babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
What's there to understand? None of the PM's you mention came from upper class backgrounds.
Chretien: Son of a mill worker.
Mulroney: Son of a mill worker.
Pearson: Son of a Methodist minister.
Now, I'm sure Chretien's and Mulroney's fathers were probably skilled workers, and so made a good wage. And minister's usually get a free house and other benefits.
Maybe you consider that upper class.
"Layton should just admit that his coalition deal was with Dion. he did it because Dion was so weak that the NDP could have been in the driver seat if things had played out as Layton wanted them to."
I can aboslutely assure you that one thing you will never hear Layton say publicly in a hundred million years is "my deal with only valid as long as Dion was Liberal leader because i thought i could control and manipulate him. Now that the Liberals have a more formidable leader - the deal is off". Are you some NDP-hater who is trying to give the party the most totally destructive advice imaginable???
Liberals refuse to come up with ideas for fighting the recession. In a well thought-out move the Liberals, who are backing away from the coalition by insisting they want to see "concrete action" from Harper, are now refusing to say what that concrete action might be.
This is fascinating. The Tories force Iggy to back down from the Coalition. Iggy does but, to save face, says he wants the Tories to produce a stimulus budget. The Tories, hoping to steal his thunder and gain an accomplice, ask Liberals what that budget should contain. They refuse to tell him.
I'm not sure who looks stupider here.
I don't know if that is his problem but there seems to be a complete misreading of the game being played by Jack, Iggy and Harper. Its not something unique to here, either, the media's echo chamber declaring the death of the coalition is in full gear. Repeating an untruth may spread it far and wide but it will not make the untruth a truth (see 'Iraq has WMD and we know where they are' for further details).
Iggy can not champion the coalition option right now, but he could kill it. Why hasn't he? He is using it to exact concessions, ok, that's one possible reason but they are concessions based on the existence of a deal to take power. What concessions would satisfy him? He, wisely, hasn't said. Jack is playing right along on this. Coalition if necessary but not necessarily coalition is channelling a pretty successful strategy in Canada. We did get conscription, in the end, but by the time it arrived it did so with only a slight blip on the public opinion radar as opposed to a full-on protest. If the coalition's "reintroduction" goes as smoothly we will be debating who should be the NDP cabinet in weeks.
Ignatieff has reportedly written 17 books. How can someone who has written so voluminously be such an unknown quantity. Clearly I need to get my ass to the library and start reading over the holidays. I suggest we all do the same.
This was all covered in the 2006 Liberal leadership campaign.
Ignatieff is essentially an Isaiah Berlin-style individualist; except where the interests of the great powers are concerned. In that case, the national identities of those countries (the US, maybe Russia) are so transcendant and perfect that they are in fact universal (Empire Lite stage).
Of course, these were his ideas when he was singing for his supper in the UK/USA (where his books were written). Now that he must please a Canadian audience, we'll see what the line is (he has a new book coming out in the spring, in time for the leadership convention).
You have the right to challenge whatever you please.
You do not have the right to lie.
I have never proposed "allying with the Conservatives."
So sad that you are prepared to lie through your teeth to defend your pathetic, right wing Liberal Party.
That exchange was a few days ago, right after Iggy's ascension. In the time since events has unolded as I suggested. The Liberals narrative is all about the Harper government listening, taking this seriously. Fell good stuff. No substantive expectations being mentioned, let alone raised.
While Jack Layton has been talking about the substance which we must see- and do not expect- in the Throne Speech. All the things he has mentioned are in the Coalition agreement package, which is important, but he has made no reference to that. IE, its all about the substantive requirements, not about the coalition.
Further, Jack has featured aspects of the stimulus package that it is guaranteed will not be offered Harper even if he bends backward completely:
"Housing, child care on NDP list"
"The federal budget must offer affordable housing and child care programs alongside support for lagging industries in order to receive the NDP's support, Jack Layton said yesterday."
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=1083909
Even if Harper produces exactly the kind of package that is Iggys best hope for declaring victory it will all be bailouts, infrastructure and other investment in development, etc. Affordable housing and child care programs are not going to be on the list.
They are also programs that appeal to NDP and Liberal and Lib/NDP voters [plus a lot of Cons/NDP swing voters in BC and elsewhere].
And, later the NDP can remind people what the Liberals passed on in favour of propping up the Harper regime... whose honeymoon around doing the right thing will be measured in mere weeks after the glow of the Throne Speech.
[For Jack's comments see also. Layton not expecting 'miracle'. Doubts federal budget will contain proposals needed to win support of opposition parties. http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/555105 ]
Iggy is definitely not in the catbirds seat on this.
The positioning the Liberals want is to be able to blame Harper when the economy goes sour "and you didn't do enough."
There is an obvious flaw in that. Then why did the Liberals vote for the Throne Speech?
Because the coaliton agreement was available to the Liberals- featuring the very same 'doing more' that the Liberals will be wanting to say should have been done.
Which is why Jack talks about the substance now and for the next several weeks. It isn't the coalition that matters- its what the coalition set out. and how that becomes the measure.
In my opinion, if the Coalition comes to pass then people will be measuring it by what it does, not about how they did not think it was right/wise. That may or may not be true, and we won't find until if it happens.
But what most voters think about the coalition itself will definitely be forgotten if it never happens. Critics just assumed the NDP would continue promoting the coalition itself. It was always evident that was neither desirable or necessary. So its no surprise that the NDP has focused completely on the substance of what was in the coalition agreement.