I'll take what Ignatieff said from before he was leader, and give you back the Conservative record on something that matters, like the economy and our finances. You know, the thing the Tories are so desperately desperately trying not to talk about (thus all this false focus on coalitions).

OK, now, let's follow the bouncing ball, or red line, as the case may be:

Feb. 5, 2008 (http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSOT…). “The way to manage this economy through difficult global times is not—as the Liberal Party would do—to drive us into deficit.”

Oct. 7, 2008 (http://www2.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story…). “I know economists will say that we can run a small deficit, but the problem is once you cross that line, as we see in the United States, nothing stops deficits from getting larger and larger and spiralling out of control, and we want to avoid the kind of government, household and trade deficits we see in the United States.”

Oct. 14, 2008 (http://www.thestar.com/FederalElection/article/…). “We’ll never go back into deficit.”

Oct. 17, 2008 (http://www2.canada.com/windsorstar/news/story.h…). “I believe, based on everything I’ve seen so far, that there’s no reason why the government of Canada won’t stay in balance, why we can’t maintain a balanced budget this year,” Harper said, speaking after a meeting in Quebec City with French President Nicolas Sarkozy. But for future years, he said it would be premature to say if his government will be able to maintain a surplus. “Others are speculating about future years. I don’t think we’re yet in position to know all the information in that regard and I think it would be premature to speculate on that.”

Nov. 6, 2008 (http://www2.canada.com/windsorstar/news/story.h…). “One message was very clear. Don’t be afraid to run a deficit if the deficit is in the best interests of the economy.”

Nov. 24, 2008 (http://www2.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story….). “The government of Canada today is in surplus,” he said Sunday at the conclusion of the summit. “The government of Canada today is not planning a deficit. But if the government of Canada decides … that we do have to engage in fiscal stimulus, that government spending is essential not just to shore up economic activity but investment markets, that would be the occasion we would go into what would be called a cyclic or a short-term deficit. But we would only do that if we can assure ourselves that we can do that while preserving a structural surplus, that any return to a normal level of economic growth will immediately take us out of deficit. And that’s the only condition under which we would consider that set of actions.”

Nov. 27, 2008 (http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Public…). “Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, Canada is not currently running a deficit and this is thanks to the good management of the Minister of Finance, who will present his economic and fiscal update later today.”

Dec. 1, 2008 (http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Public…). “If we run a deficit of $30 billion in this country, we are running a structural deficit. It took a long time to get out of that problem. We have taken the long-term view, the view that says we have to help Canadian business with the Bank of Canada, with Bill C-50, with ensuring adequate credit in this country. There are more provisions in that regard in the fall economic statement, all good for the country, not running big deficits.”

Dec. 16, 2008 (http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/554390). “We’re going to have to run a deficit, do some spending measures we hadn’t planned on doing, but I think, if we do those things, we should be able to come out of this (economic downturn) pretty strong in due course.”

Jan. 23, 2009 (http://www.thestar.com/article/576621). “I think we’re in a rare time where you need a deficit.”

Jan. 27, 2009 (http://www.budget.gc.ca/2009/speech-discours/sp…). “There will be no long-running or permanent deficit … As the economy recovers, we fully expect to emerge from deficit and return to surplus within five years.”

May 14, 2009 (http://www.dose.ca/news/story.html?id=1596802). “Our deficits will be large, but they will be temporary,” Harper told Quebec municipal leaders gathered for an annual convention. “In fact, in the short term, they will be as large as they have to be to help us weather this recession. As a country, we can afford it. But only if these deficits are temporary and our stimulus spending ends when the recession ends.”

May 26, 2009 (http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2009/05/26/flaher…). “We will run a substantial short-term deficit this year which I would estimate at more than $50 billion.”

June 11, 2009 (http://www.canada.com/business/fp/billion+defic…). “Our deficit will be significant but is affordable.”

June 13, 2009 (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTV…). “He’s wrong,” Flaherty told journalists in a conference call from a G8 finance ministers’ meeting in Lecce, Italy. “Because he says growth rates likely will be slower than I had predicted. Now, if you make an assumption with respect to lower growth rates, then you get the results that he postulates. But anybody can do that.”

June 25, 2009 (http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1731889). “If you take out the one-time spending, we have a deficit of only about 1.5% of GDP and we should easily recover from that in the two years following the recession.”

