don't sweat the debate

Despite most journalist not understanding how to score debaters, people aren't likely to decide their vote on those.

There were many articles going on about how harper won simply because he didn't totally lose his shit during the debate last night and because he managed to squeeze some words out in response to critical questions. That he lied and lied, that he responded without actually answering the questions or giving any kind of supporting arguments seemed to mean nothing to most journalists.

Dan Gardner has an excellent piece, though.

Harper's preferred word was "bickering." That's how he described Parliamentary debate. It's all just bickering. (It wasn't only him, to be fair. Jack Layton used every clash between Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff as a chance to smile wryly and pose as the only adult in the playground.)  But what exactly is Parliament, and more specifically the House of Commons? It's the place where people chosen in ridings across the country gather to talk about the nation's business. Our representatives often disagree. Is this bickering?

Gardner says that less than half of Canadians are so clueless about Canadian governance that they actually think the people elect the prime minister. Rather than sweep away that ignorance, Harper makes use of it. Indeed, he fosters it in order to advance his immediate political interests.

Those of us who do understand the dangers harper poses to our democracy as he not only undermines it but attempts to set false beliefs in people concerning it can't possibly educate 50% of the population in three weeks.  That will have to wait until we have a Prime Minister who favours education and doesn't refer to educated people as elitists or imply that intellectual is a bad word.

However, people do respond to day after scandal ridden day, seeing the party that rode in on outrage and promises of accountability and transparency lie to us, steal from us, hide information from us, line their friends pockets with our money, and show appalling insensitivity to voters.

These new stories came up in the last two hours:

Conservatives quit over Vaughan health-care money - Two Conservatives have quit their own riding association in Vaughan north of Toronto, accusing incumbent candidate Julian Fantino and the Conservative government of handing $10 million in public dollars to a private non-profit group involved in a major health-care development.

Conservative candidate asks for ‘ethnic costumes’ for Harper photo op
A Conservative candidate in the GTA is at the centre of a growing controversy after his office asked multicultural groups in the riding if they would like to wear “ethnic costumes” to a photo op with Stephen Harper.

G8 legacy fund: boon or boondoggle?

As controversy continues to swirl around a $50-million "G8 Legacy Infrastructure Fund" that beautified a Conservative-held riding last year, the debate has centered on a key question: Was this spending typical of cases when Canada hosts international events, or was it a ploy to help Tory MP Tony Clement get re-elected?

Ignatieff has been taking some flack for spending too much time in the debate on the contempt issue and not enough on the Liberal platform.  I thought he did what was right , effective, and necessary.  The government was brought down over being in contempt.  We are in an election because the government was voted to be in contempt.  That is what this election should be about first of all.  Yes, each party must state what it will do with whatever power it gains, but let's not forget why harper and his party got the boot.  And they did get the boot.

Two thirds of Canadians through their elected reps fired him.  Said they don't trust him.  Said he has no respect for the very institutions established over many, many years of government to give a fair and accountable Parliament.  Accountable to us, the people.

Ignatieff drove that home over and over.  It's something that most Canadians could be made to understand even if it's on a simple level.  The two thirds of elected reps representing Canadians said they don't have confidence in harper and his party.  Ignatieff made this clear, and added the very good keeper lines:

“A majority? ... Majorities are things you earn when you earn the trust of Canadian people and you haven’t earned the trust of the Canadian people because you don’t trust the Canadian people.” 


Go to Far and Wide to see how people are shifting their support.  Steve V gives a terrific analysis of the recent polls, and while the shifts are rather cautious and a little slow, they are steady, show a definite trend, take place in areas of the country that make a difference in an election, and show that people are reacting to the repeated examples of contempt the harper government has been displaying daily.

What don't 1/3rd of Canadians get?

The new Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey suggests Stephen Harper's party stands at 40 per cent, 12 points ahead of the Liberals, heading into the first of two televised leaders' debates.

