Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Countdown to cleanliness!

As you'll see from my new sidebar addition, there are now less than 7007 days until the Conservatives set their clean air standards, and still a mere 44 years until they meet their target of a 50% reduction in Greenhouse Gas emmissions. I'll only be 75, so I hope to live to see Ambrose get her props!

In other pledge countdowns:

The Tories are now 25 185 days from bringing Polar Bears back from extinction using cloning technology.

We're 34 310 days from creating genetically indestructable wheat strong enough to grow in the tundra wastelands of Saskatchewan again.

The Conservatives are just 43 435 days from completing their plan to raise PEI from beneath the Atlantic Ocean, and

We're just 52 506 days from establishing a high artic research base where Edmonton used to be.

Exciting times!

Make no mistake about it, those of us who survive are going to absolutely cherish the next 144 years of Conservative rule.

Sadly, year 145 is going to be a bitch. But I'm sure any day now the Conservatives will announce a plan to deal with the invasion.

Darn. I may have said too much.

Good luck building your shelters everyone I've gotta go...

Recommend this Post

Monday, October 23, 2006

Conservatives promise to cut GHG emmissions by half in time for Britney Spears' 69th birthday....

In other news, the Conservatives have pledged:

To bring Polar Bears back from extinction using cloning technology by 2075.

To create wheat strong enough to grow in the Saskatchewan again by 2100.

To raise PEI from beneath the Atlantic by 2125, and

To establish a high artic research base where Edmonton used to be by 2150.

It's a bold new plan for the future.

Not that many Canadians will survive to see it.

Recommend this Post

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Libs/NDP should politely decline London North, Help May win the seat...

This will NEVER happen, I realize, but I wonder what others think of my own prefered strategy for the Liberals and NDP of politley declining to run candidates against May? The old convention of not running candidates against National party leaders is hardly followed anymore, but still, might it not be an interesting strategy?

Fair or not, it seems Haskett (if she gets the nomination) will be a somewhat "controversial" candidate, and would not the Liberals and NDP benefit as much in the long term (I would argue MORE) from a socially conservative Tory being TROUNCED by a combined Liberal/NDP/Green effort, in what I assume will be a reasonably high profile by-election, than in putting up high profile candidates themselves (as some have suggested, wrong-headedly imho, maybe even a Liberal LEADERSHIP candidate!)?

Wouldn't May beating Haskett 70-30 (totally pulled that out of the hat, probably hyperbole for effect, but you see my point) with a combined "anybody but the right-wing nut" coalition be even better for the Liberals and NDP than simply winning one more seat in the House? Besides, the alternative would seem to be to try to actually WIN the seat, and a high profile Liberal, a high profile Dipper, and May, might risk splitting the vote and letting the Tory candidate actually take the seat!

It would be piling on, of course, but it would be fun to watch (for me anyway), and I think it would be a smart tactic. What's better for the Libs and Dippers than for every political party in the province (country?) not with the initials "CPC" getting to point to London every day from now until the election and say "evangelical" and "Christian" and "Republican" and "Bush" every other word? Seems to me you could virtually guarantee a Tory loss, and spend the whole time painting Haskett as the face of the new Canadian Conservatism.

If they're playing Chess, and not Checkers, I'd personally think the Liberals and NDP would at least mull it over. They won't of course. And, imho, more's the pity. It's about time the Greens had some representation in the House.

More importantly, the potential entertainment value is huge.

Recommend this Post