eyeball Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Why they want to drag this out is beyond me frankly. Cynicism. They probably think that breeding it in people that would never vote Conservative is just as good as reinforcing it in people who would never vote for anything but. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 That might have been the main horse the Conservatives rode into town on, but I for one voted for the Conservatives in 2006 to get rid of the Liberals. I suspect many other voters did too. High and mighty words like "accountability in government" and "respect for Parliament" were great sound bytes but that's not what swayed me to switch allegiances. That said, I think the Liberals, at this moment in time anyway, are controlling the agenda and the message. A snap election might work against the Liberals because they could use more time to do more damage the further the election is pushed back. I don't dispute that... I was quite disgusted with the "I'm entitled to my entitlments!" Dingwallian attitude myself.. I think that comes from an arrogance and a false sense of superiority the Liberal party acquired through the false majorities of the late '90's and ealy '00's.Add in the spnsorship scandal,and rudderless leadership and the Liberals have got precisly what they've deserved!!! Having said that... It's more than a little rich that the Conservatives can sit there on some sanctimonious high horse,as if they are above shady behaviour... Whether they are sound bites,or not,"Accountability in government" and "Respect for Parliament" tend to resonate when the exact opposite IS,in fact, taking place.. The Conservative record on those things really are'nt very good,and even if they counter with the sponsorship scandal stuff (which they surely will),they've had the football for 5 years...They cannot escape those things. Ironically,Fife and Ibbitson both kinda/sorta agreed that this could help the NDP!!! Layton could rightly say that if it's corrupt behaviour your looking for,you've got the Liberal sponsorship scandal...If it's usurping parliament you want,you've got the Conservatives... We are'nt those guys!!! I'm no fan of Layton (I would consider voting for the Dips if someone like Mr.Broadbent or Mr. Douglas was leading them),and Fife said that they simply don't have the core constituency to carry the day...However,they did feel that this could allow them to gain seats... I suspect that Liberals want to get these Conservatives in front of a committee to really put the coals to them.I say this because the panel on Power Play felt that their could be a confidence motion as early as next week.I thionk that the opposition would really rahter have the last thing in the publics mind is these tory MP's in front of a Parliamentary committee explaining why they were trying to usurp the parliamentary process... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 I think that comes from an arrogance and a false sense of superiority the Liberal party acquired through the false majorities of the late '90's and ealy '00's. I would add the false sense of security since there really was no credible alternative. It's more than a little rich that the Conservatives can sit there on some sanctimonious high horse,as if they are above shady behaviour...Whether they are sound bites,or not,"Accountability in government" and "Respect for Parliament" tend to resonate when the exact opposite IS,in fact, taking place.. I have a basic distrust of politicians in general. Perhaps that's why I tune out of feel good phrases. My typical reaction to political speeches devoid of specific policy or substance and full of touchy feely phrases is "yeah, yeah". BUT, once a party starts to screw around with milking the Treasury to enrich their pockets, then my ears perk up. I haven't yet made up my mind about where I stand on this "in and out" business. Will it impact on my voting intentions? Truthfully, I doubt it, at least for the next election. I guess I'm not yet ripe for the picking. The Conservative record on those things really are'nt very good,and even if they counter with the sponsorship scandal stuff (which they surely will),they've had the football for 5 years...They cannot escape those things. Sponsorship is dated, I agree. The thing is a lot of voters have memories like elephants and won't let go for a long time. Just look at the ire the name of Mike Harris in Ontario still raises. Ironically,Fife and Ibbitson both kinda/sorta agreed that this could help the NDP!!!--- I'm no fan of Layton (I would consider voting for the Dips if someone like Mr.Broadbent or Mr. Douglas was leading them),and Fife said that they simply don't have the core constituency to carry the day...However,they did feel that this could allow them to gain seats... Ugh. I'd vote for Ignatieff before I'd vote for the Dippers. I thionk that the opposition would really rahter have the last thing in the publics mind is these tory MP's in front of a Parliamentary committee explaining why they were trying to usurp the parliamentary process... Maybe so. But I still maintain that the timing of the election is an extremely important factor that the Liberals have to consider. My sense is that they should wait until the budget to make their move. Plus, the weather will be milder and hopefully more people would turn out to vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) I would add the false sense of security since there really was no credible alternative. I have a basic distrust