Since no one I know will talk politics with me, I guess I will just blog my opinions. Well, Chris will gladly talk about them with me, but he's no help in making the hardest political decision of my life. He's all "Just vote NDP" and I'm not sure that's what I'm prepared to do.
I'm an NDP girl through-and-through. I volunteer; I vote; I cook; I bake. I do what I can do in order to help the NDP gain a victory! I'm not sure I can do that this time though.
I live in the riding Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar. It happens to be one of the "ridings to watch" this election. Nettie Weibe, the NDP candidate, lost by just over 200 votes last election. It could be a victory this time. Kelly Block, the Conservative candidate, could very well win her seat back. Who knows? The Liberals are being smart this time - there is (currently) no Liberal candidate in my riding. They never stand a chance anyway.
So, my thinking is currently this:
If I vote for Nettie Weibe, following my heart, and the NDP gets in, that's one more seat towards another minority government. The last thing this country can handle right now is another election in 20 months. We cannot afford it! In the last seven years, we have spent more than $1.2 BILLION on elections. Four elections in seven years. Crazy, huh?
If I vote for Kelly Block, following my head, and the Conservite gets in, that's one more seat towards a majority government. We need a majority government. Canada may have been able to avoid the brunt of the recession if it had just had a majority government the last seven years. We did well considering the rest of the world was in turmoil. Just imagine what could have been if we DID have that majority government!?!
So, my big decision is do I follow my head or my heart? I thought I had my decision made, then the election was officially called, and I said, "I have no idea where I'm going." I asked Chris yesterday if he would follow his head or his heart. He told me to follow my heart. Not the answer I wanted to hear.
AND THEN there is this whole possibilty of the coalition! I will be the first to admit that I don't know much about coalitions (any hard-core political people out there care to explain it to me), but from what I understand, if there is a minority government, the three parties (NDP, Liberal, Bloc) can form a sort of party of their own and take over the other party (Conservative). Is this right in thinking? If it is, how well do you think our country will run on three parties with completely different beliefs? NDP: Make life more affordable! Liberal: Raise taxes! Bloc: Take Quebec out of this country! AND give us more money! I don't think that would work. That's if my thinking is correct.
Now, I know, all those three parties want to do is take out the Harper government.
Jack Layton, NDP, I love the guy. He's a real people person. He's an amazing speaker. And I just think he's awesome.
Liberal Leader, whatever his name is, he needs to get the hell off my TV. He seems like a real douche bag. And I will never, ever support Liberals as long as he is leader. Doesn't the rest of the party realize that their popularity is going down? And why could that be? BECAUSE YOUR LEADER IS A DOUCHE BAG!
Gilles Duceppe, or whatever your name is. Frenchy-Frencherson. Bloc. WHY do we have a Quebec party representing our country? Do we see the Saskatchewan Party with seats in Parliament? No! Why is that? Because we represent ONE PROVINCE.
Anyway, I'm at work, so I should probably get some work done. You know, important stuff, folding and stuffing envelopes. I'd much rather keep talking myself in circles. LOL!
On a side note, I download some Bryan Adams this morning! So psyched to listen to him again! I was watching Bravo (TV channel) last night, and he is having some concert or something, and it's going to be on tonight. I love Bryan Adams. In fact, he's on my iPod right now!! He's playing! "All For Love". Good song.
Alright, gone now. Talk later! Please, please feel free to weigh in on your opinions about the election!
The Conservatives won't have a chance at a majority given the corruption stories which are affecting them currently.
ReplyDeleteA very good point. Which should lead me to vote for NDP, especially if the Conservatives WON'T be getting a majority anyway. If there is going to be an election anyway, I may as well follow my heart, right?
ReplyDeleteShannon you know where I stand...I am voting for Kelly Block. I believe Harper has not been given the opportunity to govern his way and for that reason we have absolutely no idea what he is or is not capable of.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the coalition is concerned it scares me to think that our government could be over thrown b/c three guys decided they didn't like the way the elected guy does his job and be damned what the people who elected him think. I believe a coalition will deliver us into the hands of communism. As my husband said the other day " in any other country this would be considered a coo" I personally do not want my country run by three power hungry guys who's only concern is the lining of their pockets with our tax dollars.
