- Give Harper and His Con's The Boot, It's Just That Simple

Posted: 6/21/2010 9:59:50 AM the Globe and Mail
Coalition: a false calculation. The Liberals would be foolish enough to evacuate the centre by merging with the NDP, Lysiane Gagnon, Globe and Mail, Jun. 18, 2010
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/coalition-a-false-calculation/article1609930/
Tab 4

Just exactly what's wrong with the approx 2/3rd of Canadian that voted against Harper getting together and giving Harper and his Con's the boot. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Stephen Harper is, once again, applying the Harperavellian Fundamental Principle: "it doesn't have to be true, it only has to sound plausible", to formulate this corollary: 'Losers don't get to form coalitions'.

If I recall, the Liberal-Democrats' first attempt at a coalition was with the Labour Party. That's right the other 'loser'.

Clearly they were under the impression that had they come to an agreement they would have assumed the government and from what I saw everyone else in Britain seemed to be operating under the same understanding.

I don't recall anyone in England suggesting that it would be unconstitutional for the two losers to form a coalition and assume the government.

I also don't recall Harper making any comments along the lines that that would have been an illegal government, or un-holy alliance, or that Canada would not have recognized it if they had assumed power. Perhaps Harper could explain this non-sequitur.

That's a good question for Harper, do his comments mean that had the Liberal-Democrats and the Labour Parties formed a coalition, would Harper refuse to recognize this government of losers as being illegal or 'un-holy'.

Anyone who suggests that the Parties that don't finish first getting together to form a government is somehow illegal or improper simply does not understand the Parliamentary system, are confusing our way of government with that in the US (in which case perhaps they could explain what would happen if there were three major parties in the US and not two) or deliberately misleading and distorting to promote their own self-interests.

The reality is that it doesn't matter what position the Liberals take, Harper and the Con's are going to run hard on this 'un-holy' alliance concept, in all its manifestations. The Harper strategy is to aim at the 33% die-hard Con supporters whose epi-centre is in Alberta and, as long as everyone else is divided he is guaranteed to end up with more seats (so, of course, only 'winners' get to form the government). Then, if there is an additional sprinkling here and there, who knows.

The solution is either Canada has only two parties or people vote as if there were only two parties. It's just that simple.

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html