Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Liberals have surrendered 43 chances to defeat Harper

TiVo wants you to know that Jack Layton said something rather interesting in the House of Commons today.

He noted that MPs have had 43 opportunities to defeat the Harper government on confidence matters -- 43 votes -- but the Dion Liberals have stopped them every time.

43 times on 43 votes.

And each and every one of those 43 times, Stephane Dion and the Liberals put their partisan interests first instead of taking Harper outside, like middle class families who want real change expected them to. Is that the kind of leadership that people who voted Liberal were looking for?

Only Jack Layton’s NDP have been standing with those on the centre-left who want Harper out now -- not just when it’s convenient for Dion’s backroom strategists.


Dana said...

If I understand you correctly you're saying you just want to defeat the Harperites and trigger an election even all the polls say that the Harperites will just win another minority.

Is that what you're saying?

Cause if that's what you're saying you're a time, energy, thought, committment and money waster of the first magnitude and I can safely ignore anything you say as hopelessly naive from here on out.

John W said...

Did you see the panel tonight on Mike Duffy on Climate Change with the NDP and Cons showing beyond any doubt there is an alliance against any policy coming from the Liberals..

Jack Layton is willing to endure 5 years of extreme right wing government which will forever change the face of Canada and wipe out 50 years of CCF-NDP progressive thought and achievement if he thinks he can be Leader of the Opposition.

northwestern_lad said...

John... I was watching the same thing tonight and I didn't see that at all. The NDP was making a totally different argument that the Con there, plain and simple. There is no alliance there and to say so is just flat out dishonest. Disagreeing with the Liberals doesn't mean that you're in cahoots with the Cons. It means you have a mind of your own.

James Curran said...

Yadda yadda.

John's right. The NDP have nothing better to do than beat up the Liberals. Conservative Scandal after scandal and all they want is to talk about the Liberals. I warned you before this strategy isn't/won't work for the Dippers.

Yadda yadda...yeah but the liberals....yadda, yadda....and the Liberals....

northwestern_lad said...

Oh James.... only if that were true... but if you want to keep saying otherwise go right ahead. The facts prove otherwise...

I like ya James, but this is getting tiresome... When your party decides to step up against this government, then you can take someone else to task. Until then, the NDP is by itself standing up to this government with it's words and actions

Blogging Horse said...

"Oh poor downtroden Liberals. Won't everyone just leave them alone?" (cue the violins, sobbing peasants and what not).

The only party in "alliance" with the Conservatives are the 96 Liberals who have kept Harper holed up in 24 Sussex for months by not voting them out 43 times!

Jack Layton and the NDP may not be beating up on the Liberals, but somebody should for giving Harper the majority government that 66% of the population didn't.

Maybe that's why the Grits are doing so great in the polls, huh, Dana? Just a thought.

janfromthebruce said...

I don't get it: as North_Western lad says, disagreeing with the Liberals doesn't mean that you're in cahoots with the Cons. It means you have a mind of your own.
But it does show that obviously the libs are in bed with the cons, because, although they love to squack, at the end of the day, they vote with the cons. Must be that they are in cahoots with the Cons or they weren't keep voting with them. Can't have it both ways - you are either with them or not. What's it going to be.

Blogging Horse said...

Jan, the Liberals have become like the 5 year old who calls the girl in class "poo-poo head" to mask a secret crush.

'Cause everytime Layton has tried to take Harper down, the Liberals are there to stop him.

Maybe if Harper would just agree to take Dion out for a malt and let him know he doesn't want to go steady, the rest of us could finally have the election Dion said he wanted 18 months ago.

Malcolm+ said...

It is important to remember that, despite their pretty words and pathetic posturing, a Liberative government would not govern in a substantively different manner than the current Conserveral minority-cum-majority.

The Liberatives - believing as they do in their divine right to be te government - would like to see Canadian politics simplified. Let Canadians choose between one rightwing party (the Liberatives) and another rightwing party which may or may not be slightly farther to the right (the Conserverals). Their strident anti-NDP tactics are designed to advance this false dichotomy.

(Note that "strategic" voting, for example, is not generally pushed in seats where it arguably makes sense, but rather i seats where the NDP is the principle alternative to the Conserverals [ie, Palliser], or where the Conserverals are not a factor [ie, Trinity-Spadina]. These strategies are not designed to defeat Conserverals at all, but rather to defeat New Democrats.)

Frankly, if five years of Harper majority is the cost of pushing the Liberatives to the back of the bus, it is short term pain for long term gain. It would allow for a real alternative to right wing policies, as opposed to Liberative lip service.