September 11, 2006

Battle Lines Are Drawn at La Citadelle in Quebec City

I was at the debate in Quebec City this past weekend, and while I will not project a winner, I will say that one candidate stood out from all the rest.

Michael Ignatieff showed he is the candidate who is willing to get his hands dirty to do the right thing.

Bob stood there and said straight-faced that he has tried constitutional negotiations before and that they are not what we need. Then he said to elect him because he had the experience to do something he was not willing to do.

Stephane Dion implied that he does not care how the whole situation works out. “Canada can still work without Quebec signing the Constitution.” Let’s try using that one in the next referendum. When the next PQ premier calls a referendum and says the federal government has been unwilling to negotiate for almost 20 years, they will say we are at a stalemate, and sadly enough, the separatists would be right.

While the Quebec City area elected 9 federalist MPs (YES NINE) in the last general election, the Liberals polled 9%. (YES NINE). Clearly what we were doing before is NOT the answer.

Bob Rae says it is too hard to change. Stephane Dion says that we are already on the right track. Michael Ignatieff says let’s fix this problem.

We want a leader that CAN, not a leader that CANNOT.

Don’t let anybody tell you that your dreams are not possible, because the very reason we are Liberals is because we do dream, and we dream BIG.

A final historical note: How many years after Quebec got conquered were French Canadians given special rights due to their culture, history, and language?

14 years…after Quebec got conquered by les maudits anglais Guy Carleton, the British Governor, made the hard decision to give the French religious rights and a civil code rather than assimilate them.

When was the last time we tried to bring Quebec into the current constitutional framework by recognizing its distinct culture and history…

Yes 14 years

Last Question…Ironically, where did Governor Carleton first propose this bold proposition?

La Citadelle du Quebec

11 Commentaires:

Blogger grit heart a dit...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

9/12/2006 8:23 a.m.  
Blogger grit heart a dit...

Simplistic and juvenille arguments.

It is not about CAN and CANNOT.

You need to stop being so partisan in your support for Ignatieff and begin the process of understanding polotical gamenship versus pressing public policy.

The Constitution is not pressing public policy. And, Liberals would be foolish to try and make it such.

9/12/2006 8:24 a.m.  
Blogger duojet57 a dit...

The battle lines are drawn, but it's Ignatieff that is raising the white flag.

Had he lived in Canada and fought for the federalist cause in 1980 or 95, he would have realised the separatist quest for additional powers is insatiable.

Instead, he's falling for the trap that Quebec is a separate nation, distinct from all other provinces, and needing special status -- that can only come at the expense of a strong, unified Canada.

9/12/2006 9:03 a.m.  
Blogger Alex Plante a dit...

Grit Heart knows it all. He is omniscient, just like God.

We are so honoured to have you comment on our blog. Someone who holds the unquestionable truth.

A person with such an enlightening vision should publish his name. Only cowards have to hide behind pseudonyms.

Please, Grit Heart, tell us who you are.



9/12/2006 10:02 a.m.  
Blogger Ed King a dit...

I guess all you need to be declared omniscient around here are some well-reasoned arguments backed up by facts. GH is simply pointing out the flaws in Ignatieff's approach, and all you can do in response is ignore his arguments and attack him instead. Since I have chosen to affix my name to my comment, maybe you can answer my concerns without resorting to insults.

In light of all the hardship the last round of constitutional talks caused, is it reasonable to announce plans to amend the constitution at a time when very few, if any, premiers are interested, let alone the public? How will Ignatieff succeed where Mulroney failed in 1990 and 1992? Why are Bob Rae and Stephane Dion, among many other people, wrong to think that the odds of success are very slim? If they are correct in their assessment, is it reasonable to promise amendments if there is little chance they will be agreed to and ratified by the provinces?

According to Michael Ignatieff, what is the fiscal imbalance and how will this problem be solved? If Ignatieff and his supporters can diagnose the problems of our constitution and prescribe a remedy, surely they can tell us what the fiscal imbalance is in specific terms. And give at least a vague idea of what they will do to fix it while ensuring that the federal government still has the means to fulfill its responsibilities while managing its massive debt.

9/12/2006 11:09 a.m.  
Blogger Concerned YL a dit...


9/12/2006 11:20 a.m.  
Blogger PhillyC a dit...

"We are so honoured to have you comment on our blog. Someone who holds the unquestionable truth."

Imagine accepting the truth.

9/12/2006 1:18 p.m.  
Blogger s.b. a dit...

My god. You aren't even old enough to remember the last constitutional embroglio and Iffy hasn't lived in the country since the BNA act was our constitution. You are a fool and so is your candidate.

9/12/2006 4:17 p.m.  
Blogger grit heart a dit...


Maybe you want to delete your last post. It lacks class.

Attack my message all you want, attacking me is silly.

9/12/2006 6:04 p.m.  
Blogger cat mutant a dit...


Get over yourself. You're candidate is hardly flawless. One of his biggest flaws is that he has you supporting him. I say that because from reading many of your comments, you seem to prefer to alienate rivals in your own party, rather than have constructive debate.

9/12/2006 9:30 p.m.  
Blogger s.b. a dit...

Cat Mutant. I`ll repeat just for you. Iggy hasn`t lived in Canada since the BNA act was our constitution and the Fuddle duddle team aka Alex and Antoio who support him aren`t old enough to remember the last constitutional debacle. These are just facts. Do with them what you like but they are the truth. Reopenning the constitutional debate is foolish epsecially with the PQ possibly poised to win an election in QC, only fools and fools who follow the fool would do so.

9/14/2006 3:50 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home