[ridenrain]

I guess double secret probation is over?

Quote:

Bill Curry

Ottawa — From Friday's Globe and Mail
Last updated on Thursday, Aug. 27, 2009 08:47PM EDT


Employment insurance was the big issue in June as Michael Ignatieff and Stephen Harper locked horns in a classic minority Parliament power play, but Liberals now say it's just one file among many and EI will not trigger a fall vote.

After a flurry of news conferences and private meetings, the Liberal Leader and the Prime Minister agreed in June to a bipartisan panel on reforming Canada's safety net for the unemployed, and a summer election was avoided.

But Mr. Ignatieff's campaign co-chairman and a Liberal member of that panel are now saying that even if it fails to produce a deal, Liberals will not force an election on EI alone.

Liberal Senator David Smith, co-chairman of the national Liberal campaign, said EI is not a “defining issue” that merits bringing down the government.

That still leaves open the possibility of a no-confidence vote on other issues, such as the state of the economy, but the senior Liberal is clearly throwing cold water on election speculation as MPs prepare for next week's caucus retreat in Sudbury.

“I don't see an election being fought over unemployment insurance,” said Mr. Smith, using the program's original name. “It's an important issue and it's an issue that we want to address … but I don't see that as the defining issue that would trigger an election.”

The senator, who takes part in regular conference calls with senior Liberals across the country, went on to question the need for an election at this time. His comments are in sharp contrast to more hawkish statements coming from Liberals over the summer. As recently as Monday, the Liberal Party was sending out private talking points stating that “Stephen Harper's got to go.”

Mr. Smith isn't using those talking points.

“Michael and the Liberal Party remain committed to wanting to see Parliament work, to want to hold them accountable. Does that mean, on every single issue, when you've got the NDP and Bloc [Québécois] voting on matters that could be deemed confidence to bring them down, that we have to push the button every time?” he asked, noting that polls consistently show Canadians do not want an election. “We just don't have to be in a constant shootout at the O.K. Corral for an election every time Parliament meets and there's a vote of substance in the House.”

The senator's comments are the latest twist in the continuing political theatre over EI.

Mr. Ignatieff's approach to rattling sabres with the Prime Minister triggered much debate and second-guessing among Liberals as to the wisdom of the strategy. Subsequent polls showing a dip in Liberal support gave credence to Mr. Ignatieff's internal doubters.

A well-informed party source said disappointing internal polls have cooled the Liberals' enthusiasm for an election. Canadians, the source said, just don't grasp Mr. Ignatieff's vision for the country and have not warmed to him since he became leader. They see him as a status-quo politician, not a catalyst for change.

Meanwhile, the Prime Minister also recently played down election talk and divisions over EI. He told reporters last week that the positions of both sides are “a bit different,” but that EI reforms would be announced in the fall.

Marlene Jennings, who is one of three Liberal MPs on the six-person panel, agreed that an election will not be triggered solely on the issue of EI, and insisted that was never in the party's plans. She said the Conservatives are attempting to portray the Liberals as a single-issue party, when in fact the Official Opposition has a long list of concerns, including the economy, agriculture, the salmon shortage in British Columbia, consular cases, the H1N1 virus and medical isotopes.

Ms. Jennings said her side is acting in good faith on EI and has asked for costing on a range of possible options. She said it remains an important issue for many Canadians who do not qualify for EI.

“EI and accessibility to EI and regional fairness is important to Canadians, but there are a lot of other issues that are just as important,” she said.

[DerbyX]

First you cry about them trying to force an election and know you cry about them not.

[ridenrain]

It's not about me. It's about Iggy talking tough then slinking away.
Did he learn that from Dion?

[DerbyX]

Why should the Libs be responsible for forcing an election Harper is trying to force? Harper tried to blame the Liberals back last Octobre too.

[OnTheIce]

DerbyX wrote:

First you cry about them trying to force an election and know you cry about them not.

Nobody's crying, he's posted an article noting fact, not opinion.

This is a good move and a bad move for Iggy all at the same time.

It's a good move not to force an election over EI, but backing away isn't doing well for his image....tough call.

[DerbyX]

OnTheIce wrote:

DerbyX wrote:

First you cry about them trying to force an election and know you cry about them not.

Nobody's crying, he's posted an article noting fact, not opinion.

This is a good move and a bad move for Iggy all at the same time.

It's a good move not to force an election over EI, but backing away isn't doing well for his image....tough call.

Trying the ultra non-partisan approach eh?

RR is crying and I think you know it. No matter what has happened or who the Liberal its either "they are forcing an unwanted election" or "they are backing down".

Recall Ryans threads from back in june. Iggy was riding high in the polls and he and RR and others were crying that Iggy was going to force an election that nobody wanted because they were poll watching.

