Why the hate for harper?

[wyly]

Actually, Christianity is an important part of Canadian culture and history.

FUNDAMENTAL christians do you even know what they are? these are the same type of extreme nuts that run Iran...the same type of nutters that are F****** up US politics...

You're also wrong about the electoral system because he has a minority government with a higher percentage of the vote than Chretien got a majority with. If anything, if it was acceptable that Chretien got a majority with less, it's f**ked up that Harper doesn't have a majority.

the electoral system is F***** up regardless of what party wins...

[Molly]

He's probably Canada's best PM ever.

Oh Lord! Talk about your 'ugly American'.....

[Shady]

I think the real question is how would Hammurabi feel about the current agreement worked out in Parliament? And how is his code of laws reflected in this decision?

FUNDAMENTAL christians do you even know what they are? these are the same type of extreme nuts that run Iran...the same type of nutters that are F****** up US politics...

I'm more concerned with environmentalist fanatics, who want to destroy our economy and our standard of living. I'm also more conerned with Islamic fanatics, who want to destroy us period.

[wyly]

One word I would not use with Harper and that is "fanatic".

I do not doubt the man is a classic conservative, fundamentalist

Christian, anti-abortionist, etc., but fanatic?

yes a Machiavellian fanatic, be grateful he does not a have a majority, be grateful the majority of Canadians do not share his fundy views...he's not pragmatic he's afraid of being found out...he knows that Canadians would reject him in a second should he reveal himself instead he chooses a path of incremental change, a death of a thousand cuts...

power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely....

[Molly]

You're also wrong about the electoral system because he has a minority government with a higher percentage of the vote than Chretien got a majority with. If anything, if it was acceptable that Chretien got a majority with less, it's f**ked up that Harper doesn't have a majority.

False.

The highest popular vote Harper has managed- 37.65%- is lower than Chretiens worst outing- 38.46%

[waldo]

yes a Machiavellian fanatic, be grateful he does not a have a majority, be grateful the majority of Canadians do not share his fundy views...he's not pragmatic he's afraid of being found out...he knows that Canadians would reject him in a second should he reveal himself instead he chooses a path of incremental change, a death of a thousand cuts...

and every once in a while, the real Harper surfaces... to override any such claims of simple pragmatism - like... cue the Sault Ste. Marie video (where Harper thought he could only be heard by closed door party loyalists). What's just as telling, is that Harper just can't seem to git er done... in the face of a split center-left Opposition, Canadians still don't trust Harper with that ever elusive majority.

[justme]

FUNDAMENTAL christians do you even know what they are? these are the same type of extreme nuts that run Iran...the same type of nutters that are F****** up US politics...

Iran is a Muslim country and to compare the Canadian PM to the religious leaders of Iran is absurd.

Who is it that you think is f**king up US politics and how?

[ToadBrother]

..and you still ramble on about another place.....Canada is not England.

But the functional aspects of the constitutions are extraordinarily similar, so similar that rulings in one country in the Commonwealth Realms can be seen as precedent in the others (indeed, the King-Byng Affair and the 1975 Australian Constitutional Crisis still are seen as precedent-setting events in the history of the Westminster constitutional system).

So it will be your continuing purpose to represent Canada's goverment in such a broad context to either avoid specific introspection or trumpet the virtues of a Westminster system regardless of domestic relevance. Got it.....

I'm assuming at this point that you're just giving up the ghost on the whole thing. The fact of the matter is that in the history of the Westminster Parliaments (including Canada), Parliament has taken a role of oversight over even military matters (even though the application of military force is entirely within the realm of the Executive), to the point of even overthrowing governments (Asquith's fall) and national governments (in WWI in Canada and Britain) and in WWII (in Britain).

I have laid out how our system works. Parliament does not directly command military forces, because the command of the military comes under the Royal Prerogatives (which are exercised by the Sovereign or their vice-regal representative solely on the advice of the Government). However, because Parliament ultimately is responsible for formation and confidence in any Government, no application of the Royal Prerogatives is ultimately beyond Parliament's power to influence, or, if need be, to deny. That is the whole point of the constitutional compromise at the foundation of the Westminster system.

In the American colonies, it was the refusal of King George III and his ministers to apply that principle to their own legislatures (in short, to accept them as parliaments in their own right, with the same rights as the British Parliament) that was one of the reasons for the revolution.

