“If they aren’t going to make it a confidence vote, they’re clearly not serious about it,” he said.
Say, I thought Stephen Harper was a strategic genius who was gonna rule like he had a majority. What bills exactly is he prepared to fall upon, if not this one?
Buk Buk Ba-Fucking-Caw, Tory sissies! What you waiting for? Your mamas? What if your mama's chickenshit too?
12 comments:
Cue the trolls.
Psst...BCL...I've seen your picture and I wouldn't be calling anyone a sissy if I were you. You are not exactly the Alpha male type.
Oh I see,
the Libs have been running scared, sitting on their hands,
and a bill comes along that's no confidence and suddenly you all are acting tough.
LOL.
"C'mon, let me attem, let me attem" (as Dion says to his foe safely behind the large plate of plexi glass).
Waaay too funny.
What if there is no crime bill before an election?
Then a whole session of Parliament is wasted.
The reason it is not a confidence vote is because the Conservatives know they could not win an election on the issue, especially given their low standing in the polls tight now.
After abstaining from the mini-budget vote, the Liberals are hardly in a position to talk tough on this one.
Raging Ranter: This isn't about Liberals. It is about Conservatives and how, after first loudly proclaiming that everything in the Throne Speech would be a matter of Confidence, they have now flip-flopped. I already told you why in an earlier post: if they lose a confidence vote on the matter they would have to fight an election on the issue, an election which would not likely be successful for them.
Just rememember the Harper party credo: It's not a flip-flop if you refuse to acknowledge your position was ever any different than it is now.
It's common for politicians to flip-flop, of course, particularly when moving from opposition to government. Examples abound of Liberal and NDP governments doing it. What makes Harper unique is in his bald-faced refusal to ever say, "Yes I know I said ...., but I had to change my position because ....." so people can either accept his explanation and move on, or call it bullshit and hold him accountable.
At least when you explain the reasons for your flip-flop, your apologists aren't left looking like a bunch of blithering idiots as so frequently happens to Harper's.
Psst...BCL...I've seen your picture and I wouldn't be calling anyone a sissy if I were you. You are not exactly the Alpha male type.
Why. You. Bitch.
That kind of cattiness is really effeminate, you know.
BCL, you forgot to post "the Fabulous Chicken" image. I love that one.
At least when you explain the reasons for your flip-flop, your apologists aren't left looking like a bunch of blithering idiots as so frequently happens to Harper's.
Lucky for Harper, his minions behave the same way when it comes to their own contradictions. Posts get scrubbed and everyone agrees not to talk about it anymore.
Canceling the gun registry was in last month's throne speech? I must have missed that part.
And yes, you're correct. This is NOT the issue the Conservatives want to fall on. It would be handing the Liberals a gift. The gun registry, much like Kyoto, still enjoys almost mythical support among Canadians, despite the obvious impossibility of it's stated objectives.
As for "this isn't about the Liberals," neither you nor I get to decide whom this is about. That doesn't change the fact that any sabre-rattling by the Liberals on this one will make Dion look like a fool. Oh wait....
I agree. Everybody knows somebody who owns a firearm. They know they aren't criminals, they know they aren't a danger to society. They know that 30+ years of demonizing gun owners has been useless. More criminals have more guns now than ever, and are much more apt to use them.
Thanks for the tip; I'll make sure to encourage my MP to change it to a confidence vote.
Post a Comment