Continued from here
Canadian Parliament Prorogued again: Part 6
Thu, 2010-01-14 11:44
#1
remind
Canadian Parliament Prorogued again: Part 6
Thu, 2010-01-14 13:49
#2
hsfreethinkers
Good questions Polunatic, though I (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) find it increasingly annoying that we have to guess what policies our politicians favour, what they are plotting and deliberating behind the scenes, and what they would do about x, y or z. Why can't they be more upfront and quit dickering us around?
Thu, 2010-01-14 13:55
#3
It was good to hear from Layton about "getting back to work". However, that begs the question - "what for?" Layton suggests that the NDP will support getting back to business as usual. There are some other ideas floating around however. It will be interesting to see the responses.
Yesterday, Layton, the other opposition parties and Harper were sent letters from Fair Vote Canada. It suggests that they put an end to all the shenanigans and abuses of power in Ottawa which are built into the our so-called democratic institutions. In other words, it's not just about Stephen Harper (even if he is the most blatant authoritarian in recent memory). The letters call on the leaders to work on a plan post-haste to implement a proportional voting system where everyone's vote is equal and governments need a popular mandate in order to govern. This falls on the heels of the January 5 call from 132 political scientists to
...set aside partisan interests and together support a substantive program to engage Canadians in a national discussion on :1) fair voting principles - voter equality, proportional results and the formation of governments whose policies reflect the majority of voters, and 2) the various types of fair voting systems based on those principles...Here are some excerpts from the letters to the party leaders signed by Fair Vote Canada President Bronwen Bruch.
Stephen Harper letter:
Dear PM Harper:Your party represents fewer than 40 per cent of Canadian voters. You can’t square that minority support, and the unilateral shutdown of Parliament, with any reasonable concept of legitimate and representative democratic government.
I do not accuse you of violating democracy itself only because the Canadian political system as it stands is intrinsically undemocratic. If you are leading a party of democrats, then surely it is time for you to abandon the shamocracy and make the House of Commons democratic.
The fix is not difficult. Amend the Canada Elections Act to guarantee every adult Canadian man and woman equal representation of their own choice in the House of Commons. Then establish a swift process to produce the necessary electoral reform. That would make Canada, at last, a democracy -- and you for the first time the Prime Minister of a democratic state.
Dear Opposition Leaders,As some of us have been saying since Prorogue 1, democratic reform is the elephant in the prorogue room that none of the parties are talking about, including the one that supports proportional representation. This is an opportunity that should not be squandered.... Democrats, whether in government or opposition, should do everything in their power to bring an end to this gross misrepresentation of the people of Canada.
If the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper uses the prorogation to develop a plan for swift electoral reform, we trust you will cooperate.
In case that is not his intention, your parties, which together represent a substantial majority of Canadian voters, should use the prorogation to re-examine your various agendas and devise a shared action plan for democratic reform...
Thu, 2010-01-14 14:45
#4
The general public couldn't care less about inside the beltway process issues like proportional representation that just seem like self-serving schemes to give more seats to parties that are disfavoured by the current system. People couldn't care less about what fair for political parties. They care about what's fair for them as individuals.
While i agree that electoral reform is important - it is something that should be given as low a profile as possible in the current public discourse. It really has nothing to do with the current situation. Even if we had PR, unless we amended our constitution to reduce the powers of the Prime Minister - prorogations would still happen over and over again. Its not the solution to this particular problem.
Thu, 2010-01-14 14:59
#5
PR has everything to do with prorguation. If there is PR, i believe more Canadians will be engaged to our Parliament, and more Canadians will be upset and outraged at Proroguation because we would feel that the Parliament is more relevant and belong to the people than under the FPTP system. FPTP breeds apathy, which is directly related to why Harper chose to abuse his power.
Thu, 2010-01-14 15:01
#6
They care about what's fair for them as individuals.And since most voters votes don't go toward electing anyone, the system is unfair to them. And since most voters do not have any local representation, the system is unfair to them. That is easy for people to understand except that political leaders do not talk about it.
Harper can abuse parliament because the electoral system is one that encourages abuses - starting with the voters who do not get equal votes and fair representation. True,immediate steps should be taken to give MPs a vote before the PM goes to the G-G for a prorogue. This was suggested by Prof. Andrew Heard earlier this week in his piece "Give the House the Authority". I haven't heard of any suggests from any parties on prorogue reform.
