Dear Editor:
When a 21 year old Senate page, Brigette DePape, took the unprecedented step of holding up a “Stop Harper” sign during the reading of “throne speech” she played the role of the child in the story of the “Emperor’s New Clothes” who observes the king is in fact naked.
She quite correctly pointed out two things that should be obvious to all adults: Mr. Harper’s so-called majority is the result of a defective vote-splitting electoral system that gives 100% of the power to the Party with just 40% of the votes.” As Ms. DePape observed it is even worse, since 75% of Canadian voters did not vote Conservative.
This university grad and experienced Parliamentary page also pointed out the other obvious fact: there is no real possibility to stop the Harper agenda within the Parliamentary system. We are facing a four year long dictatorship. Farmers will be among the first victims with the destruction of the Canadian Wheat Board at the top of the corporatist agenda of the Harper government.
We need more creative and courageous people like Ms. DePape to lead non-violent opposition to the imposition of American Republican’$ values on Canada by the Harper Conservatives. And should ordinary Canadian’s in the next election or by-election organize themselves to conduct a straw-vote pre-election Canadian Wheat Board style vote123 preferential ballot poll, such citizens thereby empower themselves on voting day to avoid much of the vote-splitting vulnerability of our single-mark ballot system.
Sincerely,
Eduard Hiebert – ST Francois Xavier Manitoba
A persuasive take by Mr Hiebert. Will Brigette DePape’s action be the first of many shots across the bows of a virtual majority (Harper & Co) by the real majority (those who did not vote Conservative)? For the sake of Canada and democracy, let’s hope so.
Luv that, “shot across the bow” analogy. I also see it as the “first shot” in a long hard battle which must be waged relentlessly for the next four years. It has been suggested by many of the Conservative pundits that the actions of Ms. DePape are undemocratic, disrespectful, and self centered or the act of a “leftist kook”. I believe her actions to be proof that some democracy still exists (for now) as one so daring goes unpunished by law and other than her lost job she was able to make a political statement, unlike the peaceful demonstrators in last summers G8/20. She is a Canadian hero who felt a statement, which many of her leftist kook comrades have been shouting, must be made. Thank you Brigette!
I get a kick out of the premise of the 40% bandied about seemingly and constantly only by those who are anti-Harper. There is no realistic attainable populist majority in a five horse race. Hello!!! This is why others, myself included convey it is simply whining and sour grapes. In a two or three party race yes. The Bloc and Liberals were decimated in this five party raceand the NDP rode the populist wave in Quebec to decisively become opposition. Despite this unexpected result we remain far from attaining 51%. There are simply two many dividing the pie. To argue 60% did not vote for Harper is also to say For her to convey 40% did not vote for Harper is for others to convey 80% did not vote NDP, 95% did not vote Liberal and 99.9% did not vote Green. Regardless if anti-Harperites accept it as a majority, the current system is our system and majority acknowledge it as legitimate majority. The fact Harper has gained additional seats each election demonstrates more are becoming in favour of his leadership. This election many more preferred Harper over the options of Ignatieff or Layton. To be sure those rattling sabers on the left would be quite as church mice if Layton or Ignatieff were elected with just a one seat majority. The hypocrisy is deafening.
To speak up, to speak out, to convey opposite opinion is good. Indeed more Canadians should do so. It creates awareness both to oneself and others. That being said we should be capable of doing so and at same time with respect to institutions and others as well as with tolerance to institutions and others. Some understand that social value and some do not.
It is irony that although her protest was non-violent,it was not the avenue in my opinion. It reeked of grandstanding self interest, self agenda, exclusion of respect & intolerance to others. Some agree some do not. I admire her courage and conviction, and I very much admire her willingness to speak out and voice opinion, but for me it remains it was not the time nor place… simply grandstanding. With all that being said he is the sad irony… if she had been equally non-violent with her sign protest at the G20, chances are she would have been arrested, charged and jailed. How very wrong and screwed-up is that! It shall be a sad day if civil rights and democratic principles are trampled as Blair and those officers under his command did. If that becomes the norm then self agendas at exclusion of others and anarchy will prevail.
