Deceiver prorogues, Iggy and Layton talk is OT here

[damngrumpy]

Harper is a snake in a pit full of them. He has told so many lies no one can find the truth, but then
his years in opposition, allowed him to learn from the Liberals.
No he shouldn't be allowed but the rules of our parliament allow for this kind of action.
He doesn't want to have a spectacle during the Olympics and when the House opens the same old
questions will start all over again. As for bringing him down, why? He is doing damage to his
government leave him there, the other economic shoe is going to fall in a couple of months.
All the gains will evaporate and we will see a deeper recession. I hear all this green shoots business well the green shoots are nothing short of mold from wet bills.
If we are patient the Tories will still be there when the music stops later this year and we will be
rid of them for another fifty years. Harper's kind are like locusts they come round every couple of
generations and then go back to where ever they came from.

[Fritzthecat]

Kinda cool, the Deceiver prorogues the government and his flock use it as an opportunity to slag the other parties?
What do you suppose they have been smoking?

you are right - we should have all voted Green last election and allowed Lizzie the Loon to drive us straight into economic hell. Then we'd have a functioning parliament all right, which would be good as we could all watch it all day long as none of us would have jobs.

Yes, Harper has done an excellent job of making sure the unemployment rate stayed low.
Wow, he's got my vote next time.

And what would Taliban Jack Layton have done differently? After all he only said Canada should be spending more money he left out the part about how much more and on what. Perhaps you can enlighten us.

How about you enlighten me on how Harper and his Konservative regime are ensuring jobs and job creation for Canadians? Hey, maybe we should crank up taxes and sign another NAFTA style trade agreement, just like Brian and his gang did last time we had a Konservative regime.


And please, don't deflect the question. Just answer it.

[Urbane]

Harper is a snake in a pit full of them. He has told so many lies no one can find the truth, but then
his years in opposition, allowed him to learn from the Liberals.
No he shouldn't be allowed but the rules of our parliament allow for this kind of action.
He doesn't want to have a spectacle during the Olympics and when the House opens the same old
questions will start all over again. As for bringing him down, why? He is doing damage to his
government leave him there, the other economic shoe is going to fall in a couple of months.
All the gains will evaporate and we will see a deeper recession. I hear all this green shoots business well the green shoots are nothing short of mold from wet bills.
If we are patient the Tories will still be there when the music stops later this year and we will be
rid of them for another fifty years. Harper's kind are like locusts they come round every couple of
generations and then go back to where ever they came from.

Yes, he learned from the Liberals or at least they all play from the same playbook when they are in government. Read Rex Murphy's take on things that I posted a few days ago in this thread and you'll see that he makes that very point. I've voted LIberal in the past far more than I've voted Conservative but I do have a concern that we don't continue to have one party, the Liberal Party, as the "natural governing party" as Alan Fotheringham calls them. The Liberals shouldn't be running Canada all the time - that just isn't healthy. I hope that you're wrong and that the recession doesn't continue. I hope that Canada flourishes and if that helps the Conservatives win the next election that's fine with me. I think the Liberals need some more time out of office.

[melwilde]

Well, I wonder about the rhetoric I have read by some posters. All this over an extra 17 days.
many previous Federal and Provincial Governments have done the same thing and yet no critic appears to understand that.
With regard to the prisoner issue; Paul martins government worked out and signed the prisoner transfer agreement. To suggest we torture prisoners is false, as well, saying our Officers in Uniform are weak, is out of line and an insult against our men and women in uniform. Critics may not want to understand the anger Afghans have against individuals who are killing their family and friends, but I sure do. I kept the video Of Dosanjh and kinsellas remarks, so please argue the liberals didn't make these statements, if you will.
If one wants to clearly state they don't like the Prime Minister, that's OK in any democracy, but at least keep the information accurate. Given that we have a minority Government, the opposition have had ample opportunity to defeat the Government. Fish or cut bait guys, but quit crying about it.
One suggestion I do think has merit is that the hiatus will allow time to change the majority in the Unelected Senate. Given the games that have been played in that body, the only thing better than a majority change would be elections in the Senate.
Opposition is one thing, but lets stay to some basic facts folks.

