s he got to lose?”
For starters I do believe that the Conservatives still have “the tape” which we’ve not heard in its entirety that has Layton crooning coalition.
I also believe that Layton would lose whatever rank and file he’s built up and the Liberal converts plus he’s doing well in Quebec because he’s not the Bloc, or Harper.
I also believe that Layton would lose whatever rank and file he’s built up and the Liberal converts plus he’s doing well in Quebec because he’s not the Bloc, or Harper.
It does seem that Iffy’s bleeding support from the left. However I think that the NDP rank and file are only as loyal as the polls. I still wouldn’t rule out some kind of coalition attempt.
Bert @ 9:18 – Zing!!
The original document signed by Jack Gilles and Mike doesn’t expire until 2012. Would they try to replace the Conservatives? In about 1/2 a heart beat if they thought there would be no repercussions from the electorate. I maintain the biggest reason the coalition didn’t move ahead last time was the massive public reaction. Once it became clear that leaving the loons in charge of the Liberal party was damaging the Liberal party, Big Liberal stepped in and put a halt to it. Dion out Iggy in. I have a sneaking hunch that Iggy would be flushed just as quickly as Dion should Iggy make such a move which is probably the only thing keeping the coalition from moving ahead now. If the clowns can safely pull a fast one – they will.
That definitely sounds like a hint towards making that coalition again. It’s hard to tell whether that would work again. On one hand, it was like political suicide before, but lately, I heard of a poll that said that a good number of Canadians would support a coalition. Hopefully, it’s wrong.
The reason why Ignatieff could not answer a simple question: “why do you want to be PM?” is because with a coalition, which he needs desparately to survive, Ignatieff with the smirk on his face knows that with a coalition, anyone of them can be the PM. Each of them will be acting PM, to run canada the way they want and or ordered by their terrorist groups.
As we all know there is a coalition of NATIONAL television MEDIAS they all speak the same language, they all support the Coalition parties and they all hate the prime minister.
I too the coalition is still alive and well. Look at the detainee issue, they are all sing the exact same song. They all hate Harper and would do anything to get rid of him. I think they would attempt a coup again.
So ya, my spidey senses tell me that’s what Iffy meant by “alternative.” He knows he is not going to be duly elected to sit in the PM’s chair. Remember he was not elected leader so he maybe believes he can become PM in a similar fashion.
You’ve nailed it Joe! When the Coalition of losers is made up of those who know they can’t get elected in the democratic way to form government they resort to the most undemocratic of actions – coalition and overthrow – Perhaps someone should tell Iffy and the Coalition of Losers and Bob Rae that we’re not in Russia anymore.
I bet that Rae’s pulling the strings.
Jen – “…there is a coalition of NATIONAL television MEDIAS they all speak the same language, they all support the Coalition parties and they all hate the prime minister.”
Sorry, but know they don’t. Your comment is not only sweeping the good journalists(and we do have some of those) in with the rest. It’s not going to change any time soon either – the courts unanimously decided that media can tell “untrue statements” as long as they do so in good faith.
Read the NP’s editorial today.
Could this be why the media and unnamed others are trying so hard to get the PM to recess the House of Commons. They could then go to the GG and re-present their deal to her.
They would argue that Canadians do not want an election, just an alternative to the Conservative government.
I find it strange that all this talk of recess has surfaced shortly after the house cleaning in iffy’s office.
The coalition coup did not work before and will not work now.
Unless they try it during the Olympics, when they assume no one is paying attention to them.
PMSH better get those new Senators named ASAP.
When we have the majority in the Senate, even with liberals heading all committees, would those committees stay the same if a coup was successful.
Is that what is behind all this, losing their control of the Senate, for the next several years.
Without the Senate to block and ammend bills passed in the HofC, libs might have to grow up and become a real opposition and quit looking for the scandal of the week.
I wouldn’t lose any sleep, trying to interpret Iggy’s latest ramblings. It’s just typical Liberal double-speak, all of which, in mathematical terms, can all be boiled down to:
“blah1, blah2, blah3 …”
but/on the other hand
“not blah1, not blah2, not blah3 …”
The other thing is, GG Michaelle Jean’s five-year (not written in stone, but by “developed convention”) term is up on Sep 27, 2010. I expect Harper to appoint a 6 foot 5, 300 pound, ex-military man, who will lay down the law to any coalition stooge who dares to come by for a chat.
Ignatieff’s “What they want is an alternative to the Harper government.” had me wondering as well.
