Great line of the day

From Arianna Huffington:

When you look at the elements that were crucial to the creation of each of these debacles [Iraq, Fannie Mae, Citigroup, Madoff] it's amazing how much in common they all have. And not just in how they began but in how they ended: with those responsible being amazed at what happened, because...who could have known? Well, to paraphrase James Inhofe, I'm amazed at the amazement.
In fact, when historians look for a name that sums up the Bush II years, they could do worse than calling them The 'Who Could Have Known?' Era.

Emphasis mine.

Its been a long time since elementary school

The last time I bothered to think about the Canadian "head of state" was in about Grade 6.
All this tut-tutting aboutwoefully ignorant Canadians is silly. We know what's important.
In this survey, 90 per cent knew that the Governor General can turn down a Prime Minister asking for a new election. Now, that's important. But as for the other questions, meh!
Our head of state technically is still the Queen, but in reality it is our Prime Minister.
And as for how our government can be described, well, technically it is a "constitutional monarchy" but in reality its a parliamentary democracy.
And as for whether we elect our prime minister, well, of course we do -- that's why we have political parties. Canadians have been told for a century now to vote for the party, not the person, and the vast majority of the time that is exactly what we do. Our last election was all about Mr. Sweater-Vest vs Mr. Green Shift.

Another thousand cuts

Well, so much for the packaged sliced meat business in Canada -- after the Maple Leaf experience, I would have thought the other companies would have been compulsive about their equipment cleaning processes, but maybe I thought wrong. Now lets see if Gerry Ritz can come up with a few more jokes.

Great line of the day

Steve has a great post up about how the Canadian public mostly hates the idea of having a coalition government and Liberals had better deal with this reality. And in the Comments, Issachar points out another lesson that the Liberals have now had to learn:

Having your funding entirely dependent on the Conservatives NEVER getting a majority is a very bad idea for the Liberal party.

Monster crash

I was reading this story, and this story, and this story -- and then I finally found this, for a little comic relief:

The cu-cu-cu bird

And from across this great province we call Saskatchewan, we hear once again the cry of the cu-cu-cu bird -- "C-C-C-Christ, its c-c-c-cold here!"

Things that make you say "Hmmm"

From the Globe and Mail story globeandmail.com: How high-risk mortgages crept north:

Former Triad chief executive officer Mark Tonnesen, who spearheaded his company's aborted push into Canada, said the proliferation of high-risk mortgages could have been mitigated if Ottawa had been more watchful.

Yeah -- or if all those trustworthy, mature, serious, self-regulating, responsible mortgage companies hadn't been so stupid and irresponsible and greedy!
Of course, everything that goes wrong is always the government's fault, isn't it, because private business is practically perfect in every way and all those dumb civil servants can't manage their way out of a paper bag and nobody ever would have believed....
Oh, I guess I need another cup of coffee...

Great line of the day

From Paul Wells:

From a springtime of committee chaos to a summer of ultimatums to a fall election, a December crisis, a tasty prorogue-y holiday feast, and the near certainty of another New Year psychodrama. I could swear there was a pattern in there. Blame the opposition if you like, but what olive branch did the PM hold out that they refused? Stephen Harper spent his whole adult life complaining that the state was no good for anything. Now, under him, it is so. Consistency at last.

Emphasis mine.
And are we finally seeing the end of the media myth about how smart, disciplined and competent Stephen Harper is?

Our Liberal leader

Some photos of Iggy from the Ignatieff photostream:


At the 2007 Toronto Pride parade


Afghanistan


In St. Catherines, Feb 08


Chrysler Tour, March 2008


International Women's Day breakfast


BBQ with Protective Services - June 1, 2008


At the National Gallery




Etobicoke-Lakeshore Summerfest 2008




At the leadership launch

Respect

Thousands of people lined the highway of heroes today as the three soldiers came home:


Aaron Harris Toronto Star


Kevin Van Paassen, The Globe and Mail

From the Toronto Star story:

Heavily bundled mourners, some waving flags and some wearing red hats, scarves or coats, lined both sides of the street outside the base.
"I wanted to play `Going Home' but the pipes froze. I couldn't even feel my fingers on the holes," said Dan Irvine, 49, a former military man from Napanee who took his bagpipes to the procession . . .
The convoy reached Cobourg at about 4:15 p.m. There, on the Ontario St. bridge, stood a shivering crowd of perhaps 200, including 73-year-old Korean War veteran Dave Galbraith, who arrived with five friends. . . . As the hearses passed, some people took their hats off despite the wind and heavy snow.
The motorcade passed Oshawa around 5 p.m. People had begun arriving on local bridges more three hours earlier. Korea veteran Danny Mann, 74, wore medals and a Royal Canadian Dragoons beret.
. . .
"The public response to the casualties, I think, has been quite extraordinary," said Canadian military historian Jack Granatstein.
"I have never seen anything in my life like the crowds that line Highway 401," he said.

