Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Incoming!


38 comments:

CanadianSense said...

It's an outlier!

Ti-Guy said...

Fuck. Didn't get here soon enough and now CanadianSense has soiled the thread with his pre-climactic moistness.

Ew.

Notice, BCL, how the pollsters no longer report the undecided?

CanadianSense said...

Tigy

unlike you, others don't log onto multiple online handles to create traffic and consensus.

Best of luck with Peter Donolo.

Let's hope he does not change anything. Everything is going great!

Big Winnie said...

CS: I hope the CONs keep up with the scandals...You're right! Everything is going great!

How's that for "Situational Awareness"

Gayle said...

Oh my god. It's all over!!!!!

I guess Harper will be pulling the plug any time now. Or not.

FrankD said...

Outgoing! Ian Davey

Ti-Guy said...

I guess Harper will be pulling the plug any time now.

He just may. I wouldn't put it past him.

And the clapping seals in the Conservative rank-and-file will only cheer louder, of course.

Ti-Guy said...

unlike you, others don't log onto multiple online handles to create traffic and consensus.

Are you accusing me of sock-puppeting?

Now I KNOW you're a liar. Ha ha ha!

CanadianSense said...

Wrong TI-guy I don't want an election until 3 years!

(It will give your party a chance to hold a real leadership race this time)

nice try, most of us want opposition to do their job and drop the silly games.

Gayle said...

TG I would not put it past him either, though I am curious about how the media will react given their take on Ignatieff's stated desire to defeat the government. No way any election call now is anything but opportunism.

I already know the CPC supporters will buy the excuse.

austin said...

Gayle- If Harper calls an election it's opportunism but if Iggy calls one it's a good decision?

Ti-Guy said...

Oakville Crackpot:

Wrong TI-guy I don't want an election until 3 years!

I've already established you're a liar, so I don't care what you say. I'm sure if Harper called an election tomorrow, you'd cheer him on.

Gayle:

...though I am curious about how the media will react given their take on Ignatieff's stated desire to defeat the government.

Same as they did last year. They will simply start covering the polling and the campaign ads and simply ignore the big question. They're very good at that and despite all their blogging and Twittering NEVER respond to questions that make them uncomfortable with anything other than outrage at the impertinence or with withering condescension. With one or two exceptions...

Ti-Guy said...

Gayle- If Harper calls an election it's opportunism but if Iggy calls one it's a good decision?

Ignatieff can't call an election. Only Harper can by asking the GG to dissolve Parliament...for any damn reason he pleases, apparently.

Ti-Guy said...

Sorry...responded for Gayle.

austin said...

Alright then Ti, If Iggy succeeds with the help of the other parties in voting no-confidence and there by triggers an election will it be as bad as if Harper just calls one?

You really took the wind out of my sails on this one.

Gene Rayburn said...

He he Oakville Crackpot... guess the Ignawanker got a new name. Just follow the tissues to find him.

Ti-Guy said...

If Iggy succeeds with the help of the other parties in voting no-confidence and there by triggers an election will it be as bad as if Harper just calls one?

In our system, the PM and his Cabinet can *only* govern with the confidence of the House. If he loses it, he has no right to continue governing. That's how it works, fundamentally. As for the reasons for doing so...well, I'm sure there would be hundreds...most substantives, some opportunistic. But we are talking about three opposition parties here, not just one person.

The ability of the PM to call an election for any reason has long been condemned as opportunistic...by none other than Harper himself, which is why he brought in legislation to fix an election date. Which he promptly ignored at the first opportunity.

If Harper had the ability to be candid he himself would admit that such an action would opportunistic.

What I'm more concerned about is that his hypocritical sycophantic supporters would not punish him for doing so, as they, as "principles Conservatives" would be expected to.

Gayle said...

Feel free to respond for me anytime TG.
Austin, you seem to be suggesting I think Ignatieff's decision to try and force an election had nothing to do with opportunism. I am not sure why you would jump to such a conclusion. Unlike some people, like you maybe, I don't see things as black and white as "my guy good. Your guy bad". I actually recognize hypocrisy and try to avoid it.

My comment was based on the facr Ignatieff was widely criticized for opportunism when he tried to force an election. I am just wondering whether those same people would be consistent should Harper force an election.

austin said...

So whats the problem if Harper votes no-confidence in himself again?

