kimmy

Then you should probably turn off your computer and call Mr. Martin ASAP. He desperately needs your help. Imagine? We don't need to imagine. We saw last election what the Liberal Party can do, in its current incarnation. They turned what was assumed to be a majority government for Team Martin into a minority government and what appears to have been a near-defeat. And they've appeared directionless and ineffectual ever since, unable to manage public opinion or put up a facade of confidence on any issue, except briefly after the healthcare talks. Imagine what the Liberal Party can do in their present circumstances? I'm sure their opponents are salivating just thinking about it. I would agree that they have shot their last bolt; they've been handed a rocketlauncher, giftwrapped by Mr Chretien himself. As people keep mentioning Mulroney did this or Sir John A did that, I keep finding myself reminded that both Mulroney and MacDonald were dumped unceremoniously from office. -kimmy

What does that mean? I think a look at those little bar-graphs tells the story. Among low-income earners, Liberal support has bled to the NDP. Among mid- and high-income earners, Liberal support has bled to the Tories. Among federalist Quebecois, Liberal support has bled to the Conservatives. Among the "soft separatists", Liberal support has bled to the Bloc. It is particularly surprising that even in Quebec, the Conservatives are presently polling better than the Liberals. It's always been assumed that federalist Quebecois would have no choice but to vote Liberal, but perhaps that's not the case anymore. For a long time the Liberals have won elections by occupying the biggest chunk of the centre... and right now their piece of the centre has shrunk a lot since the Feb 14 poll. -kimmy

It's great that you guys can keep your senses of humour at a time like this. Never lose that. you don't see the flagrant abuse of the contract awarding process as a rather major portion of this? -kimmy

I've always been somewhat in favor of waiting for the report. I'll point out that the Liberals and their boosters haven't felt the same way until just a couple of weeks ago. The recent bundling of Kyoto and Atlantic equalization measures was, allegedly, an attempt to provoke a non-confidence vote, apparently in the belief that the Liberals would fare better in an election now than they would after the Gomery report. And of course, prior to the last election, the opposition parties called in Martin to hold off on an election until after the results of the inquiry were known; Martin declined. His plea last week for the opposition to not defeat his government until after the report comes out was the first time they've said anything to the effect of not wanting to go to the polls until the report comes out. Was this sudden interest in waiting for Gomery's report prompted by an epiphany of some sort? Or was this change of heart just the latest strategic decision in their "oh shit- what do we do now?" damage-control plan? Perhaps it was motivated by idealism, or perhaps it was motivated by political self-interest-- people will have to judge for themselves. And the Conservatives' decision on whether to wait for Gomery's report or support a non-confidence motion? Perhaps that decision will also be made by idealism or perhaps political self-interest-- people will have to judge that for themselves too. -kimmy

Mulroney's pumping taxpayer money into Bombardier seems like an odd thing for a Liberal supporter to complain about, considering how much money the Liberals have given to Bombardier since they took office... -kimmy

I thought that most denizens of this forum would know me well enough by now to know that when I "cast aspersions" I don't play around. I thought I'd been clear that I was kidding. I've already explained myself. I'm sorry you didn't take it in the spirit it was intended. That's about all the apology I can find in my heart to give you. If you honestly feel I've cast aspersions upon you, then take it up with the Moderator, or perhaps just get over it. And if you don't honestly feel I've cast aspersions on you but are pretending to because you think you can score some cheap points or something... well, that's sort of lame. -kimmy

Hey, if it happens in the states, then let the good times roll! At least Cagerattler has managed to concede that this is a cash-for-favours scam. That's progress, I suppose, but it's only part of the accusations against the Liberals. The stuff the Liberals are accused of happens all the time in the US too, or at least I gather as much from what I've seen on "The Sopranos". Except that rather than sending Furio in with a blow-torch and a pair of pliers to deal with businessmen who wouldn't "donate" to the Family, it sounds like Alfonso merely sent Tony in to warn that their contracts could get cancelled if they didn't "donate". -kimmy tightlips

Dear Fleabag, Of the 8 Edmonton ridings, the Liberals won only 2... Deputy PM McLellan by less than 800 votes, and longtime local favorite David Kilgour by less than 200 votes. In the 6 ridings contested by lesser Liberal candidates, the Conservative candidates won by large margins. I'm not exactly sure how anybody could interpret those results as "big Liberal support". The two Liberal incumbents who held their seats did so in their usual cliffhanger style, but I'd interpret that as an endorsement of the candidate, not of the party. I can't imagine McLellan faring better at the polls next election than she did last time out. And as for Kilgour, I saw on the news tonight that he's considering crossing the floor (as he did earlier in his career over the GST.) -kimmy

uh, I knew that. I was just having a little fun. (hence the ) chee and people say *I* need to lighten up. -

