…if these professors were confronted with a situation in which their favorite Party, the NDP, had won more than 140 seats in the House of Commons. Imagine if the NDP had double the seat total of the Conservatives. Imagine what would happen if the Conservatives had then gotten together with two other parties, one of them being an Alberta Only party and then perhaps the Christian Heritage Party, one that would be supporting Capital Punishment and Opposing Abortion. Imagine if the Conservative Party with their right of centre coalition partners including a party dedicated to the Independence of Alberta. Imagine if the Conservatives signed a document with these smaller parties and presented that to the Governor General and said, “We have ourselves a legitimate, constitutional, coalition of elected members who have lost confidence in the government led by Jack Layton. He must face the house. He must face defeat, and we must now come to you Governor General, your excellency and pick up the keys to a new government.”
Can you imagine the professors of our elite universities going on the National TV Newscasts, saying “This coalition is very much in keeping with Constitutional Values, Canadian values and there is no reason to go back to the polls. These coalition partners ought to be given a chance to make government work.”
If you can imagine the professors giving their intellectual and moral consent to that, then you can also imagine Pigs flying, Cows barking, and Cockroaches coming up with a cure for cancer. If you are willing to believe that the professors of this country would approve of a coalition of the right then you are willing to trade in your fine mind for a fine box labeled B.F.I. For the alphabetically homeless, that means a dumpster.
Stephen, the NDP/liberals signed one agreement and the Bloc signed a different agreemnt.
The reason is that to be member of the Canadian govt you have swear allegiance to Canada, which the Bloc refuses do.
Likewise, the GG’s swore allegiance to protect and promote the govt of Canada.
It amuses me to hear the talking heads all saying the GG can take govt power away from the party that is 12 seats short of majority, and give it to the Liberal/NDP who have the separatists Bloc as a de facto member of their govt and has veto power in the running of the Cdn govt.
The GG absolutely cannot give the Cdn govt over to any coalition that has a member in it whose only aim in life is to destroy Canada.
Not yesterday, not today, and not in the future.
It is totally illogical.
And if she tried to do, it would be officially considered an act of treason, and she would be dismissed immediately by the elected PM.
Election by the people trumps any appointment in any democracy, any time.
To put it another way.
What would Ontario/Quebec federalists think if Western Canada voted to let the United States govt come into Western Canada and take over?
Would they think that the GG should allow that too?
Hey that’s not a bad idea.
Tarpaper
Jim in Ottawa,
Troll Alert!!!!
Don’t concern yourself too much with Indiana Homez. He fancies himself as an Indiana Jones clone and likes to think he can judge a persons intentions.
The Opps want Harper to step down ? Why ?
Because Harper outwits them at every turn – he makes them look pathetic. Simple as that. It doesn’t jive with their world socialist view so its not fair! Tough toenails.
Shall we get another Joe Clark just so you can finally compete?
A few pundits spin and hope it catches fire. Fat Chance !
Harpers the best PM we’ve had in 50 years – maybe more….
ET: mark bourrie – well, I’m a PHD as well, in societal structures and information systems, and I say that your notion that we elect MPs and they then do exactly what they want – is competely wrong.
We have a representative government; this means that those MPs don’t act as themselves; they represent us. That means that they can’t do what they want; they must do what we want. That’s why we have elections. Not to simply send some individual up to Ottawa, free as a bird, to make whatever random choices they want, without any accountability.
Sorry, my friend, I completely disagree with you here. The key word is “represent”, which is not a synonym for “parrot”. I cannot do better than to quote the words of Edmund Burke:
“It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiassed opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”
Let’s look at cases, shall we? Consider abortion; I know in my riding, many people think it is tantamount to murder; others think it’s a sometimes necessary medical procedure. What is our poor MP to do when given a free vote in Parliament? Choose one side over the other? Abstain? Hide? Or should he poll his riding, and vote the majority? If you choose the latter, then why do we bother with MP’s at all? Why not have government by plebiscite or referendum instead?
