parliamentarycrisiswatch - summer edition

By the time that word of a second summit between Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff had come out,  most of us ParliamentaryCrisisWatchers had already downgraded the election threat-o-meter from red to yellow, and were just waiting for official confirmation that the Liberal leader’s perfect record of backing away from any position that could ever potentially be described as “courageous” remained intact. We were not disappointed, although ITQ will admit that the blue ribbon threw us for a loop. Offering your grudging support for a government you’ve only just finished condemning for its “flagrant incompetence” is one thing — but doing it in exchange for a few vague promises to get back to you with more information, and an advisory panel? Somehow, that seems even more embarrassing than forcing your caucus to hide behind the curtains during votes, although that could be because you’re now forced to paste a fake smile on your face and pretend it’s a victory.

Colleague Wherry has the details, such as they are — basically, blah blah productive blah blah meeting again tomorrow. Thank goodness ITQ didn’t spend the last three hours hanging around the Hot Room for that. While we wait for the inevitably anti-climatic conclusion, let’s play a game, shall we? Let’s imagine that, rather than Harper and Ignatieff facing off over a stack of spreadsheets on a coffee table, it was Harper and — Bob Rae! Would the last week and a half have gone any differently? Would we be in the same place now? Discuss.  (Feel free to substitute any other leadership candidate, or noteworthy non-candidate, for Rae.)

Kady O’Malley liveblogs the Parliamentary Crisis Watch