Dog Wags its Own Tail

Articles like this one do continue to prop up the idea that if only the centre-left would get a fair hearing, the Canadian populace would receive them well. Most of the left, it seems, still believe that the only way you could have an economic/political system exist which produces a country of haves and have-nots, which wastes enormous resources and destroys the lives of countless in wars--and which does much the same with the environment, which works against the best interest of those who vote for those who continue the system's existence, is because people have been misinformed or left uninformed, by the evil powers of the misanthropic status-quo.

I don't believe this is the case, and instead think that the reason progressives are only so well received in this country, is not because the wrong books/papers/arguments have been put before the populace, not because other viewpoints have been stigmatized or hidden, but because too many Cdns are not raised with sufficient nurturance for them to sort of naturally believe--at a gut level--that life should be good, that they ought to, *deserve* to, live in a warm, welcoming, world. Instead, they see in Harper and Ignatieff, their own. And that's our problem.

patrickmh

Incrementalism

The headlines of canwest publications are obviously designed to impress a certain perspective on an issue. The brain is fresh, coffee is added, the perfect time for planned suggestion. I would love to greet a paperboy with copy of the Tyee in the morning, rather than a poor soul grudgingly trying to get rid of all his horrid 24hr "papers"

Change?

Seven weeks to go. Plenty of time for the fickle polls to change.

However, if Iggy deliberately screws up this opportunity, I predict that doing so will see the end of the Libs as a powerful alternative to the ReFormaTories.

All that will remain will be for the NDP to once again assume their strong Socialist position by cleaning the weak-kneed out of their ranks.

The most frustrating thing for me

The most frustrating thing is that many commentators in the working press, who could have reported on these events straight (facts; history; details; background and comparisons and let people decide for themselves) have instead tended to imitate the right-wing press as if they were parrots too.

People need to know that a defeat in the house of commons was a PERFECTLY NORMAL aspect of parliamentary democracy and NOT a governmental cataclysm or a constitutional crisis; they need to know the role and function of the Governor General and they needed to be disabused of the idea that her function was to judge the disputing parties.

The ignorance of the people, on average, is only exceeded by the irresponsibility of the press which has fed and fanned that ignorance (seemingly in cooperation with the Prime Minister's Office) instead of dispelling.

I don't know which is the most dysfunctional: The Conservative Party and its sociopath leader - or the irresponsible and seemingly polls-driven press.

Instead of covering the story like professionals the majority of the working press has spent most of their time lighting their hair on fire.

Thanks for this Gutstein

This is a very good analysis. People who watched this unfold got a sense that the hysteria in Canada made no sense unless you were a knuckle dragging conservative/reformer. The polls tested ignorance more than anything. Where were the consitutional experts. Instead we got screaming political hacks or politicians of one strip or the other. Just a repetition of the same. The terminology which started with the conservative spin machine so quickly ended up as part of the jargon on the media outlets. A government representing 37% of the population became sacred and constitutional but a government representing 62% became feared. Words like coup de tat were thrown around. Other world democracies that go through this all the time must have thought we were a bunch of fruitcakes. Quarry bay is right on again. The powers who manipulated this "crisis" were obvious to any thinking person.

Harper got is arse pulled out of the fire by the Governor General and what do you know, the first thing he is going to do he is going to quickly appoint 18 conservative senators before he is out of office. I wonder if he told her of his plans or did he snow her with all this sincerity crap. This is the same party that was critical of John Turner.

If IgnatiefF falls for the Harper fake sincerity bit then he is a fool.

Patrick McEvoy

Patrick said:
"...but because too many Cdns are not raised with sufficient nurturance for them to sort of naturally believe--at a gut level--that life should be good, that they ought to, *deserve* to, live in a warm, welcoming, world. Instead, they see in Harper and Ignatieff, their own. And that's our problem."

And he is brilliant! Excellent bit of social psychology. I believe you may be correct, Patrick! This is the "Mell, what did you expect? [the] Suck it up!" mentality.

So how do you hit these average folfs over the head with a dose of what ought be without grossing them out with what sounds like (to them) whimpiness? After all, one must stay true to the message while giving the message for a message to be real.

Ther You Go Again

As a centrist Liberal, I did not support the coalition. It was an idea whose time had not come---it was that plain and simple.

Does this make me a "knuckle-dragging" conservative? Does it make Bill Tieleman a knuckle dragging conservative? Don't think so.

As for Bill and Christy having orgasms thinking about a coaltion government, I believe all news junkies were excited or freaked. Then our Canadianesness kicked in answe all thought about what that might mean in this particular moment in time.

The majority of Canadians took a "pass". Not because they were "ignorant' about Parliamentary procedure (probably) but because the idea sucked. We are not used to rule by coalitions, we see that those countries in the world that have coalition governments usually have nothing but rancor to deal with internally once thet align, and, oh, yes, did I say the idea sucked?

Canucks, for better or for worse, really want to live by the credo of Peace, Stability and Good Governmennt.

A coalition that includes a party that would be satisfied to break the country up, delivers none of these.

As usual, it seems the average Canadian has more common sense that so called constitional experts and politicians.

what is to be done?

People should be demonstrating in front of Can-West media offices all over this country.

Perhaps this might raise the issues of corporate media concentration and corporate subversion of democracy in the national media.