I say vote with your head. You can continue to do your good works whether the NDP gets in or not. YOUR heart would not be running the country so vote with your head and let's give Harper a chance...There will always be another election if you don't like the way he does things. But we can't know how he will do them if we get another minority or a coalition. There I've said my piece...lol Oh and I would be more than happy to have you call me up to discuss politics any time :)
My husband wanted me to tell you that the reason there is a coalition government loop hole in place is to protect the country from a government elected through deception and instituting anti democratic laws. Harper has not done anything of the sort. This is just a power grab using a loop hole that was put in place to protect us. Give him the the chance and if he is incompetent he can always be voted out next term.
ReplyDeleteA coalition government is legal and constitutionally supported as it is in any other country who has a parliamentary democracy.
ReplyDeleteHow can you say the other three leaders who would be willing to work with others are power hungry and the one individual who is screaming he wants a majority is not power hungry?
The Conservatives have already shown with their contempt for parliament that they can't be trusted in a minority and one can only imagine what would occur with a majority.
They way that they are going about it is back handed! Harper has not done anything undemocratic to warrant a coalition taking over for the safety of the country. And they are power hungry! Jack Layton would NEVER get to be PM. Over and over again he comes in third in the votes. Ignatiaff is mostly despised and there aren't many that have any faith or trust left for the liberals and as far as Gilles Ducep...well hell..do you really want to hand Canada over to a man who doesn't even want to continue to be "Canadian" He wants Quebec to separate! So these facts all make up 3 guys with little chance to get the top dog spot so why not join forces and TAKE OVER the country and then they squabble about who gets what.
ReplyDeleteAnd as far as the contempt for parliament goes I think that is a big load of BS...and can't be trusted with a minority government??? He hasn't be able to DO anything with out those 3 nags shooting down everything he has tried to do so how can he have lost trust he was never given in the first place??? The only reason this election has been called is b/c the other guys want another shot at the top spot before they are due to take a crack at it. These guys have no patience and certainly no respect for the wishes of Canadians. PS..Shannon's blog..signed her name to it...I've signed mine. Hiding behind anonymous is the reason this country is in the state it is in...there aren't enough people brave enough to stand up and say what they think just sheeple who follow along...I'm just sayin.
No, coalition governments are legitimate and Harper himself wanted to form one back in 2004. It is interesting that Harper is the only party leader demanding more power and yet you think he is not power hungry.
ReplyDeleteContempt of Parliament is a serious issue and not something to be taken lightly if you care about democracy.
It seems to me that that he is not "demanding" a majority but asking Canada to give him the opportunity to prove himself without having to beg borrow and plead to the the other 3 to try to get anything done.
ReplyDeleteAnd being accused of being in contempt of parliament and actually being are two different things. I have not seen anything that leads me to believe that he was. You and I differ on opinion...we are on different sides....so are they. You question my care for democracy as they did to Harper...I believe you are probably loyal to a certain party to a fault. I am not. I am trying to see things objectively and if I believed a different party were a better option I would vote that way. History has proven that any government left in power for too long becomes corrupt. But Harper has NOT gotten his opportunity to govern his way. I would like to know who you plan to support...it's not like you are giving out your name anyway so your vote will still be "anonymous"
The Harper government was found in contempt of parliament nough said.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if you are aware of what they were in contempt for.....so I found it for you...take the time to read it...it's short and not too many big words.
ReplyDeleteOn March 9, 2011, Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons Peter Milliken made two rulings on contempt of parliament: The first found that a Conservative Party cabinet minister, Bev Oda, could possibly be in contempt of Parliament.[3] The second ruling found the Cabinet could possibly be in contempt of parliament for not meeting opposition members of parliament's requests for details of proposed bills and their cost estimates, an issue which had "been dragging on since the fall of 2010."[6][3] Milliken ruled that both matters must go to committee and the committee must report its findings by March 21, 2011; one day before the proposal of the budget.
