Harper didn't break his own law

[guyser]

In other words, Harper is a politician with the same morals as any other politician.

"We shall have fixed dates ! " 'cept when it suits me not to

"Parliament is not functioning ! " but please ignore the fact I can pass anything since those wimps wont stand up to me

Do I think a Lib or NDP would do it differently? One can hope, but one would be dumb to really think so.

[guyser]

I think it's pretty unreasonable to expect Harper to handicap himself by allowing the opposition, who declared they will not cooperate with Harper, to wait until the polls look better for them to initiate what they themselves have been implying is a foregone conclusion.

But that is exactly what he said he was willing to give up.

He was a dummy for attacking this in the first place. Now we can see he will govern just like the rest.

[Moonbox]

That's why they're called the Opposition. The Opposition is there because people voted for parties that had policies different than that of the party that formed the government. That happens in a democracy.

Yes. I know.

In this case, Harper got a minority government with less than 40% of the popular vote; the mandate that he has therefore received is to cooperate and find consensus, which was happening in the parlaiment;

That's not what's been happening. There's been no consensus. By your very words you'd supported my point. The rest of parliament DID NOT support him. They voted against or abstained. Abstaining to legislation that your party can't support because you're afraid of an election is not cooperation. That's called waiting for the polls to improve. That's a sham parliament.

but Harper obviously wants to dictate Canada, and for that reason has been cooking up nonsense in order to justify another election and hopefully a majority government.

What you just said is nonsense. Dictate? Godwin's law anyone? You don't dictate in an electoral democracy. If he was to 'dictate' anything crazy like the doom mongers say he's trying to, his party would vote non confidence against him. Any elected government with a majority basically dictates legislation. That's providing the Senate and the whole party goes along with it. Your just using big scary words.

[Moonbox]

But that is exactly what he said he was willing to give up.

He was a dummy for attacking this in the first place. Now we can see he will govern just like the rest.

and on that I'll agree.

and also on

In other words, Harper is a politician with the same morals as any other politician.

Do I think a Lib or NDP would do it differently? One can hope, but one would be dumb to really think so.

What my whole post was about, if you read the title again, is all the people crying foul play as if Harper is doing something terribly evil and crooked. Instead, what he's basically doing is calling Dion's weak-kneed threats as the bluffs they are while at the same time making him publicly declare he won't support Harper's government and cooperate. If Dion has publicly stated he won't support the government, why wait for the inevitable and seemingly near future non-confidence vote?? Unless, of course, you're a Liberal and you're waiting for the polls to improve.

[guyser]

That's not what's been happening. There's been no consensus. By your very words you'd supported my point. The rest of parliament DID NOT support him. They voted against or abstained. Abstaining to legislation that your party can't support because you're afraid of an election is not cooperation. That's called waiting for the polls to improve. That's a sham parliament.

Boy , can you ever figure out what you want? The CPC's can pass anything at this point. The Libs suck and wont stand up for anything.

Thus, Harper gets what he wants. Dysfunctional, sham, monkeyhouse, you can call it anything you want but he leads without opposition.

IOW, Parl is functioning.

What you just said is nonsense. Dictate? Godwin's law anyone? Your just using big scary words.

Dictate = Godwins law? Uh oh.

[guyser]

Unless, of course, you're a Liberal and you're waiting for the polls to improve.

And we can change that to read "Unless of course if you're the PM and waited until the polls improve."

It cuts both ways.

[jdobbin]

Once again, Harper didn't break the law.

How many times does it have to be repeated before you realize that he didn't break the law?

Or is it just that you don't wish to acknowledge this fact and prefer to use any ammunition you can, even if it is in fact false?

No, he acted cynically and that is why even the National Post is disappointed in him. It is a broke promise because it is game playing that he derided the Liberals for.

[AngusThermopyle]

Actually what I read stated "nothing affects the powers of the GG, including the power to dissolve parliament at the GG's discretion".