So Garfield, is it time for us old hippies to come out of the woodwork again. Have sit-ins in the gallery of the parliament buildings, chain ourselves to the doors, bare our naked bodies to the world in protest.
I don’t think you want to see that. If the current generations form of protest is to stand quietly with a cardboard sign then who are we to criticize. Let’s just hope it works and it stimulates a change in attitude in the current regime of old boys in the House of Commons and the Senate.
First Ms DePape, then the hash-brown hoax. Great, what next? Fact is, Garfield, the party in power is the Party of Contempt, and a majority of Canadians are not in favour. Ms DePape and the hackers are speaking for the majority.
Garfield, you are 100% correct in the premise that none of the other parties garnered sufficient votes individually to claim official government status under our current electoral system, but what you seem to be dismissing is that the sour grapes and whining you continually accuse the dissenters of is that of representatives of a majority of Canadians who are of centrist left to left train of thought. Combined we are the majority and are not in favour of this current Harper Government’s right wing ideology. Under what we label democracy we have the right to protest, the right to demand that our point of views be addressed or at least acknowledged, and the right to demand accountability and transparency. Unfortunately the current government and its lesser supporters do not agree that collectively we have those rights and that we are nothing less than leftist kooks with an axe to grind. Many Conservative pundits like you all but tell us to get back in our caves and disappear that we are merely a nuisance, but unlike the Conservatives, who can only really get along with themselves, the coalition of the opposition supporters can come together and most importantly now do and we have the right to be heard. Expect more of this form of highly effective protest from more and more ordinary Canadians over the next four years. The bear has been poked, now watch him roar. Oh and Reg, as much as I agree with your sentiment, I won’t be getting naked in public anytime soon; be thankful for small wonders!…..lol
As a side note…the hash brown hoax is absolutely mean spirited and unacceptable and I don’t think it is representational of 99.99% or more of Canadians…right, centre, or left.
You’re right left-or-right, only thing harper would choke on is telling the real truth… And only 75% of Canadians didn’t vote him in, so we can surmise that at least 25% of Canadians wouldn’t have done this…
True Grimalot, but the other leaders (Liberals and NDP) didn’t make as much as he did.
First my thanks to the Cornwall Free News for publishing my letter! And this in its entirety!
To the on-line forum, I appreciate much of the tenor!
As metaphor, I appreciate PJR’s 2 comments and will amplify two concepts. Every journey starts with the first step, even though many claim now is not the time, or not the right way…, but in the end, neither life nor democracy is a spectator sport. And arm-chair quarterbacking has its place if this informs ones next steps with some action where clearly some action is much more effective than others. In order to do more with less, I invite each one, without exception including Garfield, to examine more clearly my letter’s final sentence. These next steps are outlined in greater detail at http://www.eduardhiebert.com/ereform/v123p.htm and put into further next step practice at http://www.vote123.ca which is still viewable despite google’s warnings.
Secondly, towards greater clarity and reduce the two steps forward one back action, at the literal level “a shot over the bow” is a warning shot which literally threatens an escalation of a violent solution, even where your’s likely did not include this implied nuance. Likewise concerning the hashbrown comments, I too underline the left/right corrective provided as one very good step in the non-violent direction which is expressed even more powerfully by “We know that the solution to terrorism isn’t more repression and police state measures, but really solving the social problems that make terrorism seem like a recourse.” (Justin) Unfortunately at almost every turn, the extreme partisan Harper faithful like Mike Duffy twist where possible every act of protest into an act of a security breach and window of terrorism. At their core, such reactions of choice clarify what Harper and company mean with “tuff on crime”, a euphemism for two-tiered gated society.
