NationStates Jolt Archive


Another Canadian federal election?

Pages : [1] 2
CanuckHeaven
28-11-2008, 00:05
Canadians recently elected a Conservative minority government, the 2nd one in two years. They stated that they would work with the opposition parties to make parliament work, yet they kick off with this (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081126%2fTories_fiscal_081127):

Opposition MPs were threatening to topple the Conservatives Thursday after the government announced it would put off a new economic stimulus package until next year and would slash funding to political parties.

Defeating the Tories in Parliament could trigger another federal election or allow opposition parties to band together and form a new government.......

The new measures will go to a vote in the House of Commons early next week.

Other highlights from the government's fiscal update include selling off $2.3 billion worth of federal assets, limiting raises for public servants and slashing close to $30 million of federal funding for political parties.

Under the new proposal, this is how much the parties stand to lose:

- Conservatives: $10 million

- Liberals: $7.7 million

- NDP: $4.9 million

- Bloc Quebecois: $2.6 million

- Green Party: $1.8 million

While the Conservatives would lose the most money, it would be a smaller share of their overall revenue because they get most of their funding through private donations.

"The Conservatives have much better grassroots organizations and are much better at raising money," CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife said Thursday.

But opposition MPs slammed the proposed Conservative legislation as a cynical move intended to weaken other parties.

"Instead of an immediate stimulus package to attack the recession, this government is apparently going to attack democracy," said NDP Leader Jack Layton during question period Thursday afternoon.
I think the opposition should call the government's bluff and defeat this proposal. I would imagine that if that were to happen, then the Liberals would be given the opportunity to form the government.

Should the opposition pull the plug?

Perhaps the Conservatives are hoping for the Liberals to take over during the pending economic downturn, so that they won't be the ones perceived responsible for the inevitable deficits that will follow?
New Manvir
28-11-2008, 00:16
Ottawa needs a kick in the ass and to get back to work.
CanuckHeaven
28-11-2008, 00:24
Ottawa needs a kick in the ass and to get back to work.
Seconded!! Your opinion on whether the opposition should support the government on this?
FreeSatania
28-11-2008, 00:57
The thing I noticed about this story is that Ignatieff totally upstaged Dion on this issue. While I do think that Dion has been the most ball-less opposition leader in *like ever* - Ignatieff scares me. The guy's a total pro-American tool... and I don't like the look of him. Dion's days are numbered and I'd rather have a Conservative minority than a Liberal government with Ignatieff at the throne.

Anyone else suspicious of that guy?
Knights of Liberty
28-11-2008, 01:09
The guy's a total pro-American tool... and I don't like the look of him.

He should be. We are better than you.
FreeSatania
28-11-2008, 01:16
He should be. We are better than you.

You sir are not welcome to my tea party.
CanuckHeaven
28-11-2008, 01:55
The thing I noticed about this story is that Ignatieff totally upstaged Dion on this issue. While I do think that Dion has been the most ball-less opposition leader in *like ever* - Ignatieff scares me. The guy's a total pro-American tool... and I don't like the look of him. Dion's days are numbered and I'd rather have a Conservative minority than a Liberal government with Ignatieff at the throne.

Anyone else suspicious of that guy?
I am suspicious of him and Rae, but I would prefer either over the current regime. Maybe the Liberals will be bold and go with Dominic LeBlanc (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081124.COMARTIN24/TPStory/National).

Harper is being less than honest.....
Unlucky_and_unbiddable
28-11-2008, 03:51
Ottawa needs a kick in the ass and to get back to work.

Isn't that what the election was for?
Ki Baratan
28-11-2008, 03:53
Pull the plug. If the Conservatives want to fuck around and pass this bastard bill instead of doing something to help hardworking Canadians who are getting screwed, then they completely deserve to be blown out of the electoral landscape into oblivion's end.
Pull the plug, and go right to the Governor General, even she can see that the CPC is doing this because it thinks its immortal.
Xomic
28-11-2008, 03:57
I say pull the plug.
Ki Baratan
28-11-2008, 04:06
I'd love to fight an election over this, the conservatives are absolutely on the wrong side, and everyone will instantly know that its all about Harper getting his damn majority. He'll fail.
Saige Dragon
28-11-2008, 04:07
Isn't that what the election was for?

No, that was the Conservatives kicking and screaming that they couldn't work through their agenda because of this concept called the Opposition. Funny how government works.
CanuckHeaven
28-11-2008, 04:08
Isn't that what the election was for?
Yes, but the Prime Minister is playing with fire.
CanuckHeaven
28-11-2008, 04:10
Pull the plug. If the Conservatives want to fuck around and pass this bastard bill instead of doing something to help hardworking Canadians who are getting screwed, then they completely deserve to be blown out of the electoral landscape into oblivion's end.
Pull the plug, and go right to the Governor General, even she can see that the CPC is doing this because it thinks its immortal.

I say pull the plug.

I'd love to fight an election over this, the conservatives are absolutely on the wrong side, and everyone will instantly know that its all about Harper getting his damn majority. He'll fail.
I say YES!! Pull the plug...call their bluff and they will fail!!
Ki Baratan
28-11-2008, 04:10
No, that was the Conservatives kicking and screaming that they couldn't work through their agenda because of this concept called the Opposition. Funny how government works.

This

Harper is wasting his good grace with the people of Canada. We're tired of elections, we want someone to fucking fix the economy, and he's shown that he doesn't give a damn one way or the other about what happens to us Canadians, so he needs to go, and his party needs to be reduced to nothing.
Call the damned election and lets wipe out the CPC.
Xomic
28-11-2008, 04:12
I say YES!! Pull the plug...call their bluff and they will fail!!

Pretty much.

Hit them hard, and fast, also, replace Dion with Obama.
CanuckHeaven
28-11-2008, 04:14
Pretty much.

Hit them hard, and fast, also, replace Dion with Obama.
First part should be no problem, but the latter part would be damn near impossible. :D
Unlucky_and_unbiddable
28-11-2008, 04:16
Pretty much.

Hit them hard, and fast, also, replace Dion with Obama.

Obama's so right wing he makes me want to puke. I'd almost prefer Harper over Obama because at least people can see through Harper's bullshit.
Ki Baratan
28-11-2008, 04:16
Ignatieff or Rae to lead the Liberals, or if it comes down to a coalition, Layton with Dion as DPM, otherway around works too.
CanuckHeaven
28-11-2008, 04:50
Ignatieff or Rae to lead the Liberals, or if it comes down to a coalition, Layton with Dion as DPM, otherway around works too.
If an election were imminent, then the Liberals would have to go with Dion as leader. It would be impossible to elect a new leader beforehand. As far as a coalition is concerned, the Liberals would never agree to Layton as PM, even though he is very popular.

Even if Dion were to lead the Liberals, the Conservatives would stand to lose a lot of seats, especially after Harper's pronouncements that he would work with the opposition to make this government work. Harper also stated during the election campaign that the government would NOT run a deficit, and since that appears likely in 2009 (anywhere from $14 Billion to $42 Billion), the electorate is going to be mighty pissed off!!

Exclusive: Harper Running Deficit... NOW (http://mikewatkins.ca/2008/10/08/harper-government-running-deficit-now/)
Veblenia
28-11-2008, 05:28
Jesus...I haven't even washed the blood off my boots from the last election.

But yes, call Harper's bluff.
New Manvir
28-11-2008, 05:45
Seconded!! Your opinion on whether the opposition should support the government on this?

I don't like what the Conservatives are doing, but I also don't want another election. I'd be a bit more supportive of an election if I actually thought the Liberals had a chance of winning. If there is one though I predict it'll just have the same result as last time, and waste about 2 months of time that they could have spent getting shit done.
CanuckHeaven
28-11-2008, 07:16
I don't like what the Conservatives are doing, but I also don't want another election. I'd be a bit more supportive of an election if I actually thought the Liberals had a chance of winning. If there is one though I predict it'll just have the same result as last time, and waste about 2 months of time that they could have spent getting shit done.
I seriously disagree with you there. The Conservatives stated that they would work with this new government and that was their mandate. The first opportunity and the Conservatives have kicked their opponents in the groin, and that would play out very badly for the Conservatives. That and the fact that Harper lied about the deficit.

Another point from the article I posted in the OP, is that the Conservatives want to cut funding to the political parties, but they see nothing wrong with increasing the size of the cabinet:

Other opposition members also said the Conservatives should rein in their own spending, noting that Harper's cabinet has increased in size from 26 members to 37.
That is a 42% increase in the size of the cabinet and that will mean millions more in government funding for those portfolios.

People will see what is going on. They will vote differently.

Remember also that the Conservative vote in 2006 was 36.27% and in 2008 it was 37.6, a gain of less then 1 and 1/2%. There was no great momentum going towards the Conservatives.
Veblenia
28-11-2008, 16:44
Chretien and Broadbent are in coalition talks. (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081128/national/coalition_talks)
Gift-of-god
28-11-2008, 16:50
Chretien and Broadbent are in coalition talks. (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081128/national/coalition_talks)

I think I like Chretien just a little more:

Chretien was seen on his way to his downtown Ottawa office, but when asked about the coalition talks he feigned an inability to understand English.

"Je ne comprends pas anglais," he said.

A coalition government would be a first for Canada, would it not?
Veblenia
28-11-2008, 16:57
A coalition government would be a first for Canada, would it not?

Federally, yes. I don't know if you want to count Rae-Peterson as a coalition in Ontario...I tend to. But then, four elections in three years would be a first for Canada, too.

EDIT: Four elections in five years. My bad.
Gift-of-god
28-11-2008, 17:04
I'd prefer a coalition government to another election. They're too expensive, and there is a bit of a financial crisis to deal with. It's unfortunate that this fiscal policy is supposed to address that but it doesn't.

And they have the balls to make it a non-confidence issue.
Veblenia
28-11-2008, 17:18
I'd prefer a coalition government to another election. They're too expensive, and there is a bit of a financial crisis to deal with. It's unfortunate that this fiscal policy is supposed to address that but it doesn't.


I agree.

I have a feeling, however, that the Tories will "back down" by loosening rules on corporate and union donations rather than restoring the subsidy. The Liberals will be mollified by being allowed to turn on the Bay Street spigot again.
East Canuck
28-11-2008, 17:22
I'd prefer a coalition government to another election. They're too expensive, and there is a bit of a financial crisis to deal with. It's unfortunate that this fiscal policy is supposed to address that but it doesn't.
Seconded. Especially with the elections going on in Quebec, I don't really want 3 elections in a row.

+And they have the balls to make it a non-confidence issue.
They have to. It's the law that budgets have to be non-confidence issues.
Gift-of-god
28-11-2008, 17:30
Seconded. Especially with the elections going on in Quebec, I don't really want 3 elections in a row.


They have to. It's the law that budgets have to be non-confidence issues.

Is it a budget? I thought it was a 'fiscal policy solution for the ongoing economic crisis' that was supposed to modify the budget, rather than the budget itself. Perhaps I was wrong.

You know, it's been a while since Montreal had municipal elections.
East Canuck
28-11-2008, 17:38
Is it a budget? I thought it was a 'fiscal policy solution for the ongoing economic crisis' that was supposed to modify the budget, rather than the budget itself. Perhaps I was wrong.

You know, it's been a while since Montreal had municipal elections.

Budget, modify the budget, adds to the budget: they all have to be non-confidence.

And thank god we don't have to go through a municipal election too. Or 25, as Montreal likes to do them. Fusions my ass.
Gift-of-god
28-11-2008, 17:46
Budget, modify the budget, adds to the budget: they all have to be non-confidence.

And thank god we don't have to go through a municipal election too. Or 25, as Montreal likes to do them. Fusions my ass.

Then hopefully Broadbent can pull it off. If any Canuck politician can do it, it would be him.
Neesika
28-11-2008, 17:49
As Rick Mercer likes to say, I'm always up for an election...bring it on!
Neesika
28-11-2008, 17:58
Ignatieff or Rae to lead the Liberals, or if it comes down to a coalition, Layton with Dion as DPM, otherway around works too.

LeBlanc came out of nowhere...he's an interesting candidate. I can't fucking stand Ignatieff. He pissed me off during the last Liberal convention...go back to Harvard you fake-Canuk. Rae's got some good support which is surprising considering he's a freaking Maritimer and an ex-NDPer...but I can't make myself believe he'll win it even though I want him to, and even though he currrently has more support than Ignatieff. Part of that is not being able to believe the Libs would choose the less pretentious twat of the bunch.
Ki Baratan
28-11-2008, 19:49
If an election were imminent, then the Liberals would have to go with Dion as leader. It would be impossible to elect a new leader beforehand. As far as a coalition is concerned, the Liberals would never agree to Layton as PM, even though he is very popular.

Even if Dion were to lead the Liberals, the Conservatives would stand to lose a lot of seats, especially after Harper's pronouncements that he would work with the opposition to make this government work. Harper also stated during the election campaign that the government would NOT run a deficit, and since that appears likely in 2009 (anywhere from $14 Billion to $42 Billion), the electorate is going to be mighty pissed off!!

Exclusive: Harper Running Deficit... NOW (http://mikewatkins.ca/2008/10/08/harper-government-running-deficit-now/)

Actually, the constitution of the LPC allows them to pick a new leader immediately if the current party leader resigns. You'd never know it, but lots of people, including Chretien, are being pulled in to work out the leadership. They expect a bloodbath and I couldn't be happier with Ignatieff at the helm, he's a damn good fighter on the stump and this is a chance to wipe out the CPC.
Ki Baratan
28-11-2008, 19:50
Federally, yes. I don't know if you want to count Rae-Peterson as a coalition in Ontario...I tend to. But then, four elections in three years would be a first for Canada, too.

EDIT: Four elections in five years. My bad.

Borden had a coalition during the first world war.
CanuckHeaven
28-11-2008, 21:23
Looks like the opposition is calling the Conservatives bluff and they are slowly backing away from their idiotic proposal!!

Plan to slash party funding won't be in key motion (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&date=true&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081127%2fTories_fiscal_081128)

The Conservatives are backing away from including a thorny plan to slash public funding for political parties in a confidence vote on the fall fiscal update.......

The news came after CTV's Ottawa Bureau chief Robert Fife broke the news that former Liberal prime minister Jean Chretien and former NDP leader Ed Broadbent were meeting to discuss toppling the government and forming a coalition.

Kory Teneycke, communications director for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, said on Friday that the controversial funding measure won't be included in the bill coming before Parliament on Monday.

"The vote that will be taking place on the ways and means motion on Monday actually does not contain changes to the political subsidy," he told CTV Newsnet, noting it would come forward in a separate bill.
I imagine that Harper will learn from this and quit leading with his chin?

Maybe not.......
Ki Baratan
28-11-2008, 21:29
Harper learning from his mistakes? Not a chance! I hope the opposition keeps fighting until the CPC actually puts in a stimulus for the economy in the bill. Right now if they back down after getting the party money concession, they'll lose public support.
FreeSatania
28-11-2008, 23:37
I am suspicious of him and Rae, but I would prefer either over the current regime. Maybe the Liberals will be bold and go with Dominic LeBlanc (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081124.COMARTIN24/TPStory/National).

Harper is being less than honest.....

I'd like that. But I'm a skeptic ... the last thing we want is a two party system with both sides controlled by Zionist puppets -- like what the americans have now. Dominic LeBlanc -- didn't strike me as one of those... but then I dont think he'll get a chance at the leadership.
Mikesburg
28-11-2008, 23:53
Should the opposition pull the plug?

They certainly shouldn't let the party subsidy thing slide, that's for sure. It might bite them in the ass politically, but so would losing their wallets.

