3 points about this putative Lib/NDP merger.

1. It's an awfully messy and convoluted way for the Libs to dump Iggy, doncha think? I thought their backroom boys kept a stash of well-sharpened knives for any and all occasions.

2. Math deficiency meets magical thinking. What strategist in his or her right mind would assume that the outcome of a Lib/NDP mashup would equal the sum of their polling numbers? NDP's 17.4 + Lib's 26.2 = 43.6 .... who's been smoking crystal meth?

3. "Secret" talks are usually kept in the backrooms. There's a whole lot of yapping going on; loose lips sink ships. The usual suspects may be deliberately trying to scuttle Iggy's leadership but the potential for this bad science project to blow up whatever is left of the LPC should be an urgent concern for any rational thinker who hasn't deserted. As for the NDP - does anyone there with two brain cells to rub together think this will enhance their credibility with voters? Are they simply so thrilled they're being courted by The Big Boys that they've taken MASSIVE leave of any good sense they may have once had?

Yo! Iggy!

Time to grow a pair! Now!

New Democrat Leader Jack Layton taunted his Liberal counterpart Michael Ignatieff Saturday to vote against the Conservative government's "Trojan horse" budget legislation.

Layton argued there was "no way" Prime Minister Stephen Harper would allow his government to fall ahead of next month's G8 and G20 summits, and so would be forced to negotiate with a united opposition.

"The opposition has the opportunity to do some tough bargaining with Mr. Harper right now," Layton told The Canadian Press.

Please, Liberals, write, phone, fax your guys and gals. Make them see the light. Please.

Ride That Horsey!

Yee haw!

Liberals are hoping to pin down Prime Minister Stephen Harper over where he stands on abortion in his G8 maternal-health initiative for the Third World.

The Opposition is to introduce a motion in the House of Commons on Tuesday demanding that the plan cover a "full range" of family-planning options, which would include contraception and abortion.

The Conservative government has been unclear about whether the plan will fund such options.

The motion says funding all options would be consistent with the policy of previous governments -- both Conservative and Liberal -- and with the approach approved by all G8 countries, including Canada, just last year.

The motion should pass easily with the support of all three opposition parties.

It could put the Conservatives in an awkward spot, forcing them to clarify the issue and potentially alienate one faction or another within the party.

Some readers may recall that Iggy and I have a troubled relationship, though I did applaud him when he first threw down the abortion gauntlet. But I really think this issue has legs.

From the beginning Motherhood Steve has been flipping and flopping on his G8 maternal health initiative.

The trick is to get the language -- oh noes! 'abortion language!' -- just right. Appease the base -- no contraception, no family planning. But repeating ad nauseum 'we will not reopen the abortion debate' -- for everyone else.

It's not working very well.

LifeShite has this headline: 'PM Harper "Caves": "Not Closing the Door" on Contraception in G8 Maternal Health Push'.

"As we have been saying all along, we are not closing the door on any options that will save the lives of mothers and children, including contraception," Oda said in response to a question from Bob Rae. "And as we have been saying all along, we are not opening the abortion debate."

Layton pressed the Prime Minister further, asking a question that he called "extremely important" and "extremely clear": "Does the Prime Minister agree with the broad sweep of opinion that is extremely clear, that contraception saves lives?"

Harper avoided the question, insisting that he had already answered it, and attempted to raise a different issue.
. . .

Mary Ellen Douglas, national organizer for Campaign Life Coalition, called the Prime Minister's comments "a giant step backwards and a disappointment."

"We're disappointed that the Conservative government has taken a step backwards in accepting contraception when they were very clear that their aim was to provide good maternal care," she commented. "All Canadians were supportive of providing good maternal health care, safe water, medicines and so on, so why bring in divisive items such as contraception and abortion?"

Douglas concluded, "The Prime Minister has caved in to pressure from pro-abortion activists to allow for contraception in the G8 health plan. Hopefully he will not cave on abortion too."

Ooooo, the dread word -- 'caved'.

A CBC poll asked if contraception should be part of the initiative. Not surprisingly, the vast majority of Canadians said YES (90% to 9%).

This issue resonates with normal people. This issue clearly demonstrates Stevie Peevie's problem with his base. He's hog-tied.

But don't listen to me. Listen to my Facebook friend Connie Fournier at the Freaks:

Ignatieff is playing this perfectly. He knows that Harper will run like a sissy from this issue, and it will cause another fracture in the conservative base.