Lastly Garfield if you are saying there are people on the left who are as partisan and more than you seem to be in places, I much agree with you. Partisanship may feel good at times, however if you review the 1% v. 99% article at the http://www.vote123.ca site you have the opportunity to see how most of the partisan crowd on both sides of the divide are being played. Regarding your comment of church mice you are dead wrong. A very large number of people have raised objection years earlier however people like Paul Martin respun these concerns as a concern over an “electoral deficit” while never coming clean of any understanding how the single-mark ballot contributed to the problem. However people like Harper while on the outside looking in actually raised the vote123 method as an option, but once close to getting unfair advantage from the vote-splits suffers total amnesia.
Reg the logic you put forth is excellent analogy and I confess has me in a quandary. In reading your comment I confess my choice of the two is illogical as I feel more comfortable with the hippie scenario you put forth… and no that does not convey I prefer anarchy. My personal feeling is a oath of employment and integrity was taken and broken. She was employed as a Senate Page and as such with certain values, trust and expectations. Kudos for her in choosing the most opportune time to maximize her message and effect. As much as I disagree with it, I am not one to criticize the essence of smarts and cleverness and give her credit for that aspect only and for her conviction and bravery. That being said I also have much respect for the essence of respect. It is something I expect from others and something I have ingrained in my kids. It is something earned.
To me a group effort as you conveyed is less offensive and morally acceptable. Although successful in hitting prime time coverage and effectively getting her message out, I doubt if it changes perspective of the populace. As much as she created awareness and conversation I suspect she also galvanized and motivated further entrenchments. In bypassing a unwritten social code of ethics she has not galvanized nor swayed the middle majority. Ironically and bizarre as it seems, I suspect he actions worked in Harper’s favour. Certainly it did not do him any harm. Those that are anti-Harper are vocal and entrenched, those that are anti-establishment are equally so and absolute will voraciously cheer one of their own. Those that are pro-Harper are also entrenched. The key is to do what Layton accomplished and to motivate the masses, to get them to buy in. For that to happen I do not believe radicalism or extremism is the answer. It will get portrayed in the media yes absolutely and the message will be beamed to the masses but it will not sway the middle group in that dissing and self-centered grandstanding is not something average Canadians embrace.
.
Left-or-Right, true as you say of the majority/centrist aspect, but I do not buy into the argument that because 60% voted multiple options other than Harper they are therefore by default anti-Harper or anti Conservative. After each election we hear that populist vote argument put forth by the partisan die-hards of the losing side. This election especially, I see it as whining and sour grapes as I truly view it as a unachievable standard and thus a mute point. That argument can always be put forth however in a five party race I view it as a hollow argument. It simply falls on deaf ears as I do not/can not buy into it. The system and rules in place are accepted by the parties and the populace as a whole. They seem content to abide by it and to accept the results. I hear contrary of it online by those of certain political affiliations, but certainly there is not talk of it on the street or by the mainstream. It simply is a non issue, a non concern to average John or Jane Doe citizen. Also, the fact Harper gains additional seats each election I believe is also with a message.
I agree with you 100% when you say under our democracy we have the right to protest, the right to demand that our point of views be addressed or at least acknowledged, and the right to demand accountability and transparency. I also wish more Canadians would do so and I would prefer on the accountability issue Harper would be more forthcoming. Now with a majority government hopefully it changes. I for one am acceptive of opposing views and in truth respect such if it is civil, respectful and presented in a mostly non-facetious/non-partisan fashion. Opposing views presented in such fashion create so I listen and contemplate instead of tuning out. To be acceptive to opposing views has created so I at times research further and to modify current perspective.That is what I cherish with opposing views, the greater awareness it can create.
I do not believe majority of those who are contrary to the current government are leftist kooks with an axe to grind. I do however feel a certain segment absolute falls into such category.Those that are zealots are typically easy to spot(on both sides of the spectrum) With zealots minds are set in stone and seldom with compromise or tolerance and so depending on tone of message I readily tune in or tune out.