If there was a 'critical mass' of demonstrators in front of corporate media offices all across this country, perhaps, just perhaps, it might get a 30 second airing on the National with Peter Mansbridge.

However, the cynic in me says that many Canadians are too damn gullible and 'polite' to ever do this. Instead, we'll forget about how the corporate media subverted the workings of democracy at a crucial time when it has been tested and failed, and 3 , 6, or 12 months down the road from now raise the issue of media concentration all over again when another issue testing the strength of Canadian democracy fails. When will it ever end?

It's a cycle that should end right now!

We need to seize on opportunities to completely embarrass and de-legitimize the corporate owned mass media in this country, and give the CBC a good ass-kicking while we're at it.

The minute the coalition

The minute the coalition announced their intentions, they were labeled "separatist coalition" by every Reform/CRAPP politician and commentator, showing the hands of professional mindbenders .

Coalitions are penny a dozen, all over the world. Churchill organized one for the duration of WW2 and the heroes of the Asper media, Israel, has nothing else but coalition governments.

The stupidest and biggest lie was the claim that Harper was the "elected PM" of Canada.

He was appointed PM, as the leader of the largest party in Parliament, but when the coalition became a reality, it held the majority and the GG was supposed to give them governing powers.

The biggest danger now is that with a no-confidence vote in January, Harper would once again force the GG to call elections, which would give him the chance to gather the sympathy vote for a majority.

With majority in his hands we can kiss Canada goodbye.

Ed Deak.

to 'not your wife...: Do

to 'not your wife...:

Do you really think Canada will be stable and peaceful when Harper and his Conservatives ban the right to strike, take away funding from political parties and instill a defacto dictatorship?

BTW, we are currently living under a dictatorship at the present moment. 'Stable and peaceful' governments usually have some form of a working democracy. Canada's democratic institutions have failed this important test. It is now up to citizens to enforce/demand democratic principles upon our leaders and take to the streets in vast numbers.
Shut down the stock exchange. Shut down corporate media offices.

In any case, Canada is not worth saving if Harper and his gang of criminals are allowed to run this country into the ground.

No surprise. Most of the

No surprise. Most of the medias is right wing and Conservatives like their GOP cousins like to spread lies and misinformation to stir up a frenzy like we saw the last couple of weeks.

Drama = It Sells Papers

You can't help notice how in the States how they do their red / green thing with breaking down the votes in the various States. They also have their red / green Media as one is saying this and the other is saying that. Here in Canada we have the red/green show. And on line they were showing how Robertson did the red / green thing. Does this mean its Christmas? Ho Ho. I think it means what it means we also do the red / green thing. And our media well they appear to be doing the red thing.

And the Media was not Kind to Harper

but something came out of this whole experience for me at least I knew very little about the Bloc as up until the Coalition I really believed they did not want to be part of Canada. Did you know Canada is a Cancer? Anyways it was wonderful to hear that the Bloc was now in to unity with the rest of Canada and believe once the Bloc opens up to Canada and lets us in on how the Bloc truly feels well we will all be one happy Canada.

Breath of Fresh Air

Thank you, thank you, thank you Donald Gutstein and the Tyee for telling it like it is. As we move further away from democratic rule, we have seen a widening chasm between "elite speak" (those who drank the coolaide) and the facts. Typical of any class society, the elite become more and more out of touch with reality and come to believe their own veribage with great conviction.

Recall the rulers of France in 1789. Is this ringing any bells?

The elite corporate power in Canada has spoken. Our duly elected governing MP's SHALL NOT form a coalition. That is verboten. They must follow orders.

The good news? Canadians are free to organize, to dissent, to oppose and yes, even change things from the way they are. We need to all keep that in mind, and continue working for change.

If our ancestors could do it in the 1930's, surely we can do it today.

Not your wife

I don`t want to talk about whether the coalition was good bad or indiffrent,the point of the article,the point I was trying to reinforce is about corporate control.

There were many in the media that were giddy about the prospect of a coalition goverment and it matters not about their reasons for wanting the coalition.

I disagree with many posters on-line but I try to frame my reasons for the disagreement and I usually don`t change my mind, I stay true to my convictions. The distressing part of this affair is that there were many imformed media that were,in my opinion forced to change their stance on the coalition.

It boggles my mind that people fold up their tent so easily,we don`t lead dissadents into the gas chamber do we? We don`t flog or cane or imprison people for disagreeing.
Take Bill Good for example,he has been on the air for like 80 years,radio,tv news anchor,how much money does he need?

I ask all of you this,would you not give up a job or pay cheque to save salmon from extinction, and it`s not just media,there are many that have sold out, Mark Jaccard has sold out, David Suzuki has sold out,Elizabeth May sold out.

If the most educated amongst us will sell out for money maybe there is no hope at all. " give a man a fish and he can feed his family,teach him to fish and he can feed his family forever"

" There is no one so blind as those who refuse to see"

Thankfully we have alternate media

That MSM bows to economic threats, from those that seek the status quo, is painfully obvious. No major daily will actively seek poverty once having suckled at the corporate teat.

Thankfully we have the option of reading alternate and independent media sources to find some balance.

A few days back (Dec 5) CanWest ran an editorial telling readers that they should accept Jean’s decision because, “In this time of economic uncertainty, consistency and stability are important”.

