Which political ideology is this again?
When you examine what they stand for its becoming evident that the liberals really have lost their way. For example:
That prostitution is a noble trade and should not be referred to as human trafficing.
Drug users should be given a nice safe place to inject instead of stopping them from using the drugs in the first place.
That marijana is harmless, and that it should be legalized and taxed.
That to clean up the environment you must commodify it (Kyoto).
That adscam was just an anomaly.
That you can negotiate with terrorists.
That parents don't have the right to raise their own children.
That the senate is just fine the way it is.
That any constitutional change would be bad.
That the not with standing clause should be abolished because somebody might one day actually use it.
That all references to our historical traditions both military and with regard to the Crown are meaningless and should be abolished.
That abortion should never be limited, there should be a right to die, but celebrating life is equivalent to racism and or homophobia.
That the ban on reproductive technology should be lifted.
That a gun registry is going to stop crimes committed with unregistered weapons.
That private health care doesn't exist in Canada.
That using terms like "barbaric" to describe female genital mutilation is uncanadian.
That if a conservative senator repaid false claims its justification for asking the PM to resign, but if a liberal senator refuses to make the same reparations, its justification to allow him back into caucus.
That when an ex-DM of the education ministry gets arrested on charges of child pornography, no connection should be made to his involvement in producing a controversial sex-education policy being imposed in that province.
That SunNews, a private news broadcaster that produces 100% canadian content should be denied fee for carriage, but the Oprah Network which is based in Chicago USA should not.
That finding out the root causes of why terrorists hate us is more important than tracking down and arresting terrorists.
That if during a federal party leadership race, one candidate is allowed more time to get his "supporters" registered, this should in no way be construed as a coronation.
That even though Pierre Trudeau refused to serve during WWII you can claim he ran towards danger while criticising the RCMP for protecting the PM during a terrorist attack on Parliament Hill.
That communist chinese governments are something to be admired. That we should be sending winter advice to refugees trying to escape ISIS and not using military force against ISIS. That only the liberal party has the hereditary right to rule.
Labels: useful idiots
The SCOC couldn't rule on a checkers match
So let me get this straight?
The SCOC has ruled that heroin users have a right to insite because its considered treatment.
What they missed like the nose on their face, is that nobody was endowed at birth with an addiction. Addictions are an imposition that either freely entered into, or forced into, is not required to continue life. Matter of fact, addictions in some cases, can be down right fatal.
This decision, was not based in law, this was another read in to the charter, based on nothing more than a fashonable trend, and will do nothing but incite vigilante behaviour by those more militantly opposed to the drug culture.
The other outcome is that these inner cities that allow places like insite to exist will drive away the productive (and tax paying) citizens to jurisdictions which refuse to have these blights located in their neighbourhoods.
The only justice that could come out of this is if insite opened a clinic next door to each of the justices homes.
Labels: useful idiots
vandals that pose as G20 protesters
Here is what is flawed about the assumption that Prime Minister Harper is responsible for the vandalism.
To believe he is responsible for the acts of these terrorists you must believe the following lies:
- That vandals have a right to destroy property.
- That visiting heads of state are never under threat from anyone.
- That the civil authority has no legal right to limit or restrict exclusive use of public property.
- That all police work without pay.
- Finally, that the vandals bear no responsibility for their actions.
Here is what you have accomplished.
You have single-handedly proven beyond a doubt that Ann Coulter was right.
You have tarnished the reputation of every left leaning org and political party in Canada as being just as brain dead as you are.
Proven to the writer that you are no different than the Taliban.
Labels: Chastin Introdo, liberals, the free lunch crowd at it again, useful idiots
10% vs $1.95
I will tip my hat to the opposition for voting to end one tax payer subsidy to political parties.
Now if you would be so kind as to table a motion to end the per vote shakedown and maybe we can talk.
You opposed the 10%ers because as there are more conservatives than liberals in the HoC there will be more conservative 10%ers being mailed into liberal ridings.
You couldn't compete so you wrapped yourselves up in fiscally prudent clothes long enough to get this through.
Well good for you, you decided to bargain in bad faith with the voters so you could tip the field in your favour.
But now you don't have the option of using the 10%er yourselves...sucks to be you.
But I digress.
The point I've seen coming out of liberal trolls of late is aimed at dividing conservatives or convincing them that the Harper government isn't conservative enough.
Don't be too fast to think you've found a silver bullet.
Harper might decide to test your convictions, and you have to remember that if you want to seal the deal you need to give voters something more than a promise, you have to act.