July 10, 2009 (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082…). “We will allow the deficit to persist if necessary. We will not, in order to meet some timetable, start raising taxes and cutting programs. That’s a very dumb policy … If the recession turns out to be longer than that, for example, or the recovery turns out to be shallower, then that will change the pattern of the recovery from the current deficit.”

collision if Necessary, but not Necessarily a collision… Typo intended

Ted, could you provide a link to these instead? It blocks out a lot of space and most of this is copy and paste? If you want to dump these on a blog and link to that from here, that would work for everyone I think.

Ted…….So? What's your point.. If the Coalition of Losers hadn't forced this 'budget' onto Canadians; your 'talking points' would be moot.

Nice try though.

Why don't you go see if you can get yourself invited to a CPC 'secret meeting'. Then you can 'secretly' tape it and 'secretly' send it to the Liberal party, who will then slip it to the CBC who will broadcast it for free!!

Stephen, it looks like your thread has been inundated with several things that the Liberals asked for and after receiving them,unanimously supported.
And Ignatieff claims that the Conservatives aren't cooperative? Looks pretty cooperative to me.

What recourse do Canadians have if it is a lie?

If he can't be trusted on his word (which is pretty evident) , don't vote Liberal.

Dippers have been very silent on the issue. Cabinet seats are at stake, and so is Liberals handing them the crediability they have long dreamed of.

Yes…you've managed to timeline that very well Teddy… so how about rather than talk about history you come up with a strategy to forecast what the future holds and write it in stone…

In the military they call people like you “Chicken Hawks”…other places they may call you an “arm chair quarterback”

The reality every sitting gov't faces is that the playing field on everything has the potential to change every single day…

That's fact, that's life, that's reality…

To expect any gov't not to alter their plans in the face of the world reality is just simple to say the least…tough times call from tough measures…

If the Gov't came out 1 1/2 years ago and said 1/2 million Canadians will lose their jobs in the next year and still be unemployed by this time next year unless they're willing to re-educate themselfs, move to where there are jobs available for them, or take a pay cut, how do you thnik the MSM and opposition would have reacted…?

Don't bother answering because I already know what your answer is from your slogan “We can do better”… fortunately by supporting Harpers Gov't for the last year on over 5 dozen votes your party has shown that they wouldn't do anything differently except maybe to have sold their soles in the Christmas season, which was planned from before the fall election to form a Coalision gov't

I wonder if Iffy has figured out how to shake loose of the Dippers, once he has handed Jack the keys ?
The more clout Iffy gives the Dippers, the more seats Dippers will get in the next election, the one after this one, and the one after that.

simply lie to them

The Liberals at one time despised sepratists. Remember Chretien?

There is no passion for the country in that party anymore. They love power and they hate Harper. They as individuals love their country but they have lost the will to fight for Canada. They have chosen the shortest route to regain 24 Sussex, country be damned.

But, but, but, Terry1 has informed us on the previous thread there would be no coalition with the Liberals in it.

Who's in charge of the information flowing out of Camp Liberal?

Can't get much clearer than coming straight from the horse's mouth, he's prepared to form a coalition government.

But Jack will want everything in writing and made public BEFORE he will do the deed.
Hold out for the cabinet post Jack!

Maybe there are 12 real Liberals left, that will put a stop to this insanity.

12 real Liberals who want to build the party back up rather than cave to the lust for a quick re-entry to power by giving away their 'real power' , their brand, to the Dippers to share.

didn't you hear…it's not the NDP who are planning on renaming thelselves…it's the Liberals… so they aren't actually lying about Liberal's being in it… suggestions for new names will be voted on in a national reforendum but the short list will be pre-decided behind closed doors… My money is on Socialist Opportunists Party…SOP

Perhaps the Lib/Left are on track to establish a single party dictatorship by teaming up with the NDP to form a National Socialist Party.

They feel they have the divine right to power at all times refusing to accept the peoples' choice when it's not them. They are acting that scenario out right now by constantly threatening to bring down the government elected by the people less than a year ago and for no reason beyond a power grab.

We better be afraid, very afraid when a party is so determined to grab power by any means using lies, trickery and guile . It's actually unbelievable some of the old stalwarts in the Liberal party haven't come forward and tried to instill some sanity into the mess.

Iggy's word on anything isn't believable at all any more. Furthermore Mr. Ignatieff your signature is still on the agreement that doesn't expire for a few years yet. Get a grip! How studip do you think Canadians are?

