No surprise there.

The real questions are, what now? Will Harper be able to govern? Will the NDP and the Tories combine for 155, or will they just miss? Will Harper work with Duceppe? How long can this crazy mess possibly last?

The good news:

• The Bloc lost both popular vote and seats in Quebec. They can spin all they want, but this was a big blow to them, and is good news in the leadup to the next provincial election and sovereignty referendum.
• Paul Martin is finished as Liberal leader. The party will now be jolted out of corruption and complacency, and will have to reorganize and revitalize itself in preparation for the future.
• The Tories have a win but not necessarily a mandate. Their small minority will not allow them to do all the scary things that the Liberals accused them of wanting to do (and that they probably didn’t want to do in the first place).
• Svend Robinson was defeated in Vancouver. Whew.

The bad news:

• The Bloc Quebecois lost seats but gained power. They’ll now hold the balance of power in government, and they can exact a steep price to keep Harper’s government alive.
• Minority government or not, Stephen Harper is now the Prime Minister of Canada. He has made a number of promises that I’m extremely uncomfortable with, and I suspect, many Canadians are too. (The silver lining here is that politicians are very good at breaking promises).
• Had the Conservatives lost, Stephen Harper would surely have been forced out and the party might have had a chance to elect a more moderate, centrist leader and move to the left. Instead, Harper will keep his job and the Tories will remain socially conservative. Depending on your take on the situation, this is either good or bad. Regular readers here ought to understand how I feel about that one.
• If you’re gay and planning to get married, you might want to move that date up a bit.

And yes, for posterity’s sake, I’ll say it again: I was wrong in my prediction of no gains for the Tories in Quebec.

• Don’t count out the Liberals just yet: I know all the polls have Harper ahead, but the gap has been narrowing over the past week and the latest polling data is at least 48 hours old. Vote distribution is a matter of interpretation, and the people doing the interpreting are just as guilty of bandwagon-jumping as the next person. Furthermore, what people answer in polls always differs from what they actually do on election day at the ballot box. I’m not saying Harper will lose, I’m just saying it’s not a lock that he’ll win either. If tomorrow ushered in another Martin minority government, I wouldn’t be shocked.
• Predictions of a Tory breakthrough in Quebec are premature: On the same note, I’m simply not convinced of polls that have the Conservatives picking up multiple seats in Quebec. While their support numbers are higher than the Liberals, the Libs’ support is concentrated here in Montreal and the Tory support is spread out all over the province. One Tory seat? Maybe. None, most likely. Certainly not eight or ten. Won’t happen. Not this election.
• The Bloc will likely hold the balance of power: That’s the most likely scenario in a Tory minority government. The Liberals will rarely support the Conservatives, and the NDP almost never. If Harper wants to govern, he’ll need the Bloc. That won’t be good for Canadian unity no matter how they spin it. And if Harper refuses to deal with Duceppe, it will be a very short time until we’re right back at the polls.
• Paul Martin’s dusting off his resume: If the Tories win tomorrow, Paul Martin can kiss his political career goodbye. If nothing else, that would help the Liberals move past the sponsorship scandal and start with a clean slate, so to speak. As for Martin, what do ex-Prime Ministers do nowadays when they’re not testifying at federal enquiries? Anyone heard from Kim Campbell lately?
• There will be a January 24th: Whoever wins the election, life will go on. The sun will rise in the east. Canada probably won’t be all that different from what it is now.
• A little perspective: We can quibble all we want over sponsorship scandals, constitutional reform, healthcare or tax cuts, but remember that whoever wins will be democratically-elected, relatively moderate, and won’t be killing people in torture chambers. Even those of us holding our noses and voting for the “best of the worst” would do well to pause for a moment and appreciate the momentous significance of having the right to vote at all. Because I look around the world and I realize that it’s no small thing.

Vote early, vote often, vote your conscience. Stay tuned for liveblogging of the results tomorrow night.

Martin was later forced on the defensive after a close ally — Canadian Auto Workers union President Buzz Hargrove — told reporters that Harper’s “view of the country is a separatist view” and would aid those who want independence for the French-speaking province of Quebec.

“I have big differences with Stephen Harper but I have never doubted his patriotism,” Martin told reporters, also dismissing Hargrove’s suggestion that people in Quebec vote for the separatists rather than Harper.

Hargrove’s endorsement of the Liberals is the kind of thing that would make me less inclined to vote for them, not more – even without his suggestion that Quebecers vote Bloc. Martin’s campaign is looking increasingly desperate.

Hey Paul: When even the American comedians are mocking your ads, they have to be really awful.

Then again, I suppose we should cut the Liberals some slack for how bad their campaign advertisements have been this time around. After all, their ad agencies all went and got themselves indicted in the sponsorship scandal.

(By the way, Colbert also had Andrew Sullivan on the show as his guest tonight. True to tongue-in-cheek form, his first question was “what is a blog?”)

Catch that? And in related news, Duceppe attacks Harper for not attacking Layton for Martin’s attack on him.

I’m starting to understand American politics better, where the word “attack” is usually followed by something like “Iraq”.

So why vote Liberal, you may ask?

Is it because I think the Liberals have done such a great job? Not really.

Is it because I buy into the scare tactics about Stephen Harper being George W. Bush reincarnated, prepared to turn us into a far right-wing theocracy? No, I find those ads amusing at best and ridiculously disastrous for the Liberals at worst.