Gayle said...

Or, in other words, what TG said.

austin said...

Oh I miss read what you said then Gayle, my apologies.

Gayle said...

It's opportunistic austin. How did you miss that?

Did you also miss it when he declared it was dangerous to plunge the country into an election during a fragile economic recovery?

Gayle said...

Accepted. Disregard my last post. I would delete but can't figure out how to do thay from my Blackberry.

austin said...

When I think of it though I am not sure it would be opportunistic for Iggy to call an election, unless of course political suicide is an opportunity.

Gayle said...

In fact, I think it was the CPC who claimed opportunism. The media condemned him for having no reason to go to the polls, all of which played a huge role in the declining numbers.

austin said...

"In fact, I think it was the CPC who claimed opportunism."

Well I guess the kettle really got told.

Ti-Guy said...

So whats the problem if Harper votes no-confidence in himself again?

Are you interested in a serious discussion or are you just wasting time?

Words have meaning you know. Ignatieff can't call an election and Harper doesn't vote non-confidence in himself if he asks the GG to dissolve Parliament. If we take his stated reason (ie. lie) for dropping the writ last year, he explained that it was because Parliament had become "dysfunctional." Due to the actions of his own caucus of course, but I digress...

CanadianSense said...

Ti-guy you have established as the lead bedwetter in the smear brigade you don't care about what the Polls say.

We don't want an election. Sux to be you.

I don't want an election the CPC won, time for the children in opposition to do the math and grow up.
Introduce Bills in opposition days debate the liberal ideas let the HOC deal with the Liberal platform, your coalition partners are just waiting for your brilliant plans!

Fred said...

"The ability of the PM to call an election for any reason "

Actually, in our system, the PM can't and doesn't call any elections.

He or she goes to the GG, says I have lost the confidence of the House and requests it.

The GG doesn't have to accede to the request. Maybe there is viable, non- separatist coalition available and ready to govern.

Maybe. The GG is supposed to do what is best for the people, not the Government or the Crown

Ti-Guy said...

Ti-guy you have established as the lead bedwetter in the smear brigade you don't care about what the Polls say.

We don't want an election. Sux to be you.

I don't want an election the CPC won, time for the children in opposition to do the math and grow up.
Introduce Bills in opposition days debate the liberal ideas let the HOC deal with the Liberal platform, your coalition partners are just waiting for your brilliant plans!


This is illegible, Crackpipe. Correct and re-submit.

RuralSandi said...

Hmmm...Ti Guy, methinks CanadianSense overuses the bedwetter thing - must have a problem with it himself or he wouldn't talk about it so much.

If Harper called an election - there are neverending tapes of him saying Canadians don't want an election. Every speech he could.

Ti-Guy said...

methinks CanadianSense overuses the bedwetter

It's the closest thing to a swear word he'll allow himself. He's very virtuous. Or virginal.

Well, delicate, anyway.

Jon Pertwee said...

What would Freud say about Oakville Crackpot?

Ti-Guy said...

Freud was a sexist and most of his work was unscientific.

Modern psychology/psychiatry has to be applied here.

Now, what is significant with CanadianSense is not really his behaviour here, but the fact that he's acting out at many different Liberal blogs. His profile gives a few clues...all over the map.

Provisional diagnosis: Classic case of coo-coo bananacus.

austin said...

All right Ti, I'll pick serious discussion. I think only a partisan person would hold something like calling an election against any politican regardless of what they said before. If we as citizens did not vote for a party because they were opportunistic or they play political games, nobody would ever vote. That is the whole nature of politics, each party believes they are what is best for this country so if they did not try to get into power or get a majority then they are not doing what is best for the country are they?

Gayle said...

I think the problem with CS is that he only reads every second word. That explains why he so badly mischaracterizes the posts he is responding to, and why those responses make no sense.

Steve Bloom said...

Check out this alarming article, bcl. If true, the boreal forest is pretty much toast. As recently as last spring, forestry officials were talking big about being able to contain the problem. The amusingly-named Nojack is already pretty far east. Why isn't this headline news in the big papers?

Gene Rayburn said...

CS doesn't rant, he's a verbal masturbator. Wanking all over any liberal blog no matter the topic, he has to have his ignatieff fetish. His blog speaks depths about his issues; and lack of artistic and aesthetic skills.