RMR: Proroguevacations.com

[knives254]

2 people are not going a a prorogue vacation.

[eblunot]

1 quickvic - check your recent Canadian history.Our Canadian banks were prevented from creating a vacuous bubble like that created by the USA "Subprime mtg fiasco" by regulations

Harper tried to have changed ( weakened).Thank the voters who voted for anyone other than Harper's "Conservatives" .Just imagine how much havoc this man could wreak upon naive Canadians with a majority in parliament.He is great as a funny( buffoon) figurehead to take flack and be held on a short leash by other parties

[1quikcivic]

of course we have the largest deficit ever, have you only been watching local news? the whole world is in a huge deficit. surprisingly, canada's economic state is not nearly as bad as many other countries. harper isnt the best by far but you are naive and nearsighted if you believe that another leader would have miraculously kept canada shielded from a global economic meltdown.

[edward5331]

LOL!

[1quikcivic]

everybody's economy is in turmoil, by the way, or have you not noticed. Our GST is down 2% and even chretien prorogued 4 times in his time. im not even a fan of harper, its just silly that people have such short memories and are so biased, but of course nobody thinks they are biased! the conservatives arent doing the best job but if the liberals were great they would still be in power.

[UltimateKingSonic]

... They were. While the Liberals were in power, we had surpluses to boot. Harper comes along? Biggest deficet in Canadian HISTORY. That should be a red flag right there.

Also? Whatever the hell Harper is trying like a madman to keep from the other parties. You know, like the documents about the Afghan Detainees? The ones he heavily censored the first time, prorogued after to avoid giving them up, and now is hiring someone to give him even more time. The guy's desperate to hide something.

[UltimateKingSonic]

... I'll state this. Harper has messed up this country in so many ways, this is just the poison icing on the toxic cake. There's no other way to look at it: Things have gone downhill (fast) since Harper became PM. Our economy is in turmoil (As it's expected to be for years and years to come) our eviromental image is crumbling and to top it off? When Harper is keeping the other parties from learning what the deal with these Afghan Detainees is, you know something big is bubbling right there.

[pinkshirted]

That sums it up right there. Thank you.

[laxpol]

zzzzz

Rick Mercer hasn't been funny for years

[pinkshirted]

Okay I guess SummonHeather backed down? I was enjoying the debate...

[TheTreeAMV]

... *tries to avoid commenting for fear of being dragged into the debate*

Funny one, Rick *thumbs up*

... and for the record, all you arguers - I actually like Harper and I think he's doing a good job. I also like the Republicans and Palin. Just because you dislike something doesn't mean other people are obliged to share your opinion. We have multiple parties for a reason.

[JON2871]

@TheTreeAMV well u obviously did not avoid commenting fool

why do u like Palin so much? is it cus her whore daughter gave a handjob?

[SummonHeather]

Also, I look at the general principles guiding the party, and then I compare those against how they applied those principles to reality.

For example, the Conservative Party of Canada has their founding principles right on their website. I agree with the intent of those principles and look to see how they are being applied.

[westeightyone]

Gosh.

'WE' made a joke at 'THEIR' expense.

How clever of 'US'. Problem solved.

'THEY' are sure to be hurt by 'US' laughing at 'THEM' for wasting "OUR' money on

'THEM'-selves.

'OUR' laughing at 'THEM' this time will make

' THEM' think twice about doing the exact same thing over and over again in the future.

This is like laughing at a person who's just robbed you. I can see why the robber would laugh but the victim would have to be fucking nuts to find any humor in the robbery..

[phoboskitty]

many Conservatives are not actually conservative but reformers that had no where else to go and ran to the whitest party they could find. and its disingenuous to allude that Proroguing parliament is in any way normal

[SummonHeather]

Well, that's a pretty inaccurate statement. I think that a look at any of the parties in Canada would show that they all draw from a diverse sample of Canadians, as they should.

[pinkshirted]

It's funny because you're wrong and I am right.

[phoboskitty]

Harper has always been an ineffectual leader he is a Failure as a PM and he is turning Canadian Conservatives into American Republicans the bitches of the corporate elite its sad but its true i do not understand Conservatives anymore and how they can support Harper and still look in the mirror every morning

[SummonHeather]

Well, I'm a Conservative and I'm very interested in hearing about what you would like to see done differently. I really like a lot of the things that they have accomplished. I would really be interested in hearing a few details from you. What do you think the federal government should be doing differently?

[athlon866]

I can't believe the video created such a fierce debate...

[mcread]

@lewert. You may want to check your history. Trudeau alternated between minority and majority status.

[tyler17719]

You are right. Trudeau never won successive majority governments.. (which means ones after the other)

1968 - majority

1972 - minority

1974 - majority

1979 - loss

1980 - majority

Lewert, Chretien prorogued parliament 4 times and yes, he did so to avoid 'scandal' and hot issues.

But that doesn't make it right. The precedent here is terrible and worrisome. Parliament shouldn't be prorogued for political means, ever.

