Tuesday, May 31, 2011

= BOOM!!!

... Tory Majority + NDP opposition.

Mark my words.

Although maybe me and my wife can load up our Cavalier and make a dash for the The Free Republic of British Columbia, if the Trans Canada hasn't been blockaded by then. Kill me if we run out of gas in Mushaboo, though, or in Calgary where they haven't mastered the concept of a two-way street. And d'you know how many prairie place names, like "Winnipeg" for example, were originally First Nation's words meaning "frozen tundra" or "ain't nothing here but blackflies"?  Many, many of them.

On the other hand, maybe we could stay put and join the new nation of Que-ntario, where we pay for their social programs and in turn get physical access to their blonde chicks, especially Mitsou. My wife wouldn't be too happy with that, but apparently they've also got cheese.

In any case, I'm planning for major changes ahead. These two are like kids playing with dynamite. They have no clue.  Bad shit is on the way.  Prepare to duck.

16 comments:

bionicliberal said...

OMG you said something that could be interpreted as "not nice" about the NDP. Prepare to be called a right-wiwng fascist by the barking dogs of the NDP blogmire.

leftdog said...

BCLSB ... I think your prediction is likely to be proven accurate. I think the next Parliament is going to look like a firefight. While I don't anticipate Taiwan style parliamentary fist fights on the Chamber floor, I think it is going to be loud and vicious.

The ugliest part likely won' be anything ideological, it will be 'age' based. Middle aged pot bellied old Tory MP's simply can't tolerate the new 'youth' demographic that sits in Opposition now.

I think you are dead on. 'BOOM!!!" may well be an understatement.

BigRed said...

Leftdog again leaves something to be desired in his analysis. For one, I believe the NDP pledge to be civil goes out the window the minute the Cons start cutting without consulting the public-sector unions. That will be a major flashpoint. To the idea that age will play a role, I have a feeling that it will be more about maturity. Age will be the vehicle for the insults, but if Dussault gets up in question period and asks an informed question or speaks on a bill in a heavily informed way, there will be respect. After all, the Cons have young guns as well. Andrew Scheer, possible next speaker of the house, is 32, and has been in the house since he was 26. James Moore has been there since 24.

Fred said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Robert McClelland said...

Prepare to be called a right-wiwng fascist by the barking dogs of the NDP blogmire.

Why would we do that. The liberal obsession with a hypothetical referendum on an issue that's already been rejected twice is nothing more than a source of amusement to us and self destructive for the Liberal Party.

The Mound of Sound said...

Leftdog really must stop drinking from the bowl that flushes. Firefight in the Commons? We now have one man rule and that's done by fiat, not by parliamentary procedure. He obviously can't grasp the notion that political skills don't come from a ballot box but from years of experience. The youth demographic in the NDP ranks will be as effective as hecklers ever are.

As for moving to BC, best make up your mind on that before we close the passes. There's a serious amount of unrest building over the Enbridge pipeline/Kitimat supertanker port initiative. There will be civil disobedience and likely violence on a scale not familiar to Canadians. This has the potential to be a very pivotal moment for British Columbians.

Tof KW said...

Robert McClelland said...
Why would we do that. The liberal obsession with a hypothetical referendum on an issue that's already been rejected twice is nothing more than a source of amusement to us and self destructive for the Liberal Party.

You know, I myself would be very amused at the thought of both the Harper Conservatives & the Layton NDP having to deal with a PQ government and rising separatist sentiments. Neither have had to worry about Quebec before. And unless Charest wins a miracle re-election, they more than likely will have to.

I would be amused, that is, except this has the potential to tear-up this nation, just like the 1992-95 period.

Robert, your partisan posts can't cover up the fact that the NDP is playing with fire here, just like Mulroney with his Quebec nationalists in cabinet. For the sake of your party, you better pray the PQ doesn't win.

Frankly I don't hold much hope of Firewall Harper defending confederation. He'd be just as happy if the provinces were all just a loose federation, with a combined army to send out on US-lead misadventures.

As for the NDP, I REALLY wonder now where exactly they stand on Canadian unity. Screwing over the Clarity Act tells me they don't take it very seriously. And Robert's comments here just reinforce that. It's all a big joke to bash the Liberals some more, isn't it?

