According to Duffy PMS is gonna hold a meeting with the leaders of the Opposition parties in the near future to “try and work out a legislative agenda” but that’s just a ruse to label them non-co-operative louts and call an election.

On the face of it that sounds plausible, except that we’ve seen the Liberals quite staunchly not opposing the CPoC since day 1 so they might once again throw a wrench into the gears and not play ball by either not showing up for votes or scratching their collective arses when they are called, and giving Harper his way.

….. who knows.

Ah but doesn’t their partisan glee warm the cockles of your heart as they rush to the polls waving brightly coloured banners and spouting party rhetoric at the top of their little lungs……. extorting all who will listen (and even those who don’t give a rats) to elect their guy; that individual who will represent their party in the House as s/he works so desperately to maintain the sham that they are actually representing the constituent?

The selection of the candidate that will be whipped by the party – what greater Canadian patriotic duty can there possibly be I ask — by gads man, I can hardly wait !!

Joseph Sobran once wrote in an essay, “Democracy has proved only that the best way to gain power over people is to assure the people that they are ruling themselves. Once they believe that, they make wonderfully submissive slaves.”

—————

PS: I had a good time in my ‘wee tent by the river. Complete and total disconnect, no cell phone, no TV, and no Internet… it has relaxed me tremendously, a more mellow anarchist you’re unlikely to find

Better get that checked.

I’m sure many people would like to hold continuous elections until they “win” and then stop holding elections for a while, but those are pathetically piss-poor reasons. Contra your interpretation of the polling numbers as a reason to “go”, the polling numbers may just mean Canadians want the minority government to continue right where it is.

In terms of “my” cultural preferences – I anticipate that a fair chunk of the 35% you cite will change their minds when invited over the course of a campaign to reflect on the actual record of the Conservatives, as opposed to the “he says, then she says” kind of sparring that characterizes discussion now. I personally am looking forward to compiling a terrific list of Conservative gaffes, lies, flip flops and failures – in a relatively short time they’ve piled up quite an impressive record.

I certainly understand and sympathize with your reluctance to see the Conservatives exposed to that kind of critical scrutiny, and I think you’re quite right to want to see it delayed – in that awareness, you show more savvy than Harper.

But if it helps, try and see it like this: I’m simply agreeing with your Beloved Leader. He too is irked by the current climate of uncertainty, and he and I both agree that clarity of mandate is required.

>I oppose most of the policies and philosophy of the Conservatives in their current incarnation: I view the Liberals as opportunists without a coherent political philosophy of any kind.

Your view of the Liberals and prospects for actual change is a welcome confirmation of my argument. Appreciated, dude. Your “argument” is a selfish complaint that the 35% of Canadians who voted Conservative and continue to support Conservatives in the polls should never have a turn in control and should be turned out at the earliest opportunity. Plural governments don’t work very well when you pay lip service to the marketplace of ideas and then tack on the caveat, “except for you, with whom I disagree”. That includes tearing stuff down as well as building it up.

>several long-term policy and program initiatives that I care about and that I value

Do those on your own dime, then. Pay for your own cultural preferences. If you don’t want a tug-of-war over public spending on aesthetics, don’t implement them with public money.

Well, from my perspective, the answer to that is my point number five: several long-term policy and program initiatives that I care about and that I value are being damaged beyond repair, without public debate or assessment of their efficacy (and in some cases, DESPITE a positive evaluation). My personal goal in calling for an election isn’t to benefit the Liberal party, although I tried to point out in my post why it might, in some ways, be to their strategic advantage: it’s to prevent further erosion.

How about the Liberal party elect another leader and try again on their own dime, not mine.

You can start with 1) The Green Tax Shift, then go on to number 2. Um, what’s number 2? Oh right, all the social programs that the CO2 reduction tax will pay for. Ok, number 3? anyone? anyone? hello? is this thing on?

The real reason you want an election forced is to get rid of Dion as your leader when the liberals loose (at the Canadian taxpayer’s expense, and the expense of all Canadians as you suspending government operations for another election).

Your words:

“And to be brutally honest, they simply won’t be able to ditch the guy until he loses one. ”

“a role that reinforces Dion’s image of ineffectual passivity”

“either Dion manages to surprise the country with an effective campaign, or he loses and the Libs can get on with finding a leader who can lead”

How about the Liberal party elect another leader and try again on YOUR dime, not mine?