When Harper promised to never let anyone discuss the issue of abortion, he showed the Liberals his Achille's heel. He proves it every election cycle when he makes some lame-assed pro-abortion* comment in the middle of the campaign and his poll numbers immediately take a dive.

As long as Harper lets them kick this sand in his face, they are going to keep doing it.

Kick that sand! Ride that horsey!

*Actually, I think it should be 'when he makes any reference to abortion', his poll numbers dive.

That Abortion Debate? Bring It On!

Seriously. I'm having too much fun with Iggy's Abortion Gambit/Gauntlet/Grenade.

First, cast your minds back to the brouhaha over Ken Epp's private member's bill, C-484, or as we followed one of its proponents in calling it, The Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill.

Back then, people with more than one functioning neuron saw it -- as its supporters did, despite the mewling of Ken Epp et al. -- as a sneaky, backdoor attempt to open the abortion so-called debate with the aim of restricting and ultimately outlawing abortion.

We, the sane people, said: 'NO. We are not debating women's rights.'

Well, many pundits -- I'm too lazy to go back and find all the links but you know who and where they are -- opined: 'We need to reopen the debate.'

To which, we, the sane people, said: 'FUCK the debate.'

Welly-well-well.

Look who's saying FUCK the debate now.Lorrie Fucking Goldstein in the Toronto Fucking Sun:

Is this really what Ignatieff wants pre-occupying Parliament when it resumes? To roll back the clock and reignite the debate over abortion?

Hee. What's that acronym floating around these days? Something like: IOKIYAADSHA -- it's OK if you are a desperately spinning Harpocon apologist.

Iggy Throws Down the Abortion Gauntlet

Regular readers may remember that Iggy and I have a troubled relationship, but if he keeps this up, I may change my tune.

Today he threw down the gauntlet and dared Harper to address abortion.

Here's the headline: 'Include abortion in maternal-health pledge, Michael Ignatieff tells PM'.

The press release issued after the presser included some gems from the ReformaTory anti-choice songbook:

This from Treasury Board President Stockwell Day in March 2000: “The thinking is, if you can cut a child to pieces or burn them alive with salt solution while they’re still in the womb, what’s wrong with knocking them around a little when they’re outside the womb?”

Ontario Tory MP Cheryl Gallant said in 2004 reference to an abortion clinic: “We saw that young American (in Iraq) have his head literally cut off in front of the cameras, but what’s happening down there is absolutely no different!”

Yeeheehee. So, inquiring minds do want to know -- is abortion included in your maternal-health pledge, Steve?

UPDATE: Gauntlet upgraded to grenade.

Michael Ignatieff has lobbed an abortion grenade into the midst of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's plans to become an international champion of women's and children's health.

Iggy and Me

OK. I admit it. Michael Ignatieff and I have a troubled relationship. (We are related by marriage, but I don't think he knows that.) I have tried to be nice and even supportive.

But today, after promising he never ever no-how no-way do that again, he did it again.

In a totally typical and predictable Liberal way, he and his handlers have opportunistically tried to hi-jack another grassroots group -- Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament.

After his open letter to CAPP evincing support and bum-kisses, his on-line town hall today, supposedly to address CAPPers' issues, was a TOTAL FUCKING JOKE.

I give you the bits that have anything REMOTELY to do with CAPP's issues.

[Comment From Wendy Perry Wendy Perry : ]
Mr. Ignatieff,will you be attending one of the CAPP rallies?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:00 Wendy Perry
3:00

Michael Ignatieff:
Thank you Wendy for your question. Yes, I will talk at the Ottawa rally on Saturday.
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:00 Michael Ignatieff
3:00


[Comment From Ian Perkins Ian Perkins : ]
Mr. Igantieff can you explain why Canadians are upset with the prorougation of Parliament?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:00 Ian Perkins
3:01

Michael Ignatieff:
Ian, Canadians want their MPs back at work and they want their Prime Minister to be accountable to Parliament.
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:01 Michael Ignatieff
3:01


[Comment From Jeff Jedras Jeff Jedras : ]
I'd like to ask about democratic reform. Many Canadians feel the current First Past the Post system doesn't fairly value or reflect their votes. Do you believe we should consider a new voting system, and what do you think that system should look like?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:01 Jeff Jedras
3:02

Michael Ignatieff:
Im prepared to look at reform of our voting system provided that reform doesnt fragment the country and weaken the ability of national parties to hold the country together.
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:02 Michael Ignatieff
3:03

Michael Ignatieff:
Whats important is getting more Canadians to turn out at elections. Our participation rate is now below 60 percent. We need to get more people involved.