There is definitely a movement out there to unseat PM Harper by whatever means possible; that is not something new.
As I’ve commented here and elsewhere when the coalition first took shape last year, the coalition was planned BEFORE the purported spark that set it off, i.e. the 2008 Economic Update, with its cutting off of political party funding and its insufficient stimulus funding (according to the opposition parties).
A recent series in the G&M by Brian Topp, former NDP campaign chief, confirms it:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/brian-topp/coalition-redux-the-prime-minister-makes-a-big-mistake/article1382092/
« Wednesday, November 26, 2008: Just before 6:00 p.m., my BlackBerry buzzed. An email from Jack Layton.
“CTV is reporting that the per voter public financing scheme is to be cancelled in tomorrow’s update,” he wrote. “I believe that the Liberals could be tempted by our earlier proposition, faced with such a catastrophic proposal. Self-preservation could provoke out-of-the-box thinking. I would like to discuss having you re-open your line of communication with your contact.” …
I took a bit of time before replying to our federal leader’s email, to get my mind around the idea we were going to try to reactivate our coalition proposal (we had floated the idea of replacing the Conservatives through a coalition during the 2008 election and then again earlier that fall, and had been rebuffed by the Liberals, who were now focused on a new leadership convention). … »
In addition to the NDP’s machinations, there have been a large number of op-eds scolding Canadians they do not know how their government works; consequently they need to be schooled on the legitimacy of coalitions. All these so-called “experts” whom nobody had ever heard of before have crawled out of the woodwork to implant the idea of the validity of a coalition in Canadians’ minds.
In addition to the academics’ “expert advice,” recently [Nov 02 2009] Professor and failed NDP candidate Michael Byers wrote this:
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/719037
“Liberals and New Democrats together could unseat Harper
Electoral ceasefire would put nation’s centre-left majority in political control …
There is only one surefire way to prevent a Harper majority. The Liberals and NDP should agree to not run candidates against each other in the next campaign. …”
Although Byers doesn’t call it a “coalition” and doesn’t envisage a combined platform in that agreement, he would like the parties to agree to a referendum on proportional representation.
On the latter proposal, Michael Byers shows his anti-democratic bent by saying:
“Many New Democrats might wish to make the immediate introduction of proportional representation a condition of the ceasefire agreement, since a referendum might not produce the desired result.”
IOW, never mind consulting the public, because they may not go the way WE [he and his like-minded friends] want them to go.
And Michael Byers is not the only one to muse about “an agreement.” Even Chantal Hébert, whose columns are usually quite balanced, gets into the “how to unseat Harper” act:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/742159–hebert-could-old-foes-offer-voters-new-deal?bn=1
” … If Michael Ignatieff and his new crew really wanted to think outside the box, Roy Romanow, Ed Broadbent, Alexa McDonough and Jack Layton would be the guests of the upcoming Liberal think-fest. And Jean Chrétien and other Liberal luminaries would also be in attendance.
The meeting would be turned into a convening of the elders of both tribes and it would focus on the unfinished business of last year’s coalition pact. …”
All the more reason for conservatives to be vigilant and to support PM Harper, even if we may not agree with ALL the policies his government espouses.
“For starters I do believe that the Conservatives still have “the tape” which we’ve not heard in its entirety that has Layton crooning coalition.”
Yes, “the tape”. I seem to remember one line in particular, that it sticks in my mind “…democratic process, yeah, what about it?”. Tell me that wasn’t Jack! saying that? I’m shocked, I say shocked that an elected political party leader would say such a thing in this democratic country called Canada!
It should be played over and over again, even at the start of the morning in our public school system, discussed in history classes, poli-sci classes, anywhere that democracy exists, as an example of power-hungry, undemocratic people, impatient with the “democratic process”, that marginalises a fringe political Party like the New “Democratic” Party.
Joanne- I think you are absolutely right about the fact that a coalition is brewing in the backrooms. Bob Rae holds the power in the Liberal party. Peter Donolo is a hand puppet of PowerCorp and Chretien and their special interests cannot afford to be away from the trough for much longer.
They will not wait for an election they know they cannot win. The media is also in the pocket of the same powerbrokers. Cue those who scream that the Harper government is too “secretive”. They are the ones who had their careers built by nice Liberal leaks over the past decade.
It is like the mafia – they owe favours.