I've mentioned the vote subsidy as a place to start, here's more.
Table a motion to kill the gun registry, yes I know its one of the few remaining Chretien legacies..other than Adscam....but if you want to prove you mean what you say this time, you better be ready to through not only that legacy under the bus, but be prepared to watch your left wing go NDP.
Then there's the perenial desire to incur into provincial jurisdictions. Propose to amend the health act to allow private healthcare, such a motion will solidify what base you have in Quebec...but it could again cost you some political capital...but thats not the point is it, you guys want to reach out to conservatives right? Unless thats not what you want to do. Perhaps the game is to depress the conservative suppport...a war of attrition...if the right won't come to you, you'll ensure they don't go to anyone.
Admirable, but for one problem.
That Chretien-Martin balance that was around to keep the right from voting for anyone is the bridge that got burnt long ago.
Two things will keep the libs in perdition.
Video archive of Chretien's memorable promise to "kill da GST" and Bob Rae's prominent position in the LPC. Real fiscal qualifications that.
Nothing better to motivate a vote against the liberals like a trickster and a fraud.
Labels: useful idiots
Gilligan strikes again
Yep, Gillligan makes a total arse of himself again with the latest liberal faux pas to blow up in their face.
How so?
Contest is launched on party website to photo-shop the Prime Ministers face on where he'd rather be than Copenhagen.
By the way, lets get one thing straight, the day that Harper is afraid to go somewhere and confront a bunch of spineless pansies that don't understand basic economics and where all that money actually comes from is the day I find myself a cabin in soem remote wilderness.
But I digress.
Contest runs and lets the entrants know that every entry will be reviewed and they will get a chance to pick the finalists.
So what gets to the finals?
Some dip stick puts up the infamous photo of Oswald beig gunned down by Jack Ruby with Harper's face super-imposed over Oswald's.
So what's the message here?
Liberals equate Harper with someone that would assasinate a sitting US president?
No?
Liberals equate Harper with someone that should be blamed for the assassination of Kennedy?
Not that either eh?
Or is it that liberals want to see our PM assassinated...
Hey after the rucus they made over the Chretien face ad, the bar was set, by them.
How is it that Gilligan should be the guy to wear this?
Simple, web content is a party operation that is tied tightly to war room ops, black ops to be precise.
Who is responsible for the clowns that reviewed but still posted this "entry".
That would be the head clown in the war room.
So if Donolo doesn't want to see his boss get dragged down further by the shinanigans of the first mate of the SS Minnow, he might want to maroon him somewhere till after the next election.
I don't expect this advise to get heeded, which is fine by me, I want the liberals to go down in flames.
Keep up the good work Kornflake.
Labels: useful idiots
Hebert needs to get outside of the Montreal Toronto corridor more often
Todays missive from Hebert seems to be framed in the pov of that old canard of the two solitudes.
Thats the reason for the title.
Chantal still like most of the closet separatists, that the is legislation existant that makes Quebec an integrial part of any legal construct in the nation.
The truth which she usually alludes to is this time ignored. Used to be that folks bought the unity crisis hook line and sinker....welcome to the internet age....the fact is that Quebec is no longer able to threaten the unity of the country since the coup attempt last year.
The veil is lifted.
So you can try to gin up as much opposition in the guise of a unity crisis all you want. But that execise is likened to the debater that tries to link holocast denial with those that are critical of AGW...you just lost the argument.
Here's the irony.
If Chantal and the rest of the media echo chamber are going to contend that without Canada adopting Quebec's target (and effectively killing the economy of the oil patch) then does it not also follow that all nations (read China, India and Brazil as well as the US) have the same obligations? BTW, I do recall that Harper just visited India and China, what do you suppose was talked about...oh yeah...it wasn't AGW it was the economy.
In closing, there is always a point in time where the next generation gets to replace the current one, its called attrition I believe.
There is a new philosophy developing out there, and the current crop of columnists seem to be stuck in 1967 just fiddling while their rome burns. Chantal needs to understand this.
We don't fear the separatists anymore, they are irrelevant.
We don't listen to the aging hippies anymore, as they have become the establishment they used to protest against.
The crisis mongers don't sway opinion like they used to, now they get mocked.
Welcome to the brave new world Chantal.
Labels: useful idiots
Talkng point - election campaign (door knocking)
Before I go further I'd like to state that there are two items I want to see as platform.
- A pledge to eliminate Chretien's vote subsidy.
- Reform or remove the HRC's.
