April 22, 2005
Link Counter Link
Last night's 7:02 p.m. programming is/has/will be blogged about in a major way today, and, for the most part, Torontoist will stay out of it. Except to say we stand by our prediction: Despite Steve's statements this morning, 2005 will NOT be an election year in Canada (federally speaking, of course).
Think we're wrong? Well in the spirit of our PM's money-where-the-mouth-is post-Gomery election promise, Torontoist is willing to offer a special prize (probably a CD) and a free Torontoist button to the first five people willing to bet against our no-election guarantee. Email here to place your bet. Now some links:
- The woman that ate a finger in her chili might have lied about it. Where did she get a manicured finger? There are ways.
- Radwanski hints that Kinsella may be more credible than flatulent ad man Jean Brault. Torontoist has been saying this for sometime now too. In fact, Torontoist eats guys like Brault for breakfast.
- Skinner aka the Streets doesn't eat KFC. And, he doesn't like chicken on his pizza. But if it's there - not a problem, he'll pick it off.
- If there's one thing that Conservatives across the board can appreciate, it's overly dramatic rightist propaganda.
- The implementation of the rat hotline begs the question: Where are the various rat rights groups now? Rats should be free to roam in Toronto!
- Instead of the "BBBBBLUUE JAYS!!" chant last night, it was "STEERROIDS!" every time Yankee tough-guy Jason Giambi came to bat.
- Who would you pick to head up Canada's next government? Take this quiz to find out.
|
The 2004 PoliticsWatch poll (at http://politicswatch.com/VoteSelectorQuiz2004.html) is a better representation of the issues that'd be in 2005/2006 election ('cause, really, what's changed?).
The quiz linked in this blurb is old too... I'm told that I should be voting for Alexa McDonough, leader of the NDP, and that I'm only 7% match with Stockwell Day's reform party. While I agree in spirit, I also feel this information is slightly, er, dated.
bam! thanks guys. my bad. changed.
If the opposition party continues like that, yes there will be an election this year. But we can't assume that there won't be any election in 2005 on Paul Martin's words only...
... afterall Montreal City will have an election this year!
harper is gutless! i dare him to force an election.
Can the parties afford to have another election? I mean unlike the Liberals the other parties don't have cushy government contracts to launder money from....
the minister of finance in any govt should notice quarter billion dollar cheques being cut to party hacks...
last i read, all the parties are broke so it'll be a no-frills election. Martin might keep his seat since he raised $10mm or so more than he needed last go-around...
and how is harper gutless? cuz he hasn't called an election yet when most people don't want one? j' comprends pas.
when do people ever "want" an election? that isn't really what happens in canada. elections come when they are necessary. if steve h. really thinks one is necessary, and believes that the liberals are really under criminal investigation (which they are not), then he is obliged to force an election. it shouldn't be a question of "wanting." but he won't force an election, for the reason i've given in an earlier comment.
Josh i agree, many people don't want elections, but that's often a function of not being politically engaged. making people accountable is one of the benefits of democracy. we don't take our politicians, in any party, to task often enough on this point.
Harper isn't confident he can win an election right now, or even win a non-confidence vote. that makes him opportunistic, like every other politician, not gutless.
i suppose that's one way to look at it. but don't you think if harp believes the gov't is corrupt, he is obliged to take it down, no matter what his personal ambitions are?
and if he puts his personal ambition before the good of the country, i would say that makes him more gutless than opportunistic, no?
i hear your point. but isn't the fact that Martin hasn't resigned an example of putting "personal ambition before the good of the country"? sponsorship-wise he was at best ignorant, at worst part of the problem, and the whole thing happened under his watch.
is that the kind of guy you want at the helm?
wait one second- in no way am i endorsing paul martin. based on action alone, though, i think he's done more than the opposition, the media or even gomery in exposing this scandal. since he personally caused much of this grief by himself, i would say he is either putting the country before his own political career, or just has poor political decisionmaking skills. he basically shot himself in the foot.
steve harper is just on the sidelines screaming like hockey mom. he hasn't actually done anything yet besides empty threats...i think it is HE who should actually do something or step down. he is leader of the opposition, and he should oppose.