Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Maudes and shockers | Main | Election improprieties »

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

A post-election post

(Cross-posted from Burkean Canuck).
I've been a LITTLE busy over the past eight weeks with the election.  Here are some of my observations and lessons learned . . .

And, finally, to my old friends Stephen and Laureen Harper, my sincere congratulations. My thoughts and prayers are with you and your children as you shoulder the responsibilities we Canadians have no right to ask you to take on. May God bless you and keep you.

Posted by Russ Kuykendall on January 24, 2006 | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A post-election post:


Post Election analysis

"Canadians did not (merely) endorse neo-conservatism when they elected him ( S Harper) last night," "They (clearly had) voted against a Liberal Party that had become smug and arrogant." The Globe and Mail Analysts said the outcome reflected clearly a weariness among the voters with the Liberals, whom they identify with broken promises, scandals, untrustworthiness and virtual one-party rule, but also a sense of uncertainty about Mr Harper and his conservative socio-economic ideals. Their uncertainty really includes for good reasons too the past bad behavior of three past Prime Ministers, including the Progressive Conservative, as well as the Liberal ones, and the fact that the majority of the Canadians no longer trust explicitly any of the federal leaders, federal political parties. The majority of voters they are still really fearful of the continual repeat of the politician's broken promises, their poor management of the governmental services, and tax payer's money.

Stephen's Harper's present association with any of past key players of the Brian Mulroney's government is clearly also further hindering the new Conservative future trust, popularity now next as well. It really really would be better for the New Conservatives themselves still to have made a full clean break with any of the old Conservatives or you may really face an federal election within months and not years.

(Luke 5:37 KJV) And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. 38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. 39 No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

Posted by: Canadian | 2006-01-24 7:28:28 PM

OK, I think that I've been sitting quietly as a polite guest for sufficiently long today, without seeing the answer anywhere, so I'll ask my question: How does the Conservative Party form a government now, with a minority of seats in your Parliament? I see 124 seats for the Conservatives, PLUS What? I suppose the 29 seats from the NDP are likely allies (?) of the Conservatives. And then who is this ONE Independent? In my ignorance of your political system, I am guessing that you must take parties as allies on an all or nothing basis. If that's so, (a BIG "if" and I hope it's not so) then this ONE Independent guy seems like he would be the same type of, all of a sudden "important" guy along the lines of a creepy guy named Jim Jeffords in America who got into that role when he switched parties after the election from Republican to "Independent" in our U.S. Senate, awhile back, to screw up the Republican's razor thin Senate majority back in 2000? But even if you do got the NDP and the IND guys to vote with the Conservatives, you still only have exactly 50% of the 308 seats in Parliament voting with the new Conservative government. Don't you need 50% plus one to govern?


Posted by: Conrad | 2006-01-24 7:33:43 PM


See http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/idb/forsey/parl_gov_02-e.asp and http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/idb/forsey/parl_gov_03-e.asp and http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/idb/forsey/institutions_06-e.asp

Posted by: Russ Kuykendall | 2006-01-24 10:21:44 PM

Canadian Border Guards leave post!!!! Apparently in the crunch they felt the situation at the Peace Arch last night was "to dangerous" so they left a few supervisors to man the border while the U.S. did the work on their side.

Why the hell are they even in the Border Service. If they can't handle risk, they should be flying a desk in some safe place in our big three cities. And people wonder why we have a rural-urban split!!!!!!

Kate's blog left the following

[email protected]
in case anybody wants to send a thank you. I did.

What the hell is this!!!!!! Border guards leaving their posts because they think it is to dangerous. Another blessing of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms combined with the Liberal governments baby-assed, bleeding heart policies/interpreations.

Of course the Border Guards need to be armed - so lets get with it. These same people who deserted probably have the feeling that a handgun/long gun registry/ban is a wonderful thing - even for them while on duty. Then what - the charter allows them the right to refuse to bear arms while on duty??????. We don't need deserters standing on guard for us.

The housekeeping list just keeps getting longer

Posted by: calgary clipper | 2006-01-25 7:30:23 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.