Deceiver prorogues, Iggy and Layton talk is OT here

[westsidebud]

Sorry but democracy is accountable. It is not Harper’s fault that the Liberals are basically an inept rudderless ship drifting off aimlessly into political irrelevancy and that Jack Layton is a flake who has basically never spent a day in the real world in his life.

If you don’t like Harper vote accordingly but frankly many Canadian got tired or Liberal corruption and a criminal justice system that favoured giving more rights to criminals than the victims. The Conservatives and Harper are bringing about policy that many Canadian’s are supportive of. This is why Harper is rising in the polls while the Liberals continue to drop and Taliban Jack Layton sits still.

Yes, not everyone will always agree with anything and everything in politics but the fact is that more people are agreeing with Harper these days. And for those of your Taliban/ Afghanistan sympathizers out there, yep you can keep supporting Taliban Jack or the Liberals. Some of us have no sympathy for these cowardly cold blooded killer’s, and yes, some of you would make them Canadian citizen’s if you could, I realize that as well. Just not all of us agree.

your day is passed al just sail off into the sunset. we will see how corrupt the harper goverment is in time.

canadians do not want american justice system,, it doesnt work .

and since you forgot al, my grampa did not fight in ww2 so sum punk like harper could throw everthing they fought for out the window.

yes it does matter how captives we caught get treated, we are not thugs and we dnt ever want to be thugs,

please do not disgrace the brave men and women of our military with your rightwing neo nazi propagnda. they did not give there lives for canada to turn into nazi germany.

if you dnt understand this then what exactly were you doing in 1942?

[fred 2]

what were u doing in 1942?

[mtnman1]

Sorry but democracy is accountable. It is not Harper’s fault that the Liberals are basically an inept rudderless ship drifting off aimlessly into political irrelevancy and that Jack Layton is a flake who has basically never spent a day in the real world in his life.

If you don’t like Harper vote accordingly but frankly many Canadian got tired or Liberal corruption and a criminal justice system that favoured giving more rights to criminals than the victims. The Conservatives and Harper are bringing about policy that many Canadian’s are supportive of. This is why Harper is rising in the polls while the Liberals continue to drop and Taliban Jack Layton sits still.

Yes, not everyone will always agree with anything and everything in politics but the fact is that more people are agreeing with Harper these days. And for those of your Taliban/ Afghanistan sympathizers out there, yep you can keep supporting Taliban Jack or the Liberals. Some of us have no sympathy for these cowardly cold blooded killer’s, and yes, some of you would make them Canadian citizen’s if you could, I realize that as well. Just not all of us agree.

your day is passed al just sail off into the sunset. we will see how corrupt the harper goverment is in time.

canadians do not want american justice system,, it doesnt work .

and since you forgot al, my grampa did not fight in ww2 so sum punk like harper could throw everthing they fought for out the window.
yes it does matter how captives we caught get treated, we are not thugs and we dnt ever want to be thugs,

please do not disgrace the brave men and women of our military with your rightwing neo nazi propagnda. they did not give there lives for canada to turn into nazi germany.

if you dnt understand this then what exactly were you doing in 1942?

What side was your grampa on? Speckin se duech? das boot, das boot, boss...lookin se, das boot, boss. (Pardon my spelling).

[Al Czervic]

your day is passed al just sail off into the sunset. we will see how corrupt the harper goverment is in time.

canadians do not want american justice system,, it doesnt work .

and since you forgot al, my grampa did not fight in ww2 so sum punk like harper could throw everthing they fought for out the window.

yes it does matter how captives we caught get treated, we are not thugs and we dnt ever want to be thugs,

please do not disgrace the brave men and women of our military with your rightwing neo nazi propagnda. they did not give there lives for canada to turn into nazi germany.

if you dnt understand this then what exactly were you doing in 1942?

As usual your commentary honours the calibre of your character succinctly.

[steven lloyd]

(Pardon my spelling).