[westsidebud]

Well, I wonder about the rhetoric I have read by some posters. All this over an extra 17 days.
many previous Federal and Provincial Governments have done the same thing and yet no critic appears to understand that.
With regard to the prisoner issue; Paul martins government worked out and signed the prisoner transfer agreement. To suggest we torture prisoners is false, as well, saying our Officers in Uniform are weak, is out of line and an insult against our men and women in uniform. Critics may not want to understand the anger Afghans have against individuals who are killing their family and friends, but I sure do. I kept the video Of Dosanjh and kinsellas remarks, so please argue the liberals didn't make these statements, if you will.
If one wants to clearly state they don't like the Prime Minister, that's OK in any democracy, but at least keep the information accurate. Given that we have a minority Government, the opposition have had ample opportunity to defeat the Government. Fish or cut bait guys, but quit crying about it.
One suggestion I do think has merit is that the hiatus will allow time to change the majority in the Unelected Senate. Given the games that have been played in that body, the only thing better than a majority change would be elections in the Senate.
Opposition is one thing, but lets stay to some basic facts folks.

lmao harper wouldnt know a fact if it hit him in the ballzzzzz

[Urbane]

Lorne Gunter makes some good points. Politics is as phoney as WWE wrestling. Actually, politics is more phoney than WWE wrestling. It's easy to fall into the partisan trap of thinking when your party does something it's noble and all for the good but when the other guys do it it's undemocratic. Anyway, I think this is worth a read:

Lorne Gunter: Prorogation isn't the problem
January 13, 2010

Here's why the proroguing of Parliament doesn't matter in a practical sense: On any given day, most Canadians couldn't tell you whether Parliament was in session or not. Sure, those Canadians who watch Question Period regularly --and tune in to the afternoon parliamentary wrap-up shows on cable news networks -- know when the House of Commons is in session. But for everyone else, it's hard to tell: There is so much noise and fulmination emanating from our political parties that whether or nor there is a formal session, every newscast and every newspaper front page will almost always contain a story featuring the government spinning its policies and the opposition parties railing against the government's ineptitude, insensitivity, deviousness or cheapness.

The scene changes depending on whether the House is sitting, but the rhetoric remains the same. The backdrop may be Parliament's wood-panelled green chamber when the Commons is in session versus some hotel banquet room or seniors' lodge or protest rally when it is not. Yet the verbiage is identical.

To most casual observers, our political discourse appears as two unbroken, intertwined threads of prevaricating and pontificating from the government on the one hand, and whining, whinging shrillness from the opposition on the other. Prorogation offers the ordinary voter no rest from the cacophony because he or she will notice no change. The tone, vocabulary and sound level from our politicians will remain the same throughout the suspension of Parliament.

The Tories' prorogation until early March is wrong in a theoretical sense. It is arbitrary. It is undemocratic. And it is almost entirely partisan. I don't like it.

Still I disagree with Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale that the two-month suspension "disrespects Parliament." It doesn't disrespect the institution any more than the average Question Period with its shouted insults, desk-thumping buffoonery and manufactured hysteria. Besides, prorogation is an ancient Parliamentary convention. It is impossible to disrespect Parliament by using a valid parliamentary rule to adjourn Parliament.

Moreover, given all the games the Liberals played with parliamentary rules and powers to get their way when they were in office, Mr. Goodale and his colleagues are great ones to talk. They even called snap elections despite having solid majorities --a much bigger and far more expensive deal than a two-month prorogation -- just because it suited their partisan ends.

It is fair to contend that Stephen Harper and his government have pulled the plug in part to prevent the Afghan detainee debate from overshadowing glowing coverage of next month's 2010 Vancouver/Whistler Olympics. The many Tories who are defending their party's use of prorogation would be incensed if the Liberals did the same thing under the same circumstances. So any condemnation that is good for the Liberal goose equally befits the Tory gander.

Yet it is also equally fair to argue that prorogation was forced on the Tories by the Liberal Senate. Because the Liberals enjoyed a majority in the Senate, they saw nothing wrong with using Parliament's upper chamber to block legislation the Tories had managed to pass through the lower chamber. That, too, is an ancient Parliamentary convention. Still, it is more than a little hypocritical for the Libs to accuse the Tories of undemocratic behaviour when they themselves used unelected senators to thwart the will of the people's elected representatives.

Using the undemocratic Senate to partisan ends is no more noble the pulling Parliament's plug.