Now for something completely different

For more than 60 years, artist Roy Doty has been drawing an annual Christmas card -- all different, all humorous, all terrific. Check them out.

Concern trolls at the National Post

So now the National Post is trying to smear Ignatieff by describing his nomination as interim leader as an "unseemly lunge at power".
Oh, isn't it just so wonderful to see the folks at the National Post so damned concerned for the purity of the Liberal party?
The way I see it, we Liberals have a choice -- at the end of January, when Parliament resumes, we can have in place to deal with Harper either a caretaker leader without authority or stature, or a fresh and highly respected leader who is committed to revitalizing the party.
Which do you think the National Post would prefer?

I don't want to start a fight, but

This doesn't make sense:
Last week, we didn't want a vote. We were in favour of the Coalition being named as the government without a general election, because the rules of Parliament said that this could be done.
This week, some do want a vote. Some now seem to be opposed to Michael Ignatieff being named as interim leader without an election by the whole membership, even though the rules of the Party apparently do not even allow for such a vote to be held.
Basically, I think it comes down to this -- if the rules have been followed, then the result is legitimate.
Or am I describing this wrong?

Have the caucus meet in public

I'm tired of hearing about how awful it would be for the Liberal party to make Michael Ignatieff its interim leader "behind closed doors". OK, so open the doors.
Let the Liberal executive and the Liberal caucus meet on Wednesday in public -- there are lots of large meeting rooms in Ottawa that are easily set up for TV and radio broadcast, with translation facilities. Let Ignatieff and Rae both speak, then hold a vote by ballot.
The networks would love it and so would the public.

The path between

I think Iggy is getting it right.



Today in CTV's Question Period, Michael Ignatieff provided a sensible -- ie, Liberal! - - frame for the next several weeks, a path between belligerence and withdrawal.
I don't have a transcript of what he said, but here's a few of my notes:

"Coalition if necessary but not necessarily coalition" . . . "it is important to have the option . . . to spare us another national election" . . . but "Canadians would not forgive a party" which would not even look at the budget before declaring it would defeat the government.

He stressed where the responsibility for the crisis lies -- with Harper:

"We're in a crisis caused by a prime minister behaving irresponsibly"

But he also talked about the importance of Liberals working to re-build the national unity which Harper has destroyed:

"We need to bridge some of the gaps . . . the key issue is the national interest, the economic interest of Canadians . . . we need to read the budget brief but if [Harper] fails to produce a budget in the national interest, he will go down"

The country is going to need a national unity message -- reading Devo's description of the Halifax Conservative rally yesterday it is upsetting to realize how divisive this has become:

* Conservatives are spitting mad and absolutely hate Liberals, New Democrats and, especially, "the separatists". . .
. . .
* I am a communist and a sore loser, not to mention any number of other things that I would prefer not to repeat here...maybe it was my 'STOP HARPER' button;
* irate well-dressed middle-aged gentleman . . . between expletives and name calling, told me that Bloc MPs are not legitimate members of the House of Commons and, therefore, incapable of forming a coalition;
. . .
* Canada is more divided today than it has ever been at any time in my life.

There has to be a message of unity for the country to grasp, and the country will respond, I think, if this message comes from Ignatieff.
Jeff highlights today's Toronto Star poll showing how people would vote with a change of Liberal leadership:

Now -- with Rae -- with Ignatieff
Conservatives: 42% -- 41% -- 38%
Liberals: 22% -- 26% -- 33%
NDP: 18% -- 15% -- 13%
Bloc: 10% -- 10% -- 10%
Green: 7% -- 6% -- 6%

I think it is striking that only with Ignatieff are the Liberals even close to the Conservative numbers -- close enough to fight an election on, I think, if that's what we need to do at the end of January.