I'd like to thank the young liberal trojan horse who move the PM's message to those who may not have seen it and been re-energized to rally for that majority.

The Liberals, don't know how to be in Opposition let alone a Minority. Their collective minds only function as an entitled majority therefore, a Liberal minority govt, led by an unschooled, untested politician such as Iggy, would most certainly be, a coalition. Once there, the minions could call the shots, as in ' why are you bothering MI(me) with such silly details'.

His goal, is not a better Canada. His goal is 24 Sussex, the cameras, the prestige and the addition to his resume.
Canadians, are simply his tool, to have a more significant epitaph on his tombstone. WE need to provide him with additional paragraphs about HIM, in the history books.

That's the ONLY thing that inspired him to return, what 'we Canadians' could do for him. 'We Americans', couldn't give him that big white house no matter how hard he wished and dreamed.

Ted, great post;tories are liars all the time.

And to top it off Iggy gave a great speech in Montreal where he slagged Harper right in the groin and I bet he felt it all the way in Ottawa. Iggy's the man!!!

december 2008 and today are different months in the calendar and different situations are in play. Iggy can and will win this one on his own.

Boys and girls have a good time with your love in and please think of me while I sip some really good Tuscans for a couple of weeks. I know Iggy will survive well until then.

I hope its ok with y'all to travel abroad
Ciao!!!

LOL… maybe in the land of rose colored sky's and Gumdrop mountains you live in Terry… In Canada we already have a gov't… But right from Iffy's mouth he's stating he'll form gov't with the colusion gov't which is why the GG porogued parliment for the Christmas season last year a week or so early… at which time Liberals poled the public and WE made it painfully clear to Mr Iffy who signed the paperwork with all it's T's and C's for Colusion giving NDP cabnet posts and the Bloc Veto powers… or does he plan to take his signature back off the document they still display on their website…

http://www.liberal.ca/pdf/docs/081204_petition_…

or are you going to tell us all he never signed it on the bottom line…

ed, are you going to tell us Harper never lied?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/bl…

Michael Ignatieff is trying to neutralize a key Conservative weapon before an election campaign begins, by flatly ruling out any prospect that his Liberals would form a coalition government with other parties after the next election.

This week, the Liberals released a surreptitiously-recorded video of Prime Minister Stephen Harper speaking to party loyalists in Sault Ste. Marie last week – and warning that unless the Conservatives win a majority government, Mr. Ignatieff will try to form a coalition with the New Democrats and the Bloc Québécois.

Listen to the video boys and girls

we know your type Terry1…. youre entitled to your entitlements

From another blog:
Finally, someone should give Justin Tetreault– who filmed Harper's speech in the Soo, and who used to blog as the Northern Ontario Liberal–the Order of Canada. He may have saved his nation from four more years of Conservative rule. I mean, what did Nancy Green do to get her snowflake? She skied down a hill! That's it!

Just visiting?:
http://www.warrenkinsella.com/index.php

LOL…you are so far behind today Terry… go get caught up on your annalysis… ddi you watch the video or just read the first paragraph from the gob and mall?

you may want to look here before patting yourself on the back…

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullco…

every sane person who watches this video will come to pretty much the same conclusion…the CBC got hood winked

Terry1 the troll is hard at work but I don't think he get's it… Harper is telling it like it is and we all know it… the people know it, their pet dogs know it, even the flees on the dogs and cats know it… a blind, deaf mute, in a comma knows it…

To form Gov't the colusion of losers were ready to take power less than a month after the election because they knew the likely outcome would be a Harper minority so they planned in advance to do so…

Harper is simply telling it like it is becase if they force an election about nothing the only thing it's really about is they want control for powers sake and not with any thought to the best interest of Canadians…300 million dollars for an election about nothing?!?!

and ya… it still holds true… Iffy, just visiting… but not before he costs Canada 300 million before he leaves OUR true North

I can show you if I take it out of context where you've been lieing every time you open your mouth

was that before or after he slagged that province regarding Asbestos export?

harper is a committed lair and is in process of pissing away $60BB of our money besides the $300 he misappropraiated for last year's election. I hope the federal court nails him on that one.

LOL…you have no concept of what the deficit will look like once oil and natural gas go back up even just 20% do you given it's what…25% of our national exports or more…

Going against the grain, i'm not sure how effective the coalition tactic will be. Time will tell.