Do you think ANY credible media will pick up this story and air it in public? Or, will the coalition overthrow just happen out of the blue with all of the usual Liberal apologists justifying it to the unsuspecting public?
Iffy’s not as popular as he thought he would be, so his only option to become PM anytime soon WOULD be within a coalition.
I think we’re in for nasty times ahead.
I agree with Ruth. Both Martin and now Ignatieff are always saying “what Canadians want”. For one thing, it sounds like they’re talking about a foreign country…well, in the case of Ignatieff (the American) we are a foreign country. Ignatieff knows nothing of what WE Canadians want. He most certainly did not hear from Canadians that Canadians want an alternative to the Harper government. There will always be those who want an alternative to whatever government is in power – that’s nothing new. What Ignatieff means is that HE would like to be the PM.
The way I see it, by virtue of its size, the NDP has to be the one who sleeps around and the Bloc, by virtue of being a one-province party, doesn’t have to sleep with any party. The Bloc simply has to show up with the key to the brothel.
Jack Layton, I believe, is desperate to remain relevant even if only minimally. He is the perpetually abused and used bridesmaid who has stood up for bride after bride only to be tossed aside or occasionally used by the groom as a stand-in.
Maz2: Your comment really brought home a point: the seculars are always ready to condemn religion (the Christian religion, that is) and yet it always seems to be a church which rescues people like this family. Funny, that.
The very fact that a poll was commissioned as to whether Canadians would accept a coalition tells me that it is not dead…..has anyone EVER seen that type of poll prior to 2008.
Nasty times indeed…I agree with MaryT that the whole “proroguing parliament” rumour is the wishful suggestions to put the plan in place.
Gabby, where do the BLOC stand in all of this apparently they signed the coalition agreement, therefore would want their piece of the pie.
Let’s say Iggy should be the last one to know what Canadians want, he who returned as a stranger on the wings of opportunity.
Liberal scribe, Lawrence Martin thinks what we need for 2010 is for the youth to take over, he specifically thinks Justin Trudeau as “the politician who can change things”. Maybe for the Liberals, he’ll have time to grow on all fronts before they get near power.
Martin opines Junior Trudeau is “articulate in both languages, dashing, magnetic” he’s also got charisma, “a rare political gift”. Oh, he also wrote he “draws crowds wherever he goes”.
Martin also writes; “Everybody is sick and tired, or they should be of the eternal grip on power of the post-war baby boomer cohort”. I can tell him one thing we are tired of is the old hat “cohort” hanging around in the MSM aiding and abetting all the latest gotchas conjured up by the desperate for power Liberals.
Maz2 – Thanks for the link. Some Liberals, no doubt, would do exactly what Jason Kenney did. Unfortunately, and I would love to be wrong, I suspect a Coalition Government would have sat on its hands, at least for a time.
Don’t forget that the Old Toronto Boys promised that Iggy would be PM by now and the Coalition was the only way The Waffle could accomplish that.
So, the question now becomes, is Mr. Ignatieff so self-centered and egotistical enough to try go the Coalition route again to gain power through the back door and dark corners of politics?
YES!
Canadians would then have to decide who they trust.
Jen at 1:45 pm, I have no “inside” information on what the Bloc’s stand is on anything. All I know is what Duceppe always says: “If it’s good for Quebec …” blah blah blah.
As someone else already pointed out, numerically as things stand now the Libs and the NDP need Bloc support to form a workable coalition. If the coalition were to regroup, the Bloc’s demands would probably be even greater than they were last time around, especially since the Bloc may mock the other two parties of caving in to the Conservatives.
However, if the three opposition parties were to approach the GG, one must remember that enough time has elapsed from last year’s election to justify a new election.
Would the present GG grant a similar coalition’s demand to dissolve Parliament and allow it to govern? I don’t know. Perhaps she would choose not to go that route to convince her detractors last year’s decision was justified. However, a new issue, the detainees and the supposed defiance of the government towards Parliament has emerged as the excuse of “non-confidence.”
I believe the kind of deal proposed by Byers and Hébert, most likely involving Elizabeth May as well – that is, to not run candidates against each other’s parties in the next campaign – may be the route the opposition parties choose.
I believe the kind of deal proposed by Byers and Hébert, most likely involving Elizabeth May as well – that is, to not run candidates against each other’s parties in the next campaign – may be the route the opposition parties choose.
I missed those columns I guess. Interesting thought.
But wouldn’t that essentially be a ‘coalition’?
Oh sorry Gabby. I see that you’ve already provided those links. Must go back & catch up. Thanks.
