Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
Well, you can't have it both ways. It can't both be part of the constitutional tradition and a radical undemocratic coup d'etat.
But in any case, your explanation doesn't account for Harper's assurance to the GG that "the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the house have been in close consultation"
You're telling me that's just boilerplate? I'm not saying Harper did anything wrong then. As you say, it's part of the constitutional tradition--and indeed, it would be irresponsible for the opposition parties NOT to explore a coalition government under these circumstances.
But it might just be cause for everyone to cool it with the fake outrage.
|
That to me just says that the Opposition required something to be done. There was no official talks of backroom deals being done, no troika of party leaders divying up cabinet seats.
You do know that the Conservatives could never, ever conceive of governing with either the Bloc or the NDP... right? I mean there is an ethical difference between then and now. You see that, right?