Once Iggy didn't then suddenly they were laughing at him for not pulling the trigger when he should have.

Its always the same. No matter what the Liberals do they are derided.

[ridenrain]

I told you. Way too much of that red kool-aid.

[DerbyX]

As opposed to your addiction to the blue stuff?

[OnTheIce]

DerbyX wrote:

OnTheIce wrote:

DerbyX wrote:

First you cry about them trying to force an election and know you cry about them not.

Nobody's crying, he's posted an article noting fact, not opinion.

This is a good move and a bad move for Iggy all at the same time.

It's a good move not to force an election over EI, but backing away isn't doing well for his image....tough call.

Trying the ultra non-partisan approach eh?

RR is crying and I think you know it. No matter what has happened or who the Liberal its either "they are forcing an unwanted election" or "they are backing down".

Recall Ryans threads from back in june. Iggy was riding high in the polls and he and RR and others were crying that Iggy was going to force an election that nobody wanted because they were poll watching.

Once Iggy didn't then suddenly they were laughing at him for not pulling the trigger when he should have.

Its always the same. No matter what the Liberals do they are derided.

And you're a mirror image of ridenrain but you're standing on the left side.

Iggy is dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't....very true.

If he forces an election over EI, it's a huge risk. If he backs away, there's a risk him image as a "leader" will be tarnished.

[DerbyX]

OnTheIce wrote:

And you're a mirror image of ridenrain but you're standing on the left side.

Iggy is dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't....very true.

If he forces an election over EI, it's a huge risk. If he backs away, there's a risk him image as a "leader" will be tarnished.

And you aren't identical to RR how?

I don't deride the other parties for doing what I supported in my own party. Lets examine the senate appointees. I'm not attacking Harper because he did it. He is being attacked because he campaigned so virulently against it only to be the worst PM for it.

[OnTheIce]

DerbyX wrote:

OnTheIce wrote:

And you're a mirror image of ridenrain but you're standing on the left side.

Iggy is dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't....very true.

If he forces an election over EI, it's a huge risk. If he backs away, there's a risk him image as a "leader" will be tarnished.

And you aren't identical to RR how?

I don't deride the other parties for doing what I supported in my own party. Lets examine the senate appointees. I'm not attacking Harper because he did it. He is being attacked because he campaigned so virulently against it only to be the worst PM for it.

Derby, I know it's a major shock to you, but not everyone who has the "C" next to their name is the same person.

You often attribute quotes from ridenrain, etc to other Conservatives just because you assume we share the same views. The majority of the time your "you guys said it" or "you think" arguments have nothing to do with the poster you're replying to.

If you haven't yet noticed that we all don't share the same views and opinions, I guess there's no much hope for you going forward.

Now, let's get back on topic, shall we?

[DerbyX]

OnTheIce wrote:

Derby, I know it's a major shock to you, but not everyone who has the "C" next to their name is the same person.

You often attribute quotes from ridenrain, etc to other Conservatives just because you assume we share the same views. The majority of the time your "you guys said it" or "you think" arguments have nothing to do with the poster you're replying to.

If you haven't yet noticed that we all don't share the same views and opinions, I guess there's no much hope for you going forward.

Now, let's get back on topic, shall we?

No, I judge you on your own merits and from where I sit you are no different then he is.

Case in point was you pitiful dismissal of my post that I thought was very non-partisan.

[OnTheIce]

DerbyX wrote:

OnTheIce wrote:

Derby, I know it's a major shock to you, but not everyone who has the "C" next to their name is the same person.

You often attribute quotes from ridenrain, etc to other Conservatives just because you assume we share the same views. The majority of the time your "you guys said it" or "you think" arguments have nothing to do with the poster you're replying to.

If you haven't yet noticed that we all don't share the same views and opinions, I guess there's no much hope for you going forward.

Now, let's get back on topic, shall we?

No, I judge you on your own merits and from where I sit you are no different then he is.

Case in point was you pitiful dismissal of my post that I thought was very non-partisan.

Naturally you thought it was very non-partisan.

You're only capable of partisanship, so you must be trying really, really hard but the partisanship busts out of your mouth like diarrhea out of a baby.

[DerbyX]

OnTheIce wrote:

Naturally you thought it was very non-partisan.

You're only capable of partisanship, so you must be trying really, really hard but the partisanship busts out of your mouth like diarrhea out of a baby.

Like I said. You are just as bad as rr no matter how much you claim you aren't.

You can't defeat a single point I made illustrating just how bad Harper was at reneging on his promises so you launch partisan ad hominem attacks. My mistake for trying to debate you.

On yer bike sunshine.

[ridenrain]

Can you take this somewhere else or are you now going to cry to a mod and get it erased?