A note: The Monday Mailbag, which usually appears Tuesday, will this week appear Wednesday. Did I just blow your mind?
I could come up with a clever excuse (police snipers?) but the truth is I can’t post it because I’m pinned down by police snipers. Also, I’m emotionally distraught about Paul Wells taking off on vacation in a time of singular political intrigue and potential constitutional crisis. Question: Is Paul really on holiday or will he reappear next week… as Prime Minister of Canada?
[Spoiler alert: holiday.]
But seriously – Andrew Coyne blogging roughly 3,293 times in one 24-hour period? Paul Wells blogging not at all? That Dion guy smiling? There is only so much unprecedentedness we Canadians can take.
If any of Paul’s regular commenters get nostaligic for being scolded, smacked down or confronted with the full force of Wellsian exasperation, just drop on by and I’ll be happy to put you in your place.
“Is Paul really on holiday or will he reappear next week… as Prime Minister of Canada?”
A Prime Minister from…. Sarnia? Really, that’s too much. I know as a Bills fan you have to believe anything is possible. But let’s try to be a little serious.
Seriously, what has gotten into Coyne? It’s like he has an internal blogging energy source that requires charging for months at a time in order to sustain his outrageously intense blogging pace for about 48 hours, tops. Feschuk, here’s a test: go down the hallway, and look right at him as he types: does it at all resemble a star imploding? And if so, haha, I just tricked you into going blind.
Olaf, I don’t work in the same building as Coyne. Or even in the same city. I was outsourced six months ago and am now the artificial construct of four bloggers in Bangalore.
Before you start clapping yourselves on the back for profilic output, I would like to note that you have not commented upon or analysed the constitutional crisis in the making.
To be fair, neither have the Globe and Mail, the National Post, the Toronto Star (and as an aside, I’m not interested in links pointing to those news services when I visit Maclean’s.ca).
Can your writers get to work to consider the salient issue of this newsweek? The role of the GG is considered to be a political position without authority to fundamentally change or influence our Democratic institutions. The last time a Governor General used their reserve power was durinig the King/Byng affair, an action which has been ever-after historically referenced as a constitutional crisis that led to campaign action toward Independence from the Monarchy. The only coalition governments Canada has know have been coalitions that included the ruling party (the exception of Premier David Peterson’s government was not generally considered to be a coalition government and by David Peterson’s recent summary of history, the complexity of the now-proposed coalition government makes it completely unlike). Even The Great Coalition formed by George Brown saw the exodus of 40 grits to the Liberal side.
If our Governor General exercises her reserve party and does not do what our elected Prime Minister requires, what does this say to Canadian? That is the area where Maclean’s should comment!
For my part, I feel that our current GG is particularly restrained from exercising her reserve power by her own actions during her term. She has not returned any legislation to parliament to show her willingness to act in opposition to the government of the Day. She awarded Henry Morgentaler the Order of Canada, an act which prompted your magazine to devote a cover story to Abortion. In this, she showed aggressive political stripes to say: The Parliament and Courts are unsuited to handle a charged moral and health issue. If she then says to us that our Democratic Head of State has no control over her office, which is long a convention of our constitution, WHAT IS SHE SAYING TO ALL OF US?
An historic day, for sure. Now tell us Scott, is what Mr. Dion proposing to do the Mr Harper the equivalent of a wedgie or a straight up kick in the danglies?
Scott – this rumoured coalition business has me all confused. I mean, Whitney denies vehemently that she has rekindled her, er, “romance” with Bobby. Is this true? And if John Ivison or Bob Fife tell me otherwise, who should I believe?
Isn’t the simplest solution to this constitutional mess to have the Governor-General dissolve parliament permanently and commence rule by Divine Right? Long live the Queen!
“Is Paul really on holiday or will he reappear next week… as Prime Minister of Canada?”
A Prime Minister from…. Sarnia? Really, that’s too much. I know as a Bills fan you have to believe anything is possible. But let’s try to be a little serious.
