Past their best-by date – a “Dear Jack” letter.
It must bug you Jack, that the Tories are competitive virtually everywhere in the country except in two cities, while you are really competitive only in the poverty pockets. I can see it with my own eyes Jack. I travel through one of those pockets every day. Your representative there is hardly ever there. And he doesn’t need to be. A monkey could win that riding representing the NDP. It’s dirt poor and safe. If this country was poor as you pretend it is, your vote would be far more efficient. But it’s primarily a middle class country and that’s why your party is just a rump, a protest movement.
Speaking of Jack… how stupid does an NDP supporter have to be, not to have noticed that their party’s modern raison d’être is to grant a handful of career opportunists access to a parliamentary pay-tit?
Most organizations with a 48 year record of uninterrupted failure would have folded by now – unless there was something in it for the losers at the top.
Anne, please! The timing nor the motives behind the non-confidence hasn’t any bearing on responsible government. There was a time when even Harper knew the difference between the presidential and parliamentary systems. There was a time when Harper adhered to the notion of responsible and representative government. In case you’ve not seen or repressed too deeply the memory. Here’s a passage signed onto by Harper, and Layton, and even that dastardly “separatist” (actually he’s a sovereigntist, big difference) Duceppe:
“As leaders of the opposition parties, we are well aware that, given the Liberal minority government, you could be asked by the Prime Minister to dissolve the 38th Parliament at any time should the House of Commons fail to support some part of the government’s program. We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority. Your attention to this matter is appreciated.”
You just stay on your soapbox Bill. I’m sure we will eventually come around to your way of thinking. The NDP has really grown since it was founded hasn’t it.
Jack Keeps telling us how Harper hasn’t got the confidence of Parliament. But the bigger reality is Jack hasn’t got the confidence of the people.
Now run along and support a few York assistants and screw the thousands of students.
His political leanings aside, Jack Layton strikes me as a smarmy glad-hander. How he got to where he is, I find nothing short of miraculous. Then again, as Charles Adler mentions and the polls demonstrate, he’s really not got that much of a following. It isn’t likely to change.
So I’m not at all riled or upset, just surprised. Oh, and, very grateful to NDP supporters for not recognizing a dud when they see one.
BTW, anyone care to defend our electoral system or Harper’s prorogation of a parliament that didn’t have confidence in the government who called for the suspension of parliament.
*************************************************
Bill, perhaps you would comment on how you can support a leftist system. Leftists always use the inherent openess of democracy in an attempt to illiminate it.
If you can find a leftist system that has ever led to additional rights for it’s people, I’ll stand corrected.
Let us not forget that Harper was calling for an election in that quote. The coalition of the lefties wanted to govern.
Soveriegntist/separist is a distinction only in the quebec mind. A vote for either is independence. The lies a soveriegntist/separist salesman tell to try to close the deal make no difference in reality.
Last post, sorry Kate for overstaying my welcome.
bestman: Classic example of disingenuousness. With nothing substantive to contribute you resort to a personal attack, and one that is old, and by now widely considered baseless. They voluntarily paid market rent for their place. The very next sentence in your quote attack is:
“In response to the article, the co-op’s board argued that having mixed-income tenants was crucial to the success of co-ops, and that the laws deliberately set aside apartments for those willing to pay market rates, such as Layton and Chow.” What’s the problem?
uuess: Stewwart, if that’s not an accidental typo, I owe you props. You’re one clever insulting machine. I’m not afraid to call Quebecers idiots because I like and respect them. Montreal is a fantastic city, home of the storied franchise known as les habs. Quebec’s gastronomy is better, Quebec women more sensual, beautiful, and intelligent. And the men, don’t get me started 🙂 Quebec has the best intellectuals in this country, and the best film makers in this country. Rivaled only by Toronto. Seriously, you’d fix our electoral system with a little gerrymandering. The fact that one’s vote is represented in legislature only if one votes for the winner isn’t a problem for you, especially when so many ridings are won with far less than the majority of votes? And that was a Conservative mayor that called in the army to Toronto, I was happy to dig myself out! Peace… I’ll go play somewhere else now. Wake me if someone posts something intelligent 😉
Bill,
Ha, good one. Rivaled only by toronto.