Is it because I think that the culture of corruption that has set in amongst the Liberals is worth rewarding? Definitely not.

Is it because I’m voting strategically, in a riding where a Liberal vote would prevent a Bloc or NDP candidate from getting elected? Nope, my riding has been solidly Liberal since 1968 and even the sponsorship scandal won’t be changing that anytime soon. I could safely lodge a protest vote with little impact.

Is it because Martin convinced me in the debates? Not at all; in fact, he’s probably one of the worst debaters I’ve ever seen, and he got his butt kicked all the way to Ellesmere Island and back.

Is it because I agree with the majority of the Liberal policies and platform issues? Not even.

Is it because I believe that a Liberal victory represents the best chance to keep Quebec in Canada and to fight sovereignty? On the contrary, I think it will probably hurt a great deal.

So, you’re probably asking yourself, why on earth would I vote for this party?

Good question.

The answer is simple: Despite all the scandals, despite all the corruption, despite the promises I don’t believe and the policies I don’t agree with, the Liberal party still is the “best of the worst” in my mind. On the major things the government has done lately, I’ve been much closer to the Liberal point of view than to the Tory one.

Some examples:

• The economy: Whatever else he’s done, Martin has balanced the budget and improved economic conditions. He did his best to stand up to people like Jack Layton against spending we can’t afford. He even stood up to Bono – and hey, if you can say no to Bono, you can say no to anyone. The Canadian dollar is up, unemployment is down, and while the economy is still plagued with problems, I simply don’t believe that Harper is better equipped to solve them than Martin is. The Tory promises to reduce the GST may play well in the media, but in practice there are plenty of other places worth cutting first.
• Social issues: Gay marriage is probably the most prominent example lately. As I’ve stated many times on this blog before, every Canadian – gay or straight – ought to recognize this as an issue of fundamental human rights. Any of us who belong to any kind of minority should understand that if you can have a majority-rules decision against one minority, the same logic could be used against any of us. Martin and the Liberals were on the right side of this one. Harper and the Tories were on the wrong side. And while I don’t really believe Harper will reverse it, nor do I agree with electing a party that has dedicated so much time, energy and resources to fighting it. I think the Liberals took a courageous position on this one and I respect them for it (if for little else).
• Voting for the candidate, not the party: Cop-out? Perhaps. But I like Marlene Jennings, the incumbent Liberal MP in my riding, well enough. Her voting record is often in step with what I believe (though not always), and she has been especially strong in defending Israel and in working to strengthen Canada’s ties with Israel, which is an issue of importance to me. And I’m comfortable having her represent my riding in Parliament, whether as a member of the government or as a member of the opposition.

So the upshot is, I’m not entirely happy to be voting Liberal and I’m not about to hit the campaign trail for Martin’s team. There are plenty of places where I flat-out disagree with the Liberals on policy, and there’s no doubt the party is about as corrupt as you can get. But I’m not going blue this time, for those reasons and for the reason that I simply don’t believe the Tories have presented enough of a positive platform. They’ve been stronger in attacking the Liberals, sure, but their policy initiatives haven’t won me over.

Okay, bring it on. I’m ready.

• Someone needs to buy Paul Martin a stopwatch, so he can time his statements better. There was hardly a segment in which he didn’t get cut off for nearly going over his time.
• Jack Layton really needs to stop phrasing every answer with his slogan that there is a third alternative. We get it, okay? We just don’t like it.
• As for seniors, children, and working families being Layton’s priorities, well, that’s all very well and nice. (Oh, and if he were being honest, he ought to have listed labour unions at the top of his list). Personally I’d like a government that works for all the rest of us, too. But that’s just me.
• Stephen Harper said one of the only courageous things in the entire debate, when he defended his belief that large companies need tax breaks in order to stay competitive and to create jobs. Unfortunately, he didn’t follow through. Half the debate seemed like a competition on who could bash the big bad rich corporate bogeyman the most.
• Gilles Duceppe’s name-dropping is getting annoying. I can just picture him as the guy at the B-list Hollywood party trying to score points with the cool kids by talking about his lunch with Brad and Angelina. Can’t you just see it?
• Most of the time, the other three candidates ignored Duceppe, figuring there was nothing to gain from going after him and everything to lose. Martin and Harper, in my opinion, lost an opportunity there. Except during the unity segment, none of them bothered to attack Duceppe, and therefore none of them really managed to make the case that they would strongly defend Canadian Unity in the case of a referendum.
• On that note, I’m not sure what Jack Layton hoped to gain by repeatedly talking about “winning conditions” for Canada in Quebec. He couldn’t possibly be thinking he’s going to win any seats here, could he?
• If you tied Paul Martin’s hands behind his back, who else thinks he would be mute?

Overall I’d have to give this debate narrowly to Stephen Harper on points, because he survived the first real test after gaining the lead in the polls, and managed to sound more coherent than Paul Martin in most of his responses. However, it was far from conclusive. Martin has indicated that there is plenty of Liberal ammunition to look forward to in the next two weeks, most likely in the form of attack ads painting Harper as being in the pocket of American Conservatives.

As Duceppe grows bolder about gunning for Canada in general and promoting sovereignty, Layton salivates with the notion of once again holding the balance of power, and Martin and Harper duke it out for another two weeks, tonight’s debate has one solid conclusion: this debate is still wide open.