But truth be told, it's the conservative version of the 'hidden agenda' tactic, and i found it deplorable when we were on the receiving end of its use. It smacked of defaming a politician for the sole purpose of winning, justified by very loose ethical justification.

If this is the occasional fly swatter used to throw your opponent off message, then that's modern politics. If this is the backbone of the Conservative election strategy, then I don't like what this government has become.

Keep those wet dreams alive but unfortunately no true economists believe you. even Flatulence was at a loss for another lie yesterday.

Good post Ted, which leaves many questions Ignatieff and the Liberals must answer during the campaign.

1. Do the Liberals support the auto bailout? Iggy needs to address that. Autoworkers and unions need to know the Liberal position. That added roughly $11 billion to the deficit.

2. Do the Liberals support the stimulus spending? The coalition, led by the Liberals demanded something in the area of $35 billlion in stimulus funding. They got it.

3. Iggy's favorite, EI reform. Adding the extra 5 weeks of benefits payable added about $1 billion. Is Iggy for the extended benefits or not. And the lowest figure for Iggy's EI 9 week qualifying is in the area of $1.2 billion

4. Would a Liberal led government revisit 1993-2006 policy and cut transfer payments and health care spending to balance the budget? Government revenues have declined due to the global recession, and there would be a deficit even without the above noted spending.

5. Tax increases. Iggy has ruled them out and yet promised to balance the budget. So without tax increases that leaves cutbacks in government spending, most likely program spending. So where will the Liberal Party make cuts if winning the election.

I eagerly await both your and Iggy's answer to these questions Ted. And by the way, Liberals, including Dion, McCallum and Goodale all insisted in the October 2008 campaign they would not run a deficit

Terry:

This is the last time I'll bother responding to your “posts”.

Iggy is on record of not only making descisions without thinking (war crimes in Qana(sp?)), but also making a complete mess of it when he tries to “correct the record” (his support for Iraq then his climb down).
The day liberals should have realized what an empty shirt he was, was when Parliament voted to extend the Afghan mission.

“tories are liars all the time.”

So, what's the point of a democracy?

Is the converse “grits are truth tellers all the time”?

Is there any way to have a serious political discussion with entitled, self-referential Liberal$?

When Dion said he didn’t want a coalition during the 2008 election campaign, he never supported one after. Er, wait, then he did.

Ignatieff didn’t sign a letter to the GG indicating his support for a coalition. Er, wait, yes he did. He changed his mind. I guess that means there is no possibility that he would ever change his mind again when convenient, especially if election results grant him the opportunity to form a coalition and finally get rid of Harper. Just ignore all his past statements,and not the ones he makes now – until those become past statements too, then all bets are off as they always are with Liberals.

You see CC, also considering how often Michael Ignatieff has changed his mind on many positions he’s held before on various issues, he just can’t be trusted when he’s already changed his mind on the coaltion issue already.

As for that card being played too early, its always been there long since the last coalition attempt back in ’08. So there is no reason that it can’t be given new life again once the offical election campaign kicks off.

What is telling is that Ignatieff is on the constant defensive on this issue. It will dog him the whole way, right up until election day. No, this issue is far from going anywhere. It has only just begun.

When Dion said he didn’t want a coalition during the 2008 election campaign, he never supported one after. Er, wait, then he did.

Ignatieff didn’t sign a letter to the GG indicating his support for a coalition. Er, wait, yes he did. He changed his mind. I guess that means there is no possibility that he would ever change his mind again when convenient, especially if election results grant him the opportunity to form a coalition and finally get rid of Harper. Just ignore all his past statements,and not the ones he makes now – until those become past statements too, then all bets are off as they always are with Liberals.

You see CC, also considering how often Michael Ignatieff has changed his mind on many positions he’s held before on various issues, he just can’t be trusted when he’s already changed his mind on the coaltion issue already.

As for that card being played too early, its always been there long since the last coalition attempt back in ’08. So there is no reason that it can’t be given new life again once the offical election campaign kicks off.

What is telling is that Ignatieff is on the constant defensive on this issue. It will dog him the whole way, right up until election day. No, this issue is far from going anywhere. It has only just begun.

BatB, yes there is but you would not be able to be a part of the discussion……you know the deal..bats in the belfry,etc LOL

Cretin hated seperatists? are you kidding me?

kepping them alive as the “enemy” was the secret to his election wins.

THANK GOD THERE ARE IDIOTS LIKE TERRY IT IS SO EASY TO BEAT THE LIBERALS WITH THEIR ARROGANCE !