Of course the assumption here, and the one they want readers to focus on, is that there is a cause and effect relationship between economic certainty and a stable government. Bullcrap! There may be a correlation, but insinuating cause and effect is simply putting an Orwellian spin on reality.

Giving Harper’s minority Conservative government more time to regain confidence is no guarantee the economy will be less uncertain a month down the road. Or, indeed, that the Conservative government will be more consistent and stable.

Those that have been paying attention to top guns in our banks and investment institutions know that this period of economic uncertainty will not end abruptly in Jan 2009. At that time ... other than handing out corporate welfare ... the Harper government (or indeed the coalition) will be able to do little to change global economic trends.

Also, CanWest, doing its best to mislead, went to great lengths to outline five points … accountability, cooperation, lame party leaders, lack of trust and blind partisanship … the public should focus on.

Unfortunately, there was no mention of the fact that the GG’s office, like the monarchy it represents is an anachronism ... a dinosaur. Its reps are not installed through democratic process. Its decisions are open to partisan influence (in spite of the fact that many political pundits claim the opposite is true).

There was no mention that the function of the GG’s office is to reign in democracy when it gets out of hand, and that the GG’s office may actually be hindering democracy, not promoting it.

i've been expecting an

i've been expecting an article like this one. what took you? have to blame someone of course b/c this ridiculous power grab didn't pan out the way the fools had hoped it would.
sure, we'll give away $30billion dollars right away. as long as the unionized workers get the bulk of it, that is.
this plan was sunk before it was hatched. good night coalition.

sirjohnna

Just to let you know,the article isn`t about the coalition. Maybe you should read the article again.

better Harpers 50 billion to the banks

"e, we'll give away $30billion dollars right away. as long as the unionized workers get the bulk of it, "

and the banks will spend the money on executive bonus and stock options. Much better than the great unwashed who might spend in local taverns, restaurants, and business's.

Fools indeed.

Get the picture

Personally my favorite headline from the week was the front page of The Province:

Panic Grips Nation

Interestingly. A friend passed me along a poll conducted by Canwest during the week of terror. This poll was directed at their journalists and staff asking what they thought of the unholy alliance. Later they published the results.

Does anybody find this curious? Maybe the headlines should have been: Panic Grips Newsroom!

that must be why harper is

that must be why harper is appointing 18 new senators next week. needs to reward the reporters that were in on the conspiracy last week.

There you go again.

Who's time has not yet come? When then? When there is nothing left of Canadian values to protect? All the arguments you present use the same information from the media which notyourwife. Gutstein has exposed in the article. You swallow the same line that the Governor General did. There is absolutely nothing undemocratic with what the coalition tried to do. It represented a majority and there was nothing wrong with the Bloc, who incidently are Canadians, from keeping it afloat.

The trouble with wimpy liberals in whatever form they show up even as part of the left, if is that they never want to make a tough decision. As soon as the winds of oppposition start to blow they run for cover. Gutstein effectively showed the dissenters as a bunch of political weather vanes.

Charottetown Redux

After the Meech and Charlottetown fiasco's the politicians are gradually coming around to understand that the people of Canada want a say in how governments operate. There may have been questions in the press regarding the legitimacy of the coup taking over and the press was right to suggest that this was a crisis. Particularly when three party leaders were calling for their coup to succeed. The pressure of the people caused Mulroney to submit Charlottetown to a referendum when many, if not most, elites were in support of it. The people spoke and rejected it, even in Québec who it was designed for.

Polling showed the coalition coup leaders that their scheme was not wanted by the people and they allowed it to die without the conviction of putting it to any test. Heck, they didn't even wait for a more legitimate test of the budget vote next month! The Governor General called a time-out and within a few days the designated capo was the first to jump ship! He resigned, leaving his listing ship with its polyglot passenger list waiting for a new captain!

History will not be kind to this gang.

polls are us!

"Some people say that ... our media is out to lunch!"

Harper commands a large war-room, lay the blame for mis-information at that scource.

This is all a deliberate attempt at spin doctoring the population, and make them forget that Harper is the one who started all this with his crazy partisan attacks.

Maybe we now can stop comparing Polls, please?

They are so obviously selfserving and represent nothing.

Dog and Tail

Patrick McEvoy wrote:

"Too many Cdns are not raised with sufficient nurturance for them to sort of naturally believe--at a gut level--that life should be good, that they ought to, *deserve* to, live in a warm, welcoming, world. Instead, they see in Harper and Ignatieff, their own. And that's our problem."

Nail. On the head.

Who started this?

November 27, 2008. Harper government releases its Economic Plan.

3 days later, Jack Layton:

"...let’s just say we have strategies, this whole thing would not have happened if the moves hadn’t have been made with the Bloc to lock them in early, because you couldn’t put three people together in one, in three hours. The first part was done a long time ago, I won’t go into details,..."

Why not ask Jack to go into those details.

It had nothing to do with any so-called Harper partisan attacks. It had everything to do with a pre-meditated hit.