Maybe this was why the annointed one was offering up Stornaway?
……and I was planning to be so much less cynical in 2010….this is HARD WORK….
Joanne at 4:27 pm, I suppose that arrangement – not running a candidate in ridings where other opposition candidates have a chance of defeating the Conservative candidate – is a form of coalition.
However, a true coalition entails an agreement on a set of policies and shared power by having seats at the cabinet table.
http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/coalition-governments-canada#introduction
“Coalition Governments
Coalition governments are different from majority and minority governments in that they involve two or more political parties forming the government together (whereas the other two involve only one political party sitting as government). In coalition governments, members from each coalition party will fill government offices. It may be the case, for example, that the Prime Minister is from one political party, while the Minister of Finance is from another. The coalition parties will work closely together to develop government policy, and their MPs will vote in unison in the House of Commons. …”
In the arrangement suggested by Byers, the main purpose is to defeat Harper. Elizabeth May has often expressed the same goal. Hébert’s suggestion is a more realistic approach (though not one I favour) in that she describes the ineffectiveness of the status quo for the opposition parties.
Does this mean that there will be no Green candidates in the next election. The senate will be filled, with no vacancies for May for many months or possibly years.
How will libs/ndpshare the 1.95/vote or will one party agree to forego it by not running candidates.
I think that in order to form a coalition those leaders must present a list of cabinet ministers to the GG before she could agree. And those ministers must be agreed to by all opposition caucus members. If an election is called by the defeat of the budget, and if the ndp/libs do not field 308 candidates we will know they have something in the works. It will be up to the voters to give PMSH a huge majority so their coup is not possible.
Their coup was in the works before the last election. And where is it possible for the libs to gain over 70 seats to get a minority. They could swallow the ndp but would still need about 40 from the Bloc. Aint going to happen.
And what if Danny boy comes out for PMSH next time around.
But, we have to keep a close watch on what they are doing, and never trust a thing they say.
What we are witnessing is the frustration by the media, opposition, political junkies who unable to devise a coherent plan to defeat the current government.
Do you remember when Chretien was the ‘Teflon’ PM?
The feces throwing chimp routine as almost run it’s course.
I am for one not going to be suprised again when the CPC leadership outmanoeuvre the clowns again, again, again, and again.
It is fun to watch.
Gabby – I finally got around to reading those columns. I remember the Byers one now. Yes, he’s all for uniting the left and electoral reform.
That Chantel Hebert column really took me by surprise though. She pretty much shows her true colours there. I thought she was fairly non-partisan but that sure isn’t the case in her Dec. 23rd column. In any case, she refers to it as an ‘electoral coalition’.
I think we have even more reason to be wary now.
IMHO, Chantel Hebert has always come across as a Liberal and as a Quebec nationalist.
If the opposition pulls a coalition, there’ll be riots in the streets.
Past behaviour is a good indicator of future behaviour. Therefore, never trust a Liberal, NDP’er or a blocquist.
If Canadians are unable to see how superb our PM and government have performed during these trying times, then they don’t deserve quality government.
There is absolutely no valid reason for the GG to grant a coalition wish. If anything, the GG should dissolve the opposition parties for their incredible failure in Parliament.
Amazing how these opposition parties continue to “just not get it!!”
Joanne at 9:53 pm:
Upon re-reading Hébert’s column, this sentence struck me – a sentence I had not paid much attention to when I first read the piece.
From the Chantal Hébert column:
“Instead of responding with new original moves, the Liberals and, to a lesser degree, the NDP have persisted in playing checkers on what had become a chessboard.”
In other words, Hébert is arguing that Harper has demonstrated an uncanny ability to adapt to new situations, whereas the NDP & the Libs have persisted in their old ways, which is why Hébert thinks the two opposition parties might have more success by thinking out of the box – i.e. pursue the coalition idea.
I don’t necessarily interpret her column as evidence of partisanship on her side, but rather as a rational analysis of what the situation is at the moment and how it could change.
Where I find her piece disappointing is her advice to call on the old guard of the two parties, people like Romanow, Chretien, Broadbent. Haven’t those guys had enough of a chance at the wheel? I have no problem with oldtimers – I’m not being ageist here – but isn’t it time those guys faded away into history?
======
MaryT’s question at 8:02 pm is really interesting, something I had not thought of. What DOES happen to the $1.95 per vote if the opposition parties decide not to field candidates in all 308 ridings?