THANK GOD THERE ARE IDIOTS LIKE TERRY IT IS SO EASY TO BEAT THE LIBERALS WITH THEIR ARROGANCE !

Ted, I think that you are forgetting a little tidbit of information. Perhaps you don't understand the concept of a minority government. Think back reeeaaal hard about ten months. The Tories DID NOT want to have this kind of spending going on. Then along came the stooges …Jack, Gilles, and Dion…, skipping hand in hand with Ignatieff in tow. They told Harper that he must “cooperate” with the opposition to make parliament work or they form a coalition that Canada does not want. So, Harper decided, since he was in a minority position, that he will cooperate and spend more to try and make parliament work.
Now you and all your little lefty friends want to say that big bad Harper did it all by himself. Who is exactly is playing games here, Ted?
It used to be that Liberals would wait a few years before rewriting history. I guess they decided that one year of waiting is good enough now.

OT but….If we'd like to publicize another 10%'er ,this one sent out with Hedy Fry's name on it…..Kathleen Harris, Ottawa Sun today “Grits roasted over flyer”. It went all the way to the Maritimes, including the area where CFB Gagetown resides. It clearly does insult the military.

Seem to recall Ms Fry as not a supporter of Iggy during the pseudo leadership run. Is she trying to make mischief? Are the Libs starting to fire inside their own tent? Given her persona and experience one would certainly expect her to know better.

Great questions, Paulsstuff.
Now all we need are some answers.
As you said, the Liberals all insisted during the 2008 campaign they would not be running a deficit.
Let's not forget they also denied they were planning a coalition.
The coalition was not a spur of the moment thing formed in November after the Economic and Fiscal Update, it was hinted at time and again in the media, but the opposition parties always denied it was in the works.

http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/articl…
“Layton opens the door to coalition government
September 22, 2008
TORSTAR NEWS SERVICE
NDP Leader Jack Layton is refusing to rule out a coalition government with Stéphane Dion's Liberals if that's what it takes to oust Prime Minister Stephen Harper. …”

http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/10/06/CoalitionTim…
“Dion, Layton, May: Time Has Come to Craft a Coalition
A centre-left government is doable. See Europe.
By John Ryan, 6 Oct 2008, TheTyee.ca
If the Conservatives do not get a majority in this election, Canada could still get a majority government. This could happen if the Liberals, NDP and the Greens (if they elect any members) formed a coalition. Such a coalition government would reflect the majority of Canadians who do not support the Conservatives. …”

http://www.greenparty.ca/en/node/8196
“How We Vote
Submitted by Elizabeth May on 6 October 2008 – 10:51pm
There have been numerous calls to vote strategically from non-partisan sources working to further the cause of the environment. The popular online petition source, Avaaz.ca, has raised funds to create anti-Harper ads in three ridings where Conservatives could be vulnerable. One of them is my riding in Central Nova. …
If a Conservative government is elected, I’d like to talk about what we can do to form a coalition. …”

http://www.thestar.com/article/515967
“Coalition games could start when counting votes ends


Minority outcome would open door to grand bargain between Liberals, NDP, Bloc

Oct 13, 2008 04:30 Am

ROSEMARY SPEIRS

… Still, the media is speculating about possible coalitions or more informal opposition alliances to drag Harper down. …
Interestingly, Duceppe recently swallowed his spleen about Dion, the architect of the Clarity Act, and observed he might be willing to enter into an agreement with the Liberals on some issues, such as the environment – in Quebec’s interests, of course. Duceppe has no doubt already ruled out a coalition (sharing cabinet seats) with a federalist party, but he might see merit in an Ontario-style accord. …”

Notice bolded dates of articles.

“Are the Libs starting to fire inside their own tent?”

I'm not so sure.
They probably discussed and adopted the “Canada and Canadians are no longer respected worldwide” meme at their Sudbury retreat.
It fits in with their “we can do better” slogan, denigrating Canada's standing in the world community, saying that under the Liberals Canada will regain its former prestige.

Like Hedy Fry said in her flyer, Justin Trudeau said Canadian travellers are now ashamed to wear their Canadian flags because of the terrible things supposedly done by Canadian mining companies abroad.
You can listen to the segment on a CJAD talk show here:
http://www.cjad.com/media/985771/Wednesday%2C+S…

Warning: Justin Trudeau's mouth is on super-drive. At one point the host invited him to take a breath.