And abortion, in this example, is a relatively simple matter – most Canadians know how they feel about it. What about a more complex issue, such as how to implement secure borders against terrorism, drugs, and weapons? Here we need to balance the needs of people and business to cross the Canada/US border for a number of reasons with the need to keep our society safe. To pretend there is an easy, simple solution – particularly when dealing with a prickly US partner – is willfully disingenuous at best. I expect our elected representatives to study this matter in detail – far more detail than you or I are prepared to consider, I submit – and try to balance the needs between traffic and trade, and security and safety, which they will do in an all-party Parliamentary committee. Then, after the work in committee is done, a bill is presented to Parliament. At this point, if there is still serious disagreement among the parties, that will be made known in Question Period and elsewhere. Parties will consult with their caucus and members, and the public mood will be judged. If the issue is important to the public, the governing party often goes back into committee and reaches a compromise with the Opposition. That is why most bills in Canada pass with the support of all major parties.
I went door-to-door in the last election. It’s almost impossible to get three minutes of time with a voter to discuss a general election, let alone an arcane issue like border policy. I understand in our complex society, we have to delegate some responsibility to our MP’s, and trust them to find the best solution for Canada. Note that I say “Canada”; I expect my MPP’s to do what’s best for Ontario, and my local reps to do the best for Richmond Hill and York Region. (Others please note: this is my reason for disputing the Bloc’s legitimacy; they freely admit that they make policy based only on its impact on Quebec, not the country.) We choose our MP’s on the basis of broad party principles, for the most part, and judge them accordingly.
Finally, to your last point on “accountability” – we do hold our MP’s accountable on election day. Where are Maxime Bernier and Garth Turner today? Do we hold their feet to the fire often enough? Some would say “No”, especially when compared to the US, where the Representatives have to face the music every two years, but others, noting the falling turnouts, would despair of having elections more often.
As an engineer, I look at our Parliamentary system from a control systems point of view, and I feel the feedback mechanisms are too lumped, too slow, and not granular enough. But changing that would require a long and drawn out rethought of our entire political system; a very probably worthwhile exercise, but one not on the cards at the moment.
Dion must be saying
Harper you magnificent bastard!
but Dion is no Patton, he couldnt run an icecream stand with two flavours.
I see the Mop and Pail has Rae assuming the spokesman role , and Iggy is probably picking them up and laying them down as fast as he can running away.
“Sickening that there are even media, so called smart people, who parrot this.”
I own two parrots (Reggie Bush & lil’Pecker) and I can tell you that parrots never say anything. The only thing that a parrot can do that sounds remotely intelligent is MIMICING; so, I think your comparison between the MSM and parrots is very accurate.
Squawk-a-Fella “It’s the Squawk”
You think Dion’s pissed!
http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2008/12/apologetic-mumbai-killers-we-didnt-get-the-memo-about-obama.html
KevinB, I agree with you. Government is by nature a blunt instrument. Its best use is in those places where you need a blunt instrument, like war.
Pretty much anywhere else, government is too slow, too ham handed and too stupid to do anything other than screw things up. The more government control, the worse the result.
See USSR and China for relevant citation. USSR is toast, China they can’t breath the air or drink the water. Local examples, the 407 and the Kanuckistan Wheat Board.
Thanks, GYM. Your edit @ 12:20 p.m.?
Let’s go for it!
Yes, I can imagine it Mr. Adler. Can you imagine a high school educated radio broadcaster challenging eminent experts on the very issue they are expert on? Can you imagine a broadcaster who has substituted for Sean Hannity on Fox News accusing a politically unaffiliated university professor of bias? Find your own dumpster sir.
I voted for Kim Campbell too. Wanted to vote for Peter Lougheed but was slightly too young.
I do not understand Liberals. PMSH tosses the subsidy cut into the update to flush the game. It does, and the tripartite hydra head of heck goes on the attack.
Why not just not take the bait and vote the government down on the susequent confidence day using the body of the hydra. If you leftards had the votes as a Coalition, why thw heck not use them without announcing your Coalitionship?
You really have to get over the idea of activity for the sake of activity. Isn’t Kinsella supposed to be a strategist? How about Scott Reid? Why not think through your actions before actioning?
It is getting very tiresome having political opponents so decidedly amateurish in execution, although hugely enjoyable to watch.
Aureus Puer by Blackberry
Devin, and your point is . . . ?
I thing — accepting for a moment the idea that MPs should be parrots — that the coalition parties’ MPs are doing what their voters would want.
The Bloc voters want more power for Quebec. Check.
The Dipper voters hate Harper and want him out, and would love some say in government. Check.
