gdp's Comments

Macleans.ca : "Mulroney's from Baie-Comeau?"

Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:53:48 +0000

HA! It's hard to think when you're on TV. Hee hee.

Macleans.ca : Fear and loathing in Montreal

Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:58:43 +0000

And I vote for depressing over hilarious Philippe. Only in Quebec could a stupid e-mail flame war turn into a headline story about language. Chill people, chhhhiiiiillllllllll. Relaxe Max.

Macleans.ca : Fear and loathing in Montreal

Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:54:25 +0000

Jack, http://louisprefontaine.com/eric-amber.txt

Macleans.ca : UPDATE: ListeriosisReportWatc ... : Oh, wait, never mind. There it is.

Mon, 20 Jul 2009 20:43:10 +0000

That's not what Kady said, so the only person you're agreeing with is yourself.

Macleans.ca : A summer of discontent

Mon, 20 Jul 2009 20:06:52 +0000

Are you saying the media has no responsibility. What do you think would happen if Ignatieff advocated raising the GST in order to help get the deficit back under control? People would freak out. And what would the media report on? The merits of the actual policy? BORING! Or the effects on the horse race? I think we all know the answer to that question.

Macleans.ca : Blue-chip panels and the summer doldrums

Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:18:10 +0000

That's because all the punditocracy know that Harper just made that up on the spot so he wouldn't look like he doesn't care about the unemployed; which he clearly doesn't: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNe... The pundits are okay with cynicism. It confirms their world view of politicians. But any sign of weakness...ah, that's a mortal sin that CANNOT be forgiven.

Macleans.ca : Blue-chip panels and the summer doldrums

Mon, 20 Jul 2009 06:51:15 +0000

Calgary Junkie - I'm a card-carrying Liberal and I read the National Post. Makes excellent bird-cage liner after I've done rolling my eyes at the editorials. And the LPC plan is already on the record: "The Liberal party has proposed a national, 360-hour standard of EI eligibility, for as long as this crisis lasts. If implemented quickly, up to 150,000 more Canadians -- who've lost their jobs through no fault of their own and who have paid into the system --could qualify for EI benefits. That kind of change will have a positive effect on the Canadian economy." Oh that does mess with the narrative that Ignatieff never proposes detailed alternatives to what the Cons are doing. Oh well.

Macleans.ca : That wasn't so hard

Fri, 17 Jul 2009 12:50:40 +0000

Exactly. The real question is why did the Act stipulate that the PBO be under the thumb of the Library of Parliament? The Cons, at least if you believe their 2006 campaign rhetoric wanted an "create an independent Parliamentary Budget Authority to provide objective analysis directly to Parliament about the state of the nation’s finances and trends in the national economy". http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes2006/leadersparties/... Just not TOO independent I guess. After all, there's no reason that the PBO couldn't have been designated as a an Officer of Parliament like the Attorney General or the Official Languages Commissioner, instead of an officer of the Library of Parliament.

Macleans.ca : That wasn't so hard

Fri, 17 Jul 2009 09:33:48 +0000

Hmmm, reading some of the comments about Page from the resident Conbots, you get the impression he's not nearly as popular with them as say...Sheila Fraser. I guess what's good for the goose is NOT good for the gander! Try to stay on script guys. You're the "accountability" party, and the Liberals are the liars and crooks, remember?

Macleans.ca : Ekos-ting on fumes: Hey, at least the stuff about the Afghanistan mission is interesting!

Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:20:15 +0000

My theory is that, politically speaking, because the Conservatives and Liberals basically agree on the mission, then everyone knows it's going to end in 2011, and not before, so what's the point in thinking about it. the public is resigned to it.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:12:34 +0000

Besides which, we all know that about two seconds after Ignatieff does release his platform the discussion will switch from the merits of whatever policy he proposes to how it affects the horse race, how the Cons wil react, what polls show about how Canadians view the platform, etc.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:55:14 +0000

That may be true. I'm an LPC supporter and have my biases just like anyone else does. That doesn't invalidate the point I was trying to make however.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:14:59 +0000

Trying to "fit in" is something that human beings do. Haven't you ever had the experience of traveling abroad and then noticing, after a surprisingly short time, you start using local expressions and appropriating the local accent? What's important is that he's a Canadian citizen, and that he chose to come back here. Not that, at one point in his life, he may also have thought of himself as an American.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:13:02 +0000

And big deal that Ignatieff described himself as American. He had been living there for a number of years, and probably thought he would continue to do so for many more. Don't you know any expatriates? Don't you realize that people can have multiple identities, multiple loyalties, at the same time? It's especially easy for Canadians to "slip into" the identity of an American since we speak the same language, with more or less the same accent, grow up watching the same tv shows and movies, etc. Haven't you ever seen Canadian actors or professional athletes who go to the U.S. and, after a few years, start referring to themselves as Americans? I've noticed people like Jim Carey and Michael J. Fox do this numerous times. Does that subtract from their Canadianess? Only to people who possess a petty, insecure, jealous form of nationalism. If you love anyone else, than that means you don't really love me.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:12:17 +0000

Ah, good find. So he finally did "grudgingly admit" he was wrong, and "immediately changed the subject" when asked to elaborate. Well, baby steps I suppose.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:39:50 +0000

Not as unfortunate as the fact that Ignatieff has subsequently, and to his credit, explained that he made a mistake in judgment for supporting the invasion, (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/05/magazine/05iraq... while Mr. Accountability always avoids providing a straight answer as to whether he was wrong, and Jean Chrétien right, on the same issue. Not to mention the fact that Harper was an elected official at the time he badmouthed the Canadian govt to an American audience, and not just an academic.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:11:42 +0000

I stand corrected. He didn't go on Fox televison to say it. He said it to a meeting of the Council for National Policy, a "right-wing U.S. think tank": http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNe... He went on Fox television to complain about Canada not joining in the Invasion of Iraq. Which is fine. That'll work too. As for Canadians not handing Ignatieff the keys if he can't provide compelling reasons to vote for him beyond "I'm not Harper", I would say that's PLENTY compelling and getting more and more compelling the longer Harper stays in office. I know the Con plan is to drive up Igantieff's negatives (only way you can win another minority) but you seem not be noticing that Stevie's negatives are going through the roof at the same time.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 20:55:32 +0000

What I would say is that the levels of disgust with Harper are reaching such a critical mass now that focusing on him - and how he conducts politics - may be sufficient for the Liberals to win an election. I think I would just run a continous loop of last week's performance at the G8. Maybe throw in a few timely reminders of past hits like going on Fox televison to describe Canada as a third-rate European welfare state, or threatening to sue anyone who claimed he was connected to the Cadman bribe offers, before deciding umm...yeah...maybe better settle out of court on that one. Damn audio tapes. As for Quebec, I would run ads of his "separatists and socialists" venom from back in January. Maybe a reminder of his thoughts on the importance of culture and artists. Hell you can even run some special Alberta ads about income trusts! And then just close thing things off with shots of him...*shudder*...smiling. That should do the trick. An attractive platform would certainly not hurt though.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 20:38:22 +0000

Mmmm, I agree that Wells is very good at seeing the "weaknesses in the armor". The only problem is that he's been in the trenches so long, and gotten so cynical, that it's the only thing he sees.

Macleans.ca : And how's that coming along?

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 20:36:46 +0000

So Ignatieff should release his platform ahead of time (when the Cons can spend unlimited amounts of money distorting and attacking it "tax on everything"-style) because Wells and Radwanski are bored? Ermmm...maybe not.