I am sure that the pur laine inbreeding makes them more intelligent. Much like pure breed dogs.
At least we can always count on the lefties for humor.
Bill – please? In this particular instance it quickly became evident that the majority of the people had not lost confidence in the NEWLY elected government. And it is after all the will of the people that counts, isn’t it? What do you think would have happened if another election had been called instead????? As my daughter said: “I thought I just voted, guess that one didn’t count?”, who BTW is in law school and a conservative – what’s this world coming to?
If you’re from Toronto, you’re smarter than those from the regions.
Correct, Bill?
Layton and the NDP are clowns.
Bill Stewart
For those with (AcD) Acronym Disability:
PR: Proportional Representation; DR: Disproportionate Representation
PR=DR
Your views on PR are ridiculous and stupid. You’re analogy to Alberta is ignorant. You fail to recognize that Alberta is a REGION, and they are entitled to have their views as a REGION represented. We don’t vote as a collective, we vote as individuals; therefore, the people in a particular riding decide who represents that region. In the real world you can’t have 2.5 children, you can have 2 or 3. Similarly, you can’t have 10% of an MP’s seat, you have it or you don’t.You completely ignore this fact! You would prefer that a small minority have DISPROPORTINATE sway in their riding because of larger concentrations of like minded lefttards thousands of miles away.
I was watching Top Gun yesterday and the instructor said ” There is no second place, there is only first place”. You wouldn’t like Top Gun Bill, in your eyes, declaring a winner is “outdated”. In Bill’s perfect world the Top Gun reward would be proportionately divided amongst all the competitors based on their performance; but, the performances would have to be weighted based on specific disadvantages certain “protected” competitors may have. This means even though you won, you might not win. This a good morale boost for the losers, but unfortunately they ALL lose in the end because they didn’t reward the best person for the most important job. This is what you truly don’t understand, you don’t understand the value of excellence and the positive effect and affect on others an excellent person has. Your philosophy is one of self-loathing and playa hating, you don’t see the beauty of excellence and you don’t admire, nor are inspired by excellence. Instead of feeling inspiration, a socialist feels inadequacy when in the presence of excellence.
Leftards and their inability to gather grass roots support is the true motivator for PR/DR. Fortunately the concentration of lefttards in any given populations is small, this is Darwinism at work acting protect the gene pool.
Taliban Jack. You know what the wife always says when Jack shows up on TV, honey you have to stop spitting at the TV screen.
The really scarry thing is that with the direction Canadian politics is going, the “failure” NDP has the potential of holding the balance of power in an upcoming election. At that point, failure or not, they get a prime spot at the public trough. With the advent of a strong regional party like the Bloc in Quebec, he regional pressures we are seeing with the Danny Williams Bloc in NFLD showing the power of regional politics there, and the West likewise having many regional based issues in common, it seems like we are in for more years of minority government ahead. That means that someday, if the election math is right, NDP may gain influence beyond its number of elected members. A very scary thought……
I can picture Taliban Jack reading this intently, and then snapping back into his self absorbed world and being very concerned that a camera might have caught him when he wasn’t clenching his jaw and framed with his goofy staring at the horizon Stalin poster pose.
This little commie is a joke and a scar on our political system; cut government spending starting with guaranteed tax dollars for votes.
Thanks Bill Stewart for the dear leader/ commie/ homo/ can con film/ french/ Habs trough sucker special interest take.
Bill keeps talking about “democracy” because (like all good Bolsheviks) he knows that in a raw democracy, as opposed to a representative republic, there is a back door for the mob to seize power which is all these NDP mini-fascists want….POWER.
If the “Big Bang” was preceded by the “singularity” then lucky jack’s intelligence was the void which surrounded it and the immensity of the void in space was dwarfed only by the size of his ego.