The Liberal voters cast ballots for their party despite the fact their leader is a failure. Obviously, they didn’t want Harper to be PM. So, that, too, is a check.
Is a coalition a good idea for Canada for political reasons? No, and I can give a pretty good argument against it by citing the Irish separatist support of British minority governments in the 19th century and how the end result was the Irish Free State. But don’t tell me all profs are stupid (BTW, David Bercuson argues in the Globe against the coalition, and there are no profs that I can see who say it’s a good thing for Canada.) What most of us do say is that it’s legal, and that next time a Liberal PM in a minority is about to lose a confidence vote — as Paul Martin did in 2005, resulting in the election of Canada’s New Government — the PM is going to high-tail it to Rideau Hall and ask for a one-year prorogation (the max). Then he’d use federal money to cross the country to try to break up the coalition deal.
If this weapon has in Paul Martin’s arsenal, he’d quite possibly still be PM today.
As for insulting professors as stupid, this is an Orwellian line of thinking. Up is down, smart is stupid, cold is hot…
I think — accepting for a moment the idea that MPs should be parrots — that the coalition parties’ MPs are doing what their voters would want.
The Bloc voters want more power for Quebec. Check.
The Dipper voters hate Harper and want him out, and would love some say in government. Check.
The Liberal voters cast ballots for their party despite the fact their leader is a failure. Obviously, they didn’t want Harper to be PM. So, that, too, is a (qualified) check.
Is a coalition a good idea for Canada for political reasons? No, and I can give a pretty good argument against it by citing the Irish separatist support of British minority governments in the 19th century and how the end result was the Irish Free State. But don’t tell me all profs are stupid (BTW, David Bercuson argues in the Globe against the coalition, and there are no profs that I can see who say it’s a good thing for Canada.) What most of us do say is that it’s legal, and that next time a Liberal PM in a minority is about to lose a confidence vote — as Paul Martin did in 2005, resulting in the election of Canada’s New Government — the PM is going to high-tail it to Rideau Hall and ask for a one-year prorogation (the max). Then he’d use federal money to cross the country to try to break up the coalition deal.
If this weapon was in Paul Martin’s arsenal, he’d quite possibly still be PM today.
As for insulting professors as stupid, this is an Orwellian line of thinking. Up is down, smart is stupid, cold is hot…
I heard on Adler something about Toronto and Montreal taking the Stanley Cup away from Detroit and sharing it between the two most important cities in North America.
The Republicans picked John McCain, hardly a conservative. Look what happened to him.
The opposition enemies would like nothing more for us to dump Harper and pick someone they like, someone they can beat: a new Joe Clark. We do that, we can’t call ourselves Conservatives anymore.
Stay strong. Harper’s the man they are most afraid of. Call his office and leave a message of support. And start calling his MPs and tell them where you stand.
The coalition,its authors and supporters have proven one thing. Their hatred of Harper is greater than their love of Canada. To climb into bed with separatists (and they are separatists even if the word hurts their feelings) is tantamount to making a deal with blackmailers.
kevinb- that’s my point about a representative government. You yourself state that you expect your MP to do ‘what is best for Ontario’ etc.
Therefore, this decision is one that ‘best represents what-is-good-for that area’. It is not simply up to the individual MP to make that decision. He must consult his constituents, research the issue, go back to the area, consult some more etc. He does not go to Ottawa for himself, to do what he might want, but to represent the needs of his area and the needs of the nation. That’s what he’s paid to do. If he wants to do something on his own, he can become a lobbyist.
He’s accountable to us for his decisions. We may turf him at election time, but our decision is based on his record of his representation of our interests.
I totally agree with you that the government bureaucracy is a monstrous concrete block of astonishing slowness; a turtle moves at the speed of light in comparison. Government, unionized bureaucracies are seething domains of in-fighting, power-brokering risk-avoiding Safe Jobs and Huge Pensions. They are isolate from the public, from Canada, and live in an Ottawa bubble.
And I agree – not granular enough, in their ‘one size fits all’ mentality. And..the lack of information coming out of these offices is something else; besides the contradictory misinformation they provide to us.
Phantom – China is changing, don’t be so dismissive; they, for instance, have property rights while we in Canada don’t. They are rapidly emerging from a peasant subsistence economy into an industrial, and scientific, nation that can’t be dismissed or ignored that easily.
