[DerbyX]

uwish uwish:

DerbyX DerbyX:

How did the Liberals? All they did was appoint senators in exactly the same procedure as Mulroney did so therefore they cannot by definition have fouled it up. In fact Chretien was even fair enough to appoint an NDPer. No such fairness from Harper.

Victims rights activist Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu for Quebec.
Former provincial auditor general Elizabeth Marshall for Newfoundland and Labrador.

OOO the horror!!! your saying an NDPer is better than a victims rights activist?

Irrelevant. Now examine how many Lib senators are people of good character.

[DerbyX]

Bodah Bodah:

DerbyX DerbyX:

How did the Liberals? All they did was appoint senators in exactly the same procedure as Mulroney did so therefore they cannot by definition have fouled it up. In fact Chretien was even fair enough to appoint an NDPer. No such fairness from Harper.

Ok I wont blame any party for it being the way it is, fucked up. I dont want senators appointed anymore, period.

Shit here's an admission for you I don't even like it when Harper appoints senators. I want the system changed to stop that, and there's a bill that's been sitting there for way too long to change all of this.

So he's sending in his peeps to get'r done.

You can't spin that any other way, but then maybe you'll likely suprise me as usual

Well aside from the fact Harper cannot reform the senate without constitutional changes and provincial say so what do you think he is going to do?

Also don't make the assumption that senate reform is a conservative agenda only. The only reason Harper is pushing this is because he thinks it will benefit him but he'll drop this quick as can be once he gets the majority and he'll blame it on the reality he simply cannot alter the senate appointment process on a whim just like he cannot make fixed election dates a law overriding the westminster parliamentary system.

He'll shrug his shoulders and say "I tried" while he appoints more unelected senators and smile while he is doing it.

[uwish]

"Funny I kinda love Canada and think we have done a fine job as a country. Sorry you don't feel that way. Exactly who was in charge during all those years the military so gallantly forged a global rep?"



what military? you mean the $500M the previous government paid out in cancellation fees for things like new ship born helos? Explain to me now then, why our DnD budget is among the highest in NATO since CPC joined?

And I don't support many of the peacekeeping missions we were part of, not because I don't believe in it fundamentally, but I think you must have clear rules of engagement. Bosnia, Somalia, 90% of them didn't hence you get genocide on our watch and we have ZERO capability to do anything about it.

[uwish]

DerbyX DerbyX:

uwish uwish:

DerbyX DerbyX:

How did the Liberals? All they did was appoint senators in exactly the same procedure as Mulroney did so therefore they cannot by definition have fouled it up. In fact Chretien was even fair enough to appoint an NDPer. No such fairness from Harper.

Victims rights activist Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu for Quebec.
Former provincial auditor general Elizabeth Marshall for Newfoundland and Labrador.

OOO the horror!!! your saying an NDPer is better than a victims rights activist?

Irrelevant. Now examine how many Lib senators are people of good character.

put the dooby down man, now isn't the time.

[DerbyX]

PimpBrewski123 PimpBrewski123:

Look, by no means an expert on Senate reform.

But it all seems ironic that no one seemed to notice when the Liberals dominated the senate, and that was ok. But the fact that now the Conservatives are filling some seats, the media reports it as no longer appropriate. The same could be said on the prorogation matter. In all fairness that should be looked at from both sides of the issue. There seems to be a bit of bias, that's all.

No. In fact the PCs/Reform/Alliance/CPC have been decrying it for decades. People aren't bitching that Harper is appointing senators.

They are bitching that despite all his bluster about not appointing senators he has been the very worst offender in Canadian history at doing it. In fact despite everything he ever said about openness and accountability nobody has ever led a government so determined to undermine democracy then Harper.

[uwish]

DerbyX DerbyX:

PimpBrewski123 PimpBrewski123:

Look, by no means an expert on Senate reform.

But it all seems ironic that no one seemed to notice when the Liberals dominated the senate, and that was ok. But the fact that now the Conservatives are filling some seats, the media reports it as no longer appropriate. The same could be said on the prorogation matter. In all fairness that should be looked at from both sides of the issue. There seems to be a bit of bias, that's all.

No. In fact the PCs/Reform/Alliance/CPC have been decrying it for decades. People aren't bitching that Harper is appointing senators.

They are bitching that despite all his bluster about not appointing senators he has been the very worst offender in Canadian history at doing it. In fact despite everything he ever said about openness and accountability nobody has ever led a government so determined to undermine democracy then Harper.

put previous liberal governments sanction things like torture and that's fine by you...

[DerbyX]

uwish uwish:

"Funny I kinda love Canada and think we have done a fine job as a country. Sorry you don't feel that way. Exactly who was in charge during all those years the military so gallantly forged a global rep?"



what military? you mean the $500M the previous government paid out in cancellation fees for things like new ship born helos? Explain to me now then, why our DnD budget is among the highest in NATO since CPC joined?

And I don't support many of the peacekeeping missions we were part of, not because I don't believe in it fundamentally, but I think you must have clear rules of engagement. Bosnia, Somalia, 90% of them didn't hence you get genocide on our watch and we have ZERO capability to do anything about it.

Smoke another fatty. Harper has done no such thing (BTW you missed the point entirely). IN fact as a %GDP Harper has been the same as Martin and less then Chretien, Mulroney, and Trudeau.

The fact that you think Canada seems to be some sort of damaged failure thanks to Liberal rule without taking note that most of our most cherished achievements have come under that very rule speaks volumes about you and any party you support.

So go ahead and say that Canada's achievements in WW2 and Korea was just damaged goods under a failed Liberal leadership.

[Thanos]

Pre-Trudeau Liberals weren't as anti-military as post-Trudeau Liberals are.