I just can't stomach Rae or Ignatieff at the helm of a minority. It would be somewhat ironic if Rae were at the helm of a government during yet another recession.
Mikesburg
28-11-2008, 23:55
"The news came after CTV's Ottawa Bureau chief Robert Fife broke the news that former Liberal prime minister Jean Chretien and former NDP leader Ed Broadbent were meeting to discuss toppling the government and forming a coalition. "

Now that's a coalition most Canadians would welcome. Bizarre system we have.
Fighter4u
29-11-2008, 00:02
Yeah personally I don't like either Liberal frontrunners. I mean Dion (rather stupidly) but bravely stood up for what he believed in. How many potlicians would hadm done that even those it was unpopular? How many of you guys complain that potlicians will only support things that are popular?

WHY?

Because if not then they get just down by a voting popualtion that only cares about their own wallet(EVEN those most of us would agree that global warming is a problem) and now that oil has dropped. It seens stupid to had worried about gas prices. Dion would had been a wicked PM. But any honest man can never surive in potlics.
FreeSatania
29-11-2008, 00:03
"The news came after CTV's Ottawa Bureau chief Robert Fife broke the news that former Liberal prime minister Jean Chretien and former NDP leader Ed Broadbent were meeting to discuss toppling the government and forming a coalition. "

Now that's a coalition most Canadians would welcome. Bizarre system we have.

Insidious plotting behind closed doors -- Now, thats how the fate of a Nation *should* be decided :p But, yeah - not a combination I would mind.
FreeSatania
29-11-2008, 00:11
Yeah personally I don't like either Liberal frontrunners. I mean Dion (rather stupidly) but bravely stood up for what he believed in. How many potlicians would hadm done that even those it was unpopular? How many of you guys complain that potlicians will only support things that are popular?

True. But you said it yourself honesty is often punished in politics. The problem with Dion as a leader isn't that he's a bad guy - or that he isn't qualified. Infact I think he'd be a great guy to have at the *side* of any leader. But he just doesn't have the *personality* to be a leader.

Mind you for all his rhetoric Harper really isn't any more charismatic. Layton is, Chretien is, Ignatieff unfortunately is ... Perhaps we deserve to have the shitty leaders that we do because we *apparently* value charisma over integrity any day.e

BTW - I agree with you Dion isn't all that bad. Hey who knows maybe if he gets the chance to actually run the country he can make a reputation for himself simply by not screwing up!
Fighter4u
29-11-2008, 00:15
I agree 100% with that. And usually charisma leaders aren't as smart as the more qualified "boreding" leaders because the smarts one personality aren't as open or flamboyant due to how life probably treated them in the past or that just naturaly how they are. Thses guys are the one who should lead,not the guy who more known because he louder,funnier and more charming.

But yeah I agree with you 100%.


Yeah,those I also suppose a agurement can be made that we need someone who knows how to handle such a downturn in the markets. And that(out of all the choices we have) may be Harper. But we can't give up our ideals either now can we?
FreeSatania
29-11-2008, 00:32
Yeah,those I also suppose a agurement can be made that we need someone who knows how to handle such a downturn in the markets. And that(out of all the choices we have) may be Harper. But we can't give up our ideals either now can we?

I wouldn't say that Harper knows how to deal with a down turn in markets any better than say Layton. Sure Harper will serve the interests of the big banks and the multinational corporations. But he'd happily shaft all of us to do it ...

We *Canadians* have this inferiority complex like we have to woo businesses here and pander to her every exploitationistic whim. We don't have to. This economic downturn is a global phenomenon ( it's hitting the USA hardest right now though ). Business' won't just flee Canada looking for elsewhere to go - there is no such better place over the rainbow for them to go. ( ...well mabey mexico)
Fighter4u
29-11-2008, 00:40
I wouldn't say that Harper knows how to deal with a down turn in markets any better than say Layton. Sure Harper will serve the interests of the big banks and the multinational corporations. But he'd happily shaft all of us to do it ...

We *Canadians* have this inferiority complex like we have to woo businesses here and pander to her every exploitationistic whim. We don't have to. This economic downturn is a global phenomenon ( it's hitting the USA hardest right now though ). Business' won't just flee Canada looking for elsewhere to go - there is no such better place over the rainbow for them to go. ( ...well mabey mexico)



I see. Those Harper does have enough money to convine many voters that he is the only who can handle the downturn. Also he been setting himself up as the responible guy for while a while,who fell into a defict that he didn't want only out of the country best intrest blah,blah..

Not to forget the NDP proimses many things that will cost alot of money and they be in a hardspot between their party base and the rest of the Canadian population. And the Liberals as we all know don't have two pennys to rub together.
Sudova
29-11-2008, 00:43
Canadians recently elected a Conservative minority government, the 2nd one in two years. They stated that they would work with the opposition parties to make parliament work, yet they kick off with this (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081126%2fTories_fiscal_081127):


I think the opposition should call the government's bluff and defeat this proposal. I would imagine that if that were to happen, then the Liberals would be given the opportunity to form the government.

Should the opposition pull the plug?

Perhaps the Conservatives are hoping for the Liberals to take over during the pending economic downturn, so that they won't be the ones perceived responsible for the inevitable deficits that will follow?

They should, at the very least, TRY, and call this. They should try for a couple of reasons:

1. because, if (as you posit) this is political Kryptonite for the Conservatives, then it's an opportunity to get a government more in line with Opposition views.

2. because if it isn't, then (when/if it fails) the Liberals have a serious campaign issue or three to topple the Conservatives the old-fashioned way-at the voting booth.
CanuckHeaven
29-11-2008, 01:09
They should, at the very least, TRY, and call this. They should try for a couple of reasons:

1. because, if (as you posit) this is political Kryptonite for the Conservatives, then it's an opportunity to get a government more in line with Opposition views.

2. because if it isn't, then (when/if it fails) the Liberals have a serious campaign issue or three to topple the Conservatives the old-fashioned way-at the voting booth.
I agree on both points.

Part of me would like to see the Conservatives yanked for being politically stupid, but the other part of me wants to watch the reaction of the Conservatives (should they remain in power), and Canadians, as the deficit numbers start to soar next year with no one to blame but the Conservatives!!
FreeSatania
29-11-2008, 01:23
I agree on both points.

Part of me would like to see the Conservatives yanked for being politically stupid, but the other part of me wants to watch the reaction of the Conservatives (should they remain in power), and Canadians, as the deficit numbers start to soar next year with no one to blame but the Conservatives!!

You're vengeance will come at a cost to us all. But it's not really worth it unless it all ends in a hail of gunfire with harpers crumpled blood soaked body and the foot of the steps of Parliament -- and Me propelled to the seat of power by the adoring masses... Short of drama like *that* Id rather just have responsible government.
CanuckHeaven
29-11-2008, 06:08
Id rather just have responsible government.
That is what the taxpayer deserves ultimately!!
FreeSatania
29-11-2008, 21:48
Well I know this thread has been dead for a day now but the issue isn't. Harper has backed down but now that the opposition parties more or less have their ducks in a row the could topple the government anyway.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.WBSpector20081128081255/WBStory/WBSpector

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/545828
Mikesburg
29-11-2008, 21:58
This is just bizarre. If we do end up with a new government, they're going to have to pick one damn popular individual to lead it, otherwise you're going to have a seriously divided and angry electorate.
FreeSatania
29-11-2008, 22:23
Well I'm for anyone except Harper or Ignatieff. Despite media speculation on the subject it looks like Dion is the likely candidate but then on one knows for sure! I'm not particularly against the idea of a coalition myself. As for the electorate -- well we're always pissed off and divided.
[NS]Nation of Quebec
30-11-2008, 00:03
It looks like I'm the only one who actually supports Harper and what he was proposing. I don't see why the parties should be getting money with each vote and our MPs are the biggest waste of money in the country.

The Opposition's backroom deals are an insult to both democracy and to the wishes of Canadians. Canadians voted for a Conservative government, not a Liberal one, not a NDP one, and definitely not a coalition. The Liberals and NDP are clearly not respecting the wishes of the Canadian people and instead are trying to take the government over instead of earning it through the people.

The Liberals have nobody to lead them and I sure as hell wouldn't want someone as incompetent as Dion representing my country. Rae destroyed Ontario's economy and he would only do the same to Canada. Ignatieff is nothing more than a pro-American tool and I don't know enough about LeBlanc, but I doubt he has a chance anyway.

As much as I respect Layton as a leader, I completely disagree with his economic policies that would turn the country into socialism and borderline communism. Any NDP government would run the country into a huge deficit with their spend happy policies. The Liberals wouldn't be much better.

The point is, the opposition should respect the wishes of Canadians and actually give the government the chance to actually get things done instead of playing partisan and threatening to overturn them because of policies that they disagree with.
FreeSatania
30-11-2008, 00:49
Nation of Quebec;14258559']It looks like I'm the only one who actually supports Harper


yep

Nation of Quebec;14258559']
The Opposition's backroom deals are an insult to both democracy and to the wishes of Canadians. Canadians voted for a Conservative government, not a Liberal one, not a NDP one, and definitely not a coalition.


Actually the majority of Canadians didn't vote Conservative -- thats why the government is so weak. If you combine the votes of NDP + Liberal supporters then far more people voted for them.

Nation of Quebec;14258559']
The Liberals have nobody to lead them and I sure as hell wouldn't want someone as incompetent as Dion representing my country.


Why is Dion incompetent, he's not charismatic, he certainly bent over backwards to try and accommodate Harpers insanity... but I've seen no evidence of the man being incompetent at all.

Nation of Quebec;14258559']
Ignatieff is nothing more than a pro-American tool and I don't know enough about LeBlanc, but I doubt he has a chance anyway.


Agreed on both points. Ignatieff really scares me ... I really think he's some kind of American spy or something. If you want to read something really scary - the man has a book 'empire lite'. Fucking drooling idiot called America a new Roman Empire or something ... like that was a good thing.

Nation of Quebec;14258559']
As much as I respect Layton as a leader, I completely disagree with his economic policies that would turn the country into socialism and borderline communism. Any NDP government would run the country into a huge deficit with their spend happy policies. The Liberals wouldn't be much better.


If the economy does really take a turn for the worse a little bit of socialism might not be a bad thing. We have a lot very very rich fucks and then there is the rest of us ... unless your in the top 1% of the wealthy I don't think you really have to worry. And it's that rest of us which are the engine of the economy. And as far as big business leaving -- they won't the economic downturn is a global phenomenon. Business will stay as long as there is plenty of money to be made.

Nation of Quebec;14258559']
The point is, the opposition should respect the wishes of Canadians and actually give the government the chance to actually get things done instead of playing partisan and threatening to overturn them because of policies that they disagree with.


It's their right and duty for MP's to vote their conscience and not to prop up a government which tries to bully them into submission.
[NS]Nation of Quebec
30-11-2008, 01:19
Why is Dion incompetent, he's not charismatic, he certainly bent over backwards to try and accommodate Harpers insanity... but I've seen no evidence of the man being incompetent at all.

Didn't you see the CTV interview he did? He was asked a simple question three times and he kept on asking for a do-over and one of his aides even had to explain the question to him. You don't get do-overs in the real world once you're Prime Minister. I have no problems with having a French PM, but I do have problems with an incompetent one.

If the economy does really take a turn for the worse a little bit of socialism might not be a bad thing. We have a lot very very rich fucks and then there is the rest of us ... unless your in the top 1% of the wealthy I don't think you really have to worry. And it's that rest of us which are the engine of the economy. And as far as big business leaving -- they won't the economic downturn is a global phenomenon. Business will stay as long as there is plenty of money to be made.

While I do agree that I don't want the greedy top one percent in control, I'd rather have a Conservative government cutting federal spending than an Liberal NDP government spending everything on any program they can get their hands on and sending the country further into deficit. Let's not forget that all the unions asking for even more money which puts more pressure on the auto makers to spend more money to accommodate them. No wonder they're having the problems that they are now.


It's their right and duty for MP's to vote their conscience and not to prop up a government which tries to bully them into submission.

It's not bullying, it's simply being fair. The Conservatives actually stand to lose the most money.

When it comes to expanded democracy, I think Harper would be the man for the job anyways. After all, it's the CPC that stands for senate reform, accountability, judicial reform and free votes in parliament.

This is a solid moral issue. The Liberals and NDP had no chance of a coalition before the election. As soon as the issue of ending subsidies to their parties is mentioned, they jump start the coalition talks. This is about politician greed above all! Politicians shouldn't been given such luxuries, and that itself, is democratic. They had no problems with the budget until their precious subsidies would be cut. All the government wanted to do was to end a over $30,000,000 tax-payer paid program in an effort to cut federal spending to help the economy.

And to have a coalition reliant on a separatist party is disgusting. It's quite obvious the Bloc will be making fierce demands before allying with any coalition. It's dangerous for national unity. It would be an insult to all of those Canadians who do want Harper as their Prime Minister. Just because they have to right to do something doesn't mean it's the democratic or moral thing to do.

All for the sake of politicians having more cash in their pockets (the fact that we're basically in a recession makes them even more despicable).
Nobtook
30-11-2008, 01:25
Nation of Quebec;14258559']The Opposition's backroom deals are an insult to both democracy and to the wishes of Canadians. Canadians voted for a Conservative government, not a Liberal one, not a NDP one, and definitely not a coalition. The Liberals and NDP are clearly not respecting the wishes of the Canadian people and instead are trying to take the government over instead of earning it through the people.

Wow... the Conservatives may have gotten 46% of the seats in parliament, but I think they only got what, like 36% of the popular vote? It seems more like they wanted anything BUT a Conservative government, but the votes were too widespread through the other parties that the Conservatives managed to snag enough ridings by a small majority. The low popular vote but high number of seats implies that they may have won more seats, but many of the ones they won were by a thin margin, and the seats they did not win (i.e. NDP/Liberals/etc. got) were probably won by large numbers.
So explain to me why you think a majority of Canadians WANTED a Conservative government? Most of us didn't.
Ki Baratan
30-11-2008, 05:04
Nation of Quebec;14258710']It's not bullying


Actually, yes, its bullying. Its bullying when you make EVERY SINGLE BILL a confidence matter. Its bullying when there are 43 confidence measures within a single year, all because Harper knows he won't win those votes if they're regular votes.
Harper had a great chance to gain a mandate by helping to fix the economy, and instead the VERY FIRST bill his government comes up with is this attempt to decapitate the opposition parties. Harper is a bully, and I can't wait to see him lose.
Ki Baratan
30-11-2008, 05:08
Wow... the Conservatives may have gotten 46% of the seats in parliament, but I think they only got what, like 36% of the popular vote? It seems more like they wanted anything BUT a Conservative government, but the votes were too widespread through the other parties that the Conservatives managed to snag enough ridings by a small majority. The low popular vote but high number of seats implies that they may have won more seats, but many of the ones they won were by a thin margin, and the seats they did not win (i.e. NDP/Liberals/etc. got) were probably won by large numbers.
So explain to me why you think a majority of Canadians WANTED a Conservative government? Most of us didn't.

The problem is that there's a multi-party system in Canada, so the Conservatives could have won these seats with as little as 26 percent of the vote (assuming the other parties split with 24.75% in the riding). Obviously they won seats with more than that, but the fact is that there was no single force that directly opposed the Conservatives, there were three, and in some cases, four, other major parties that one could vote for. ...First past the post is a bitch.
[NS]Nation of Quebec
30-11-2008, 05:33
Actually, yes, its bullying. Its bullying when you make EVERY SINGLE BILL a confidence matter. Its bullying when there are 43 confidence measures within a single year, all because Harper knows he won't win those votes if they're regular votes.
Harper had a great chance to gain a mandate by helping to fix the economy, and instead the VERY FIRST bill his government comes up with is this attempt to decapitate the opposition parties. Harper is a bully, and I can't wait to see him lose.