Why in heavens name would one of the best Prime Ministers this country has ever had step down.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper should and will, I believe lead this country well into the future.
The country will, under his leadership remain safe and strong.
God Bless Prime Minister Stephen Harper!
I notice that the NDP website hasn’t had an update since Dec. 1st. Jack must be busy waiting for his meeting with the GG? http://www.ndp.ca/
Toronto Maple Leafs Win Stanley Cup!!!
Canada was stunned Monday when it was announced that The Stanley Cup will be awarded to the Toronto Maple Leafs, possibly as early as December 6th. The cup will be stripped from 2008 playoff champions the Detroit Red Wings and awarded to the Leafs who didn’t even make the playoffs.
How is this possible, Canadians ask? Well, the Leafs formed a coalition with eastern conference semifinalists the Montreal Canadians, and conference quarter finalists the Ottawa Senators, now outnumbering the Red Wings.According to current Leaf coach Ron Wilson “the Red Wings have lost the confidence of the league and should hand the cup over immediately to our coalition”.
NHL commissioner Gary Bettman is cutting short a European trip to try to resolve the unprecedented hockey crisis that could force a second playoff series, or see an opposing team coalition take the cup.
ET: You yourself state that you expect your MP to do ‘what is best for Ontario’ etc.
Er, no. I said I expect my MPP to what’s best for Ontario; I expect my MP to do what’s best for Canada. Currently, there is discussion about extending the subway in Toronto north to Richmond Hill, where I live. From a selfish point of view, this is great for me and my family; it would reduce our commute times, make transit a more attractive choice, and reduce the congestion on roads and air pollution. However, let’s say that when the details come under investigation, it becomes clear the most effective way to spend transit dollars is to build subways into the northwest region of the GTA. If that were the case, I would expect my MPP to vote for the northwest line, and not for the Yonge line; that is, not to vote the narrow self-interest of his constituents, but the greater good of the province.
The duty of any elected representative is to the ambit of the political body to which he is elected; an MP’s is to the country; an MPP/MLA’s is to his province; a municipal politician’s is to his city or town, not just his ward. That many politicians at every level have allowed themselves to degenerate into those who “deliver” the contracts or jobs or government cheques is another sorry indictment of our current system, and the intelligence, or lack thereof, of what Mencken called the “booboisie” who elect them.
With all due respect, Antenor–your views are well worth the read–please could we have some paragraphing? Please?
Apparently not stirred has some type of man-crush on me.
“He fancies himself as an Indiana Jones clone and likes to think he can judge a persons intentions.”
I guess “not stirred” fancies himself as a James Bond clone; but I guess he prefers a nice hairy arse.
Three more soldiers killed today. I am hoping, but not optimistic, that Layton will not use their deaths for political purposes.
kevinb – an MP has to represent the interests of both his riding and the province and the nation. He can’t focus on only one of them.
The MSM screaming that Harper has hurt the feelings of the people of Quebec is rubbish. A majority of Quebecers don’t want separation. And sovereignty IS a synonym; when you are separate your decisions are sovereign over your own territory.
They don’t see themselves as part of Canada for many reasons, in large part because they’ve been brainwashed to think that way, and in larger part, because francophones align themselves with other peoples by language not by geography or economic connections.
BUT, they don’t like being used, either in a Sponsorship scandal or as a strategy for the NDP-Liberals to grab power from a legitimate government.
Mark Bourrie, you are generalizing the request to prorogue parliament and ignoring context. It can’t be granted ‘every time a government is going to lose a confidence vote’.
The NDP-Liberal-Bloc coalition was setting up a situation, where every time a budget is presented by a legitimate government, all the Opposition parties have to do is coalesce, bring down the govt and insist on their being the new govt. Without an election. Oh, and with an internal agreement, based on bribes, that no election would be possible for several years.
What was going on now, was not a legitimate confidence vote, but a long-planned putsch, a coup, based on setting up ONE PARTY, a party that is out of the electoral reach of over 80% of Canadians, as the powerbroker in the deal. And, this party would vett all House Motions in the future, rendering the votes of all other MPs irrelevant. The deal was based on bribes using taxpayer money, promises of cabinet and senate positions etc.
Now, in context, can anyone approve such an agenda?