I think what truly bothers the Liberals, though, is that during the current suspension, the Tories will gain a majority in the Senate for the first time since they formed the government in 2006. When Parliament returns, the Liberals will have lost their ability to undermine the Tories' agenda via the back door of the Senate.

From now on, once the Tories manage to get a piece of legislation through the Commons, it won't face obstruction in a Liberal-dominated house of patronage.

If the Liberals dislike a Tory bill, they will now have to force an election by voting it down in the House -- something they have not had the stomach for in nearly four years.

[Liberty and Truth]

Well, I wonder about the rhetoric I have read by some posters. All this over an extra 17 days.
many previous Federal and Provincial Governments have done the same thing and yet no critic appears to understand that.
With regard to the prisoner issue; Paul martins government worked out and signed the prisoner transfer agreement. To suggest we torture prisoners is false, as well, saying our Officers in Uniform are weak, is out of line and an insult against our men and women in uniform. Critics may not want to understand the anger Afghans have against individuals who are killing their family and friends, but I sure do. I kept the video Of Dosanjh and kinsellas remarks, so please argue the liberals didn't make these statements, if you will.
If one wants to clearly state they don't like the Prime Minister, that's OK in any democracy, but at least keep the information accurate. Given that we have a minority Government, the opposition have had ample opportunity to defeat the Government. Fish or cut bait guys, but quit crying about it.
One suggestion I do think has merit is that the hiatus will allow time to change the majority in the Unelected Senate. Given the games that have been played in that body, the only thing better than a majority change would be elections in the Senate.
Opposition is one thing, but lets stay to some basic facts folks.

lol harper wouldnt know a fact if it hit him in the ballzzzzz

lol so you guys at least have one thing in common.

[NAB]

Lorne Gunter makes some good points. Politics is as phoney as WWE wrestling. Actually, politics is more phoney than WWE wrestling. It's easy to fall into the partisan trap of thinking when your party does something it's noble and all for the good but when the other guys do it it's undemocratic. Anyway, I think this is worth a read:

Lorne Gunter: Prorogation isn't the problem
January 13, 2010

Here's why the proroguing of Parliament doesn't matter in a practical sense: On any given day, most Canadians couldn't tell you whether Parliament was in session or not. Sure, those Canadians who watch Question Period regularly --and tune in to the afternoon parliamentary wrap-up shows on cable news networks -- know when the House of Commons is in session. But for everyone else, it's hard to tell: There is so much noise and fulmination emanating from our political parties that whether or nor there is a formal session, every newscast and every newspaper front page will almost always contain a story featuring the government spinning its policies and the opposition parties railing against the government's ineptitude, insensitivity, deviousness or cheapness.

The scene changes depending on whether the House is sitting, but the rhetoric remains the same. The backdrop may be Parliament's wood-panelled green chamber when the Commons is in session versus some hotel banquet room or seniors' lodge or protest rally when it is not. Yet the verbiage is identical.

To most casual observers, our political discourse appears as two unbroken, intertwined threads of prevaricating and pontificating from the government on the one hand, and whining, whinging shrillness from the opposition on the other. Prorogation offers the ordinary voter no rest from the cacophony because he or she will notice no change. The tone, vocabulary and sound level from our politicians will remain the same throughout the suspension of Parliament.

The Tories' prorogation until early March is wrong in a theoretical sense. It is arbitrary. It is undemocratic. And it is almost entirely partisan. I don't like it.

Still I disagree with Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale that the two-month suspension "disrespects Parliament." It doesn't disrespect the institution any more than the average Question Period with its shouted insults, desk-thumping buffoonery and manufactured hysteria. Besides, prorogation is an ancient Parliamentary convention. It is impossible to disrespect Parliament by using a valid parliamentary rule to adjourn Parliament.

Moreover, given all the games the Liberals played with parliamentary rules and powers to get their way when they were in office, Mr. Goodale and his colleagues are great ones to talk. They even called snap elections despite having solid majorities --a much bigger and far more expensive deal than a two-month prorogation -- just because it suited their partisan ends.

It is fair to contend that Stephen Harper and his government have pulled the plug in part to prevent the Afghan detainee debate from overshadowing glowing coverage of next month's 2010 Vancouver/Whistler Olympics. The many Tories who are defending their party's use of prorogation would be incensed if the Liberals did the same thing under the same circumstances. So any condemnation that is good for the Liberal goose equally befits the Tory gander.

