It's not the economy
Home / Blogs / Jim Johnston's blog /
By Jim Johnston on 7 December 2008 - 10:29am
There is a great column by Rick Mercer in the Globe and Mail at http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM... called "It's not the economy, stupid".
In this column, he suggests that the blatant partisanship battle between Steven Harper and the rest of the parliament might be best settled by resignations of M. Dion and Mr. Harper. Interesting idea.
- Jim Johnston's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Blogs are personal opinions, and may not reflect the position of the Green Party of Canada. For official party policy please visit the policy and press release sections.
Recent Comments
- Rick Mitchell | 13-May-2012
- Anne Marie Benoit | 12-May-2012
- Frances Thauberger | 11-May-2012
- Paul Maillet | 09-May-2012
- Steve May | 09-May-2012
- 1 of 2222
- ››





Comments
The "Musings" of John Baird
A very good commentary. Thanks for sharing it with us. I had seen Mercer's quote about shooting a rabid dog in last week's Globe & Mail.
There was something Mercer wrote about, however, that I have not seen reported, and I would appreciate anyone's help in directing me to a media article with more information. Mercer wrote about John Baird suggesting to the media that if the GG did not prorogue, the Cons were ready to go above her head and that of Parliament.
This scenario, which I haven't seen discussed in the mainstream media, was one which I was personally concerned about playing itself out. What if the GG had decided NOT to prorogue parliament? Harper and the Cons had taken a position that the GG MUST aquiesce to any request the prime minister made of her. If she said "No", and Harper insisted that she had no right to say "no", where might that have led to? All of the Cons, including the Speaker of the House, not showing up on Monday morning to face a no-confidence vote? The firing of the GG and replacing her with one who would do Harper's bidding? Harper had said he'd do everything legal to prevent his own downfall. We surely would have been into a constitutional crisis had the GG said No. I wonder if any of these scenarios might have been discussed during the lengthy meeting between Harper and Jean.
Anyone who could point me in the direction of finding out more about Baird's "musings", that would be really appreciated.
"Sudbury" Steve May
"Sudbury" Steve May
CBC interview...
...apparently with veteran journalist Don Newman, which i culled from the scant
references via google and a commenter on a Gob in Pail story, see
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM... , find "William Robertson from Hamilton, Canada writes:"
does this mean appealing to Eliz. Regina II herself to replace such a GG with such a background (see my comment on her "wise move" at http://www.greenparty.ca/en/node/8680#comment-8891 )?
....................
i'm editing this entry to follow up on some better searching, problem caused by lack of plural in Mercer's piece, where Baird said "over the headS", so here's a (possibly edited) video of the interview,
http://www.wikio.com/video/669763 ,
at around 3:30 mark Baird makes the somewhat more innocuous (repeated) statement about appealing to the people, over the heads of Parl. & GG