[Bodah]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Well aside from the fact Harper cannot reform the senate without constitutional changes and provincial say so what do you think he is going to do?

I agree it wont be an easy feat to pull off, I believed the provinces were consulted some point in the past I believe and it was which provinces that rejected it ? Quebec and whhich others ?

You think its impossible to achieve though, note taken.

DerbyX DerbyX:

Also don't make the assumption that senate reform is a conservative agenda only. The only reason Harper is pushing this is because he thinks it will benefit him but he'll drop this quick as can be once he gets the majority and he'll blame it on the reality he simply cannot alter the senate appointment process on a whim just like he cannot make fixed election dates a law overriding the westminster parliamentary system.

He'll shrug his shoulders and say "I tried" while he appoints more unelected senators and smile while he is doing it.

Is that one of the hidden agenda things you guys keep on "Harping" about.
I'm not going to get into a debate about what you think his real reasons are for doing what he's doing. When its evidently just your opinion.

[DerbyX]

Bodah Bodah:

I agree it wont be an easy feat to pull off, I believed the provinces were consulted some point in the past I believe and it was which provinces that rejected it ? Quebec and whhich others ?

You think its impossible to achieve though, note taken.

No I don't think its impossible. I think Harpers leading people down the garden path by claiming he can do it with a piece of legislation.

As for what provinces rejected it well simply read Bootleggas posts on the subject. He has posted at length that the very provinces (IE Alberta) who most wanted senate reform rejected the attempt at it to stick it to QC.

Bodah Bodah:

Is that one of the hidden agenda things you guys keep on "Harping" about.
I'm not going to get into a debate about what you think his real reasons are for doing what he's doing. When its evidently just your opinion.

Its not a hidden agenda. Its right out in the open. Senate reform is a means to an end for Harper. It appeals to his base because his base is pissed off cons who can't stand a Liberal majority in the senate and they think that will change under a senate election process. Its an empty promise because as gets stated endlessly senate reform requires constitutional amendments and provincial consent.

Its like federal parties making health care promises. They cannot do very much without provincial say so seeing as health care is under provincial jurisdiction.

Far from me saying its a bad idea or saying its impossible I simply want the facts to be presented. I'm tired of the anti-Liberal crybabies decrying the senate for no other reason then its (or was) dominated by the Liberals by virtue of them having dominated the government.

A person who truly wants senate reform will do so without partisanship because they believe its a better way.

[Bodah]

Aight, enough of this jibber jabba... I'm off to play L4d2, I'm Jimmy Legs if you see me on there.

[Zipperfish]

DerbyX DerbyX:

First off your post reeks of the arrogant elitism you claim the Liberals are full off. Nobody but nobody can govern the senate or parliament unless they are a conservative.

Second, just how obstructionist has the senate been especially considering you cons have crowed enormously over just how much Harper has accomplished and how many bills he has passed. This is all because the senate (very wisely) amended a rather shitty piece of legislation put forth by Harper and the same people crying about it would be the same people cheering if and when a conservative majority senate obstructed any piece of Liberal legislation. The Liberal senators aren't "imbociles" (and its imbeciles you moron. If you are going to insult peoples intelligence then spell it correctly) who show no indication of supporting Harpers agenda they are Liberal senators who don't happen to agree with Harpers legislation or reform ideas.

Third, just why you guys think that elected senators will automatically be better then appointed ones is beyond me since most of you consider the bulk of elected government MPs (or their provincial counterparts) with contempt. We might end up entirely with the exact same partisan politics we have now in the HOC.

You might also do well to realize that far from benefiting from a 3E senate your brand of conservatism would see its voice diminished (by far the best argument for a 3E senate actually) since fully 3/4s of the country is either centralist or left of centre.

Forth, if you want to monkey with senate reform then you had better be prepared to reexamine the parliamentary system too since complaints about its fairness and representation are just as legitimate. You might like to examine what would happen if the left votes were suddenly allowed to get their second choice counted. Hint: It wouldn't be too beneficial for the CPC.

Fifth, considering the "west wants in" mantra you might also look at the population distribution to see that Ontario I believe will get a much larger voice.

Great frickin' post, Derby!

[herbie]

$1:

They are bitching that despite all his bluster about not appointing senators he has been the very worst offender in Canadian history at doing it.

That doesn't seem to matter now everyone's standards are so low that "The other guy did it" is accepted as a legit reason.
That's exactly what my son said once. His sister ran up a $2000 phone bill and got punished so it should be okay when he ran up $2000 a couple months later. So let's hear how he didn't deserve a slap in the head and his snowmobile taken away.

[PimpBrewski123]

herbie herbie:

$1:

They are bitching that despite all his bluster about not appointing senators he has been the very worst offender in Canadian history at doing it.

That doesn't seem to matter now everyone's standards are so low that "The other guy did it" is accepted as a legit reason.
That's exactly what my son said once. His sister ran up a $2000 phone bill and got punished so it should be okay when he ran up $2000 a couple months later. So let's hear how he didn't deserve a slap in the head and his snowmobile taken away.

Speaking of money and partisan votes,

So if the NDP offered me a 100K and a few beers for their vote in the next election, would very much consider it. So as for beers, had a few tonight too.

[Lemmy]

So Harper's appointed 33 senators now. 33 senators at $131,000/yr. Nice one, err, 33, Uncle Stevie. That's quite a selfish spending spree you've gone on, buying yourself a Senate with our tax dollars in the middle of a recession. Oh wait, I forgot, Ayn Rand tells you selfishness is a virtue. But how can they fit all those bodies in the chambers? Mike Duffy's ass alone takes up a couple of cubic metres.