Wary Wary, Jack you are quite contrary, but how does your garden grow? (JACK says) With silver smells and cocky shills and no tar sands in the back row!! Paradise
Bill, couple of points: if the Quebecois are so brilliant when do they begin to pay their share of Canada’s equalization moneys? Or as silk-stocking socialists is this beneath them to worry about common things like paying your way?
Mel Lastman was not a Conservative. There are no recognized party affiliation in city politics in Toronto though unofficialy Miller and his cronies are aligned with the NDP.
Anne: With all due respect, our parliamentary system is based on responsible and representative government. Canadians do not directly elect a PM. We elect a parliament. Strictly speaking it is the parliament that elects the executive. It is responsible government based on confidence of the house that safeguards the authority and legitimacy of parliament. I quoted the above letter signed by Harper, from a time when he liked parliamentary democracy, to emphasize that parliament may be dissolved ANY time it has lost the confidence of the house, and that the GG should consider all options before exercising constitutional authority. Obviously with a parliament that had sat for only 11 days or so, calling another election would have been done only as a last resort. A more reasonable option would have been to ask parliament if any combination of duly elected parties holds the confidence of the house and can command support of the majority of the house. Click here for more.
Indiana Homez: you obviously have no clue as to how PR could co-exist with Single Member Plurality to produce a legislature that more adequately reflects the will of the voters. Look up MMP, for example. But do you really think that not winning a riding by at least 50% of the vote entitles one to feel like a winner and true representative of the interests of that riding. I’m glad you take your life lessons from Hollywood jingoistic crap, but democracy is not a game. It is about best representing the will of the people and serving the common good. First Past the Post has some merits (namely local representation), but PR is far better, especially when combined with SMP (i.e. MMP). You don’t believe that a party that received close to a million votes (7%) of popular vote should be represented in parliament? Similarly do you agree that a party with a mere 10% of popular vote should get 50 seats? Stop watching crap and hurling insults and get informed.
It is so gratifying to witness Jack Layton being administered a verbal spanking and sent to his room with a firm suggestion to please smarten up.
Even a prolonged lecture from Bill Stewart, drivelmeister, cannot rain on this parade. Stewart, however, does provide an example as to why the NDP receive even the few votes that they do.
Much to Layton’s chagrin, Adler tells it exactly like it is with a large dose of intestinal fortitude which most in the MSM seem to be drastically lacking.
Will Layton learn anything from this? Not likely. Although even someone as obtuse as Layton has to realize that any chance to sit at the cabinet table is completely nonexistent. However, his preferred spot at the public trough will be assured and, thanks to the tax dollars of “ordinary Canadians”, he will be spared the indignity of having to work for a living.
Jack blew it !! Should have supported the Political Party subsidy cuts. Would have hamstrung the Libs far more than the NDP. Would have had the Leftist vote more to himself. The Latte Lib Crowd had a close call.
Indiana:
If your point is that proportional representation only rewards the lunatic fringe, I agree with you.
Any nutbar can form a party, then hope to join up with other nutbars in another party to form some sort of apparition that does not accurately reflect the will of the largest proportion of voters.
The British, from whom we’ve inherited the most stable parliamentary system known to humanity, have the longest-running parliamentary democracy in the world.
History has shown first-past-the-post works.
A coalition led by a man who would quickly push aside Dion to take over the prime ministers’ chair with 17.5% of the popular vote demonstrates clearly the dangers in a proportional representation system.
Canadian voters are much smarter that the smarmy Toronto crowd, and their representative Bill Stewart, give them credit for.
The power grab late last year has made many complacent people more aware of the power-hungry Jackasses (literally and figuratively) that purport to know how to spend our money better than we do.
I think Indiana homez, in a moment of uncharacteristic sapience, just made an argument for the coalition.
“this is Darwinism at work acting protect the gene pool.” ???
I think humanity, to some extent, has insulated itself from natural selection…lucky for you.
Doug: Actually I keep redirecting our attention to parliamentary democracy. We are not a republic and the uninformed opinions around here regarding what our Canadian tradition defines as “democracy” are shocking. People around here often claim to be patriotic and true Canadians but so few actually understand first principles like responsible and representative government.