I have become pro Conservative and very much pro Harper. Although I do not agree with all his policies, I like do that he is a strong decisive leader. In looking at both sides of a coin I feel his decisions are mostly logical. As for his persona it basically is a non-issue for me. I am more concerned that as a manager, he manages proficiently. I want substance, results and real workable solutions. Most aspects he professes I find myself in general agreement upon. I have become fed up with governments of political correctness and their feel good do-nothing policies, or their throw-money-at-it-feel-good-policies. Although I did not like nor trust Ignatieff I found myself in agreement with much of his his foreign policy and a few other aspects. Layton however is a no go for me, however as official opposition perhaps he melds into the real world. A new page has been turned with this election and so I reserve my judgment of Layton and await to see what unfolds now that political realities have transformed as they have.
Perhaps many Conservative pundits convey leftists should get back in your caves and disappear as they are merely a nuisance. I truly hope I do not portray myself as falling into that category. I am pro Conservative and pro Harper yes, but I strongly believe there is seldom a true right or wrong answer in politics. There are too many variables, additionally it comes down to ones perspectives and beliefs. As such there must be some tolerance and respect, especially if such is being conveyed. For example during this election my debating with some of those those on the left has created so I am with concern and greater awareness with issues such as security, free trade agreements and Canadian sovereignty. There are a few where our ideologies are total opposite and we seldom agree, however a mutual respect and tolerance exists. A few times they have given me a rash with their obstinance and I know they at times felt the same towards me 😉
From the mood I see online I do believe protests will become more voracious in nature. It will garner greater media attention and awareness, it will allow for venting and enthusiastic congratulatory accolades from those of similar bent. I may be wrong but I do not see it as swaying the mainstream populace. I feel those acts which contravene certain social values, although tolerated, will serve to galvanize both extremes and the effect upon the middle majority who in not respecting such antics, perchance will side with Harper. Time will tell.
Garfield, you remind me of a song by Bruce Hornsby “That’s Just The Way It Is”. You should listen to it.
The liberal types or greenish or whatever you want to call the non-cruel, rainbow people in happy land – they won’t vote to protect themselves. Most of the ones that do vote are totally stoned out, junked up, multiple prescription dopers, over 65, and totally sold on plastic land. This class of drooling, junkies are voting to put their children and grand children in jail for an extra couple hundred bucks a month. We lost arguments to these people all our lives. That generation was raised on depression, war and fear. Ironically they fought fascism then, to ask for it later. They don’t ask question. They love to follow orders. They were nurtured on abuse, and now, they are being led into this stoned out, foggy universe, of soon to be, expired usefulness enriching doctors and drug companies while the well groomed troopers plan to jack boot down the streets. It doesn’t look good as far as hoping goes. Plus the competition of top quality contemporary propaganda is super slick, that is, if you turn it on. It’s like a dirty dog. You don’t have to let it in the house. The answer is usually something unexpected. 🙂 See you later, maybe not.
An employee has avenues to follow if they are disgruntled, upset or whatever. Express your concern through channels, escalating as needed, find other work or put up with it and follow the rules.
This was not an issue of work conditions so find other work should have been followed, and protest like regular citizens.
These percentages being flouted will only mean something to me when we get over 90% of elegible voters out to the polls.
Is it a “defective vote-splitting electoral system” only when your party does not get to lead?
Garfield, I have one question for you. Have you ever seen as many Canadians of so many different non right wing political backgrounds (actually including Conseratives), in so many locations, and on so many occasions come together to protest against an elected leader in this country before? Why is that?
History is in the making here; Harper’s plan to polarize the nation into an American style two party system is all but complete. Fence sitters will have to choice sides as there is little future hope for a true centrist party in this American style political system of the future. Some centrist will of course select Harperism as their religion of choice while others like me, pushed to the left by a party of ideological bullies, will choose to spit out the seeds of sour grapes. We will cultivate these seeds, growing our vines and hopefully in four years successfully market our wine. As a grape vine withers without attention so does political resolve without awareness.
You are very diplomatic and passionate in your writings Garfield; you grasp the political scene with astuteness and understanding. You make legitimate arguments and accept the ideas of others. Unfortunately you do frequently come off as just as intolerant and as much a zealot as you as you claim we whiners are, but do not change my resolve is strengthened by yours.
