ReeferMadness

Oh. And here is a statement from one of the Conservatives more articulate and reasonable supporters. And they say Conservative supporters are less educated.

wtf. Really? I wasn't talking about Harper firing Wright but this is far too easy. Here Anything else? Do the Conservatives feed you talking points directly? Or do you need to go and get them yourself from their website?

Which, sadly, tells the tale of the Republicans. She's heads and shoulders above Donald Trump, the current front runner.

Yeah. The PMO is the victim. That's how we all see it.

In fairness, Trudeau removed all the senators from the Liberal caucus. The Conservatives, by contrast, tried to control the audit and cover up the malfeasance. See the difference?

Yeah. All those unscrupulous left wingers in the Justice Department.

And when did you start this forum? 1850?

You seem to have a belief that this drivel has anything to do with Harper being an honest man. hahahahahahaha Harper and honest man. Jeez..

False. Despite an unprecedented level of US style attack ads run by Conservatives which demolished the public's perception of a hugely accomplished and intelligent man, the Conservatives received less than 40% of the vote. It was a broken voting system that arbitrarily awarded them with a phony majority of seats. Agreed. The system was designed with the power vested in MP's, not with the PM. The PM is theoretically accountable to MP's. The parties have succeeded in undermining and inverting the system using the party leader's powers to control and subvert MP's. Instead of members of parliament being the peoples' representative in the government, they are effectively the parties' representatives back to the people. This issue has gotten steadily worse across the years but Harper took it to a whole new level. Curiously and regrettably, this issue is little understood by average Canadians who seem to get most of their political understanding from watching American TV.

Maybe you could choose a name that would better reflect your current views. Like neoconservative or maybe neofascist.

Honest man. Harper. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! jeez, even you don't believe that.

It's not who wrote it. It's that the New York Times published it. And if most of the audience don't know much about Canada, it's even worse. Even if they only casually browse the article, it portrays a very unflattering picture of this country. We look like some redneck backwater.

It's no longer surpr You fail to appreciate the mentality of the Harperites. Harper is God. Harper is infallible. And if - somehow - Harper should ever do anything that is even remotely, tangentially less than perfect, well, of course it's nothing compared to what those Liberal guys did. Get with the program, man.

This editorial (The Closing of the Canadian Mind) was published in the New York Times today. It's sad to see another international black eye courtesy of a government with no soul. What really stings, though, is how accurate this assessment is. And to think that there are so many sheep out there that would vote for them again. A few choice passages It's a dismal read that portrays a glum, though accurate picture of what is going on in this country. Harper makes Canada look like an unsophisticated backwater populated by slack-jawed yokels who wouldn't recognize good governance if it poked them in the face.

Because you only care about taxes and don't give a crap about things like honesty and democracy. Most right wingers only assign value to things that have a price tag on them.

Just keep telling yourself that, buddy. It's OK if I vote for liars and crooks because they're liars and crooks that will put a few more shekels in my pocket. Nice.

Honesty? You care about honesty and still vote Conservative? hahahahahahahaha

Speaking from personal experience, when those small businesses fail, the owners are not the only ones who lose. Employees often lose unpaid wages, vacation pay and other pay. Creditors lose also. And failing businesses may be in arrears on paying employee benefits. I once found myself out of a job, a hold on my bank account and owing my dentist $1500 because the company stopped paying the insurance company several months previous. The company managers didn't think to notify employees of this minor detail.

Since you've failed to address anything I've said in my post, I assume that you can't find any excuses, however feeble, for Harper's behavior.

No, I'm operating on the premise that when power is usurped from elected officials and transferred to unelected drones in the PMO democracy is diminished. And when one party fiddles with the electoral rules in a way that provides that party with a greater chance of winning future elections, democracy is diminished. And when a government prevents knowledge gleaned from publicly funded science from being distributed to the people it is supposedly accountable to, democracy is diminished. And when a supposedly responsible government negotiates trade deals that will fundamentally alter public institutions in secret, democracy is diminished. And when a party cheats on elections and deliberately attempts to disenfranchise voters that aren't likely to vote for them, democracy is diminished. And when a government gags its own ministers in favour of talking point from the PMO, democracy is diminished. And when even the PM is too cowardly to face the media to answer to the people, democracy is diminished. I don't expect right wingers to care about things like democracy because most of them only care for something that you can put a price sticker on. Oh, I forgot. You are "disappointed".

So, in your view diminishing Canadian democracy is minor stuff.

Well, I'm not surprised that you don't like to be reminded that Harper promised honesty and transparency. They have no relation to anything during his time in office, either.

I'm in favour of honesty and transparency. You remember them. Those were the things that Harper and his corrupt cronies promised to bring back to Ottawa.

What we have is bad. It's horrible. The system is designed such that the PM is supposed to be accountable to parliament and implement the will of parliament. However, what actually happens is the PM and the PMO control the government's MP's. And in the case of a "majority government" (most often a majority of MP's but nowhere near a majority of the populer vote), controlling the government's MP's means controlling parliament. So, the system is upside down. Instead of the PM being accountable to parliament, the PM is effectively accountable to nobody. You have someone with the power of a president but without all of the checks and balances. It's the worst of both worlds. And Harper is the most insidious exploiter of this power to date.

And Kimmy, one more thing. If you think we should be able to directly vote for the PM, I agree. But if we want a style of government where we directly have a leader, then we need a set of rules that limits the power of this leader. Because, at the moment, we have a system where the PM has all the power of a head of state with little of the checks and balances that you see in, for example, the American model.