13 September 2009

The Cruel Shoes

The picture says it all.

Suddenly, Jack Layton is suddenly not so keen on an election.  He’s talking about making parliament work, about working with the Connies.  You know, the sort of stuff Jack and his householders used to chide the Grits over.

An unusually media-skittish Mr. Layton said little Saturday during an event in Toronto, but what he did say lowered the temperature somewhat.

“I think that everybody involved would want to see us co-operate in the House of Commons and get some results for people — especially those that are struggling right now: the unemployed and people being left behind,” Mr. Layton said as he inched away from reporters at an archway opening in Toronto.

“So that's going to remain our preoccupation.”

Looks like the real preoccupation will be getting the shoe that’s on the other foot out of Jack’s ass.  Hint:  it went in via the mouth while he was shooting it off before.

-srbp-

35 comments:

Anonymous said...

I use to have a bit of respect for this guy until now. He hasn't tried once to make government work. Now all of a sudden. Just goes to show, what goes around..

Anonymous said...

with all that said...are you suggesting it is a good time for an election? With 75% of Canadians not wanting a fall election I tend to agree that Jack is flip floping on wanting to work with Harper.

Do you think we should have an election this fall?

Edward G. Hollett said...

I really haven't given it much thought.

I simply point out with a tremendous roaring laugh how quickly the Dippers are trying to find political shelter under Harper's gigantic ass.

Anonymous said...

Why don't you give it a bit of a thought. The question is really simple. Do you want a fall election?

I couldn't agree more concerning your post...Jack is a flipper and goes where the wind blows. The question is not hard, however I have feeling that you have no intention on answering the question. I do think that you will go to all extremes bringing other issues to the front...except answering the question on whether you want an election this fall.

Come on Ed, surprise us and give everyone an answer

Edward G. Hollett said...

C'mon 1732, amuse us all and let us in on the big secret:

Who are you and why do you want to know?

You just have some reason for hiding your identity. I think you will do everything to avoid that simple and fairly obvious point.

Anonymous said...

Yes Mr. Ed...what are your thoughts on another election? I know I don't want one. We have the Bobbers...Liberals, the Dippers as they are called and the Nippers....Cons. Not much to choose from. I've been out of Canada for ten years and tried to keep up with what was going on back home. However, since returning the end of May, this country is in a real mess without any foresight for the future from our elected officials and I tar them all with the same brush. I don't need to wonder why there was not any news coverage about Canada overseas....it is just the same old, same old here. I even complained to the BBC. They replied when there was news worthy news about Canada they would broadcast it. Canadians are extremely unhappy, have become unmannerly and irratable at the drop of a hat. I've been staunchly Canadian defending it if I had to do so while over seas. But I am being forced to go overseas again to find employment. The attitude of the Canadian people and its severe unemployment is due to the elitism and fundamentalism of this country. You know, I don't blame people for having the need to remain anonymous especially in Newfoundland. There are only 33 million people in this country and it wouldn't be the first time someone lost their job from voicing their opinion especially in Newfoundland. We talk about the freedom of speech in this country all the time but yet, are condemned in many quarters for speaking out. So Mr. Ed, why is it important for YOU to know someone's identity before saying if there will or will not be an election? Ah yes! Could the be you are located in parasitic part of Newfoundland, that being St. John's the Sin City. From that I can assume you don't want certain people to know what your thoughts are lest you be condemned from the powers that be. Alieh De Maries

Edward G. Hollett said...

So much smoke and bullshit, 1932 to keep secret a very simple thing.

But what's the real reason you want to hide your identity as you skulk about the Internet?

SHow me yours and I'll show you mine.

Anonymous said...

Hi Ed:

My name is William Murphy and I live in St. John's....I would like to know if you would like a federal election this fall?


Wm Murphy

Edward G. Hollett said...

Why do you want to know William are you taking orders?

When do you promise delivery?

Anonymous said...

The question is not hard, however I have feeling that you have no intention on answering the question. I do think that you will go to all extremes bringing other issues to the front...except answering the question on whether you want an election this fall.


this was a quote from 1732....this person was dead on!!

Anonymous said...

What a simple question. Am I missing something? I certainly don't want an election why wouldn't you answer that easy question? Bizarre!

Anonymous said...

I just thought if I gave my real name you would answer the question.

Wow are you touchy. Sorry

Wm Murphy

Edward G. Hollett said...

The post is the post.

It has nothing to do with whether or not I want a federal election tomorrow, next month or next year.

Mr. Murphy: you need to develop a sense of humour.

Anonymous said...

of course it has nothing to do with whether you want an election. Why would you think it would. A number of people asked if you would like an election. You have been asked a number of times by the media and others what your thoughts are concerning various political issues and I tend to agree that this is not a loaded question. Someone mentioned that 75% of Cnadians do not want a fall election. i have no clue if that is accurate but I sure as hell do not want an election.

the question is not that out to lunch. I wonder why you refuse to answer the question. You went off on a tangent about people who do not sign their names to wondering if people have an agenda against you. What the hell does that have to do with your thoughts on a fall election. Isn't your blog is all about these things

Your refusal to not answer the question is now a part of the thread. Not the question about a fall election

Without the bullshit and oral gymnastics, do you want a fall election?
.

