Wild Bill

Yeah, he does tend to do that!

"Silly Englishman! Your father was a hamster and your mother smelled of elderberries! I taunt you in your general direction!"

I'd vote for the Tories, since they seem to be the only ones who believe I should even have the opportunity.

Hey, virtually every Albertan would disagree with you! If you think that by telling them it was a myth it will change their minds then you will be disappointed. You give me a mental picture of Jimmy Swaggart standing in the middle of the Papal Square, Vatican City, during Easter Mass and yelling and yelling at the crowd of hundreds of thousands of worshippers - "Hey all you Catholics! You've got it all wrong!"

well. that's maybe a dozen or so. Would you be comfortable if they held a vote on it? like maybe, the day after Dion takes power?

What planet do you live on? I live in Ontario and even I know enough history to know that western separatist sentiment has been around for generations, in significant numbers. Ever hear of the Crow rate? I can't for the life of me understand why Albertans stuck around this long! If I weren't too poor, old and fat I might emigrate there myself. I find myself trapped right in the middle of madness, with no hope of escape.

Well, if you've got a better one showing high support for the coalition I'd love to see the link! Still, it's early...

You are mistaken. In a minority, one party still has the most seats. To displace them requires a deal with two or more other parties who's combined seat count will exceed that of the first party. The Liberals and the NDP have nowhere near enough seats to outdo the Tories. They only have enough if they include the Bloc. Period. End of story.

Here's the link to my Bell Sympatico server home page: http://sympatico.msn.ca/ Scroll down the left side till you come to their voting poll of 'question of the day'. If you read my post before it changes tomorrow you'll see their question about how Canadians feel about the coalition. It is not truely scientific but Sympatico serves a LOT of people! The results show well over 60,000 people have voted and about 60% are dead against the coalition. Only 21% at present are in support. Apparently there is a similar simple poll at ctv.ca, with similar results.

We Canadians are no longer the politically violent type, except for some FLQ types in Quebec, I guess. Of course, the older ones don't murder anymore. They just got tenure at some universities instead. Still, we WILL get to vote again someday! It remains to be seen if the Opposition will gain or lose support at that time for their actions this week. One thing's for sure, the hatred out west for Liberals has just been renewed for another few generations! I guess being the party that reaches out doesn't include Albertans.

Mais certainement, mon ami!

Tit for tat! If the Liberals succeed would you care to place a bet on how many decades it will be before the Liberals get more than a handful of seats in Western Canada? How about a bet on how long it will take before an Alberta separatist party gets enough seats in their provincial parliament to take a shot at it? It's obvious that you're one of those western Canadians who likes either the Liberals or the NDP. That's your right of course but I would find it hard to believe that you have a lot of company.

No, I'm simply saying that when ordinary people get the chance to vote they don't care about all that! The wishes of ordinary Canadians DO rule the day at the ballot box! How many people do you know who consult with constitutional lawyers before they cast their vote? Are you saying that because the people see some talking head on CBC NewsWorld stating that this coup is technically legal that they will all say to themselves "Oh well! It's ok then! And I will love them next election!"? As I said in another post, the deal with Karla Homolka was legal, too. How does the ordinary Canadian feel about that?

It may not be a good attitude but it's a real one. One that seems to be growing, as well. It illustrates another divide between us, that of rural and urban dwellers. Each has dramatically different values and beliefs. Each feels they aren't getting enough political attention because of the other group. Just another brick falling out of the wall of unity...

Again, another lawyer's argument. The vast majority of citizens are not lawyers. They may be wrong in their belief that a government MUST come about as the people's choice in an election but so what? That doesn't mean that this coalition will not get them upset enough to have them pay the Opposition parties back NEXT election! I'm becoming more convinced that a lot of people don't live in the real world...

Who cares if its your fault or not? My point is that the average voter is going to view all this from what he believes is right or wrong and doesn't care about fine points of constitutional law making it legal. You can lecture all your fellow citizens all you want and they won't give a damn. Neither will it influence their vote come NEXT election! The vast majority of voters are NOT political junkies. They do believe that they have the right to pick ALL their own governments. The fact that they are technically wrong is not relevant. They are likely to punish those they feel took away their choice first chance they get. If you have to get a judge to make someone vote for you then you've lost.

Well, that's the lawyer's argument! Technically you may be right but do you really think that's what the majority of voters believe? If you're right, then they'll all simply say "Golly! I never knew that! Who woulda thunk it? I guess I have to accept it as perfectly ok, then!" That's a much bigger stretch. Tell us again at the next election.

Mea culpa. Still, are you not picking apart my model instead of my point?

Well, I'm sure that if you just keep scolding them like that and wait long enough then of course it will happen. Meanwhile, you might consider that they have REASONS why they don't agree with folks like you and unless you stop calling them names and satisfy their arguments then you'll have a very, very long wait.

