7 Replies to “Real Time: New Rules”

  1. Thank God we don’t have the US system. I prefer a “true party system” with whipped votes. As long as the party MPs stand up for the ideology of the party.

    We ARE different up here Red…

    The fate of the American “Democrats” highlights one of the biggest flaws in their system. Doing what is “popular” becomes more important that doing what is “right”.

  2. WGrit – I’m beginning to question that. What was “right” about legislating & passing into law, on Friday, mandatory minimum jail terms for having anywhere from 5 – 200 pot plants? And that’s just one of the mandatory sentences. It gets worse. Was that the right thing for the Libs to do? I don’t think so. I wonder what else is coming down the pipe that we will cave in to, or agree to passing into law. Sickens me.

  3. Thanks for the video RT, I love Bill Maher. And I agree what he says could apply to Canadian Liberals ( and Republicans to Conservatives).

    I worry about misinformation and disinformation. Most people see two sides in disagreement and think that’s normal, that’s the purpose of government and opposition. But when one side distorts and manufactures information and claims they’re facts, people assume that both sides are the same and can’t trust facts from either side (maybe so).

    I think Maher’s most relevant point is there isn’t much difference between the 2 sides, and that applies more so every day here in Canada, Con v. Lib. When you argue with an idiot, it makes you look like one too.

    So I think people give up on trying to sort things out for themselves, and simply look at the party leaders. As evidence I cite the poll last November that claimed half of Canadians believe they vote for Prime Minister directly (my interpretation is that people were confused by the question and answered that was a major factor in deciding their vote for their MP; I don’t think that many people could get something so simple so wrong, really). I also cite the difference between public perception of Dion vs. Iggy, and the federal Conservative attack ads – directed at the leader, nothing else. South of the border, Obama’s public persona was arguably a major factor.

    It has come down to a battle between public perception of leaders, which is controlled by the media. I have no idea how the media’s roles in all this will change, but I’m pretty sure it won’t continue to be the same. Watch Iran and pay attention.

  4. penlan – that bill is not law yet as it has to pass the Senate, and I would like to think there is going to be an election before that happens. I also think allowing that to pass was a strategic move by the LPC. It is not that I agree with the bill, but I want the LPC to win the next election and passing this bill takes that whole “soft on crime” thing off the table.

    That said, I think parts of that bill are defensible. I take no issue with mandatory minimums for selling drugs as part of a criminal organization or in schools (but not “near” schools as the legislation says – I think if they want to address this issue they should just increase the penalty for selling to children). That said, I suggest these things are already considered to be aggravating factors and judges are going to send them to jail anyway.

    I do take issue with focusing on the low level dealers. Many of these people deal to feed their own habit. In Edmonton the police target prostitutes (who I can assure you are ALL drug addicts). The maximum sentence for prostitution is 6 months so the police go undercover, pick up a prostitute and then ask her to get them some drugs before they “do the deed”. That way they can charge the prostitute with trafficking and she goes to jail for 3 years instead of 6 months. It is hideous, and will only get worse with this legislation.

  5. WG — I don’t see much that’s “progressive” about the LPC these days. It’s all about trying to battle with Harper for the centre right position of the middle that the Conservatives have occupied for the last couple of years (at least in terms of public perception). Granted, they don’t have the same ideological contempt for government that the Conservatives seem to be afflicted with, but aside from that, there’s not a lot of daylight between the two parties in practical terms.

    When (and if) elected, the Liberals will find themselves forced to implement some kind of austerity program to get the books back in order. Look forward to several years of cutbacks, program rollbacks, more downloading of costs to the provinces, and tax increases. There won’t be much opportunity there for them to be “liberal” in the sense that many of their supporters would like. It will be another conservative government under a different name.

  6. RT,

    Good video and good comparison. Ignatieff appears to be quite a bit further right than Dion. But that being said, he began his first leadership campaign by talking about planting his flag in the “left-centre” of Canadian politics. So perhaps he is simply a chameleon and has no real point of view.

    Time will tell.

  7. “I also think allowing [C-15] to pass was a strategic move by the LPC. ”

    Cost them my vote, forever.

    Seriously, it was a fucking ridiculous altar upon which to slaughter their left-most support. I only ever voted Liberal strategically, before, though I actually really liked the candidate in my riding last go around. They will not, however, get even my strategic vote from now on.

    Fuck ’em.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s