McGuinty Resigns as Premier of Ontario

[Wayward Son]

I certainly respect your opinion, but I think losing the last election with all the ammunition Hudak had is inexcusable. Dalton should NEVER have won with his record, and, I was regretting Hudak's campaign from the get go, I new he was blowing it and I think our party did too. He's a failed contender. Drop him.

Personally I feel that if Hudak and the PC gave Frank Klees more support in April 2011 they could have cracked the Ornge scandal wide open by June. They would not have had all the ammunition that came out through the Auditor General or Kevin Donovan and the Toronto Star, but I think they would have had more than enough to seriously hammer the Liberals, leaving the PCs with either a minority or possibly a majority. It was a huge missed opportunity that only Klees seemed to see at the time.

[Wayward Son]

FACTS are facts... Your Bias is noted and will be reflected in the credibility of your future posts...

Yes, Have vs "Have-Not" just happens..... Good management vs poor has nothing to do with it right??? The most populated province with highest tax-rate went into Have-Not? Your forgetting that there are many "Have" provinces .. They were financially "Bright enough" to deal with these trying times??

Are you suggesting that Ontario is the province with the highest taxes?

[MiddleClassCentrist]

FACTS are facts... Your Bias is noted and will be reflected in the credibility of your future posts...

Yes, Have vs "Have-Not" just happens..... Good management vs poor has nothing to do with it right??? The most populated province with highest tax-rate went into Have-Not? Your forgetting that there are many "Have" provinces .. They were financially "Bright enough" to deal with these trying times??

My bias to question the obvious bias of a tabloid style news station?

Ontario is still a massive contributor to the federation We are BARELY a have not province for equalization payments. It's hard to be a have province when you are stuck with the entitled baby boomer generation whose kids are moving out west or internationally and are not supporting services.

Politicians have very little control over the economy, they can influence a bit by slowing downward trends with a cushion or push a boom with investment. They can make it a bit worse with massive cuts in a slow down making the drop a bit steeper and deeper. But they are really just reacting to the work of the market... not their divine intervention. Canada should be a prime example for this... we've been doing alright but... without the world economy recovering, we are still in a lull. Stephen Harper will claim it is his responsibility we are doing better than most but it's not. Economics 101... you can't control the free market.

Edited October 18, 2012 by MiddleClassCentrist

[g_bambino]

Proroguing the Legislature is questionable.

Indeed it is. And finally the media is picking up on the parallels between McGuinty's actions now and Harper's back in 2008 and 2009 and the lack of parallel between the amount of public outrage triggered by each.

[Mr.Canada]

Indeed it is. And finally the media is picking up on the parallels between McGuinty's actions now and Harper's back in 2008 and 2009 and the lack of parallel between the amount of public outrage triggered by each.

PM Harper does it and everyone goes crazy and calls for everything but a public hanging. Dalton does it and no one cares because he's a Liberal and he can do what he wants. Hypocrisy.

[madmax]

PM Harper does it and everyone goes crazy and calls for everything but a public hanging. Dalton does it and no one cares because he's a Liberal and he can do what he wants. Hypocrisy.

If PM Harper had Prorogued in late 2008 and RESIGNED, you might have a point.

If Dalton had Prorogued and NOT resigned then people would be demanding a pound of flesh.

Right now, it seems teh public is happy he is leaving and accepting proroguing as the price of such a decision.

I am not one of htose who agree with Proroguing.

[scribblet]

Prroguing is merely a tool at a first minister’s disposal, resigning saved his butt and staved off an election, it bought time for the party and most of all, he won't be held to account.

The 'contempt' motion was a partisan political game, same as it was with the federal opposition. Resigning saved him from a vote of non-confidence and also leaves him able to say he resigned rather than fired as will no longer be held to account.

Interesting how people can rationalize what McGuinty did because we know had it been a conservative the reaction would be far different.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/McGuinty+every+right+prorogue/7405808/story.html

[bleeding heart]

Anyone else notice that the better the Conservatives have done politically, the more power and influence and successes they've had...the more their adherents cry victimhood?