It's not bullying regardless of how many times you call it that. It's simply leveling the playing field. As I said, the Conservatives would be the ones losing the most money. It's not their fault if the opposition mismanaged their own money. I bet if the Liberals were the ones in power and the Conservatives were in the Liberal's place you wouldn't be calling it bullying. You'd probably be singing the Liberal's praises in their efforts to punish, the big, mean, and evil Conservatives.

The program should be cut regardless of who's in power and what opposition decides to bitch about it. Why should my tax money go towards a party that I didn't even support or vote for? If you want things to be fair without any so-called 'bullying', then the program needs to be cut all together so the taxpayers' money goes to more useful causes like healthcare or the economy instead of some greedy politicians' pockets.
CanuckHeaven
30-11-2008, 06:05
Nation of Quebec;14259380']It's not bullying regardless of how many times you call it that. It's simply leveling the playing field. As I said, the Conservatives would be the ones losing the most money. It's not their fault if the opposition mismanaged their own money. I bet if the Liberals were the ones in power and the Conservatives were in the Liberal's place you wouldn't be calling it bullying. You'd probably be singing the Liberal's praises in their efforts to punish, the big, mean, and evil Conservatives.

The program should be cut regardless of who's in power and what opposition decides to bitch about it. Why should my tax money go towards a party that I didn't even support or vote for? If you want things to be fair without any so-called 'bullying', then the program needs to be cut all together so the taxpayers' money goes to more useful causes like healthcare or the economy instead of some greedy politicians' pockets.
Conservatives know how to budget? Conservatives are fiscally responsible? NOT!!

Tories blamed for coming deficits (http://www.dose.ca/music/story.html?id=37e84a85-2ccb-4309-9a0e-cd3dde432de2)

OTTAWA - Parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page told MPs Thursday that Canada's deficit next year could be as high as $13 billion and that Conservative government decisions to cut the GST and raise government spending are to blame, not global economic events.

"The weak fiscal performance to date is largely attributable to previous policy decisions as opposed to weakened economic conditions," Page wrote in his first report to parliamentarians on the government's economic and fiscal position.

Page concluded Ottawa could run a deficit as high as $13.8 billion next year, in 2009-10. Deficits could remain higher than $11 billion each year through to 2013, adding nearly $50-billion to Canada's debt over the next five years.

Page provided a range of deficit scenarios for MPs. His most optimistic scenario shows Ottawa with a surplus of $1.3 billion next year and a surplus that would grow to $11.8 billion by 2013. What he described as his "average" scenario has deficits of $3.9 billion and $1.4 billion for next year and the year after that before Ottawa returns to the black.

But in a briefing with reporters, Page said he believes the most likely outcome "would tend towards the lower scenario," in which the deficit could be greater than $13 billion next year.

Page's report gave Prime Minister Stephen Harper's political opponents fresh ammunition as they stepped up attacks on the Conservative's ability to manage the federal treasury.
Smoke and mirrors and outright lies don't cut it!!
CanuckHeaven
30-11-2008, 06:09
More:

Policies, not crisis seen causing Canada deficit (http://money.aol.ca/article/policies-not-crisis-seen-causing-canada-deficit/428003/)

OTTAWA, Nov 20 (Reuters) - The Canadian government will run budget deficits for the first time in over a decade as the economy slides into a mild recession, the new parliamentary budget officer predicted on Thursday.

The gloomy outlook provided by Kevin Page, the budget officer, provided ammunition to the opposition Liberals, who accused Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper of irresponsible spending and poor economic stewardship.

"The most interesting point was the statement in black and white that this deficit is not because of a global economic situation but its entirely because of actions taken by the Harper government," said Liberal legislator John McCallum.

"Its a made-in-Canada Stephen Harper deficit," he said.
And who was responsible for those surpluses for the past 10 years? The Liberals.
Ki Baratan
30-11-2008, 07:32
Nation of Quebec;14259380']It's not bullying regardless of how many times you call it that. It's simply leveling the playing field. As I said, the Conservatives would be the ones losing the most money. It's not their fault if the opposition mismanaged their own money. I bet if the Liberals were the ones in power and the Conservatives were in the Liberal's place you wouldn't be calling it bullying. You'd probably be singing the Liberal's praises in their efforts to punish, the big, mean, and evil Conservatives.

The program should be cut regardless of who's in power and what opposition decides to bitch about it. Why should my tax money go towards a party that I didn't even support or vote for? If you want things to be fair without any so-called 'bullying', then the program needs to be cut all together so the taxpayers' money goes to more useful causes like healthcare or the economy instead of some greedy politicians' pockets.

If the Liberals were stupid enough to ignore an economic recession in order to decapitate the Conservatives, I'd be yelling just as loudly for them to be replaces, because this isn't responsible governing, this is bullshit designed to make Canada a single-party nation, and I won't fucking tolerate it from any political party, so how DARE you accuse me of partisanship, when its your own party MPs who brought this on themselves with their shortsightedness and frank meanspiritedness. The only thing I'd cheer right now is an immediate plan for dealing with the economy, which the Conservatives have already said on the record that they won't have until February 09 at best.

If you ever bother to read the law (unlikely at best) you would understand that each VOTE for the party earns THAT PARTY the $1.95, your vote for the Conservatives does NOT give the Liberals or anyone but the Conservatives money.

Get a grip, lose the partisan sniping, and read up on the actual laws before you start accusing others of partisan complaints.
Nobtook
30-11-2008, 09:22
The problem is that there's a multi-party system in Canada

Yes, and no. A minority government forces it to be a responsible** government. Majority governments can be ridiculous, because then there is nobody to oppose them if they want to do something radical that the rest of the nation opposes... kind of like this bill to cut funding to the parties. Sure, the Conservatives MAY be losing the most money in total, but it's not going to cripple them like it will cripple say, the Liberals. If Harper had a majority government right now, he'd be wiping out his opponents with this bill and nobody could really do anything about it.
Now, if only the parties could all cooperate (ya, like THAT is ever going to happen!), then maybe they would be able to comprimise about certain things, and at least TRY to make everyone happy. :rolleyes:


**responsible in the sense that it has someone to answer to... doesn't necessarily mean they BEHAVE responsibly :P
FreeSatania
30-11-2008, 12:31
I'm not against minority governments at all -- but harper runs this one as if it were a majority. It's a weird system we have but the opposition parties absolutely have the right to form a coalition if they feel they can not deal with Harper. (We've had one before)

As far as how long this coalition will last? I don't know... While I don't think having the Bloc involved is a disgrace (their members were elected too) - I don't think it's a very stable situation. This new coalition could fall at the drop of a Hat.
Fighter4u
30-11-2008, 15:35
Nation of Quebec;14258710']Didn't you see the CTV interview he did? He was asked a simple question three times and he kept on asking for a do-over and one of his aides even had to explain the question to him. You don't get do-overs in the real world once you're Prime Minister. I have no problems with having a French PM, but I do have problems with an incompetent one.


Wow. Put Obama in for Dion and that is basically what the Repblcians were doing to Obama for the past year. Making up BS issues to drawn attention away from the real issues.

Harper is a bully and cares only about one thing. Power. And he do anything to get it.
FreeSatania
01-12-2008, 00:03
Well more and more keeps leaking out about the new proposed coalition:

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2008/11/30/7585241.html

Jack Layton (Conference Call Transcript) " ...this will be an NDP-Liberal coalition, which is supported by the Bloc, with policy ideas that the coalition is bringing forward. Okay? And that's going to be helpful to you in your dealing with those that have concerns, because they, you can see where Harper's going here, he's going to say it's the socialists and the separatists and the opportunists getting together. ..."

And incidentally nothing about a change in liberal Leadership ... So far that idea seems to be nothing but speculation by the media.
Veblenia
01-12-2008, 04:01
A deal has been reached..... (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/30/canada-coalition.html)

Personally, I'm disappointed Jack didn't get deputy PM, and I can only see this coalition ending in a bloodletting. But compared to the Tory trajectory, this is very good news.
CanuckHeaven
01-12-2008, 06:01
A deal has been reached..... (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/30/canada-coalition.html)

Personally, I'm disappointed Jack didn't get deputy PM, and I can only see this coalition ending in a bloodletting. But compared to the Tory trajectory, this is very good news.
One part of me wants the opposition to dispose of the Harper Tories mean spirited approach to democracy, and the other part of me wants to see the Tories take it on the chin as they start to rack up large deficits.

Logically, this government, as is, is going to fail, so it is better for a coalition to step in now!!
Veblenia
01-12-2008, 06:14
Logically, this government, as is, is going to fail, so it is better for a coalition to step in now!!

Oh, I agree. The Tories neither understand how to deal with the economic crisis, nor do they show the faintest interest in/understanding of how to build consensus in a minority Parliament. This crap might still play in Alberta, but most of the rest of the country has long repudiated it.

I had to laugh, though, when I read this coalition deal was supposed to last two and a half years. I'm giving it until August. Hopefully that'll be long enough for the Tory graybeards to hang Harper after he's called to the carpet to explain this little stunt of his.
Mikesburg
01-12-2008, 14:46
While I think Harper has brought this on himself, I think that now that he's backed down on the more controversial elements of his 'fiscal plan', the opposition parties should be backing down too, despite how much the politicos amongst us might be fascinated with the prospect of a Lib-NDP coalition (which will only get things done if the BQ gives it their seal of approval.) I doubt the majority of the electorate would be as pleased.

Think about this: why would Canadians be happy with a change of government, when it's obvious that naked ambition and mean-spirited policies are being espoused by both sides of Parliament. If the coalition was led by someone Canadians liked, meaning most definitely NOT Stephane Dion, and wasn't reliant on a separatist party to pass Everything, it might be more palatable to Canadians.

As much as most people on this forum despise Harper, he returned to Parliament with increased representation... and just short of his majority. By defenition, he should be running the show, as long as he co-operates with the opposition. He's learning that he can't play rough like he did in the last session of the House. While the economy is in downturn, Canadians don't want to worry about another shuffling of chairs in Parliament.

I also think that a Lib-NDP power grab (and let's face it, that's what this is turning into) might be damaging to Confederation. First of all, the western provinces, particularly Alberta, will feel outraged by this. The seeds of separation are already out there. Their republican (small-r) sentiments would be enraged by a 'back room' deal to remove their favourite son. When you combine this with a government that would need support from a Quebec Separatist government, I think we're courting disaster. Hard financial times are the perfect time for formenting dissent, and all it takes is one planned no-confidence vote for the BQ to shut down the new Parliament, and steer a pro-separation agenda again. And this time, you might find a western Canada that would be happy to leave Confederation too.

Am I reading too much into this? Probably. I just think it's a time for cooler heads to prevail here. Our national economy and integrity demand stability and token gestures of co-operation, not damaging partisan sniping.
Megaloria
01-12-2008, 16:25
Alberta may just have to console itself with a long swim in the money vault.
CanuckHeaven
01-12-2008, 16:52
While I think Harper has brought this on himself, I think that now that he's backed down on the more controversial elements of his 'fiscal plan', the opposition parties should be backing down too, despite how much the politicos amongst us might be fascinated with the prospect of a Lib-NDP coalition (which will only get things done if the BQ gives it their seal of approval.) I doubt the majority of the electorate would be as pleased.

Think about this: why would Canadians be happy with a change of government, when it's obvious that naked ambition and mean-spirited policies are being espoused by both sides of Parliament. If the coalition was led by someone Canadians liked, meaning most definitely NOT Stephane Dion, and wasn't reliant on a separatist party to pass Everything, it might be more palatable to Canadians.

As much as most people on this forum despise Harper, he returned to Parliament with increased representation... and just short of his majority. By defenition, he should be running the show, as long as he co-operates with the opposition. He's learning that he can't play rough like he did in the last session of the House. While the economy is in downturn, Canadians don't want to worry about another shuffling of chairs in Parliament.

I also think that a Lib-NDP power grab (and let's face it, that's what this is turning into) might be damaging to Confederation. First of all, the western provinces, particularly Alberta, will feel outraged by this. The seeds of separation are already out there. Their republican (small-r) sentiments would be enraged by a 'back room' deal to remove their favourite son. When you combine this with a government that would need support from a Quebec Separatist government, I think we're courting disaster. Hard financial times are the perfect time for formenting dissent, and all it takes is one planned no-confidence vote for the BQ to shut down the new Parliament, and steer a pro-separation agenda again. And this time, you might find a western Canada that would be happy to leave Confederation too.

Am I reading too much into this? Probably. I just think it's a time for cooler heads to prevail here. Our national economy and integrity demand stability and token gestures of co-operation, not damaging partisan sniping.
You are reading too much into this. Harper lied to us during the election and during his acceptance speech. He lied to us about the deficit, and he now has lied about working with the opposition to make this government work. Time is up. He is willing to play silly bugger this soon after the election, he needs to go.

Remember that 63% of the electors did NOT vote for Harper. He should have realized that before making this monumental blunder.

Besides, the coalition is bringing on a team of 4 wisemen:

Coalition would be guided by all-star economic council (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&date=true&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081130%2fconservative_budget_081201)

CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife reported Monday that the council would comprise Frank McKenna, Paul Martin, John Manley and Roy Romanow.

"This is a way to assure Canadians the economy would be managed properly," Fife told CTV Newsnet.

The panel of "wise men" would help the new government navigate the current global economic turbulence, he said.

The list includes three Liberals and one New Democrat, though none currently hold elected office.

McKenna is a former Liberal premier of New Brunswick and ambassador to the U.S., Martin is a former Liberal finance minister and prime minister, Manley is a former Liberal finance minister and foreign affairs minister, and Romanow is a former New Democrat premier of Saskatchewan.
Bring it on!!
Megaloria
01-12-2008, 16:54
You are reading too much into this. Harper lied to us during the election and during his acceptance speech. He lied to us about the deficit, and he now has lied about working with the opposition to make this government work. Time is up. He is willing to play silly bugger this soon after the election, he needs to go.

Remember that 63% of the electors did NOT vote for Harper. He should have realized that before making this monumental blunder.

Besides, the coalition is bringing on a team of 4 wisemen:

Coalition would be guided by all-star economic council (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&date=true&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081130%2fconservative_budget_081201)


Bring it on!!

They got the Frank! Here I thought he was keeping out of politics.
Veblenia
01-12-2008, 18:50
Besides, the coalition is bringing on a team of 4 wisemen:

Coalition would be guided by all-star economic council (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&date=true&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081130%2fconservative_budget_081201)



This doesn't inspire much confidence for me. Why is this deal looking less and less like a progressive coalition, and more and more like a shotgun wedding to the right flank of the LPC?
Mikesburg
01-12-2008, 19:42
This doesn't inspire much confidence for me. Why is this deal looking less and less like a progressive coalition, and more and more like a shotgun wedding to the right flank of the LPC?

Same here. We've always had a PM leading the party with the most seats. And now, we're talking about chucking that, to have 4 unelected people run the country. I'm sure the electorate will love that...