Write on, Donald

It's refreshing to see in print what I have been thinking all along. As a former reporter in the MSM,I have watched The Vancouver Sun become more and more obviously right-wing. Its endorsement of Harper certainly showed where the paper's beliefs lie, and I guess we shouldn't be surprised when the Sun's headlines reflect its bias.
Meanwhile, thank goodness for Craig McInnes and Peter McKnight, whose columns are a breath of sanity amidst the Yaffe- and Enchon-speak.
I'm sorry the coalition will never get off the ground now, and worry that the new Liberal leader, dear Iggy, is not the man to save us from Harper.
Let me be wrong!

Platitudes for the Independent Media

Rumour has it that CBC funding will be cut by $200 million by a Conservative government.

Would that be useful for the Aspers?

Realisticman. A "coup" by definition...

...is a forced take over of a constitutional government by a minority usually the millitary. The use of the word in this context is misused and exactly what Gutstein addresses. This attempt was a constitutional transfer of power after a pending nonconfidence vote.

Since we rarely have two minority governments in a row, the only crisis was for the Harper fan club who completely misjudged the last election results. The only advantage Harper has had in this is the media was in his pocket. There are more people learning the truth of all this every day and the nonsense that Gutstein exposes will be the beginning. For Harper appointing 18 senate seats before he gets kicked out the door will really unmask the arrogance of the man. "You had an option sir, you could have said, no!"

Right, Left, Centre.

Perhaps the adage that a picture is worth a thousand words is more true than ever before. Does anybody take seriously anything in the Asper, Murdoch, Uncle Tom Cobley and all press? Michael Ignatieff was a regular performer on British Tv and more right wing than the proverbial. He was later in favour of the invasion of Iraq if you remember. The actions of Harper have devalued parliament, compromised the position of the Governor General and go barely questioned. Does anybody remember the meaning of ethics? Does it count for nothing when a Canadian Prime Minister blatantly lies to the country? Apparently it was not a serious matter to the press in the UK when Tony Blair lied, or to the American press when George Bush lied but there were massive public demonstrations against their actions. In Canada it is simple; to retain power simply prorogue parliament and load the Senate with yes men. Who cared when Canada's honourable name for peacekeeping was prorogued throughout the world? Did the media then inform us if that was a right, left or centre decision? Who cares if the Canadian Health Service is underfunded and diminished in favour of multi-national insurance companies, they support your national media. You can always rely on policies with AIG or somesuch because if they fail your taxes will be available to bail them out.The quality of life in any country is directly related to the honesty of its government and, as Gandhi said, 'If you think you are too small to make a difference you have never been to bed with a flee'.

Newman's take on Aspers

http://www.straight.com/article-175437/izzy-asper-sought-influence?

The review of Peter C. Newman's new biography of Izzy Asper is really worth a read.

Canwest share price has dropped fron $18.65 at the time Izzytook over Black's papers to 59 cents. It carries $4 billion in debt. I don't think we have too much longer to wait.

The sons who are now in charge are very to the right and total Harper supporters, and the attempt to influence the news is quite out in the open. That's why Izzy bought out Black to begin with.

I think Iggy is much smarter than Harper and will play a quiet game. McKay's announcement about not extending the Afghanistan stint is another signal that Harper will move if pushed.

I have a feeling that tne Coalition has already done at least half its job.

Skywalker

A bloodless coup, if you prefer.

"This attempt was a constitutional transfer of power after a pending nonconfidence vote."

Perhaps the GG disallowed it then because of the admission that it was pre-meditated and the suggested reason was a lie.

As for Harper appointing 18 senate seats being arrogance, that's just stupid. Harper has repeatedly tried to get support for Senate reform and since that is impossible, it seems, then it is his obligation as Prime Minister to appoint people to the Senate.

What should he do? Wait for the Liberals to regain power and watch them fill the Chamber as they always have? That would be stupid!

Tyee's Best Article Yet

Congratulations, Gutstein, for living up to your name and having the courage to speak truth about power. Clearly, the mainstream media -- and consequently, pollsters -- were directed both to support Harper and to push Dion and Rae out the door, all so that Harper could retain power and/or that Harper's dinosaur twin, Ignatieff, could be ushered in.

One point, however. You omit to hold the backroom Liberals accountable for their own culpable role, which, in my view, is that they deliberately helped foil the coalition, allowing Dion to push for something they knew would cause enough controversy to be his final kick in the teeth. The powers that be will never allow ANYONE to rule who'd actually fight for the public realm -- be it a Dion or a Layton, or a Stanfield, or a Broadbent, or a McLaughlin, or a Douglas. ... or anyone else who might interfere with the robber-baron rule of this country.

The moment has passed, and coalitions (and with them, proportional representation) will carry a dirty name with the pre-programmed sheeple forever. I agree with Fiat. This country is toast.

No, a coup is by force!

There is no force here. It is a legal constitutional transfer of government.

As for the GG, well how would she know that since Harper had two hours and the coalition members got to send her a letter? Then she bought the hysteria about Canada in crisis. Harper was in crisis and rightly so.

As for senate seats, if he is so confident that his new conciliatory tone will carry the day as all you suggest, what does he have to worry about? So admit it, he's no better than the liberals of John Turner. It's just like the Reformers and their "We won't take pensions." They get their snouts in the trough reall quick.

Coup d'état

"Edward Luttwak remarks in Coup d'État: A Practical Handbook: A coup consists of the infiltration of a small, but critical, segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder. In this sense, the use of either military or another organized force is not the defining feature of a coup d'état."