of politicians in general. Perhaps that's why I tune out of feel good phrases. My typical reaction to political speeches devoid of specific policy or substance and full of touchy feely phrases is "yeah, yeah". BUT, once a party starts to screw around with milking the Treasury to enrich their pockets, then my ears perk up. I haven't yet made up my mind about where I stand on this "in and out" business. Will it impact on my voting intentions? Truthfully, I doubt it, at least for the next election. I guess I'm not yet ripe for the picking. Sponsorship is dated, I agree. The thing is a lot of voters have memories like elephants and won't let go for a long time. Just look at the ire the name of Mike Harris in Ontario still raises. Ugh. I'd vote for Ignatieff before I'd vote for the Dippers. Maybe so. But I still maintain that the timing of the election is an extremely important factor that the Liberals have to consider. My sense is that they should wait until the budget to make their move. Plus, the weather will be milder and hopefully more people would turn out to vote. 1.Agreed...That goes to the false majorities I spoke about...When there's really no competition,you win by default.And you don't really have to put out anything earth shattering,just something tthat's slightly different and not scary.I contend that this is why the Liberal party is really rudderless.They really have'nt had to seriously compete in the are of public policy since the waning days of the Trudeau era...And that is to all of our detriment.... 2.Agreed again...Most are snakes to the core!!! Whether the In/Out scandal is an actual "scandal" is'nt really the issue...I think both Fife and Ibbitson hit on it...It's the cumulative effect of the Conservative contempt for Parliament in a minority setting...That has become undeniable!And one can see,if they would act this way in a minority position,how would they act in a majority position?? That's kinda scary when one thinks about it.... 3.I don't disagree with that,either...The PC's are in the wilderness in Ontario for a reason...Alot of people got sick and tired of how they ran the provincial gov't... The Bob Rae NDP gov't comes to mind,as well.. 4.The Dip leader is the tipping point.I'm fairly certain I would not vote for a Jack Layton lead NDP.That's not to say that their is'nt good people in that party.eg.Peter Julian,Charlie Angus,Dave Christopherson...As I said before,if someone like Mr.Broadbent,or Mr.Douglas,lead that party..Voting for them would be easier... 5.Possibly...I doubt they'll attempt to bring the government down next week...The PR dictates that they'll get some of these Conservatives in front of a committee to publicly shame them before pulling the plug. Edited March 10, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 2.It's the cumulative effect of the Conservative contempt for Parliament in a minority setting...That has become undeniable!And one can see,if they would act this way in a minority position,how would they act in a majority position?? That's kinda scary when one thinks about it.... 5.Possibly...I doubt they'll attempt to bring the government down next week...The PR dictates that they'll get some of these Conservatives in front of a committee to publicly shame them before pulling the plug. That first bit... AYE! If that doesn't scare the crap out of people, it certainly should. The second bit, I honestly hope they take your advice. Folks are finally waking up to what they are watching- that each of these events is not an exception or a minor oops or poor communication, that everyone does not do 'it' and that so many events and statements run dead contrary to our parliamentary system, and dead contrary to their own claimed philosophy and intent. That growing awareness needs to ripen enough to stick as it should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 It's the cumulative effect of the Conservative contempt for Parliament in a minority setting...That has become undeniable!And one can see,if they would act this way in a minority position,how would they act in a majority position??That's kinda scary when one thinks about it.... AYE! If that doesn't scare the crap out of people, it certainly should. Harper Government - Tipping Point!!! Just what was it... err... just what will it be!!! It’s not the parts that count but the sum of the parts. Which invites the question: Is anyone doing the math? => Just recently, four senior Conservatives (including two senators) were charged with willfully exceeding spending limits in the 2006 campaign that brought the Tories to power. The “in and out” financing scheme came at the same time that Stephen Harper was promising a new era of transparency and accountability. => Just recently, we had the document-altering scandal featuring International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda, who appears in the House of Commons for Question Period but refuses to answer questions on the matter. => Just recently, we had new revelations in regard to the government’s so-called integrity commissioner, the one who received 228 whistleblowing complaints and upheld not a single one. She left with a half-a-million-dollar severance package – and a gag order to go with it. => Just recently, we learned that the office of Immigration Minister Jason Kenney used ministerial letterhead to raise money for the Conservative Party. We’ve also seen a contempt of Parliament motion brought against the government for its refusal to disclose basic information on the costs