Day 16 of 14 -

Day 16 of 14


The parties began meeting this morning and, after a break at some point, will continue through the afternoon. I’m told it could be a long day.


Day 16 of 14

  1. We could turn it into a satirical TV series: This Fortnight Has Sixteen Days

  2. Any takers on how many days to resolution*? I'm taking 23.

    *resolution is here defined as "the matter is claimed to have been resolved by the government, and the Speaker does not disagree."

  3. Do you guys think maybe the PMO and the Habs are "channeling" the same source? The Habs were written off by the sports pundits, just like the Conservatives were written off here and else where by the media pundits. Yet both are still going strong. Moral lesson to all the nay sayers…there's a reason why pro teams play the games and why we have elections. Ferverently wishing does not make something so. Working hard, doing all the little things right and believing in your worthiness all can help you to prevail against both long odds and long knives. In the hab case superhuman goal tending hasn't hurt either….wonder who the CPC Hallak is?

    • I appreciate your desire to somehow equate the Conservative government with the Montreal Canadiens, but really, you didn't do it with this. And anyway, the concept is risky–Montreal may not win the Stanley Cup, and then where will you be?

      • At least two playoff series beyond anyone's wildest expectations, for starters. Oh, sorry, you meant Harper…

  4. Interesting to see that it is taking so long, given that they were supposed to have been close to an agreement right before Milliken's last deadline.

    Methinks that the level of posturing going on here is greater than generally acknowledged.

    Everyone wants to make it seem as though they're working towards a solution, even though they don't ever appear to be on the brink of actually coming up with one. Hmmm.

    • Dennis, I think we might actually agree on this point…

      • It explains the pig that I just saw fly outside my window. lol

    • Don't you see, Milliken doesn't have a deadline? He doesn't want to pull the trigger that the rules say he should. And the opposition seems to be in no hurry to go there either. I suspect G's pool entry of 23 days (above) is way off.

  5. Kinda hard for Libs to carry on with 'Cons are war criminals' after Bill Graham's testimony in committee yesterday.
    Even harder for Libs to plead the 5th when Dippers and BLOC want to pin 'war criminals' on both the libs and Cons.
    A few highlites"

    'Graham said even in hindsight Canada can't be held responsible for prisoners being tortured once they were handed over to Afghan authorities.
    “You can't be responsible for what you don't know about…''

    '.. organizations were concerned about the conditions of the Afghan jails, but “it's not the same as torture..''

    '.. he didn't accept allegations that Canadians were “knowingly or implicitly involved” in a way that they would make them liable for possible war crimes.'

    • Negligence is not a defense of the law, no matter who it comes from.

    • Bill Graham the Conbot, spewing standard talking points from the evil Harper PMO — who knew?

  6. Hints emerging that the government are throwing up more conditions.
    Paging speaker Milliken…[should we ring the division bells for this…?]

    • and your source for this is…..

      • You called me ignorant recently when I asked you for a source. Presumably, given Scott's link below and how it discredits WW's argument because it's from a Bloc MP, you'll see that it's perfectly reasonable to request a source.

        • I knew that someone would make this knee-jerk response.

          So, every example of someone asking for a source is the same, is it? That's your argument, is it?

          • I guess not.

            I thought for a moment you might have been swayed by my argument the other day and I got all excited about the rationality of it all.

          • So, you ARE of the belief that it's perfectly reasonable to request a source in all situations, are you? lol

            I'll also add that, once the source was provided last time, none of you managed to answer the question I originally raised. Just like I said.


    • Ah, a Bloc MP. Thanks!

  7. If only this sort of deliberation had preceded the decision to go to war in Afghanistan…

  8. Hang on to your hats folks. We may be going to an election or an appeal to the Supreme Court. However, Iffy does not know what Harper will do and he needs to do something to get himself out of an unwanted election.

    So I suspect the Libs and the Conservatives will come to some agreement without the Bloc and the NDP.

    Sharing military secrets with a Separatist party seems a little strange when a referendum could only be a couple of years away. As for the NDP they will continue to be their santimonious selves.