Vive le Quebec libre 🙂
set you free: Typical canard about PR used by those who know nothing about it. PR systems set up thresholds for qualifying for representation in a legislature. That number is usually between 2- 5% of the popular vote. Last October, none of the fringe parties (e.g. the soft landing for nutcases known as the Christian Heritage Party) even came close to 1% of the popular vote). So the idea that dangerous fringe parties will run the asylum is completely baseless. Yes, PR would likely lead to coalition governments (which could be stable or unstable but usually less acrimonious & adversarial than the H of C these days). Plus, the current system is likely to keep producing minority governments anyway. Please inform yourselves before spouting off. PR isn’t perfect, but it’s worth a look. Click here!
Thanks, it’s been good times around here today….
Bring in proportional representation and we’ll end up with a situation like Israel’s: The government having to cater to small groups of fanatics and crackpots in order to maintain a coalition. No thank you!
After the second bill stewart entry I started to scroll past, isn’t that what you do with trolls?
joebalini:
It seems to me that Indiana is stating the obvious … that the NDP is headed for extinction.
BTW, anyone care to defend our electoral system or Harper’s prorogation of a parliament that didn’t have confidence in the government who called for the suspension of parliament.
Bill, perhaps you would comment on how you can support a leftist system. Leftists always use the inherent openness of democracy in an attempt to illiminate it.
If you can find a leftist system that has ever led to additional rights for it’s people, I’ll stand corrected.
*********************************************
BUT BILL, I must have missed your oh so educated retort on my simple question. What system are you holding up as a reasonable alternative, and where in the world is it currently successful?
Indiana..PR= Elizabeth May = pension. Send me the money and I will bi##h at myself. I’ll tell myself I’m wrong, I’ll sip raindrops to avoid upsetting the balance of nature. Just send me the money.
doowleb:
People’s Democratic Republic of North Korea.
People’s Democratic Republic of Cuba.
People’s Democratic Republic of Venezuela.
People’s Democratic Repubic of …
I may be wrong, but it seems to me those are the types of Democratic Republics (Canada is not a republic, doncha know?) Bill seems to favour.
“Plus, the current system is likely to keep producing minority governments anyway. Please inform yourselves before spouting off. PR isn’t perfect, but it’s worth a look.”
Bwahahahahahaha.Yeah Bill.Take your commie butt over to Europia,and see how that’s working out.Don’t take a car though.The “friendly Muzzies” in France,GB,Belgium,etc,might carbaque for you.Twit.
doowleb: Although I would describe myself as a democratic socialist (a discussion for another day!), I was only here correcting shockingly misinformed opinions (notably Adler himself) about our existing parliamentary system, and suggesting that if confronted with the possibility of improving our existing democratic system, we should consider it. In my view, in Andrew Coyne’s view, MMP would be a marked improvement on a deeply flawed electoral system. Whether we end up with stable working coalition governments or not depends on entirely on us. Folk around here constantly rail against Quebec and the BQ, but they command such a powerful voice in parliament precisely because our electoral system grants them such disproportionate representation. MMP would mitigate against this and it would give a voice for those who deserve a voice, such as the Green Party.
Bill,
What I find obnoxious about you (aside from the leftardism) is that you moan that Harper using our constitution’s rules is bad but Layton and the Separatists using the constitution’s rules is just fine.
I’d say attempting to take power in a legal but democratically invalid way is far worse than not letting it happen.
Paul Martin was the one to ignore the will of the house. At least until he bribed stronach and cadman. He lost no less than 5 confidence votes and just pretended they didn’t count (and of course the media trotted out the same lying weasels who pretend their PhD’s in “constitutional law” was the reason for endlessly excusing whatever their party does and endlessly bashing whatever conservatives do.) Harper lost no confidence votes as they weren’t held. He didn’t lose the confidence of the house because he avoided the question. Proroguing parliament happens all the time. A 3-way coalition has never happened in the Westminster system in either the UK or Canada. Especially because the second and third parties didn’t even have more seats than the conservatives did alone.