[owlnebula]

What a simplistic, superficial video. I guess that what makes it so appropriate to this situation.

[SummonHeather]

Oh, who cares!  It's not like it's not a normal thing in Parliament. It's legal. Paul Martin did it once during his minority. Chretien did it about four times. Trudeau did it about ten times. Get with it, people! Oh, yeah, and those of you who don't think these guys are working - they're working in their ridings and on their other responsibilities. This is one of the toughest jobs out there, and the most undreappreciated because of democracy-challenged, arrogant morons.

[fallbread]

Excelent vid rick lol

[dangerousmezzo]

Bang on -- thanks Rick!

[athlon866]

I am outraged to learn parliament got suspended again.

[dezza2001]

outraged? really? is it that outrageous that instead of the Liberals yelling at the conservatives in Parliament and canadians not paying attention, the Liberals are yelling at the conservatives outside of parliament and canadians not paying attention?

[TheCars4Sale]

Oh no no no nooo. Everyone's paying attention, not just LIberal Party supporters. And not just in Canadians. Less wrastlin', more attention please! :)

[Robotman42]

@athlon866

The members of parliament are the ones who deserve to be suspended, wouldn't you say?

[athlon866]

imagine you pay your workers 12,000/year. they actually work only 9 months. would you still be willing to pay this much?

[SummonHeather]

@athlon866 You are so wrong. Sitting in parliament is just part of the job. Most of these MPs see very little of family or friends for years and years. If they're not sitting in Ottawa they're working in their home ridings, or working on issues, or assignments and other responsibilities. Oh, and I think you meant $120,000 per year.

[SummonHeather]

Oh, you're outraged, are you?  What about the previous 104 times that parliament was prorogued since confederation?

[athlon866]

they chose to do this job. nobody forces them to become an MP. For example, a soldier choose to be enlisted to be sent to border zone. If they do their jobs, taxpayer would appreciate their work. MP Dan McTeague gets appreciated on his work; Canadian Forces get appreciated on their work. I'm just thinking about taxpayers.

[SummonHeather]

I understand your frustration. The job of an MP includes sitting in parliament, working on committees as well as a lot of other things. I'll tell you that a lot of taxpayers who go to their local MP for help with issues might very well be happy that their MP might be more available during this 22 days.

[SummonHeather]

As well, the taxpayers must understand that a prorogue is a normal tool of parliament. If taxpayers want to change the rules of parliament, they should talk to their MPs to see if that's possible. To be honest, though, that would probably be practically impossible. It would probably involve changing confederation agreements - we would have to ask a constitutional lawyer about the viability of removing the ability to prorogue from the rules of parliament.

[lewert]

Proroguing Parliament is only normal when the business of debating bills is complete. Doing it at this time shows that Harper is desperate to avoid awkward questions about his government, and does not find it necessary to be anwerable to Canadian voters.

[lewert]

Actually, taxpayers understand all too well exactly how this normal tool of government is being misused. The issue isn't the tool: it's how the tool is wielded.

[SummonHeather]

Well, the debating bills wasn't complete and usually isn't complete. Let's see, Paul Martin, 1 prorogue, debate not finished; Jean Chretien, 4 prorogues, debates not complete; Pierre Trudeau, 10 prorogues, debates not complete. Which special, extra-excellent prorogue are you talking about? Inquiring minds want to know.

[pinkshirted]

I can slightly understand your point, but PMs like Trudeau were far better. At least Pierre had charisma. And also, he screwed up unfathomably less than Harper. Don't even challenge that point.

[SummonHeather]

Pinkshirted - are you for real?

There are many people who think that Trudeau seriously damaged Canada, so that's a matter of opinion. Charisma is also a matter of opinion. We're talking about whether proroguing is a tool of parliament which is done at the prerogative of the Prime Minister. Anyways, what royal decision-maker would you appoint as the holy decider of which prime minister had enough charisma to break the rules?

[lewert]

Charismatic or not, Trudeau was elected to successive majority governments, something Harper hasn't achieved once. Like most PMs, Trudeau did prorogue Parliament, when the legislature had completed most of its business. Last time Harper prorogued Parliament, he was facing a vote of nonconfidence. Such misuse of a standard Parliamentary tool was last seen in 1873, when Sir John A. Macdonald prorogued Parliament to halt investigation into his part in the Pacific Scandal, over which he resigned.

[pinkshirted]

I am totally for real... Let's see, Harper basically canned the Women's Bill Of Rights, he pretended that Canada was in fine financial shape when the recession started, and he is cutting funding left, right, and centre for the arts because he claims that 'normal' Canadians don't care about art and culture. What is culture then harper? Wearing a sweatervest? He is also ignoring climate change. Also, he is pretending to be all buddy-buddy with Obama, even though Obama doesn't like him.

[Robotman42]

Trudeau has done far worse things. Don't believe me? Look at our justice system. (and "justice system" is merely a commonly accepted euphemism, by the way)

[pinkshirted]

I think there are more important things than our justice system. And if Harper was any good, he would have fixed the so-called problem.