The Liberals would be better off to keep the threat of a coalition government to keep the Cons from stepping over the line, while they bide their time to pick a new leader, and get a proper mandate from the electorate. Everyone's waiting for a real Liberal Leader to come along anyway. If Stephane Dion takes power this way, Canadians are NOT going to be happy that the Liberal party will choose the next PM after the fact. That tactic destroyed the Progressive Conservatives when Kim Campbell was hoisted on a Canadian public who didn't feel they had a say on who their PM was.
Fighter4u
01-12-2008, 21:03
Are you guys kidding me? We aren't like the states. We don't vote to vote in a PM. Were supposed to vote for the best rep. for our riding in the party that we think can best represent our riding intrest and that party in turn either already has or eventally gets a leader who they think can lead the party and serve it seats(ridings they won in) and such people who voted for them, best intrestes.

But frankly,the only province that does that anymore is Newfoundland. And yes we didn't vote Liberal/Green/NDP because Danny Williams(our priemer) said so. We did it because Harper forced our reps to do as he said,screw whatever they thought was best for their ridings. Which got us mad.

Nevermind when Harper in the House of Commons and said shit about us Newfoundlanders, Fabian Manning sat their next to Harper when he could had made up some excause and lefted. The same Manning who stood up to Williams did not stand up to Harper and that costed him big. Which led to Harper being shut out of Newfoundland & Labrador.
Veblenia
02-12-2008, 06:26
If Stephane Dion takes power this way, Canadians are NOT going to be happy that the Liberal party will choose the next PM after the fact. That tactic destroyed the Progressive Conservatives when Kim Campbell was hoisted on a Canadian public who didn't feel they had a say on who their PM was.

That's not really what I'm concerned about, people have become Prime Minister via party succession rather than election in the past without too much negative press. Frankly, that was the least of the PCs worries when Kim Campbell was elected Chief Scapegoat for the Mulrouney era.

I'm more concerned about the NDP lending legitimacy to a right-leaning Liberal government that will deliver Paul Martin neoliberalism at a time when we need it the least. The NDP has negotiated itself very little leverage in a government that is offering those same old promises that the Martin-era Liberals reneged on in the past (ie: national child care). And who holds all the fiscal cards? Martinite Liberals.
The Romulan Republic
02-12-2008, 06:38
That's not really what I'm concerned about, people have become Prime Minister via party succession rather than election in the past without too much negative press. Frankly, that was the least of the PCs worries when Kim Campbell was elected Chief Scapegoat for the Mulrouney era.

I'm more concerned about the NDP lending legitimacy to a right-leaning Liberal government that will deliver Paul Martin neoliberalism at a time when we need it the least. The NDP has negotiated itself very little leverage in a government that is offering those same old promises that the Martin-era Liberals reneged on in the past (ie: national child care). And who holds all the fiscal cards? Martinite Liberals.

The NDP lending legitimacy to the Liberals? Which country are you talking about again?
Veblenia
02-12-2008, 06:46
The NDP lending legitimacy to the Liberals? Which country are you talking about again?

:rolleyes:

This doesn't seem like something I should have to explain, but....

Given the current seat count in the HoC, there is no way the Liberals could claim to form an alternative government that had any hope of retaining Parliamentary confidence. If Stephane Dion, on his own, wrote to the Governor General and asked her to let the Liberals form a government after the non-confidence vote she would roll her eyes, dissolve Parliament and call an election.

With concrete support from the NDP, and tacit support from the Bloc, the Liberals claim to government is stronger. By entering into a written agreement with the Liberals, the NDP caucus is providing legitimacy to the Liberals claim to be able to retain Parliamentary confidence without resorting to a general election.
The Romulan Republic
02-12-2008, 06:54
:rolleyes:

This doesn't seem like something I should have to explain, but....

Given the current seat count in the HoC, there is no way the Liberals could claim to form an alternative government that had any hope of retaining Parliamentary confidence. If Stephane Dion, on his own, wrote to the Governor General and asked her to let the Liberals form a government after the non-confidence vote she would roll her eyes, dissolve Parliament and call an election.

With concrete support from the NDP, and tacit support from the Bloc, the Liberals claim to government is stronger. By entering into a written agreement with the Liberals, the NDP caucus is providing legitimacy to the Liberals claim to be able to retain Parliamentary confidence without resorting to a general election.

I was thinking more along the lines of legitimacy, or perhaps a better term would be respectability in the eyes of the electorate. We clearly were referring to different things.

However, you are probably correct in that the Liberals need NDP support to make this fly politically.
Mikesburg
02-12-2008, 14:18
I'm more concerned about the NDP lending legitimacy to a right-leaning Liberal government that will deliver Paul Martin neoliberalism at a time when we need it the least. The NDP has negotiated itself very little leverage in a government that is offering those same old promises that the Martin-era Liberals reneged on in the past (ie: national child care). And who holds all the fiscal cards? Martinite Liberals.

I think it's a good play for the NDP. Being part of a coalition government is the stuff of wet dreams for that party. If the electorate can see NDP in power at the fed level, voters might be less inclined to vote Liberal to shut out the PCs, knowing that a coalition is a viable alternative.

TheL Libs, on the other hand, need not be so hasty.
Veblenia
02-12-2008, 15:17
I think it's a good play for the NDP. Being part of a coalition government is the stuff of wet dreams for that party. If the electorate can see NDP in power at the fed level, voters might be less inclined to vote Liberal to shut out the PCs, knowing that a coalition is a viable alternative.


I think Jack and crew will have to go back to their base in a year's time and explain why none of their core policies were implemented in their first shot at government, over the noisome cries of the Liberals claiming this experiment shows it's time the "left" was united.

I'm still supportive of the coalition, against my better judgement, but so far I'm not seeing much of an opportunity for the NDP to be anything more than a rubber stamp for two more years of right-Liberal governance. :(
Gift-of-god
02-12-2008, 16:12
Layton has laready proven himself at implementing NDP policies at the federal level even when they were less powerful. I think he'll be quite successful at enacting at least some of the policies that NDP supporters will want.

I like the novelty of it. I like the way it introduces a new dynamic into our sytem. The possibility of coalition acts as a balance to the first past the post sytem from now on. Minority governments are going to be about making partnerships, as lopng as the threat of a coalition hangs over the HoC. Another layer of accountability.
Veblenia
02-12-2008, 16:20
Layton has laready proven himself at implementing NDP policies at the federal level even when they were less powerful. I think he'll be quite successful at enacting at least some of the policies that NDP supporters will want.

I hope you're right. I admit I'm a natural-born pessimist.

I like the novelty of it. I like the way it introduces a new dynamic into our sytem. The possibility of coalition acts as a balance to the first past the post sytem from now on. Minority governments are going to be about making partnerships, as lopng as the threat of a coalition hangs over the HoC. Another layer of accountability.

Gratuitous link to national pro-coalition rallies (http://www.makeparliamentwork.com/makeparliamentwork/rally-listing)
Hotwife
02-12-2008, 16:54
Question: Why not a vote of no confidence, and then hold new elections?
Veblenia
02-12-2008, 17:10
Question: Why not a vote of no confidence, and then hold new elections?

Because we held an election six weeks ago?

There's nothing fundamentally ungovernable about the Parliament we elected in October, it just takes a reordering of the constellation of power within it. The Conservatives showed no interest in or capacity to work with their fellow Parliamentarians; if a government can be constructed out of a broader base of our elected representatives then why not give them an opportunity to govern? The worst that can happen is that too will fall, and we'll have new elections anyway.
Hotwife
02-12-2008, 17:13
Because we held an election six weeks ago?

There's nothing fundamentally ungovernable about the Parliament we elected in October, it just takes a reordering of the constellation of power within it. The Conservatives showed no interest in or capacity to work with their fellow Parliamentarians; if a government can be constructed out of a broader base of our elected representatives then why not give them an opportunity to govern? The worst that can happen is that too will fall, and we'll have new elections anyway.

I think you're not holding another election because you know the count wouldn't change.

Unlike the US, where people were actually upset enough to vote for change, it doesn't look like enough Canadians are upset enough to vote for change.

I think it would have been better, in the current economic situation, to allow Harper to fail, take the blame (it would probably be a matter of months from now), and hold new elections.

Now that the new coalition takes power, they get to take the blame for what happens next. Bad timing.
Gift-of-god
02-12-2008, 17:18
Elections are very expensive. In this time of financial crisis, we do not need to spend money on two elections in six months.
Veblenia
02-12-2008, 17:21
I think you're not holding another election because you know the count wouldn't change.

Unlike the US, where people were actually upset enough to vote for change, it doesn't look like enough Canadians are upset enough to vote for change.

I think it would have been better, in the current economic situation, to allow Harper to fail, take the blame (it would probably be a matter of months from now), and hold new elections.

Now that the new coalition takes power, they get to take the blame for what happens next. Bad timing.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion. Fact is there are three parties in the House of Commons, who hold a majority of the seats and were elected by a majority of Canadians, who are willing to work together on issues they hold in common. One party decided they were better off trying to force through divisive policies that didn't have House support by threatening an election *nobody* wanted if they didn't get their way.

Two styles of governance. I know which one I prefer.
Kryozerkia
02-12-2008, 22:04
*drools on command at the thought of NDP having some kind of power*

I totally support this coalition! ^_^
Neesika
02-12-2008, 22:36
The Law Faculty is like an ant-hill after some kid kicked it over right now. It's fucking glorious.
Neo Art
02-12-2008, 22:47
I think it would have been better, in the current economic situation, to allow Harper to fail, take the blame (it would probably be a matter of months from now), and hold new elections.

And I just can NOT believe that all those experienced members of the Canadian government didn't call you up to ask what they should do!

They must have lost your number.
Hotwife
02-12-2008, 22:55
And I just can NOT believe that all those experienced members of the Canadian government didn't call you up to ask what they should do!

They must have lost your number.

Oh, I guess I should always call you to ask what to post. I guess I lost your number.
Neesika
02-12-2008, 22:58
Kiss and make up.
Hotwife
02-12-2008, 22:59
Kiss and make up.

**smooch**

yeeech!
Neesika
02-12-2008, 23:12
**smooch**

yeeech!

He slipped you some tongue?
Hotwife
02-12-2008, 23:13
He slipped you some tongue?

I think he's been licking his own balls.
Neesika
02-12-2008, 23:14
???
Mikesburg
02-12-2008, 23:15
*drools on command at the thought of NDP having some kind of power*

I totally support this coalition! ^_^

And my 'wet dream theory' is just confirmed! :tongue:
Kahless Khan
02-12-2008, 23:18
I gave a vote for my MP because of his advertised platform and proposals. Had there been plans to form a coalition with the NDP, BQ and technically Greens, I would have voted differently.

Since when did my vote become a blank-checkbook :confused: I'm sure this would provoke enough Canadian voters into actually going to the polls should there another election, whether they support this new "party" or not.
Chumblywumbly
02-12-2008, 23:19
Since when did my vote become a blank-checkbook
Since you started living in a quasi-democratic representative system.
Kryozerkia
02-12-2008, 23:32
And my 'wet dream theory' is just confirmed! :tongue:

The best part is, it's constitutional, and Stevie can cry all way home wit his tail between his legs. Humbled.

I don't know why people are up in arms. I am curious to see democracy. I never thought I would see it, and damn, I was wrong. It's refreshing to see politicians working together. Partisan politics are bieng put aside for something greater. It takes a team of skilled spin doctors to win an election but it takes a person of honour to put their differences aside and work with someone they may not normally side with.
Veblenia
03-12-2008, 05:51
The best part is, it's constitutional, and Stevie can cry all way home wit his tail between his legs. Humbled.


Oh, I imagine the pack of jackals he runs with will turn on him long before he gets all the way home.....
:D
CanuckHeaven
03-12-2008, 07:00
The first poll pn the proposed coalition:

Canadians split on removing Tories from power: poll (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&date=true&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081202%2fpoll_future_081202)

In the midst of a coalition showdown, Canadians are deeply divided on whether the Conservatives deserve to stay in power, with 35 per cent saying the party should continue to govern and 40 per cent wanting change, according to an Angus Reid Strategies poll for CTV News.
Go figure, we have 25% of Canadians with NO opinion. Fairly sad!!
Mikesburg
03-12-2008, 15:11
The best part is, it's constitutional, and Stevie can cry all way home wit his tail between his legs. Humbled.

I don't know why people are up in arms. I am curious to see democracy. I never thought I would see it, and damn, I was wrong. It's refreshing to see politicians working together. Partisan politics are bieng put aside for something greater. It takes a team of skilled spin doctors to win an election but it takes a person of honour to put their differences aside and work with someone they may not normally side with.

It's constitutional, but the GG still has to decide whether it's a wiser course of action then returning to the polls. She may just decide to tell the coalition to go to the polls and run as a coalition, thereby letting a little steam out of a public that's already getting steamed up about this.

And if politicians were really 'working together', they would have set aside their differences and worked through the current minority parliament. This isn't 'working together', this is Ides of March out with the long knives tactics. It's partisan opportunism, and the electorate is going to bite back.
Gift-of-god
03-12-2008, 15:40
It's constitutional, but the GG still has to decide whether it's a wiser course of action then returning to the polls. She may just decide to tell the coalition to go to the polls and run as a coalition, thereby letting a little steam out of a public that's already getting steamed up about this.

And if politicians were really 'working together', they would have set aside their differences and worked through the current minority parliament. This isn't 'working together', this is Ides of March out with the long knives tactics. It's partisan opportunism, and the electorate is going to bite back.

There are reasons to not have an election, though. The money involved is a big one, as is the simple fact that most Canadians are a bit electioned out, and some of us still have to deal with a provincial election. If the electorate is steamed because they feel they have no say, what you need (and here I get Machavellian) is some way of making the electorate feel as if they got an election without actually spending the time and money required to do so. I don't know how this would be done. Another referendum asking if we should allow coalition governments to form after an election?

Yes. This is the time of the long knives. But it all comes back to Harper talking about a deficit budget with an economic stimulus package and then turning around and making a budget that effectively emasculates the opposition and lets employers pay women less than men.
Mikesburg
03-12-2008, 17:14
There are reasons to not have an election, though. The money involved is a big one, as is the simple fact that most Canadians are a bit electioned out, and some of us still have to deal with a provincial election. If the electorate is steamed because they feel they have no say, what you need (and here I get Machavellian) is some way of making the electorate feel as if they got an election without actually spending the time and money required to do so. I don't know how this would be done. Another referendum asking if we should allow coalition governments to form after an election?

Yes. This is the time of the long knives. But it all comes back to Harper talking about a deficit budget with an economic stimulus package and then turning around and making a budget that effectively emasculates the opposition and lets employers pay women less than men.

Oh, I definitely blame Harper for this, but I think the Libs are taking a poison pill here. As for another mechanism for the public to decide, referendums use the same apparatus as elections, so it amounts to the same thing. And as much as people complain about the cost of elections, it's still economic stimulus, the sort of thing that a Lib-NDP coalition is complaining is lacking in the Conservative 'fiscal plan'.

But I hear you on election fatigue. I feel kind of sorry for the Governor General. She was put in power by the Liberals, and she's being asked to endorse a rather shaky coalition. I think she'll endorse it, for however long it lasts, and we'll be back at the polls again anyway.
Gift-of-god
03-12-2008, 17:27
Like you said before, alienation of the west is a big concern with this. This will have some blowback, no doubt, but I think the additional dynamic introduced by the possibility of coalitions is worth paying that price.

I had the same thought of using elections as stimulus, but I think we need some more long term investment in industry rather than just paying people do some temporary work. More bang for the buck if you can pay someone to build something that will generate more economic stimulus.
Gift-of-god
03-12-2008, 17:38
Every time Harper or one of his cronies talks about how the Bloc are horrible people who want to destroy Canada, he actually makes the Quebecois more likely to separate and less likely to vote Conservative. Another tactic that can only increase alienation.
East Canuck
03-12-2008, 17:43
Like you said before, alienation of the west is a big concern with this. This will have some blowback, no doubt, but I think the additional dynamic introduced by the possibility of coalitions is worth paying that price.