Edited May 19, 2010 by ToadBrother

[wyly]

Iran is a Muslim country and to compare the Canadian PM to the religious leaders of Iran is absurd.

religios fanatics are the same regardless of what they practise, once they have absolute power they change their world to reflect only their beliefs...fundy christians are no different than fundy muslims...he has a religious agenda that does not conform to the majority, only minority status prevents him from taking bigger steps in changing Canada into something that conforms to his religious beliefs...

these are the beliefs of his church Harper beliefs which he refuses to discuss for obvious reasons-

Alliance Church doctrine, like those of other evangelical denominations, strongly oppose homosexual relationships, describing them as the "basest form of sinful conduct."

The Alliance Church is also tough on divorce and holds that Christians who have been adulterous do not have a right to remarry.

The Alliance Church, to which Harper has belonged for decades, believes Jesus Christ will return to Earth in an apocalypse

The denomination's leaders, in addition, oppose abortion, stem-cell research, euthanasia, the use of marijuana and ordained female clergy.

The Canadian church's website features a list of sample prayers "for the lost," so members can pray for sinful non-Christians they hope Jesus Christ will save from "eternal damnation."

Who is it that you think is f**king up US politics and how?

you've been in a coma the last ten years have you?

[jbg]

Oh Lord! Talk about your 'ugly American'.....

So typical that you'd introduce your anti-Americanism (maybe typical of some Canadians) into a discussion about Harper. Harper is not an American leader.

[Keepitsimple]

religios fanatics are the same regardless of what they practise, once they have absolute power they change their world to reflect only their beliefs...fundy christians are no different than fundy muslims...he has a religious agenda that does not conform to the majority, only minority status prevents him from taking bigger steps in changing Canada into something that conforms to his religious beliefs...

Wyly....it seems to me that on a number of threads, you've been a firm supporter of the Charter of Rights - at least for arguments that you were trying to put forward. Have you forgotten about the Freedom to practice one's religion? Sounds to me like you are quite blatantly showing religious discrimination.

Further, we happen to have a pretty good adherence in Canada to separation of Church and State. In fact, you will never hear Harper talk about his religion.

The Roman Catholic Church considers homosexuality contrary to natural law and sinful, while homosexual desires are considered "disordered" but not themselves sinful. The Church also believes that all abortions including the destruction of embryos is immoral. The Church also believes that Christ will return. The Roman Catholic Church does not accpt divorces, however they will provide an annulment where it can be proven that the marriage was fraudulent in some way. So Wyly, is the RC Church - the most populous religion in Canada - just a bunch of fanatics?

Edited May 19, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[ToadBrother]

The Roman Catholic Church considers homosexuality contrary to natural law and sinful, while homosexual desires are considered "disordered" but not themselves sinful. The Church also believes that all abortions including the destruction of embryos is immoral. The Church also believes that Christ will return. So Wyly, is the RC Church - the most populous religion in Canada - just a bunch of fanatics?

I tend to agree here. I disagree with the RCC's views on many things, not the least of which is their view on homosexuality, but, in general, the Church does behave itself, so to speak, and keeps to its side of the Church-State divide. In all actuality, I've met a lot less Catholic fanatics than I have from other denominations.

[jbg]

In all actuality, I've met a lot less Catholic fanatics than I have from other denominations.

Not too many Jewish fanatics either; but I doubt Canada has many Jews.

[wyly]

I tend to agree here. I disagree with the RCC's views on many things, not the least of which is their view on homosexuality, but, in general, the Church does behave itself, so to speak, and keeps to its side of the Church-State divide. In all actuality, I've met a lot less Catholic fanatics than I have from other denominations.

agreed... as Trudeau demonstrated, I never saw any evidence of his beliefs influencing his political decisions, he kept a strict divide between church and state...the same can be said of Canada's moderate Protestant churches...just as many Canadian Muslims want no part of Sharia Law invading Canada's secular system the vast majority of Canadians want no part of Harper's fundy christian morality...the very nature of his churches beliefs is to change Canada to reflect their morality...

[Moonlight Graham]

He's probably Canada's best PM ever. Culturally he's a real conservative, and that's something Canadians are just not used to. Reagn did not become extraordinarily popular except in hindsight.

Hopefully in hindsight his greatness will also be recognized.

BAHA! Oops, sorry for the outburts.

Best PM ever? Very hard to claim that since he's never even had a majority government, so obviously many if not most Canadians easily disagree with you.

Harper's ok, i disagree with him on a bunch of key issues and would probably despise him were he and his party to have a majority and some the policies that would follow from that. But as a PM with a minority gov, he's doing an ok job considering the alternatives...but that's not saying much at all.

