Credit where credit is due. Discuss.
STARTING THINGS OFF, I'm fascinated by this position of Aaron's:
Governments are under no obligation to consult with the public in the development of any bill. True, they do so at their own peril, and put themselves at risk of outcries just like the one erupting over DMCA. But it is not incumbent upon them to hold public meetings, and their failure to do so does not give them any less legitimacy.
But, Aaron ... given the slogan of the Stephen Harper Party of Canada of "Gettings things done for Canadians," how exactly do you propose that Steve and the Stevettes can "get things done" for Canadians if they have no idea what "things" those Canadians want "done" for them in the first place?
And isn't it a bit inconsistent to take the position that public consultation isn't such a big deal when that same party, not that long ago, was howling endlessly about the badness of same-sex marriage because, ostensibly, a majority of Canadians had made their opinions known on the subject?
And given how poll-driven are the Conservatives, to now suggest that they don't really need to hear from the public on this issue smacks of rank hypocrisy, wouldn't you say?
Anyway, I'm out of here for a couple of hours, so I'll leave it up to the regular swarm of rabid weasels to nail your posting bleeding to a wall, Aaron. I'm sure they'll be gentle.