Proroguing to duck accountability is but one form of abuse that flows from an undemocratic mandate resulting from first-past-the post. Proportional representation is about giving more influence to the voters. It is not a party-centric reform as you suggest. Voters from all parties suffer from the current system. We can't wait for the NDP to win a majority government in order to reform the voting system.
Thu, 2010-01-14 15:27
#7
Dear Opposition Leaders,
... Democrats, whether in government or opposition, should do everything in their power to bring an end to this gross misrepresentation of the people of Canada.
Harper loves the gross misrepresentation end of it though.
[url=http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16915]"Harper’s Actual Agenda is to Dismantle Canada"[/url]
First Prorogue, then Eviscerate
by Murray Dobbin
There is, for good reason, a lot of enthusiasm across the country as the groundswell against Stephen Harper's cynical shuttering of Parliament continues to grow. The prime minister from hell has gotten away with so much — and the opposition is so weak that any indication of genuine public disgust at his continuing demonstration of contempt for democracy is a welcome sign. And everyone who cares about the country should be taking part in the new movement for democracy.But we should also be careful that this issue does not totally distract us from Harper’s actual agenda which is still exactly as it has always been — to dismantle the Canada so painstakingly built by two generations of Canadians. In March, Harper will present his first “austerity” budget. It could prove to be more damaging than the proroguing of Parliament.
Harper and Flaherty's job is to help out banksters and creditors in general by creating structural deficits and throwing the country into a debt hole same as Mulroney did. That's the plan: tax breaks for the rich and pauperize the country so rich friends of the conservative party can strip the country bare of assets and everything else that matters. As Michael Hudson said recently, the new unwritten business model declares that debt is wealth creation. And our neoliberal stooges are well versed in wealth/debt creation.
Thu, 2010-01-14 15:50
#8
First past the post is the "original sin" of parliamentary abuse and lack of accountability by the PMO.
Thu, 2010-01-14 15:52
#9
Harper and Flaherty's job is to help out banksters and creditors in general by creating structural deficits and throwing the country into a debt hole same as Mulroney did.And he's only able to contemplate it because the first past the post voting system gives him the power to do so without needing the majority of voters to agree.
Thu, 2010-01-14 16:18
#10
PR is good.
But your faith in it as a cre all is way misplaced.
Let alone that one of the surest ways to douse outrage over what Harper does would be to smother it with would be seminars on how its all connected to lack of PR.
Thu, 2010-01-14 16:57
#11
I have been a supporter of PR since my highschool days - which was a very long time ago now, but jeepers...
forest
-trees.
Thu, 2010-01-14 17:11
#12
The electoral system is the forest. Forms of parliamentary and executive abuse are the trees. I have never suggested that PR is the be-all but it's a pre-condition for getting to the real solutions on the economy, foreign policy, environmental, etc. Remaining silent on the root causes of this arrogant abuse of power does not do a service to fighting the prorogation. Letting this issue fizzle out after the rallies as it's likely to do would be yet another missed opportunity.
Thu, 2010-01-14 17:20
#13
PR while an important instrument for increased citizen engagement and a more representative democracy, does zilch to fix any of the issues you mention. PR is no guarentee of anything- you need only look around the world to understand this.
Thu, 2010-01-14 17:53
#14
PR while an important instrument for increased citizen engagement and a more representative democracy, does zilch to fix any of the issues you mention. PR is no guarentee of anything- you need only look around the world to understand this.
It looks like all parliaments in countries with PR are hard at work earning their taxpayer funded pay cheques. That's what it looks like from here.
With PR the ReformaTories would have [url=http://wilfday.blogspot.com/2008/12/what-would-proportional-house-of.htm... fewer seats under a PR system - the Liberals four more - NDP 19 more - Bloc 16 fewer[/url] etc.
Steve Harper would have even less elbow room for pulling the shananigans that he does. And it would force Ignatieff's hand even further to either prop up the Tories and making it even more obvious of the power sharing arrangement between those two oldest political parties, or the Liberals would feel more obliged to act like an official opposition party in search of voter support.
I think there are many Canadians who don't understand Canada's democracy gap and how it has become the chasm that it is today.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:00
#15
Thank you Fidel. I agree that we need to force Iggy's hand. PR was part of the NDP's last election platform so I hope that they will carefully consider Fair Vote's challenge. If Canada had PR, the chances that Harper would even be PM would have been greatly diminished.
