Jerks

Tonight I noticed this comment to the Western Standard story about Harper's speech:

"Her Excellency". Makes me want to vomit. Makes me want to pick up and move my family. Might as well call her "Your Majesty". Think she'll shake a few chicken bones to figure out what to do?

Then I saw this post, titled:

Do you tink itz izzy being da oppazishun?

And this one titled

Do you t’ink it’s easy to deliver a tape to the media?

And then there was this knee-slapper:

"Do you tink it's izzy to make a webcam?

These are the people who think their guy should run the country. Sorta makes you throw up in your mouth a little bit, doesn't it.
UPDATE: Some of the commenters to this post obviously don't get my point. The people who said these things are jerks not because of what they said but because of how they said it -- they think its funny to insult Michaelle Jean's Haitian heritage and to sneer at a French accent.
Sigh.

Harper reminds me of McCain

I knew there was someone Harper reminded me of and now I've got it -- Stephen Harper reminds me of John McCain.
You remember how Obama was trying to talk about what he would DO differently from McCain (health care, get out of Iraq, economic leadership) while John McCain and Sarah Palin were attacking Obama for what they said he WAS (terrorist sympathizer! socialist! celebrity!?
Well, now Harper is doing the same thing.
Canadians aren't supposed to trust Dion because he's a separatist! a traitor! both!
While Dion focused on what the Coalition would DO.
Madame Governor-General, let Parliament vote!

Its the economy, stupid

Say it loud, say it proud -- "It's the economy, stupid".
I'm afraid this basic truth is getting lost in all the rhetoric about separatists and socialists and take-overs and Governors General and proroging and all this inside baseball parliamentary play-by-play.
It's the economy, stupid.
This is why Canada needs the Coalition Government -- Harper's Conservatives were unwilling and unable to do anything t0 help the economy or save jobs. Dion and Layton have a plan and are ready to implement it.
It's the economy, stupid.
Regardless of why the Coalition formed, it doesn't matter anymore. The value of the Coalition to Canada is what it can do for the economy.
Because its the economy, stupid.
The Canadian Labour Congress has it right:

So did I

My Blahg has a post up titled "I did":

Conservatives need to stop parroting the line that nobody voted for a Liberal, NDP, Bloc coalition government during our last election. That is not true. On October 14th, 2008, I voted for a Liberal, NDP, Bloc coalition government if the Conservatives were held to another minority.

And so did I!

Good things

The Georgia Straight lists the good things that would happen when the Canadian Coalition is running the circus:

• A Liberal-NDP coalition government would stop the senseless appeal of B.C. Supreme Court Justice Ian Pitfield’s decision that allowed Vancouver’s supervised-injection site to remain open.
• Canada might get a prime minister who won’t boycott an international AIDS conference in his own country and who doesn't reject the wisdom of scientists on issues ranging from climate change to drug treatment.
• Canada would have a prime minister who recognizes the urgency of climate change and who would give responsible instructions to Canada’s negotiating team at the crucial UN climate conference that begins in Copenhagen this November.
• There would be less spending on the military and more spending on the arts, which wouldn't be treated as a "niche issue" by the government.
• Canadians could feel confident that the military mission in Afghanistan wouldn’t continue after 2011.
• A Liberal-NDP coalition government would appoint more progressive judges to the Supreme Court of Canada and to superior courts in the provinces.
• There would be a reduced chance of the Canadian government extraditing Marc Emery to the United States, where he would rot in jail for the rest of his life for selling marijuana seeds over the Internet.
• The court challenges program would be reinstated, resulting in a more level playing field for disadvantaged groups. Canada might even get a national daycare program if Harper is bounced out of office.
• A federal stem-cell advisory panel wouldn’t be stacked with opponents of embryonic stem-cell research, which would be a relief to those who suffer from Type 1 diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, and other debilitating conditions.
• Stockwell Day would no longer be a senior cabinet minister, and whoever is in cabinet will no longer be muzzled and have their communications and speeches vetted by the prime minister's office.
• Canada might finally approve a UN resolution regarding indigenous rights.
• Canada would no longer be ruled by a control freak who has exerted greater political control over the RCMP, which poses a threat to Canadian civil liberties.