Mario Lagüe (moderator):
3:02 [Brad Bossack] -
Greetings, as a member of CAPP (Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament), I wish[...] to speak of changing the currant democratic structure to providing and endorsing more participation within the process decision making. As you have seen, there are many Canadians who are feeling very disenfranchised, and are rallying to be heard in a new way. What are your feelings and idea's on democratic renewal in this country?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:09 Mario Lagüe (moderator)
3:10

Michael Ignatieff:
Politicians need to get out on the road and answer tough questions face to face with voters. there:s a hunger for direct participation and involvement. Thats what I discovered on my tour of colleges and universitiesand I want to keep on going with town halls in every Canadian community I can get to.

Comment From Alan Goodhall Alan Goodhall : ]
Thank you for this forum Mr. Ignatieff. Yesterday Mr. Layton stated to the media that the NDP would propose legislation to limit the power of a prime minister to prorogue the house. Do you feel legislation is required or is this more a question of ethics of the party in power and best left to the public to decide through the ballot box?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:39 Alan Goodhall
3:40

Michael Ignatieff:
Provided a Prime Minister respects Parliament and its authority, legislation isnt needed. Mr. Harper used prorogation to duck a confidence vote and to evade tough questions in the House. That;s wrong. Ive already pledged not to use prorogation that way. The problem is not the power itself, so much as its abuse.
Mr. Harper has abused his power.

Comment From Glynn Pearson Glynn Pearson : ]
I am very concerned about your response about prorogation. Harper was elected on promises of accountability and transparency after a debacle with the Liberals of the day (including a long prorogation). I don't know you and I don't want you to feel disparaged but it has been demonstrated that we cannot trust the person in power to act with the public's best interests in mind. Would a new Liberal government consider committing to legislation to ensure the responsible use of prorogation?
Thursday January 21, 2010 3:55 Glynn Pearson
3:57

Michael Ignatieff:
As a great writer once said, rules are for people with no character. Meaning, that you need to legislate when you cant trust the people who hold power. My view is that we dont need to legislate limits on prorogation. We just need to return to the basic understanding that used to limit prerogative power, namely that you dont use it to duck tough questions in parliament and you dont use it to duck a confidence vote. harper used it this way and it was wrong, and Canadians are telling him dont ever do that again.

Faff, faff, and more faff. (Go to the link for some really gagsome slo-pitches about his favourite part of the job, for example.)

Insulting, the whole damn exercise. We, the grassrooty CAPPers, got all moisty-panty, thinking, 'Wow, party leader takes note of discontent, wants to address us.'

Ha. Iggy and his handlers bethought themselves: 'Hoho, a ready-made huge audience. We'll deign to talk to them -- showing off our super-duper webby skills -- and they'll all join Iggy's Facebook page.'

In short, it was a better handled version of the attempted co-option of the feminist 'Left Wing Fringe' movement.

I sent in a question, which, needless to say, did not make the cut. It was:
Mr. Ignatieff [moi being polite], would you work with the NDP and the Bloc to form a coalition that would represent the majority of Canadians and work cooperatively on the pressing problems of the day?

So. Sorta-cousin-in-law Iggy, FUCK YOU.

Ignatieff Responds to CAPP

An open letter to the members of Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament. (I put that [you] in the second para.)

To the members of CAPP,

This Saturday, January 23, thousands of Canadians will attend anti-prorogation rallies organized by the Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament (CAPP) Facebook group. They won’t be going as Liberals or New Democrats, as Bloc Québécois, Conservatives or Greens. They’ll be going as Canadian citizens, united in their opposition to Stephen Harper’s shut down of Parliament. That will happen because one of you had the courage to stand up in protest – and then another, and another, and another.

I want [you] to know how heartened I am by the mere existence of this group – the largest spontaneous online political movement we’ve seen yet in this new digital age of politics in Canada. I am heartened because the vitality of our democracy depends on the participation of its citizens, regardless of their political stripes. And your efforts and your numbers – over 200,000 of you so far – proves that Canadians truly are standing guard over our democratic traditions and institutions.

Some dismiss your efforts as nothing more than a click of a button. They are wrong. I know that your organizers have been volunteering their own time for several weeks to prepare Saturday’s rallies. And I know that thousands of you will be taking time off school and work, or away from your families to attend them. Anyone who pretends that those sacrifices don’t count is highly mistaken.