Bono, as I’ve said before, we want your views on politics just as much as we want Paul Martin donning a leather jacket and belting out “Where The Streets Have No Name”. Which is to say, not at all. Not that I expect U2 to get out of politics anytime soon.

On the radio this morning, one of the leaders of a local West Island charity phoned in and mentioned having run into Bono at Hurley’s Pub on Saturday night, and apparently having chatted with him about domestic versus foreign aid. I don’t know how much that will change government policy, but it’s sure great advertising for Hurley’s.

However, Bush might want to consider this: there’s a world of difference between the embezzlement of a few billion dollars and the loss of a few thousand lives.

I don’t think it’s right to directly blame Bush for the disaster that has emerged in Katrina’s wake. That’s reserved for people who want to politicize everything.

However, a true leader recognizes that the buck stops with him. In that sense, Bush’s move is the right one. That said, I suspect his words will ring hollow to the people who have lost their homes, families, communities, livelihood, and loved ones.

“I will be speaking to the president when the timing is appropriate,” Martin said in Regina. “It’s very important as far as I’m concerned that that phone call take place when it is right for Canada to have it take place, and that will be quite soon.”

Translation: the White House hasn’t returned the call from the Prime Minister’s Office.

In any event, it’s not the kind of problem that can be resolved with a phone call. It takes a relationship, and Martin has gone out of his way not to establish one with Bush.

The problem is, Martin wants it both ways. He wants to be seen as anti-American when it’s convenient, but when he wants the U.S. to respect Canada, he is unwilling to reap the consequences.

Like the CBC’s labour dispute, the biggest risk in Canada playing trade harball with the U.S. is that they’ll realize how easy it is to ignore us. Carolyn Parrish can go on stomping on Bush dolls if she wants; it’s pretty obvious that the real Bush doesn’t really care much.

“He’s very difficult to deal with because he won’t agree to things that he doesn’t believe he can deliver, although that is very frustrating and annoying and infuriating,” Bono told reporters while standing next to Martin.

Canada currently spends the equivalent of 0.26 percent of GDP on foreign aid. Martin says he would rather commit to small increases he knows he can afford than make long-term promises.

Bono, I love your music and the video for Where The Streets Have No Name kicks ass. So I mean this with all due respect: shut up!

Martin may be a weak political leader who waffles more than an Eggo, but at least he’s a political leader. Who elected Bono leader of anything?

This is just part of a larger rant that I have about celebrities and politics. We used to have economists talking about the economy, international relations experts discussing international relations, political analysts talking politics… Agree or disagree, the people leading the discourse usually actually knew something about their topic and had solid credentials in their field.

Since when did “#1 on the Billboard rock charts” become a credential for discussing world trade or poverty?

This is not a new phenomenon. It’s been going on for years, and has been encouraged by the fact that stars get publicity for their political action, and are under a large amount of pressure to pretend to care about causes bigger than themselves. Some actually do care. I have no problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is this notion that we’re supposed to listen to them because they’re celebrities. In a debate about world trade, if you put a Ph.D. in global economics at a table with Jeanine Garofalo, why should we assume that they’re on equal footing to discuss the issues? I won’t give much weight to Paul Martin’s opinion on rock music, so why should I care so much what Bono thinks about politics?

In last year’s American election, in which we had Springsteen singing for Kerry and Britney Spears cheering for Bush, I couldn’t help but wonder whether anyone was actually basing their vote on what celebrities were saying. And if so, what does that say about the electorate?

That’s my issue with Live 8 in general. International aid and third-world poverty are serious issues, and nobody elected Roger Waters or Dave Matthews to decide how best to spend our tax dollars to deal with them.

Celebrities are human beings – often with good hearts and fat bank accounts. If they want to do charity work or get involved in worthy causes, more power to them. But when they use their charity work as a publicity stunt, it cheapens them and their cause.

It also creates issues among fans who respect celebrities for their art but dislike their politics. Should I refuse to watch Sean Penn’s movies because I don’t like his soapbox political views? No, that’s mixing issues, isn’t it? But by suggesting that his celebrity status lends credence to his politics, the celebrities themselves have mixed those issues, leaving someone like me to either have to avoid art because of politics, or wonder if I’m implicitly supporting politics because of art. When I go to an Our Lady Peace concert and, in the midst of screaming and cheering, Raine Maida shouts that we should “send a message to Bush to stay out of Iraq”, it puts a sour taste in my mouth. Regardless of his message (I’d feel the same way if Raine said the opposite), suddenly I’m no longer at a rock concert, but at a political rally. It didn’t say that on my ticket. I didn’t pay for that. All it did was to make me feel manipulated and used.

The most reasonable point I’ve ever heard from a celebrity on the issue of celebs in politics comes from Alice Cooper:

“To me, that’s treason. I call it treason against rock-and-roll, because rock is the antithesis of politics. Rock should never be in bed with politics. If you’re listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you’re a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we’re morons. We sleep all day, we play music at night and very rarely do we sit around reading the Washington Journal.”

Cooper’s comments were made in the context of last year’s US election campaign, but they’re equally valid for issues like foreign aid and world trade.