Now then, as to the subject matter. Should one of the candidates come knocking at my door be sure that my questions will be to find out what you want to do if your party forms a government. Not grand idea's and vague generalities, I want specifics.
Also know this, especially if you're a liberal candidate. I'll be asking which piece of legislation that the Harper government has passed, or was pending, that your party is opposed to. Do not say all of it, I'll remind you that the NDP and the Bloc where more than willing to vote against the government many times, but all those times you're party allowed those laws (which you say you oppose) to pass. So I'll ask again, please be specific, on which one of those laws you want to reverse that you think are so bad.
Is it raising the age of consent?
The GST cut, so you'll want to raise the GST then?
Elected Senators? You either want reform to be a big constitutional package like Charlottetown, or you like it just the way it is....so all that noise about Harper's senate appointments was just more flatulance?
I think you get the point.
BTW
One more thing I'd like to see in the next election. Is if Harper indicates that he is only willing to debate one representative of the opposition....and they can figure out which one gets to go head to head with him. Oh I can hear the accusations of divisive already. Here's the phsycological two by four that you'll get hit with. If you guys where willing to go into a coalition in the fall and have one leader speak for all of you, whats the problem now? If it happened I can just imagine the opposition tearing each other apart if Harper refused to relent. Want a bet the liberals will be hard pressed to justify to Bloc voters that they should speak for them.
The beauty of a suggestion like this is that the leaders debate is not held by law, its a tradition that the leaders have agreed to participate in. Thats the catch, they agree to be there, but they don't have to be there. The thing is run by the broadcasting consortium, and they negotiate with the leaders to arrange a debate.
Last time when Lizzie May demanded a spot, Harper almost refused. This time with the justification that only one representative of the coalition be present so that the odds are fair will have the opposition foaming at the mouth. What it could also do is cut off attempts by the liberals doing what they always do when the campaign comes apart at the seams and plead with the NDP to lead them their vote. It would definitely harden up the NDP base and not allow the liberals to raid it.
But hey, I'm just speculating. No truth in anything I've posted. Not one word.
Labels: beer and popcorn, May's little green monster, Quebec politics, the free lunch crowd at it again, useful idiots
the liberal bland ad
Will it work?
Depends on the message they want delivered.
My guess is the "message" is not about any particular policy, its about making people not be afraid of Ignatieff. He may be an elitist snob, but hey don't he just look so harmless in his blue shirt sitting in a meadow, this guy can't possibly have some agenda to tax the hell out of you with a new carbon tax.
What I'm expecting though is a rebuttal from somewhere, (and just so you know that until the writ is dropped anyone, yes anyone can produce an ad) to juxtapose this latest statement with that historic one he made during that leadership debate against Dion.
Now he says they can do better, but the last time they had government Ignatieff tells us "we didn't get it done".
So what Iggy is saying is, they will do better than what they did last time which was to do nothing at all.
It writes itself folks.
Labels: useful idiots
Please God no
Same event two opinions.
First the non-partisan - Barrack just made the worst mistake ever appointing that woman as Sec of State. He can now spend the next four years looking over his shoulder and watching out for landmines left laying around for him. I sincerely hope he has laid out some rules for her and her husband that clearly state that if she or her husband so much as look cross-eyed at him she's fired.
Now the partisan side - He just give the republican's better odds at finding their mojo.
Labels: useful idiots
The LPC and KHS running out the clock
The Ethics committee will have KHS come to testify, however I couldn't help but notice that the chair made a big deal that if the Minister allowed his extradition to proceed he would be ruled in contempt of Parliament.
I get the message, but I wonder if the libs are getting to far ahead of themselves?
KHS lawyers have petitioned the SC to another appeal, so the minister can say its in the courts hands at this point.
We also have the fact that Karl is going to be coming before that committee before his 15 day deadline is over, the only tactic left in in bag at that point is that he will refuse forcing the committee to obtain the speakers warrant. This would no doubt push his appearance to a date after Dec 1. I've a suspicion this was the plan worked out in advance by the legal team of KHS and their contacts in the OLO.
My advise to the CPC is this.
Don't offer any opposition to KHS appearing before committee. As a matter of fact enthusiastically endorse it as well as having Mr Mulroney tell his side.
Why?
KHS appearance before the committee is not the goal of the liberals, their goal is to nail Harper with something.
Allowing these two, Mulroney and KHS to appear before committee will make it clear this issue has nothing to do with Parliament. It will be on the public record as tabled by the committee that this is a civil matter.