Legal and democratic are two separate concepts. You seem to think that “what you want” and democratic are the same thing.
My, my. Mr. Stewart, you seemed to have stirred up a bit of a hornet’s nest. Interjections of common sense and sound observations tend to do that around here.
The angry right fringe fully realizes that implementation of their angry right agenda
would be impossible in a truly democratic system where every vote counts. Thus the vociferous opposition to any
deviation from first past the post in which
their dear leader can garner 100% of the power
with 40% of the vote.
As for Adler, he has become an embarrassment to right wing open mouth yahoos everywhere in his new role as Steve Harper’s toady.
Deriding an NDP safe seat as one in which a monkey could win while calling, for instance, an Alberta riding in which a sack of monkey shit could win under conservative blue, efficient. Pathetic.
Bill
MMP was soundly defeated 62 percent to 38 percent in Ontario in a referendum. Remember?
I don’t care what Andrew Coyne thinks. He is a single individual and does not speak for me. The majority of Ontario voters said No to MMP. Why? Because they want all Members to be elected, not just some, while the balance are hacks being rewarded by their respective parties. You know, like the senate. Like Craig Oliver, many are ignoring the fact that Harper wanted to reform the senate but got no support from the opposition. Quebec troublemakers would object.
By the way, Harper was wrong calling Duceppe’s people separatists. Actually he should have called them separatist blackmailers.
philboy
More dimwit leftard sophistry.
The liberals won my riding. Does that mean my vote didn’t get counted? Should I cry about “stolen elections” or do only retard lefties such as yourself get to do that?
Ask Italy how their PR has worked for them. PR gives the lunatic fringe too much power.
What would you say about a coalition which was made up of the CPC, Alberta separatists, the Ayn Rand party, the “it’s all about war for oil” party and some anti-immigrant party (have I left out any leftard bogeymen?)
I bet you’d be less happy with PR then. Try to reverse your scenarios to see if they’d still be acceptable in reverse. If not, you most likely are advocating something which isn’t just. Note also that any system put in place to manipulate the system in your favour can be used to manipulate it against you just as easily.
I’ve got a question or two for Bill Stewart and, in fact, for anyone who voted in the last federal election. Did you vote for a coalition of two or more parties? I know I didn’t. Was there anywhere on the ballot you marked the words “Liberal/DNP/Bloc Coalition beside any candidate’s name?
What coalition supporters have to understand is that had that band of bandits taken the reins of power a very serious split in our country would more assuredly have taken place. The split would have occurred at the Ontario/Manitoba boarder where, east of there, by far the party with the greatest number of seats in parliament is the CPC.
That split would have severely disenfranchised the West. Our votes would have counted only for the purpose of sending our MP to parliament. We would have had no voice in government. PMSH saved Canada from the three stooges show and thank god he did. None of those idiots had any clue as the serious ramifications of their attempted coup. None of these goofballs has a good concept of what Canada is in all of its regions. What does Dion or Duceppe know about the West except that we have the tar sands? Jack Layton knows even less.
So Bill Stewart – when you look at the GG proroguing Parliament – you should put your petty partisan politics aside and thank the good lady. She obviously is wiser than you give her credit for.
The liberals won my riding. Does that mean my vote didn’t get counted?
Yes.
What would you say about a coalition which was made up of the CPC, Alberta separatists, the Ayn Rand party….
I would say that if that was what the majority of Canadians voted for, then so be it. What is important is that every vote would count.
I trust democracy. Why don’t rightards like you, warwick?
The only reason Philboy and his pal Mr. Bill are here is because there’s no one to talk with on lefty sites. Nobody goes there. Those sites are as popular as Layton’s is with the voters.
Google: “tyranny of the majority”
Did you vote for a coalition of two or more parties?
I voted for who I wanted to represent my riding. That is all anyone gets to vote for, sideshow.
Philboy.
You still don’t get it. Canadians did not vote for a coalition.