I had the same thought of using elections as stimulus, but I think we need some more long term investment in industry rather than just paying people do some temporary work. More bang for the buck if you can pay someone to build something that will generate more economic stimulus.

Honestly, the west seems pretty-well alienated as it is. How many liberals hails from the west? Even "liberal" BC has elected more conservative than before.
Neesika
03-12-2008, 17:44
Every time Harper or one of his cronies talks about how the Bloc are horrible people who want to destroy Canada, he actually makes the Quebecois more likely to separate and less likely to vote Conservative. Another tactic that can only increase alienation.

It also makes him look like a moron, because he proposed an aliance with the Bloc way back when to try to fuck with Paul Martin.

I have heard people here who I used to think were sane talking about Western seperatism in serious terms...and all I can do is laugh and laugh and laugh...

People act like separation is automatically a bad thing. I say bring it on motherfuckers...and watch the aboriginal nations wake completely up.
Neesika
03-12-2008, 17:46
Honestly, the west seems pretty-well alienated as it is. How many liberals hails from the west? Even "liberal" BC has elected more conservative than before.

Yes, but Alberta, as an example, is a Conservative stronghold, and we have completely bought into 'the Liberals will steal our oil money to bail out Ontario's auto industry'. People are fucking going on about the NEP like it happened yesterday...it's surreal.
East Canuck
03-12-2008, 17:50
Yes, but Alberta, as an example, is a Conservative stronghold, and we have completely bought into 'the Liberals will steal our oil money to bail out Ontario's auto industry'. People are fucking going on about the NEP like it happened yesterday...it's surreal.

I stopped hoping for a liberal Alberta the day they elected King Ralph for the third time.

BC is another matter. How can this weed-growing paradise become conservative all of a sudden?
Mikesburg
03-12-2008, 17:52
We'll need some creative person to draw up the new map of Canada for us.
Yootopia
03-12-2008, 17:53
BC is another matter. How can this weed-growing paradise become conservative all of a sudden?
The immigrants from Hong Kong tipping the balance a bit?
Gift-of-god
03-12-2008, 18:19
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN0332574820081203

Coalition has released a stimulus package.

Harper will address the nation tonight. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081203.wPOLcoalition1203/BNStory/politics/home?cid=al_gam_mostview)
Iniika
03-12-2008, 18:30
Honestly, the west seems pretty-well alienated as it is. How many liberals hails from the west? Even "liberal" BC has elected more conservative than before.

*raises hand?*
Neesika
03-12-2008, 18:35
Sorry, distracted by big tits in a nice red bra peeking through a boyish, plaid shirt. Very nice.

Okay right. Harper to speak tonight, fuck I can't wait...think I'll have some hotwings and beer for this!
Iniika
03-12-2008, 18:39
The immigrants from Hong Kong tipping the balance a bit?

This.
Yootopia
03-12-2008, 18:44
This.
I am so wise ^__^
Skaladora
03-12-2008, 19:02
Every time Harper or one of his cronies talks about how the Bloc are horrible people who want to destroy Canada, he actually makes the Quebecois more likely to separate and less likely to vote Conservative. Another tactic that can only increase alienation.
Thank God, some Canadians (like you) are still sane.

Seriously, the Anti-Bloc rhetoric has got to stop. Whenever I hear shit spouted about TEH EBIL SEPARATISTS I become less and less interested to stay part of a Country who sometimes seem like it doesn't give a shit about respecting the people my province chooses to elect to represent them in Ottawa. I think like that, and I never even voted for the Bloc.
East Canuck
03-12-2008, 19:18
Sorry, distracted by big tits in a nice red bra peeking through a boyish, plaid shirt. Very nice.

Okay right. Harper to speak tonight, fuck I can't wait...think I'll have some hotwings and beer for this!

Pictures please?
Gift-of-god
03-12-2008, 19:25
Do we know who came up with the idea for a coalition?
Saige Dragon
03-12-2008, 19:55
I stopped hoping for a liberal Alberta the day they elected King Ralph for the third time.

Please continue to hope. I live here.

Can someone, however, please explain to me why so many are calling this coalition a coup? It isn't usurping the government (the House of Commons, the Senate, etc...), nor the leader of Canada, (the Queen).

The Conservative party just happens to hold the most seats by one party in the HoC and Harper just happens to be the leader of the party. That really only makes him lead administrator if anything.

Hell that isn't even true. Before this whole shebang there was still an Opposition in the House which happened to hold more seats than the Conservative Party and I'm pretty sure Dion is the head dude over there. All I can see is that the Opposition members are doing exactly what they were elected to do, which is represent their constituents and provide a check and balance against the ruling party. In the case of a majority gov't the Opposition really only does the former and then in place of the latter provide argument for argument sake. But this isn't a majority gov't, it is minority gov't, therefore the Opposition is free to band together and it should damn well be expected. It comes with the territory.

If Canadians don't want another election, if Canadians don't want a coalition gov't made up of commies and separatist frogs then maybe more than 59% should have shown up to polls a month and half ago to to elect the gov't that they actually wanted. ;)
CanuckHeaven
03-12-2008, 21:04
This activist (neo-con?) wants to label this an act of sedition or a coup-d'etat:

How to stop seditious Liberal/NDP/Bloc Coalition (http://crux-of-the-matter.com/)

And is even proposing this:

Conservative MP’s would resign en masse? (http://crux-of-the-matter.com/2008/12/02/conservative-mps-would-resign-en-masse/)

You should read some of the comments....they are hilarious!!
Saige Dragon
03-12-2008, 21:14
This activist (neo-con?) wants to label this an act of sedition or a coup-d'etat:

How to stop seditious Liberal/NDP/Bloc Coalition (http://crux-of-the-matter.com/)

And is even proposing this:

Conservative MP’s would resign en masse? (http://crux-of-the-matter.com/2008/12/02/conservative-mps-would-resign-en-masse/)

You should read some of the comments....they are hilarious!!

Good, that would mean no more Rona Ambrose and her bluegrass festival. Well the festival can stay, she can go however.
CanuckHeaven
03-12-2008, 21:19
From the gold mine:

(2004 Letter to Gov. Gen. Adrienne Clarkson):
“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.

(From the letter to then-Governor General Adrienne Clarkson signed by all three opposition leaders including LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION, Stephen Harper!)
(September 9, 2004)
Priceless mais oui?
Gift-of-god
03-12-2008, 21:25
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/547490

Text of the coalition agreement.
FreeSatania
03-12-2008, 22:03
BC is another matter. How can this weed-growing paradise become conservative all of a sudden?

I don't know, maybe it's because the faggot bashing neo-nazi rednecks aren't high and don't forget to vote where as the rest of us, well... I voted NDP btw.

Seriously though western alienation is a real problem. I blame the Liberals under Chretien -- BC was struggling and yet the Libs kept taking and taking.


If Canadians don't want another election, if Canadians don't want a coalition gov't made up of commies and separatist frogs then maybe more than 59% should have shown up to polls a month and half ago to to elect the gov't that they actually wanted. ;)

I actually think that voter turnout was worse for the left. Seriously, half of the people I know in BC didn't vote. All of them are pot heads, and most of them probably would have voted for the NDP!

I think pot should be legal but *seriously* we should be allowed Tazer anyone who doesn't vote!
Mikesburg
03-12-2008, 22:41
[url]Coalition has released a stimulus package.


That just sounds dirty.

Of course, if Harper had a bigger package...
Neesika
03-12-2008, 22:44
That just sounds dirty.

Of course, if Harper had a bigger package...

I'm ashamed that I didn't immediately find an innuendo in the original statement.
Tmutarakhan
03-12-2008, 23:22
Harper will address the nation tonight.
__________________
...at the gay bar!
Seldom has a sig worked so well with the post.
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 02:20
That just sounds dirty.

Of course, if Harper had a bigger package...

Sexcellent!

Seldom has a sig worked so well with the post.

I mentally add those words to every post I make.
Nova Magna Germania
04-12-2008, 02:23
Thank God, some Canadians (like you) are still sane.

Seriously, the Anti-Bloc rhetoric has got to stop. Whenever I hear shit spouted about TEH EBIL SEPARATISTS I become less and less interested to stay part of a Country who sometimes seem like it doesn't give a shit about respecting the people my province chooses to elect to represent them in Ottawa. I think like that, and I never even voted for the Bloc.

It's your decision but I'd rather have u guys stay. :wink:
Hayteria
04-12-2008, 02:49
I actually think that voter turnout was worse for the left. Seriously, half of the people I know in BC didn't vote. All of them are pot heads, and most of them probably would have voted for the NDP!

I think pot should be legal but *seriously* we should be allowed Tazer anyone who doesn't vote!
Why? So that the same people who wanted them to vote are the same people who tazed them? I think many reasons why people wouldn't vote would tend to be reasons why they shouldn't; if not voting indicates that someone is lazy, why would you want them to decide who runs the government? Ironically, I voted NDP myself, but if a more permissive approach towards non-voters holds back my preferred party, then so be it.
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 14:29
Harper expected to ask GG to suspend Parliament (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&date=true&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081203%2fHarper_GG_081204)

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is expected to visit Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean this morning and submit a formal request to have Parliament suspended until late January, in an attempt to prevent a confidence motion that could bring down the government.
From what I understand, if Jean refuses Harper's request, then he will resign. I am looking for more info in that regard.
East Canuck
04-12-2008, 15:09
Harper expected to ask GG to suspend Parliament (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&date=true&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081203%2fHarper_GG_081204)


From what I understand, if Jean refuses Harper's request, then he will resign. I am looking for more info in that regard.

I'm willing to bet 50 bucks that the suspension of government is going to happen.
Mikesburg
04-12-2008, 15:42
I think that's the safe path for the GG. Having been put into power by the Liberals, she can't come across anything other than completely impartial. I'm guessing our MP's have a long Christmas holiday while the rest of us figure out how to come up with some cash to fill our stockings.

I watched the 'leaders' taped statements last night, and I'd have to say I was entertained, if a little disappointed. As soon as Harper's little five minute nothing new segment popped on, I was immediately reminded how much I instinctively dislike him. It's the set of his eyes, or a leer or something that he does.

And Dion was a bit of a joke. His tape was late getting to broadcasters, and at least on CBC, they aired it partway through his speech which was cumbersome, halting and at times somewhat laughable. I don't think it will sit well with a large portion of anglo-canadians. I didn't catch Jack Layton's speech until this morning, but in the end I don't think these speeches will change people's minds.
Kryozerkia
04-12-2008, 15:49
Thank God, some Canadians (like you) are still sane.

Seriously, the Anti-Bloc rhetoric has got to stop. Whenever I hear shit spouted about TEH EBIL SEPARATISTS I become less and less interested to stay part of a Country who sometimes seem like it doesn't give a shit about respecting the people my province chooses to elect to represent them in Ottawa. I think like that, and I never even voted for the Bloc.

What I found amusing, in his speech last night, Harper used the word "separatist" in his English address yet in his French one used "sovereignist".

Personally, whenever I hear shit like that, it makes me want to move to Quebec and vote for the Bloc, and I'm a total New Democrat. Or fail that, make the Ontario First Party (OFP) and try and separate from Canada. Should it win, I'd offer to let Quebec come in, since they're cool and leave the west of Canada and its Conservatives, to rot.
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 16:15
I'm willing to bet 50 bucks that the suspension of government is going to happen.

I think that's the safe path for the GG.
While I am not willing to bet on this, I do believe that the GG should not allow the Conservatives to close down the business of Canada, just to face a certain non confidence motion in January.

She should refuse his request based on that probability. I don't believe that she will sanction another election at this time in that it would probably be the most divisive election in the history of Canada.

The opposition have signed an agreement to work together for at least 18 months and the GG should proceed along those lines.
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 16:27
He asked the GG to prorogue the HoC (http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5hsWCWQwAlsJNxzi0bVvj3XuJ5wlw). She has yet to make a decision.
Kryozerkia
04-12-2008, 17:05
He asked the GG to prorogue the HoC (http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5hsWCWQwAlsJNxzi0bVvj3XuJ5wlw). She has yet to make a decision.

It would be meaningful if his damn government actually accomplished SOMETHING. Alienating the opposition, taunting the opposition, having a throne speech and a budget does not count as something. The latter two are just part of house keeping.
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 17:09
From what I understand, Harper is arguing that because the Throne speech was accepted, the parliament actually sat and for a while gave him the confidence of the house. This would then give him the authority to legally ask for proroguation.

Regardless, I bet the GG has some of the world's best Westminster style constitutional scholars advising her right now.Their understanding is probably loads better than mine.
Mikesburg
04-12-2008, 17:10
While I am not willing to bet on this, I do believe that the GG should not allow the Conservatives to close down the business of Canada, just to face a certain non confidence motion in January.

She should refuse his request based on that probability.

I agree that would be the 'right' thing to do, as acceding to this request based on facing a non-confidence motion would set an ugly precedent. However, I think the 'safe' thing for her to do, personally and both for the current state of national affairs, would be to go with the advice of the PM.
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 17:14
I agree that would be the 'right' thing to do, as acceding to this request based on facing a non-confidence motion would set an ugly precedent. However, I think the 'safe' thing for her to do, personally and both for the current state of national affairs, would be to go with the advice of the PM.

If she makes no decision, does that mean the House sits on Monday?
Neesika
04-12-2008, 17:15
Fuck, he's been in there over an hour...I hope she's tearing him a new asshole! And I hope Peter Hogg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hogg) is sitting in a darkened corner rubbing his hands together.

It would be pretty fucking bad for the GG to prorogue based on the threat of a non-confidence vote...her major function is to ensure that someone has the confidence of the house...if that is impossible, you go to election, not to a freeze out. I understand the 'safety' factor, but to ignore the fact that someone (the coalition) DOES have the confidence of the house, would be profoundly problematic.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 17:16
If she makes no decision, does that mean the House sits on Monday?

Yes. The non-confidence vote would go ahead on Tuesday anyway, and she'd be forced to make a decision.


Harper has one other option...to step down as leader of the Conservatives, fade out of the scene, and hope to sweet fuck that his successor could convince the coalition to accept him.
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 17:18
Don't let Harper 'duck a confidence vote:' former GG (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&date=true&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081204%2fgg_schreyer_081204)

The former governor general who presided over the downfall of the Joe Clark government in 1980 says Governor General Michaelle Jean must not let Prime Minister Stephen Harper "duck a confidence vote."

Ed Schreyer told CTV's Canada AM in an interview aired Thursday morning, just hours before Harper headed to Rideau Hall to meet with Jean, that a government must have the confidence of the House in a parliamentary democracy.

The Tories have not said what Harper's meeting will be about, but political analysts and reporters on Parliament Hill have said they expect the prime minister to ask for a prorogation. If granted, the prorogation would end the current session of Parliament before an expected confidence vote on Monday, one Harper would likely lose.

"Any group that presumes to govern must be willing to face and seek the confidence of Parliament, and it mustn't be evaded and it mustn't be long avoided. I can't put it any more succinctly than that," Schreyer said.

Schreyer then hammered home his point even more clearly and in no uncertain terms.

"I must come back to your use of the words, 'to duck a confidence vote,'" he said responding to a question.

"That must simply not be allowed to happen."

Schreyer has said that Parliament could take a short break over the holidays, but not solely to allow the Harper government avoid a confidence vote.