Coalition if Cons.form minority gov't? Ignatieff called it a hypothetical question he didn't “like.”

All questions to Ignatieff are “hypotheticals” it's a cop-out, he has no clue what's going on or what he might do in any situation. He's a mess of contradiction for starters, sort of flying by the seat of his britches, hoping for some wise men in the Liberal bunker to come up with a plan, a magic carpet to take him to the throne. Problem is the wise men seem to be on a long sabbatical.

Without a reason for an election and his pledge to vote against the government no matter what ,he's putting his fate in the hands of Jack and Gilles. If they support him in his folly, the electorate can have at 'em and that's what's got them all worried. So it should, we are not in election mode, it we go we'll make sure they get the message this time around. That's what I'm hearing, the polls seem to be backing that up.

by releasing the so called hidden agenda of Prime Minister Harper video to every media across the country Ignatieff has just blown up his own 2 million dollar ad campaign, these guys are unbelievable, they spend weeks building up the release of the ads, they spend millions on promotion and before the campaign even gets going they fly off on an issue where Ignatieff is just not credible. If this issue was really so explosive why didn't they save it for the election, these guys are so amateur and this reaction to a so called “scoop”, it was a private party event where the party leader was speaking, show the lack of a plan in their campaign

Here is the PERFECT VIDEO for the Conservatives to show right now: 1) a clip of Dion, with the date shown, where he says before the last election, that the Liberals will not form a coalition. 2) the clip of Dion and the others signing the coalition agreement. 3) then show recent clip of Ignatieff saying he will not form a coalition. THAT would seal the deal for a Conservative majority, if the Liberals force an election.
Stephen, please send this to your contacts in the CPC.

We have been provided with another moniker for Iggy by Iggy himself: “Hypothetical Iggy”. All questions have become “hypothetical” OR in a take off on Trudeau's “just watch me” Iggy says “wait and see” when asked a tough question he cannot answer.

Beyond slagging, there's nothing left for the Liberals who have no plan, no vision but are offering themselves up as fit to take over the reins of power.

Can anyone recall such behaviour in our civilized democracy? Constant threats and attempts to bring down a government we elected as per our system which is doing a stellar job in a recessionary period.
It's irresponsible and pure madness driven by blind lust for power. It should be treated as a threat to the stability of this country. Mr Ignatieff is not the man for the job, that's becoming more and more apparent to those of us who have been here while he wasn't.

If ever we needed a majority, a Conservative majority, it's now.

Ditto.

Sigh… This again?

You know perfectly well the fact that some journalists were speculating about a coalition is not evidence the liberals were planning one.

Gabby, the liberals know the importanc eof beating the dictator and hypoctrital liar named harper and will act accoridingly. If you support Harper you also mus tbe a liar and hypocrite.

Bring on the whining!!!

By the way I love iggy's newest ads…he is definitely heading in the right direction.

Its wonderful to be in Italy and see things from this geography!!!

Enjoy Tuscany Terry, if indeed that's where you are!! Get the hell off the computer and enjoy the scenery.

Be careful though, you risk betraying your base if you indulge too much of the fruit of the grape,
“in vino veritas”.

Gayle, if it were only one journalist speculating, I might agree with you.
But when it's several (I've given three here) plus the leader of a party and would-be MP who made a deal with the leader of the Official Opposition, that all sort of gives credence to the “speculating” doesn't it?
Of course I know what your reaction will be, so no need to reply.
I find your predictable responses increasingly boring.

BTW, maybe you should find more compelling reasons to “Sigh” …

And your comment has what to do with what I posted?
Nothing. Zilch. Zero. Nada. Niente.

Still using the predictable epithets, I see. The sunny Italian clime has done nothing to improve your disposition, not to mention your manners.

Maybe if you had invited your soulmate Gayle to accompany you, she would have been justified in uttering her customary “Sigh” … for entirely different reasons … and that might have improved your chronically aggressive mood.

stephen, I see Tony Clements is finally being held accountable for his homophobic rants and cutting funding for visible minorities. Typical reformatory racism.

centrigrade, as I've said before, you have nothing to add to any conversation so if that's your best shot then I think you better enroll in kindergarten.

computers are available 24 hours a day when you live in this age. Of course harper would shut them all down on Sundays but that's another discussion

Gabby, why would I improve my manners even more than they are now. They piss you off which is my full intent.

sirjohnawannabe……….setting the table for agood meal is always a good idea. Tories will be the Liberal meal!!!

