Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Bag 'O Links

-Lots of Afghanistan news. The Liberal motion to set February 2009 as the withdrawal date will be voted down tonight thanks to the NDP even though 2/3 of Canadians agree with it. Gordon O'Connor, meanwhile, is in trouble for the treatment of prisoners, and Dion has some egg on his face for an odd proposal.


-After going 7 for 8 in first round predictions, I'll go with the Ducks, Sharks, Sabers and...I dunno...let's say Sens.


-Looks like the Clean Air Act is dead, although I wouldn't be surprised to see one of the opposition parties bring the amended version back on an opposition day.


-The sexy centrists are no more...it'll be Royal versus Sarkozy in the French election run-off.

Labels: , , ,

posted by calgarygrit at 4:06 p.m.

17 Comments:

  • Aw, that is too bad. For a spur of the moment outside-of-the-box thought, Dion's idea was not terrible. Really, any of us could have thought it up. And, he seemed to take it back immediately.

    Instead of pounding at it repeatedly over and over, Harper should have just thanked him for the suggestion, and moved on to something more - what's the word? - productive.

    By Blogger Jacques Beau Vert, at 5:01 p.m.  

  • The NDP can't support the motion without pissing all over their grassroots which voted for immediate withdrawl. The Libs and Greens wouldn't have a problem doing just that but the NDP knows the importance of respecting those who donate their time and energy to the party.

    It is a shame the Libs decided to put forth a motion which was designed to fail. The main reason why I like Dion better than Harper is that I hope he will do a better job of creating consensus through compromise in a minority parliament. These kinds of stunts make that look doubtful.

    Not that the NDP are any better in this regard-their ammendment to the budget denouncing Conservative and Liberal governance was just as useless.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 5:13 p.m.  

  • The NDP is opposed to the ill-defined mission in Kandahar. They were in November 2005 when Paul Martin began it and that hasn't changed.

    What has changed is the Liberals. Less than a year ago, 66 Liberal MPs voted against extending the mission to 2009.

    But with this motion and Dion as leader, the Liberals are now saying it's okay by them for Harper to keep Canada in an ill-defined mission for another two years.

    One wonders what those 66 Liberal MPs will do. Will they continue to oppose Harper's extension of the war like the NDP, or will they give-in like Dion?

    By Blogger Blogging Horse, at 5:17 p.m.  

  • Sego Sego Sego!

    By Blogger Anthony, at 5:58 p.m.  

  • Blogging Horse:

    What is to oppose anymore? The mission has been extended. Moreover, Harper didn't even need to seek the consent of Parliament (and obviously did for petty partisan posturing).

    So will he extend again or not? Obviously he wants that flexibility. Obviously, the NDP want to give him that flexibility.

    Why the NDP continue to cozy up to the Conservatives is really beyond my understanding. Maybe Jack! just likes the Conservatives, I don't know. But continually supporting odd conservative moves sure is creating a divide with the Dipper grassroots.

    By Blogger Ted Betts, at 6:10 p.m.  

  • The NDP is in favour of a motion to pull out of Darfur in 2009. The government hasn't actually agreed with the NDP policy to intervene in Darfur, but they thought they'd get a jump-start on the inevitable motion to pull out.

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 6:21 p.m.  

  • I was looking forward to watch the NDP contort into partisan applause, yet now that I've seen it it's curiously unsatisfying.

    By Blogger Jason Townsend, at 7:06 p.m.  

  • I wonder why Canada is in Afghanistan until 2009? Answer that one Dan, before slagging the NDP. And don't forget to thank Iggy and the Scarborough Mafia while you are at it, eh?

    By Blogger Greg, at 7:09 p.m.  

  • I was afraid the Dion proposal was that he was to eschew toilet paper, instead using his left hand and a Nalgene bottle of water.

    By Blogger matt, at 7:09 p.m.  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger rob, at 7:54 p.m.  

  • The Ducks?

    You are dead to me.

    By Blogger rob, at 7:55 p.m.  

  • Cerebrus, if Harper does try to extend the mission we can all be sure that it will be the Liberals who will allow it to happen again and not the NDP.

    This was a disingenious motion meant to fail. Maybe the NDP will continue this game and put forward their own motion with no chance of passing. But really, this kind of politics just shows a total disrespect for the intelligence of the electorate.

    Frankly I really don't like Harper or the Cons but its lame shit like this that makes me prefer a Harper minority to a Dion majority and increasingly indifferent to what kind of minority we get.

    But yeah, if you guys still think people are stupid enough to buy the spin that the NDP and the Cons voted against this for the same reason then that shows a definite continuity between Martin's way of doing politics and Dion's. Canadians, however, have usually not been fans of politicians who treat them like idiots.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 9:39 p.m.  

  • So most of the Liberals opposed the extension of the mission two years ago, and now they are all in favour of it?

    Two more years of search and destroy, thanks Dion.

    By Blogger IHateMikeDuffy, at 9:41 p.m.  

  • cerebus said

    "Why the NDP continue to cozy up to the Conservatives is really beyond my understanding."

    That's not quite fair. Layton is playing 'politics for minor players'.

    It's makes the NDP look important, but it helps the CPC. Some of us have not forgiven Layton for helping harper come to power. This will not help him.

    By Blogger JimTan, at 9:51 p.m.  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger JimTan, at 9:52 p.m.  

  • cerberus & Greg; I think the NDP opposing the motion on the grounds it's too long is fair enough. If Harper brought forward an environmental plan which was a step in the right direction but not far enough, no one would blame parties for voting it down on those grounds. Same thing for the Afghanistan motion.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 9:53 p.m.  

  • jim said

    "So most of the Liberals opposed the extension of the mission two years ago, and now they are all in favour of it?"

    Of course, you are wrong

    By Blogger JimTan, at 9:58 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home