Thursday, December 11, 2008

Wait for it ... wait for it ... wait for it ...


And if you don't like Blogging Tory Sandy Crux's staunch, unwavering conservative principles, just wait 15 minutes:

Yes! PM Harper to fill the 18 senate seats?
December 11, 2008, 10:21 am by Sandy

Apparently, according to CTV, PM Stephen Harper is going to fill the 18 senate seats before Christmas. That is very good news for everyone who voted Conservative in the October 14th election — just a few short weeks ago!

I know the new undemocratically elected leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, Michael Ignatieff and all other opposition leaders and their supporters will scream that the PM has flip-flopped his promise to have Senators elected. But, these are difficult and very different times.

You knew that was coming from Sandy, didn't you? Yes, you did. You absolutely did.

32 comments:

LuLu said...

But, but, but ... it's totally different when Big Daddy does it.

Srsly, kai?

craig said...

Jeebus. What a whore.

WV: herinfee (I'm not makin' this up).

CC said...

craig:

Sandy Crux is not a whore. She gives it away for free. That just makes her a slut.

I'm glad I could clear that up for you.

CanuckRover said...

But, these are difficult and very different times.

What the fuck does that even mean!? So appointing 18 senators is necessary for fixing the economy? Ugh, my head hurts.

Any wagers on who makes it in? I didn't think Harpie even had any friends. Flanagan?

Frank Frink said...

Knew this was comin? Pshaw.. perish the thought. It never crossed my mind. And if you believe that I've a got a little 3-lane bridge here in Vancouver...

Metro said...

Personally I kinda like the undemocratic appointed senate thing. It means they don't have to keep whoring themselves out for votes.

But it's always the Conservatives who rail against it who wind up abusing the hell out of it. Mulroney actually added Senate seats to try and ram through some of his legislation.

So all I'm saying is that this is completely consistent, as is the Blogging Tory reaction.

Ti-Guy said...

Sandy Crux is neither a whore nor a slut.

She's a fucking moron. In one short passage she lauds what the Harpies have long derided as undemocratic while lambasting the Liberal party for its lack of democracy.

That's criminal stupidity; and I've called the police to have the bint arrested.

Wayne said...

The West wants an equal, elected, and effective senate. The East does not.

Harper is filling the seats so that Liberals will not be in those seats. Any Liberal or NDP would do the same.

Harper has tried a number of times to get senate reform and has got nowhere.

End of Story.

Ti-Guy said...

Now Wayne's speaking for the East as well?

Stuffing the Senate with politicians isn't going to make it any more effective. Judging by the type of person who's attracted to politics these days, I would argue that that would make the whole system even more irritating than it is.

I wish some people would stop confusing elections with democracy.

Harper has tried a number of times to get senate reform and has got nowhere.

He's done absolutely nothing but bitch and moan about it.

Seriously, Wayne...what are you growing on that farm of yours?

thedarkerside said...

The "undemocratic elected leader of the liberal party"? Huh? Since when do parties have to hold an election?

Guess anything to smear the "other guy" eh?

catnip said...

Just popped in to give you some breaking news: The sun is hot! (Who knew??)

On topic, way to be bipartisan there, Harper.

Wayne said...

"Since when do parties have to hold an election?"

Dec 11, 2008 Globe and Mail
"Liberals must move quickly to embrace the concept of one member, one vote." Belinda Stronach EX Liberal Parliamentarian.

Wayne said...

The Sun is Hot.

Since 12 people release the same amount of CO2 as one car does in a year.

Since the left hold the belief in "man made global warming/climate change".

Since the left are lemming like in their belief of "man made global warming/climate change".

It is sad that lemming mass suicide is a myth, because the left could stop "man made global warming/climate change", in mythical lemming like way.

Sigh. One can only dream.

Reality Bites said...

Hey Wayne, must really SUCK that the Conservative Party does NOT support a Triple-E Senate either, eh?

Wayne said...

Ouch. Thanks for the salt in the wound RB. :)

roblaw said...

Yup. Seems a little disingenuine. Just like fixed election days.. no argument here.

But, hey, speaking of which.. uh, are we to assume the Liberals and NDP would be willing to support a constitutional amendment to require an elected Senate? Just curious.. as I'd get right behind that and help you-all dump on Stevie if it meant there was not a snow-ball's chance in hell of Elizabeth May or any BQ people being appointed..


wv = "parog".. hahaha..a well known hunter in World of Warcraft -people who know Parog are aware that he only talks in trade chat to get people talking and doesnt always think what he's saying. On the other hand, people who dont know Parog just contribute to his daily trade chat spam.

Chet Scoville said...

are we to assume the Liberals and NDP would be willing to support a constitutional amendment to require an elected Senate

If memory serves, the NDP has historically been in favour of abolishing the Senate.

M@ said...

But, hey, speaking of which.. uh, are we to assume the Liberals and NDP would be willing to support a constitutional amendment to require an elected Senate?

What does this have to do with anything? Nothing, for two reasons.