In theory it is all fine and dandy to trust the judgment and wisdom of our elected reps. The majority of the time it works well in practice. But sometimes politicians attempt to do something so monumentally stupid or criminal that they need be brought back into line by the people.
This Parliamentary system is hopelessly out of date if there is no recognition of the people’s right to determine when the politicians have gone too far. Perhaps it is time to reform the system to reflect the modern era.
Likewise, I also doubt that anyone thinks that profs are stupid. They have a lot of knowledge in a small area of expertise. That does not automatically mean they have adequate life experience, common sense, good judgement or wisdom. Every modern study has shown that they overwhelming lean left. Therefore people should be skeptical of their expert advice. Bias is fine as long as they are up front about it.
Phantom, ET:
Apparently, I didn’t make myself clear when I said I thought the feedback mechanisms were too slow. This is not a comment on the nature of government or bureaucracy; it’s a comment on the infrequent formal sampling of public opinion (aka “elections”) in our system, compared to others. As I’ve noted previously, in the US, the House is reelected every two years; a President every four; and one-third of the Senate every two years. Thus, every two years, some significant portion of the electorate is being sampled in a meaningful way (as opposed to Ipsos/Angus/Nanos etc. opinion polls, where no one’s job is on the line). At the same time, at least 2/3rds of the US Senate is not involved at any election, so that a particularly “hot” issue will not completely change the face of government.
Contrast that with our system, where elections have been fought – and won – on such single issues as wage and price controls, or a gasoline tax. (Students of irony will recall that both issues were derided contemptuously by Pierre Trudeau during his winning campaigns, and then subsequently implemented once he had his majorities. Gonna follow in your Daddy’s hypocritical footsteps, Justin?) That is what I mean by “too lumped” and “not granular enough” – we take a single snapshot of opinion in time, and often based on a single issue, and then use that snapshot to decide ALL issues and policies until the next election.
In fact, if I were more cynical than I actually am, I would look at the outcomes of our last three federal elections where we had no burning issue in either one and emerged with no majority either, and suspect that Mr. Harper is creating an issue on which to run. If he can capitalize on the Liberals’ weakness, the NDP’s naked ambition, and the Bloc’s “what’s in it for us?” thuggish greed by running against the “coup-alition”, he might polarize the electorate around this issue, and indeed win his hoped-for majority.
If any pollster had the brains or guts to ask the following question to Canadians:
If you could choose one of the following options for government and agree that it would hold for the next five years, regardless of whether individual measures were defeated in the Commons would it be:
1 – A Conservative majority, led by Harper
2 – A Conservative minority, led by Harper
3 – A Liberal minority, led by Dion for now, with a new leader to be determined later
4 – A Liberal majority, led by Dion for now, with a new leader to be determined later
5 – An NDP minority, led by Layton
6 – A BQ minority, led by Duceppe
I believe the overwhelming choice would be #2. Polls show most Canadians think the Tories are the best at handling the economy and finances, but they are suspicious of the social agenda. The public basically supports the left on social issues, but doesn’t trust them to run the economy well and without corruption. If the Tories are in control of the purse strings, cockamamie ideas like a national daycare plan (in a country where a moving average of birth rates has been in decline for years?!) wouldn’t see the light of day, while the much-exaggerated spectre of a fundamentalist Christian theocracy (which I don’t believe the Tories remotely care about) would also die if the left had the ability to vote down such bills.
But, our system doesn’t allow such a sensible option. (And, yes, there would have to additional conditions – e.g. call an election for example, if a budget was defeated three times, instead of having government stagnate, or if a bill was defeated by say, 2/3, of the Commons, etc.) Too bad.
And to those suggesting (not you, ET/Phantom) PR or preferential voting or transferable voting – note that none of these address any of my issues.
Yea, it has its faults but no one’s ever found a better one.
Bob Rae will be on Adler any moment now to spew his hatred of Harper and divide to conquer tactics in his despicable power play.
lynnh wrote, “This Parliamentary system is hopelessly out of date if there is no recognition of the people’s right to determine when the politicians have gone too far. Perhaps it is time to reform the system to reflect the modern era”.
As much as I have sympathy for Mark Bourrie’s thoughts, I’m leaning towards lynnh’s suggestion.
To think that the recent crisis needed the imprimatur of a political hack appointment like Jean was truly scary.
