Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Why Do the Libs Want an Election Now?

Simple.

First: They recognize the mistake they made in appointing and anointing the Harvard intellectual as leader of their party, but they don't want to admit that. After all, they wanted us to be wowed by having such a towering intellect as our fearless leader. They are, after all, Libs, and their natural position is to tower above us while we prostrate ourselves in front of them. And since they don't want to admit they made a mistake, they don't want to change their leader without the customary rejection of him at the polling booth. No siree. They want to be able to blame the voter. They're Libs, after all.

Second: Iggy knows he made a big mistake in accepting the coronation; he is uncomfortable in the role, and he is looking for the most honorable way out. And he too is looking for a way to pin it on the Canadian voter. It's better to make your exit after losing an election, than before it. Being able to blame it on someone else takes the spotlight off the self-serving hubris.

So. The Libs have decided to make the tax payer/voter take the rap and the bill so they can protect their asses, get it over with, to rise from the ashes another day, all the while blaming the honky, unwashed voter.

Thanks, Libs.

For what it's worth, I do think Iggy would be much more in his element locked away in an ivory tower and I don't think he was really leading the Party.  I've read some of his stuff and knew something about him, before he came back to Canada. If he had been leading the Party, his positions and by extension, those of the Libs would be somewhere else on the political spectrum - like on the spot where the Cons are now, and the Cons would be further to the right. And for this we are paying. Thanks Libs.

I hope the Canadian public sends you (the Party) a very clear message that you have not been working for us and you are, as a consequence, fired. I hope we send you into a corner where you can sulk and cry until we have undone the Liberal legacy and you have lost your arrogance.

Labels: , , , , ,

6 Comments:

Blogger Dave in Pa. said...

So, you're not buying into the theory that this is a Lib-Bloq post-election coalition conspiracy, which is the real ulterior goal? That the Lieberals, Dippers and Bloqheads all know that individually none of them has a prayer of winning a majority BUT that a "coalition" could conceivably oust the Conservatives unless the Conservatives win a majority?

March 30, 2011 9:20 am  
Blogger Louise said...

No, I don't find that one very convincing. As a Con party talking point, it's aefully useful, though, and if the Libs, Dippers, Bloqheads hadn't calculated that factoid into the equation, then they are all pretty stupid (which is true, regardless, but why shine a spot light on it).

Poll after poll in recent weeks have given the Cons a healthy edge, and the Canadian public remembers well the last time the "coalition" after the fact was tried. I don't think the Libs are so stupid they would try that again with it still fresh in our minds, but they are arrogant enough to make us pay for their mistake in hoisting Iggy on to the Party Throne.

March 30, 2011 11:02 am  
Blogger Louise said...

He,he,he,he. A comment attached to this article says pretty much the same thing:

"Give the Conservative the majority for this poorly timed election and get on with governing Canada...and keep getting our economy back on track. Get rid of the Liberal Foreign Minister Leader who will probably cut bait & run after he loses anyway...He has other plans and forced the election because he wants out & can do it this way to save the little face he has left...let's see if he stays in Canada once this ridiculous excercise is over."

March 30, 2011 2:51 pm  
Blogger Dave in Pa. said...

From my reading, the Cons now have 143 seats and need to pick up at least 12 seats to have a majority.

It'd be wonderful if all this Grit-Bloq-NDP scheming and obstructionism backfired on them and the Conservatives win a decent sized majority, say 160 seats. There'd be moaning and wailing in their party HQ and in the CBC and other MSM offices all over Canada! :-)

So, what's your election prediction then? Increased seats but still minority for the Cons? A relatively modest majority for the Cons? About the same seat distribution as now?

April 01, 2011 10:49 am  
Blogger Louise said...

First, based solely on emotion, I want a massive majority for the Cons so the Libs will be forced to rethink who they are.

I would love to see Justin Trudeau go down to a Con by a wide margin. The symbolism of that would be magnificent.

Same with Elizabeth May (except, of course, she doesn't hold a seat now, but I'd like to see the Greens wiped off the map).

I'd also like to see Libby Davis (NDP) and Ralph Goodale (Lib), that hard-assed dipper who replaced Rahim Jaffer in Edmonton go down.

That Edmonton woman, Linda Duncan, is suffering too much from self-inflicted ugliness and I think her election was just a fluke (as in a protest vote), so it's quite possible she'll be replaced and since Albertans for the most part are allergic to Libs, I doubt that a Lib will win, although it has happened before. During Chretien's reign there was a woman from Edmonton who was in his cabinet (I can't remember her name.)

But it would be nice to see a clean sweep by the Cons of Western Canada.

However, having said all that, I have no idea how this is going to turn out. We have such a left-leaning press (including the TV - CBC in particular) and they are very influential during elections, so I will probably have heart failure if my hopes are realized and I'll have to miss all the fun.

However, I have a gut feeling the long, tortuous tenure of Canada's Natural Governing Party is teetering on the brink, and whether we see a rout by the Cons or a return to a hung parliament, and a series of hung parliament (God help us) I suspect Canada as a whole is slowly turning, and I think the threat of Islamism and the scourge of political correctness is the cause. My fingers, toes, legs, arms and eyes are crossed.

April 01, 2011 12:16 pm  
Blogger Louise said...

And another point, I hope we have a decent voter turnout. The low turnout in recent years rather disturbs me. I don't think it bodes well for the future.

April 01, 2011 12:18 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home