Wirewalking

Over at Dymaxion World, commenter Steve Muhlberger says

Boy this is fun. Like the whole country wirewalking without a net.

But pretty soon, like tomorrow, we have to reassure the country that, yes, it is is safe and, yes, the Coalition will be working to help them out and, yes, they will be listening to what Canadians want.
I was very glad to see an announcement made about an economic stimulus package that actually would help people.
And about the four wise men.
Now, announce a cross-country listening tour.
And get some ads up...

Knives out

The Maple Syrup Coalition isn't even formally announced yet and the knives are out for Harper. He is going to experience the reality of Conservative loyalty, AKA "those who live by the sword..."

The Maple Syrup Revolution

Skdadl calls this the Maple Syrup Revolution.
So we could call the Conservative exit "sugaring off"?

Absolutely correct

Curiosity Cat says it's time to clear the air:

. . . if Ignatieff or Rae or Lebanc oppose any reasonable coalition terms which will allow a progressive government to replace the Tories next week, then they will not – repeat not – become leader of the Liberal Party. Liberals will rise up in wrath against any candidate who spoils this chance to install a government which will work with the other two opposition parties to protect Canadians against the gathering storm of the recession.

They're baaaak!

NDP, Liberals reach deal to topple minority Tory government
Wow! I guess they'll just be waiting now for a chance to vote.
I've been reading comments to the effect that Alberta should not interpret this as an attempt by Quebec and Ontario to reassert themselves and to dictate the national agenda again.
And basically I would agree, in that the regional component, so far at least, has not been a deciding factor in the drama of the last few days.
But I wonder if there might turn out to be a some truth to it, in this sense:
A few weeks ago, Ontario was deeply, deeply upset when they became a "have-not" province in terms of Canadian equalization formulas. To those of us who live in provinces whose economies ebb and flow, the degree of angst we heard from Ontario was surprising. Radio hosts were babbling, and op-ed writers were outraged -- it seemed like Ontario thought the sky was falling, and the rightful and natural order of the universe had been overturned.
So it was in this context that Harper produced his contemptuous, insulting, do-nothing economic statement, demonstrating he could care less about Central Canada's economic troubles. And thus he made it much, much easier for Ontario and Quebec to support the return of the Liberals to power.

They aren't impressed

Over at Macleans blog there is a post by Aaron Wherry titled Eulogy for a government? and the first comment is this one:

I donated 1000 dollars to the Conservative Party of Canada this year, and 400 to my local campaign.
What has transpired in the last 72 hours has absolutely disgusted and disillusioned me. At the first Conservative Party Convention (in what seems like a lifetime ago), we were told, and told each other that we would do it better than the other guys. Accountable government, no tricks, no slimy games, just good governance and a United Right.
We, the grassroots of the CPoC have told ourselves that the compromises in policy were simply a temporary condition necessary to achieve power.
We the grassroots of the CPoC told ourselves that the misgivings of this government in its campaign spending, were simply trumped up allegations, created by vengeful officials at elections Canada and members of the left wing media.
We the grassroots of the CPoC turned a blind eye when government grew under Harper, not shrank as promised.
We of the grassroots watched with awe as the facade finally came crashing down this thursday, and the people we placed in power, were exposed as lying, conniving, inept opportunists, just as bad as the people we removed from power 3 years ago.
I will never donate or volunteer on a campaign so long as Stephen Harper is the leader of the Conservative Party.

Ouch!