I’m grateful to Kate for posting Adler’s latest editorial. Sometimes he really bugs me but this past week he (and Roy Green) have truly hit proverbial nail on the head.
In addition to reading what he wrote, it’s even more powerful to hear him reading it. You can do so here at 34:00 : http://chedam.corusradionetwork.com/dynamic/dynamic_audiovault_process.asp?dt=20081204_12
Another thought experiment: how ’bout the Republicans in the US making aligning themselves with a new Revive the Lost Cause Party designed to remake the Confederate States of America. The analogy works all the more since the nominally federalist Libs should be firmly at odds with the Bloc, and the Republican were founded to oppose slavery.
This morning I couldn’t sleep so I caught the 640AM morning show out of Toronto. The host had on a “constitutional expert” from the U. of T. The fellow had an English accent, which immediately makes me suspicious because of the likes of MP Libby Davies and Hedy Fry. I realize it isn’t PC of me to say such a thing but wayyyy too often, when you hear a public person with such an accent talking in Canada they are either Left or Radical Left.
So anyhow, this prof went on & on about what a “terrible” thing it was for the GG to grant the prorogue to Harper (and the Canadian people IMHO!). But then he let it slip, “Now I’ll admit that my preferences lean towards the NDP and Liberals.” Full stop!
Do you all realize HOW INSANE it is that the so-called experts who dramatically help fix the viewpoints in the minds of the Sheeple, are almost always NDP or Far Left Liberal voters??? Not only are such folks NOT unbiased (to any reasonable degree) but they’re not even remotely centrist in the views. So though the Canadian people clearly reject the NDP election after election, academics with NDP mindsets are brought forth as “experts”.
I’ve carefully documented a tangential example of the media shaping public opinion here: http://pelalusa.blogspot.com/2008/12/how-media-divides-us.html
P.S. Can we start a fund to convince Don Newman and Craig Oliver to just leave. I don’t care where they go, just leave now!
lynnh – exactly right.
lynnh wrote, “This Parliamentary system is hopelessly out of date if there is no recognition of the people’s right to determine when the politicians have gone too far. Perhaps it is time to reform the system to reflect the modern era”.
Mark Bourrie – I disagree that ‘it has its faults’ but no-one’s found a better solution. That’s a cop-out. As kevinb points out, the US system has some aspects of its governance put forth to the public, to determine its validity, every two years. We, on the other hand, have no such mechanism.
And consider our Senate; unvetted, unelected, unaccountable. And being used, now, as bribes to the Bloc for their support against the people, against an election.
We cannot operate a parliament as a structure of elites, who are Sent To Ottawa, and in their supremacy, ignore the public.
Consider again what the Coalition did; it deliberately set up a governance, based on merging two national parties that had failed to achieve governmental power..and whose numbers are so small that it requires a PowerBroker, the Bloc, a party that is out of the electoral reach of over 80% of Canadians. This party was given the Keys To the Nation. It vetted ALL House Motions – nothing could pass without its approval. Its support ensured that the coalition would not go before the people; there would be no election.
In return, this coalition would pay it billions, give it Senate seats..and so on.
Now, we have the MSM pundits screaming that Harper has alienated Quebec!!! No way.
The people who have set up this framework, putting Quebec’s Bloc in as the PowerBroker, have alienated all Canadians. After all, what this does is to set up an elite level of government, beyond the reach of the majority of Canadians. We can’t vote for the Bloc.
This puts all of Canada into the control of the Bloc.
Did Harper do this? No.
It was Layton, Dion and Duceppe who did it. And they think that this act of destroying out democracy should be accepted? They call us ‘anti-Quebec’ if we don’t accept it? How dare they do this to us.
WallyJ:
You just did…
Point one:
The ‘journalists’ want PM Harper out because he is not dancing to their tune.
Point two:
As many here already gathered, those here, which are calling for PM Harper to resign claiming to be conservatives, are not.
Point three:
Rae is a rich socialist; there is not a lower kind of human being than that. He joined the Liberals to do exactly what he is doing. If Rae becomes the leader of them, he will be still socialist. If he becomes PM he will do socialism.
Socialism is equal to fascism. Fascism is equal to socialism as an ideology. The two differ in practice only. The difference is that fascists in Spain pushed business around. The socialists with the help of all knowing professors run business. In general direction of toilet.