You can guess where it goes from there, and its not the front page.
Why do I predict the committee will decide this way?
Just as government legislation in the House of Commons needs only the support of one opposition party to pass, so too does any committee only need the combination of one party plus the government members.
The liberals may have an agenda but they seem to be ignoring the fact (made obvious by Pat Martin's outburst the other day) that the NDP are seeking to undermine the liberals at every opportunity. My guess is that at the end of the day there will be a motion that in some form or another determines that the issue between the two men at the middle of this are in a nasty civil dispute over 300 grand and it has no bearing on this or previous governments (like the one that settled out of court with Mr Mulroney for 2 million).
Such a motino would leave the liberals holding the bag on this and being the only party supporting the idea of KHS deportation being delayed.
The worst of all possible optics of course is that KHS is going to refuse to play hostile witness before committee which will only further depreciate Mr Schriebers credibility.
It all hinges on how well the liberals have covered up how often and how long they have been in contact with KHS.
If they got sloppy even once, Karl will use it to his benefit and throw them under the bus in a heartbeat.
This guy is not Chuck Guite.
Labels: useful idiots
Mulroney and Schreiber
I know I should be concerned over this but for some reason my gut is telling me there are a lot of major news outlets with pre-written templates ready to go .....some of them may have been sitting around for a few years.
And all of it based on the statement of a guy facing criminal charges in Germany.
Imagine the rage the media and the opposition liberals will go into if Harper rags the puck long enough for Schreiber's extradition to go through and then hands the matter over to the RCMP?
I think I'm going to enjoy watching this.
Here's why.
The only way there can be an election is if the liberals believe they can put Harper on the defensive. If they believe this business over Airbus has any traction you bet the liberals will find their testicles in time for the next nonconfidence measure.
Think of the timing.
Harper has said he's going to get an independent third party to advice the government on how best to proceed, but no timeline.
Today Harper is reintroducing his senate reform bill with the understanding that when the NDP introduces its referendum bill it gets the governments support, a bill that is guaranteed to be held up in the senate if not returned to the commons altogether (read liberal obstruction to change).
Harper then has his opportunity to put the question of confidence to the house on an issue the liberals will feel safe opposing if they believe the M-S issue has legs.
Going forward in speculation, I presume that the day before the nonconfidence motion, Harper will make a decision on the issue that will take it out of play. It could be an inquiry, handing the matter over to the RCMP to investigate, or saying this is Schreibers feeble attempt to stay in Canada to avoid prosecution and that no action by the government is neccessary as this has nothing to do with the current adminstration.
I'm betting on the last possible outcome as it would leave the liberals holding the deciding votes on whether there will be an election or not, and having made statements to the effect they would be bring the government down it would do irrepairable damage if they sat on their hands again.
The beauty of it is that unlike Adscam this issue has nothing to do with the current government, so the liberals chosing this issue (and certain media outlets) to run a campaign on will be responded to with "last time we checked Mr Mulroney was not on the ballot" read witch hunt.
The media and the liberals have made careers out of attacking Mr Mulroney, its time they gave it a rest....but I know they won't being creatures of habit and all that.
Labels: Conservative majority, senate reform, useful idiots
Liberal on the lam
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/CityandRegion/2007/11/09/4642092-sun.htmlH/T to AGWN
"A warrant was issued yesterday for the arrest of a former Liberal riding association treasurer who failed to appear in St. Thomas court.
Suzan Pawlak, 49, is charged with 42 counts of fraud and uttering forged documents. "
Do the liberals really want the Harper government to start investigating past PM's?
Be careful what you ask for, you might get it.
I for one would like to know the details of why if the liberal government of J Chretien had such a good case against Mulroney why they paid out a 2 mil of tax payers dollars as an out of court settlement?
Or which ridings got the dirty money from Adscam?
Or why did Martin say first that CSL only made a few million when it was actually in the hundreds of millions?
Labels: useful idiots
Question for those opposed to the war in Afghanistan
I've heard many use the term "I support the troops but not the mission" most notably those that inhabit the liberal and ndp ranks and their inherent entourage.
But I have a question....and if you're a candidate in the next election you best be prepared to answer it.....if DND said they needed more equipment to fight the war in Afghanistan, would you as an MP support the troops then or will you maintain your non-supporting role of the mission and refuse their request by voting against any such budgetary expense?
You know, support the troops and support the mission?
Here's another.
