(no subject)

[electricland]

Scary scary segment on The Current this morning: Link Byfield explaining why the Charter is a bad thing and we should just go back to straight majority-rules. Parliament should be second-guessing all of the Supreme Court's decisions and if anything squicks out the majority of the members, like, say, gay marriage, it should be overturned. I, as a mere female, have the vote because the majority granted it to me and the majority is good and just. GAAAAAAH.

(OK, I may be paraphrasing a little, but not much.)

The woman they had on with him whose name I didn't catch was good, fortunately, although very nervous.

I hope I'm not wrong about my riding being a solidly Liberal safe seat, or I may need to vote Liberal after all. (Well, if I'm wrong, I'm in good company.) What I'm hoping is that the flirtation with the Regressive Conservatives (not my term but I like it so I'm stealing it) was a brief wave, now over.

Comments

[electricland.livejournal.com]

I don't share your loathing for Jack and the NDP, and in my view a minority government of any kind is an opportunity for opposition parties to make their voice heard. What do you want him to do, scream "Anathema! Anathema!"? If one party consistently votes against another party's bills, however innocuous, because We Are Morally Opposed To Everything They Stand For, that seems just as bad for democracy as a majority with perfect party discipline that rams its bills through without consultation and without caring what the other parties have to say. (All this to say that even the RCs have a couple of decent ideas -- not many, but a couple.)

That said, I have yet to check out the NDP and Green platforms in detail, and will do so before I make up my mind. I was considering sending them both cash and voting Liberal, but I think Lucienne's safe enough that I can actually use my vote to send a message...

[gurudata.livejournal.com]

Hiho,

Both platforms are definitely worth a read. There's a lot of surprises in each. People seem to hold onto strong stereotypes of each of these. Especially the Greens, where most assume that they're the same as the US party of the same name. Fiscally, their platforms are VERY different.

Cu,
Andrew

[life-on-queen.livejournal.com]

What do you want him to do, scream "Anathema! Anathema!"?

Yes.

For Layton to scour the Liberals for being virtually identical to the Regressive Conservatives and then say, "but we wouldn't mind working with the gay-bashing, missile-loving, women-haters if they got into office," strikes me as hypocritical at the very least.

You either stand by your values or you're just another power-lusting political wanker who is happy to say anything to get elected. The attitude of moral superiority that the NDP exudes, as demonstrated by Mr. Layton's obnoxiously sanctimonious performance in the debate, is insulting and deeply deceptive as the party has proved, whenever it has gotten the slightest wiff of power, to favour political expedience just as much as the next guy.

If you want to get my vote, don't sell me fertilizer and tell me it's roses.

Either the NDP stands for moral and societal values that are fundamentally irreconcilable with joining the RCs under Mr. Harper in a coalition or they don't -- which is it?

Because I find Mr. Layton's attempt to have it both ways deeply, deeply offensive.