Both are totalitarian dictatorship.
Blastomitosis….. Seems a variant of this resides in the old libraries of academe…… goes strait to the brain.
Works a lot faster than prions …. more like flesh eating disease of the grey matter.
To the Westerners on here. Lets hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. Just to be prudent. It will be a long time if ever, before we can trust Central Canada again with its myopic politicians.
By sleeping with Quebec separatists, they have proven an infidelity to the core Principles of the Dominion.
They have rendered them into pulp. Self protection or preservation, has to be a permanent worry now. From another military or economic take over from The East. Danny Williams you poor fool. You will become just another step ford wife to Eastern needs. Losing your fish was not enough to Federal interests ( Meaning Ontario -Quebec) eh?
By the way this was not Harpers fault . The fix was in it seems even perhaps before the election. This is just BS spread by the “Separatist Coalition”. Harper was just pulling a Ralph Kline. Make the first cuts in government like he did here & they will love you. As well make it difficult to argue other cuts. Those who read any of my posts know I have never shied away from criticism of conservatives or Harper. This is wholly bogus propaganda being put out about this being his fault in any way. Just look at the players behind the coup. Not just the faces of it.
This idea he should step down is ludicrous. He has increased the seats in Parliament every election for the CPC. More spin from the Junta.
Another thing. Sick of these Academic Moons pissing on us from on high. You folks sound exactly like the adults on a Charlie Brown special. WAH whaaa.
PM Harper is the best PM this country has seen in 40-50 years. The people who want him gone are so frustrated that their endless smears and empty attacks continually fail. Harper’s a bully, wha, wha , wha, what a bunch of intellectual half-wits. Only people looking threw the Trudeauvian Liberal looking glass think he has to go, for them that would be a victory. PM Harper tried to do what was right and put a stop to the odious practice of stealing taxpayer money in order to prop up private political parties and their ideologies, whether anyone in the country actually shares in those ideologies doesn’t matter, and if they do, get out you’re cheque books and get the hell out of mine. We already pay for MPs salaries and expenses, plus their gold plated pension plans, and that uber-criminal Chretien and his blind followers think we should also pay for their private political parties. Despite what the Kool-Aid drunk Separatist/Liberal/NDP alliance followers think, those parties are not a public service and should never have been supported by the taxpayer in the first place. Taxpayers paying 86% percent of all funding for the Separatist Blocs ? Yeah, that makes alot of sense. The Separatist/Liberal/NDP alliance new mantra “Harper has to go” why? Because we don’t like him, and he’s not a Statist, a Separatist, or a communist. Piss off!!
“Harper is the best Conservative leader we have seen in my lifetime.” Increasingly I agree with this. Possibly best Prime Minister. I know many on the left will reject this . . . but we shall see. This story is just unfolding and I strongly believe that it is Stephen Harper who is fighting for the best interests of the country. He has quite a struggle on his hands. Last night I suggested to one of the donation soliciters that I thought Harper should have apologized for whatever role he has played in this. I have changed my mind as I think more deeply about what is really going on.
Any pretend conservative who grants the Liberals’ fig leaf justification that Harper is at fault for proposing that conscripted tax monies to ALL parties be cut is doing a poor job of acting.
Do your homework. Over 60% of Canadians agree with Harper on this issue. It’s too bad he backed off on it but that may have been to demonstrate that the Coalition just barrelled forward anyway in their naked power grab without the fig leaf.
Oh yeah, and their argument ran sort of like this:
1) Our parties are near bankruptcy because of our financial mismanagement and we cannot do without our Party Welfare.
2) We should run Canada’s fiscal policy in a time of world economic turmoil rather than the guy whose party finances are in good order, who has a degree in economics rather than jaw i.e. law, and whose steady stewardship including paying down the debt has put Canada in a better position than most.
“The ‘journalists’ want PM Harper out because he is not dancing to their tune”.
There’s no reason to think that Canadian reporters are any different from their American counterparts who vote over 80% Democrat, putting them left of the general population.
Ottawa reporters don’t like any Conservative PM and will do a hatchet job on him.
They particularly don’t like a PM like Harper who knows this and has “dissed” them.
They’re like the crusty newspaperman Lou in the old Mary Tyler Moore Show who said to her: “You have spunk….I hate spunk”.