Bookish - Zilch? Representative democracy is zilch when it comes to curbing abuse of authority by the minority over the majority? On policy, why did most European nations begin to take action on climate change after Kyoto while Canada and the US did nothing? I never said PR was a guarantee of anything. Those are your words. I said it was a pre-condition to address the issues so that policy reflects public opinion and voting intentions.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:04
#16
Is there a good case for phony majority tin pot rule or the high probability for gross distortion of party votes to seats ratios? Why shouldn't Steve the dictator's party have 100% power with 22 percent of the registered vote federally same as Dalton McGuinty does in Ontario? FPTP is an abominable system mathematically and grammatically speaking. You'd have to be drunk or stoned and thinking in terms of hockey results for it to make any sense.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:04
#17
You are comparing apples to oranges. PR provides no pre-conditions on anything. Governments without PR have also moved ahead. What matters is the political culture of the nation, not the structure of its goverance.
I agree PR is crucial in reforming our system, but to think this is a time to lecture people about PR when they are finally waking up to the way our system actually works against the interest of average people is like giving a grade 2 student a lecture on calculus when they are on the cusp of figuring out how to add and subtract easily.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:11
#18
CAPP now has over 188,000 members:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=260348091419
I'm pleased to announce that I have sent the link around and managed to sign up a few people today. 
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:19
#19
It's not even calculus, it's elementary school ratio and proportions. A sixth or seventh grader could understand it, and Canadians are some of the most well educated people in the world.
I think someone should propose FPTP for hockey rules across Canada to be reflect our uncompetitive 19th century electoral system. The team that scores more goals than the other side in two out of three periods of hockey wins the game. Each period of hockey could be a FPTP deal. This way teams could win by scoring fewer goals than the other guys.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:19
#20
I think you and Stockholm underestimate the voting public big time. This is not an "inside the beltway", PHD issue. Millions, yes, that's millions, of voters have supportd PR in the four referendums that have taken place. That's millions of Canadians ready for qualitative reform. Millions of people DON'T want to get back to business as usual. We're not starting in Grade 2. Way more people are already familiar with PR than are with prorogation. To dismiss that reality as part of your argument to dismiss Fair Vote Canada's initiative, is disparaging to the voting reform movement and the work they've been doing for the past 20 years or more.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:23
#21
Stephen Harper letter:
Dear PM Harper:Your party represents fewer than 40 per cent of Canadian voters. You can’t square that minority support, and the unilateral shutdown of Parliament, with any reasonable concept of legitimate and representative democratic government.
I do not accuse you of violating democracy itself only because the Canadian political system as it stands is intrinsically undemocratic. If you are leading a party of democrats, then surely it is time for you to abandon the shamocracy and make the House of Commons democratic.
The fix is not difficult. Amend the Canada Elections Act to guarantee every adult Canadian man and woman equal representation of their own choice in the House of Commons. Then establish a swift process to produce the necessary electoral reform. That would make Canada, at last, a democracy -- and you for the first time the Prime Minister of a democratic state.
Yeah, like that's going to happen. Minority governments work best when they cooperate with the other parties. Harper has been all about antagonism, bullying and "My way or the highway". PR usually results in coalition governments which again, work best when the parties that make up the coalition cooperate.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:28
#22
Yeah, like that's going to happen.That's why there's a second letter to the leaders of the opposition parties. And believe it or not, I've heard there was a time that Harper actually supported PR along with some of his Reform Party pals.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:28
#23
.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:33
#24
The general public couldn't care less about inside the beltway process issues like proportional representation that just seem like self-serving schemes to give more seats to parties that are disfavoured by the current system. People couldn't care less about what fair for political parties. They care about what's fair for them as individuals.
While i agree that electoral reform is important - it is something that should be given as low a profile as possible in the current public discourse. It really has nothing to do with the current situation. Even if we had PR, unless we amended our constitution to reduce the powers of the Prime Minister - prorogations would still happen over and over again. Its not the solution to this particular problem.
The power to prorogue should be taken from the Prime Minister and given to the leaders of the other parties.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:35
#25
That's one possible way forward for the Leafs. 