As for senate seats, if he is so confident that his new conciliatory tone will carry the day as all we suggest, what do you have to worry about? Perhaps we should wait and see whom he appoints before condemning him or comparing him to others.

Surely you jest, Realisticman?

It was not "small" and not part of the "state apparatus" nor did it "displace the government from its control". Government, my friend, is the House of Parliament and the opposition is also part of Government. It was a transfer of power from one party to a coalition of three if you like. Nice try though.

As for "we should wait and see whom he appoints before condemning". Is that why he is in such a hurry? Do you really believe there will be anyone but his political friends that will get this payoff? You really think he won't tip the balance in the senate in his favour? What do you take us for?

The duty of the Opposition

The duty of the opposition in the parliamentary system is to oppose and, in the case of a minority government especially, to take the control of the House away from the party which currently has only minority control of the House.

When the coalition takes over, you may have missed this wrinkly, it will have a majority so long as the coalition maintains the confidence of the House.

It was precisely that feature of the parliamentary system which moved Stephen Harper to contact the Governor General and solicit the support of the NDP and the BLOC in order to wrest control of the House from the Paul Martin Liberals.

The inability of the Conservatives and their supporters to understand the most fundamental principle of Canadian Government is just another reason why they cannot be trusted for a moment longer with the reins of power. Not least of which is evident in the appointment of unelected senators - just another in the long list of things Pee Wee has lied about to the Canadian people.

Which lies, the bought and paid for press have ignored and/or spun like turning gold into straw. With the evil Rumpelstiltskin for a Prime Minister in the upside down land of Stephen Harper's world, what would you expect?

The only Coup was Harper's move to use the same get out of jail free card that John A MacDonald did. As you well know, or ought to.

Many countries have been and

Many countries have been and are being governed by coalitions, so what is all the hysteria about?

The beauty of coalitions is that no party has enough power to become dictators, as we have under majority governments, like the gang we have now here in BC, selling off the province in secrecy, without even telling the owners what they've sold and for what?

Churchill's coalition in wartime Britain is the best example of how they can work for the benefit of all instead of one sector.

However, the coalition under Ignatieff is toast anyway and the best scenario for the time being is a Harper minority, where he can't become a Moses to lead the suckers into the desert for 40 years, instead of the 2-3 weeks the distance would have required......

Ed Deak.

SharingIsGood

Hi SharingIsGood,

The way to communicate with those who vote conservative, who believe the whole environment thing is overdone, who think those who would oppose the war in afghanistan are essentially traitors, etc., is to find a way to like them, to respect them.

How is this possible? The old way of thinking of them as primarily in need of our cavalier attacks on the media that manipulates, uses them, allowed us to mostly focus our attention of their/our collective enemies--we didn't really have to face up to the fact that we likely thought their tastes, their company--*them*, kind of disgusting, we really didn't have to look at them. And so now as some on the left begin to acknowledge that the problem is somehow in the "sheeple" as much as in the "shephards," the left is left with only the knee-jerk response: "What the fuck is wrong with you people!" And so we think of national collapse, and hope that the beasts who voted in Harper "enjoy" the hell on earth he will surely provide them with.

If we take a longer, less self-deceptive look at the broad populace, if we allow ourselves to understand ourselves as democratic, with democratic sympathies, while still overtly assessing them in what might easily be made to seem an aristocratic way (i.e., that they are constitionaly not as healthy as we are), we can move toward loving and respecting those who would still support Harper, regardless of how often the Tyee found its way onto their porches. You'll see in their eyes and their demeanor--they have not known the love we have known. They are the results of childhoods involving a considerable amount of fear and sadism. *And,* almost no matter how damaged, how limited their ability to love is, we'll see that they likely still possess the ability to read in other peoples' eyes, true respect. They're not much used to such a response; they'll likely think they probably don't deserve it; but they'll love us for it. And, eventually, as we listen to them with more true respect than we heretofore have managed, they'll better listen and attend to our stories, too.

That, in my judgment, is the way to get to them, SharingIsGood. But the truth is, if your childhood was garbage, there's only so much growth possible. Tactically, as always, you've got to get to the children. May every well tempered, progressive person, go into education.

And have kids (though not too many, lest they experience abandonment issues. one or two will do, nicely).

patrickmh

Crisis

Its funny how our crisis seems not much different that the form of Government in place in many of the more civilized democracies around the world

Sweden,Italy much of Scandinavia Israel and I seem to recall that Iceland has never had a majority government since the birth of the Icelandic parliament.

Even the United States has been the victim of bipartisan government over the years and witness Obama in the last 2 weeks.

One has to wonder if Harper will demand recounts of the votes taken where the Bloc voted in favor of Harper bills before the house.

My somewhat suspicious mind wonders if this was a test by the Cons to see what would happen if and when other Right wing agenda items are brought before the house as Harper has some right wingers to keep happy. Capitol punishment,abortion and the like. We know Harper can keep the right muted for a while but sooner of later the Sheeps clothing is going to come off and the old reform waters will ease through this facade.

Corus

You just had to listen to all the neo-cons on Roy Green (the Red Green of radio) all basically saying that it was immoral. They would give the Idea that it was illegal to vote down a party with the most sitting members,it was Gods will that PM harper rule.Then the great Addled one, Charles (the want to be american) waded right in with the same garbage that we elected PM Harper in gods name to rule. Well I didn`t vote for PM harper I voted for my MP. That is why the two lightweights in Ottawa created a new rule for a Government facing a non confidence vote.

