For those fed up with Harper's undemocratic behavior, tell your MP

[Alta4ever]

You people are nutbars, your brains must be reacting to the tin foil wrapped around you heads.

[ToadBrother]

You people are nutbars, your brains must be reacting to the tin foil wrapped around you heads.

Is this the next step in denial; belligerence and petulance?

[waldo]

speaking about those fed up with Harper's undemocratic behavior... Wild Bill's preferred common man demonstration of that behavior now sits as 202,000 - and counting.

[Shady]

speaking about those fed up with Harper's undemocratic behavior... Wild Bill's preferred common man demonstration of that behavior now sits as 202,000 - and counting.

Wow, big deal. It's mostly highschool and university students. Besides, some of their members aren't even Canadians.

[ToadBrother]

Wow, big deal. It's mostly highschool and university students. Besides, some of their members aren't even Canadians.

You're right. Let's look at the polling data instead.

[Alta4ever]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/prorogation+Parliament+threat+democracy/2447118/story.html

The prorogation of Parliament is no threat to democracy

BY PAUL BENOIT , THE OTTAWA CITIZENJANUARY 15, 2010

One wonders what must be taught by way of civics in the classrooms of our 170-plus university professors who, in their statement published in the Citizen and elsewhere this week (and at noprorogation-nonprorogation.ca), accuse the prime minister of “undermining our system of democratic government” and of “violating the trust of Parliament and of the Canadian people.”

I would have to disagree with them on at least eight points.

[ToadBrother]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/prorogation+Parliament+threat+democracy/2447118/story.html

Now you're fishing for the very rare columnist that agres with you? Just how many more degrees of pathetic can you get? Face it, Canadians want their MPs back in the House at the end of this month.

[madmax]

You're right. Let's look at the polling data instead.

[madmax]

Face it, Canadians want their MPs back in the House at the end of this month.

There are a few diehards who see the Iceberg but believe there isn't ice under the water.

I really feel bad for those who are still trying to push the "its no big whoop" message after 18 days adrift.

Make no bones about it, the CPC MPs in many ridings are not happy campers. I have seen some of the presentations being prepared. The government is going to be defenceless. If they can't handle the message now, I only see rough waters ahead.

Maybe they will miss the Iceberg. But the CPC have to find a rudder first.

[Alta4ever]

There are a few diehards who see the Iceberg but believe there isn't ice under the water.

I really feel bad for those who are still trying to push the "its no big whoop" message after 18 days adrift.

Make no bones about it, the CPC MPs in many ridings are not happy campers. I have seen some of the presentations being prepared. The government is going to be defenceless. If they can't handle the message now, I only see rough waters ahead.

Maybe they will miss the Iceberg. But the CPC have to find a rudder first.

You don't seem to see it for what it is, it is all political posturing.

The liberals and the NDP spin one way.

The Conservatives spin another.

The crux of the issue whether or not it is democratic, it is our Constitution says so. Whether you like the reasons presented by Harper is a different issue. Why is that so you hard for you people to understand?

Now if the Liberals and the NDP want to open up the constitution and charter lets do it to (remove the ability to prorogue), but I guarantee you it will mark the end of Canada as we know it.

Edited January 18, 2010 by Alta4ever

[myata]

But my point isn't so much that Harper is equally unrestrained as Charles I as it is the notion that government is somehow separate from Parliament, that government, in the grand sweep of things, holds a larger role. What the Long Parliament did after the end of the Personal Rule and the abortive Short Parliament, stated very clearly is that Parliament is supreme; not the Crown, not the ministers of the Crown, not any particular bloc within Parliament, but Parliament itself.

All true, yet it's very disappointing and even worrying to see that the leading opposition party does not seem to notice the serious flaws within our political system that this PM's behaviour has clearly exposed. The Liberals are OK scoring points a la "we are working" whatever it's supposed to mean, they are nowhere on the radar screen on issues of serious democratic reforms, non-partisan cooperation in the House, moving toward a more proportional representation and so on. It appears that the system would suit Iggy just fine as it is, as long as the power drops in his hands.

I seriously think that at this time there doesn't appear to be an alternative to saying to Iggy's Liberals very clearly, real democratic reforms leading to open, transparent and functional democracy NOW, or no more support, now or ever. A government abusing democratic system for its own benefit is still not as bad as a completely dysfunctional democracy because nobody is interested or believes in a possibility of positive change. It's "Liberals in coalition for real democracy" or "NO Liberals", as far as I'm concerned.