You lefties are in love with the word coalition. That’s because you can never manage to do anything on your own. You always need outside help.
By the way is Jack still in love with Iggy?
philboy
I look forward to your “Obama stole the election” line cause some yanks didn’t vote for him. I can’t wait.
I suffered all of those years of liberal rule without once suggesting they weren’t legitimately elected (at least until Martin lost 5 confidence votes and still refused to leave.)
PR means gridlock. It’s unworkable. The only people who support it are people who will benefit which means fringe parties who lack public support.
Our system isn’t undemocratic. Its a system which requires BROADBASED support in order to take power rather than giving lunatics power far beyond what their vote warrants. It means that to govern, you have to have permission from the largest number of people.
“Yes, PR would likely lead to coalition governments (which could be stable or unstable but usually less acrimonious & adversarial than the H of C these days).”
Bill, I know in your mind you think you are an intellect who has come to SDA in an effort to educate the ignorant masses. Let me assure you that you are delusional. People are well aware of the how parliament works and how Jack and Stephane could have legally formed a governing coalition with the support of the Bloc. But they didn’t. They tried and failed. Get over it, move on with your life and for the sake of your beloved left wing political party quit inferring that anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant or uneducated. You will never win people over by calling them stupid.
Now have a nice day! :^)
Make that “West of there” Remember Bob… Review is your friend>
jutthinkin: as far as I know France does not have PR (it has run off system that is kind of the opposite to PR), most of GB also is not PR, thanks for coming out though. I see that you’ve never met an opportunity to make an ass of yourself you didn’t like.
warwick: The first intelligible, if not bordering on intelligent, comment. I agree that legal/traditional and democratic principles are different. At least we seem to agree that Harper only prorogued parliament to save his own skin. Clearly house business wasn’t all resolved, and the House would have risen but a week later. Harper thus asked to prorogue solely to avoid a vote of non-confidence. This the same man who had previously understood that the legitimacy and authority of government rests on having the confidence from parliament. The cowardly choice to prorogue parliament, while legal/ procedural, was undemocratic (he knew he didn’t have command of the House) and, let’s add another layer, unethical (Canadians needed leadership and he chose rather to save his own career). Moreover, to make Senate appointments when your government is under a cloud of non-confidence, in my view both undemocratic and unethical (although the GG share blame since she could have granted Harper a prorogation that curtailed the powers of government since the confidence of the house was clearly in doubt.
The coalition, I have argued, was legal, democratic, and even ethical (although the latter is debatable). Each member of parliament was duly elected, including the “separatists” (with whom Harper previously “consulted”). BQ members enjoy no more and no less the rights of any other Canadian. In “consultation” a coalition was struck, and had the GG following a vote of non-confidence asked if opposition parties could gain command and confidence of the house, that would have been “legally” and democratically justifiable since having a new election after parliament has sat for only 13 days makes no sense. As far as Canadians having their say. They certainly would have their voice heard loud and clear in the next election. If they agreed with the coalition, they would re-elect candidates or they could turf them if they thought their elected representatives had acted imprudently.
You contradict yourself, warwick. Giving steve harper 100% of the power with a 40% plurality of the vote IS giving lunatics power far beyond what their vote warrants.
You’ve never once questioned the legitimacy of all those liberal governments? So what? That means absolutely nothing.
Obama who?
The coalition and their supporters are making the argument that since Harper and the CPC didn’t get a majority of the votes, the parties that did get the majority should have power.
However, those three parties are made up of a majority of MPs who won election, not by majorities, but by first past the post. Funny how they’re more than happy to accept those results for themselves but not the CPC. There’s a word for that – hypocrites.
The numbers again:
NDP – 37 seats, 7 (19%) by majority
LPC – 77 seats, 17 (22%) by majority
BQ – 49 seats, 13 (27%) by majority
Or put another way:
NDP – 81% won through first past the post
LPC – 78% won through fptp
BQ – 63% won through fptp
Finally, there’s only one way to make every vote count – a one-party system. Even the dullest person has to see that that’s no solution.