Harper's dinosaur twin, Ignatieff

Go Alda, go.

I've been calling him the Trojan Horse of the coalition.

When am I going to stamp on my rose-tinted glasses once and for all?

I hoped there was a chance that the coalition could move, vote, and bring home our troops, because 2009 will be the bloodiest stupidest year of the debacle yet.

Amazing what desperation can do.

I actually hoped that now people know it's all about a pipeline to carry Turkmenistan gas to anywhere but Russia's plan, with construction scheduled to begin in 2010, that Canada's role might seem obviously nothing to do with pencils for children and women's rights in Kandahar, where access to satellite porn has soared, how helpful.

I actually hoped, like some kid's caged hamster, that Afghan ambassador Samad's illogical statement might enrage people: Canadian troops aren't in Afghanistan to do with the pipeline because they'll be gone long before it's completed.

I actually hoped that Canada's rep to the Asian Development Bank, Howard Brown, would answer my recent, apparently unreceived, email. He was recently quoted:
“Nobody is going to start putting pipe in the ground unless they are satisfied that there is some reasonable insurance that the workers for the pipeline are going to be safe.”

The ADB is running the finances for the TAPI pipeline, for which the slaughter in 2009 is going to be outrageous, but not unprecendented, except maybe in Canadian military history.

It was rather gratifying to hear Lib and Con candidates in the last election mudballing each other as to whose fault it was that we have troops in southern Afghanistan. A glimmer, a glimmer I turned into a triumphant walk along the Cowichan River. So the NDP wants the troops home, but rarely if ever mentions the pipeline and Caspian Sea agenda, the ruling parties (who doubtless talk industrial opportunities along the pipeline route, ghouls drool) think the time has come that it might unravel and so start blaming each other, I love it

Silly me, stamp on the glasses, up rises Ignatieff, hawk of hawks.

I love real flying hawks, so I'll go with Alda's "dinosaur twin".

No, I loved the romance of dinosaurs.

Ignatieff, the ghoul twin of Harper.

Ghoul fans, weigh in.

Wars are never fought by

Wars are never fought by countries, as we've been led to believe for ever, but between governments, rulers, priesthoods, who then persuade their slaves to go and kill and die for them in some "sacred cause".

We can expect another 30 to 50 Canadian soldiers to die in Afgh. in the next 3 years, for nothing. As the vast majority of soldiers who have died and die, in all wars, also for nothing, but hot air.

Ed Deak. WW2 vet.

Thanks for that, Margo.

Thanks for that, Margo.
Wouldn't that be something - the Conservatives and right-wing Liberals with their true colors finally showing, so aligned in their policies that they'd have to fight like dogs just to keep their bases - clearing the way for true progressives as the only solution? (We can hope, but I'm not holding my breath.)

As for Afghanistan, you bet. It's all about Peak Oil and the need to secure the black gold from the Caspian Bay. War is and ALWAYS HAS BEEN about stealing resources from occupied countries. Afghanistan is no exception -- thus, our sickening subjection to the non-stop rant by our media and politicians to convince us that we're there to "teach little girls to read."

Canadians, in the childish and Disneyish delusion that we're "oh-so fair and kind and educated" and we're "the most giving people on the face of the earth" buy this pablum, of course, hook, line, and sinker.

The question is, why are they so gullible?

There's nothing sadder (and angering) than listening to grieving parents and wives of dead soldiers -- sad because those deaths are so horrible and tragic, and angering, because the deaths are so unnecessary.

A note for the realisticman

I hope you won't find it churlish of me to mention, at this stage of the game, several conversations you, I, and others were engaged in over the past couple of years relative to the exposure of Canadian consumers and homeowners to the mortgage financing crisis here in Canada.

You will recall that I made the point that certain 'types' of mortgage finance instruments had become very commonplace here in Canada and that, in the fullness of time, the same kinds of exposure and consequences which were a certainty in the US were also going to take a heavy toll in Canada.

You might care, since you didn't apparently believe me at the time, to consult today's Globe and Mail for what may, in a ghoulish sort of way, put paid to that long-ago debate.

I have emails out to some colleagues in the banking industry in an attempt to discover whether it was mortgages of the type discussed in the Globe article that made up the 50 billion package of mortgage goodies that the federal treasury has taken off their hands.

I have further been told that the percentage of mortgages currently in danger of falling into the non-performing category is well into the 25 - 30 percent range..

Very nice piece, by the way Alda...sadly the dissembling isn't just taking place about our 'role' in Afghanistan.

I'm sure you noticed Defence Secretary Gates' effusive praise of our troops performance in country - coupled with that other horse in the team of US foreign policy. ie - that we won't be withdrawing in 2011.

Since Senator Obama appears not to be making much noise about getting out of Afghanistan I suspect we'll be there a lot longer than the current plan shows.

We'll be in Afgh. until the

We'll be in Afgh. until the public gets fed up with the casualties and the lies that bring them on, and then NATO will make a run for it, the same way as the Russians have in 1989, after having lost about 15,000, and also the Brits long before them.

The Taliban will then take over and kill all the collaborators with the invaders and everything will return to what it was before.