If you want our troops to only be engaged in so-called peacekeeping, does that mean if they get attacked while on said "mission" will they be allowed to fight, or do you insist they defend themselves with a tersely worded memo released by the UN general assembly? If you have trouble with that one ask Romeo Dallaire how effectively that would have worked in Rawanda.
Lastly.
I've heard some nonsense about negotiating with the Taliban. Please explain what you plan to offer to the Taliban, an orgnaization which has clearly demonstrated it has no intention of negotiating in good faith?
Labels: eliminate terrorism now, Justin Trudeau, useful idiots
The liberals other useful idiots
Sheila
Copps wants you to believe the latest liberal talking point without question.
"
There is a popular view amongst some Liberals that a quick election will provoke a disastrous Dion loss, clearing the way for Ignatieff's ascendancy. "
Sorry Sheila, but when useful idiot's say one thing I start applying the second rule of
MSM tabloid journalism. If you don't provide the story then go look for it.
Hence, its not Iggy we should be paying attention to but those that can claim their hands are clean because you cannot find their fingerprints on the knife.
"
Mr. Carroll was one of Mr. Dion's key leadership organizers and a fierce loyalist, Mr. Fergus supported rival contender Bob Rae in last year's party leadership contest.Liberal sources insist Mr. Fergus's first loyalty has always been to the party and it's his connections at both the grassroots and national levels that won him the post.He has served as a riding president, head of the party's youth wing, and vice-president of communications ? and he has worked for two cabinet ministers."
Bob sure has been going out of his way of late to show what a team player he is and I've got a suspicion that his supporters are if not giving credibility to the Iggy coup rumour mill on the hill, they are not doing
anything to squelch them either.
Meanwhile
Garth wins the Carolyn Parrish award.
"So far, everything was going according to plan. And then Tory-turned-Grit Turner let slip a bombshell that's leading many to wonder whether we're safe from a fall vote after all. "We have an opposition day next week," he reveals. "We have the opportunity of putting forward a motion that will call into question the confidence in the government. We have that possibility. And so I think right now we're trying to determine if this is the right thing to do."Does he think it is? His answer speaks volumes. "I still believe that we are going to have an election in the next few weeks."The move, if it happens, seems to be in direct contradiction to what Dion said so publicly in a sometimes rambling 45 minute rebuttal last week. Why introduce a motion to bring down the government when the party itself is abstaining from voting on the Throne Speech or its crime bill? It's hard to answer that question, but the Liberals insist all options are on the table. "I'm the deputy leader," answers Michael
Ignatieff. "I have to have heard of it. No, we're considering our strategy. We're not here to roll over, let me tell you." "
Bottom line.
If the liberals are looking for who is trying to push Dion out of the big chair there are two factors that must be kept in mind to uncover the true
perp.
The unwritten rule of alternation, and the "Power" behind the throne.
Stop looking at Iggy as the guy that wants Dion gone, its most likely someone that doesn't presently sit in the
HoC. There is some sleight of hand going on, while
everyone's attention is on Parliament Hill, the real story is being played outside of Ottawa.
Really, think about it for a moment on Iggy's past missteps and tribulations, and then try to tell me that he could mastermind a coup.
Nope, palace coups require professional assassins like Warren
Kinsella. Iggy doesn't have one of those in his retinue.....Bob Rae does though.
Labels: Justin Trudeau, Liberal leadership race, useful idiots
Latest update on the catch 22
Looks like the liberals are finding out too late that their much vaunted coup last spring getting
Pablo's private members bill passed is going to push them into an election they cannot afford to fight both figuratively, financially, and physically.
And unless its not clear I'll explain it again.
The opposition parties must oppose the throne speech if it states the Kyoto targets cannot be reached by the Kyoto deadline. Especially Dion will have to make possibly the worst decision of his life to give his party more time to prepare, or let his pride get the best of him.
I'm counting on his pride, he is after all a liberal.
Start the countdown for a press release from Lizzy May saying the deal is off.
Labels: Conservative majority, kyoto, May's little green monster, useful idiots
Liberals new useful idiot part 11
Good ol Iggy. He's starting to figure out that if the librals trigger an election that they have no chance of winning he's going to be blamed for trying to oust the sitting leader.
To wit he's informed liberals everywhere.
"don't do it, I'll get blamed for it".
Its a bit of a two edge sword though with a bunch of young guns anxious for their chance in government and leadership and the spectre of age hanging over the current party leadership, that
if they don't do something drastic soon the second slot will be taken over by the NDP.
