Stéphane Dion has saved the sovereigntist movement in Quebec, and it's only going to cost Alberta and the other "have" provinces a billion dollars to do it.
« What does this mean for the over-under? | Main | 'This puts us back another 20 years' »
Stéphane Dion has saved the sovereigntist movement in Quebec, and it's only going to cost Alberta and the other "have" provinces a billion dollars to do it.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.colbycosh.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/350
This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on December 2, 2008 6:25 PM.
The previous post in this blog was What does this mean for the over-under?.
The next post in this blog is 'This puts us back another 20 years'.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
Comments (11)
You mean a billion dollars down payment?
Posted by Golson Molden | December 2, 2008 6:46 PM
Posted on December 2, 2008 18:46
Something is horribly wrong when a politician brags about forcing a politican of the opposite sex "onto their knees" twice in a single interview.
Posted by FACLC | December 2, 2008 7:21 PM
Posted on December 2, 2008 19:21
Hah! I thought that was weird too. My suspicion is that that was given in French (the interview) and that it doesn't have the same connotations there. Either that or the PQ leader is incredibly vulgar.
Posted by Tyler | December 2, 2008 8:05 PM
Posted on December 2, 2008 20:05
Hey Colby, did you ever dream about a Diplomacy game? Maybe have a dream that you were playing Russia, and Satan had drawn Turkey, and offered a Juggernaut on generous terms?
Did you ever have that dream?
Do you think Stephane Dion is having that dream right now? Do you think in his dream, Satan looks a bit like Gilles Duceppe?
(Sorry, I don't know enough about Diplomacy to figure out an appropriate 3-way alliance that would give Layton a metaphorical representation.)
Posted by Ryan Cousineau | December 2, 2008 8:17 PM
Posted on December 2, 2008 20:17
She's French, isn't getting on her knees just her way of giving a friendly howdy-do?
Posted by Colby Cosh | December 2, 2008 9:45 PM
Posted on December 2, 2008 21:45
This unhealthy relationship between Quebec and the rest of Canada, like a marriage between an indifferent lady and a man eager to please, has got to stop (this just being the latest example as to why). Why doesn't someone call Quebec's bluff (or promise) and cut their equalization payments to be on par with the rest of the country?
Because the Liberals (or Conservatives) would mine them for votes.
Time for a referendum on whether they are allowed to stay in Canada.
Posted by Half Canadian | December 2, 2008 10:54 PM
Posted on December 2, 2008 22:54
Really? Geez, I was in the wrong parts of Montreal, then.
Posted by Lord Bob | December 2, 2008 10:55 PM
Posted on December 2, 2008 22:55
What "other have provinces"? I thought it was just us... Or have Newfoundland's and Saskatchewan's transition plans finally expired?
Posted by Sam Mikes | December 3, 2008 12:03 PM
Posted on December 3, 2008 12:03
I don't think any of you understand. When the Troika get finished re-jigging the equalization formula, by definition the only "have" province will be Alberta.
Makes things so much simpler. After all, as Barbie once said, "Math is hard!"
Posted by Garth Wood | December 3, 2008 12:56 PM
Posted on December 3, 2008 12:56
BC, Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan are all above the shame line.
Nfld and Lbrdr are in transition (translation: too rich for equalization, too greedy to let go).
Posted by Ryan Cousineau | December 3, 2008 9:21 PM
Posted on December 3, 2008 21:21
That's for 08-09. As was widely reported, Ontario is descending below the "shame line."
Posted by Colby Cosh | December 3, 2008 9:34 PM
Posted on December 3, 2008 21:34