[oops! shouldn't have tried to update the title with low memory 
apologies for making this disappear earlier]
Mr. Gary Moore of Calgary AB (it’s even better he’s from Western Canada) has done a fine job of presenting the case for why Canada’s present Prime Minister should do the statesman-like thing and step aside for the Coalition. Even Harper’s best neo-con buddies are now frantically signaling for him to back off.[2]
I don’t ordinarily post a whole MSM piece, but this letter-to-the-editor deserves wide distribution. Please consider clicking on one of the title links and visiting the original source (and their ads 
)
Meanwhile, to see what I’ve been writing about this issue since it broke open last Thursday, have a look at the last few entries in Doom’s Politics category.
King Stephen [1]
letter — Calgary Herald
To claim that the move by the opposition is "undemocratic" shows a complete misunderstanding of our form of government. The PM’s role is supposed to be one of "primus inter pares," or "first among equals" in Parliament. Our current PM, however, seems to think he is a president, directly elected, or even a king, ruling with divine right. He bullies and obfuscates, and his claim of the moves of the opposition as being undemocratic is put to the lie by his own efforts to bring down the Martin government. He attempted then to work with the Bloc, so his current position is hypocritical. If the majority of MPs wish to support an individual from a party other than the one with the most seats, it is democratic and reflects the views of the electorate. If this means that some parties work together to do so, then so be it. More than 60 per cent of Canadians voted other than Conservative. How is it undemocratic if Stephen Harper is removed?
Gary Moore,
Calgary
MORE: The TARP debates weren’t nearly this much fun …
… and just when we thought it couldn’t possibly get any weirder, it started getting weirder …
"Bloc part of secret coalition plot in 2000 with Canadian Alliance: A document obtained by The Globe and Mail shows that the scheme would have propelled then Alliance leader Stockwell Day to power in the coalition. A lawyer who was described then as being close to Day, says he didn’t discuss the matter with the MPs", by Daniel Leblanc, Toronto Globe & Mail, December 3, 2008.
Speaking of signed documents, here’s a bit of present Canadian history. Click on the pic for some recent CTV coverage that included this image.
[1]: "King Stephen", by Gary Moore, Calgary Herald (letter), December 3, 2008.
[2]: "Canada’s Constitutional Crisis", by David Frum, National Review / AEI, December 3, 2008.
"For the personalities involved in this week’s power struggle in Canada, there seem few good outcomes ahead. For the parties, at least, there is hope–but the hope is indirect, not obvious. Today’s winners will be tomorrow’s losers; today’s losers, tomorrow’s winners. Politics is a long game. The grab for power by unprincipled means always exacts costs. This latest round was a gambit that should never have been played." [this quote is presently featured on home page of the American Enterprise Institute]
John - great coverage of this!
BTW who’s to say that Stephen Harper cannot simply fire the governor general (who was, after all, appointed by a liberal government) and appoint a new one that will likely see things his way?
..back to the main topic, I have grown weary of some people saying that the forming of a coalition would be “undemocratic”.
Ah, I remember when everybody used to say that the governor general has no real power and is only a “symbolic” job…
MikeC -
Thanks for the kind words.
Things are advancing at frightening speed. Looks like the GG is being seriously hung out to dry here.
Well Harper’s strategy seems to be to mobilize his Western base against Quebec with a Quebec provincial election coming up in just a few days!
“Federal coalition crisis dominates Quebec election campaign”, by Chris Boutet, National Post, December 3, 2008.