Labels: Liberal leadership race, useful idiots
Media bais pt 2
So let me get this straight. Harper has declined the PPG's invite to this years shindig and according to them its because he just doesn't love them.
Really?
Lets try this, if you get an invite to a party that you attended last year and the host said a condition of attendance was you had to give a speech in which you play the part of court jester how interested would you be in attending?
If the message hasn't set in no problemo, I've got an idea if the PPG so-called "gala" is cancelled so it doesn't become "an evening with Stephane Dion".
Lets have the entire political blog establishment in this country have a "gala evening" wherein the guests of honour are those that inhabit the top of the pile at the PPG. The condition of course is that the invitees give a speech in which they describe themselves in "self-deprecating" humour.
Wouldn't it be fun watching Jane Taber expound on how policy is just to dull to report on and juicy tidbits on Parliament Hill is sooo much more important.
Or how about Jim Travers detailing how disappointing it can be after years of being a liberal shrill its never materialized into a senate seat.
And what of Peter Mansbridge and Lloyd Robertson, talking about their particular biases when reporting the news.
Lets include Mike Duffy and Don Newman as well, outing their reliable sources the "party insiders".
Addendum:
Lets be frank. If the PPG hasn't yet figured it out, or they don't want to say it for obvious reasons, here's the news.
Harper doesn't hate the PPG, he just won't respect anyone that refuses to respect him.
So if you guys are put out cause he won't try to be your best friend, and in a pique you believe writing bad things about him will get the revenge you so dearly crave, perhaps you should reconsider and instead of trying to be tabloid gossip columnists you should stick to reporting the news. You know pending legislation, asking legitimate questions instead of "do you love Canada", not repeating the liberal talking points.
Try that and before you know it the PM might be intersted in actually talking to you.
Till then, you get nothing but irrelevance.
And one other thing. The PPG gala is only a tradition in the pecking order of the PPG.
Labels: useful idiots
Liberals new useful idiot part 10
Who's the latest addition to the rans of the LUI?
Why Stephane Dion himself.
Can someone tell Stuffy that if he wants to make
accusations he should find a reliable source.
Labels: useful idiots
An idea waiting to catch fire
Here's the knowns:
1- There are the blogs, some well read, others like this one not so.
2- There is Youtube, which allows bloggers and the like to prove beyond a doubt an event did indeed take place, or a certain thing was in fact stated.
Here's the commonly held beliefs:
1-That there is bias in the media
2-That the media, based on the desire to increase market share, is less concerned with getting it right (the truth) and more concerned with sensationalism.
Here's the idea:
Perhaps some enterprising bloggers capable of such a thing could expend a bit of effort and compile some Youtube video. The point of this exercise not to expose bias, but to pit one major media outlet against another.
I'll provide one example of how this can be beneficial in getting the MSM more interested in truth telling than sooth saying.
Lately there has been a lot of media speculation about the cabinet shuffle with many of the talking heads quoting the ubiquitous "unnamed source" or "senior anonymous staffer". What would be usefull, and wildly entertaining, is if we could see a comparison for example say (for the sake of demonstration) Craig Oliver or Jane Taber detailing how they have the scoop on which ministers are being shuffled and to where. Then after the event in question has occurred run a second video clip of the actual result. Then after posting the evidence on Youtube showing how off their prediction was, bring it to the notice of one of their rivals...oh I don't know...say Mike Duffy. He likes to run contriversial stuff, especially if he thought someone else was going to run it before him....he more than anyone is obsessed with maintaining his persona of being in the know around the Parliamentary Press Gallery. The end result is that certain outspoken memebers of the PPG start losing credibilty among their peers, and those oft quoted unnamed sources start losing their appeal until they agree to have their name published.
Even if this didn't come to pass, the fact that this idea gets out there is enough to keep the media on its toes from now on.
I'll wait and see if this idea gets run with....and if it does I promise I won't take credit for it.
Labels: useful idiots
Liberals new useful idiot part 10
Thought for today.
You don't bring a knife to a gun fight.
Let me explain.
If I was the PM and a certain Premier openly suggested that he wanted a one on one to discuss constitutional changes, I would respond just as openly that the government would be willing to table any change in the House of Commons that is
first agreed to by all the provinces and territories.....now Jean
you sit down with them and get that unanimous agreement......and stop trying to pit Ottawa against the ROC.
Jean Charet of all people should know this, I'm surprised he's forgotten after living through the Meech years.
Could someone please tell him that Trudeau liberalism doesn't work.
Labels: useful idiots