This may not be correct however given other debates that I've heard on this topic it would appear to be true. That being the case then Harper has broken no laws at all.

Complaining about his methods is rather silly, he's a politician, none of that breed are honest.

[jdobbin]

Complaining about his methods is rather silly, he's a politician, none of that breed are honest.

Oh, complaining and being disappointed is never silly. It seems an honest reaction from people and organizations (such as the mostly supportive National Post) to cynical measures. They were hoping for better. It isn't enough to shrug your shoulders and say," well, I'm just like the worst you have seen from the political parties that you turfed out when it comes to calling elections."

Complaints and disappointment is what Layton has faced from his own supporters today for denying May an opportunity to debate.

Edited September 9, 2008 by jdobbin

[Moonlight Graham]

So technically maybe Harper didn't break his own law. If he did, wouldn't he be charged & investigated for breaking the law? But what Harper did was break the spirit of his own law.

"Non-functioning Parliament" my rump. Harper wants an election because he has been watching the U.S. election coverage for past months & its got him all jealous & riled up to get on the campaign trail & make phoney speeches featuring the phrase "And so, my friends...". He's probably also wants to get an election done before a possible Obama win, which has the potential to muck his support for conservatism at home.

[blueblood]

Oh, complaining and being disappointed is never silly. It seems an honest reaction from people and organizations (such as the mostly supportive National Post) to cynical measures. They were hoping for better. It isn't enough to shrug your shoulders and say," well, I'm just like the worst you have seen from the political parties that you turfed out when it comes to calling elections."

Complaints and disappointment is what Layton has faced from his own supporters today for denying May an opportunity to debate.

Complaints and disappointment is what Layton will face from some supporters for having the Taliban endorse the party who suggests bailing out of Afghanistan immediately.

[jdobbin]

Complaints and disappointment is what Layton will face from some supporters for having the Taliban endorse the party who suggests bailing out of Afghanistan immediately.

I don't know if that would end in complaints but you never know.

[Topaz]

If Harper comes back with a minority his government should function fine and no party would dare defeat him within the next few years. A renewed minority provides him with the renewed confidence of Canadians and any party that tried to defeat him over anything but the most controversial issues would be to blame for any other money wasted. A renewed minority is fine for Harper because basically it says to the opposition, "See! Canadians want me here. Quit yer bitchin!"

WHY would a minority government work fine AFTER an election and not BEFORE the election????? THis guy likes spending Canadian taxpayer s money left and right! Controversial issues??? Where do I begin????

[Moonbox]

And we can change that to read "Unless of course if you're the PM and waited until the polls improve."

It cuts both ways.

You're right. Again though, as you constantly ignore, the PM and his supporters aren't the ones whining right now. The Liberals and their supporters are the ones carrying on. By whining and fussing about the election being called, Liberal supporters are basically just saying,

"Despite the fact that legislation was being passed which we openly opposed along with the MAJORITY of the House of Commons, it was okay for us to wait until the polls improve for the Liberals at which point we will do what we were elected to do and actually vote against legislation that we think is wrong for Canada. On the other hand, knowing that this was the Liberal plan, it is completely unreasonable for the Harper Conservatives to not allow us to watch polls until we think we could actually win an election. I mean, obviously they should allow us to play our waiting and watching game until they find themselves at a disadvantage."

[jdobbin]

You're right. Again though, as you constantly ignore, the PM and his supporters aren't the ones whining right now. The Liberals and their supporters are the ones carrying on. By whining and fussing about the election being called, Liberal supporters are basically just saying...

I'd hardly call the National Post Liberal or a Liberal supporter. In their editorial yesterday, they said Harper was cynical and the election call was disappointing in that in violated the spirit of the legislation. In other words, they disagreed with the decision.

I personally think the legislation was stupid to begin with and that Canada already had fixed election dates of five years. I feel that in our system, the Opposition or Government should have the right to pull the plug and seek a new mandate. Parties that misread the tea leaves do so at their peril.