First, the CPC was going to put together "advisory" elections, based on which the Prime Minister would appoint senators. They always saw a constitutional amendment as a non-starter, especially in the short term.

Second, the CPC has senate reform as a central part of its platform, and has had it for many years. The fact that other parties don't support them doesn't matter at all; they ought to abide by the principles on which they campaigned.

Of course, it's all irrelevant anyhow. The senate reform issue was exposed as bullshit on the very first day of CPC government, when they appointed Michael Fortier. And if you don't like those principles, etc. etc.

roblaw said...

..hey, don't have a spaz M@.. I was just asking a question.. touchy :)

..but, assuming that the PM, in the spirit of.. well, "cooperation", agrees to change his stance on Senate appointment to revert to that practice advocated and practiced so dilligently by the Liberals for so many years (ask John Turner about that.. he has some relevant experience in that regard), I would assume that Michael Ignatieff would take the PC appointments as a sign of, well, accomodation of other parties principals..

LOL

M@ said...

..hey, don't have a spaz M@.. I was just asking a question.. touchy :)

You asked a question that either was intended to minimize the lies that Harper has been spouting, or was really, really stupid.

Charitably, I answered your question directly, without calling into question your motives in asking it. But now I'm just going to call you an idiot and move on.

roblaw said...

..ok, I'll be direct..

Yes - Harper is being duplicous - you can't say, "Senators need to be elected" and then just throw it away because you KNOW that if the Liberal swine manage to get in power, they'll fill those spots before you can blink with their fellow travellers..

And Yes - while I'm the one that brought it up - Harper was also being duplicous calling an election at a time that was opportune, as opposed to abiding by the fixed election date he sought to impose.

Clear enough M@?

Now - answer me this "direct question" - do you support the executive of any government appointing their buddies and pals into the Senate as "payback" for past service to the party?

If you say "no" - I'll say, well, good for you, because neither do I, so we have that in common - if you just bluster about the Conservatives being disingenuous liars without taking a moment to look in the historical political looking-glass, well, I'll say, whatever.. while I don't agree with what Harper is doing, well, I'm not going to lose sleep over those who bitch about it when they aren't prepared to suggest that their party do any better.

psa said...

i am totally against any notion of senate reform. the senate has been the only part of our federal government that has functioned as designed in the last few years. sure there have been some doddering old waste buckets there over the years but it has served well of late in the roll of chamber of sober second thought. an elected senate is a waste of time and money as it would likely reflect the electoral shape of parliament. it would turn the senate into a political body rather than a contemplative body. the senate is where our elder statesmen and women get to apply their wisdom and it is of no use to us whatsoever if it becomes just another partisan political pit.

cue: but but but the liberals. oh if only i knew how to type a raspberry.

M@ said...

"Their party" implies that I am affiliated with a party. I'm not and never have been.

But no, I don't support elected senators. Give this a read and tell me how the senate isn't performing its duties.

Senate appointments are relatively rare compared to the many, many political appointments a government makes. The question isn't who is appointed or why, the question is what is the proper legislative function of the upper house.

But we can get back to the point: Harper doesn't really care about an elected senate; it's not the principled, pro-democracy stance that he's claimed it was. It was a way to polarize the west and east to gain more votes for his party. It was always bullshit, and I pity anyone who was gullible enough to believe it every time he's said it up till now.

I pity even more those who will continue to believe Harper actually cares about the senate after he's appointed his own 18 buddies -- for a total of 19 in two years -- to it.

Romantic Heretic said...

Here you go, psa!

Thppppppppt!

You're welcome.

The Conservatives are no different than most people despite their protestations. They are all in favor of democracy right up until the point that democracy doesn't do what they want. Then it's stick a cap in its ass and throw it overboard.

I've learned to live with it.

Chet Scoville said...

Oh, and what psa said.

Frank Frink said...

Chet is correct, the NDP has always been in favour of abolishing it.

Only Senate reform that truly interests me is in having the provincial seat allocation better reflect Canada's current population distribution.

liberal supporter said...

OT: neo indicted!

KEvron said...

kate will be outraged!

KEvron

Pearce Richards said...

Wayne - Harper is filling the seats so that Liberals will not be in those seats. Any Liberal or NDP would do the same.

Actually, in the Liberal minority under Martin, he realized he didn't have a mandate to recklessly stack the Senate, so he appointed Tories and NDP senators as well.

But don't let facts get in the way of your talking points. Those pesky facts.

Sheena said...

WV = explbing

What Preston Manning's and Bert Brown's heads are doing tonight.

Cameron Campbell said...

It is sad that lemming mass suicide is a myth, because the left could stop "man made global warming/climate change", in mythical lemming like way. so says Wayne.

How sad that the only way Wayne figures his side can "win" is if everyone else were dead.

mikmik said...

Man, the drooling going on at Crux. Get a fucking bib you morons. It isn't just the pure hypocrisy of your glee, it is the obscenity of your lust to be just like those you thoroughly condemn.

Like this one:
hy⋅poc⋅ri⋅sy
2. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.