Schreyer, a former premier of Manitoba who ran federally for the NDP in 2006, was the governor general when former Progressive Conservative prime minister Joe Clark's government was defeated in a confidence vote in 1980.

He said the Office of the Governor General will make decisions based on procedures, traditions and the law. He added that he had and maintains a very high regard for Clark, but he did not immediately grant his request to dissolve Parliament.

"In the event that an alternative group was willing to come forward to form government, I would have felt obliged to grant a commission to form such a government," he said.
Mighty strong words. I agree with the former GG.
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 17:25
The most political decision (to prorogue in the hopes of 'allowing cooler heads to prevail') may not be the most constitutionally correct one (giving the coalition a chance). The resulting blowback in terms of regional alienation has to be considered, even if it has no legal weight.
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 17:30
If she makes no decision, does that mean the House sits on Monday?
She HAS to make a decision. I think her only option is tell Stevie wonder that he needs to go face the music in the HOC.
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 17:35
Sinuhue, your lawyer friend has been retained. (http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/legalpost/archive/2008/12/04/confidence-crisis-opportunity-for-constitutional-lawyers.aspx)
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 17:40
She did it. She said yes. Parliament is prorogued.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081204/GG_decision_081204/20081204?hub=TopStories
Neesika
04-12-2008, 17:40
Sinuhue, your lawyer friend has been retained. (http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/legalpost/archive/2008/12/04/confidence-crisis-opportunity-for-constitutional-lawyers.aspx)

Oooh, I wonder by whom? Interesting...so it could be that regardless of her decision, this will be challenged in the Supreme Court ....

FUCK, she granted prorogue.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 17:47
This is going to be insane...there are no spending limits on THIS campaign. It's going to get very, very ugly.

Harper still hasn't come out to give his speech.
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 17:49
She did it. She said yes. Parliament is prorogued.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081204/GG_decision_081204/20081204?hub=TopStories
This will be extremely harmful to Canadians.

The next two months will be unbearable. I am truly disappointed by the GG's actions in this most serious manner.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 17:54
Alright, Harper's got a prepared speech on the podium, it's sleeting, and here the fucker comes.
Hotwife
04-12-2008, 17:55
Alright, Harper's got a prepared speech on the podium, it's sleeting, and here the fucker comes.

I take it he in essence asked for a time out.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 17:56
"Following my advice, the GG has agreed to prorogue Parliament. Last friday I asked Canadians to let us know of their opinions of the Parliamentary situation...their answers were clear...the men and women of Canada want the gov't to continue to work on the agenda on which they voted...our plan to strengthen the economy. Parliament will resume on Jan.26, and our first priority will be the presentation of a federal budget. "(from the French)
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:00
Why did it take so long for the GG to grant your request, and now with six weeks...what will you do to restore a constructive political environment...

"I can't discuss the content of my discussions with the GG, it's a constitutional tradition...to answer your other question, I believe that canadians across this country have as their main priority the economy. The opposition criticism is that we have to focus on the economy immediately and today's decision will give us all an opportunity to do this and work together. In the Parliament of Canada there are 4 political parties and 2 independants...all have been elected to represent their constituents...they have a responsibility to voters to act in the best interests of Canada as a whole...it's critical for us three parties to work together on the decisions that need to be made with respect to the budget which will be the next major step in the gov't economic stimulus plan. We did this last year...first step was to keep Canada in a better position that other industrialised countries...now gov't realises other major steps need to be taken...an opportunity now to work on these measures..." (fades out, and from the French)
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:02
How will you rebuild trust?

"Let me just say on that particular issue...the gov't brought forward an issue that it believes in strongly...in a time of economic restraint, when asking all Canadians to tighten their belts...political parties should tighten their belts. (referring to wanting to cut funding to parties)

The day after we announced the policy we announced we weren't proceeding immediately, we would simply freeze the allowance...we addressed their concerns in 2 days...they've said repeatedly that's not the issue...they wanted an economic stimulus package immediately...we need trust building here on both sides...everyone knows that gov't who has only sat for 2 weeks can't go out and announce a comprehensive plan immediately without talking to anyone. We are planning here the quickest federal budget in history..I don't believe the opposition parties...I'm not saying their insincere...but they couldn't produce a budget as quickly...we'd see it a lot later than Jan.26 if it was up to them..."
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:06
"Work together in the interests of Canada..."

So he's backing away from his separatist rhetoric.

In french: What democratic legitimacy do you still think you have, to spend gov't money, make announcements and make significant decisions?

"This gov't was recently elected with a stronger mandate and according to the polls I've seen, the people of Canada believe that we should be able to work to fulfill our mandate and as we said in the speech from the throne, our priority is to move forward to the second step of our comprehensive economic plan with a federal budget. The opposition parties supported that, they passed the speech from the throne and it's more than legitimate, it's my sole responsibility now, to fulfill my mandate. Obviously very quickly once we've brought down the budget, the parties will oppose it" (from french)
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:10
Are you going to be launching an election campaign, and is it appropriate to use public funds to do that?

"We use party resources for anything related to a campaign, that's a strict rule, we don't use public funds. My work, the govt's work will be focussed almost exclusively on preparing a federal budget. Because we're doing it so early this year we won't have time to do much else, and I hope the other parties will be concentrating on the same things. Regardless of the machinations of Parliament, Canadians expect us to get on with it. I think there are many people in the opposition who are not comfortable...who would prefer in the short term to see the gov't work on the business of governing and who would like to work with the gov't on the issue of the economy...in the case of the Liberals and NDPs particular, it's in the interest of their parties in my opinion...their mission and in their interests to do that as well, getting to a side deal with the Bloc is a different game, a different agenda...and let me repeat this...the Bloc have every legitimate right to be here but their game is not about working on the economy to serve the interests of the country...they have a different fundamental agenda, not what we have between the three of us...and that's a fudamental difference and I think that's our first responsibility...the Bloc's views are always taken into account...but I say the other three parties have other responsibilities to the public as a whole. Let me say this...everybody knows I've met with Mr. Duceppe and listened to him and his party, we have in fact responded through policy to requests he's made...but as PM I've never put myself in a position to be beholden to the Bloc to govern...no PM should be in that position, it's not good for the country, very risky for the gov't in power...I think that's...pesonally think that's not a route to go down. "
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:13
Duceppe comments:

"The Bloc wants to defend the views of those who do not support the Conservatives...the Conservative leader held an election this Sept at a cost of $300 million supposedly to deal with the economy...but now he's putting off for at least six weeks the implementation of a recovery plan...and wants an election, an additional 2 months will be lost. He will try to assauge the people in the next 6 weeks...the men and women of Quebec asked us to continue to defend the values and needs of Quebec and to oppose their ideology...we will rid Quebec of Harper and his gov't" (from French)
East Canuck
04-12-2008, 18:14
How will you rebuild trust?

"Let me just say on that particular issue...the gov't brought forward an issue that it believes in strongly...in a time of economic restraint, when asking all Canadians to tighten their belts...political parties should tighten their belts. (referring to wanting to cut funding to parties)

The day after we announced the policy we announced we weren't proceeding immediately, we would simply freeze the allowance...we addressed their concerns in 2 days...they've said repeatedly that's not the issue...they wanted an economic stimulus package immediately...we need trust building here on both sides...everyone knows that gov't who has only sat for 2 weeks can't go out and announce a comprehensive plan immediately without talking to anyone. We are planning here the quickest federal budget in history..I don't believe the opposition parties...I'm not saying their insincere...but they couldn't produce a budget as quickly...we'd see it a lot later than Jan.26 if it was up to them..."

Coming from someone who's been RE-elected, it smells alot like bullshit. Especially since the finance minister is the same one.

Also, the minister for art was rather quick in his decisions even if he's a new one.

I hope canadians see through this smoke and mirrors.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:16
Duceppe says he will continue to support the coalition (as expected). I have no doubt we'll still be facing a non-confidence vote when the HoC reconvenes...

Duceppe is being very careful to maintain solidarity...people are asking him about Dion...he isn't saying shit against him...
East Canuck
04-12-2008, 18:16
Are you going to be launching an election campaign, and is it appropriate to use public funds to do that?

"We use party resources for anything related to a campaign, that's a strict rule, we don't use public funds. My work, the govt's work will be focussed almost exclusively on preparing a federal budget. Because we're doing it so early this year we won't have time to do much else, and I hope the other parties will be concentrating on the same things. Regardless of the machinations of Parliament, Canadians expect us to get on with it. I think there are many people in the opposition who are not comfortable...who would prefer in the short term to see the gov't work on the business of governing and who would like to work with the gov't on the issue of the economy...in the case of the Liberals and NDPs particular, it's in the interest of their parties in my opinion...their mission and in their interests to do that as well, getting to a side deal with the Bloc is a different game, a different agenda...and let me repeat this...the Bloc have every legitimate right to be here but their game is not about working on the economy to serve the interests of the country...they have a different fundamental agenda, not what we have between the three of us...and that's a fudamental difference and I think that's our first responsibility...the Bloc's views are always taken into account...but I say the other three parties have other responsibilities to the public as a whole. Let me say this...everybody knows I've met with Mr. Duceppe and listened to him and his party, we have in fact responded through policy to requests he's made...but as PM I've never put myself in a position to be beholden to the Bloc to govern...no PM should be in that position, it's not good for the country, very risky for the gov't in power...I think that's...pesonally think that's not a route to go down. "

Except, y'know, that the conservatives have been shown to have a different interpretation of election law than the rest of us so I don't believe that answer for one second.
Hotwife
04-12-2008, 18:17
Let me guess: the Conservatives have enough money to do the election thing all over again, and the other parties don't....
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:18
Except, y'know, that the conservatives have been shown to have a different interpretation of election law than the rest of us so I don't believe that answer for one second.

Especially since the next six weeks WON'T be an election campaign officially...and if it's not an election campaign, there are NO limits on spending. Even if they stick to party funds, you're going to see a river of cash funding attack ads.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:19
Let me guess: the Conservatives have enough money to do the election thing all over again, and the other parties don't....

Yup.

They also have access to public funds, despite their claims that they won't use them.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:20
Layton set to comment...wooohooo, cue some ACDC!
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:24
Layton

" We will continue to ask Canadians to support a majority that will work towards an economic plan...I think it's a sad day for Parliamentary democracy...we believe the majority of the House were prepared to work right now...I'm talking about Canadians who are losing their jobs by the thousands...can't put food on the table...wanted to see a gov't that would work on these issues...we were ready to work and agreed upon a plan that we presented to Canadians calling for bold action, along the lines of what we're seeing in other countries. This plan was rejected by the PM who is now choosing to protect his own job rather than focusing on the jobs of Canadians.

We don't have confidence in this PM and when we return to the HoC we'll express that lack of confidence"
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:25
What do you think about Harper's suggestion that you three work together?

"Unfortunately, Mr. Harper can't be trusted...we gave him our opinions and he rejected them and chose to attack the institutions of democracy...he rejected our point of view and now he's trying to lock the door so the people cannot speak, and cannot throw him out of office...now he's coming forward with an element of contrition saying maybe now I'll listen to you...I can't trust him...if he brings forward some interesting ideas, we'll take those ideas and integrate them into the coalition gov't."
East Canuck
04-12-2008, 18:26
Layton set to comment...wooohooo, cue some ACDC!

Layton

" We will continue to ask Canadians to support a majority that will work towards an economic plan...I think it's a sad day for Parliamentary democracy...we believe the majority of the House were prepared to work right now...I'm talking about Canadians who are losing their jobs by the thousands...can't put food on the table...wanted to see a gov't that would work on these issues...we were ready to work and agreed upon a plan that we presented to Canadians calling for bold action, along the lines of what we're seeing in other countries. This plan was rejected by the PM who is now choosing to protect his own job rather than focusing on the jobs of Canadians.

We don't have confidence in this PM and when we return to the HoC we'll express that lack of confidence"

4 minutes to type this after he spoke. Damn your fingers work fast. :tongue:
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:28
4 minutes to type this after he spoke. Damn your fingers work fast. :tongue:

I'm typing as he speaks. :P


Has he just delayed the inevitable?

"he does not have the confidence of the majority of MPs...they clearly signed a document telling him what they thing and he's denied them the opportunity to have a formal vote to formally express lack of gov't, he's locking the doors of the HoC so the elected members cannot express themselves, that is an attack on democracy" (in french)
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:31
Will your budget be ready by Feb?

"We're prepared to get started on that right now, but he's locked the doors. We will will continue to develop our ideas and I look foward to working with other players to accomplish that."

Duceppe suggests Harper isolating Quebec by extending invitations to you and Dion, but not to the Bloc.

"Mr. Harper extended an invitation to present ideas...I called him actually and he granted me an hour long conversation we presented a lot of info to him...he rejected them. Not only did he reject them, he took away my right as a MP to vote on an issue of confidence..."


He's really focusing on the HoC being 'locked' and not really answering the questions.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:32
(in french) You talk about propaganda...how will you counter that when you have less money than the Conservatives?

"Ideas are always more important than money" (in french)

Hahaha, really? Layton Layton Layton.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:36
Is Dion going to speak or what? He's supposed to be the fucking leader of the coalition, and no word yet.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:40
Bob Rae speaks hahahahahahhahahaahahaha....

Reaction?

"Well we'll have a confidence vote about the budget...to use a classic phrase, you can run but you can't hide...the PM has suspended Parliament, it's unprecedented...can't think of a time in Canada when this has happened so the PM of the day can avoid a confidence vote...he's clearly lost the confidence and trust of the house and it's too bad, we could have gotten on quickly with a new gov't to address concerns of the economy and now we're in a state of suspended animation, and the better idea is still that the house works together."

"It's not just about a budget, it's about confidence now, about confidence in a PM that will throw any argument, attack our commitment to the country, to the unity of the country...he will mislead Canadians about what proposed and say things that are untrue just to carry on...Canadians need to deal with this..."

Will the coalition hold together until Jan.26

"I think it's important for people to stick together, these are the times that try men's souls...we need to understand that this is a time that tests all of us, Libs, NDPs, Canadians...do we want a gov't in place that is so profoundly undemocratic...a PM prepared to call anyone anything to get his way...am I prepared to do that, no I'm not. I am who I am because I believe this is a PM and the Reform Party agenda he's attempting to foist on the country is bad for the country"
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:48
Where the FUCK is Dion?
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 18:49
Before making her decision, the GG should have met with the leader of the Opposition (Dion) before making any proclamations. I think she has subverted the roots of our democracy.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:50
Finally, Dion speaks!

"You must realise the enormity of what happened today. For the first time in the history of Canada, the PM has fled the Parliament. What Mr. Harper asked today is without precedent....the result of his total lack of leadership in this minority gov't. Our position has not changed and even if we respect the GG's decision, we didn't hear anything today from the PM to change our position." (from French)
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:52
"The PM has an obligation to reach out to the other parties, build bridges...he has failed completely. We have seen the exact opposite...he has merely paid lipservice to the ideas of cooperation and consenus. The challenge to Mr.Harper is to do what he says, instead of merely talking....he needs to follow the example of the coalition...we found common ground and interest to come together in this time of crisis to the economy...or Mr. Harper can return to his divisive politics that he has followed until now...at the expense of Canadians...warm sentiments aren't enough, his view must change, now more than ever we need to be united.

We are facing the worst economic crisis since the Depression...he promises action but has wasted 2 months in partisan games, and locked the doors of Parliament...he's asking Canadians to wait even longer to see where he stands."
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:53
Can your coalition survive until Jan? (french)

Oui et oui.