Thanks, Steve

If there is one thing which threatens a continuation of the PC-Reform coalition government, it is a Liberal-NDP coalition government.
Because more Canadians actually voted for the Liberals and NDP than for the PC-Reform.
So what is the first thing the new Harper minority government does?
Introduce a so-called economic plan so inadequate, callous, cynical and ideologically rigid that the Liberals and the NDP are now on the brink of creating a coalition government.
Thanks, Steve -- there was no way these folks were going to get together otherwise!
The Conservatives made the classic mistake of thinking that the other parties were just like them -- short-sighted, partisan, and incapable of taking any action that would serve the best interests of the country rather than the party. Now the Cons are gobsmacked - and it couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch.
Here's the buzz tonight -- Far and Wide writes:

There will either be more concessions from the Conservatives, namely a serious stimulus package, or we will see a coalition government that introduces exactly that. Despite the rather feeble spin attempts by Conservatives and their reeling supporters, you've already lost, it's just a matter of who makes the ultimate call.

Glen writes:

For a man who, until recently, made everything into a confidence motion to strong-arm his way through Parliament, this has to be one of the most humiliating and cowardly things he's ever done.

Aaron writes:

There are 305 elected members in the House of Commons. In our democracy, you either find the support of more than half of those elected representatives to form a government and pass legislation or you do not and are defeated. There is not a lot of ambiguity about that.
You have to work with the other parties in a minority. Harper chose not to. What I find bizarre about all this is: the Conservatives seem surprised.

WesternGrit writes

It will get ugly, but we need to fight back.
67% of the Country didn't vote Conservative, and now they are ALL uniting together to overthrow Harper who is only a small angry minority. Canadians are speaking through their MPs - which is the way a Parliamentary democracy works.
This is not the American Republic - where the President rules... The elected MPs ARE THE PEOPLE, and they are speaking.

Dawg writes

By forcing a coalition dialogue to happen, Harper let the genie out of the bottle. Coalition talk has its own momentum. It takes a major event to bring feuding parties into alignment. A threat to their survival is one of those events that can trigger new ways of thinking. Now anything is possible. A paradigm shift is taking place right before our eyes.
The potential here is simply enormous--as are the risks.

Yappa sums it up:

Pressured by the IMF, OECD, APEC, G7 and G20, among others, to join the rest of the world's wealthy countries in addressing the economic meltdown, and facing increasing domestic pressure to ease the recession, the PM attempted a risky ploy: an economic statement that combined a refusal to create a stimulus package with an unrelated announcement that he was cutting all funding to the country's political parties, thus bankrupting every party but his own.
The ploy was evidently intended to tie the hands of Canada's other political parties by making opposition seem self-interested.
Counting on the Official Opposition to be ineffective until they select a new leader, expected in May of 2009, the Prime Minister underestimated the will of all opposition parties to stand up to him.
It can now be seen that the PM made a grave tactical error. Canadians are already suffering from the recession, still in its first quarter, and quickly turned on a government that refuses to lift a hand to help them. The opposition speaks for all its constituents when it says that the government must fall and a coalition must take its place. The man who staged a successful hostile takeover of one of Canada's founding parties, a man long known as one of Canada's craftiest politicos, is poised to be toppled.

Ian Welsh writing at POGGE looks at the long view:

Harper's strength last election was primarily in two places: the praires and non-urban southern Ontario. Oil is going to drop below 50 dollars soon, when it does the oil sands in Alberta are going to become unprofitable and the good times in Harper's western base will end. Likewise, southern Ontario has been taking it on the chin for sometime, and no matter what happens to Detroit, that's not going to end. While Alberta will vote Conservative no matter how bad things get, the rest of the prairies are not nearly so dedicated, and southern Ontario might well remember that the Liberal party was much better for them than the Conservatives, who have refused to do anything meaningful to help Canadian manufacturing.
If the Liberals and NDP decide to do this, then, they have to be in it for the long term—they need to expect to govern for at least four years. An election in the middle of the recession will doom then, they have to put in place policies to get through the recession and out the other side, or they will be slaughtered.
If they are willing to work together, are willing to commit to stick this out for four years, then they should grasp the nettle and defeat the Tories.

