Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Party Leader With 25% of the Seats in Parliament Sets Terms

The hubris of Michael Ignatieff comes through in this interview. Somebody must be bringing in the favors because once again the Globe & Mail fawn over him like any good PR agency should. Ignatieff warns PM against use of hardball tactics in Parliament

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has issued a warning to Prime Minister Stephen Harper that he won't tolerate the misuse of confidence votes or hardball parliamentary tactics when MPs return next month to decide the government's

Hardball parliamentary tactics? As opposed to overturning an election?

“He took the wrong signal from the election. The signal he took was that he could try anything he wanted to and he grievously underestimated the Liberal Party of Canada. We've got our act together, got a leader chosen, and he can't keep making these misjudgments of the mood of the House and hope to survive.”

Iggy says Harper "grievously underestimated the Liberal Party of Canada." Oh please. The recent election was the Liberal Party's worst showing since Confederation. They are dead west of Ontario. They haven't had a majority in Quebec since the Trudeau era.

The Liberals have inked a deal with the New Democrats to take over government in a coalition, but Mr. Ignatieff has indicated he could back the budget if it delivers the appropriate economic help to increasingly anxious Canadians. The coalition came together after opposition parties were infuriated by an economic statement that, among other things, would have eliminated voter subsidies for political parties and suspended the right to strike of civil servants.

Point #1: OK. (deep breath) Globe and Mail people, one last time. The coalition deal is not just with the Liberals and the New Democrats. As we all know, the Liberal seats (77) + the NDP seats (37) = 114 seats, which is less than the 143 seats that the Conservatives have. So, to get the majority they publically signed on with the Bloc Quebecois who have 49 seats. Why do they keep pretending that the Bloc aren't part of the deal? I understand why the Liberals do that but why does the Globe?

Point #2 Does the Globe realize that eliminating voter subsidies and suspending fat cat government workers from striking is a popular move to the majority of the public?

Nonetheless, Mr. Ignatieff said liberal parties around the world are best positioned to take advantage of the current economic turmoil. International conservative leaders such as Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush rode the wave of looser market regulation that has been blamed for sparking the global financial crisis.

Take advantage? That's cold.... And by the way: Don't put Bush Sr., and Jr. in the same sentence as Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. Especially Bush Jr.


  1. A very good point Sea Salt. The Toronto media has such an endorsement for the Liberal party. They call them the natural ruling party,and refused to report on Paul Martin`s offshore tax free business. They published the photo of Stanfield dropping the football, he caught several passes, but they printed the one he dropped. I remember a front page picture of Trudeau diving into a swimming pool, the media just loved Trudeau. Now they love Justin Trudeau, despite the fact that he has never done anything significant. Perhaps this how you get a Senate appointment.

  2. The G&M want Harper gone and they've been pretty upfront about it. As soon as the coalition formed the first editorial from the Globe was a call for Harper to step down. I don't think they've changed their position since. Iggy will be their golden boy from now on.

  3. Nothing beats the Toronto Star for Liberal bias though. It's over the top. I find it mildly amusing to hear Liberals complain the CTV (and more specifically Mike Duffy... some comparing his show to Fox News)is biased and supports Harper. Do they actually think the CBC and the Star are bastions of journalism without bias? Cry me a river...

  4. Strack is correct about the Toronto Red Star. The folks at the Kremlin, could not have come up with anything close to the Star.

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

  6. I agree Fydor. It's better they're up front and honest about it. The public is better served. They can read an array of commentary from different perspectives and make up their own mind as opposed to reading one "objective" opinion and swallowing it as gospel.

    Still... I must say that I find Conservative media (at least in Canada) are more critical of their own then the Liberal friendly media are of the Liberal party. The Liberals could have a sham of a platform and a lame duck leader and the Liberal friendly media will find any excuse to endorse them. I don't believe this is the case for the Conservatives and conservative-friendly media.