If elections were criminal trials, you could probably get Paul Martin acquitted on a "reasonable doubt" defence. But elections aren't criminal trials, and Paul Martin doesn't have the right to be presumed elected until proven guilty. Personally, while I think Paul Martin is probably a good person at heart, I'm just no longer confident in his abilities, and that's all the reason I need to not vote for his party next election. There's also the question of how many of Chretien's old associates are still in prominent positions in the party. Even if one believes Martin was innocent and unaware of wrongdoing, what about the Chretienites in the party that are still there? If all the Chretien loyalists were defeated in the next election, would Paul Martin have enough seats to even be official opposition? Further, even if one assumes Martin's innocence and ignores questions about remaining corrupt elements within the party, there's still the question of whether people can trust PMPM to deal with things in a thorough, complete, and effective manner. We've seen the resistance from within his own party. Do people really trust him to do a good (or "good enough") job of seeing justice done? What I'm getting at, is that even if Paul Martin didn't personally do anything wrong, that's not a very compelling reason to vote for him. -kimmy

Whatever else her qualifications, Stronach's french will never be good enough to be PM. -kimmy

I don't get the logic behind that. While the Liberals haven't yet noted a major drop in nationwide polls, as you note, the Liberals have been hit hard in at least a couple of "hot-zones", Quebec and Alberta at the very least. In fact many observers believe that the Liberals have been so thoroughly battered in Quebec that they could be swept completely off the map, or at the very least lose 15 or more of their Quebec seats. Assuming they lost 15 seats in Quebec and 2 more in Alberta, and held their seats in every riding they currently have, that still leaves them at only 116 seats. Where are they going to get the 39 more seats they'll need to get a majority? I'm skeptical that they'll even hang on to all of the ridings they have outside Quebec and Alberta, let alone manage to secure a whopping 39 more. What's going to drive that kind of wave of support? Leaving aside scandals, they haven't exactly been setting the world ablaze with anything else they've done in office either. Even if most voters disregard the scandals as "not Paul's fault" (a big "if," you'll agree), I still don't see exactly what it is that's going to prompt big numbers of voters who didn't support them in June 2004 to change their mind in November 2005. -kimmy

Yeah. What Argus said. -kim

We recognized the quote. It was used often during the election campaign and has been discussed here before too. I just didn't want to ruin your fun. Yeah, and just happened to also change the meaning and remove any context from the quote. The REAL context of the quote: Harper (with the NCC at the time) was being interviewed for reaction to Chretien's comment that he would apply some "tough love" to the West. Harper's comment is that he believes Chretien knows his comments wouldn't further reduce Liberal support in the west, because Liberal support in the west was already largely confined to ridings where regional issues are a non-issue with a large portion of the voters. Bigotted? Not really. The only judgment made about Asian immigrants is that they tend to vote Liberal. I believe polling tends to support that view. The assumption that there are regions of cities where minorities gather so that the can live with people like themselves (the real definition of "ghetto") should not be very controversial. Every major city in Canada has a "Chinatown" or something like it. There are parts of every major city in Canada where you won't find English signs on shops. There *are* ethnic enclaves in most major Canadian cities. Do you have any *real* issues with Harper's quote, or is it just something you hoped would sound "scary"? -kimmy

Then she is a bigot or an idiot. Its really not that hard to call a spade a spade; I wish more Conservastives would try it. Poor choice of words? The quote is absurd, not accurate. I failed to notice that Cagerattler couldn't even copy the quote correctly. Here's the full quote, with the omitted part in bold for emphasis. I can't vouch for Manitoba or Saskatchewan, but in Alberta the Liberals' holdings are in downtown Edmonton and Millwoods... calling those ridings ethnic ghettos is a touch indelicate, but not far off the mark, particularly when you consider the full meaning of "ghetto" and not the urban gangsta connotation it has developed. And in BC, their turf is confined to the GVA, where caesar of all people has complained about bloc voting by immigrants. I don't think there's any secret that the Liberals are highly dependent on the ethnic vote in a number of ridings, particularly in Vancouver-Surrey, which is why the Sikh Golden Temple's proclamation on same-sex marriage during the PM's trip to Asia was of much concern within the party. -kimmy

Defeated Montreal-area Liberal candidate Yolande Thibault's campaign called her African-born BQ opponent a N***** after the last election. As for this... "You have to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from Eastern Canada; people who live in ghettos and are not integrated into Western Canadian society." ... the truth is, it's more accurate than most would care to admit. The mistake wasn't in the quote itself, it was saying it out loud. -kimmy

