All politicians lie

But some lie more than others…a lot more.

If there’s one point on which Stephen Harper has been adamant, it’s his claim that the opposition politicians trying to strip him of power are undermining democracy.

"The Canadian government has always been chosen by the people," the prime minister declared in his mid-week televised address to the country.

But now, he told viewers, a coalition of opposition parties is trying to oust him through a backroom deal "without your say, without your consent and without your vote."

Just how valid is Harper’s claim that changing governments without a new election would be undemocratic?

"It’s politics, it’s pure rhetoric," said Ned Franks, a retired Queen’s University expert on parliamentary affairs. "Everything that’s been happening is both legal and constitutional."

Other scholars are virtually unanimous in their agreement. They say Harper’s populist theory of democracy is more suited to a U.S.-style presidential system, in which voters cast ballots directly for a national leader, than it is to Canadian parliamentary democracy.

"He’s appealing to people who learned their civics from American television," said Henry Jacek, a political scientist at McMaster University.

Read more at CTV

If I get one more retarded facebook invitation to another group that claims the opposition parties, that represent 62% of the vote, are being undemocratic in tossing Harper’s government on its arse, I will implode, explode or something worse.

  1. #1 by Rob Kroeker on December 4, 2008 - 8:23 pm

    Legal, sure – and completely constitutional, but I remeber the days of Chretien winning a massive majority with 38% of the popular vote. What goes around, doesn’t even come around for Harper though, at 38%, he doesn’t get a majority of seats. Where was this 62% arguement in the 90’s? Bloody convenient for people to hold onto this now.
    It also becomes very clear to me about the left wing bias of the media when they accuse Harper on confusing people with the “American” system. Funny, how there’s no mention or educating by the Canadian media about the electoral college that at times can allow a president to win without the consent of the popular vote (which everyone knew was unfair, although completely constitutional and legal in the American system). Yes, we are not anything like the US (especially in terms of voting for one man over another for leadership), and yes, Harper is obviously trying to make Dion, and Layton, and Duceppe the face of this coallition (not to mention the very public signing ceremony with these three men). But the spirit behind the whole thing is that people’s votes might not have been at 62% anti-conservative if they knew what this new alternative would’ve been (however, we’ll never know because these three stooges would never commit political suicide and go to the electorate). And although what they are trying to do is legal and constitutional, it isn’t right – and we all know it. Face the electorate and see what happens. Your 62% figure will disappear.

  2. #2 by LT on December 5, 2008 - 7:19 am

    The last poll put Harper at 44% in the wake of this nastiness. Enough for a resounding majority, but my 62% figure would only drop to 56%. I know all about the undemocratic nature of our first-past-the-post system, I work for the Green Party. We had 7% of the vote and got 0% of the seats. The bloc had 10% of the vote and about 1/6 of the seats. Crazy! We need PR, we need to change this ancient parliamentary system.

    What drives me nuts is that Harper started all this. In his fiscal update he tried to ram through 3 pieces of legislation that would have been beyond radioactive to 3 center-left parties.

    No more public financing
    No right to strike for public workers
    No equal pay for women

    In the words of Rex Murphy he “threw hand grenades down their underwear.”

    Harper intentionally put this forward thinking it is win win for him. If the Liberals slither off to the backrooms like they did all last parliament they lose a huge part of their funding. If the Liberals take down the government and it goes to an election the Conservatives win easy because the Libs have no leader and no money. Majority central.

    What he didn’t anticipate is that all three parties decided to unite together and kick him in the nuts. Now he runs and hides behind the G-G’s skirt crying poor baby to the electorate. Oooh, they are trying to take over, like they conspired a back room coup to thwart the will of the Canadian people.

    The Liberals don’t want to lead the country supported by the Bloc. They are a lot of things, but they usually have good sense of their need survival. That coalition would have to govern for a very long time for people to forget what they did.

    All Harper had to do was give them a real indication that he wasn’t going to try running them off the road. Instead he just ratchets up the rhetoric spewing out lies and propaganda that would make Goebbels proud. It is so freaking sickening.

  3. #3 by Rob Kroeker on December 5, 2008 - 9:29 am

    I agree with you totally – harper went for the balls, and got kicked instead. I remember grinning and thinking “Yeah! Kick ’em while their down! Way to go harper!” – but then, those guys absolutely did surprise all of us by standing up to someone who has been bullying them for years. It almost cost him his job. Hopefully some lessons will be learned, and some compromise will be found (which is really what canada has wanted for the last 2 years). Maybe Harper bullies a little less, and maybe this coallition backs down too.

    but in reality, this will never happen!

Comments are closed.