I'll never forget when the Soviet general walked across the bridge, the last man out of Afgh. and was asked by reporters what he thought about the whole mess?

He laughed and said : " Like the old proverb says, measure your cloth ten times before you cut it..."

Somebody should tell this to our own idiot politicians and the gullible fools who support them .

Ed Deak.

Mortgages

Big Globe front-page spread with a depressing Calgary vista on the inside double. Seems to be a very weak day for news since the intrepid reporters couldn't give any statistics, as you note. Looks like sensational journalism to me. You or I could have done a better job than those reporters just by going a-googling.

Good that the practice was nipped in the bud. Good to that the mortgages in question were CHHC insured. As you and I have been saying for a long time, this was reckless. Lucky for those that jumped in that rates have not, yet, gone up.

Fiat Lux wrote: "Somebody

Fiat Lux wrote:

"Somebody should tell this to our own idiot politicians and the gullible fools who support them."

Absolutely;SOMEOBODY is profiting here.
Wish our co-opted media would do some authentic investigation and figure out exactly which arms companies and which Daddy Warbucks are making the profits. I've heard rumors of companies in the maritimes and I know there's at least one in Calgary, but where else? Cui bono?
In other words (as always in effective journalism) follow the money...

The House as Voice of the people

In spite of pollsters, pundits and newspaper editors most people feel in their gut what is fair. If Canadians recognize that our Prime Minister is appointed by the Governor General and the Governor General is appointed by the Prime Minister( not necessarily the same one) and the two of them had a secret meeting and decided to prorogue parliament they would see something fundamentally unjust.
Parliamentary democracy must have checks and balances on power. Michaelle Jean had poor advice not to seek the will of the House as only MP's speak for the people. Now that the PM has discounted the votes of Canadians who are separatists any future PM can discount the votes of any group of Canadians. What could make Canada a leader in democratic reform is for the GG to admit her mistake, the Liberals to stick to the coalition and make it work. If it should crumble then the voice of the people should be heard directly through a vote on the budget. Let the politicians keep their seats. After a formal audit of government books let the parties present their budgets to the people and let us have a formal vote to choose the one we want. The house would then be responsible for its implementation. Imagine an election fought on how policy would affect our wallets instead of worrying about charisma or misinformation on the constitution. If you think we couldn't understand the broad strokes remember that the vote was kept away from women because for years they were thought to be unable to make wise decisions.

Ordinary Canadian

While I agree with your sentiments and would even assert that the country is currently ruled by a non-parliamentary dictator, I don't think this can be heaped at the door of the Governor-General.

She had no choice, in my opinion, and followed the precedent in effect; though, I'd muse, she did it (given her personality and history) with a heavy heart.

The die was cast in 1873 (and earlier in Britain) by Lord Dufferin. I'll provide details if you're interested.

The incriminating facts, relative to the real scoundrel, are visible in the eyes and lineaments of Stephen Harper's face and the caterwauling of his supporters and enablers in the press and elsewhere - of which Gutstein's article is excellent proof. Liars tend to make up for their lack of ‘truth’ with a high gudgeon, excessive repetition and single-pitch volume.

Back to the point?

As usual, the comments have veered wildly off the original subject by the time I seem to get to the piece, which usually keeps me from commenting, but this time I'll take a swing at what I think is the central question of the article: was this a real constitutional crisis or a media-manufactured one?

While I agree there's been serious editorial spin against the coalition and that some of the polling is certainly torqued, I still don't think the media created the "crisis". After all, this was only the second time in Canadian history (and the first in more than 80 years) that we faced the prospect of a change in government without an election, and it would have been (or might be, though it's looking less likely now with Ignatieff in charge of the Liberals) only the second formal coalition government in our history, the first since the First World War.

While the coalition would certainly have been legal, it would have been unprecedented in modern Canadian political history and had at least as many legitimacy issues as the Conservative government, ie. how many people who voted Liberal would have done so if they had known they would have been governing with NDP cabinet ministers and reliant on the Bloc for survival?

IMO, the G-G should have taken it out of everyone's hands -- refused Harper's prorogation, let the government fall in the House, then refused the coalition and sent us back to the polls. Then, if there were a Tory minority and the other three parties formed a coalition to defeat it, they would have a democratic mandate beyond any doubt as well as a constitutional one. Yes, it would have been an expensive, pain-in-the-ass, but isn't preserving democracy in a time of great uncertainty worth it?

To me, what the whole imbroglio highlights is that our political system has undergone enough of a sea change that our constitutional conventions, which are designed to give us the flexibility to get through such situations while preserving the rule of law, are in need of a serious revamp. Bad timing, given that Harper has just re-energized the separatist movement as a side-effect of this whole show.

get our act together

In the U.S., the left of George Bush never got their act together until Obama came along; the left of Harper still haven't achieved success here. Harper continues to use Bush/Rove style of politics. Everyone else is operating as if the political machinations have not changed.
Living on the west coast it is obvious the Can West papers (Vancouver Sun, Province, Courier, North Shore News), TV (Global & Chek)and radio(CKNW) operate as the head cheerleading squad for Harper, Campbell and the NPA party of Vancouver civic politics. I find it numbing, the story of homelessness & poverty is barely paid lip service on Global. Both Harper & Campbell continue to promise action & dollars for these and others problems, then do nothing. And where is the opposition? Why have we not heard more from Carole James? Could it be there is nothing to put the Liberals feet to the fire? Bill Bennett must be looking at Gordon Campbell in envy.
And then there are the Fed Liberals; they have been an uncoordinated for a long time. Maybe Iggy will make a right turn, we will have to wait to see; Trudeau & Chretien used to turn in various directions as required.