Edward G. Hollett said...

It may be several people, 2215, it may be one person. That's the thing about anonymous comments. You never know.

And that is the bullshit and gymnastics of the anony-twits, most of whom come with an agenda that underpins their reason for anonymity.

Whwther or not it is a loaded question is irrelevant. Whether or not I have been asked by anyone else is also irrelevant.

What is relevant is that I have answered: the post is the post and that's not my issue.

And yet you have - or someone has - persisted.

As I have noted elsewhere the federal political parties are beset with a leadership problem and a lack of direction such that the public haven't taken to any of them. That has persisted througbh the last two or three elections if memory serves.

In the background to this thread we have yet another example of THAT issue and THAT issue is far more important and far more relevant than whether or not I want an election.

As for bullshit and gymnastics, that would be confined entirely to people who opt to hide their identity even though the option exists to do anything lese, including identifying themselves by a full name.

And as for an answer, you've had it. You may not like it or it may not conform to your preconceived notion or whatever else is there, but there is the answer.

So why was there such an intense interest in getting a different one than mine?

Anonymous said...

Silence is golden when you can't think of a good answer.

Anonymous said...

And as for an answer, you've had it.

Are you for real!!

What answer. People have asked you whether you want a fall election. What is it?

Who mentioned anything about what's in the post is in the post, leadership and anoy-twits.

People are persisting because you have not answered the question.

Sense of humour...this is fucking hilarious

Wm Murphy

Anonymous said...

I just read from an earlier quote that you said....

"In the background to this thread we have yet another example of THAT issue and THAT issue is far more important and far more relevant than whether or not I want an election"

That is probaly right but after reading all these to and fros about the need for an election during the next couple of months I am now curious if you think it is necessary for Cdn's to go to the polls this year

Bonnie Lavers

Edward G. Hollett said...

Mr. Murphy, you may want a certain answer but you will not get the one you want.

That doesn't mean you won't get an answer.

It just means you won't get an answer that fits into some pre-programmed format. If that doesn't suit your purposes: sucks to be you because your purpose is not my concern.

To me, the question is not whether or not they should be an election but why it is that the three major parties have been unable to sort themselves out and actually garner more than the same paltry level of support among Canadians over such a long period of time.

Someone mentioned the number of people who supposedly told a pollster they don't want an election. That sounds like a typical party talking point, probably from the party that doesn't want an election at the moment. They've all used it over time.

But here's the thing the talking points don't tell you: three days after the writ drops, the same 75% of respondents won't remember they didn't want an election. They'll get down to the business of picking which of the lot in front of them they will vote for.

Which brings me back to the point: why is it that the three major parties have been stuck in the political doldrums for the past three or four years.

If you can figure that out you can figure out why the most exciting thing they have to talk about is whether or not they favour an election at that moment.

The next thing you know they'll be bitching about damage to election signs.

Anonymous said...

Maybe it was from talking points from the person who posted it.

Talking points...what are you muttering about. I for one read a vocm story quoting 75% of respondents do not want an election.

I assume that if I wrote the comment you would say the same thing. I for one, wouldn't know talking points if they came in the mail. Do you think for one minute that comments to your blog originate from Party war rooms. I have a feeling that they could care less.

It just means you won't get an answer that fits into some pre-programmed format.

Now that's a wonderful quote!! A pre-programmed format. People were asking a yes or no question. I have never heard of a yes/no question falling under the format of something pre-programmed. That's a first and actually quite funny if you believe such drivel.

I wonder if these are talking points that you wrote or were given in the event that someone asked a simple question as to whether or not there should be a federal election.

Again you go on tangents about why the Party's cannot get their shit together. My God, you could write a volume of material talking about how disfunctional this Government is and of the other Party's.

Deflect, smoke screen, lob balloons and get personal is the defense you employ in not answering the question.

Of course I do not expect an answer; you made that very clear. This exercise in futility only highlights your paronoia that there is a plot against you and your blog.

From my humble assesment, an answer to the question will mean that you are somehow backed into a corner. What corner would that be? That's what I find curious. Maybe it is not a corner (I'm sure you will set the record straight on that one)that you will find your self in...maybe it is?

Somebody mentioned it before that you will not answer the question and boy were they right. Me thinks that if no one asked you would have told us anyway. It's almost like Danny wating to chnage the Health Minister. When we all screamed for a change, he tightened the reins and refused. Maybe a weak analogy but I for one find the simialarities striking.

All of my extra thoughts and comments now gives you all kinds of fodder to launch into other areas of "setting the record straight" while talking about Party lines and Liberal haters

I for one will wait patiently on those comments while not holding my breath about the original question.


Wm Murphy

Edward G. Hollett said...

Mr. Murphy:

A question phrased to be answered with a "no" or "yes" is a pre-programmed format.

But if the subject doesn't fit into such a simplistic format or if the answer I have doesn't fit that format, then there you have it: my answer won't fit your preprogrammed format.

As for the 75% question, it doesn't matter who said it or where it comes from. It tends to get used by the party of the moment that isn't looking for an election.