Scenario 1
Period One - 1-0 - Leafs
Period Two - 1-0 - Leafs
Game over - Leafs win
Scenario 2
Period One - 1-0 - Leafs
Period Two - 5-0 opponents
Period Three - 1-0 - Leafs
Leafs win!
Scenario 3 - Period One - 1-0 - Leafs
Period Two - 5-0 opponents
Period Three - 0-0
Tie game.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:37
#26
I think you and Stockholm underestimate the voting public big time. This is not an "inside the beltway", PHD issue. Millions, yes, that's millions, of voters have supportd PR in the four referendums that have taken place. That's millions of Canadians ready for qualitative reform. Millions of people DON'T want to get back to business as usual. We're not starting in Grade 2. Way more people are already familiar with PR than are with prorogation. To dismiss that reality as part of your argument to dismiss Fair Vote Canada's initiative, is disparaging to the voting reform movement and the work they've been doing for the past 20 years or more.
I don't underestimate anything or anyone. While you point out millions supported, millions also voted against. Those people for and against cut across all party lines, demographics, urban/rural spilts and all sorts of ways. Thinking you wouldn't cause no end of headaches by throwing this into the mix is beyond naive. It is also politically not very smart to find ways to divide a populace that seems to be uniting in their disgust of the prorogation. I have news for you - not everyone upset by the prorogation thinks PR is a good idea. And that doesn't even get into the navel gazing exercise of talking about what form of PR would talked about.
Thu, 2010-01-14 18:40
#27
The power to prorogue should be taken from the Prime Minister and given to the leaders of the other parties.The power should be in the hands of elected MPs, not the leaders. Why trade one undemocratic practice with another? "Give the House the Authority"
Thu, 2010-01-14 20:01
#28
No minority government should be able to do this IMO.
Thu, 2010-01-14 22:07
#29
That's one possible way forward for the Leafs.
Scenario 1
Period One - 1-0 - Leafs
Period Two - 1-0 - Leafs
Game over - Leafs win
Scenario 2
Period One - 1-0 - Leafs
Period Two - 5-0 opponents
Period Three - 1-0 - Leafs
Leafs win!
Scenario 3 - Period One - 1-0 - Leafs
Period Two - 5-0 opponents
Period Three - 0-0
Tie game.
That's ridiculous. I like the way it is with each team credited for every goal they score and totals tallied at the end of the game to decide the winner, and one point awarded for OT losses. Gary Bettman and NHLPA could design a fairer and more equitable electoral system for Canada's hockey crazed, beer chugging voters miffed as to why hockey makes more sense than our electoral system. It's clear from Polunatic2's examples that FPTP would not fly in Canada's favourite game. If leaders in sports can get people interested in basketball, football and hockey again, then why can't we do it with something as important as our electoral democracy? Why continue on with such mediocre fan ratings when it comes to our democracy?
Thu, 2010-01-14 22:24
#30
That's one possible way forward for the Leafs.
Scenario 1
Period One - 1-0 - Leafs
Period Two - 1-0 - Leafs
Game over - Leafs win
Scenario 2
Period One - 1-0 - Leafs
Period Two - 5-0 opponents
Period Three - 1-0 - Leafs
Leafs win!
Scenario 3 - Period One - 1-0 - Leafs
Period Two - 5-0 opponents
Period Three - 0-0
Tie game.
That's ridiculous. I like the way it is with each team credited for every goal they score and totals tallied at the end of the game to decide the winner, and one point awarded for OT losses. Gary Bettman and NHLPA could design a fairer and more equitable electoral system for Canada's hockey crazed, beer chugging voters miffed as to why hockey makes more sense than our electoral system. It's clear from Polunatic2's examples that FPTP would not fly in Canada's favourite game. If leaders in sports can get people interested in basketball, football and hockey again, then why can't we do it with something as important as our electoral democracy? Why continue on with such mediocre fan ratings when it comes to our democracy?
In politics, sports analogies are ridiculous anyway. When you have a sport where 5 teams play each other simultaneously, then maybe you could use a sports analogy.
Thu, 2010-01-14 23:27
#31
In politics, sports analogies are ridiculous anyway.OK. How about something closer to home, like political party leadership races. Why not use first past the post to select party leaders (and prime ministers on occasion) if it's so good for voters?
