PM acknowledges that he thinks about quitting politics

[hiti]

<a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/RTGAMArticleHTMLTemplate/C/20011120/wquitt?hub=homeBN&tf=tgam/realtime/fullstory.html&cf=tgam/realtime/config-neutral&vg=BigAdVariableG enerator&slug=wquitt&date=20011120&archive=RTGAM&site=Front&ad_page_name=breakingnews">Canadian Press</a>

Ottawa — Prime Minister Jean Chrétien acknowledged Monday that he sometimes thinks about quitting after nearly 40 years in politics.

In an interview with the Quebec television network TQS, Mr. Chrétien said that while he intends to stay on as prime minister until the end of his current mandate, he'll decide on his future before then.

"I'll have to ask myself whether I'll run for a fourth time," he said.

"Some mornings (I say) yes, the next day, absolutely not. It's difficult, this profession. Sometimes I say that it's quieter at my house and I could play golf.

"I won't make a decision for a good while because I received a mandate from the people with an increase in the number of seats and I have to respect the mandate."

Mr. Chrétien has indicated that he's going to remain prime minister until at least April 2003 — his 40th year in Parliament.

Industry Minister Brian Tobin and Finance Minister Paul Martin have long been rumoured as two of the front runners to replace Mr. Chrétien as Liberal leader.

Foreign Affairs Minister John Manley admits he wants a shot at the job and Health Minister Allan Rock and Heritage Minister Sheila Copps have also been mentioned as leadership hopefuls.

[stonecor]

As a group, we need to identify who is the best candidate out of this sorry lot and get behind that person. We cannnot stand by and allow Copps or Rock hijack this party.

[danielmryan]

So the con's over, isn't it?

<big><big>"Sorry, pal! I'm staying!"</big></big>

- Tr. frm. Libspk. [img]images/smiles/icon_razz.gif[/img]

[conniew]

Thanks for the "Libspeak" translation, Dan. I'm not fluent in that language. [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

Stoner,

Here is our dilemma. Do we work to get the most desirable Liberal as leader...or the least desirable? If we get the least desirable one, it's possible the sheeple will get fed up and look to a conservative alternative. OTOH, it's a gamble because we could be stuck with Nobody's-Baby-Sheila-Copps for our Prime Minister! [img]images/smiles/icon_eek.gif[/img]

[hiti]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by stoner:
<strong>As a group, we need to identify who is the best candidate out of this sorry lot and get behind that person. We cannnot stand by and allow Copps or Rock hijack this party.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Oh let them hijack the party!!! It'll be fun [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

[Mark Fournier]

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by stoner:
<strong>We cannnot stand by and allow Copps or Rock hijack this party.</strong><hr></blockquote>The contempt Alan Rock showed for the rights of individual Canadians during his stint at Justice demonstrated he is spectacularly unfit to ever hold the reins of power or to be in any position of power that could effect the freedom of Canadians.

Shelia Copps as the Liberal leader, on the other hand, would be a gift to the political right and Canadian comedians on the scale of divine intervention.

[stonecor]

I get the message, and agree it is a bit of a crapshoot (ignore the pun) but , for example, does Manley have the stones to step up and show statesmenship and national leadership in these trying times? Can we trust Martin. Sometimes the Devil you know is a safer bet since the right hasn't got it's shinola together yet. Cretien seems to have them baffled and they need to buy more time in order to teambuild. In the meantime, can we afford to go to hell in a habdbasket?

[danielmryan]

One item of note as far as the conspiracy is concerned. Ann McLellan, when introducing her amendments to C-36, said very explicitly that she paid attention to the concerns of "Liberal colleagues, civil libertarians and ethnic minorities."

In otherwords, she officially is stone cold deaf to people such as myself.

This is a very big warning. What this implies is that if we get off on "making the Liberals sing our tune," then what we're really doing is acting as their servants.

We'd be making the same mistake as Bob Stanfield did in the 1970s.

Never forget that the Liberal sees a conservative as less than human. If one of them 'quietly' asks for your help 'as a patriot', I'd either dummy along or dummy up. Just like you do at work with the kind of boss whose rallying words are "where is MY idea?"

It's time that they stopped wiggling out of being blamed for their mistakes by gulling us. Go on strike, for Gawd's sake.

If they call you "un-Canadian" for this, you're well covered. By a lot on Canadians that are plain seething, and are well liked in A-----a.