Oh, and Loraine Lamontagne comments on many blogs, I don't know if that's her real name, it might well be, but she's clearly a Liberal supporter. And what is more, what she says is backed by past Liberal conduct.

With momentum swinging towards a Conservative majority, I wonder if both have pondered the circumstances that made them bedfellows not so long ago? Should Harper gain a majority, I would think it is likely that the cost cutting will include eliminating the party funding that precipitated the formation of the coalition.

Is it not funny that the issue that galvanized the three opposition parties is forgotten as they in-fight to carve up their ever declining slice of the pie? Philosophical musings fall easily from the lips of full bellies. Wait until Mr Harper applies a choke hold under the righteous cause of defecit reduction and these gentlemen are forced to scrabble and claw while waiting out the inevitable multi-year cycle, before public opinion shifts allow them back into the game.

I wonder how this will play in hindsight.

Actually, Mulcair has a very interesting family background as does Rae – and both are well-educated and accomplished. The very thing that Cons hate – education/intelligence.

I realize your used to holding out your hand, but why didn't you support those measures this spring when they were part of the budget? Hardly a concession, considering you already voted against it!

Oh yes, you don't support the direction of the conservatives or their budget (unread), but you will support every budget implementation measure this fall- to save your own skin…(case by case of course)
Is that the morality lesson you are trying to convey Mr. Mulcair?

There is more to it though. If both parties are competing for the same political ground, why are Canadians backing the Conservatives? I would say that by and large the Conservatives have gained some credibility by meeting there promises, cutting the GST, not promising more than they could deliver on the environment. Meanwhile, on just those two topics, the Liberals promised a lot, but delivered squat. Canadian voters don't like to be taken for fools. The Liberals, it seems to me, have just gone too far, and their rhetoric is taken for what it is – rhetoric.

And you want even more Liberal cynicism on the environment? Here's an actual exchange on Kady's blog on July 29th, 2009 between myself and Loraine Lamontagne, a Liberal partisan commenter:

JARRID: Could you imagine what our economy would be like if we implemented the Kyoto Protocol and the Green Shift? I shudder thinking about it.

LORAINE LAMONTAGNE: Dion would not have implemented the Kyoto Protocol and the Green Shift no more than Chrétien axed the GST.

As Mulcair says, the Liberals are cynical hypocrites. They truly are.

Political cynicism is particularly a Liberal specialty these last numbers of years WW.

I know you want to spread the blame around, but there's a reason the Conservatives have consistently led the Liberals since January 2006: the Liberals have a major credibility gap between what they say they'll do and what they've actually done..

Sorry, i got on a bit of a rant. To sum up: its not that they are running on empty or have nothing to offer, its that all their ideas have been co-opted by what used to be conservatives.

I will say this, I think the jig is up for the Liberals. They were running on empty while they had political power, and nearly four years out of power, they've not re-fueled, they've continued on with their cynical political ploys but people aren't buying it anymore.

And many Liberals I suspect realize this more and more.

If there were A.A. meeting for addicted political opportunists, the Liberal Party of Canada would be well advised to attend.

They've hit rock bottom.