Thu, 2010-01-14 23:33
#32
![http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/object2/1470/27/n260348091419_3725.jpg[/img]](https://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/object2/1470/27/n260348091419_3725.jpg[/img]){kind=link}
Fri, 2010-01-15 00:02
#33
[img]http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/object2/1470/27/n260348091419_3725.jpg[/img]
Hopefully it will reach 200,000 by the end of the weekend!
Fri, 2010-01-15 02:02
#34
In politics, sports analogies are ridiculous anyway. When you have a sport where 5 teams play each other simultaneously, then maybe you could use a sports analogy.
That's right, in professional hockey there are always four teams left in the Stanley cup semi-finals. In Canada's parliament, it's totally different with the following teams typically: Sainte Tory Blues, Liberal Flames, NDP Flyers, and the Bloc Hawks.
And if they followed FPTP rules, a team like the upstart Leafy Greens pfff! could win it all by scoring a little more than 25% of the goals while three teams scoring the other 75% receive no trophy nothing but a buss pass to shuffleboard city in Florida. But thank goodness the NHL doesn't follow such a mathematically absurd set of rules.
Imagine watching the same two hockey teams compete for the Stanley Cup, year after year, decade after decade for 140 years in a row without a break. And neither team ever needs a clear victory to be declared absolute FPTP Coup de Stanley champions. Eh, that's alright Liberal Flames fans, your team outscored the Blues in two of three periods in a decisive game seven but scored fewer goals in total, so la coup goes the Flames for the 60th time in the same century. Sorry , it's just the way it is. Nothing we can do aboot it. Progressive change for the better is not possible. But if les Hawks de la Bloc want a referendum on leaving the league, then let's make it easy for them with a 50% plus one threshold and not a much fairer 60%, and never mind where that figure came from. Busting up the league could be a good thing, and let's not consider an alternative.
We might as well flip a coin
Fri, 2010-01-15 10:14
#35
Oh look another thread hijacked by PR proponents. No thread topic is safe 
Fri, 2010-01-15 10:20
#36
No Canadian is safe with the status quo (except bankers, industrialists & certain politicians). 
Fri, 2010-01-15 14:24
#37
In case you missed Rick Mercer this week:
Fri, 2010-01-15 16:55
#38
Scott Piatkowski
Fri, 2010-01-15 17:01
#39
I think this might be the one, Michelle.
Fri, 2010-01-15 17:50
#40
I laughed out loud so hard at that one. Brilliant.
Fri, 2010-01-15 18:54
#41
Grit Plan: Let Harper be Harper
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/grit-plan-let-harper-be-har...
"First of all the experts said no Canadian would vote based on the issue of delivering Afghan prisoners for torture. But Stephen Harper killed Parliament anyway, to squelch that debate. Why? What did he know?
Haiti Saves Harper
http://www.westislandchronicle.com/article-421455-Haiti-saves-Harper.html
"The Haitian earthquake has knocked Harper's Parliamentary closure crisis off the front pages.."
Fri, 2010-01-15 19:23
#42
But thank goodness the NHL doesn't follow such a mathematically absurd set of rules.
Isn't every best of 7 series essentially first past the post? Winning four games in OT and getting smoked in 3 blow outs still wins the series. FPTP.
Fri, 2010-01-15 22:20
#43
But thank goodness the NHL doesn't follow such a mathematically absurd set of rules.
Isn't every best of 7 series essentially first past the post? Winning four games in OT and getting smoked in 3 blow outs still wins the series. FPTP.
Yes and no. FPTP implies that someone's votes/goals have to be discarded in order to determine an overall winner. The way it is now with hockey rules, each team is credited with every goal they score through three periods of play and awarded one point for a close overtime loss. Here if a contender loses by one vote in an overtime count, all the votes for the other candidate are flushed down the pike and total victory given to the winner by slim margin. It's not an ideal comparison, but there are similarities I think.
The new NHL rules for league parity and rewarding a team's efforts for making it to the OT round of a game is clearly more equitable than the old NHL which tended to produce lopsided wins for stacked teams. Those rules produced dynasties, like the Habs, Oilers, Islanders etc. When one ponders the rule changes, a fairer and more equitable game comes to mind, and surely not FPTP. Now, if they can achieve for our electoral democracy what rule changes did for basketball in Air Jordan's time and "the Mailman", then we should expect to see a more competitive voting system and some real superstars of Canadian politics emerge.
Fri, 2010-01-15 22:51
#44
Any goals that players score in a losing game are discarded in the way that you're talking about.
