A Strategic Retreat

baird-surrender

Well, well… Harper flip-flops (again):

After 24 hours of peering into a yawning political abyss, the Harper government took a step back on Saturday, dropping a plan to kill subsidies for political parties.

“When it comes to the funding and subsidies that political parties get, we just don’t think it’s worth getting into an election on that issue,” Transport Minister John Baird said.

“We won’t be proceeding.”

A spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper said the government will have more to say on Sunday, suggesting there may be more further [sic] retreats in store.

Now, does anyone this side of Jupiter think that der Führer won’t try this again at some time down the road?

About these ads

38 Comments

Filed under STEPHEN HARPER Govrnment of Canada

38 responses to “A Strategic Retreat

  1. Bill D. Cat

    He will do this down the road . Sooner or later you all might figure out how to fundraise for the causes you hold so dear .

    P.S. should be AT sometime down the road

  2. Ottlib

    I am reminded of Monty Python’s The Holy Grail.

    RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY!!

  3. Bill D. Cat

    I am reminded of Monty Python’s The Holy Grail.

    Me too . I’ve had worse .

  4. Ti-Guy

    This isn’t the issue, so it won’t make a difference. No one believes Flaherty’s fiscal update and everyone’s mystified by it.

    Bye bye, Harper. Canadians have had enough of you.

  5. Ti-Guy

    By the way, Baird looks like a gorilla in that photo.

  6. Bill D. Cat

    No one believes Flaherty’s fiscal update and everyone’s mystified by it.

    And the issue is ?

  7. Ti-Guy

    That the Conservatives don’t understand the nature or the gravity of the economic crisis, are lying about state of the country’s finances and don’t know what they’re doing.

    You know…the usual.

  8. Bill, we are apparently already running a deficit according to the Parliamentary budget officer, yet Flaherty is claiming balanced budgets.

    While I may not support any kind of “action” like an ill advised bail out of the auto sector or other kinds of corporate welfare, I don’t like finance Ministers who lie. And this isn’t the first time Flaherty has tried to lie about balanced budgets – in 2002 he claimed a balanced budget in Ontario only to have a $6 billion deficit revealed when the Tories lost to Dalton McGuinty.

    Flaherty and the Cons ought to be ridden out of town on a rail for the horse shit “fiscal statement”. Even if they didn’t try to destroy their political enemies by means other than the ballot box.

    Imagine what they would do if they had a majority?

  9. Tory@York

    I am slightly disappointed that PM Harper backed down on the funding issue, but we’ll just have to see where it goes from here. But whatever party you are in, you have to admit, these are exciting political times. We’re certainly in for a turbulant ride during the next few months, coalition or not.

  10. Danny Olson

    Flaherty and Harper aren’t eager to post a sooty deficit just yet. Their end game is to go mega-bucks just before Harper dictates a new election, likely through re-veiling the similar end-of-public-financing of political parties gambit.
    Unfortunately, he blew this card now and it may cost him. See the tears behind those cold, blue eyes?

  11. Bill D. Cat

    So Mike , just what do you suggest ?

  12. Ti-Guy

    We’re certainly in for a turbulant ride during the next few months, coalition or not.

    Oh, we’re getting a coalition. You don’t poke Harper and then back down. You defeat him. Besides, we need to look at the books to see just how cooked they are.

  13. told ya..! This was just nuts even for PMSH.

  14. Gayle

    I still think it is best for the opposition to make Harper wear this recession – though I suppose they have something to fall back on if they take over and can prove he has been lying about our finances.

    By the way, did you know this talk of coalition is actually a coup d’etat? Just ask Sandy…

  15. I was taking a walk through Blogging Tories and I seen me this,Stephen Taylor: Prorogue?. Another masterstroke, one after another.

  16. Gayle

    Ahh yes, running away looks good on him.

    Talk about fiscal responsibility.

  17. You know – Harper doesn’t like being challenged and put on the spot and he’s vindictive as hell. Even if he were to prorogue – could they not go to the GG saying he is not governing and they have no confidence anyway?

  18. Ti-Guy

    Just ask Sandy…

    I can just imagine that conversation:

    Sandy: “It’s a coup d’état.”
    Me: “Sandy says it’s a coup d’état.”
    Sandy: “No I didn’t.”

  19. Tomm

    A Strategic Retreat.

    It will be an interesting week.

    Ti-Guy, be careful not to get too excited, you might have an accident.

    …Or wear Depends.

  20. Ti-Guy

    Ti-Guy, be careful not to get too excited, you might have an accident.

    Seriously, it’s not that exciting. I just want these juvenile delinquents out of my Parliament.

    I’m sure you’ll agree you and your party are unfit to govern.

  21. Hmmm…..it’s Baird and Polievre everywhere – where are Harper, Flaherty, Prentice, et al?

  22. Tomm

    As if.

    They are doing a fine job. It would have been better with a majority, but I guess that will have to wait until the Coalition of the Big Balls breaks down.

    I’m guessing 8 months. I’m guessing that the combined support for all three parties at the time of the collapse will be under 50%.

    But whose to say. Maybe sanity will return to the Liberal locker room and they will begin to see some of what the Oracle can show them right now.

    Things like, the juxtaposition of their public comments two weeks before and two weeks after. Their accepting powerful NDP cabinet ministers. Their having to make the ugly decisions that they thought they had left to the Prince of Darkness (i.e. Harper).

    The dirty business of the BQ.

  23. Tomm, Harper is damaged goods, no matter what the outcome of this. I say, good. He rolled the dice, like his mentor.

  24. Tomm

    Blues Clair,

    Harper will certainly carry the scar forward with him. It may make him more attractive, like Chretien, who knows?