Got another smear campaign going?

So, if I write something that speculates Harper is a closet Nazi, and then someone else does, and then someone else, does that make it true?

Remember when reporters were speculating about Harper's secret agenda? How much of that became true?

Sometimes you make it so easy…

“Remember when reporters were speculating about Harper's secret agenda? How much of that became true?”

Oooh! I am thrilled, Gayle! You have admitted that the “secret agenda” meme was never a credible one.
Did the Conservatives put “soldiers in our streets”? No.
Did the Conservatives take away “a woman's right to choose”? No.
Did the Conservatives abrogate SSM? No.
Did Harper eat babies? No.
So, you're right. In that particular case, in the case of Harper's “secret agenda” it was all foolish, unfounded speculation.

But … you yourself, among others, have posted links elsewhere to the documents signed by Dion, all the Liberals including Ignatieff, Layton, and Duceppe to the effect that a coalition among the three parties was ready to wrest the government away from the Conservatives.
Did the three opposition leaders sign a document with the intent to take over the government? Yes.
If the GG had agreed to the bloodless coup, would they have taken over the reins of government? Yes.
Would Layton have received 6 cabinet positions plus six parliamentary secretary positions in that cabinet? Yes.
Would the Bloc have effectively received a veto in that ruling troika? Yes.

So, were the rumours and speculation about a coalition in the works during the election campaign justified ? Yes.
Did that speculation turn out to be true? Yes.
Quod erat demonstrandum.

Phew! That was sooo difficult!

Excpt, of course, you missed that oh so vital element to prove your point – evidence the LPC were planning on a coalition prior to the economic statement.

Sorry.

Stephen is even afraid of that one because its dynamite and will seriously hurt the cons. The reformatorts smear themselves wonderfully all on their own.

Gayle, how can you expect them to provide proof. They only understand how to do drive by slurs….. no proof needed!!!

“Sorry.”

Apology accepted.

wow…just how low does your stuff get? You are becoming a true Harpercrite.

Tell us all about it right here Terry, don't be shy.

Don't worry about it.

She is only trying to avoid acknowledging she has no point. She is not mature enough to admit when she is wrong. That is why I feel sorry for her.

Stephen, your site has a cleaner, trimmer look to it.
I'm still not crazy about the threaded conversation format, but this new look is easy on the eyes.

Gayle, she is increasingly frustrated as her party sinks in the mess they have made for themselves in Quebec.
I can't imagine how she can continue to support them when they crap all over her province. Just goes to show you how blind some people really are

I've just read trough this thread and am fascinated by how little the Liberal folks on here consistently add to the debate in terms of substance.

It warms my heart though as it confirms they actually do belong to the party who's playbook involves no policies or positions, just telling each audience what they want to hear and social engineering and they are not just plants to inspire discussion.

Ah, true love has bloomed between two liberals, Terry1 and Gayle!
How sweet!
You definitely deserve each other.

Trying to sully the name of a Conservative cabinet Minister is an example of their bankrupt state.

Fairy, how about this truth you never dreamed of. Tories,separatists and socialists in the same bed running from liberals. Sounds like harpo has been had by Iggy to me.

I love it!!!

Well well, today Harper is prepared to lead a coalition government with the socialists, propped up by the separatists. Surely, this is a coup. Undemocratic. Common, help me remember all the crap you were spewing last year when the tables were turned. You haven't forgot, have you?

Were the Conservatives “in coalition” with the Liberals when the Libs voted for them 79 times in a row?

A coalition, for the uninitiated, is a signed formal agreement between parties to install a cabinet and Prime Minister. The Lib-NDP coalition would have seen the divvying up of cabinet seats between parties and the installation of a new PM without a new election (and just 6 weeks after the Canadian people returned Harper with a minority government).

The opposition parties didn't run in the previous election seeking a coalition mandate, so it was quite offensive when they tried to do it shortly after an election where they denied they would form a coalition.

So to recap, I was talking about “coalition government” in the way the dictionary defines it, while you're talking about “coalition” as the Liberals are now trying to redefine, muddle and distance themselves from what it really means.

Small Business owners are largely forgotten. Thats why I only focus on them. I have experience several members of my family file bankruptcy due to small business failures. I also I suffered through 2 destroyed businesses due to failure however, in my failings I have learned some of the secrets to success. (Who can say they know it all?)

http://www.onlineuniversalwork.com