Gimbol's diatribe and screed

This will be how many leaders of the opposition?

Chretien used to love taunting the leader of the opposition on their first day on the job stating that he looked forward to working with the current one and the next one as well.
So how many are we at now?

After Martin there was an intermn, then Dion,then Iggy, now Mulcair.

The NDP seems eager to have their new leader take some swipes and do some verbal damage against the PM, which oddly from what the mule says contridicts that.
But I digress.
Right now I'm not going to predict what Thomas will or will not do, what I will do is comment on what I've observed.
Mulcair (the mule) is similar in his approach to Paul Martin, specifically he's of the Quebec political class. A class of politician that is adept at throwing rivals (even within their own party) under the bus. The mule apparently does not play well with others as demonstrated with his history in the Charest cabinet, a career shortened when Jean decided to move Thomas to a portfolio that the mule felt was a demotion. That caused the mule to take his bat and ball and go home. However, being a career politician in Quebec, the mule was stuck on the horns of a dilema. See about the time he left provincial politics the federal liberal party was going through some difficulties over some misappropriation of progam funding, end of story is that it wasn't a good time to be a liberal politician in Quebec. So he did what any enterprising individual quebec politico does, he looked for an opportunity to co-opt somebody else.
He found the perfect foil in Jack Layton. Think about it, NDP wants to capitalize on the liberals loss of support in Quebec among the fair-weather federalists that could no longer count on a federalist option of the liberals to bring home the bacon. And there being no NDP organization in Quebec to speak of, a federal party ripe for a take over by co-opting where those that see Canada as a power sharing agreement between two nations, will be able to function unencumbered by the party apparatus from the ROC centered in Quebec. The voters in Quebec, sharp enough to see an easy way to power, easily would hand a safe liberal seat to an ex-lib under that NDP banner. They see a takeover of a federalist party run by anglo idealists too blinded by making inroads in Quebec to understand the mistake Mulroney made when he signed Lucien Bouchard's nomination because he wanted a Quebec luetenant that could guarantee the seats..even if it meant making promises he could never deliver. Jack, bless his heart, knew that his time on this earth was limited, and could promise the mule whatever he wanted without worrying about having to deliver, for example say reopening the constitution to give Quebec's political class its holy grail an enshrined distinct society clause (whatever they would call it matters not, it would be the constitutional arrangement where there is Quebec and the ROC, and everything...but the bill for it...is split 50-50).
Thomas being the same type of operator that Paul Martin is, likely got to work on his leadership camapaign the day after Jack signed his nomination papers. Without any competition in Quebec for supporters, he used his political connections. Its important to note that in Quebec, people don't vote based on ideology, they vote based on who can deliver. Theres a whole litany of screed I could go on to explain why this arrangement has come to pass, but rather that do that I'll sum it up to one statement. Quebec has had an arrangement where they learned that the number of ridings they have in their province has a value to federal elections such that they are able to hold the ROC ransom by virtue of that many seats help decide the outcome of an election. They never vote based on the policy of a party save one. That party will gain power in the HoC, and once they do, that government is given a list of demands. The mule understands this dynamic, and has played the voters in Quebec like a harp.
The point of going on this long exposition is this:
The mule didn't need to win the leadership of the NDP tonight, he only needed to be in contention, to be seen as someone that could win. His real goal wasn't to unite the base of the NDP behind him either, he only needed enough to add to what he has wrapped up in Quebec.
His actual goal is to take over the liberal party. Not a merger or a agreement, a takeover and hostile if neccessary.
He knows the liberal party base, and he is familar with the partisans that inhabit the establishment and that they will not willingly submit to an agreement where they have to water down the wine. His intentions I believe are to take over the party riding by riding.
Sounds a bit tinfoil hat right?
I can understand that, its just a prognostication based on assumption, so have to wait for the events to play themselves out.
Heres how I see it working, and why I see a similarity with Paul Martin.
Martin undermined Chretien by getting control of the ridings. My guess is that right now there are some Mulcair supporters out selling liberal memberships to make sure when the lpc leadership is declared, there will be 50% support for a motion to merge with the NDP. Matters not if its successful, just that it makes the floor of the lpc convention to get voted on.
Mulcair can pretend he isn't interested, but the lpc could be so divided by that time all it owuld take is a symbolic gesture like say a few of the remaining liberal caucus joining the NDP. Just enough that they no longer can retain official status in the HoC. Its symbolism that matters.
Once the ridings go NDP, the mule will point out how his party has momentum, which about this time would be about a year before the next federal election.
Now why would any of this be plausible?
Okay, try this.
You have the NDP and its supporters that have tasted power (coalition) and they are tired of oppostion, they are also tired of playing second fiddle to the liberals. The liberals, having lost three elections now, and having finished behind the NDP, are upset and angry at being denied what they feel is their birthright. Folks like that tend to shift to actions that previously where unthinkable just last year.
So heres my advise to the folks on the right.
Do not just expect this guy to be like the last inept leaders of the opposition, he is experienced, however, he has some flaws that can be capitalized on.
He is a Quebec politician, that means he has some skeletons in his closet.
He is proud, and his pride will be his downfall.
There is no policy he won't ditch in a heartbeat if its in his path to power. He can do this without worrying about his leftwing base as they will not vote liberal, and if as the media finally figured out tonight (h/t to Bob Fife) that there is nobody but Bob Rae in the liberal party that is in a position to lead them to power, where will the base go with there vote...Lizzy May and the Green's?.....really?
But the biggest obsticle to the mule is that he is a Quebec politician and does not have a lot of experience politically outside of Quebec where people vote not on who brings home the bacon, but on ideological positions.
The internet does not allow federal leaders to say one thing in Quebec and something else outside of Quebec and get away with it anymore..this ain't 1967 and he ain't no PET.
Talk of imposing a carbon tax may buy votes in Quebec, because they hear that as a carbon tax on the ROC to help Quebec pay for its social programs. Just ask S. Dion how that worked.