Yes, I think we will all agree you need to work on your German writing skills - although to be honest I couldn't tell. At least you can spell in English and form basic English sentences. You're definitely up on westsidebud there - although, so is my six year old grandson.

[mtnman1]

(Pardon my spelling).

Yes, I think we will all agree you need to work on your German writing skills - although to be honest I couldn't tell. At least you can spell in English and form basic English sentences. You're definitely up on westsidebud there - although, so is my six year old grandson.

[Al Czervic]

(Pardon my spelling).

Yes, I think we will all agree you need to work on your German writing skills - although to be honest I couldn't tell. At least you can spell in English and form basic English sentences. You're definitely up on westsidebud there - although, so is my six year old grandson.

good one Steven !

[unclemarty]

and since you forgot al, my grampa did not fight in ww2 so sum punk like harper could throw everthing they fought for out the window.

too bad your grampa never had the opportunity to tune you in.

[NAB]

""Andrew Coyne, the best political pundit in Canada, has calmed down slightly from his initial reaction to Stephen Harper's diabolical decision to prorogue parliament.
"I am not actually calling for civil war," he allows, after earlier comparing Harper's move to King Charles I's abuse of the English parliament, which produced a brief respite in the British monarchy's 900-year run. Well, phew to that, I say. God knows where I put my musket, which hasn't been properly cleaned in ages in any event. Andrew, as always, is rational in the extreme, even if a little upset. The same can't be said for everyone who took offense at the Prime Minister's decision to suspend Parliament until March rather than face the inconvenience of more questions about Afghanistan.

Ralph Goodale, for one, sounds like the guy who discovers the local airport has introduced full frontal body scans, and he's first in line. But that's nothing compared to the conniption fit at the Ottawa Citizen, where Michael D. Behiels loses all control.

It is becoming patently obvious Harper now presides over a minority government that can all-too-readily be characterized as a not-so-benign dictatorship. Harper successfully exploits the first-past-the-post electoral system -- which he and Flanagan denounced as immature -- and the ideological and political divisions within the opposition parties, to impose his unflinching will on his cabinet, caucus, and what he characterizes as an utterly dysfunctional House of Commons, one made so by the government itself. With his appointment of yet more Conservatives to the Senate, Harper will exercise full and unfettered power over Parliament, a power which he will readily use to cow the judicial branch of government with his so-called tough-on-crime legislation.

[...] Indeed, it is clear that Harper will engage opposition MPs, senators and Canadian citizens in a constitutional war over the prerogatives of Parliament, a war that he and his cabinet are determined to win at virtually any price to our constitutional democracy and its hallowed institutions.

Just give me a minute here while I clean the fulminations off the floor.... There, that's got it. Those things can get slippery if you don't get the mop out right away.

Now, all this talk about civil war, dictatorships and unfettered power is making me decidedly nervous. Unfettered power? Uh, isn't this still a minority government that can be brought down any time the opposition decides to do so? Last time I looked, the government was still obligated to present itself to voters at some point, and live (or die) by the result. If someone legitimately thinks Stephen Harper is threatening the Constitution, there are about a gazillion lawyers in Ottawa who'd be happy to take the case.

Yes, we know: People are really mad that the Prime Minister has found a way to avoid facing more questions about the detainee issue. And they're madder still that he keeps thumbing his nose at any and all challengers, and getting away with it. As Behiels notes, when he isn't gathering pitchforks for the march on Parliament, the list is getting impressive: Peter Tinsley, Paul Kennedy, Linda Keen, Kevin Page ... Richard Nixon would have been envious at such a long line of enemies.

All that is bad. Agreed. But a constitutional crisis? Please.

As it happens, I've been reading a book about the conscription crisis that blew up in the closing months of 1944, when Mackenzie King was accused of costing Canadian lives by his reluctance to use conscripted troops as reinforcements for the volunteers fighting in Europe.