    But he will never be the same. That is an interesting side to this. If the Grits retreat from the abyss, after looking into it, then this new Parliament will not be the same. Harper will carry a scar, and the Grits will carry a new sense of seriousness to their business.

    I don’t think anything short of a baseball bat upside the head will effect the Dippers, but they are only the sidekick here.

  25. Indeed, I have feeling the coalition won’t happen. Now, the size of Harper’s wound is the question. Just speculating here, but, I’m sure the Liberals, Bloc, and NDP will have many demands that Harper will have to cave into with the next budget. That should make his base happy.

  26. Ti-Guy

    Does anyone know what Tomm’s talking about?

  27. Tomm

    BC,

    Yes, I think you are right. If the coalition doesn’t happen, it may be because Harper commits to opening up the doors to power so that others get some say in the economic decisions.

    His base will be pissed. They want to see knockout punches, not 15 round decisions.

    But Harper owns the conservative side of politics right now and I don’t think his stength will really be affected, except for perhaps some drop in contributions.

  28. Tomm

    Ti-Guy,

    I’m just babbling.

    Since the events of Thursday I haven’t slept. I have spent all my time trying to track you through your many blog visits. From RT through Wells and Kady, you have been one busy boy. I just don’t have the stamina of a young pup like you.

    Ti-Guy, was that cryptic enough or do you want another couple of paragraphs?

  29. Ti-Guy

    You shouldn’t stalk, Tomm. It’s so illegal.

    Are you sock-puppeting?

  30. Tomm

    No.

    I didn’t post there, just read the comments.

    Wells has a dry sarcasm. Kady is just wonderfully earnest. Macleans has some first class political bloggers.

  31. RT, enjoy your blog. But one thing: you really shouldn’t use Führer thing. Harper’s just another neo-con but hardly compares to Hitler. It diminishes Hitler’s evil and unfairly elevates Harper’s misguidedness. Best left alone. Enough epithets we can use without that one. Otherwise, good post.

  32. Tomm

    RT,

    You posed a question:

    “Now, does anyone this side of Jupiter think that der Führer won’t try this again at some time down the road?”

    Hard to tell. You can certainly bet on his opening up this little funding can once he gets a majority government.

    But I’m guessing he may feel that he over played his hand a touch and is now waiting to see if the Coalition of the Big Balls is similarly minded.

    This little funding discussion might be off the table for awhile. But it sure would be sweet if the parties had to actually replace hot air with money.

    There is no reason that my vote should give $1.95 to anyone. If I want money to go somewhere, I should be doing that directly. How lazy a nation have we become that we expect our “effort” to vote to also be an automatic donation?

    “…Can someone press the remote for me, I don’t feel like moving my hand…”

  33. Yes, Tomm that 1.95, hang on to it tightly. You know, I don’t like my tax dollars spent on roads I don’t drive on.

    Goodnight.

  34. wilson

    ”we are apparently already running a deficit according to the Parliamentary budget officer, yet Flaherty is claiming balanced budgets.”

    Mike, Flahrety said the budget would have been in deficit $6B, that’s why the cuts to MP/Minister spending, wage caps for federal employees and the now famous $30m party funding cut. It was part of balancing the budget.
    Because of the cuts, the budget is in surplus $800m, make that $770m with the entitlements being returned to the parties.
    Until the Libs demand we go into deficit for the bailouts.

    In all the excitement of the Liberals getting back into power without spending a dime,
    you Libs have a pretty serious optics problem.

    Finance Minister Layton, bailouts, and CTV reports Dion has promised Quebec more money, and dropped the $50b corp tax cuts.

    That may seen a small price to pay for power, but it’s not looking so good from the West.
    Oh, lost my head, forgot who I was talking to.
    Go Kyoto go, take the Oilsands down with you!!

  35. sharonapple88

    Mike, Flahrety said the budget would have been in deficit $6B, that’s why the cuts to MP/Minister spending, wage caps for federal employees and the now famous $30m party funding cut. It was part of balancing the budget.
    Because of the cuts, the budget is in surplus $800m, make that $770m with the entitlements being returned to the parties.

    Running a deficit for a short period of time wouldn’t kill the nation. For some other nationals like Dubai where the national debt is higher than the GDP this might be a problem, but after several years of running a balanced budget and cutting the debt, it wouldn’t kill the federal government to go into the red for a few years. Now it would deal a blow to the Conservatives since they ran on the point of there being a balanced budget, but Canada would be fine with this measure.

    And for some reason hearing that the government is going to make spending cuts to as to run a surplus during an economic downturn is more disturbing than comforting.

    Finance Minister Layton, bailouts, and CTV reports Dion has promised Quebec more money, and dropped the $50b corp tax cuts.

    Yeah, Layton’s been all over the media talking about being finance minister… actually couldn’t find anything on this outside of chatter on Conservative blogs. Ditto about most of those other points. Closest we probably have to the opposition’s plans are Scott Brison’s points.

    That may seen a small price to pay for power, but it’s not looking so good from the West.
    Oh, lost my head, forgot who I was talking to.
    Go Kyoto go, take the Oilsands down with you!!

    In this economic climate, the tar sands project is going down regardless of Kyoto.

    People argue that the auto-industry is a dirty, uncompetitive industry that shouldn’t receive a bail-out… well, you could argue that the oil sands is that and more. It’s only profitable when oil is close to $100 a barrel. Imagine how much more expensive it would also be if the industry dealt with the pollution it makes from the process instead of leaving it in large tar ponds (50 square km, so large they can seen from space… one so large that it’s being held back by the third-largest dam in the world), or if companies were told to restore all the land they’re mining instead of just a fraction of it? As for being competitive product — it doesn’t appear so with the high expense and with groups in the US like the state of California and the mayor council moving away from tar sands oil.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s