That's a very good point. I was just pointing out that the guy at the top of the budget does not sign every cheque or approve every expense. That argument gets used a lot, and I think it's false and innuendoriffic. It's like imagining that Bill Gates personally knows about it when Microsoft hires a new employee or buys some ad-time on a tv station in Florida. Your point about the size and strength of Paul Martin's support is well taken, although I'm not sure what the breakdown of Martin's support in the party is in terms of Quebec caucus vs the rest of Canada. I do recall Martin turfing Stephane Dion, and possibly others, from cabinet posts when he took over as PM, and he had to bring in Lapierre as his Quebec point-man. It might be that PMPM just doesn't have the right connections in the Quebec wing of the party. We do know that the Party people who have been fingered so far are people with close ties to Chretien, and we know that Chretien and his loyalists had an intensely adversarial relationship with Martin. Perhaps somebody with more insight into Paul Martin's strength in the Quebec wing of the party could address this question. I'm sure that Martin knew something about what was going on, but I'm not sure I'm convinced that he had insider knowledge of the kinds of abuses that we're now finding out about at the inquiry. You make very good points about Martin and the call for public inquiry. -kimmy

Yay! Nice to see you again Indeed. Those of us who've been following this already had a pretty good idea what was going on, thanks to testimony from others. And among those who haven't been following this, there are probably a significant number who just don't care, or have already made up their minds. But Brault's testimony, unlike much of the other testimony, was vivid and attention-grabbing. He did not have the "convenient memory lapses" which have characterized many of the other witnesses. His description of brown envelopes left on chairs in restaurants, "the Choo-Choo Man", and other details, was a departure from the dry testimony that's characterized the inquiry. I think that potentially had the effect of getting the attention of people who wouldn't normally pay attention. I think the publication ban also had the effect of creating interest in Brault's testimony. And I think the Liberals' decision to have their own lawyer attend the proceedings also served to create interest-- if they had to have a lawyer there, then whatever Brault was saying must have been trouble. Ultimately I think that was a blunder by the Liberals-- it made them look frightened, and Brault scored points off the lawyer in their exchanges. And yes, as Mr Coyne says, the "Trust us, we're different" is not very reassuring. The Conservatives have a lot of work to do on their own platform before they go to the polls. Convincing people not to vote Liberal is only half the battle. I must admit I'm concerned and discouraged at the lack of concrete positions coming fron the Conservatives right now. -kimmy

Or, a prosecutor might suggest, a "pattern of behavior". One respect in which the sponsorship program may have been different from other government portfolios is that the Liberals say they intentially bypassed normal contract regulations in the interest of expediency. "We were saving the country!" they've said, by way of justifying their scoff-law attitude toward the rules in this instance. Now, I don't know that it's true and I don't know that it's not true. Did Chretien go to Gagliano and Guite and say "Spend whatever money you need to, and damn the rules," or was that something that they didn't decide until after Sheila Fraser found the irregularities? I don't know, and in the big picture it doesn't matter that much. But in the question of whether the same kind of attitude went on in other departments, I suppose it's relevant. Another thing which I suppose is somewhat relevant to the question of whether the same kind of practices went on in other programs, is that the RCMP has laid fraud charges against Guite and Brault in regard to bogus contracts for the gun registry as well as sponsorship. -kimmy

That it's against the law? It is against the law. Do some reading. None of the more sensible Liberal supporters on the forum are going to take issue with the claim. -kimmy

Thanks for posting. One thing I noticed from the specifications is that the C-27J appears to be much better at short take-offs and short landings, which I would think could be an important consideration. Overall, I just hope that the decision is made on the basis of needs and merits, not political factors. -kimmy

I certainly agree with that. I am sure that most Liberal MPs are honest people (as politicians go, anyway. ) The thing I'm having a problem with, though, is that when the relatively few people who have been implicated are so close to the top of the food-chain, and so central in the party's machinery, I question whether it makes sense to consider them "rogues" or "isolated". -kimmy

Personally, I do not believe that the Pope was a soulless clone at the time of his death last week. At the time of his death I sensed a powerful fluctuation in the Force at the time, which I believe was because a great spiritual presence was released from earthly bonds, although it could be that a planet has been blown up in a galaxy far far away. -kimmy

No link to offer... but I would suggest that if people use Canadian news-sources (CBC, CTV, the Globe'n'Mail, the Star, PoliticsWatch, etc etc) as their source of information about this then they should be just fine... -k

That's it? caesar's gone? hmm. She forgot to stomp her feet and shout "We want to be proud Canadians, not USA BUTT KISSERS!!!!" on the way out. Later, caesar. It's been fun. -kimmy