King, famously, had reluctantly introduced conscription, but was determined to never actually let the troops leave the safety of Canada (Kind of like Jean Chretien agreed to Kyoto without ever intending to implement it). Only volunteers were sent overseas. As the war neared its end, though, casualties rose and recruitment couldn't keep up, putting intense pressure on King to use some of the 50,000 conscript troops in Canada. King was adamantly opposed, convinced the war was won, and that Quebec would quit the country if conscripts were sent into battle.

So what's that got to do with Stephen Harper? Two things:

At the time of the crisis, King had been prime minister for almost 20 years and had an overwhelming majority over a Tory opposition whose leader didn't even have a seat in Parliament (because King wouldn't call a byelection), yet wasn't able to simply dictate policy to his cabinet in the manner of Chretien or Harper. King's cabinet included a serious number of substantial, accomplished figures, who didn't regard a cabinet seat as their greatest accomplishment. A good thing, right? Just the kind of situation nostalgic present-day commentators keep calling for.

Nonetheless, King simply refused to give in to his increasingly divided cabinet, or the overwhelming public support (except in Quebec) for using the conscripts. He stalled. He stayed away from Parliament. He avoided taking a formal vote. He badgered and berated opponents, misled his cabinet and issued dire warnings about the fall of the government and the break-up of the country. In other words, he used every dodge he could think of to get his own way despite the will of the country, the badgering of the press and many in his own caucus.

Stephen Harper, despite what you've been told, didn't invent this stuff. Nor is his manoeuvring unprecedented, or a threat to the Constitution, or democracy in Canada. He's not a dictator or a despot, or anything close to one. Prime Ministers have sought to have their way since prime ministers were invented, and can be very pigheaded about it. Politics is dirty, and there was no golden age. Just obdurate leaders and angry opponents.


National Post ""

Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blog ... z0bPtQ8NSf

[westsidebud]

your day is passed al just sail off into the sunset. we will see how corrupt the harper goverment is in time.

canadians do not want american justice system,, it doesnt work .

and since you forgot al, my grampa did not fight in ww2 so sum punk like harper could throw everthing they fought for out the window.

yes it does matter how captives we caught get treated, we are not thugs and we dnt ever want to be thugs,

please do not disgrace the brave men and women of our military with your rightwing neo nazi propagnda. they did not give there lives for canada to turn into nazi germany.

if you dnt understand this then what exactly were you doing in 1942?

As usual your commentary honours the calibre of your character succinctly.

i speak the truth. your way of thinking is a thing of the past.

time to join the future

[westsidebud]

""Andrew Coyne, the best political pundit in Canada, has calmed down slightly from his initial reaction to Stephen Harper's diabolical decision to prorogue parliament.
"I am not actually calling for civil war," he allows, after earlier comparing Harper's move to King Charles I's abuse of the English parliament, which produced a brief respite in the British monarchy's 900-year run. Well, phew to that, I say. God knows where I put my musket, which hasn't been properly cleaned in ages in any event. Andrew, as always, is rational in the extreme, even if a little upset. The same can't be said for everyone who took offense at the Prime Minister's decision to suspend Parliament until March rather than face the inconvenience of more questions about Afghanistan.

Ralph Goodale, for one, sounds like the guy who discovers the local airport has introduced full frontal body scans, and he's first in line. But that's nothing compared to the conniption fit at the Ottawa Citizen, where Michael D. Behiels loses all control.

It is becoming patently obvious Harper now presides over a minority government that can all-too-readily be characterized as a not-so-benign dictatorship. Harper successfully exploits the first-past-the-post electoral system -- which he and Flanagan denounced as immature -- and the ideological and political divisions within the opposition parties, to impose his unflinching will on his cabinet, caucus, and what he characterizes as an utterly dysfunctional House of Commons, one made so by the government itself. With his appointment of yet more Conservatives to the Senate, Harper will exercise full and unfettered power over Parliament, a power which he will readily use to cow the judicial branch of government with his so-called tough-on-crime legislation.