Mike Moffatt on
Seriously, what has gotten into Coyne? It’s like he has an internal blogging energy source that requires charging for months at a time in order to sustain his outrageously intense blogging pace for about 48 hours, tops. Feschuk, here’s a test: go down the hallway, and look right at him as he types: does it at all resemble a star imploding? And if so, haha, I just tricked you into going blind.
Olaf on
Karlheinz Schreiber for coalition Gaming Commissioner.
Dot redux on
I say we boycott Paul from now on. He keeps leaving us in the lurch.
Shawn in Montreal on
Scott, I have it on good authority that Paul is at a National Post alumnus, week long party, umm…. never-mind.
steve on
Paul Wells is really not on vacation.
He is writing his new book — Right Side, Splat! The genius of Harper.
This is breaking news. Please feel free to toss in a siren.
Anon on
Wells keep doing that. Didn’t he take off in the middle of the last election too?
PolJunkie2 on
Olaf, I don’t work in the same building as Coyne. Or even in the same city. I was outsourced six months ago and am now the artificial construct of four bloggers in Bangalore.
Scott Feschuk on
Steve: Nice callback.
Scott Feschuk on
keeps
PolJunkie2 on
Scott, your DNA is not compatible with Wellsian pissy bitchiness. Don’t even attempt it. :-)
Marty on
Awe, poor Coyne. Canadian Elections, American Elections… now this? Do you guys ever get a break?
K.R. on
Before you start clapping yourselves on the back for profilic output, I would like to note that you have not commented upon or analysed the constitutional crisis in the making.
To be fair, neither have the Globe and Mail, the National Post, the Toronto Star (and as an aside, I’m not interested in links pointing to those news services when I visit Maclean’s.ca).
Can your writers get to work to consider the salient issue of this newsweek? The role of the GG is considered to be a political position without authority to fundamentally change or influence our Democratic institutions. The last time a Governor General used their reserve power was durinig the King/Byng affair, an action which has been ever-after historically referenced as a constitutional crisis that led to campaign action toward Independence from the Monarchy. The only coalition governments Canada has know have been coalitions that included the ruling party (the exception of Premier David Peterson’s government was not generally considered to be a coalition government and by David Peterson’s recent summary of history, the complexity of the now-proposed coalition government makes it completely unlike). Even The Great Coalition formed by George Brown saw the exodus of 40 grits to the Liberal side.
If our Governor General exercises her reserve party and does not do what our elected Prime Minister requires, what does this say to Canadian? That is the area where Maclean’s should comment!
For my part, I feel that our current GG is particularly restrained from exercising her reserve power by her own actions during her term. She has not returned any legislation to parliament to show her willingness to act in opposition to the government of the Day. She awarded Henry Morgentaler the Order of Canada, an act which prompted your magazine to devote a cover story to Abortion. In this, she showed aggressive political stripes to say: The Parliament and Courts are unsuited to handle a charged moral and health issue. If she then says to us that our Democratic Head of State has no control over her office, which is long a convention of our constitution, WHAT IS SHE SAYING TO ALL OF US?
Maclean's for Dummies on
An historic day, for sure. Now tell us Scott, is what Mr. Dion proposing to do the Mr Harper the equivalent of a wedgie or a straight up kick in the danglies?
Anna-Maria on
Scott – this rumoured coalition business has me all confused. I mean, Whitney denies vehemently that she has rekindled her, er, “romance” with Bobby. Is this true? And if John Ivison or Bob Fife tell me otherwise, who should I believe?
Mark on
Isn’t the simplest solution to this constitutional mess to have the Governor-General dissolve parliament permanently and commence rule by Divine Right? Long live the Queen!
Kenneth on
Scott. I know this question has been on everyone’s minds but are too afraid to ask.
… If you could have dinner with three people, dead or alive, who would it be and why?
Rachel on
I’d choose dead people, because they’re cheaper to feed.
Sean Stokholm on