Eric is right…Brigette DePape gave up her job in quiet protest and to protest like regular citizens in Canada …well over 1000 peaceful G8/20 protesters in Toronto might have an opinion on that ….all is fair in love and politics.
Garfield, re: para 4 in your last, please distinguish between “strong decisive leader” and “manager.” I submit there’s an ocean of difference between the two. A manager essentially manages what is; a leader envisions what might be and inspires us to reach for it. Harper is a manager, I agree, but not a leader. And Canada needs a leader. As to strong and decisive, that can be said of a bully, too.
While on management, Globe and Mail online running this headline on the Auditor General’s report: “The G8 legacy: millions mismanaged, Parliament misled.” So much for Harper the manager.
I do concede there is more protest against Harper. I think some of it is fear mongering perception that lingers from Liberal ads during previous election campaigns. However in having held office I believe it gave Harper enough exposure that the electorate did not buy in to the ‘hidden agenda’ portrayal as in past. Combine that with Harper’s personality which is not endearing and total opposite to the sociable Layton. With a minority government Harper the tactician chose not to be forthcoming nor was he transparent. Add to that the constant hammering by the opposition this election of contempt and not playing nice-nice with others. Automatic Harper with those traits is not going to endear people to his personality. It does not make him likable. For myself however those factors are not of the importance I place on other aspects such as his leadership and managing skills, his policies, capabilities, etc. If I put things into context of recent past…. for example how does contempt of Parliament compare on a moral scale to the graft and corruption of Chretien’s term; also with a majority in the House and Senate Chretien had no worries of facing a contempt vote. I see much of it as the pot calling the kettle black. In my opinion the bar has already been lowered and as such it created so many of the comments portrayed I viewed as rhetoric. Many times I referenced actions of Harper in comparison to actions of McGuinty, Chretien and Martin.
We must have and also to create greater political awareness. I am not sure how to motivate Canadians to be more aware, concerned and passionate. I remain to not support the antics DePage. She created awareness with her publicity stunt yes, but I doubt she changed opinions, rather I suspect she has polarized and fostered entrenchment. There is much happening behind the scenes globally and it worries me, however I look around and see no option that balances concerns with economic prosperity for the country. Layton and the NDP policies are economic suicide in my opinion and illogical to me. Also tax and spend; politically correct philosophy and throwing more tax dollars at problems without addressing core issues I can not buy into. I just can not. Perhaps as official opposition Layton makes minor change however I fear he will be too busy having his Quebec caucus determine his agenda. As I’ve grown older and to mature and experienced more things in life I am not ready to endorse a NDP government nor the Green Party. In past I was a active supporter of the NDP and to much lesser extent the Liberals. Today I would possibly consider the Liberals if there were some changes and if I became disenchanted with Harper. As it stands in looking at the three parties Harper is most logical to me.
I appreciate your comment as to my persona and thank you for the complimentary parts 🙂 Perhaps I do come off as intolerant although I have not viewed myself as such… of course i
I am saying that with some bias. lol Confess I am passionate, stubborn and mostly entrenched with my beliefs. Shall give greater focus as the intolerance and zealot aspects as in not appreciating it in others I prefer I not portray with myself.
It will take a year or two for people to wake up to the fact that Harper will indeed make Canada into a country that most of us never thought would be possible. He has absolute power for the next four years! By year three, the mega prisons will be ready to house dissenters who are stupid enough to criticize the ruling class. We are in for interesting times
Good final point Eric… something I have found myself a few times questioning although I am already with the answer.
PJR in looking at options of Harper, Layton, Ignatieff… Harper to me is the one with superior leadership and management skills. He perchance micro-manages too much and is very hands on, but for him that style seems to work. I recall Preston Manning and the Reform Party getting hammered because of individual comments of a few MP’s. With Harper his control is such that the media does not get easy opportunity to take a individual comment and to paint the whole party with it as happened in past. The management aspect Harper has down to a fine science.