[...] Indeed, it is clear that Harper will engage opposition MPs, senators and Canadian citizens in a constitutional war over the prerogatives of Parliament, a war that he and his cabinet are determined to win at virtually any price to our constitutional democracy and its hallowed institutions.

Just give me a minute here while I clean the fulminations off the floor.... There, that's got it. Those things can get slippery if you don't get the mop out right away.

Now, all this talk about civil war, dictatorships and unfettered power is making me decidedly nervous. Unfettered power? Uh, isn't this still a minority government that can be brought down any time the opposition decides to do so? Last time I looked, the government was still obligated to present itself to voters at some point, and live (or die) by the result. If someone legitimately thinks Stephen Harper is threatening the Constitution, there are about a gazillion lawyers in Ottawa who'd be happy to take the case.

Yes, we know: People are really mad that the Prime Minister has found a way to avoid facing more questions about the detainee issue. And they're madder still that he keeps thumbing his nose at any and all challengers, and getting away with it. As Behiels notes, when he isn't gathering pitchforks for the march on Parliament, the list is getting impressive: Peter Tinsley, Paul Kennedy, Linda Keen, Kevin Page ... Richard Nixon would have been envious at such a long line of enemies.

All that is bad. Agreed. But a constitutional crisis? Please.

As it happens, I've been reading a book about the conscription crisis that blew up in the closing months of 1944, when Mackenzie King was accused of costing Canadian lives by his reluctance to use conscripted troops as reinforcements for the volunteers fighting in Europe.

King, famously, had reluctantly introduced conscription, but was determined to never actually let the troops leave the safety of Canada (Kind of like Jean Chretien agreed to Kyoto without ever intending to implement it). Only volunteers were sent overseas. As the war neared its end, though, casualties rose and recruitment couldn't keep up, putting intense pressure on King to use some of the 50,000 conscript troops in Canada. King was adamantly opposed, convinced the war was won, and that Quebec would quit the country if conscripts were sent into battle.

So what's that got to do with Stephen Harper? Two things:

At the time of the crisis, King had been prime minister for almost 20 years and had an overwhelming majority over a Tory opposition whose leader didn't even have a seat in Parliament (because King wouldn't call a byelection), yet wasn't able to simply dictate policy to his cabinet in the manner of Chretien or Harper. King's cabinet included a serious number of substantial, accomplished figures, who didn't regard a cabinet seat as their greatest accomplishment. A good thing, right? Just the kind of situation nostalgic present-day commentators keep calling for.

Nonetheless, King simply refused to give in to his increasingly divided cabinet, or the overwhelming public support (except in Quebec) for using the conscripts. He stalled. He stayed away from Parliament. He avoided taking a formal vote. He badgered and berated opponents, misled his cabinet and issued dire warnings about the fall of the government and the break-up of the country. In other words, he used every dodge he could think of to get his own way despite the will of the country, the badgering of the press and many in his own caucus.

Stephen Harper, despite what you've been told, didn't invent this stuff. Nor is his manoeuvring unprecedented, or a threat to the Constitution, or democracy in Canada. He's not a dictator or a despot, or anything close to one. Prime Ministers have sought to have their way since prime ministers were invented, and can be very pigheaded about it. Politics is dirty, and there was no golden age. Just obdurate leaders and angry opponents.


National Post ""

Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blog ... z0bPtQ8NSf

its borders on a dictatorship in the sense that all western goverments get voted in by the people then do what ever they please. but i agree any party voted in seems to go that way anyways

[Glacier]

Prorogation has nothing to do with Afghanistan detainees. The reason the PM did it is because it is part of his goal to gain a Conservative majority in the Senate. Once that happens he will be able to implement Senate reform (or so the theory goes).

The Conservatives would like the public to think they don't want to hear questions on detainees, and by the same token, the opposition is pretending to be furious about the PM circumventing democracy. But the truth is all parties know it is all about gaining the power of the Senate, which is really why the opposition is furious.