"we're prepared to govern with a progressive gov't that will serve interests of Canadians...without the coalition, Harper would continue to attack rights of workers and women, we wouldn't have the stimulus budget..." (from french)
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 18:53
Before making her decision, the GG should have met with the leader of the Opposition (Dion) before making any proclamations. I think she has subverted the roots of our democracy.

She would have made the same decision anyways, in my opinion. She needs time to meet with constitutional experts, it gives the CPC time to eat crow and copy the coalition budget, it gives the government and the public time to get used to the idea of a coalition or to vent criticism about the coalition, and it greatly reduces the risk of precipitating a unity crisis.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:55
Even if he were to say he'll be nice...

"We don't want more of his words, we need to see monumental changes"

(the following from french)

If his budget contains what you want...?

"Well it would have to be a monumental change"

what does that mean, no one knows what that means?

"We have an agreement, said what we wanted in that agreement...so we'll continue to do our work, an alternative gov't for Canadians based on prudent fiscality and Mr. Harper said...the people said his plan was a fantasy..."
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 18:57
She would have made the same decision anyways, in my opinion. She needs time to meet with constitutional experts, it gives the CPC time to eat crow and copy the coalition budget, it gives the government and the public time to get used to the idea of a coalition or to vent criticism about the coalition, and it greatly reduces the risk of precipitating a unity crisis.
Au contraire. I believe that a two month delay will precipitate a huge unity crisis. There is going to be momunmental debates about this and at the end of the day, I expect that Canadians will be more galvanized than ever.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 18:58
From french...

One clarification, you talk about monumental change but you never answered that question...what does that mean?

"It means a recovery plan, a real one...his own economic advisors said his plan based on the wrong figures...if his own advisors asking for a real plan that cannot be the basis for a budget that will restore the gov't credibility and confidence in the gov't."

Can't you give him a second chance? (said sadly as Dion walked away)
Neesika
04-12-2008, 19:00
Au contraire. I believe that a two month delay will precipitate a huge unity crisis. There is going to be momunmental debates about this and at the end of the day, I expect that Canadians will be more galvanized than ever.

I agree. The long knives are coming out, and the ONLY one who is acting in any principled way is Duceppe. It's going to be fucking ugly, it's going to be the worst sort of fear-mongering on both sides.
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 19:03
I agree. The long knives are coming out, and the ONLY one who is acting in any principled way is Duceppe. It's going to be fucking ugly, it's going to be the worst sort of fear-mongering on both sides.
I have to give Duceppe a lot of credit. Too bad he is a separatist though, he might be the best PM of the lot.
East Canuck
04-12-2008, 19:03
I agree. The long knives are coming out, and the ONLY one who is acting in any principled way is Duceppe. It's going to be fucking ugly, it's going to be the worst sort of fear-mongering on both sides.

Yeah, what a great christmas/winter solstice we're having...

Love or hate his ideas, Duceppe is a shrewd politician. I almost want to vote for the bloc because of him.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 19:06
I wish he's start rocking the bowtie again though.
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 19:15
* wonders in the MPs get paid for the 2 months of the lockdown and how much that costs the taxpayers????
Neesika
04-12-2008, 19:25
Of course they'll still get paid...they still have their positions, they've just been locked out of the House.

Then again, let's be honest here, they would have shut things down soon for holidays anyway, and few gov'ts have gotten anything done during this season. Any claims about 'oh boy we would have done this this and that' are mostly rhetoric, regardless of who is saying it.
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 19:26
Au contraire. I believe that a two month delay will precipitate a huge unity crisis. There is going to be momunmental debates about this and at the end of the day, I expect that Canadians will be more galvanized than ever.

Haper's polarising language has already made acceptance of the coalition a regional issue, and a separatist issue. By making a decision on it right away, the GG would have ended up looking like she was choosing one region over another, or worse, trying to destroy the country according to Harper supporters. She could also have decided to call an election. Then we would be 300 million $ poorer and in the exact same position in about six weeks.

I have to give Duceppe a lot of credit. Too bad he is a separatist though, he might be the best PM of the lot.

I see you have already internalised the Conservative language.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 19:29
The reason I said Duceppe is the only principled one in the bunch is because he has remained true to the people who elected him...though being a regional party, this is somewhat easier than for the Libs or NDPs who have to represent everyone from the alienated west to the damned Screech-swilling newfies :D
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 19:42
I see you have already internalised the Conservative language.
I was just stating a fact, certainly not internalizing anything Conservative.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 19:44
I was just stating a fact, certainly not internalizing anything Conservative.

...

Sovereignty is separatism?

Why aren't you calling every single First Nation separatists then?
CanuckHeaven
04-12-2008, 20:04
...

Sovereignty is separatism?

Why aren't you calling every single First Nation separatists then? "sovereigntist" is too hard to spell correctly :tongue:
Kryozerkia
04-12-2008, 20:26
...

Sovereignty is separatism?

Why aren't you calling every single First Nation separatists then?

How odd, I had the same thoughts earlier during.

What I can't get over is that Harper looked into the camera and lied to the people of Canada!
Mikesburg
04-12-2008, 20:55
Harper's got some sort of evil horseshoe up his ass.

I think any way you look at things, the damage is done. The moment the coalition decided that it was too late to back down, we were going to have problems. The only way this could have been avoided was if the opposition parties backed down when Harper backed down on the more contentious issues of his mini-budget (or whatever.)

Now the gloves are off, and I think the Cons are going to win the dust-up. While the Lib-NDP coalition had momentum, they were strong. But with weeks of Conservative attack ads I don't think this shaky coalition is going to last. I think the Liberals are going to let Dion take the fall for this and co-operate with the Conservatives to save face. (And Jack Layton will bark all the way to the next election.)

I also think that somewhere down the line, Harper will step down to save face for the Conservative party. We already know he can't reach majority territory, and this latest bit is obviously his fault. My bet is they put Peter Mackay in the PM's seat, regain the trust of Atlantic Canada, and use the negative press of the Liberal/NDP coalition and push themselves into a majority in the next election.

Of course, I could be totally wrong and Harper might fall on his face anyway, but if he does, then I'm sure Peter Mackay will take the lead and take a majority 18 months from now.

Either way, the blue party picks up all the marbles in the long run.
Gift-of-god
04-12-2008, 21:04
Harper's got some sort of evil horseshoe up his ass.

I think any way you look at things, the damage is done. The moment the coalition decided that it was too late to back down, we were going to have problems. The only way this could have been avoided was if the opposition parties backed down when Harper backed down on the more contentious issues of his mini-budget (or whatever.)

Now the gloves are off, and I think the Cons are going to win the dust-up. While the Lib-NDP coalition had momentum, they were strong. But with weeks of Conservative attack ads I don't think this shaky coalition is going to last. I think the Liberals are going to let Dion take the fall for this and co-operate with the Conservatives to save face. (And Jack Layton will bark all the way to the next election.)

I also think that somewhere down the line, Harper will step down to save face for the Conservative party. We already know he can't reach majority territory, and this latest bit is obviously his fault. My bet is they put Peter Mackay in the PM's seat, regain the trust of Atlantic Canada, and use the negative press of the Liberal/NDP coalition and push themselves into a majority in the next election.

Of course, I could be totally wrong and Harper might fall on his face anyway, but if he does, then I'm sure Peter Mackay will take the lead and take a majority 18 months from now.

Either way, the blue party picks up all the marbles in the long run.

Not all.

From now on, the Conservatives can no longer rely on the FPTP system to give them a minority government that can act like a majority. Another dynamic is now in place that can act as a balance to that. Mackay will have to play ball a lot more than Harper did unless he wants a replay. In that respect, the damage has been done.

And the coalition was able to get the budget they more or less wanted.
Mikesburg
04-12-2008, 21:18
Not all.

From now on, the Conservatives can no longer rely on the FPTP system to give them a minority government that can act like a majority. Another dynamic is now in place that can act as a balance to that. Mackay will have to play ball a lot more than Harper did unless he wants a replay. In that respect, the damage has been done.

And the coalition was able to get the budget they more or less wanted.

I think Mackay would be a far more conciliatory PM. His roots are from the old Progressive Conservative Party, and I think he would present a 'kinder gentler' face on the mean old tories. And unless the Liberals and NDP want to go to the polls as a coalition, I think you'll continue to see them split the anti-conservative vote.
Fighter4u
04-12-2008, 22:05
Whats for Christmas?



Conservative propaganda!!!!:eek:

I mean seriously, how many idoits are gonna fall for the million dollars attack ads Harper are gonna lanched? Frankly I think it about time Bush ringed up Harper and asked for his playbook back.
Neesika
04-12-2008, 22:28
I think plenty of people are going to fall for Harper's attack ads.
Fighter4u
04-12-2008, 22:31
I think plenty of people are going to fall for Harper's attack ads.


Ain't that the sad,sad truth?
Iniika
04-12-2008, 23:51
Yeah.... unfortunately half truths that speak to the fear or anger of the population are soaked up more easilly that the cold hard truth that we are in hard times and the best way to fix that is to realize sacrifices and compromises need to be made for the betterment of the country.

And I say this in regards to both sides.
Fighter4u
04-12-2008, 23:57
Yeah.... unfortunately half truths that speak to the fear or anger of the population are soaked up more easilly that the cold hard truth that we are in hard times and the best way to fix that is to realize sacrifices and compromises need to be made for the betterment of the country.

And I say this in regards to both sides.


Yes, but Canada actually has a strong econmic base to ride out the coming storm so to speak. But what scares me is the comments I read on the CTV website from Neesika linky that came from the Westerns about the "evil" coliation and from the left about the Harper Dictorship.

Canada may have many perks going from it. But alot of us are no stupider,dumber or rasict or what have you not then people from many other countrys.
CanuckHeaven
05-12-2008, 01:01
But with weeks of Conservative attack ads I don't think this shaky coalition is going to last.
After talking with the GG today, Harper may have to call off the attack dogs?

Harper also said that when Parliament resumes, the first item on the agenda will be the presentation of the federal budget and he will spend his time working almost exclusively between now and then on the fiscal blueprint.

He opened the door to co-operating with the opposition parties on the budget, saying Canadians expect all parties "to get on with it."

"It's the opportunity to work in the next six weeks on these measures, and I invite all the opposition parties, especially those that have a responsibility to the whole of Canada, to work with us, to inform us of their detailed position and we will be there to listen," Harper said in French.
It would be pretty hard to conceive that Harper would be able to get his budget passed if he was still antagonizing his foes?
Saige Dragon
05-12-2008, 01:11
Well looks as if the GG has pogoed Parliament, she can pogo my taxes while she's at it. Until, of course, Parliament is back in session
Xomic
05-12-2008, 01:20
This is bullshit, I vote Dion and Layton should hop on a plane and go meet with the Queen Herself!

Explain the situation, and she'll ether dismiss the GG, or come to fucking Canada and kick Harper's ass.
CanuckHeaven
05-12-2008, 05:03
This is bullshit, I vote Dion and Layton should hop on a plane and go meet with the Queen Herself!

Explain the situation, and she'll ether dismiss the GG, or come to fucking Canada and kick Harper's ass.
seconded!!!!!!
Saige Dragon
05-12-2008, 05:07
This is bullshit, I vote Dion and Layton should hop on a plane and go meet with the Queen Herself!

Explain the situation, and she'll ether dismiss the GG, or come to fucking Canada and kick Harper's ass.

Nah, that would just mean they can't deal with the situation like grownups. They'd be down at little Stevie Harpers level. You know, where he goes and whines to the GG... twice... that he can't govern the country.
Xomic
05-12-2008, 06:14
Nah, that would just mean they can't deal with the situation like grownups. They'd be down at little Stevie Harpers level. You know, where he goes and whines to the GG... twice... that he can't govern the country.

I don't care, he CAN'T govern the country, the GG needs to dismiss him, and she didn't, she has FAILED as the Representative of the Queen in Canada, and in doing so has basically created a a constitutional crisis in our country, in all Westminster systems, because the whole government revolves around the ability of a minority government to be brought down by the opposition if the minority government can no longer rule because it doesn't have the confidence of more the half the country.

Don't have the confidence of the house? Worried about that vote? Don't worry, just ask the GG to close Parliament!
Veblenia
05-12-2008, 06:29
I don't care, he CAN'T govern the country, the GG needs to dismiss him, and she didn't, she has FAILED as the Representative of the Queen in Canada, and in doing so has basically created a a constitutional crisis in our country, in all Westminster systems...<snipped>

You know, as bitterly disappointed as I am that Harper prorogued Parliament, as flagarantly undemocratic as the Prime Minister has behaved throughout this crisis, it's just plain wrong to lay this at the feet of the GG. She acted entirely appropriately; Harper is an elected official, she is a political appointee. The logic that has guided Governors-General since King-Byng is that appointed officials don't question or deny the instructions of elected Prime Ministers.

Andrew Coyne said it perfectly tonight: the Governor-General did the right thing in accepting the Prime Minister's advice; the Prime Minister did the wrong thing in advising her to prorogue Parliament. He's extended rather than solved the political crisis, demonstrated himself to be petulant, tyrannical and divisive, and has made it more difficult for Parliamentarians--and through them the nation--to reconcile themselves.

This was a terrible precedent to set, but we need to keep in mind that Harper set it, not Jean.
Mikesburg
05-12-2008, 15:43
This certainly didn't take long...

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/04/opposition-parliament.html

Dissent in Liberal ranks appears after Parliament suspended

Doubts about the Liberals' commitment to their coalition with the NDP are coming to light in the wake of Gov. Gen. Michaëlle Jean's decision to grant Prime Minister Stephen Harper's request to suspend Parliament.

Toronto MP Jim Karygiannis told reporters after emerging from the Liberal caucus meeting Thursday afternoon that he didn't think the NDP-Liberal coalition would survive until Parliament resumes on Jan. 26.

"The coalition, the way that we're going right now, won't survive," he told reporters in Ottawa.
Mikesburg
05-12-2008, 15:49
Also from CBC;

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/04/parliament-poll.html

Support for Tories up amid House crisis, CBC-EKOS poll suggests

The Conservatives appear to have won the initial public relations battle surrounding the impasse on Parliament Hill, during one of the most chaotic weeks in Canadian political history, an EKOS poll conducted for the CBC suggests.

Respondents in the two-day automated telephone survey conducted Tuesday and Wednesday were asked: "If an election were held tomorrow, which party would you vote for?"

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives received 44 per cent of respondents' support, up from the 37.6 per cent support the Tories received in the federal election that returned them to Ottawa with another minority government just seven weeks ago.

The results suggest support for Stéphane Dion's Liberals was down two percentage points from the election, with 24 per cent of respondents' support, while the New Democrats were down almost four percentage points at 14.5 per cent support.

While you certainly can't judge everything based on polls, they are good signposts of the general mood of the electorate. While there may be party loyalists in the NDP and Liberals who like the coalition, this is the sort of thing that gets the people who normally don't bother to vote to come out en masse.

I predict Dion is the sacrificial lamb.
Behaved
05-12-2008, 15:55
America calls him socialist, far left or radical, some even communist. I say radical. Some have said most countries would call him conservative. Unlucky_and_unbiddable, you prove it.
CanuckHeaven
05-12-2008, 16:05
Also from CBC;

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/04/parliament-poll.html

Support for Tories up amid House crisis, CBC-EKOS poll suggests



While you certainly can't judge everything based on polls, they are good signposts of the general mood of the electorate. While there may be party loyalists in the NDP and Liberals who like the coalition, this is the sort of thing that gets the people who normally don't bother to vote to come out en masse.