So let Bono think that Paul Martin is “infuriating”. That’s fine. I don’t really care. I may disagree with Martin an awful lot, but here he is being eminently reasonable, refusing to make lavish promises he can’t keep and instead sticking to more immediate, gradual commitments. Foreign aid in itself won’t solve African poverty overnight. And, despite what he may think, Bob Geldof is not uniquely qualified to tell us how to think.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that maybe – just maybe – if Bono were Canadian and had actually voted for Martin, then his criticism might be a bit more valid. In the meantime, please stick to rock music and let the politicians stick to politics.

They include:

• Stronger guarantees that Charter rights will not override religious freedoms
• Justices of the Peace who do not want to perform civil marriages of same-sex couples will not have to do so
• Churches are not required to rent out their halls for same-sex weddings
• Religious educational institutions will still be allowed to preach that homosexuality is against God’s law, without being subject to hate crime laws

Except for the second point about justices of the peace not being required to carry out the law, these amendments seem reasonable and designed to simply guarantee religious freedom.

Still, you have to wonder whether Martin would have done this if his fragile grip on power hadn’t been threatened yesterday. I’m wondering if he’s even capable of taking a stand and stating clearly that bill C-38 will pass because it’s the right thing to do.

Martin said Friday the money was targeted towards helping the Palestinians build democratic institutions, such as an independent judiciary, and to improve housing.

[ . . . ]

“It is just a down payment,” Martin told a news conference in Ottawa.

“Canada and the international community must clearly do much more at this crucial moment in the Middle East,” he said, explaining that any additional money will be contingent on Abbas following through on promised reforms.

Yeah right, cause the Palestinians have had such a great track record on that front in the past.

Mind you, Canada’s money pales in comparison to the $150 million aid package that Bush offered Abbas earlier this week. I guess now we know how the next round of bombs will be funded.

It looks like there might not be an election after all, as the Conservatives’ polling numbers slip and Harper looks increasingly like a vengeful opportunist each day. The Conservatives are going to have to come up with a better argument than “we’re not the Liberals” if they want a turn in power. In the meantime, Martin’s gamble seems to be paying off, and his shaky government might get its life support extended a little longer.

More idiocy on parade as the annual workers’ event of May Day results in “clashes with police”. That’s the media’s non-judgmental way of saying that a bunch of idiots smashed things and then reacted violently to police who tried to get them under control. Oh yeah, and they really really don’t like Jean Charest. Just in case we didn’t know that already.

North Korea’s getting bolder as the Dear Leader of Death Camps slowly realizes that the rest of the world can’t or won’t do anything to stop them. Canada won’t sign onto the US’s missile defense plan, but Japan certainly sees the value in it.

Violence is on the rise again in Egypt, as suicide attacks on tourists by Islamist terrorists sent a chill through the region. This pretty much rules out any hope that last month’s attacks at Taba were isolated incidents. One thing we can pretty much count on: if Egypt’s tourism industry suffers, they’ll find a way to blame Israel somehow.

And last but certainly not least, Passover is over and I’m back to eating real food again. It’s great to have a meal that doesn’t taste like cardboard!

What sort of “concessions”? The usual NDP mixed bag. Deferring corporate tax cuts in favour of $4.6 billion in additional social spending for things like Aboriginal housing, the environment, foreign aid and the like.

That’s all besides the point, though. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the changes, the main thing here is that we have the party who came in dead last among the four major parties in the last election essentially dictating the federal budget. What’s wrong with this picture?

Martin may succumb to Layton’s blackmail by agreeing to defer corporate tax cuts in the federal budget in exchange for a promise for the NDP to support the budget:

The apparent concession came just hours after Prime Minister Paul Martin appeared to shut the door to NDP Leader Jack Layton’s demand that the cuts be scrapped. “We are prepared to discuss the possible deferral of the corporate tax measures,” the source said.

Martin’s fighting for his political life, so it’s obvious why he’s doing this. But the NDP doesn’t hold enough seats to prop up the Liberals if everyone else votes against. Martin will probably learn the hard way that Layton’s life raft is made of lead.

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper’s director of communications apologized Friday for referring to Canada’s Prime Minister as “Osama bin Martin.”

Geoff Norquay, director of communications for the Leader of the Opposition, said he meant the reference to the international terrorist leader as a joke.

Some joke.

Watching him was a bit wince-worthy, but ultimately he got his message across. He apologized without admitting direct involvement or guilt, accepted responsibility as a leader, and vowed to prosecute the offenders. To be fair, he did what I would have done in a similar situation. The only surprise was a promise to hold an election within 30 days of the end of the Gomery inquiry – a stall tactic if I’ve ever heard one. But I think that this desperation move may pay off for him.

In contrast, the other three leaders looked like they were launching campaign speeches. Harper attacked Martin straight-on, but his speech may have the unintended effect of making Canadians wary of a mud-slinging campaign. Duceppe had me wishing – not for the first time – that he wasn’t on the wrong side, because as usual he stole the show with a fantastic opening line to his speech, something to the effect of “the last time a prime minister addressed the nation, it was 1995 and Chretien was fighting to save Canada; this time, Martin’s fighting to save the Liberals”. He picked up votes for sure.

As for Layton, his small smile bugged me even more than it did during last summer’s debates. But he implied that he’d be willing to make a deal with Martin to attempt to stave off a no-confidence vote in exchange for changes in the Federal Budget to give the NDP what they want. This is Layton’s chance to blackmail the Liberals for all they’re worth, and don’t think it hasn’t occurred to him.