[logicalview]

Prorogation has nothing to do with Afghanistan detainees. The reason the PM did it is because it is part of his goal to gain a Conservative majority in the Senate. Once that happens he will be able to implement Senate reform (or so the theory goes).

It's happening because the oppostion was just too plain stupid to think ahead. They are just bad at what they do. There were more than enough chances for Iggoitic and Slack Jack to defeat Harper through a non-confidence vote to avoid a Conservative Senate majority.

Slowly but surely, Harper is lining his ducks up for a majority government with senate support.

The notion of minority governments being held accountable by the opposition has been nullified by their own incompetency. Way to go Jack & Iggy, you've managed to get outed again as being the most inept opposition in decades.

Last year Harper called the oppositions bluff and they backed down. The opposition this time is trailing so far behind in the polls that they would most likely lose enough seats so that Harper would enjoy a majority.

Looks like they will back down again.

[steelrules]

Some alternatives.
My personal favorite is any party that supports putting property rights in the constitution.

http://www.libertarian.ca/english/liber ... tions.html
http://www.canadianactionparty.ca/policies
http://www.greenparty.ca/

[Bagotricks]

Prorogation has nothing to do with Afghanistan detainees. The reason the PM did it is because it is part of his goal to gain a Conservative majority in the Senate. Once that happens he will be able to implement Senate reform (or so the theory goes).

Its amazing that the "malfucntioning senate" sent that crime bill ( C- 15 ) that called for mandaotry minimums sentances for drug crimes back to the House full of red ink and "x"'s.

The Cons tryed to push it for votes (aka tough on crime - be afraid Canada), and the Libs voted for it because they are afraid of loosing a election and they are a torn party right now...so what happens..? The *people* of Canada get stuck a unfair law that will damage society so Harper gets more votes and gets closer to his majority? - and that statement of "damage" is backed by 25 years of data from the drug war in the US.

The sober second thought. The un elected, least swayed "wizards" of our political age that have vast experience in a vast amout of different areas that have veto power and are not swayed by fear of loosing elections and their seats ( jobs and pensions). No matter how bad things get in the House, they send bills back if they dont work for Canadians. There can be arguemnts made against and surely - they are human, but they serve no master, and thats the idea.

Harper wants to get rid of it. Change it. Manipulate it.

Whats next, electing the Senate just like Canadian Idol? - Text 1234 for Don Cherry and Text 4321 for Rex Murphy. Vote NOW! Senate Canadian Idol - Brought to you by the Conservative Party of Canada (paid for by the taxpayers of Canada - cheque crack - zing!)

Maybe then his 1 year in jail for 5 pot plant law would go through...? Interesting.

Now, we have a well respected guy that comes out and says "Higher ups knew tourture was going on and did nothing" which is a PR nightmare for any government. Then we witness the most classic character assasination motions doled out by the Harper Governemt in the media against this poor whistleblower. They called him everything but a child molester. Then...ooops! Looks like there was some truth to that...some generals had to eat humble pie...and the Harper bag men are left holding the bag...so they call the Prorogue Garbage truck to bail them out...again. Pathetic.

Now we have Con Spin-Doctors kicking up the debate in this country on talk radios and newspapers articles - "The enemy is killing our troops...WHO CARES if they are getting tortured" which quite bluntly, is sickening.

I see these WWII quotes and my own grandfather fought in that last true war. His troop(?) once took german prisoners of war that had killed and even tortured the troops he was fighting with. Did they tourture them back? No...because thats why they were fighting and dieing for. He stressed this to me. To NOT be tourtured. To be kind and save people from opressive governments, not to punish or be vengeful. It is not easy being the good guys, but thats why we are the good guys...or were anyways. I get rowled up when I see these people condoning torture.

Will be very interesting to see what happens once this christmas hangover fuzz wears off and life goes on...