of crime bills and on corporate profits. And we’ve seen the Conservatives release attack ads of such questionable quality that they were withdrawn. => Just recently, The Canadian Press reported that, in the tradition of l’état, c’est moi, the Prime Minister is insisting that “Government of Canada” nomenclature be changed to “the Harper government.” Some wag suggested the PM might want to change his own name – to Stephen Hubris. => Just recently, the PM appointed Tom Pentefountas as vice-chairman of the CRTC. Mr. Pentefountas comes equipped with two qualifications: his close friendship with the PM’s director of communications, and zero experience in telecommunications. => In this same time frame, we’ve seen what happens to those such as diplomat Richard Colvin and others who dare to speak out. => At Veterans Affairs, whistleblower Sean Bruyea’s medical and psychiatric records were circulated in an obvious attempt to have him labelled a nutcase. The recent math is eye-popping. But getting the full picture requires going a little further back. => We recall the PM on the Afghan detainees’ file denying Parliament its right to see documents. The Speaker overruled him, pointedly suggesting that he might show more respect for democratic traditions. => Before this, Mr. Harper had shut down Parliament, an act that brought thousands of Canadians to the streets to protest against what he was doing to their democracy. => In keeping with its obsession with secrecy and control, we recall the PMO’s muzzling of the public service and the diplomatic corps, its suppression of research containing data countering its ideology, and its efforts to impede the functioning of the access-to-information system. => The stifling of dissent featured such measures as the shutting down of Peter Tinsley’s Afghan detainees’ probe, => the removal of the head of the RCMP Complaints Commission => and the removal of the head of the Nuclear Safety Commission. => There was the ransacking of Rights & Democracy, => the disregarding of a fixed-date election law, => the issuance of a secret manual instructing Conservatives on how to disrupt parliamentary committees, => and a dozen other examples of authoritarian measures more befitting a one-party state than a 21st-century democracy. During the Chrétien government years, I reported extensively on malfeasance by the Liberals. To do the math on the Harper government is to conclude that, while it has no sponsorship scandal on its books, it’s already surpassed its predecessor on a range of other abuse-of-power indices. The government’s arc of duplicity is remarkable to behold. And there are more revelations to come. It may not happen in the next election, but there will be a tipping point and the PM and his ministers will pay the price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) Waldo... I'm beginning to sense a theme here... I get the feeling that Conservative Party of Canada,under its current leadership,might have a few "power and control" issues... They seem to bubble to the surface every once in a while and reveal themselves to everyone... As you have pointed out,when does the populous begin to tune in and see that these are not isolated incidents,but the actual MO of this party's current leadership??? Edited March 10, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Mostly because they don't care about someone using the wrong letterhead, or an aide using a stamp while the Minister is away, they are not so rabidly anti conservative no matter what they do. IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Mostly because they don't care about someone using the wrong letterhead, or an aide using a stamp while the Minister is away, they are not so rabidly anti conservative no matter what they do. IMO That's one of the lesser examples of this systemic problem... In and of itself,the letterhead thing is'nt that big a deal.Taken in the context of the obvious pattern that Waldo's post clearly shows... It's another link in the chain... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 That's one of the lesser examples of this systemic problem... In and of itself,the letterhead thing is'nt that big a deal.Taken in the context of the obvious pattern that Waldo's post clearly shows... It's another link in the chain... Minister Oda made a mistake, that's all. No big deal, she apologized. Let's move on. We can trust the harper Government to do the right thing. Let's rally around the PM, he needs us and Canada needs him. What Canada doesn't need is a visiting PM from Harvard here to school us Canadian taxpayers. I wonder if he'll hit us with a yard stick. A yard stick? Yes he claims to that America is his country after all. Don;t you watch the documentary ads that PM harper was so kind to share with us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 Minister Oda made a mistake, that's all. No big deal, she apologized. Let's move on. We can trust the harper Government to do the right thing. Let's rally around the PM, he needs us and Canada needs him. What Canada doesn't need is a visiting PM from Harvard here to school us Canadian taxpayers. I wonder if he'll hit us with a yard stick. A yard stick? Yes he claims to that America is his country after all. Don;t you watch the documentary ads that PM harper was so kind to share with us? YOU are the guy that watches those ads! I just KNEW there had to be someone... Otherwise they'd be a TOTAL waste... Thanks... I needed that laugh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.