[Moonbox]

WHY would a minority government work fine AFTER an election and not BEFORE the election????? THis guy likes spending Canadian taxpayer s money left and right! Controversial issues??? Where do I begin????

Because after an election Harper has a renewed minority and the confidence of Canadians will have been demonstrated in his government at least for the time being. Unless he comes up with something totally boneheaded it would look pretty stupid on the opposition's part to defeat his government shortly after having it re-elected. Most voters would see that as a waste of time and money for taxpayers and would look negatively on the opposition who defeated the government that was just re-elected. Where would that stop? Well it would keep happening until a majority was elected and chances are it wouldn't be the opposition that had been calling pointless elections.

Oh and Topaz...please begin with Stephen Harper's spending left and right behavior. Tell us about the controversial issues. Please. I can say things like, "The Liberals have shown that they are less concerned with governing and more concerned with partisan politics and fighting with Stephen Harper. Incompetence? Stupidity? Where do I begin???

See? It's easy to say stuff like that.

[Moonbox]

I'd hardly call the National Post Liberal or a Liberal supporter. In their editorial yesterday, they said Harper was cynical and the election call was disappointing in that in violated the spirit of the legislation. In other words, they disagreed with the decision.

Actually Izzy Asper owned the newspaper and he once led the Liberal Party of Manitoba. He's dead now and his sons own it, but the Asper family is usually quite Liberal. The Post has flip-flopped on who it supports in the last few years, but an important thing to note is that it's NOT a National Newspaper anymore and one of its main competitors now is the Toronto Star. Newspapers publish to a large extent the opinions its readers want to hear. It's no secret which way Toronto leans. The Post is widely considered now to be fairly Liberal-leaning.

I personally think the legislation was stupid to begin with and that Canada already had fixed election dates of five years. I feel that in our system, the Opposition or Government should have the right to pull the plug and seek a new mandate. Parties that misread the tea leaves do so at their peril.

As has been pointed out to me, it does seem like the legislation was a waste of time. With that being said, the purpose of the thread was to contend with all the posts fussing about how wrong it was for Harper to pull the plug on the joke that parliament has become.

[thermo]

You're right. Again though, as you constantly ignore, the PM and his supporters aren't the ones whining right now. The Liberals and their supporters are the ones carrying on. By whining and fussing about the election being called, Liberal supporters are basically just saying...

you might have an easier time debating your point if you stop using such condescending terms. you don't have to agree with everyone here; you don't even need to admit they have a valid point (which they - we - really do, agree or not) but try to phrase things in a less agresive manner and we all mighht have an easier time here.

[Bryan]

Actually Izzy Asper owned the newspaper and he once led the Liberal Party of Manitoba. He's dead now and his sons own it, but the Asper family is usually quite Liberal. The Post has flip-flopped on who it supports in the last few years, but an important thing to note is that it's NOT a National Newspaper anymore and one of its main competitors now is the Toronto Star. Newspapers publish to a large extent the opinions its readers want to hear. It's no secret which way Toronto leans. The Post is widely considered now to be fairly Liberal-leaning.

At one point, the Post definitely was pro-conservative. Not any more, they've been decidedly Liberal for the last couple years. Maybe they just support who ever is the opposition?

[Shakeyhands]

I'd have more respect if Harper had come out and said "look, we need a majority or at least we need to give Canadians a chance to vote on our new agenda" Otherwise he is breaking the spirit of the law, just like he has with a plethora of other issues that he campaigned on...

[Moonbox]

I'd have more respect if Harper had come out and said "look, we need a majority or at least we need to give Canadians a chance to vote on our new agenda" Otherwise he is breaking the spirit of the law, just like he has with a plethora of other issues that he campaigned on...

He is basically saying that. He's saying that the opposition won't cooperate with the agenda he's going to set forth. If that's the case, Canada needs to vote.