GG MJ could not hand over the keys to Iggy – there is no way we could have an appointed party leader appointed PM using the existing coalition agreement drawn up under Dion.
But, if Boob Rae could walk in there with the support of enough MPs (Bloc, NDP, Libs)…effectively killing two birds with one stone – ousting Iggy and achieving parliamentary power.
I don’t think Iggy has any say in anything right now. Power Corp (Chretien and Rae) have taken back control of the Liberals from Davies et al.
It will be interesting times ahead but I don’t know that it is driven by Ignatieff since he drove McCallum’s car off the cliff in the summer.
“Harper’s quiet wisdom at a time of shrillness
Relentlessly hounded by all the usual howling mobs, Mr. Harper proved himself in all of these ways in Copenhagen
‘Everyone in the world was beating their chest,” Prime Minister Stephen Harper observed, speaking of the Copenhagen global summit in one of his year-end interviews. “I never saw so much grandstanding in my life.”
Quite so. In contrast, Mr. Harper was himself never more eloquent than in the three days he spent in Copenhagen – when he said absolutely nothing. Surrounded by a madness of politicians (that is, by the fevered rhetoric of the leadership of 160 countries), tormented by the mendacity of environmentalists (that is, by the absurd naming of Canada, which produces less than 2 per cent of the world’s carbon emissions, as Fossil Fuel Country of the Year), Mr. Harper kept his head, a remarkable performance that proved him again – however else he may be judged – an authentic leader.
Rudyard Kipling once described this kind of self-control in poetic detail. If you keep your head even as everyone else loses theirs, you prove yourself. If you trust your judgment even as everyone else doubts it, you prove yourself. If you wait without getting impatient, you prove yourself. If you restrain from making yourself “look too good,” or making yourself “talk too wise,” you prove yourself. Relentlessly hounded by all the usual howling mobs, Mr. Harper proved himself in all of these ways in Copenhagen.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/harpers-quiet-wisdom-at-a-time-of-shrillness/article1414709/
Neil Reynolds
…-
“Major northern hemisphere cold snap coming
30 12 2009
Cold event setups in atmospheric circulation patterns are aligning. Two days ago I brought to your attention that there was a strong downspike in the Arctic Oscillation Index and that the North Atlantic Oscillation Index was also negative. See The Arctic Oscillation Index goes strongly negative
Yesterday, Senior AccuWeather meteorologist Joe Bastardi let loose with this stunning prediction on the AccuWeather premium web site via Brett Anderson’s Global warming blog:
What is facing the major population centers of the northern hemisphere is unlike anything that we have seen since the global warming debate got to the absurd level it is now, which essentially has been there is no doubt about all this. For cold of a variety not seen in over 25 years in a large scale is about to engulf the major energy consuming areas of the northern Hemisphere. The first 15 days of the opening of the New Year will be the coldest, population weighted, north of 30 north world wide in over 25 years in my opinion.
The Climate Prediction Center discussion for their forecast also concurs with both of the above:”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/30/major-northern-hemisphere-cold-snap-coming/
If the people want an end to the nonsense they have two choices, give the Conservatives a majority or give the Liberals power, even a minority to tame their lust for power driven by an ingrained attitude of divine ordinance to govern.
Given the behavior of the Liberals and their trumpets in the MSM we can only deduct power for power’s sake is all they’re about. The Liberals are in no fit state to govern at this time but they have no qualms about foisting their mess on the people, fighting their divisions while attempting to govern the nation.
Electing a Conservative majority is really the only way the Liberals will concentrate on getting their sorry mess in order. They can’t even do the job of Official Opposition.
In other words, Hébert is arguing that Harper has demonstrated an uncanny ability to adapt to new situations, whereas the NDP & the Libs have persisted in their old ways, which is why Hébert thinks the two opposition parties might have more success by thinking out of the box – i.e. pursue the coalition idea.
Good point, Gabby. And with rumour that Parliament may be prorogued, we see that the opposition may be in a checkmate position once again.
[...] « Avoiding the e-word [...]
Bob Rae is the key to all of this…..don’t take your eyes off this man. Just ask Ontario.
Maz2 – Thanks for the two links.
I would welcome the coalition with open loving arms. That would bring about a free western Canada. The next best thing would be a majority Harper government.
Happy New Year
[...] Persichilli is obviously as confused as I am about what Michael Ignatieff actually means when he pontificates that Canadians don’t want an [...]