Sunday, November 04, 2007

You're Kidding, Right?

Jack, in his infinite wisdom has chosen a target that the majority of people do not understand, nor care about, to be brought to the House. Note, he's bringing it to the House when obviously there are much more serious issues to be dealt with.

Why? I really think he believes now is the time to pounce. I think he believes he will over take the Lib' he believes his own press.

So back to the issue. The Senate is not a barn burner issue, but like the Con's, when the arrogance of your own self worth comes into play, ideology trumps reason.

Flip sides of the same coin Harper and Layton are, as it relates to ideology. One extreme or the other. Canadians on the whole are neither.

Canadians are fiscally responsible and neither of these two are showing that. Socially conscious within that parameter. Neither of these two are showing that either.

Guess what? Only one party does that.

Jack, I'm not sure how high you can jump but I think we're about to see.


Ryan said...

What does it have to do with ideology? I'm not getting your point here.

The senate is a waste of time and money, a leftover symbol of privilege from a bygone era. Conservatives say they want to reform the senate and make it accountable. I'd prefer either option to the status quo, and I'm sure most Canadians do too, too. I'm not sure democracy, pure and simple is an "extremist" principle.

My problem with this post is that, if there are bigger fish to fry than senate reform, why just attack Layton? The Liberals seems to be more concerned with the next election than tackling the bigger issues at hand. True, senate reform isn't a pressing issue, and Layton is guilty of a lack of priorities on that issue, but the Liberals are just as guilty. Seems a little partisan to me.

wilson said...

''I really think he believes now is the time to pounce.''

It is.

Scotian said...

Good grief!

Layton is going to further look like he is de facto working with Harper's CPC no matter what he says if he decides to make a serious run at this instead of something pro forma, I hope NDP partisans understand this. There is no real appetite for Senate Reform let alone abolition in this country even among many that want some electoral reform this is a secondary priority. This seems a rather odd thing to be heading into, well I suppose given he is having a hard time looking like more than Harper's symbiote regarding Liberal attacks and using government tools and actions to do so with perhaps he thinks this will help distinguish him and make him appear credible as more than Harper's lackey as opposed to the champion of the progressives of Canada as he and his portray/claim him as (while not in truth).

Ryan, the relationship to ideology is because this is something the NDP are pushing (or are at least claiming to be about to push for again, we shall see whether actions match words as time goes by) when there is little to no interest in the wider public and there are many more serious issues that the public are concerned with. This sounds too much like inside the political world kind of concern and not enough for the people kind of concern especially when we have a Harper government in place. Only for ideological reasons would the NDP be pushing this now in any serious manner/effort and not because it is something that is of significant interest to the voters outside of a narrow niche that is.

It is also working with the Harper spin that the Senate needs reformation *NOW* and by advancing this argument now Layton appears to be trying to make the Libs look like the only national party unwilling to look at serious reform of government. Whether the NDP likes to admit it or not they have been working de facto with the CPC whenever there is a chance to attack the Libs even though in terms of ideology, principle and policy the Libs are far closer to the NDP than the Harper CPC who are nearly the antithesis of them solely to gain seats. This while simultaneously claiming to be a party of principle first and not seats/power/expediency first.

Got to love the inherent contradictions going on there, but that doesn’t stop Layton from doing so, as KNB said it appears he has come to believe his own spin about replacing the Libs. Problem is though the best chance for that was the last election and he only gained ten seats while giving Harper the government in return and getting less actually through the Parliament to advance NDP goals in terms of policy/principles than he did in the Martin minority. Layton is too busy dreaming of finally having real power (either LOO or PM, both are more than any other federal NDP leader has enjoyed to date) at the expense of the Libs to care that to do so will almost inevitably require the CPC to hold a majority government for at least one 4 year term and given the damage that can be done by Harper with that in that period of time this should be anathema for any true believer of NDP core values.

Layton is risking the future of his party and that of the nation with these stupid maneuvers against the Libs. While I would be fine with him seeing them as competition and fighting them in the ridings, the CPC and Harper should have always been the primary target, especially once they formed a government! Layton endangers all that he claims to represent and stand for, and is more interested in helping a clearly anti-democratic PM beat down the Libs than he is in protecting those core principles as the first priority. In other words not a leader of principle but simply another expediency driven politician exactly like Harper is showing himself to be. Indeed, there is much truth in KNB's description of Harper and Layton being flip sides of the same coin in this regard.

Good old expediency first Jack Layton, always willing to place himself and his political power pursuit interests first ahead of the nation AND the core values his party has stood for since its inception on the federal stage. That latter should be something that concerns more NDPers than it clearly does, at least in the partisans online. I wonder though how many of the core voting block that stayed loyal because it was a principles first party are reacting in horror and disgust and will not stay in the next election despite what the polls are saying currently. I suspect there is more than a few out there, as well as many with remorse at loaning Layton their votes to get a Harper government the last time out too along with the Lib voters with buyers remorse for thinking Harper couldn’t really be all that bad/dangerous and that the Libs were way exaggerating so they voted CPC to send the Libs a message to clean up their act. Which time has shown they were not, even granting the limits of what Harper has done so far.

burlivespipe said...

If Canadians wonder what kind of effect the drafty ol' Senate may have and if it should be abolished, all they need to do is think about this: What if the NdP formed the government?

The senate may need some major restructuring (i'd reduce it to 5 members per province and require that those eligible for the senate be recipients of Order of Canada awards, with only 1 of the 5 allowed to be professional politicians or their ilk), but it does serve a purpose. The long-ago debate on the gst (mulrooney initially proposed 13%, then 9%) serves enuf evidence for me...

The Grumpy Voter said...

This would be an example of Jack Layton making an attempt at populism. What I think the bigger story should be is the fact that Chrysler Canada announced last week that it is shutting down production of the Pacifica and the Magnum Wagon which will lead to Canadian job losses, you know, union losses, you know, Buzz Hargrove union job losses... no wait, maybe there's a reason for Layton's silence. ;)

RuralSandi said...

This was Senator Hugh Segals idea and Layton is desperate for issues - no one ever reports on the good things the senate does.

Abdul-Rahim said...

It's a noble goal but coming from him it just seems like another political spectical from the Joker of Canadian Federal Politics.

Ron said...

Scotian is right (or rather correct ;-)

Issues like the Senate (and Royalty) will only be dealt with in the distant future when the country has matured and a large majority favour democratic reform.
In the meantime it serves as a distraction from pressing issues.

Hugh Segal (Tory senator) raised this idea simply to provide a great distraction for Harper.
Now Jack plays into their hand usual.

Jim said...

Hey RuralSandi, are you new to Canadian politics? Abolishing the senate has been in the NDP platform for 20 or better years.

I personally think Jack is a commie tool and every time he speaks I get a mental image of a braying donkey, but on this issue I agree.

Abolish the senate!