Not to mention Toronto. No matter how the cake is sliced we are going to end up with the bill.

I cannot see if they are a nation - which I do not dispute - how Newfoundland cannot be a nation within the union as well what with centuries of semi-autonomous colonial governance, it's own war record and a culture and dialect that befuddles (and charms) a Nova Scotian like me.

The real problem with Harper's statement is that "within a united Canada" idea is superfluous. If a nation is because if its internal characteristics, the external, like the unified Canada, is irrelevant. It is the same as saying "Quebec is a nation with or without a unified Canada." In order to come up with the 24 hour answer that a "real leader" would give, Harper has sold the farm constitutionally. Maybe it is merely reality. But it is new and unknown.

But what of the Ton?

This Globe article gives me no comfort as to the degree of wisdom involved in this determination.

Ben the Tiger has a good summary summary of the unhappy reaction. My favorite is the commenter at Coyne (you can find linked) who says harper did this because the PM had no choice. <i>Damn Liberals!</i> - they control everything, even Harper's will.

What I am enjoying is that our rural overlords and the dark nemesis of the Party or Perpetual Government are rushing to assure us that this nation thing is simultaneously a) vitally important to Quebec b) legally meaningless.

In a normal country heads would be exploding. In Canada holding contradictory thoughts is a prerequisite to office.

You have it exactly and that, Jay, is exactly where you and I and all people of good sense meet - at a large and generous table.