I think that, though this mess is with the Liberals, most people are cynical enough to realize that corruption is rampant in all political parties, and there’s quite a bit of distaste for the perceived opportunism of Harper and the other opposition leaders in this situation. I think people are already tired of hearing about Gomery. Mostly, I think people are tired of elections and their options are severely limited when it comes to actually voting.

What will happen is anyone’s guess. But I wouldn’t write off the Liberals just yet.

More importantly, how many Canadians will tear themselves away from “Survivor” to watch the Canadian-politics version of the game: who gets voted out of office?

Update: I guess this occurred to Martin’s handlers too; they moved his speech earlier, to 7pm, presumably to avoid competing with prime time.

Stockwell Day, the Conservative Party’s foreign affairs critic, laughed off Martin’s demand that Washington would have to alert Ottawa before taking out an incoming missile.

“These missiles are coming in at 4 kilometers ( 2.5 miles) a second, and if the president calls the 1-800 line and gets: `Press 1 if you want English, press 2 if you want French, press 0 if nobody’s there …’ I mean, it’s crazy.”

Day made a funny. Who knew he was capable of one?

Anyway, this is just Canada playing our usual game of handing over the dirty work to our southern neighbour and then criticizing it for not being squeaky clean. Nothing new here.

For one thing, the Martin government released a federal budget, which was another snoozer. Lots of promises to everyone that will deliver not a whole helluvalot to anyone. By my calculation, the “massive tax cuts” promised will save me exactly $14 in income tax next year. That’s two movie tickets and a small popcorn on cheapy night. Yippee! The budget was designed with one purpose in mind: to keep the Liberals in power. Well, mission accomplished, I suppose.

From the maybe-yes-then-again-maybe-no department, Paul Martin has proven himself, in the grand tradition of Canadian leaders, to be incapable of making a decision if it might cost him a few votes. Martin has opted not to participate in the missile defence program with the United States, on the grounds that, well, it would give him bad press because of rampant anti-Americanism. Oh, and the NDP might use words like “Star Wars”. Everyone knows that Star Wars are scary. Especially “Attack of the Clones”. That was just awful.

Anyway, I don’t quite get it. And neither does Paul Cellucci:

“I personally don’t think it’s in Canada’s sovereign interest to be outside the room when a decision is made about a missile that might be coming toward Canada.”

Paul, Paul, Paul… haven’t you learned anything in your years as ambassador to Canada? It’s not that we’re not interested in defending our country. It’s that we Canadians have deluded ourselves into thinking that if we smile and are nice and polite to everyone and refuse to take a stand on much of anything, that nobody will ever attack us. As for those pesky terrorists, well, they’re mainly just misunderstood, and we’ll give them an immigration hearing in about 6 months.

Moving on. Syria might withdraw from Lebanon in response to massive public and international pressure following the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri… maybe. I guess the Syrians don’t particularly relish the thought that the ever-pervasive “End the Occupation” posters at ANSWER rallies might be directed against them, instead of against Israel. Of course, everyone knows that Baby Assad is really just stalling, hoping that the issue will blow over and the world can go back to merrily ignoring Syria’s sins and condemning Israel. That should happen in about 10 seconds, when the Israelis begin heightening security measures in reaction to today’s suicide bombing in Tel Aviv. If there’s one thing the Arab world can count on, it’s the rest of the world’s single-mindedness when it comes to Israel.

Finally, from the Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish department, Holocaust-denier Ernst Zundel will finally be deported from Canada, after hanging out in a Toronto jail for the past couple of years, trying to fight extradition to Germany on the grounds that he would immediately be prosecuted there for hate crimes. Somehow, I can’t see anyone shedding any tears over his departure.

Renegade Liberal MP Carolyn Parrish has once again enraged members of the opposition and her own caucus after tossing a George W. Bush doll on the floor and grinding it under her heel on a satirical television show.

Something tells me there’s an apt comparison in here, to the world’s inability/refusal to do anything to rogue states who thumb their nose at international policy… like Iran with their nuclear weapons program… nah, too obvious!

To Carolyn Parrish: I mean this in the nicest possible – oh, who am I kidding? Just shut the fuck up!

Update: Looks like Paul Martin finally got the message. He fired Carolyn Parrish… at long last.

Parrish’s antics reminded me of a child who pulls increasingly annoying attention-getting stunts, in effort to find out where that invisible line is. Well, Carolyn, now you know.

The real question: with Parrish sitting as an independent, will she support the party that threw her out on votes… or the opposition Conservatives?

Update #2: Cliff speculates that she’ll join the NDP. She’ll likely be welcomed with open arms there by many MPs who share her “values”.

Prime Minister Paul Martin promised selective tax cuts to boost the economy while renewing commitments to strengthen Canada – U.S. relations and enhance social programs in a Throne Speech designed to keep the opposition parties from defeating the Liberal minority government.

The speech promised tax cuts, economic reform, and education programs. It made no mention of investing in the cash-strapped military (our newly-purchased submarine is dead in the water).

The NDP will probably vote for. The Conservatives will likely vote against. The Bloc is anyone’s guess, though I’m betting they vote for – it’s not in their best interest to have another election so quickly. Of course, I could be wrong.

“The Security Council has been bogged down in debating the issue,” said Martin, who pledged $20 million Cdn to assist the African Union in its drive to quell fighting between government-backed militias and rebel groups.