An interesting phenomenon.

Edited October 18, 2012 by bleeding heart

[Mr.Canada]

Has anyone noticed that it doesn't seem to matter who is in power that they always act the same?

Do they take their orders from Bilderberg? is the oil pipeline coming east just so it can go south into the States?

Edited October 18, 2012 by Mr.Canada

[scribblet]

I have noticed the difference in reactions to this, where is the outrage, the dictatorships, the jack boots -

Actually, McGuinty hasn't gone yet, his resignation is only, imminent, so in this case we have the conjugation of a requested prorogation and an imminent resignation.

[Boges]

Well I see the apathy like this towards McGuinty all the time on this site. Complete and utter outrage over a Robocall scandal that still has scant evidence to support it happened at more than one rogue riding.

McGuinty oversees:

- EHealth,

- Health Premium

- HST

- ORNGE

- Failed Energy policy

- A Massive deficit

- Bribing civil servants only to start a war with them

- Trying to destroy Horse Racing (Ontario's second largest agricultural sector) only to pad friend's pockets (Paul Godfrey and Larry Taunembaum)

- Cynically canceling two power plants, he initially said were essential, only to cancel them at a cost of what could approve half a billion dollars

- Oh and pretty much ignoring the Drummond Report.

But the response is always, Yeah but Hudak would be worse.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Boges

[Mr.Canada]

he has listened well to his Bilderberg group masters. he's a good slave. Now they want him to be the next PM of Canada to continue the Bilderbergs work at the national level. he will run for the federal Liberals and win, then he will defeat Harper in the next election and become PM of Canada.

[g_bambino]

PM Harper does it and everyone goes crazy and calls for everything but a public hanging. Dalton does it and no one cares because he's a Liberal and he can do what he wants. Hypocrisy.

As I said, the media has, since the announcement of the prorogation, been laying a little more into McGuinty for his direction to the Lieutenant Governor that parliament be prorogued. However, there have still been no mass protests, screamed fearmongering about the end of democracy, or burnings of the premier in effigy, as there were following the prorogations of the federal legislature in 2008 and 2010. (Okay, the last one was fictional (I think) and thrown in for dramatic effect.)

[g_bambino]

he has listened well to his Bilderberg group masters. he's a good slave. Now they want him to be the next PM of Canada to continue the Bilderbergs work at the national level.

[kraychik]

Norman Spector has stated that he believes that Michaelle Jean made a mistake in granting Harper request to prorogue government (a process which I still don't completely understand), as it set a precedent which allowed McGuinty to do the same. In other words, part of responsibility for this provincial prorogation lies at the feet of Harper and/or Jean.

[bleeding heart]

Given the system, I'd say more Jean than Harper (if blame is indeed to be laid, on which I'm agnostic).

[g_bambino]

Norman Spector has stated that he believes that Michaelle Jean made a mistake in granting Harper request to prorogue government (a process which I still don't completely understand), as it set a precedent which allowed McGuinty to do the same. In other words, part of responsibility for this provincial prorogation lies at the feet of Harper and/or Jean.

Where and when did Spector make those comments? Because, Peter Russell, one of the constitutional experts Jean consulted at that time, said some months later that Jean had placed conditions on her granting of Harper's request - parliament would be recalled soon and a passable budget would be presented - which, according to Russell, set a precedent that would prevent future prime ministers from advising the prorogation of parliament "for any length of time for any reason".

There's a slight difference between the two scenarios, as well: Federal rules (regulatory and conventional, rather than statutory) require a royal proclamation of a prorogation must give a specific date upon which the prorogation will end. No such thing exists in Ontario; in fact, legislation specifically absolves the lieutenant governor of the responsibility to give a specified limit to a prorogation (apart from that set by the constitution).

We won't know the full details until Onley's proclamation is published in the Gazette on 27 Ocotber.

[ed.: +]

Edited October 18, 2012 by g_bambino

[Boges]

The GG or LG really should have to answer to the head of the government.

They're only symbolic heads of state. If they can use their discretion on matters of governing, then what's to stop the Queen from doing the same thing?