[PIK]

he's a christian fundamentalist fanatic something not part of our culture it's not even part of our Conservative governments of our past, he is not popular now nor will he ever be in the future...in hindsight Canadians will wonder how we could ever elect him as PM...well I guess the majority of us haven't elected him or his party of fanatics, he govern's only because of a f****d up electoral system...

Can you give us a link to show he is a christian fundamentalist fanatic , stuff like this just shows how uneducated people can be.I think most on the left hates him because he does not take it up the butt ,from europe or the UN or now the IMF. for once we have someone to stand up to these people and not cower like some previous goverments did. Some people have said they would like to know if mulroney tried to set up his retirement while still in office and how evil that would have been, what do you think chretien was doing on all thoses so called trade trips to china and where did he run off to after he quit, china. And funny thing mr kyoto himself is now living there , you know chretiens buddy maurice. Edited May 19, 2010 by PIK

[Argus]

I dislike him because he so clearly despises those ancient institutions that created and guarantee our liberties. He's a classic autocrat.

And what would these "ancient institutions" consist of? The CBC?

BTW, Chretien and Trudeau were just as autocratic.

[Argus]

Really? Then explain the obviously false argument that the executive in our system of government can withhold information from Parliament? If that isn't contempt for the system created after much blood in 1689, then how do you care to define it?

Dunno. I'd define your obsession with it as obsessive, tho.

[ToadBrother]

And what would these "ancient institutions" consist of? The CBC?

The constitutional rights of Parliament.

BTW, Chretien and Trudeau were just as autocratic.

No doubt. Rousing defense there.

[Argus]

Yep, starts a thread on hate for Harper and it turns real quick to hate for Chretien. Typical right wing strategy.

Pointing out the hypocrisy of people who fell to their knees with sobs of gratitude at the very sight of Chretien while lamenting the existance of Harper is indeed typical strategy. Especially when you guys couldn't have cared less how autocratic and vindictive Chretien was yet are appalled, yes, APPALLED that Harper can be a control freak.

[Born Free]

Dunno.

It figures....

[ToadBrother]

Dunno. I'd define your obsession with it as obsessive, tho.

I think an obsession with obeying constitutional constraints would be considered a positive, as opposed to being a slavish partisan.

Edited May 19, 2010 by ToadBrother

[ToadBrother]

Pointing out the hypocrisy of people who fell to their knees with sobs of gratitude at the very sight of Chretien while lamenting the existance of Harper is indeed typical strategy. Especially when you guys couldn't have cared less how autocratic and vindictive Chretien was yet are appalled, yes, APPALLED that Harper can be a control freak.

I'm not appalled that Harper is a control freak, well, no more appalled than I was at Chretien was. What appalls me is his flagrant contempt for our system of government. I mean, if his party wants to take it up the rear from him, or any party wants to take it up their rear from their leaders, I'll just vote for someone else. But when a government tries to amend our constitution by vacuous, false arguments, and what's more, sends out legions of simpering morons to defend the indefensible, yeah, I get a little pissed.

If Harper wants to reduce the ability of Parliament to hold him to account, then he should have the courage to submit an amendment to the constitution in the House where it can be duly debated. I mean, even an autocrat like Trudeau went to the Premiers to repatriate the constitution.

Edited May 19, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Argus]

But I do hope this doesn't turn into a "my system is better than your system" kind of debate, because you'll find, all in all, I would agree with you.

The American system was one of deliberately imposed separation of powers, which kind of worked when relationsips were more congenial between the opposing parties but is now starting to break down under the increasingly hostile and divergent political ideologies growing in the US.

As the Republicans move further and further to the right it's becoming more and more difficult to govern due to this, and will grow worse.

[ToadBrother]

The American system was one of deliberately imposed separation of powers, which kind of worked when relationsips were more congenial between the opposing parties but is now starting to break down under the increasingly hostile and divergent political ideologies growing in the US.

As the Republicans move further and further to the right it's becoming more and more difficult to govern due to this, and will grow worse.

I'm not exactly seeing us doing any better. I won't lay all the blame at Harper's doorstep, because as far as the divides in Parliament go, it really is all the parties, and in particular, their leaders, who have set the tone. I'm hearing people wax poetic for the days of Chretien, when MPs, outside of scrums and QP, still had a sense of camaraderie between the government and opposition benches.

I think the minority government phase we're in is probably mainly responsible. Everyone has become so damned bitchy, and compromise is only achieved after a lot of chest thumping and antics.