With leadership I see it on the world stage where more and more he is keynote speaker and under Harper, Canada is increasingly with leadership roles. With a non-endearing persona according to the media, opposition parties and anti-Harperites then Harper must be with a leadership MOJO that he illicites loyalty and support from within the party and from the electorate. Regardless of the populist vote issue, Harper has continually increased his support level. I see it within the Conservative Party from the merging the Alliance Party and Conservative Party as one and I see it internationally and with the recent election. What you infer as Harper being a bully I will buy into, but Chretien was no better in that aspect. Regardless of his persona and style fact is he has joined two parties as one, become a international player of substance and attained a majority government. that he could not do all one his own. He had to be with leadership qualities to create so others saw similar vision and willing to follow same path as Harper.
That Canada needs a leader is a major reason I like Harper. I saw/see Layton and Ignatieff as too appeasing. I seldom trust nor support a politician that tells the electorate the politically correct answers it wants to hear. That aspect I am fed up with and refuse to buy in to.
Furtz I am curious. As much as I do not respect nor trust Layton; as much as I view ‘contrary Jack’ as spouting what the politically correct want to hear, I decided to turn the page and for the most part purge my feelings of him and await what comes forth now that he is official opposition. Why can people on the left not do the same with Harper. Perhaps I am naive, however I believe with a majority government Harper will be with changed style.
I do agree we are in interesting times and with many interesting variables.I fail to see how it would be better under the tutelage of the left. I think many Canadians did not buy into Ignmatieff and I think Layton remains with a few more layers of skin to shed.
I am with concern regarding Canada and the the hidden global agenda by the influential big-money players. At same time I realize much of the groundwork and buildup was before Harper’s time and that both the former Conservatives and Liberals bought in to it fully. In that light I suspect regardless of governing power of the day, we would be buying into it exactly as we are being that Canada is a trading and natural resource nation. What are our options. It is easy to complain, but what is the amicable solution? .
I spoke to a couple of soldiers in the Canadian Army. They told me that they were in the military so that people back home could tell the boss to, ‘shove it’ if they wanted to, or protest, wave signs, complain, write letters or march in the streets back home. They said protecting those specific rights was a common feeling. They felt it was part of freedom. They felt they were there on behalf of freedom. They didn’t see those actions as frivolous. They said if it went on more, maybe they wouldn’t be where they were. They will do as they are ordered.
Our members of the military are deserving of our respect. They are recognized as among the best in the world. Canadian soldiers strongly believe in what they do and view they are making a positive difference. It is a force comprised of volunteers and not conscripts. As much as they are soldiers and with soldier tasks, they are also ambassadors and humanitarians. They follow orders and do as they are told, but they network and interact with the people where they serve more openly than most armies of the world. I very much see that as their strength and a Canadian strength. They do not barricade and isolate as American soldiers typically do. Perhaps it is our Canadian character traits, resolve and core values that make us excellent ambassadors and natural peacekeepers. Indeed democracy and freedoms we enjoy are the result of conviction and sacrifice of others willing to put their life on the line for something worth believing in and fighting for. Be thankful we live in a democracy and not in a dictatorship. I am with utmost respect for our Canadian soldiers. They have at times been deprived and trampled upon but they remain strong, unwaivering and with moral conviction in democratic values. Even if some of us do not see it, Canadian soldiers see and realize they are making a positive difference and that typically we are defenders and not conquerors.
Well said, Garfield, about our soldiers. I agree 100%. At the same time, I’m not so confident about our democracy with the party of contempt in power.
Maple Leaf Uprising On Schedule As Planned – Bridgette DePape will be speaking at 4:30 pm in Dundonald Park in Ottawa today, June 10th. A demonstration of many groups is planned for this evening. Many expected. List of speakers include DePape and the President of the Postal Workers Union. Expect the unexpected.
…will there be medieval siege devices?
Are the special detention centers set up?
Hello Canadian Spring?