Well, at least that doesn't include the leak from the AG's report on the G8, and it shows that the Liberals are still gaining in Ontario and the Atlantic provinces.  Those gains could easily translate to seats whereas gains CPC makes in the prairies won't really add to more for them. 

Still, with the pick-your-scandal-of-the-day hitting harper & co. day after day, it's disturbing that 1/3rd of Canadian voters still think that the CONs are the way to go.

Will this latest sign of contempt for Canadians and process make a difference?  (emphasis mine)

The Conservative election campaign is scrambling to deal with the fallout of a bombshell draft report from the Auditor-General rife with concern about pork-barrel largesse, dubious spending and misinforming Parliament...And it suggests the process by which the funding was approved may have been illegal.

That sentence alone should make anyone  not directly on the pork-barrel con-express want to go out and vote for any party that can get rid of harper.  


Pork-barrel largesse: don't care about Canada or average Canadians, want only to stuff themselves and theirs on taxpayers' dollars - all of our dollars


Dubious spending:  not good value for money; waste; not well invested on behalf of Canadians; possibly shady dealings


Misinforming Parliament:  Lying, guys.  That's lying.  If they lie to Parliament, they are lying to us.  And that is at the heart of why the harper government fell, and that should be the big issue in this election.


If the government lies and hides its financial dealings, its justifications for its spending, cuts, and policies, if it lies about its actions, if it hides reports and lies about them, then it doesn't matter what they promise in an election.  It doesn't matter what they tell you when they are in power.  Nice promises and pleasant verbal reports are easy to come up with if you don't intend to back them up with proof.

Harper's bunch fell because they refused to produce figures relating to what their crime projects would cost.  They have lied and lied about the cost of the F-35.  Now we find out they lied about the G-8 expenses.


May have been illegal:  does anyone really have to say why it would be very bad to elect a group that uses our tax dollars to engage in illegal activity?


This election, whether Canadians realize it or not, is very  much about contempt and all it embraces. 

Mandatory Poilievre - the virtues of block letters.

Pirate Fish says: Good idea. Let Pierre be the front guy during the election.

Hon. Marlene Jennings: (Gerstein and Finley, facing jail time for election fraud) - ...How can Canadians trust a Prime Minister who holds our democratic elections in such contempt?

Poilievre: the Liberal Party is holding democratic elections in contempt. It ignored the results of the last election when voters spoke and gave this party increased seats and increased votes. It formed a coalition with the Bloc Québécois and the NDP.

Sort of like the older, dumber kid in the schoolyard, who having been held back several grades comes out with such brilliance as: “oh yeah? You’re the dummy!”

Hon. Marlene Jennings: ...Why do the Conservatives think that they are better than every other Canadian? Why do the Conservatives think they are above the law?

Poilievre: ...I do not know why that member thinks that her party is above the democratic process. After the last election, which the Liberals lost, they then tried to overturn the result by forming a coalition with the Bloc Québécois and the NDP, a coalition that would dramatically raise job-killing taxes and destabilize our economy.

Wow. Coalition. Democratic process. Job-killing taxes. Economy. Destabilize.

Toss those words in a hat, add a few random pronouns and verbs, grab a few and form a sentence. Be sure that you have extra “coalition” and “economy” tokens, though.

Then even Pierre can pretend to be a politician.  Maybe we can design picture blocks so he can do away with words altogether.

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ADSCAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, well that didn't take long.  After Abbott and Baird mentioning "coalition" several dozen times, O'Connor screams "ADSCAM!!!!"

Harper CONs talking ethics while trying to save their corrupt asses from defeat.  Very Monty Python.

Not many relaxed, confident faces in the CPC seats today.  Frozen smiles, mostly. 

No defense on their part as to the charges of contempt so far other than to mention the useless doc dump that had no new or asked for info.

oh...O'Connor just mentioned "coalition." 

I think we pretty much heard the CPC election talking points:  look at all the itsy bitsy things we did; scary coalition; and the all time favourite - ADSCAM!!!!!