When this group first formed, your rallying cry was “Get back to work.” Well, on January 25, the day Parliament was set to resume, my entire caucus will be back on Parliament Hill for several weeks of roundtables and working sessions on job creation, veterans affairs, the environment, health – issues you care about. Issues that can’t wait.

And this Thursday, January 21, from 3 - 4pm EST, I will be holding an online town hall on my Facebook page. It’s part of a national conversation about this country’s future that includes all Canadians and recognizes the importance of open and honest debate. I encourage all members of CAPP to join us on http://www.facebook.com/michaelignatieff. I will be happy to answer any questions you might have.

When Stephen Harper shut down Parliament on December 30, he was counting on Canadians’ reacting with cynicism and indifference. You showed him that’s not who we are. You showed him that Canadians believe in their institutions and have clear, common sense expectations of their politicians: Get to work, work together and get the job done. It’s what’s expected of every Canadian all day long, and politicians should not live by a different set of rules.

I hope your important work these past few weeks means Stephen Harper gets that message loud and clear this Saturday.

Sincerely,
Michael Ignatieff

Be there or be square. (All this talk of protest has knocked my slang back about 40 years.)

My question: Will you work towards a coalition?

My real question: Do you think you can grow a pair before Parliament comes back to work?

Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament membership now over 206,500.

CAPP for Coalition?

I floated this idea on the Facebook wall, but things are still moving there at lightning speed and no one responded.

So far, no opposition leader has taken notice of the Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament (CAPP) movement.

I proposed that whichever of Layton or Ignatieff publicly announces that he and his party fully supports CAPP, that he's ready to work with the other party leader (and the Bloc) to form a coalition, and that he'll organize a non-confidence vote at the earliest opportunity gets ALL of CAPP's support.

And that all -- at the moment over 140,000 -- CAPPers go out and work their butts off for that party and the coalition.

Personally, while I'd have to hold my nose to vote or work for Iggy and many Liberals, I'd do it to get the Refomathugs out of MY government.

Realistically, it can't be May. And logistically, it can't be Duceppe.

What think?

Women and Iggy: A DAMMIT JANET! Inquiry

By Michael Valpy: Women and Ignatieff: What went wrong?

Dubbed a cerebral sex symbol when he entered politics, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff now faces a wall in his appeal to women. They don't much like him.

The issue is hugely significant for his party, which historically has enjoyed high levels of women's support. Ignatieff predecessors such as Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chrétien held 20-point leads in the polls with women over their Conservative opponents.

But Monday's Strategic Counsel poll shows women age 35 and over – and particularly women age 50 and over – have rejected the Liberals in droves in the past six months.

As for the issue of leadership, a summertime poll indicated women had the same lack of interest in Mr. Ignatieff as they do in Prime Minister Stephen Harper, even though women are inclined to vote left of centre and Mr. Harper has been labelled the most right-of-centre national party leader in modern Canadian history.

Only 30 per cent of women favoured each leader and a plurality liked neither.

I don't like Iggy. Mainly for his support of pre-emptive war and 'torture lite'. But, like many of the women interviewed in that piece, I find him stiff, condescending, and inauthentic. Not to mention opportunistic.

I had to laugh when I saw which demographic dislikes him most -- mine!

So, step up to the mic, er, comments section. You don't have to tell your age if you don't want to, but DJ! wants to know -- who likes Iggy? Anybody here?

More 'Pro-Life' Delusion

I don't like Iggy. I don't like most Liberals in fact, but Iggy really gives me the pip.

That said, according to LifeShite, Iggy gave the finger to fetus fetishists.

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has issued a blunt response to Canadians who emailed him in the lead-up to the 40th anniversary of legalized abortion in Canada, concerning Canada's abortion laws.

In a response sent to several individuals who contacted him for comment on his party's stand on abortion, Ignatieff stated: "It is the longstanding view of the Liberal Party of Canada that women must have the right to choose, and this party will take no step that limits, or opens the door to limiting, access to safe medical services for women across Canada."

Good.

But the so-called pro-life delusion continues. Fr. Alponse de Valk, editor of Catholic Insight said:

"I will not now comment on the 'right to choose' and 'safe medical services,' after three-and-a-half million babies have been slaughtered and tens of thousands of women suffered from the after-effects," Fr. de Valk said, referring to the terminology used by the party leader in his response. "It seems to me that Ignatieff has just written the death notice of the Liberal party."

Do these zygote zealots have their heads up their butts or what? As my co-blogger and sister feminazi, deBeauxOs, said the other day: 'When even David Frum recoils from the insanity, you have to wonder.'