VanRob

Also. you picked on one poster to an extreme extent regarding his comments on the regions. I have to assume you are from somewhere out east by your lack of understanding on the issue of regions. What doesn't make sense to anyone out West is how the four provinces representing the entire geographical western half of the country constitute one regional grouping to be represented. If it is supposed to be a truly regional representation along those lines than sure, have half the senators from the east and half from the west. Oh but now that's getting silly! Well it is silly. And it doesn't make sense. Out West senate reform has been hugely popular for years. Many of us out West still consider it very important. And yes, to your apparent bemusement, some of us are fine with reform or abolition, anything, any real concrete changes that show politicians see a problem and are willing to fix it. Maybe you don't get that. Out West we elect problem solvers and as long as we see something getting done that makes us happy, even if it's not exactly the way we want it, because it's an honest hard-fought effort. I think a lot of Canadians share that mentality too! Just apparently not Liberals.

In repsonse to g_bambino. Since you seem so intent on picking apart everyone's posts based on nuances or semantics instead of actually debating the issues and since you seem intent on "correcting" everyone else I thought I should point out that much of your arguments are ludicrous. And in at least one case you were embarrassingly wrong in your statement. You said: I laughed out loud when I read that. You then went on to half-correct yourself by listing a couple tiny countries that do have unicameral parliaments, seeming to gloss over the fact that close to half the world's population lives in countries with unicameral parliaments. I don't know where your getting your info from but if you properly research, or simply look at wikipedia "unicaneralism" their's a handy little graphic for you. Nearly half the nations of the U.N. are unicameral. Our Westminster friends in New Zealand, all of the Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland --perhaps this is why the NDP is so fond of the idea--), South Korea and, of course, for those of us who are students of government systems, Communist nations like China, Cuba, North Korea and formerly all of the Soviet bloc nations. In your defense of the Senate as it currently stands, assuming that is what your trying to do in picking apart all the pro-abolition or reform arguments, you seem woefully ignorant of how the senate currently works. Either that or strongly attached to it either emotionally or by some sense of identity. It seems odd to me. Are you joking? Just because a position has a mandate does that mean the mandate is being filled? Do you honestly believe senators are fulfilling a democratic need in their current positions and that this mandate to "propose" laws is really being fulfilled? They pass laws, by rubber-stamping whatever comes across their desks. And, are you kidding me about patronage? I don't think 'patronage' gets written into any rule-book or regulation but, somehow, by gosh, it still happens. Go figure. The senate is the most note-worthy patronage appointment available in Canada.

The Liberals will most certainly fall back down to earth. The Conservatives will easily recoup to their traditional level of support in the polls (36-40). In Western Canada particularly, Liberal polling numbers are inflated to a level that is frankly silly. The Conservatives are in the midst of a huge scandal...just wait till it blows over. Also, once the Supreme Court comes back with its answers to the senate questions (probably next year) the Conservatives will announce and quickly put in the works a much-awaited reform plan. This whole senate thing could actually end up working in their favor in the long run. The Liberals are an empty shell of a party and are relying solely on Trudeau who is largely void of substance. The West and suburban Ontario will tire of him quicker than others but that's all the Conservatives need to happen to be sitting pretty for next election. I fully expect a re-elected Stephen Harper in 2015 and I would not at all be surprised if the Conservatives move up past the 40% mark.