Trust me, if Quebec flairs up again, you and the NDP will not be laughing. I guarantee that.

The Mound of Sound said...

Tof KW - that's spot on.

sharonapple88 said...

We're going to bumble our way into another round of Constitutional talks, aren't we. At least with Trudeau and Mulroney, they went into this willingly, not via a series of unfortunate events.

Robert McClelland said...

That's it TofKW, doubledown on the hypotheticals.

Tof KW said...

That's it Mr McClelland, play with Quebec nationalists and ignore a very likely PQ win in Quebec next year.

After all, I'm sure Pauline Marois was only kidding about that referendum stuff.

Polyorchnid Octopunch said...

If Ms. Marois goes for it, it will not go well for her, absent some serious fanning of flames from outside of Quebec for shortsighted partisan gain.

Sort of like what the Chronicle-Herald is trying to do with that article.

MgS said...

Harper would quite happily fan the flames of Quebec separatism for two reasons.

First, he has no reason to love Quebec politically - and in fact the history of his political roots shows a great deal of disdain for that province. He wouldn't be unhappy to see them go their own way.

Second, it would give him an excuse to reopen the constitution. In doing so, he could quite easily make some very fundamental changes to things like the Charter of Rights, as well as the distribution of powers at the Federal level (likely concentrating as much as he could in the PMO's hands, no doubt)

... if that doesn't scare you, I suggest pondering on the implications of a "High Treason" motion at the upcoming Con$ policy conference ...

Tory Convention to Consider High Treason Punishment

Can you say "Police State"?

sharonapple88 said...

If Ms. Marois goes for it, it will not go well for her, absent some serious fanning of flames from outside of Quebec for shortsighted partisan gain

Sort of like what the Chronicle-Herald is trying to do with that article.


Wait, so the Chronicle-Herald in Nova Scotia has some sort of partisan bias? The paper tries to take a nonpartisan view of things. Hey, in 2008, they named Elizabeth May the top news maker. And what would they gain by fanning the flames of anything, especailly Quebec separatism?

It's easier to dismiss the stand of something like the National Post, but are other papers like the Montreal Gazette which appear to be expressing a number of concerns on the NDP's stand and double speak on the issue of Quebec. Could they all be out to get the NDP, or are some of the issues they raising valid?

Tof KW said...

Polyorchnid Octopunch said...
If Ms. Marois goes for it, it will not go well for her, absent some serious fanning of flames from outside of Quebec for shortsighted partisan gain.

OK, I've been dealing with predictions that have a greater than 50/50 chance of occurring up to this point, but I admit to Robert McClelland that here we get into real hypothetical situations.

If the PQ wins (the most likely scenario this fall), and Marois follows though with her referendum pledge (which she will if they win, but at a timing that best suits the PQ) - then all bets are off on the final result.

You can't just dismiss it saying support for sovereignty is low and the 'Oui' side is in for a big disappointment. That's true if the vote were held now, but you can bet the farm that the Péquistes will use anything possible to create winning conditions.

The fact that English Canada voted big for Harper, who Quebecers overwhelmingly rejected more than anyone else, will be emphasized by the PQ.

We've seen this in the 1995 referendum. The Péquistes play to emotions, not reason. Any slight on the part of English Canada will be played in heavy rotation by the Quebec media.

They will use anything to divide Quebec from the rest of Canada.

They will pick another confusing, convoluted and long-winded referendum question.

For crying out loud, did everyone forget 1995? The 'Oui' side was just a few votes short of winning. It's why the Clarity Act became law.

The NDP and their supporters can mock me and dismiss my warnings, but they are in grave danger here. A true federalist party would defend Canada, not play footsie with Péquistes for partisan gains.

I remind Dippers who don't know me that I am a former PC, not a Liberal. I witnessed this tear apart my old party, and nearly our country. The NDP can keep playing it both ways and hope events never get bad, but in the long term that's a very risk political strategy.

"History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes" - Mark Twain

Maria said...

Gentlemen is always wear man suit for their special occasions and commitments.