Sunday, April 10, 2011

It's YOU I Find in Contempt Jack Layton

Yes YOU sir. YOU are the one that killed National Child Care, along with Kelowna and Kyoto. YOU voted FOR killing all those measures in 2005 JACK. For you to stand there today and lie to Canadians is just disgusting. YOU are responsible for this monster known as the Harper Government. YOU sir!


Bruce Stewart said...

Funny ... I considered all those things to be bad policy. But I didn't call the Martin Government a monster.

I think you're letting your dislike verge over into hatred, which does you no credit.

James Curran said...

Does it sound like I'm looking for credit. No. I'm giving Jack ALL the credit. And, YES Bruce, when a Governmentis found in contempt for the first ime in the history of the Commonwealth, it IS a MONSTER

Robert McClelland said...

Paul Martin was given the opportunity to secure the NDP's support but he decided to take his chances in an election.

janfromthebruce said...

Really - let's see - Martin said there would be an election in 6 weeks time but Harper, the bloc and the independents wanted to pull the plug sooner - BY 6 WEEKS -

simple math

cons plus bloc plus independents was greater than combined vote of NDP & libs - so what side would libs be on here?

Martin was playing politics and refused Layton's additional healthcare dollars knowing full well the libs/dips combined didn't have the votes to keep the lib minority alive FOR 6 MORE WEEKS - you should be honest as opposed to again trotting out the same old lie.

James Curran said...

Apare me the self righteous bull Jan. It's Jack that started the bullshit today, not Jim Curran. Telling Canadians the Liberals did nothing for daycare. We had a signed agreement with every single province on side. First and last time in history.

So, today, for lack of anything of substance, we have Harper attacking Trudeau and Jack attacking Martin. I guess Iggy IS having an impact.

thwap said...

You drinking James?

Martin had a choice. He stood AGAINST public health care.


you want to talk about Kyoto? Our greenhouse gas emissions went up more than the USA's after we signed the accord and bush didn't.

I suppose that Kelowna would have been a worthy start after decades of Liberal failure and neglect, but Martin had a choice about whether to face the electorate or not.

And, if Harper is such a monster, why did Ignatieff back away from disposing of him when he had the chance?

There's plenty of blame to go around here.

James Curran said...


Annie said...

Martin did have Accord in Health and put in 40 billion, in 2004 for 10 years and the Daycare was lost as well as the Kelowna Accord that Harper got rid of....both of them

Anonymous said...

If Ignatieff did not stand up there would be an election every time, with Harper

leftdog said...

Puleeeesse!! James my good man, as a good Liberal during election time I fully understand that there is a quota of slams you are obliged to make against the NDP. All this proves is that you have very little relevant or timely rocks to throw at Mr. Layton. The sins of the Liberals since the Martin Era are much more outstanding! Cheers! Have a great campaign!

sharonapple88 said...

cons plus bloc plus independents was greater than combined vote of NDP & libs -

Not all the Independents voted against the Liberals on this motion.

I believe the vote was 171 vs. 133

A Bloc MP was missing, 2 vacant seats, Speaker (Liberal)

Liberals: 132
Independent: Carolyn Parish

NDP: 18.

The real question would have been whether Bev Dejarlais would have voted with her former party, the NDP. I believe she was pretty much isolated and lost the nomination in the riding after she voted against same-sex mariage, but she voted with the NDP caucus on issues, like Parrish did with the Liberals. (I could be wrong on this.)

With a tie vote, the speaker would have been called to vote.

Well, it would have been interesting to see what would have happened.

Hey, the NDP gained seats after the election, but whether they were able to use them to get progress on various issues... probably not. On the whole, it's probably safe to say that the Conservatives in power have been worse than the Liberals. (See cartoon below on the problems with Conservatives in power).

And, if Harper is such a monster, why did Ignatieff back away from disposing of him when he had the chance?

Probably the same reasons the NDP and Bloc supported the Conservatives back in Sept 2009.


Going to end this novel by saying that I'd rather see a NDP government than a Conservative one. There are differences between the Liberal party and the NDP, but there's a huge gaping maw between them and the Conservatives. Also, I hope Layton doesn't go after Ignatieff with the fury of a rabid badger in the debates. Ditto Ignatieff on Layton.

thwap said...


Thanks for the substantive reply. And I certainly hope that Mr. Curran's hangover the next day wasn't too bad.

One comment:

"And, if Harper is such a monster, why did Ignatieff back away from disposing of him when he had the chance?"

"Probably the same reasons the NDP and Bloc supported the Conservatives back in Sept 2009."

I've said numerous times that as much as I desired getting rid of harper, Ignatieff's election threats in Sept. 2009 was the most disastrously ill-timed exercise in, well, I don't know what it was.

Ignatieff had turned down a chance to defeat harper before the summer recess. He'd gotten his pointless consultations with some harpercon hack on EI, which went nowhere. He attended a Liberal rally or convention or whatever, where the sentiment was clearly against going to the electorate, and then, after a weekend, starts blustering about defeating harper and going to the people.

Canadians find democracy such a chore that I believe that Layton was right to cut a deal with harper (although it was too easy on harper, given how revolting and scuzzy harper is) because the voters would have punished the opposition for forcing an election over NOTHING.

sharonapple88 said...

Thwap, I think the Conservatives have used their apparent weakness to the benefit. They've refused for the most part to work with other parties, and have used the threat of an election to get their crappy pieces of legislation through parliament. No one likes doing it, but it's either doing it or seeing an election. Let's put the blame where it belongs -- Conservatives for playing Chicken instead of co-operating with the other parties (as you're suppose to do in a minority government position).