“While the international community struggles with definitions, the people of Darfur struggle with disaster. They are hungry, they are homeless, they are sick and many have been driven out of their own country. Tens of thousands have been murdered, raped and assaulted,” told the gathering.

“Our common humanity should be a powerful enough argument and that is precisely what is missing. Put simply, there is still no explicit provision in international law for intervention on humanitarian grounds.”

Martin also admitted that intervention in Sudan is too little, too late:

“We should have intervened last June when Canada called for it,” said Martin, who acknowledged progress had been made with a UN Security Council resolution last weekend that threatens sanctions if violence continues in Sudan’s western region of Darfur.

“It’s been a long time in coming, far too long in coming,” he said.

We could argue that Canada’s aid is also too little, too late. But realistically, there’s very little our overextended military could do.

Martin has been relatively invisible on the international scene since taking office last December. This is his first effort to try to take a leadership role, in the spirit of Canada’s past reputation. And certainly, the crisis in Darfur needs more attention to be called to it – from a country other than the US, which has very little credibility right now thanks to the Iraq situation, the election, and general anti-Americanism.

Canada’s call to action is a step in the right direction, and I think Paul Martin deserves props for his speech today and his call to action. Unfortunately, the United Nations he is addressing is one that’s hell-bent on inaction.

Prime Minister Paul Martin pledged to reintroduce legislation this year to decriminalize the possession and use of small amounts of marijuana.

There had been rumours that, under pressure from the United States, the new Martin government would let the legislation fall.

Parliament failed to get the legislation through before it was dissolved prior to the June 28 election which saw Martin’s government reelected, but without a majority in Parliament.

Meeting with reporters after the first formal meeting of his new cabinet, Martin said “the legislation will be reintroduced this fall.”

I don’t smoke the stuff – never have, never will – but I support this legislation. There’s no reason why someone who smokes a cigarette can do so legally, but someone who’s caught smoking a joint will end up with a criminal record. Law enforcement resources should be dedicated to important crimes, not to chasing people with a little bit of weed.

In fact, I’d say this doesn’t go far enough. Decriminalization – replacing a criminal sentence with a fine for a regulatory infraction – won’t solve the crime involved from the supply end, nor will it help people who are legally allowed to smoke pot for medical reasons to have access to a standardized supply. The government out to simply legalize it and then tax the hell out of it, just like cigarettes. If people want to harm themselves or indulge from time to time, at least the money will go to fund the government, and not to line the pocket of some drug lord.

Sure, there are problems associated with legalization. So decriminalization is probably an important first step. And I’m not advocating drug use. But there are worse things in life than the occasional joint, and it’s time for the law to catch up with reality.

Don’t beat yourselves up too much, guys. The pollsters had it way wrong. There’s going to be a lot of questions being asked at Ipsos-Reid this morning.

Big journalism reacts as well. The Gazette thinks that the Liberals won because “fear overcame disgust”. The Globe and Mail says that Martin’s victory was only provisional, and that he should resist NDP pressures to swing too far to the left fiscally. The CBC speculates on what’s next for Martin, and questions his role as a leader. And of course, the separatist paper Le Devoir lauds the Bloc’s “remarkable victory” and says Quebecers gave the Liberals a “kick in the ass”.

Indeed. It was the Quebec Bloc sweep that cost the Liberals their majority government.

There’s a lot of speculation going on about what comes next. Will Martin manage to form a stable minority governing coalition? Or will the whole house of cards collapse in a few months? We’ll have to see.

Liberals: The nominal winner, Paul Martin, managed to hang onto a plurality, pulling ahead of expectations in the final days of the campaign and making a stronger showing than many people thought. He’ll keep his job. But he also lost his majority, several cabinet ministers, and a whole lot of seats. He also lost his ability to move his party rightward and bring in fiscal reforms, now that he will have to deal with the NDP. He probably has mixed feelings tonight.

Conservatives: Harper’s campaign was the biggest disappointment of the night for his supporters, and his opponents are breathing a sigh of relief. Despite peaking numbers and some crazy-talk about a Tory majority, Harper will be relegated to official opposition status yet again. Despite picking up a few seats, he’s the big loser of this election, no question.

Bloc Quebecois: Duceppe’s virtual sweep of Quebec was a big victory for Duceppe, as he brought his party to levels not seen since the Bouchard days. Predictably, he’s now claiming that this was a vote for sovereignty, and it looks like we might be facing the prospect of another referendum here in Quebec. On the other hand, Duceppe has to be at least a little disappointed that his party will not be holding the balance of power in Parliament.

NDP: Layton and his ragtag bunch of lefties are the night’s big winners. Despite getting the least number of seats of the big 4 parties, and only 15% of the popular vote, it is the NDP that will be setting the agenda in Parliament with this minority government. They will hold the balance of power, and Paul Martin will be forced to make all kinds of concessions to them in order to govern. Layton’s camp is ecstatic tonight.

Overall: In a way, this was the worst possible result. The Liberals had an opportunity to win a majority and move the party closer to the center. Instead, they will be forced to deal with the NDP. In a way, I would have almost preferred a Conservative minority, because at least then the government would’ve been powerless to do anything, propped up by the Liberals only long enough for them to regain their popularity, and then soundly defeated in an election that would restore a Liberal majority. Now, instead of more centrist ideas getting respect, we will be hearing about all of the NDP’s nutty policies getting attention. Tomorrow’s Canada is worse off than yesterday’s, and that says a lot.