Well, Garfield in answer to your question about people on the left giving Harper a chance…hmmmm I wonder why not ..could he be…oh I don’t know….Satan! ! …. lol All kidding aside, in my case I did give him a chance when he was first elected; I hoped he would bring forth a new style, but I soon found him to be so secretive, controlling, contemptuous, and just plain egotistical that I became more involved in politics. I read more Canadian and world news, I watch news constantly, especially political shows, and I started contributing the maximum amount to my party of choice. Heck my wife has even got into politics. We did all of this just because of Harper . As far as this term goes, one only had to watch Tony (Gazebo) Clement and John (The Mouth) Baird trying to weasel their way out of that Auditor General’s report yesterday. Fifty million bucks misappropriated from a border security fund for Tony Clement’s riding, signed over by Baird himself and no paper trails for how projects were chosen or where funding would go to boot. Call it what you will but this was Harper’s Mob defrauding the Canadian taxpayers plain and simple. I know they’ll try and fluff it off as G8/20 necessities, but that just doesn’t wash! What can we expect with a majority Harper Mafia?
Oh and for the record, I know the money was spent on legitimate projects, that is not the point. It is how the money was procured that is the problem. They hid the truth from Canadians; they flat out lied to the taxpayers and Tony Clement’s riding was the benefactor. When do the rest of the ridings get egaul perks?
Miss Brigette DePage has showed us democracy is indeed alive and well in Canada. A dictatorship would not tolerate such antics within its halls of inner sanctum. If in a dictatorship Brigette would not be with the luxury and stardom she currently enjoys.
Now that Harper has pretty much absolute power for the next four years, he will have to concentrate on stifling the press, not that the press has been any kind of threat for some time. Still, if I was a shit-disturbing reporter, I’d consider hiring a bodyguard.
Left-or-Right in seeing you gave Harper a chance in earlier days very much surprises me and creates so I can no longer think of you as a leftist zealot. That you have explored on both sides of the fence says much. Cool that your disdain for Harper transformed into greater involvement with news and politics. It is similar to my involvement where my disenchantment with the Liberals created so I embraced differing option and greater involvement. We walk similar path only in different directions. lol
I agree Harper is secretive and controlling, contemptuous perhaps, but the egotistical award absolute has to go to Layton. The Auditor General was not that hard on the Conservatives. That it is perceived as a end play for expediency sake does not make it right, but seriously nothing in any of Harper’s terms compares to the graft, kickbacks, corruption and entitlements of the former Liberals. We can criticize wrongdoings of the Conservatives and we should, but much is being made of little, especially in looking back to the Chretien years. In that department if Harper is no Angel he certainly is a improvement and the lesser of two evils.
Nothing yet perhaps Garfield…What was that Carpenter’s song?..”We’ve only just begun!” … To lie to or mislead the Canadian taxpayer about where and how their taxes are being spent is no less contemptuous and deceitful than the famed AdScam and could even be construed as criminal. No matter how the Con pundits spin this…..if it looks like, smells like, and taste like cow patties, then it probably is cow patties and no amount of bleach is going to get the smell out.
I believe Harper’s majority is a good thing. Perhaps I am naive however I believe it will bring more accountability. He is a tactician that survived longer than any other with a minority government. In bringing the Conservative Party on this path of steady progress I believe he realizes wider support can come only in appeasing some basic aspirations of Canadian’s including greater accountability and transparency. Harper previously campaigned on that platform and has not honored it. Perhaps that was of necessity and adapting for sake of survival. Regardless, that premise of survival no longer applies and focus can be afforded to conveyances neglected.
The bar was previously lowered and although Harper has not stooped to such depths as Chretien and his croonies, hopefully he will raise the bar. He is a politician and so I perhaps am dreaming in technicolour but I do honestly believe positive change will come from his majority government.
@ Garfield. I sure hope you are right, but up to this point I see little openness or transparency. Not allowing a debate on the Throne Speech is not a good start. It’ll be an interesting four years.