[guyser]

Again though, as you constantly ignore, the PM and his supporters aren't the ones whining right now. The Liberals and their supporters are the ones carrying on. By whining and fussing about the election being called, Liberal supporters are basically just saying,

I think they are out canvassing......and I have not ignored a thing.

You are certainly welcome to spin this any way you want, but at the end of the day you know that Harper has gone against his own belief vis a vis calling an election. Parl functioned fine for him , he has recd everything he wanted with nary a roadblock to overcome.

"Despite the fact that legislation was being passed which we openly opposed along with the MAJORITY of the House of Commons, it was okay for us to wait until the polls improve for the Liberals at which point we will do what we were elected to do and actually vote against legislation that we think is wrong for Canada.

And thats what Harper wanted but didnt get, a non conf vote.

[Moonbox]

I think they are out canvassing......and I have not ignored a thing.

You are certainly welcome to spin this any way you want, but at the end of the day you know that Harper has gone against his own belief vis a vis calling an election. Parl functioned fine for him , he has recd everything he wanted with nary a roadblock to overcome.

and again, you've repeated yourself but failed to acknowledge the only reason that he hasn't received a non-confidence vote is that the Liberals are waiting for the polls to improve. The only thing stopping the inevitable election is that the Liberals want to wait to make sure they WIN when they DO force an election.

It would be stupid for Harper to allow that. Yes, he has called an election after enacting a leaky piece of legislation that indicated he shouldn't. Yes, it might be considered hypocritical to some. With that being said, I don't think it ever occured to him that the official opposition would openly oppose the ruling government this long while watching polls and abstaining from every piece of legislation until the polls turned around for them. This is unprecedented in Canadian history and it's really just become a game of politics and technicalities.

The question is should Stephen Harper play the game to his or to the Liberal's advantage?

[jdobbin]

Actually Izzy Asper owned the newspaper and he once led the Liberal Party of Manitoba. He's dead now and his sons own it, but the Asper family is usually quite Liberal. The Post has flip-flopped on who it supports in the last few years, but an important thing to note is that it's NOT a National Newspaper anymore and one of its main competitors now is the Toronto Star. Newspapers publish to a large extent the opinions its readers want to hear. It's no secret which way Toronto leans. The Post is widely considered now to be fairly Liberal-leaning.

They have never endorsed the Liberals. David Asper who runs the paper is a card carrying Conservative party member.

As has been pointed out to me, it does seem like the legislation was a waste of time. With that being said, the purpose of the thread was to contend with all the posts fussing about how wrong it was for Harper to pull the plug on the joke that parliament has become.

I never said it was against the law. I said it was cyncial and disappointing. The legislation was meaningless and always was.

I said for more than two years in this forum that Harper would call the election himself and that he would say it was a matter of confidence. I said that any matter could be consideted confidence no matter how cyncial.

I was told I was wrong, that it would never happen, that Harper would never break his promise and that if he did, he would lose the election. It is all here in these forums from quite a few Conservative party supporters.

I also said that Harper would probably win the election but that people would have a cynical view of it and the National Post did.

Edited September 10, 2008 by jdobbin

[guyser]

but failed to acknowledge the only reason that he hasn't received a non-confidence vote is that the Liberals are waiting for the polls to improve. ?

Relevance? I think not.

Doesnt get non conf means he governs w/o opposition.

In all games if the opposition rolls over and plays dead it means you win. Got that?

It also means you get the spoils.

Now if they play the game the result might be a tie or a loss for you . Got that?

So, lets look at that......both teams have played, and one only has been trying, ergo, only one team got what it wants.

So, in effect, well actuality, the CPC's have recd everything they wanted . Parl worked for them. No non conf have been called.

Now lets go back to post #2 on this thread ... http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....st&p=336699

Harper said his reasons for fixed dates.... and they were.....?

1) Non conf vote- hasnt happened.

2) Parliament not working- hasnt happened.

He also said he was willing to give up that advantage (stupidly) and now here he is using his advantage.

Besides, I dont blame him for calling it now, just lets be honest, he said one thing and did the other.