A Francophone immigrant who worked for the leftist CBC, a woman married to a Communist "filmmaker," is the former Liberal government's appointee to the position of Governor-General of Canada. She's the one the current government has to rely on for a decision whether the Conservatives can continue to run as elected to do as of six weeks ago.
I thought Obama was bad news.
I thought Obama was bad news.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has held power since February 2006 not only on the strength of his political cunning but also because no other political party is strong enough to mount a serious challenge to the Tories. Harper took a calculated gamble on calling an election this past October less than three years after the last election. While he won more seats, he still did not achieve a majority government.But suddenly, only six weeks after that election, the other political leaders -- who were roundly trounced in the October vote -- have declared that Harper and the Tories are intolerable. They have formed a coalition to vote the Tories down and take power. This maneuver is legal in parliamentary tradition, and I wrote about this possibility two years ago in American Thinker.Therefore, we could shortly have a new government headed up by the Liberal Party, who won only 26% of the vote in the last election, and a new Prime Minister, Stéphane Dion, unpopular with his own party, who just announced he was stepping down as leader of his party after the Liberals disastrous showing in the polls. The Liberals are teaming up with the left-leaning New Democratic Party, but this still doesn't give them enough seats to overwhelm the Tories.
To gain power, they must form a coalition with the Bloc Quebecois, a party for which there is no American equivalent, although the old Dixicrat party is the closest parallel. While other federal political parties campaign from coast to coast, the Bloc Quebecois operates only in Quebec and its avowed purpose is to represent the interests of the only majority French-speaking province in Canada.It doesn't take political genius to understand that the Bloc Quebecois can only be persuaded to join a coalition with promises of what's-in-it-for-Quebec. A possible answer to that question lies in the fact that the coalition leaders declare they must urgently, swiftly, dramatically, start spending a lot more money, to emulate their neighbors to the south in a fiscal stimulus package to stave off economic disaster.As columnist Andrew Coyne sarcastically notes:How could the government be so blind? Can it not see that unemployment has soared to 6.2%? Why, that's four-tenths of a percentage point above its recent, thirty-year low. And what about Canadians' fears of losing their home, what with the proportion of mortgages more than 90 days in arrears standing at an all-time record 0.2%? Okay, it's an all-time record low, but still. When will it realize there's a Depression on?
[W]hat Canadians demand is "stimulus." And stimulus, we all know, in a sophisticated, 21st century economy, can be delivered in only one way: by hiring large numbers of unionized men to dig holes in the ground (see "infrastructure.") Loosening monetary policy doesn't count. Tax cuts don't count. It only counts as "stimulus" if the government spends it. [More....]
There are those who say that together the three opposition parties make up 66 per cent of the vote cast in Oct. and therefore, they, not the current government are the plurality. But they neglect to mention that this election showed the lowest voter turn-out in Canadian history, or something like that. I wasn't paying attention. What it tells me is that roughly 50 percent of the eligable voters didn't vote at all. To follow the course of the three parties who want proportional representation, I suggest that those who didn't vote be given their representation as well: leave half the arseholes in Parliament with no seats. Yup, empty seat to represent those who didn't vote. It's only fair.