[Shady]

I'm getting sick of the opposition trying to make this into a big political firestorm. If it's such an issue, force an election over it, or STFU. Put your money where your mouth is. :angry:

Instead it's talk, and talk, and talk, followed by more talk, and talk, and talk.

Edited January 18, 2010 by Shady

[ToadBrother]

You don't seem to see it for what it is, it is all political posturing.

The liberals and the NDP spin one way.

The Conservatives spin another.

The crux of the issue whether or not it is democratic, it is our Constitution says so. Whether you like the reasons presented by Harper is a different issue. Why is that so you hard for you people to understand?

Now if the Liberals and the NDP want to open up the constitution and charter lets do it to (remove the ability to prorogue), but I guarantee you it will mark the end of Canada as we know it.

Nothing Charles I did was particularly against conventions and the constitution in the early 17th century. In fact, he accepted the limitations on his ability to raise taxes, and used what limited taxation powers he did have so far as he could go. Ultimately he recalled Parliament because of the constitutional limitations of the Monarch at that time, and the argument you used, put forward by the Cavaliers and other Royalists, wasn't terribly convincing to the the rest of the Parliamentarians.

The lesson here is that just because something may be possible does not make doing it good. What Harper has done is only serving to diminish Parliament's role. Admittedly he didn't start this long slide of MPs into irrelevance, but his are some of the most extreme bites out of that institution. His refusal to honor direct demands of Parliament, his shutting it down to avoid its will, those are not the signs of a great democrat, but of a man who shows great disdain for the institution, and an odd belief that he can make it without it. He isn't the first in that either. Guys like Trudeau and Chretien were notorious for considering even the backbenchers of their own parties as useful idiots, at best.

If you feel that this is okay, that out-of-control leaders doing what they will and evading Parliament's will for temporary political advantage, then so be it. You put yourself squarely on one side of the line. But don't pretend for a minute that history doesn't have lessons, and don't pretend for one minute that you can simultaneously hold the position that our democracy is safe from the authoritarian dictates of party apparatchik (regardless of which side of the House they sit).

The reason guys like Trudeau, Mulroney, Chretien and Harper could do what they do is because not only do the MPs in their parties willingly surrender themselves for some advertising and office dollars during elections, but because the grassroots willingly surrender themselves as well. Believe me, the Liberals are no better, and I have zero confidence that Iggy or Layton, if given the same opportunity, would behave any better, because Harper's actions aren't a line in the sand, they're just a sad continuum in the rendering of Parliament into a partisan-split voting machine used by leaders, high-level strategists and party spin-doctors who view MPs as the fiddle they get to play.

[Alta4ever]

Last time I checked Charles I is not reigning, the GG is not ruling by decree since she is the Monarchs representative (she would have to to mirror what Charles did), and Harper has not suddenly become King.

[Alta4ever]

What you are doing Toad is fear mongering to put out you propaganda. Had this mattered all of the opposition would be calling for an election, calling to open up the constitution and charter.

I repeat there is nothing democratically wrong with Harper proroguing parliament, and there was nothing illegal about it.

YOU JUST DON"T LIKE HIS REASONS FOR DOING SO!

[ToadBrother]

Last time I checked Charles I is not reigning, the GG is not ruling by decree since she is the Monarchs representative (she would have to to mirror what Charles did), and Harper has not suddenly become King.

That wasn't really the point. I suspect you know that. But you have repeatedly refused to deal with any of the issues. I just simply can't imagine why anyone, regardless of political or ideological leanings, would so thoroughly sell their wits to any party.

But I'll ask you again. Who is supreme, Parliament or the PM?

[ToadBrother]

What you are doing Toad is fear mongering to put out you propaganda. Had this mattered all of the opposition would be calling for an election, calling to open up the constitution and charter.

I repeat there is nothing democratically wrong with Harper proroguing parliament, and there was nothing illegal about it.

I do question the constitutionality of the 2008 prorogation.

YOU JUST DON"T LIKE HIS REASONS FOR DOING SO!

I think Parliament is more important than any PM's ambitions, yes.

Why don't you? Are you actually that in enamored with a particularly political movement?

This is why I refuse to join any political party. People that join parties end up like you.

Edited January 18, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Alta4ever]

I do question the constitutionality of the 2008 prorogation.

I think Parliament is more important than any PM's ambitions, yes.

Why don't you?

Well Prorogation is a parliamentary tool, so how does that fit into your little world.

[madmax]

You don't seem to see it for what it is, it is all political posturing.

I am going to tell it do you straight. What is happening out there, even outside of facebook, and in the coffee shops, is outside the typical political posturing. It is to big to be driven by the LPC and NDP combined. It is well ahead of them and they are trying to catch up to public opinion.