[g_bambino]

The GG or LG really should have to answer to the head of the government.

Huh?

If they can use their discretion on matters of governing, then what's to stop the Queen from doing the same thing?

Other than where the constitution stipulates that only a governor may carry out the act, nothing except the same constitutional restrictions.

[Michael Hardner]

he has listened well to his Bilderberg group masters. he's a good slave.

I didn't think conservatives generally bought into this nonsense. Now I know better.

[kraychik]

Where and when did Spector make those comments? Because, Peter Russell, one of the constitutional experts Jean consulted at that time, said some months later that Jean had placed conditions on her granting of Harper's request - parliament would be recalled soon and a passable budget would be presented - which, according to Russell, set a precedent that would prevent future prime ministers from advising the prorogation of parliament "for any length of time for any reason".

There's a slight difference between the two scenarios, as well: Federal rules (regulatory and conventional, rather than statutory) require a royal proclamation of a prorogation must give a specific date upon which the prorogation will end. No such thing exists in Ontario; in fact, legislation specifically absolves the lieutenant governor of the responsibility to give a specified limit to a prorogation (apart from that set by the constitution).

We won't know the full details until Onley's proclamation is published in the Gazette on 27 Ocotber.

[ed.: +]

http://www.ottawacit...9741/story.html

“We’re reaping the fruits of Michaëlle Jean’s prorogation,” said Norman Spector, Brian Mulroney’s former chief of staff, on Tuesday.

Also this article, from back when the Harper prorogation was occurring. Spector opposed it then.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/harper-jean-spar-to-the-end/article1369911/

Edited October 18, 2012 by kraychik

[bleeding heart]

I didn't think conservatives generally bought into this nonsense. Now I know better.

Yes, the biggest and oldest conspiracy theories tend to have a beautifully bipartisan cast to them.

Right and left, together at last!

You'll note that Alex Jones, for example, remains a social conservative (abortion as a liberal conspiracy is part of his realm of ideas) and yet all manner of disaffected lefties are drawn to him.

Edited October 18, 2012 by bleeding heart

[Michael Hardner]

Yes, the biggest and oldest conspiracy theories tend to have a beautifully bipartisan cast to them.

Right and left, together at last!

You'll note that Alex Jones, for example, remains a social conservative (abortion as a liberal conspiracy is part of his realm of ideas) and yet all manner of disaffected lefties are drawn to him.

That's actually bad news. Strategically, they could start convincing people on both sides of the spectrum and make some headway.

Still, the mainstream of their ideas - more openness, less secrecy, and more accountability to the public are actually core bipartisan problems with the system as it is today, not crazy at all.

It's just blaming this on the Lizard People (Icke) Bohemian Grove (Jones) New World Order (Beck) or Socialist Plots (all of them) is a specially stinky kind of crazy that people like me step over like dog cookies on the sidewalk.

[kraychik]

There is a lot of truth behind the warnings coming from those like Glenn Beck, and to a lesser extent, those like Alex Jones and Jesse "FEMA camps are being built to imprison us all for future slave labour" Ventura. There is a growing centralisation of control over both the economic and social spehres of our lives being placed into the hands of government. We see it domestically, and we see it supranationally (the UN and the EU being the best examples). There is an erosion of sovereignty that occasionally occurs via treaties, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. This is not all whacked out "conspiracy theory" type stuff, Of course leftists like you either don't see it or actively support it.

[bleeding heart]

Michael Hardner just expressed something not completely dissimilar to what you're saying; and while I didn't (here) express it, I also agree that conspiracy theorists (even if their "facts" are so often lunatic rantings) tend often to be inclined towards an idea of openness and accountability--and towards the notion of the need for systemic, institutional critiques of Power.

So I don't know to whom exactly you're aiming your (incorrect) critique.

But having said what I have here about them, the conspiracy theorists are not exactly necessary. With work and diligence, a person can perform institutional critiques of Power without screeching about Bush destroying the WTC, or about rich liberals trying to control us through lax abortion laws.

Edited October 18, 2012 by bleeding heart