Yeah, and the Opposition coalition parties will be guaranteed shoo-ins to get the support of all the Tory MPs.

Despite my objection to their response, as far as Harper's provocation I would agree with you! Manning would never have done such a thing. Any good salesman knows that in a negotiation it's wise to give your rival an out, in the direction you want him to go. The Opposition parties could likely not survive losing guaranteed public money. They simply don't have the structure in place to raise money voluntarily donated in any significant amounts. We can argue about the morality of that but it really doesn't matter as far as what Harper did. Harper put them in the position of a cornered rat! They had no out. It was stupid to expect them to meekly accept it. Perhaps this coalition coup and installing Dion is political suicide. It's still a better choice! A desperate choice maybe but Harper left them with no other. A coup will buy them some time. They may fare badly in the next election but at least they'll be alive! In politics things can change quickly. Another term or two and they could be back on their feet, stronger than ever. One thing's for sure, they will have made certain that they have enough cash coming in from voluntary donations to avoid ever being in that position again.

Hey jdobbin, do you think the Liberals are finally getting past their challenges in making headway in Alberta? Gotta maintain that "truly national party" commitment, after all. I found your comment about Harper being only elected in his own riding quite interesting. It implies that a party leader is only a factor in his own riding. Last election, I rather thought that Dion had proved otherwise. Whatever, we may be witnessing just how apathetic or not Canadians really have become! Toppling Harper is really a minor moment in history. Governments have fallen many times before. What makes this situation different is the use of a 'coalition' to avoid allowing the people an immediate and direct say in the result. The Opposition apparently believe that the majority of Canadians don't care, will become convinced by the coalition's spectacular good governance over the time before the next election, or share their hate for Harper anyway. They also seem to believe that Canadians in general will not believe that it has anything to do with election financing. I find myself wanting to see how this plays out! It will be a direct test of different philosophies of government. Darwinism at it's finest. As I've posted before, since Reform died I haven't had an inspiring choice anyway. I would prefer that the Opposition be royally punished for a move that I consider undemocratic, if not immoral. Still, if the majority of my fellow Canadians are going to be happy with this occurrence then perhaps it would be best to know that for certain and let it dictate future actions.

Lemme see how this works. Harper can be removed because he has lost the confidence of MP's. Yet he was installed by the will of the people. Now the Opposition MPs don't feel they should have to prove they have the confidence of the people, because they have the confidence of the House of MPs, in essence themselves. In fact, they intend to make the man who commanded the least confidence from the people in history the leader of the people. I have a hunch that a large number of voters are NEVER going to forget this one!

Time for some basics here. The most popular design for a parliamentary democracy involves balancing off the wishes of majorities of citizens against the individual regions of a country. This is done by having two Houses, such as a Commons and a Senate. The commons has its members elected by winning by numbers to represent local ridings. Thus provinces or states with larger populations tend to command the lion's share of power in the Commons House. To protect a smaller region from a bigger one you have an Upper House, or Senate. The idea here is that every province or state has an equal number of Senators. So if California got the idea to pave over little Rhode Island it could be blocked in the Senate, despite California's larger population giving it much more clout in the Commons. This structure is true in Britain, Australia, the USA and virtually every other parliamentary democracy in the world. Their Upper Houses are elected, equal and effective. They have some differences of course like proportional systems of electing but essentially they all are true to this principle. Canada is the ONLY exception! Our Senate can not initiate legislation. All it can do is pass or delay Bills from the Commons. So it has limited power. Our Senate is not equal. Some provinces have more Senators than others. So little provinces have less protection. Our Senate is not elected. We can nitpick about the legalities but in the real world the PM appoints whoever he wishes, for life! Trudeau thought so little of the Senate he actually appointed his chauffeur! Go ahead, google for yourselves! Since Senators are appointed for life, the Liberals have had the opportunity by being more often in power to stack it with their own loyalists, who can be counted on to give any Tory PM a hard time! That's the real world scenario in Canada. Period and end of story. As I say, we can nitpick about the fine points of constitutional texts but who cares? The world is what it is and we have to deal with it. Since we are the ONLY country that has such a system, I guess we must be "special". I believe that to be much more likely than "smarter". Or maybe not. It's been a great system for those parties that have won government most often. It gives a PM incredible power, that other world leaders such as American presidents and British PMs have commented on as beyond their own wildest dreams!

My internet server is Sympatico. On the home page they ask a polling question about some current issue every day. It's not a scientific poll but given the number of subscribers it can't help but be pertinent. This morning the question is "Would you support a coalition government"? 61% voted 'NO'. So far I've seen no sign that the Opposition parties have considered how ordinary Canadians feel about what they are proposing. If the Sympatico informal poll means anything, I think they'd better consider it, fast!