blueblood

I may not be a flag waver, but I am no seperatist. However, I wouldn't take sides on this issue.

Delivering of parcels yes, letters, not so much.

LoL

Are you one? You are quite bitter about harper running the show. I find it funny because the shoe is on the other foot.

If a tory majority means the Liberals are destroyed as a party, give your head a shake. A majority would be beneficial as it would give the Libs time to get their affairs in order.

Here's what happened 1. Harper passes legislation, opposition cries their being bullied but don't want to do anything about it. 2. Harper, pissed off things are dragging out in committee, calls election and wins minority, all while the opposition cooks their coalition scheme. 3. Harper, smelling a rat, decides to put in a poison pill to see what the opposition is doing, finds out they are cooking up a coalition. 4. Coalition comes public and tries to bully Harper. 5. Harper does the happy dance as he just found a big election issue 6. Harper, laughing his ass off launches the easiest PR war in tory history and awakens the silent majority. Harper can now see a majority gov't and crippled opposition. He goes to the GG to prorogue parliament and is conducting another PR war to show that he is willing to work with opposition. With proroguing parliament until the budget and "cooperating" he has covered his ass for a probable election call. 7. Harper does the happy dance again because either way he wins! For your viewing delight, the tory war room complete with Harper's happy dance youtube

If it goes into another minority for either party, with the coalition being sold to the electorate in the election, then I guess the GG would have to grant the coalition. Look it's the only logical choice she has. The other ones are all legal, this one is the most logical. Her rep will get tarnished if she doesn't give an election if the Liberals vote the budget down. Giving an election gives all sides an out and lets the coalition be floated to the populace. If a minority gov't arises if an election occured in January, that suggests Canadians are fine with a coalition. However, by not granting an election with these circumstances surrounding the bloc propping up a coalition, especially when Canadian voters were unaware that a coalition was going to take place will result in a black eye on Jean's reputation. Being as she was willing to step down over this mess, I suspect an election will take place. By telling Harper to grow up, she oversteps her bounds and her reputation takes another bludgeoning. Judging by how Harper is insistent on party funding matters, look for that to be in the budget.

Replying to this character, results in him posting more of his nutbar drivel and screws everyone over by having his "wisdom" taking up thread space.

It even goes earlier, US marines in Mexico and dealing with Barbary pirates...

Hitler made a large strategic mistake regarding Russia. He pretty much had it sown up if not for Stalingrad. You also have to remember nuclear weapons are in play, and the US had them 4 yrs. before the Russians. The allies had air superiority as well.

i apply the same logic when going to the hospital the same as taking my machinery into the mechanics. if I can't fix it myself, then that's the only reason it goes in there. I had food poisoning for 3 days and didn't go, (rather unpleasant being at home laid up in bed for 3 days). So no I don't go unless something is completely buggered.

And part of how it works is by granting elections. No fixed election dates puts the election card at play for the GG. Time is not an issue concerning these events, i.e. public demonstrations and seperatists being involved. Do you think the GG wants to go down in history as being someone who the people hated, all for the sake of "convenience" when she has an option that is fair for everybody and is part of parliamentary tradition to boot. You have your nose buried in that social studies textbook your are failing to see logic concerning her choice.

Maybe that would have been not such a bad idea. Communism could have been cooked right then and there.

No public Hospitals? Where in the blue hell do they get their funding from? The only time I've gotten timely care at a hospital is when I came in an ambulance.

It doesn't matter that we just went through an election, by January 4 months will have passed. In the 60's when it was the minority gong show, there were elections all the time. Seperatists and an outraged public outweigh convenience of just having an election any day of the week to a rational person. With the option of deflating a potentially disasterous scenario, the GG will more than likely grant an election. Honestly, does the GG want her name to be smeared over convenience of just having an election?

You have seperatists in play and a country loathing the coalition to the point of public demonstrations. The GG is obligated to explore all options when the gov't loses confidence that will ensure a new gov't in the most peaceful, efficient, and fair manner. That would be an election. We do not have fixed election dates. If we did, then your coalition would be taken more seriously. A mechanism within our democracy allows the GG to choose between an election and a coalition, given the problems with the public, and seperatists involved with this coalition, simple logic says that an election will be very likely.

And Quebecers are like High maintenance women. Calling a quebecer a seperatist is like calling a woman fat. We're supposed to automatically understand you guys, but you won't tell us your problems. Quebecers place high demands, high maintenance women place demands. It's all right for Quebecers to do something, but it's not alright for the ROC (reasonable accomodation, language laws), it's all right for high maintenance women to call other women fat, but hell awaits the guy that does so. As a person from Quebec speaking to English Canadians, you go on and on about how we don't get Quebec, and how Harper doesn't get Quebec, honestly how are we supposed to "get" Quebec, if we haven't a clue what we're in for. If this is how Quebecer's act, (pout about how English Canada doesn't get them, yet won't tell us what we're supposed to get) can you understand why Quebec is so frustrating for the Rest of Canada?

What makes you so certain she wouldn't follow his advice? For all intents and purposes the PM runs the show. Do you see the GG going to G8 meetings? As much as you would like to see your little coalition exercise pan out because its the new hip thing, many many more Canadians don't want it to. The GG has an out, an election. And because elections don't occur every 5 yrs, and there are seperatists involved, not to mention an enraged public, the GG will grant the election option. Let the coalition take their gong show to the people and see how well it does.

and what was wrong with patton?

Exactly, an election is the easiest out for everyone if the Liberals vote no. The GG saves her reputation, the left has a chance to defeat the gov't, and the right won't have a power change sans election.

an election is an opportunity and the most fair one at that

Kevin O' Leary

And in our system, we have an option to non-confidence called an election. If a coalition thinks it can form a maj. gov't, it can take it's proposal to the people. That is one thing about non-fixed election dates is that this is an actual option. If there are elections every 5 yrs., then I have no right to complain about a coalition. But since there is an out, they can take their idea to the people and let them decide.

I've made it perfectly clear that I want the firehose spending to cease immediately. Spending should only occur if it results in price increases, not having piles of grain on the ground, just like the stimulus you want so badly to occur, why should some industries get a stimulus and some not when times are bad? The ag subsidies that you are refering to are the ones that benefit Quebec producers. A large number of producers would prefer a tax cut. The 2% of the GST resulted in savings that amounted to more than "subsidies". Another point is that in business, it is far better off to lend/bankroll business's when it's fundamentals are sound, growth looks good, and will make everyone money. I don't think an auto bail out will do that, the BSE bailout was an abysmal failure. However gov't subsidies to the oil and gas industry and ethanol production have been extremely beneficial for our country as we can produce more exports and of higher value. As for doctors, I am sick of Universities and the CHA's sick little game of screwing the public over by capping the amt. of doctors and am equally sick of gov'ts by not imposing a harsh tax on those who decide to leave for the US.

Ah, but the coalition supporters can go to the polls and make a civilized statement of their problems with Harper and have a chance at getting their party/coalition into power. This side of the outrage is somewhat controlled and wouldn't be much of an issue. The other side however would be. If the coalition is so good, why not take it to the people and let them decide for themselves?