So I will head off to sleep, feeling a mixture of relief and disappointment. And then I will remind myself that none of this really matters all that much anyway.

I will update the table above intermittently when candidates are declared elected, but I assume most people will be watching the coverage live. Instead, I’ll post some comments as I go along.

8:15pm: So far, the results for the Liberals aren’t looking nearly as grim as most of the media had been predicting.

They just announced that Scott Brison managed to win his riding – as a Liberal. Very interesting. Unlike a lot of people, I don’t view switching parties as a sign of being a “traitor”, but more as a sign of wanting to stay true to one’s ideals. Some people accused Brison of opportunism, but I think he just found that his values fit better with the Liberal party. Apparently, most voters in his riding agreed.

On the other hand, John Herron, who also switched from the Tories to the Libs, lost to the Conservative candidate in his riding. Win some, lose some.

8:50pm: Bad news for the Conservatives all over Eastern Canada, as they are down in seats and way down in popular vote. The Liberals have done what they needed to do in that part of the country, at any rate. There won’t be much more news until results start to come in from Quebec, Ontario, and Central Canada.

9:10pm: The first Bloc Quebecois MP has been elected, in Gaspésie/Îles-de-la-Madeleine. A sign of things to come in Quebec as a whole? Probably.

9:25pm: Local Conservative Party headquarters in Montreal are in a friggin’ Cage au Sports! That’s hysterical!!!

9:30pm: Polls are now closed in most of the country. Results should start to come in pretty quickly now.

9:45pm: Everyone’s talking about Layton versus Mills in the hotly-contested riding of Toronto-Danforth. But the big story that hasn’t been reported there is that the Conservative Party candidate, a guy with the odd-sounding name of Loftus Cuddy, is the brother of Blue Rodeo’s lead singer Jim Cuddy. (Blue Rodeo’s concert on Saturday at Bourbon Street North was awesome, by the way).

10:05pm: CTV just predicted a Liberal win, though they’re not saying yet whether it will be a majority or a minority.

Remember folks, you heard it here first.

10:15pm: With only 2 out of 205 polls reporting, my riding of NDG-Lachine has been declared a win for incumbent Liberal Marlene Jennings. No surprises there. I knew when I voted for her that it wouldn’t be much of a race.

10:30pm: The media networks are all projecting a Liberal minority now. As happy as I am that the Liberals will be taking it, my relief is tempered by the fact that the NDP might get enough seats to combine with the Liberals for a majority, thus giving the NDP all kinds of undeserved power in government and swinging policies to the far left. I’m crossing my fingers that they’re wrong.

10:45pm: David Pratt, the Liberal minister of defence, was defeated in his riding. Some big-name Liberals are falling to the Tories, but it won’t be enough for Harper’s team to take the reins. The Liberals are still way ahead.

10:50pm: At the moment, using elected and leading totals, it’s looking like Liberals + NDP will combine for enough seats for a majority. Goddammit! This is bad, bad news for Canada.

11:00pm: L. Ian MacDonald is talking about a “Lib-Lab” coalition, and Jack Layton dusting off his shopping list. With the NDP holding the balance of power, this is probably one of the worst-case scenarios that could have emerged. The Liberals had a golden opportunity to move rightward, towards the middle, under Paul Martin. Instead, thanks to the Bloc sweep in Quebec, the party will be forced to move leftward.

11:15pm: It’s all over now but the fat lady singing.

Gilles Duceppe just gave his triumphant victory speech after his sweep in Quebec, and – surprise surprise – is suddenly talking about sovereignty again nonstop (after swearing that this vote was not about separation). I don’t know why this stuff even bothers me anymore, it’s so expected. Still, this is bad news for Quebec.

In the rest of the country, it’s pretty much understood that Paul Martin will govern with Jack Layton’s help. The NDP agenda will be front-and-center, and we can kiss Martin’s fiscally-responsible policies, like debt reduction, goodbye.

The good news is the Liberals won. The bad news is, well, everything else. Unfortunately, I predicted this.

Two thoughts were running through my head for most of the debate: That it was actually kind of funny, and would be even funnier if not for the sad fact that these are the leaders of our country, and that it’s even sadder that Duceppe actually seems to be winning.

Harper seemed like he was already looking ahead to the prospect of a minority government, soft-pedalling his debates with Layton and especially Duceppe. Martin, for his part, looked like a tomato about to burst. Layton was just plain creepy with his fake smile that he wore the entire time. And is it just me or do you find it sad that Duceppe’s English is better than Martin’s French?

If I have to award points – and admittedly it’s tough – I’d give them to the following candidates:

To Paul Martin, for being the only candidate not to suck up to Gilles Duceppe.

To Stephen Harper, for being soft-spoken while everyone else was yelling like little children.

To Jack Layton, for actually managing to wear that smile for the entire time.

To Gilles Duceppe, for managing to use the words “fiscal imbalance” a record number of times in a two-hour period.

And last but not least, to the moderator, for staying awake.

I was just over on the Gazette’s site and I saw a banner ad for StephenHarperSaid.ca, an attack website run by the Liberal camp against the Conservative leader. (Note that the Harper camp has lowered itself to the same level by launching TeamMartinSaid.ca against the Libs.)