The liberals and the NDP spin one way.

The LPC and NDP spin isn't even united. And like anything in politics that gets spun, this one has more traction and both parties want to get their rubber on the road.

The Conservatives spin another.

Conservative spin is directed to the public. It isn't working.

Why is that so you hard for you people to understand?

You are talking to the wrong people. I am listening to the public, they are telling me and they voted Conservative.

[ToadBrother]

Well Prorogation is a parliamentary tool, so how does that fit into your little world.

I dunno, perhaps you can explain this:

"After all, Stephen Harper is the most dangerous animal lurking in the jungles of Parliament, writes Scott Reid. Kill him. Kill him dead. Do not, whatever you do, provide him with an opportunity to extend his hold on power. Because you can be damn certain he will never again be so reckless as to give you a chance to finish him off. ..The other elephant in the room is leadership. Stephane Dion has bargained his way to the drive wheel of the new government. Good for him, but only if it suits the greater good. If Mr. Dion can make his case, then great. If he can't, move to an alternative - and do it fast. Mr. Harper knows that his greatest advantage lies in Mr. Dion's weakness. The coalition can't let that impulse triumph. Don't permit the defeat of Mr. Harper to depend upon Mr. Dion's personal credibility - or that of any single individual, for that matter. There's too much at stake."

Scott Reid over the weekend

People this was never about economic stimulus it was about a power grab! This is a quiet coup, these people have no regard for democracy.

Apparently you were quite happy to make all sorts of noises about democracy when it suited you.

[ToadBrother]

Well Prorogation is a parliamentary tool, so how does that fit into your little world.

You're evading my question.

[madmax]

I'm getting sick of the opposition trying to make this into a big political firestorm. If it's such an issue, force an election over it, or STFU. Put your money where your mouth is. :angry:

Instead it's talk, and talk, and talk, followed by more talk, and talk, and talk.

As opposed to a government who's defense is that it can't Walk and Chew at the same time.

If you think your angry, you should have seen the grimmaces on peoples faces who think this government stinks and they voted for them. Now their attention is focused on Haiti.

[Shady]

As opposed to a government who's defense is that it can't Walk and Chew at the same time.

I disagree with your premise. I don't see a major problem with the prorogue of parliament at a time when the opposition parties were poised to attack the Canadian military. Its a lot better than the progrogue of parliament because of Adscam, in which the Liberals used it for. I don't remember a similar outcry. Probably because you're all opportunist hypocrits.

If you think your angry, you should have seen the grimmaces on peoples faces who think this government stinks and they voted for them.

Most people couldn't care less. They're concerned about real issues, like taxes, and jobs. Not whether some terrorists were roughed up a bit by the Afghanistan government.

Like I said. Stop talking about it and force an election. Shit or get off the pot. If you won't, then STFU, I'm tired of all the whining.

[nicky10013]

I disagree with your premise. I don't see a major problem with the prorogue of parliament at a time when the opposition parties were poised to attack the Canadian military. Its a lot better than the progrogue of parliament because of Adscam, in which the Liberals used it for. I don't remember a similar outcry. Probably because you're all opportunist hypocrits.

Most people couldn't care less. They're concerned about real issues, like taxes, and jobs. Not whether some terrorists were roughed up a bit by the Afghanistan government.

Like I said. Stop talking about it and force an election. Shit or get off the pot. If you won't, then STFU, I'm tired of all the whining.

I hate all troops. Lets cut their budget. That's an attack on the troops. Making sure the orders they recieve from Ottawa aren't illegal isn't an attack on the troops. Just because you're buddy Stephen in the sweater vest says it's an attack on the troops, doesn't make it so.

He's shutting down the parliament the troops are fighting for in order to hide from the democratically elected opposition. Isn't THAT spitting in the troops face?

Most people couldn't care less? The polls don't indicate that. Or am I wrong and you have the pulse of the Canadian People?

[ToadBrother]

I disagree with your premise. I don't see a major problem with the prorogue of parliament at a time when the opposition parties were poised to attack the Canadian military. Its a lot better than the progrogue of parliament because of Adscam, in which the Liberals used it for. I don't remember a similar outcry. Probably because you're all opportunist hypocrits.

It's a rather dangerous defense, don't you think? I mean, after all, Parliament does have the right, unilaterally, to force the government to deliver any and all documents. Are you saying Parliament shouldn't have this right?

And let's extend this argument. Do you think Harper would indefinitely have the right to keep proroguing Parliament if the majority of MPs still want to see those documents?

Edited January 19, 2010 by ToadBrother