How stupid does Harper think we are?

Harper thinks that he can get us to focus on the party funding issue, so nobody will notice that he doesn't know what is he doing when it comes to the economy.
Well, its not going to work. We actually can walk and chew gum at the same time, and we know when we're being flim-flammed:

The true horror wasn’t in the let’s-pretend numbers contained in the much-dreaded fiscal update from Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. Those were fluffed to give the delusion of deficit-free, rising-revenue fiscal stability, subject to so much imminent change as to be almost meaningless.
It’s the nightmarish aftershock from a sneaky, ill-timed, irresponsible government move to eliminate the $1.95 annual per-vote public subsidy to political parties which, given the united lineup of opposition parties that instantly formed Thursday, sets up Canada for another federal election.

And NabWeekly makes a good point -- the people who are being penalized by the Cons political funding bait-and-switch plan are the Canadians who did NOT vote Conservative in the election:

Isn’t it just like the Conservative government to use the world’s and Canada’s financial crisis to undermine Canadians who didn’t vote Conservative but voted Liberal, NDP, and the Bloq . . .When you tally up the Canadians who didn’t vote for Conservatives in my opinion tells us the majority of Canadians didn’t want a Harper government. Taking away funding to other political parties that Canadians taxpayer money goes towards is just a fiscal farce to gain strength in the Conservative Party for fear of his defeat.

Iggy!

Yes, I agree with what Steve says.
I can't pretend to have studied Michael Ignatieff as much as Steve has.
But I do believe that Ignatieff will be the leader that Canada needs -- particularly now when the 2009 Depression will give the Conservatives the excuse to try to jettison our important social programs.
Ignatieff will be able to convince Canadians to vote for him because he will articulate a vision for Canada and engage Canadians to support it. Ignatieff can, I think, "close the deal" with Canada.
It was this basic task, I am sorry to say, that Stephane Dion never was able to achieve.
I was one of those who believed two years ago that Michael Ignatieff didn't deserve the leadership of the Liberal party because he hadn't worked hard enough or long enough for it. Now, I believe, he has. He has proven his capacity to grow, and this has enhanced his ability to lead.
I was also one of those who questioned Iggy's judgment in supporting the Iraq war. But as Steve explains it:

. . . Unlike the neocons, unlike Harper, Ignatieff had INTIMATE understanding of Iraq, he knew the Kurds and Shia, he worked within the human rights horror that was the Saddam regime. Ignatieff's view started with a consideration of human rights abuse, it wasn't about oil or some misguided militarism, so we can rightly look at his perspective in a different light. Was Ignatieff right in his view? Obviously not, from my point of view, but that rejection also allows for a consideration as to the thinking, there was actually a noble thought process at the core, even if misguided. When Ignatieff admits a mistake, I take him at his word, and we move forward.

Yes, I agree.
So now Scott can add me to his list of Ignatieff supporters: Confessions Of A Liberal Mind, Far and Wide, Gauntlet.ca, Keith Torrie Today, Life In Moderation, Pierre Trudeau Is My Homeboy, Queer-Liberal, Random Noise, The Progressive Right, VijaySappani.com, A BCer in Toronto.
I'm in good company!

OK, then, let's change political party funding!

So the Cons are trying to undermine Canadian democracy and screw the opposition parties at the same time? Sounds like another Ryan Sparrow Special to me.
Maybe the Cons think they can force another election because they just don't know what to do about the Canadian economy. And before they have to battle the resurgent Liberals under Michael Ignatieff.
I think the opposition parties should call their bluff -- they should bring in a private members bill to rescind the 2003 Act which restricted corporate and union donations to parties in exchange for the public financing formula.
And they should pass it, quick.
After all, the Conservatives should welcome this, shouldn't they? It would save the taxpayers soooo much money!