Concerning Milliken's first ruling, on March 18, 2011, opposition members of parliament said they still thought Oda was in contempt of parliament, despite her testimony that day,[7] however the committee process never proceeded far enough to find Oda in contempt.[6][5]
Concerning Milliken's second ruling, on March 21, 2011 the committee tabled a report which found the Conservative Party in contempt of parliament.[6] As such, a motion of no confidence was filed against the government.[8] On March 25, 2011, Members of Parliament voted on a Liberal motion of no confidence finding the Conservative government in contempt of Parliament, passing by a margin of 156 to 145
They were found in contempt for dragging their feet releasing information to the opposition. Personally I don't blame them. The opposition has made every single Bill they have tried to pass a fight. I would like to point out the vote...156 - 145...Harper is the MINORITY of course it went through! Doesn't make it TRUTH.
I find your contempt for my opinion insulting. Saying "nough said" like you don't even want to waste your precious time spelling the whole word and that your word should be the final word - whoever you are - is a joke And now I am done arguing with someone who is all big mouth and no balls. I'm sorry Shannon but if your friend doesn't even have the guts to sign a his/her name to their opinion then it's just useless words on a page...for all I know it's freakin Jack Layton himself commenting and if you are...then say so cuz I sure have some questions for you!
http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Local/2011-03-26/article-2368494/Harper-government-held-in-contempt-of-Parliament/1
ReplyDeleteHarper government found in contempt of Parliament.... Defend the lies and corruption as much as you want but his government was the first government in history to be found in contempt of parliament.
Yep I went and read it. It didn't state what they were found in contempt for..my link did. obviously you didn't read it....did you read all the comments below yours??? Most of them agree with me. I haven't disagreed with you on the fact that they were found in contempt...I am disagreeing with why they were found in contempt. So is most of Canada. Are you aware that the reason this has all happened is because Harper was going to pull federal funding for parties. His would have taken the biggest hit but Layton, and Ignatiaff, and Ducep are really really afraid of losing their welfare cheques. If they are so popular why can't they raise their own money instead of using ours? Ignorance is bliss isn't it. Don't bother doing your homework or anything...Just argue one misinformed point over and over until I see it your way...Not gonna happen.
ReplyDeleteErin you certainly have said Harper was not found in contempt.
ReplyDelete"And being accused of being in contempt of parliament and actually being are two different things. I have not seen anything that leads me to believe that he was."
Where do you get the idea that most Canadians disagree with the Harper government being found in contempt and why do you think that matters when it is up to Parliament to determine if a government is in contempt.
It is amazing you accuse others of not knowing what is going on yet you have no idea what they were found in contempt of despite posting the real reasons yourself. According to the items you posted here are the initial reasons the speaker of the House of Commons found that the Conservative government might be in contempt of Parliament.
"On March 9, 2011, Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons Peter Milliken made two rulings on contempt of parliament: The first found that a Conservative Party cabinet minister, Bev Oda, could possibly be in contempt of Parliament.[3] The second ruling found the Cabinet could possibly be in contempt of parliament for not meeting opposition members of parliament's requests for details of proposed bills and their cost estimates, an issue which had "been dragging on since the fall of 2010."[6][3] Milliken ruled that both matters must go to committee and the committee must report its findings by March 21, 2011; one day before the proposal of the budget."
You now toss out that the reason the opposition parties found the government in contempt had to do with the public funding of political parties and yet the quote you provided has no mention of this. Why? Because the reason as supported by the information you provided was because the government was in contempt of Parliament.
The Harper government was found in contempt of Parliament and that is serious no matter how much you try to deny it.
Erin the link was simply to point out that the Harper government was found in contempt given you earlier attempted to deny this by saying the following:
ReplyDelete"And being accused of being in contempt of parliament and actually being are two different things. I have not seen anything that leads me to believe that he was."
If you want to deny him being in contempt go ahead but the reality is that Parliament which is the only body which can find a government in contempt did so. Whether you like it or not that is the reality. Just like when Prime Minister Harper was elected it did not matter that I and the majority of other voters did not support him or his party because the reality is our electoral system is established in such a manner which allows governments to form a majority government with a minority of the populations support.
