Wednesday, December 03, 2008

Hey Mr Harper !!??

This morning on cbc.ca I perused the article: "Gov. General set to arrive in Ottawa to face political crisis." and found the line - The Tories have characterized the agreement as an undemocratic coalition beholden to a separatist party - interesting ...

Mr Harper is engaging in fear-mongering. Using tired old adages and worn out rhetoric, he is trying to force the Parliament to support his Government, when clearly the House of Commons has lost confidence in the Conservatives ...

The Bloq may well be a "separatist party", but they sit as Members of the CANADIAN Parliament, and until they formally leave confederation, Mr Duceppe and his caucus remain CANADIAN citizens, duly elected to represent the interests of their Ridings AND the interests of the NATION. They are no more seperatists than the founding members of the Reform Party who pushed for Western Separation not that long ago - members who remarkably form the core basis of support for today's Conservative Party of Canada in the west ...

Politics in Canada is many things, but today BORING ain't one of the descriptors that could be applied ... Fear mongering based on a slanted interpretation has no place in Politics or LIFE ...

3 comments:

indigo said...

It is time Canada seriously accepted the no party system. A consensus government is really the only true way to have a democracy when each elected official will be chosen for his or her worth, integrity and contributions. Sounds like a pipe dream, me thinks not. Look to the south of us, that 2 year circus. Now we are again (sigh) having our own 2 year circus. It uses valuable scarce resources that would better be placed elsewhere. Like maybe: women's programs, homelessness, education, aboriginal entitlement, human rights and health care .................ah the list could go on all night.

Anonymous said...

Shawn, I think you're really off the mark with this issue. I sent you my views about this a few days ago -- pretty close to events so far, wouldn't you say? I don't know why you chose to not post my comments; however, you're the blogmeister, and you're always entitled to the last word.

In your overwhelming desire to somehow be rid of Mr. Harper, you misrepresent the BQ. They do not represent "... the interests of the NATION" -- your words and emphasis.

The deferral of a confidence vote until January is exactly what a majority of Canadians wanted. That doesn't mean that we support Mr. Harper; however, I believe that the "Coalition" was badly planned and hastily thrown together. If it had somehow taken over government on Monday it would have resulted in the kind of mess that was demonstrated in Wednesday's national broadcast. With some time to regroup, perhaps they can come up with a plan that makes sense, and that has some chance of success -- and does not involve being held hostage on every issue by the BQ.

Just for the record, I do not like PM Harper, and I supported my exceptional NDP MP in the last election. Those facts don't preclude me voicing my concerns about an idea (the Coalition) that's as bad as most of what the PM has on his private agenda.

John.

shawn said...

John ... never got your previous comments, or I would have posted them ...

I'll take the hit for my comment about the BQ ... I worded what I meant badly (like that's a surprise around here) ... I meant to say - something to the effect of - "so long as they remain sitting in the House of Commons as duly elected members of that body, they are representatives of the Federal Government ... blah ... blah ... blah ... and they are not currently promoting a seperatist agenda but one that puts Quebec's interests first ..." so something to that effect ... They represent the interests of Quebec, but until Quebec seperates from the rest of us they remain loyal servants of the Crown.

It's ALL academic now anyway ... the Coalition is cracking ... the Liberals are speeding up their leadership race ... the PM is back into the sweater-vest persona ... and tomorrow it WILL be a WHOLE new ball game ... the one statement I WILL stand by from the original posting is the comment about boring NOT being one of the descriptors that could be applied ...

Thanks.