As I noted, three days after the writ drops in any election the same people will not be thinking of the fact they didn't want an election. Parties aren't punished for forcing an election regardless of what the majority say in a poll.

When was the last time it happened? It sure wasn't in 2008. Elections turn on other issues because people appreciate that elections are more serious than about whether or not some pollster asked people before if they wanted an election of not.

In other words it is a question that doesn't matter.

Now you can read into all of that whatever you want. You can try and make it analagous to Ross Wiseman and Danny Williams and that's all fine and good.

The fact remains that there is a very good reason why I won't answer the question in a simplistic pre-programmed format. I can't give a fair and honest answer to a question based on only two choices: yes or no.

The issue is different, as I see it and that's the answer.

BTW, have you stopped beating your wife?

Yes or no.

Have you stopped beating your wife?

No dodging. The question is simple.

have you stopped beating your wife? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Get the point?

Anonymous said...

I am not married!

How about this question....Can you provide any response on why or why not, the Canadian electorate should or should not go the polls this fall?

Wm Murphy

Edward G. Hollett said...

Aha!

And therefore, as you can appreciate, the question and the format of the comes loaded with assumptions which may or may not be appropriate.

It doesn't matter how you try and word it, Mr. Murphy, the answer remains the same.

Anonymous said...

why don't you enlighten us with the assumptions that you refer.

The only answer you gave Mr. Hollett is that you have not answered the question. You did provide answers to the questions that you posed If that is what you mean by the answer then I suggest that you look up schizophrenia.

They have medication for those that are inflicted with people hearing questions and answering those questions

Wm Murphy

Edward G. Hollett said...

As many times as you ask the same question, Mr. Murphy, my answer remains the same.

Anonymous said...

I have been following this back and forth and I can't find what it is that you answered. Am I missing something?

Edward G. Hollett said...

of course you can't 1349.

The whole thing is a figment of someone's imagination.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Ed, I clearly typed my name at the end of my comment for your perusal yesterday Ahiel De Maries. What else is it you want, my social insurance number?....no way I've already had my identity stolen.

"It may be several people, 2215, it may be one person. That's the thing about anonymous comments. You never know." If this is the case Mr. Ed, you need to stop writing blogs Mr. Ed. Let me guess, the reason you are not answering the simple question "do you want an election" is because you are a Liberal. Pointing out all the faults of the PC government and the NDP without neery a comment about the Bobbers......do I smell a rat? Alieh De Maries way out here in Alberta. Oh! By the way, De Maries is the old French-Irish spelling of the anglicization of Morris

Anonymous said...

"As for bullshit and gymnastics, that would be confined entirely to people who opt to hide their identity even though the option exists to do anything lese, including identifying themselves by a full name." Then change the comment system Mr. Ed. I shant be reading anymore of your blogs...you only want people to agree with you 100%. Oh Mr. Ed, I use your system which you provide of anon because I don't have an open ID nor a URL Hmmm!! Maybe your are the plant.

Edward G. Hollett said...

1525:

There is no need to guess the reason why I have not accepted the question posed by you or whoever it was who originally posed it. I have answered, fully.

As with most partisans - the phrase I used earlier is partisan twillick - you ignore the fact that I make critical comments about all.

Or, in this case, I am steadfastly refusing to be sucked into what i consider to be a pointless, assinine and - yes partisan - question.

Yet somehow you manage to turn that into a discussion of my supposed partisanship?

Thabnks for confirming why you post anonymously. I'd suggest that you grow up, get a life, or get your head out of your ass, but I suspect better people than me have already given you the same advice and with no more impact than I would have.

Edward G. Hollett said...

1525/1539

Evidently I posted too quickly since you had more up your nose to get out.

The system for comments here depends as much as anything else on the integrity of the people using it to provide its integrity.

If you look, you will see there is an option by which someone may enter a name/URL. You don't need a URl to post there.

As well, even if you hit "anonymous" you can sign a name at the end of the comment. people who do that don't feel the need to present the French-Irish version of their name one second and the Anglicised version for another.

Evidently you have some issues that are far more significant than anyone here could deal with. Rea dif you wish. Don't read if you wish. Post a comment or not.

But if you chose to make a comment, and as I have said before, expected to be treated as you treat others. Carry on in the way you have and you will be met with the same disregard that you have evidently shown.

There are plenty of other palces on the Internet where bullshit is tolerated. I suggest you try them. This isn't one of them, as you found out to your dismay

Anonymous said...

You just don't get it or refuse to believe it....so you need to get your head out of your arse Mr. Ed and lose your obsenities period. My name is Alieh De Maries

Edward G. Hollett said...

Sorry 1618, but someone posing as you already indicated you wouldn't be posting here any more.

Do I take it that is not you or that the one before wasn't you?

Anonymous said...

This post is a good example of the Liberal hackery we see from Ed Hominem. No one wants an election Ed. If you haul you hear out a few links you might get a wiff of that as opposed to the Ed shitt you are normally breathing and spewing.

Edward G. Hollett said...

There is fear in the land among the small minds like yours 2216.

Keep spewing.

people can smell your fear.