You now raise this idea that the opposition parties voted for the motion dealing with the Harper governments’ contempt of Parliament due to the issue of publicly funding political parties. Yet nothing you have provided says that. The only thing I know from what you have provided is this
"On March 9, 2011, Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons Peter Milliken made two rulings on contempt of parliament: The first found that a Conservative Party cabinet minister, Bev Oda, could possibly be in contempt of Parliament.[3] The second ruling found the Cabinet could possibly be in contempt of parliament for not meeting opposition members of parliament's requests for details of proposed bills and their cost estimates, an issue which had "been dragging on since the fall of 2010."[6][3] Milliken ruled that both matters must go to committee and the committee must report its findings by March 21, 2011; one day before the proposal of the budget."
There is no mention of political parties having some of their funding cut off nor is that the real issue. The real issue is that the Harper government failed to meet the request made by opposition parties to provide basic information on issues being debated and as a result they were found in contempt of Parliament. Now you can make the claim with no facts that most Canadians do not agree with this or that obviously the opposition parties would vote this way since they are power hungry. However, the reality is that the Speaker of the House of Commons would be first required to find the government of the day could possibly be in contempt of Parliament. So if there was no grounds for the issue in the first place as you say the speaker would not have ruled in the manner that he did instead he found enough evidence to warrant his ruling. It is amazing that you bring in a totally different issue into the issue of the Harper government being found in contempt and then begin to state others are ignorant.
Isn't nice that you get to use my first name that way...
ReplyDeleteAnon: My bad...when I said "And being accused of being in contempt of parliament and actually being are two different things. I have not seen anything that leads me to believe that he was." I meant in MY OPINION. And as far as bringing a different issue into it.. Ignatieff brought the charge against Harper. And I am saying that they had a twist in their panties over the proposed funding pull which is why the charge was brought in the first place. They were trying to find a way to stop him from entering it. If you paid any attention to what was going on before the hearing...Like watching the nightly news..these things are pieces of a political puzzle. Harper does this so they counter with that and so on and so on...IT'S POLITICS! This is a political game played out by these parties and I am saying that I think that 3 of the parties aren't playing fair. Using backhanded ways of trying to get their hands on the top spot. But it is a game no doubt. We as voters play a big part in the game but at a high cost to us. What goes on in Ottawa is out of our hands but at election time we are given the opportunity to put what we see, and learn in the course of time between elections to try to determine who is best to run our country. I don't like the things that the other 3 stand for. Obviously you do. We can bicker bank and forth till election day. I'm just saying that I don't want dirty players running the show. And that is WHAT I believe they are.
Erin, what difference does it make if you are called Erin or Anon?
ReplyDeleteNo, the opposition parties and many others outside of Parliament took issue with the lack of openness in terms of the government’s plans and secondly that a government minister mislead the House of Commons. Both are serious issues no matter what you may think being a diehard Conservative. And I can't imagine how an individual comes to the conclusion that when the parties enforce Parliamentary rules they are the ones being unfair.
You actually have no idea where I stand but clearly if you think the Conservative party who was found in contempt of Parliament and is facing a major investigations by Elections Canada which has led to a number of Conservative senators being charged for breaking election laws makes them anything but dirty players I can't imagine what the Conservative party would have to do to drop your support.
The reality is despite WHAT you believe or want to believe is that the Conservative party without being in government and being in government with a minority have already acted in a manner which shows they are not fit to govern.
The difference between Erin Neufeld and Anon is that I am coming out with MY opinion as myself. Anyone could come along and read this and know my name and what I stand for in this decision. You are just words on a page. Not brave enough to put a name to your thoughts. For all I know you play for my side and work for the other. I stand out and be heard for who I am not one faceless heckler standing in a roaring crowd. As for the rest. I really am done now with back and forth..we can go in this same circle forever. We will just have to wait to see which one of us the rest of the country sides with. I'd wish ya luck but.......
ReplyDelete