I predict Dion is the sacrificial lamb.
I believe that what this demonstrates is that the old adage that if you repeat something over and over that eventually people will believe that what is stated is true.

The Conservatives have spent a lot of money repeating the same lies over and over and as a result, people are starting to accept those lies as truths.

BTW, Brian Mulroney was good at that too, and he was able to pull off back to back majorities, but at the end of the day, his party fragmented into the Bloc, the Reform and the Progressive Conservatives with the latter ending up with 2 seats in the 1993 election.
Mikesburg
05-12-2008, 16:07
I believe that what this demonstrates is that the old adage that if you repeat something over and over that eventually people will believe that what is stated is true.

The Conservatives have spent a lot of money repeating the same lies over and over and as a result, people are starting to accept those lies as truths.

I don't think there's been a whole lot of money spent yet. It's been pure media coverage, on both sides. Plus, this is the CBC we're talking about, not exactly a conservative bastion.

This was a public relations battle between Harper and Dion, and Dion can barely speak the language.
Veblenia
05-12-2008, 16:11
While you certainly can't judge everything based on polls, they are good signposts of the general mood of the electorate. While there may be party loyalists in the NDP and Liberals who like the coalition, this is the sort of thing that gets the people who normally don't bother to vote to come out en masse.

I predict Dion is the sacrificial lamb.

Admittedly, the coalition has done a terrible job of communicating its aims. It came out of nowhere, it's a new concept for Canadian politics, and it has precious few resources to stand up to the Tory smear machine. I don't think this poll is indicative of any more solid support for the Tories, though, but confusion over what's happening in Parliament. Some better, less hysterical, messaging might advance the coalition's cause over December and January.

I predict that Harper and Ignatieff will be trading a lot of Christmas cards over the next couple of months, though. If Iggy is smart he'll realize he's well-positioned to wrangle some face-saving concessions out of Harper, and use the resolution of the crisis to cement his own leadership bid. Tories make more natural bedfellows for him than the NDP, anyway.
CanuckHeaven
05-12-2008, 16:15
I don't think there's been a whole lot of money spent yet. It's been pure media coverage, on both sides. Plus, this is the CBC we're talking about, not exactly a conservative bastion.

This was a public relations battle between Harper and Dion, and Dion can barely speak the language.
The lies started during the election campaign and continued when the Conservatives ran off the rails after the economic update. The polls taken after uncontested Conservative attack ads ran this past week may be slightly skewed?
Gift-of-god
05-12-2008, 16:27
it doesn't matter if the Conservatives are lying or not. What matters is that they are good at preying on fear and ignorance, and so they've decided to fan the fear and ignorance of the coalition in order to muster support for themselves. One expects that they will do a good enough job that Liberals will feel heat from their constituents. This will crack the coalition.

What the Liberals and NDP need to do is either decide to fully support the coalition and get some momentum on their side, or cut their losses by hanging Dion to dry and trying to put together something that will help them win the nexy election.

Now, considering the fact that the Liberals are spineless opportunists, we would assume that the second option is far more likely. Layton has the cojones to keep the coalition running, but the doesn't have the power base. And if he tries to force it, he won't look like the underdog, which would alienate his small power base.
Mikesburg
05-12-2008, 17:19
The lies started during the election campaign and continued when the Conservatives ran off the rails after the economic update. The polls taken after uncontested Conservative attack ads ran this past week may be slightly skewed?

Fair enough. I don't watch enough tv to see attack ads. It's all internet news media and CBC or C-PAC for this guy.
Mikesburg
05-12-2008, 17:20
Now, considering the fact that the Liberals are spineless opportunists, we would assume that the second option is far more likely.

I rest my case. :)
Hotwife
05-12-2008, 17:40
Hmm.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=1032813

OTTAWA - Almost three-quarters of Canadians say they are "truly scared" for the future of the country and a solid majority say they would prefer another election to having the minority Conservative government replaced by a coalition led by Stephane Dion, a new Ipsos-Reid poll says.

The poll also indicates Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservatives would romp to a majority victory with a record 46 per cent public support if an election were held today.

The survey suggests Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean was in tune with public opinion across the country when she agreed Thursday to suspend, or prorogue Parliament until Jan. 26 at the request of Harper. Almost seven in 10 of those surveyed Tuesday and Wednesday gave prorogation a thumbs up.

The Tories also were deemed by almost six in 10 Canadians to be the best managers of the economy in these troubling times.

Results of the wide-ranging survey, conducted exclusively for Canwest News Service and Global National, paint a picture of a population gripped by fear that is largely giving the Conservatives the benefit of the doubt - for now - to lead the country in such uncertain political and economic times.
Gift-of-god
05-12-2008, 18:43
Two elections from now. That's the earliest I see Canadians getting over their fear of the unknown about coalitions.
Veblenia
05-12-2008, 18:45
Two elections from now. That's the earliest I see Canadians getting over their fear of the unknown about coalitions.

Sweet! The rate we're going, we should get those out of the way before summer.
Gift-of-god
05-12-2008, 18:47
Sweet! The rate we're going, we should get those out of the way before summer.

Good one.
CanuckHeaven
05-12-2008, 19:12
Hmm.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=1032813
From the article you posted:

The Tories also were deemed by almost six in 10 Canadians to be the best managers of the economy in these troubling times.
Are Canadians really that stupid?

Economists praise Canada's debt reduction record (http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2006/09/27/debt.html)

Many economists say Canadians should congratulate themselves for the steady progress in reducing the country's national debt.

At a time when many industrialized countries are still running deficits, the federal government announced this week that Canada's national debt will drop by another $13.2 billion when last year's fiscal surplus is applied to debt repayment.

The move will reduce Canada's debt, as a proportion of the country's gross domestic product, to 35.1 per cent — its lowest level in 24 years.

That's a far cry from the situation in the early 1990s, when Canada was spending more than it took in — something it had done for the better part of two decades.

"For 20 years, they ran continually high deficits and continually growing debt, and Canada was skyrocketing out of control," recalled University of Toronto economist Jack Carr.

But Paul Martin, then the Liberal finance minister, embarked on a steady campaign of deficit-cutting and debt payments — a mission continued by the federal Conservatives.

Since the mid-1990s, the national debt has been cut from a peak of $562.9 billion to $481.5 billion.

"It's been a remarkable transformation in Canada," said Joydeep Mukherji, an analyst with the Standard & Poor's debt rating agency in New York.

"I think it's about time Canadians took some pride in their accomplishments and bragged to the world about what they did," he told CBC News.

Canada is the only G-7 country that's in a surplus budget position.
So why is it that after 2+ years of Conservative government that we are now running a deficit? (NOTE: the above article was written in Sept. 2007)

Here is an article from Apr. of this year (http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/04/21/dbrscanada.html):

However, DBRS analyst Sach Tihanyi said in a report issued Monday that Canada "finds itself in a much more challenging economic environment than was previously expected at the time of the 2007 October economic statement."

Tihanyi said a weakening economic outlook, coupled with significant tax cuts over the past year, has resulted in lower budgeted revenues for the current year. The government latest budget projected a surplus of $2.3 billion for the current fiscal year, much smaller than in recent years.

The government has said that a one percentage point drop in gross domestic product could lop $3.3 billion from its budget balance.

"Given the short-term inflexibility inherent in expenditures, it is likely that the government would run its first budgetary deficit in over a decade," DBRS said. "Even so, any such deficit would be on the order of 0.1 to 0.2 per cent of GDP, small relative to the surpluses of the past few years."
Where did that "inflexibility" come from? Conservative mis-management!!

And the prognosis for the upcoming year or two (http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2008/11/20/7476676-cp.html):

Harper and his ministers have been softening up Canadian public opinion for a budgetary deficit in the next fiscal year almost since the polls closed on Oct. 14.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced Thursday that a fall fiscal update will be delivered in the House next Thursday, when the full scale of the domestic economic slowdown should become clearer.

"This is the time where Canadians need to have a government that manages well, that makes sure there's adequate stimulus in the economy as we move forward," Flaherty said following question period.

"If it means that we go into a temporary deficit, then that's OK. But I tell you quite frankly, you know, we're hoping to move toward a continuing balanced budget."

However a sneak preview of the nation's finances has already been provided by Kevin Page, the independent parliamentary budget officer. Page, using an average of 11 private sector forecasts, suggested Canada faces at least two years of deficits totalling at least $5 billion.

"The weak fiscal performance to date is largely attributable to previous policy decisions as opposed to weakened economic conditions," added Page's report, released Thursday morning.

Liberals jumped on that line, saying it bolstered their argument that the Conservatives had squandered a $13 billion surplus they'd inherited from the Liberals when they came to office in 2006.
The truth hurts? A deficit created by the Conservatives!!
Gift-of-god
05-12-2008, 19:47
From the article you posted:

....

The truth hurts? A deficit created by the Conservatives!!

Truth has nothing to do with it.

Canadians really are that stupid.

It doesn't matter that the NDP and the Liberals have better financial track records, as long as everyone thinks the Conservatives are better at it.

It's not about the truth. It's all about perception.
CanuckHeaven
05-12-2008, 20:03
Truth has nothing to do with it.

Canadians really are that stupid.

It doesn't matter that the NDP and the Liberals have better financial track records, as long as everyone thinks the Conservatives are better at it.

It's not about the truth. It's all about perception.
How do we as Canadians change that perception?

How do we reverse that negative propaganda?
Fighter4u
05-12-2008, 20:05
Well I thought the same thing before I was corrected. I mean after all we would think the Right would want to reduce deficts, while the left would spend more money on social ideals. It common sense right? The only problem is were in Canada and EVERYTHING backwards here!



And CH, simply by spending money the Liberals don't have to change that view.

Those I doubt the NDP does either. They spend the maxime amount of money possible in the last feveral election and would have to pay off their debts no?
Gift-of-god
05-12-2008, 20:12
How do we as Canadians change that perception?

How do we reverse that negative propaganda?

My guess would be tha the easiest way would be to organise a small group of individuals into doing loud media stunts that get across whatever message you want to deliver.

The Conservatives have a well-running trans-Canada advertising/propaganda/campaign machine. You don't. So, you have to co-opt one. The only one even vaguely accessible to you would be the media, CBC in particular. But Peter Mansbridge isn't about to let you do a five minute speech to Canada, so you have to do something newsworthy that gives you five minutes anyways.

http://www.wendmag.com/blog/2008/06/06/french-spiderman-climbs-ny-times-building/
Hotwife
05-12-2008, 20:17
Truth has nothing to do with it.

Canadians really are that stupid.

It doesn't matter that the NDP and the Liberals have better financial track records, as long as everyone thinks the Conservatives are better at it.

It's not about the truth. It's all about perception.

Think about it. Curling is a national sport...
Gift-of-god
05-12-2008, 20:19
Think about it. Curling is a national sport...

Careful. We'll slide rocks at you.
Saige Dragon
05-12-2008, 20:29
How do we as Canadians change that perception?

How do we reverse that negative propaganda?

Join the Biotic Baking Brigade (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biotic_Baking_Brigade).
Megaloria
05-12-2008, 20:48
Careful. We'll slide rocks at you HARD.

Fixed.
Neesika
05-12-2008, 21:47
*giggles*
Hotwife
05-12-2008, 22:16
Careful. We'll slide rocks at you.

I remember visiting Ottawa, and at 8 PM, the streets rolled up (kind of like a very small town), and the only thing on TV was four channels of curling.
Neesika
06-12-2008, 03:02
Ottawa has the dubious honour of being named the most boring city in Canada for a reason.
CanuckHeaven
06-12-2008, 06:06
My guess would be tha the easiest way would be to organise a small group of individuals into doing loud media stunts that get across whatever message you want to deliver.

The Conservatives have a well-running trans-Canada advertising/propaganda/campaign machine. You don't. So, you have to co-opt one. The only one even vaguely accessible to you would be the media, CBC in particular. But Peter Mansbridge isn't about to let you do a five minute speech to Canada, so you have to do something newsworthy that gives you five minutes anyways.

http://www.wendmag.com/blog/2008/06/06/french-spiderman-climbs-ny-times-building/
I think the problem today is that there is too much access to the bogus "information highway". Today, it is more like the "disinformation detour". People seem to lap up total bullshit and spit it out at an alarming rate.

When I was younger, I went door to door campaigning for the candidate in my riding. I sent letters to the editor and once I sent a letter to a Toronto Sun columnist. She was so pissed off with my polite dissing of her column that she wrote a column about it and even threw my name out there along with her usual misinformation.

There is an apathy in this country right now and what we need is someone with honesty and integrity or something to get us back where we need to be.

And no......I am not holding my breath.
Tmutarakhan
06-12-2008, 18:24
Ottawa has the dubious honour of being named the most boring city in Canada for a reason.
WOW! And the bar is set so high. That's like being the most violent city in Pakistan.
Neesika
06-12-2008, 18:28
WOW! And the bar is set so high. That's like being the most violent city in Pakistan.

*looks at your location*

I don't think you should be running your mouth.
Skallvia
06-12-2008, 18:31
WOW! And the bar is set so high. That's like being the most violent city in Pakistan.

Or the Most Unemployed City in Michigan...*looks at own Location*...fuck, lol
Mikesburg
07-12-2008, 01:25
You can always count on the CBC to give their stories a left-leaning spin.

Harper 'ran away from Parliament,' Dion says

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/06/political-rallies.html

Speaking at a pro-coalition rally in Toronto on Saturday, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion accused Prime Minister Stephen Harper of caring more about his political career than the financial well-being of Canadians.

He also suggested Harper erred in attacking the Bloc Québécois's support of the coalition.

"Harper took an economic crisis, and added the parliamentary crisis, but he then tried to transform it into a national unity crisis — all of this because he cares more about his job than your jobs," Dion said outside Toronto's city hall.

About 3,000 people attended the event, despite the sub-zero temperatures.

But defenders of the coalition cause were not the only people voicing their opinions Saturday. In fact, their events appeared to be dwarfed by a series of anti-coalition protests staged in cities across the country, including Vancouver, Halifax, Fredericton, Calgary and Ottawa.

So if the majority of protestors are anti-coalition, ('dwarfed' apparently) then why are Dion and Layton getting top billing? This is the sort of bias that the right wing usually complains about when fretting about public-funded broadcasting (and one of the right wing gripes I happen to agree with.)

At any rate, Dion is right in that quote, and Harper's playing a dangerous political game. I just find it ironic that he doesn't realize he's doing the same thing.
CanuckHeaven
07-12-2008, 09:32
You can always count on the CBC to give their stories a left-leaning spin.

Harper 'ran away from Parliament,' Dion says

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/06/political-rallies.html

So if the majority of protestors are anti-coalition, ('dwarfed' apparently) then why are Dion and Layton getting top billing? This is the sort of bias that the right wing usually complains about when fretting about public-funded broadcasting (and one of the right wing gripes I happen to agree with.)

At any rate, Dion is right in that quote, and Harper's playing a dangerous political game. I just find it ironic that he doesn't realize he's doing the same thing.
At any rate, it appears that Harper is winning the "dangerous game" at the moment and that is totally mind boggling!!
Xomic
07-12-2008, 09:53
Perhaps there is some hope: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Thousands_protest_Stephen_Harper_in_Toronto
Mikesburg
07-12-2008, 15:32
At any rate, it appears that Harper is winning the "dangerous game" at the moment and that is totally mind boggling!!

I just think Harper's used his last life line on 'Who wants to be an evil Prime Minister?'. I think he just needs to go home with his winnings and let the next contestant step up to the chair.

And he was such an entertaining player. Pure bullyboy.