Yet it is also equally fair to argue that prorogation was forced on the Tories by the Liberal Senate. Because the Liberals enjoyed a majority in the Senate, they saw nothing wrong with using Parliament's upper chamber to block legislation the Tories had managed to pass through the lower chamber. That, too, is an ancient Parliamentary convention. Still, it is more than a little hypocritical for the Libs to accuse the Tories of undemocratic behaviour when they themselves used unelected senators to thwart the will of the people's elected representatives.

Using the undemocratic Senate to partisan ends is no more noble the pulling Parliament's plug.

I think what truly bothers the Liberals, though, is that during the current suspension, the Tories will gain a majority in the Senate for the first time since they formed the government in 2006. When Parliament returns, the Liberals will have lost their ability to undermine the Tories' agenda via the back door of the Senate.

From now on, once the Tories manage to get a piece of legislation through the Commons, it won't face obstruction in a Liberal-dominated house of patronage.

If the Liberals dislike a Tory bill, they will now have to force an election by voting it down in the House -- something they have not had the stomach for in nearly four years.

Interesting read Urbane.

I posted this in the BC Forum relating it to Gordon Campbell, but it is appropriate here too. It certainly appears that those who accuse PM Harper of being dictatorial and a control freak (specifically Liberals and their supporters at this point) are really more interested in getting "their man" into the office - knowing that no matter what happens elsewhere he would "inherit" that power which was gradually put in place by his Liberal predecessors.

According to one comment I read this morning, apparently a fellow named Donald Savoie has been studying and writing on the development of where power in the Canadian system of government actually rests, ....federally, heavily today in the Prime Ministers office (regardless of what party is "in power" I presume).

He goes on to say that "Mr. Savoie has tracked the draining of power, first from Parliament toward Cabinet during the war years, and then from Cabinet into the Prime Minister’s Office under Pierre Trudeau." - expanding on how it developed further under the Chretien Liberals (asserting that Jean Chretien was known as "The Friendly Dictator") to Mr. Harper today "tightening the leash" on government ministers even more, particularly appropriate in these difficult economic times I suppose.

So it really does behove us to think long and carefully about that kind of power being placed in the hands of one M. Ignatieff, and what the result might be were he to achieve it. Even a "good Liberal" might have cause to be very concerned about the rise of another "Friendly Dictator", particularly one who is untested, and who's credentials are largely academic (and foreign based).

Nab

[Al Czervic]

How about you enlighten me on how Harper and his Konservative regime are ensuring jobs and job creation for Canadians? Hey, maybe we should crank up taxes and sign another NAFTA style trade agreement, just like Brian and his gang did last time we had a Konservative regime.
.

I have to commend you for your consistency. Long on criticisms but short on solutions. Much like your NDP.

[Al Czervic]

lol harper wouldnt know a fact if it hit him in the ballzzzzz

The upside is that at least Harper has them. Something Iggy and Layton are sadly lacking.

[I Think]

The deceivers flock hereabouts are still bleating about other governments using the prorogue, imo no government should be able to prorogue, except possibly in the most extreme situations, such as war, or national disaster.
I especially like those bleaters who automatically decide that if you dont like the deceivers regime then you must be a Liberal/green/ndp/commie/pinko - pick one.

[Logitack]

I especially like those bleaters who automatically decide that if you dont like the deceivers regime then you must be a Liberal/green/ndp/commie/pinko - pick one.

that is the mentality of the far right nutcases, nibs, but they are fun to play with

[Urbane]

imo no government should be able to prorogue, except possibly in the most extreme situations, such as war, or national disaster.

This is the 105th time in Canada's history that Parliament has been prorogued following a throne speech.

[Fritzthecat]

How about you enlighten me on how Harper and his Konservative regime are ensuring jobs and job creation for Canadians? Hey, maybe we should crank up taxes and sign another NAFTA style trade agreement, just like Brian and his gang did last time we had a Konservative regime.
.

I have to commend you for your consistency. Long on criticisms but short on solutions. Much like your NDP.

So, you won't answer the question?
Do you need a laxative?

[Al Czervic]

imo no government should be able to prorogue, except possibly in the most extreme situations, such as war, or national disaster.

This is the 105th time in Canada's history that Parliament has been prorogued following a throne speech.

But the other 103 were all OK. It was only when Harper did the last 2 where the sky had to fall down.