Dimitri Soudas Condemns Stephen Harper's Attempt at a Coalition

This interview with Harper's spokesperson Dimitri Soudas, is rather interesting for several reasons.

First off, notice how many times he uses Michael Ignatieff's name when discussing a coalition, while referring to the others as simply the leader of the NDP or Bloc. This is an old trick of name recognition associated with something deemed to be undesirable. (Thank you Karl Rove)

Even though the two leaders of the 2008 coalition were Jack Layton and Stephane Dion, Soudas is clearly trying to lay the blame on the current Liberal leader. In fact, Michael Ignatieff was the last to sign the agreement, because he really didn't like the idea of a coalition at all.

And it was he who supported the budget in early 2009, effectively killing the coalition, yet the Reformers are trying to suggest it was his idea. In fact they recently sent out a fund raising letter to their flock, trying to once again bring up a 'backroom' deal in the works to oust them. I wish.

It is also telling of the way this party operates, that even though Michael Ignatieff saved Harper's bacon by accepting the budget in early 2009, how was he repaid? They immediately started running attack ads against him. This party has absolutely no moral compass.

However, since Soudas clearly appears to hate the idea of someone trying to gain power through 'backroom' deals, he needs look no further than our current dictator.

Most people know by now that Stephen Harper worked like hell in 2004 and even into 2005, to become an unelected prime minister.

The only difference between his attempts and the 2008 agreement was that his deal actually included the Bloc, while the most recent was only the support of the Bloc for confidence motions.

In fact, from a November article in the Winnipeg Free Press about former Harper insider Tom Flanagan:

Flanagan now appears to have shifted his position and backed away from Harper's. "I wouldn't rule out parties coming together to form a coalition and whatever Mr. Harper may have said in the heat of the moment I don't think should be interpreted as constitutional theory because he was in a fight for his life."

However, he insists any coalition relying on the Bloc Quebecois must have prior electoral approval ... But he insisted he "wasn't a part" of a coalition proposal made by then Official Opposition leader Harper, NDP leader Jack Layton and Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe in September 2004 that would have included the Bloc as a full partner.

But if you don't want to believe Flanagan, you can hear it straight from the horse's ass ... er, I mean mouth.