Anyway, the banner ad included a sentence that reads: For the whole quote, it’s source and context, visit StephenHarperSaid.ca.

It’s.

Yes, I make lots of spelling errors too. But this is my personal site. I were funding an ad to appear on major websites, and wanted to make myself look good and my opponent look bad, I might consider using a spell check…

Just a suggestion.

Behind door number two, we have Canada’s most recognizable number-two man who is now acting as number one.

Bono praised Paul Martin for his efforts to fight AIDS on an international scale:

Irish rocker Bono praised Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin for leading the developed world in efforts to combat HIV/AIDS and poverty in the developing world.

A beaming Martin, who is expected to announce in the next 10 days that a general election will be held in June, laughed as Bono quipped: “I am not here to elect Mr. Martin.”

But pressed on political issues, Bono gave Martin a strong endorsement, insisting “this politician has kept his promises to me … so far.”

I know: come election time, let’s all vote for Bono! After all, he’s “Even Better than the Real Thing”.

Really, if you think about it, whatever sick freaks did this didn’t time it very well. Not only is the school is closed for Passover anyway, but there’s gonna be a lot of angry Jews discussing it at their seders and demanding action.

In the blogosphere, I see that LGF and Burnside have picked up the story. And Stefan Sharkansky wonders whether officials are too politically-correct to release information that would seem to implicate Palestinian-sympathetic vandals as the responsible parties:

The CBC and the Toronto Star might not want to confront the unpleasant truth about the motives and identities of the arsonists, but at least some Canadian journalists are doing their jobs:

The CTV network quoted sources who said the notes denounced recent attacks against Palestinians, including the killing of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, leader of the Islamic Hamas movement, and threatened further attacks.

The contents of the note and the name of the “unknown organization” that signed the note should be released.

If – and this is a big if – what CTV said is true about the content of the note, then it must – and will – be dealt with. Especially considering the note threatened future attacks, which is truly chilling:

“Our goal was only to sound the alarm without causing deaths. . .but this is just a beginning. If your crimes continue in the Middle East, our attacks will continue,” the letter reads.

There’s no telling whether the assholes who did this were using it as an excuse or cover-up, or whether they really are affiliated with some Hamas-sympathetic group. Not yet anyway. My sense is that the police will release details when they see fit, and until then, they might be keeping them under wraps to help them do their jobs. And anything that increases the chances of apprehending the responsible parties is okay with me.

And the political reactions continue. Here’s PM Paul Martin:

“This is not my Canada. This is not our Canada,” he told reporters in Burlington, Ont.

“They are attacking all of us. And it is only if we are unequivocal in that statement that we join together that we are preserving our values.”

And of course, Justice Minister Irwin Cotler (a UTT grad himself) wasted no time ringing in:

“As students, we experienced anti-Semitism, but it was an anti-Semitism of ignorance, of stereotype, of prejudice. What we have witnessed here today, it’s anti-Semitism of hatred, racism and violence.”

“We will not be intimidated and we will act and we will bring the full force of the law to bear against those who commit these cowardly hate crimes,” Cotler told reporters.

And Mayor Gerald Tremblay:

“These acts will not be tolerated in our city and must be denounced as emphatically as possible,” he said.

It’s good that people are taking this seriously.

Never once in eleven years of Hebrew school did I feel unsafe in my classroom (except for maybe the fear of exams, or a test tube exploding in a science lab). The current students, who are pretty much exactly like me, won’t have that luxury.

I’m just plain angry now. There should be a special section of hell reserved for anyone who targets or frightens innocent children.

Another update: It seems Michael Demmons has picked up the story. And Ted Belman at Israpundit posted about it, and included an e-mail from Lori Anders, who was a grade ahead of me in high school. The Globe and Mail, Gazette, and La Presse all have plastered the story prominently on their front pages. And the AP story is being picked up off the wires by publications as remote as the Kansas City Star.

The prime minister said he will leave it to the judicial inquiry he announced this week to find out which crown corporation officials were complicit in the scam cited in auditor-general Sheila Fraser’s report. But he left no doubt he intends to make those people pay.

[ . . . ]

Martin said any cabinet ministers who knew about the scandal but did not act should resign. He demanded anyone with information come forward.

Yep, and I bet he’s going to offer a reward to find the “real killer” too.

Prime Minister Jean Chretien announced he will leave office on December 12, allowing prime minister-designate Paul Martin to ascend to the office.

“We have agreed the 12th of December will be the date when … the new government will be sworn in.

“On the 12th, he (Martin) will be the prime minister,” Chretien said in a jam-packed press conference.

Paul Martin, 65, was elected late Friday by nearly 94 percent of Liberal Party delegates to be the party’s leader, who automatically becomes the next prime minister.

Chretien, 69, initially said he would retire in February 2004, but when the party’s organizing committee — which was packed with Martin supporters — decided to hold the leadership convention in November it created an usual period in which one leader was elected while another had not yet left office.

Finally, the period in which we have one lame duck Prime Minister and one PM-in-waiting will be over. And not a moment too soon.

Does anyone else suspect that, if not for the personal feud between Chretien and Martin, this would have happened a long time ago?

Why Sheila Copps is still bothering to keep her hat in is a mystery beyond me. I guess Martin needs at least one rival to pull off the facade of a leadership race.