Fri, 2010-01-15 23:13
#45
Prorogation riles many Canadians - and splits the Kent family.
Arthur Kent, who ran for the provincial Tories in October of 2007, says “In truth, there has been an unwritten fatwa maintained by the Prime Minister’s Office against discussion of any and all controversial aspects of the Afghan debacle.”In an interview, Arthur Kent added that if Stephen Harper is uncomfortable with democracy, he should quit his job.
His older brother, Peter, wouldn’t agree. Peter Kent is Mr. Harper’s Minister of State of Foreign Affairs. . . He is saying nothing about his brother’s efforts; his spokesperson did not return requests for comment.
“Hey, we’re like many other Canadian families,” Arthur Kent says. “I don’t think we’re the only Canadian family divided by this.
Arthur Kent knows of what he speaks, having covered the Afghan story since the 1980s; he knows the people, the region and the issues.
And that is why he was so moved to speak out when the Prime Minister made his decision to prorogue.
He says that while Canadian troops continue to put their lives in danger, “Stephen Harper has called it quits halfway around the world in Ottawa.”
Arthur Kent says he’s hopeful the government goes back to work on Jan. 25 as had been originally planned.
“I’ve expressed the view that when our troops are at war and (Afghan President Hamid) Karzai is making cabinet appointments that do violence to our chances for success, then Canada’s Parliament has to do what Afghanistan’s Parliament is doing, which is sitting overtime.
“It is rather perverse for our Parliament to be silenced when theirs is struggling.”
Sat, 2010-01-16 00:12
#46
Scott Piatkowski
If they had bothered to interview the entire family, I'm pretty sure that the tie would be broken in opposition to prorogation.
Sat, 2010-01-16 00:44
#47
NDPPProrogation riles many Canadians - and splits the Kent family.
Arthur Kent, who ran for the provincial Tories in October of 2007, says “In truth, there has been an unwritten fatwa maintained by the Prime Minister’s Office against discussion of any and all controversial aspects of the Afghan debacle.”Canada’s Parliament has to do what Afghanistan’s Parliament is doing, which is sitting overtime.
“It is rather perverse for our Parliament to be silenced when theirs is struggling.”
How perfectly charming for Arthur Kent to raise the issue of these two, comprador parliaments and the US puppets who lead them
Too bad only one of these populations understands this and resists...
Sat, 2010-01-16 02:05
#48
Arthur Kent, who ran for the provincial Tories in October of 2007, says “In truth, there has been an unwritten fatwa maintained by the Prime Minister’s Office against discussion of any and all controversial aspects of the Afghan debacle.”In an interview, Arthur Kent added that if Stephen Harper is uncomfortable with democracy, he should quit his job.
His older brother, Peter, wouldn’t agree. Peter Kent is Mr. Harper’s Minister of State of Foreign Affairs. . . He is saying nothing about his brother’s efforts; his spokesperson did not return requests for comment.
“Hey, we’re like many other Canadian families,” Arthur Kent says. “I don’t think we’re the only Canadian family divided by this.
Arthur Kent knows of what he speaks, having covered the Afghan story since the 1980s; he knows the people, the region and the issues.
And that is why he was so moved to speak out when the Prime Minister made his decision to prorogue.
He says that while Canadian troops continue to put their lives in danger, “Stephen Harper has called it quits halfway around the world in Ottawa.”
"My own judgement ... quite frankly is we are not going to ever defeat the insurgency." - Stephen Harper in a CNN interview March 1, 2009.
Vietnam divided American society. It divided American families. Afghanistan is Canada's Vietnam.
"This whole thing stinks." - U.S. soldier Hue, Vietnam 1968.
Sat, 2010-01-16 04:11
#49
Would Nixon have 'prorogued' the White House in 1969?:
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion/515906/nixon_and_the_1969_vietnam_...
Sun, 2010-01-17 19:14
#50
The NHL comparison is getting tedious. Each game won or lost is between only two teams and any win is therefore a majority. Every seat in politics is contested by multiple parties and not everyone votes. TIf in each contest you only have two contestamts there is no issue with First Past the Post. Besides all that-- Hockey is entertainment as it should be. Politics is also entertainment but it should be more than that.
Sun, 2010-01-17 19:33
#51
Scott Piatkowski
[url=http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=260348091419]200,001 members!!![/url]