|
Political Debate jan 9 (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Dj Smitty20 |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
adults vote. |
lol...sure about that? wasn't our last voter turnout less than 60% nationally? I probably will vote but not with any enthusiasm. |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Aaron, for every decision the Supreme Court makes there is a precis written that explains the decision. They are always based on law. These people don't just make up their minds based on their personal beliefs. Honestly, you're reaching here. If you believe that a parliament made up of people from every walk of life better understand the constitution then do nine of the most experienced judges in the country who have spent their entire adult lives studying and practicing law then I would suggest to you that your beliefs defy all logic and reason.
There is a method to hold judges accountable presently. Granted, I think that method is woefully inadequate, however, I do not believe that electing judges is the answer. Perhaps a better answer would be subjecting judges to peer review periodically (just throwing this out there I have not really looked into the viability of such a mechanism).
Your contention that we have made judges the lone arbiter of the constitution and therefore s.33 is our only protection from poor judgements illustrates a complete lack of understanding with regard to the constitution and the legislative process. As I mentioned earlier, if the court strikes down a law it is incubnent on parliament of (or the legislative assembly if it is a provincial matter) to draft new legislation that will work within the constitution. If this is not possible and the issue is that important to Canadians then a constitutional ammendment would be the answer. Of course ammending the constitution is not an easy task but if the issue is really what the people want then it is possible. Invokation of the notwithstanding clause is simply the govenment's way of saying "we are above the law" and is a breaking of the social contract between the citizenry and the state. |
there's actually an example in today's Toronto Star of an Ontario Court judge facing consequences that could include being removed...seems to take quite some time and occured as the result of a collection of complaints. Peer review is an interesting idea...I'd think that some sort of arm's length body would be needed too.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...ol=968342212737 |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
That ad was so bad even liberals realized it and pulled it. But the fact that the even had the ad and published it in the first place is pretty bad. And Mike Duffy owned that guy. It was hilarious to watch him squirm.
The canadian military is now demanding martin apologized and martin said he wouldnt because they never actually aired the ad on tv (although it was on their website). Proof that even in an election, liberal arrogance still shows.
It will be good to rid the country of these clowns and allow the liberal party to cleanse itself of the corruption from within. |
|
|
| EvilTree |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
The canadian military is now demanding martin apologized and martin said he wouldnt because they never actually aired the ad on tv (although it was on their website). Proof that even in an election, liberal arrogance still shows.
|
Source? |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
That ad was so bad even liberals realized it and pulled it. But the fact that the even had the ad and published it in the first place is pretty bad. And Mike Duffy owned that guy. It was hilarious to watch him squirm. |
It was fun as hell to watch! I love that type of political theater.
IMO the ads that got through are still pretty bad. With the marching music and the words forming a kind of Hitlarian mustash on Harper..... no imagry there, eh? Attack ads are one thing but trying to equate someone to Hitler is a little much. |
|
|
| Matt |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Smitty20
lol...sure about that? wasn't our last voter turnout less than 60% nationally? I probably will vote but not with any enthusiasm. |
in 2000 we hovered around 61%. Low, but not Canada's lowest which was 44% in 1898. Still, we are not in as terrible shape as the US, whose voter turnout hovers around the 50 - 55% area.
I think this election will surge back up to around 68%-70%, because it is a key election, and there are two distinct camps: those who want the Liberals out, and those who want to keep the Conservatives out. |
|
|
| Abercrombie |
| quote: | Originally posted by Matt
there are two distinct camps: those who want the Liberals out, and those who want to keep the Conservatives out. |
This seems to be the best statement I have ever read in these threads. Totally sums it up.
p.s. Since when are shovels called guns? |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Matt
in 2000 we hovered around 61%. Low, but not Canada's lowest which was 44% in 1898. Still, we are not in as terrible shape as the US, whose voter turnout hovers around the 50 - 55% area.
I think this election will surge back up to around 68%-70%, because it is a key election, and there are two distinct camps: those who want the Liberals out, and those who want to keep the Conservatives out. |
I agree...I suspect that much of Harper's support is a backlash against the Liberals, not explicit support for Harper and the CPC.
So what does one do if they are upset at the scandals but not at all happy with Haper and the CPC as the alternative? and don't really have confidence in the NDP to govern?
I'm finding myself in the position of prefering the status quo over Harper and the CPC, in spite of the scandals.
I also think that any attack ads are lame. It's one thing to point out defficiencies in your opponents and sling a little mud...it's quite another to fear monger. That ad re: military in the cities was nothing short of pathetic. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
So what does one do if they are upset at the scandals but not at all happy with Haper and the CPC as the alternative? and don't really have confidence in the NDP to govern? |
In this situation I would recommend that you ignore the national picture and focus on who you believe would best represent your riding. |
|
|
| MarkT |
yeah, Liberal incumbent Bill Graham works for me...
I am going to look more closely at the NDP candidate, Shapcott.
I will not consider the CPC candidate...and if they come to my door, I will tell them that if they turf Harper and amend their social policy standpoints, I'd be more than happy to consider them in the next election (I've voted Conservative in the past, at times, at various levels of gov't). |
|
|
| EvilTree |
| I actually have high opinion of Bill Graham. Can't say I know the details but from what I've seen, he's been solid, esp. as MND. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
yeah, Liberal incumbent Bill Graham works for me...
I am going to look more closely at the NDP candidate, Shapcott.
|
Having a minister as a rep is usually a good thing as they hold more influance even if in opposition. |
|
|
|
|