The Vancouver Sun

appears to be online only in digital form today (Sunday, Dec. 14). You get 3 weeks free then have to pay. So much for a newly designed web site. Designed to sucker us in to paying for their nonsense.

Monty

I was unaware the that the sun will be charging money shortly to read thier on-line paper,I hope your right because there are so many other FREE MEDIA papers that cover real stories without all the obvious spin.
This move by Canwest will surely be the final death blow to a moraly and financialy bankrupt media conglomerate.

Media gets their money from advertising,we all know how successful google is,if veiwership crumbles because of charging on-line readers ...well they will get what they deserve,the on-line news readers are the most sophisticated of all news readers,I know of no electronic media readers that will be bullied into buying the dribble from the sun,their recent redesigned site sucks.

If they think they can fight the change their wrong,newspapers are in financial distress all over north america,including the NY Times.

Well done, Mr. Gutstein

Well done, Mr. Gutstein.

More than anything this corporate press-inspired "creation" of yet another shock and awe so-called "crisis" reveals how far Canada has been "intentionally" driven off its democratic and parliamentary course.

In fact, even more sadly it reveals both the pathetic and escalating level of tolerance that our complicit mainstream press (and far too much of the Canadian public as well) have for these disturbing and persistent attacks against our constitutional and human rights.

That is the tragic part - that the dictatorial actions of Stephen Harper are being tolerated at any level both by an increasingly incompetent and irresponsible press, not to mention an increasingly corrupt one.... and by a sleeping public that needs to start paying attention and educating themselves on how our parliamentary democracy works.

What is also not mentioned about the intentionally-manipulated "panic" over the PQ support of the coalition is that the promised eighteen month stability agreement made by Duceppe and the Bloc Quebecois would have provided a real measure of economic insurance/stability for Canada in these critical economic times. An excellent and commendable achievement by the coalition....for all of us.

Instead, what did Stephen Harper do?

He aggressively provoked the PQ through his separatists taunts and fear-mongering - serving once again to divide and disturb the waters of this country.....which has been Mr. Harper's game plan along.

It is Stephen Harper and his regime who are the real threat to a united Canada. He uses the Bloc as a useful distraction for his own separatist intentions - which are to divide and sell off this country through a process of corporate/government synchronization...harmonization....and most importantly, "identification" with American corporate interests.

,

Thanks, Patrick

In the 70's, when environmental destruction began to surface in a very public way, what-were-once soft-spoken guys like Suzuki started gently talking and talking and talking and talking about how to avoid it ... to, as he has recently said himself, LITTLE OR NO AVAIL.

Apparently, consumerism and "keeping up with the Jonses" has much bigger appeal to the reptilian core brains of North American voters than any message you might give them about community, peace, love, cooperation, brotherhood, local society, etc.

Imo, voters WILL come to the truth through the unfortunate, ugly, back door of suffering and crisis and NOT the nice, gentle reasoning of the kind you suggest -- that which has been tried, and clearly failed.

We're getting a glimmer of this now that the big 3 auto companies are in distress and workers could lose their jobs, and people are FINALLY talking about shifting those industries over to what Canadians, pushed against the wall by high-priced oil, finally see as rational - LOCAL, environmentally-responsible and sustainaable industries. Thus, crisis serves neo-con governments (a la Naomi Klein's thesis), but also the other side, when a formerly-hypnotized public finally comes to its senses and sees what is in its best, longterm interests.

By the way, I have no objection whatsoever to your thesis that the all people need and deserve more "love." That is, in fact, the theory behind the hippie/environmental community movement - getting people to see what will create good and healthy, happy lives for ourselves and our children. How we get there is where you and I differ in opinion, however.

defence

Oh, that's over twenty years so it is in fact just about a, what, 15% increase.

Canada still ranks tied for 6th lowest spending on defence when defence spending is expressed as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product or GDP. In 2007, Canada spent 1.3 per cent of GDP on defence, compared to the NATO average of 1.8 per cent. Since as far back as 2000, Canadian spending on defence had remained relatively constant at 1.2 per cent of GDP but, in 2007, moved up a touch to 1.3 per cent. Here’s a selected list:

* 1. U.S. (4%)
* 2. Greece (2.8 %)
* 3. Turkey (2.7 %)
* 4. France (2.4 %)
* 5. Bulgaria, The United Kingdom (2.3 %)
* 7. Poland, Romania (1.9 %)
* 9. Italy (1.8 %)
* 10. Latvia, Slovak Republic (1.7%)
* —-
* 18. Canada, Denmark, Germany (1.3%)

http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2008/2/10/3516472.html

What Ed posted was factually true

And, Harper has been supporting and promoting an enormous increase in 'defence' spending. Which was the point, after all.

I'll refrain from saying anything further since you appear to have carte blanche to say whatever you please about anyone - while I am not permitted to point out your own errors and omissions without risking redaction.