So I expect the honey moon will last until the media starts looking for something to report..say like a caucus member for speaking about an NDP policy that the mule finds inconvenient.

Thats all I got for know, things are going to get interesting.

Labels: Diatribes and screed's

posted by gimbol @ 8:20 PM 0 comments

Crank call screed

With regard to the current automated call rant the opposition and the media are adamant is proof of the biggest scandal in Canadian history, there are some points that need to be noted:

1. The biggest scandal in Canadian history was Adscam, dead stop. Right now there is circumstantial evidence that somebody made some calls. The reach has been made that there was intent to breach Election laws, there is also the presumption of innocence that is part and parcel of our system of laws. The investigation is still on going and until then anyone that has information that proves that there was an act to breach the law, and that said act was done with intent to breach said law, they have an obligation to submit that information to Elections Canada. If they don't, the same standard being used to presume guilt can apply to the accusers.



2. The presumption that there was a breach of elections law, specifically by the use of the automated calling services, requires that the presumption should also be made that the supposed perp, whoever it is, did so with the knowledge that the chances they would be caught where very high. Therefore, its safe to assume the perp, if there is one, is either very stupid, or getting caught was part of the plan.



3. There is a time limit to lodge a complaint with Elections Canada. I believe its 30 days. I can be wrong about the time limit, but I do feel confident in the contention that there is a time limit. I also feel confident that it isn't nine months. Does this mean I can lodge a complaint with EC about the flyers I receive from Irene Mathyessen addressed "supporter" as proof of them attempting to subvert my vote? Many websites will have as requirement of entry, particularly political party websites, that you either enter address information, or check of a check box (placed in very small print at bottom of the page) that you be placed on their contact list. That check box is default in some cases to yes. How many party workers in there idle hours, especially during campaigns, are lurking the oppositions websites, editorial columns, partisan sites, and adding their name to a mailing list during these searches? How many of those same people would put their true address, or would they use a false one or one that is outside of their riding?



4. If one is allowed to entertain the idea that there was an organized attempt, then we can also presume that such an attempt should not be restricted to political parties. Taking into consideration the modus operandi of what is known, who would commit such an act with the knowledge that the possibility of being found out is extremely high, but committed to the act anyways? We can then presume that for such individual(s) the goal was not to subvert the vote, but something else. They knew what they where doing was wrong and with a media that has a predisposition to accuse the government of wrongdoing, the story would be self-perpetuating on the theme that our electoral system is broken. Keeping with this MO, one should compare to other recent events where the acts of individuals where presented as proof that the system was not working. A few examples come to mind, the G20 riots. Where organized protests where co-opted by the "black-block" to instigate a response from police, in so doing capturing that "Youtube moment" to demonstrate the oppression in the system. The Occupy protests would be another example where there didn't seem to be any reason or purpose to the protests other than to cause chaos and a reaction from the authorities. The occupation of Caledonia, where a land claim is made where one does not exist, but the government so obsessed with the political ramifications, forces the police to invoke two-tier policing, again giving the perception the system isn't working. I would even throw in the current environmental hearings into the Northern Gateway Pipeline, a hearing we find out where foreign interests are trying to bog down the process and by doing so give the perception of an unresolvable conflict.

Taking these points into consideration, the writer is of the belief that if there was collusion to break election law during the last federal election, it wasn't any of the political parties that where responsible, matter of fact I believe that mistakes got made due to false or incorrect voter lists. Regardless, what is now happening is that there are individuals using the media and the opposition parties as useful idiots to what ends I can only presume.

Here's a list of predictions:

• This issue is going to be dragged out for as long as possible



• The black block/Occupy protests will be using this as a backdrop



• There will be a call to replace the system we have now with something else, however the reason to do so will not be to actually come up with a replacement, but to convince a critical mass that the system we have now is broken.



• That if the evidence starts indicating that the Conservatives didn't do anything wrong, or that there was no organized effort, you will hear silence from the critics..almost like nothing ever happened.


• The PM is not going to modify his response to satisfy either his critics, or the media. He will continue to insist that the proper authorities be allowed to complete their investigation. The expectation that he would make the mistakes of the last liberal government will not be satisfied, if someone did something illegal, let them be charged and stand trial. If guilty they serve the sentence. If innocent, then the opposition can expect to wear it, and the CBC particularly can expect some pressure to take them off the public teat...and no doubt the PM may insist on it.

Labels: the free lunch crowd at it again

posted by gimbol @ 9:32 AM 0 comments