[pinkshirted]

but Robotman, your piano is pretty sweet.

[Robotman42]

Oh, the pianos in my videos aren't mine.  If you mean my playing, thanks but talent is God-given.

[pinkshirted]

im talking about your playing

[tyler17719]

And each and every government thereafter that didn't remedy the situation is free from all their lack of attention, correction, and action?

While mistakes may have been made in the past (whether you deem this a mistake or not), the fact is that we can't ride that in infinitum.

If subsequent governments didn't fix the problems we're having, they can't blame events that occurred decades ago

[SummonHeather]

Actually, regarding arts and cuture funding, it's the highest it's ever been - the Conservatives have been careful to increase funding. The misinformation came out because two programs were not continued because the civil service recommended that they not, because they weren't meeting objectives.

[pinkshirted]

Are you crazy? Both my parents are writers and I think they know a thing or two more than you about the arts. That's right, I am 14 and debating with an adult.

[pinkshirted]

And whoever thumbs-downed my comment obviously is not sophisticated and doesn't care about the arts or my parent's well-being.

[pinkshirted]

And now proroguing parliament? Sure, other PMs did it, but I still think it is an act of fear and cowardice. Look at the polls!

[SummonHeather]

Well, at least you don't like this parliamentary tool in general, and you're even-handed about that.

I think the polls reflect the effectiveness of the Liberal attack ads on the subject - their ads do imply that a prorogue is a bad thing. (Hypocritical, because they prorogue too.)

[pinkshirted]

@SummonHeather The Liberals can't prorogue, since that joker Harper is in power.

[Robotman42]

Copenhagen and lying about the recession aside, how (or what) did Harper screw up?

[pinkshirted]

Just read my reply to SummonHeather

[lewert]

Your facts are both wrong and incomplete. But then that's not unusual for a suppporter of Harper, is it?

[SummonHeather]

Which facts, Lewert? I would say that your facts are wrong, which is very common for the usual uninformed supporter of the opposition. Which facts? Or, are you too afraid to lose the argument, again.

[lewert]

Actually, I'm not particularly interested in what "you would say" because your lack of civility and respect for Canadian taxpayers. And I don't argue with children...especially those that stamp their feet and repeat themselves at length.

[SummonHeather]

And regarding taxpayers and voters - most of them, before this media blitz, didn't even know what a prorogue was. Um, so how would they then be experts? Parliamentary rules of order are insanely difficult for the average person - so much so that they don't even cover much of this in civics class in school. In fact, the average voter and taxpayer doesn't even know the difference between the responsibilities of the different levels of government, one of the most basic things to understand.

[lewert]

Your opinion of the average taxpayer and voters is almost as insulting as Stephen Harper's. The one thing we all DO understand is when someone insults our intelligence by assuming we're too apathetic and sheeplike to insist our elected officials be accountable to us. Or is that too complicated for you to understand?

[SummonHeather]

I know about what I speak. How many doors have you knocked on to find out what people think? I have canvassed in elections for many, many years. I have done it since I was a kid. I cannot tell you how many people have thought garbage was a federal issue. How many doors have you knocked on? Or is that too complicated for you to understand? Or are you too arrogant to question yourself?

[SummonHeather]

Lewert, one more thing. The prorogue is not really as simple as the debates ending. Every parliament has a number. Items are "tabled" onto the kind of "agenda" of that parliament. If there are items that are still left over, then when a parliament prorogues, those things are dropped and have to be re-introduced, re-tabled, on the next parliament.

[lewert]

That is why Harper's premature proroguing of Paliament BEFORE the government had got through most of its legislative business means that a significant amount of time and effort on the part of our elected officials has been wasted. Parliament still had 36 government bills before it; when Parliament does reconvene, those bills will have to start from scratch. All because Harper was afraid of answering questions about what his government knew about Afghan detainees.

[lewert]

Any bimbo can know on doors and canvass voters for elections: it's standard procedure for most election campaigns and does not require any knowledge about parliamentary procedure or indeed about anything.

[SummonHeather]

Yes, but it does give one a really good picture, sometimes, of how few details many voters understand. Not all, of course - many voters are very interested and up on the issues. I think a lot of people don't vote because they don't feel strongly one way or another.  Of course, others are apathetic. It is disappointing that just under 59% of eligible voters voted at the last federal election.

[tyler17719]

After rapidly successive elections where most people felt they knew the result (nothing), it's not surprising to have voter turnout dip considerably. Although it's less of a dip and more of a trend, which begs the question as to why we're looking at turnout on an election to election basis, rather than looking at the root.

It's not hypocritical unless you subscribe to the notion that current governments = their past. Something I'm sure not many would want to do (too many past mistakes)

[SummonHeather]

When I vote, I do look at general trends. I do look at what was done in the past to see if it was close to what the election platform was. If it was close, for the majority of items, then I have a good idea of what to expect. 

Of course, I also decide how to vote based on whether I think the platforms are a good idea.

Then, of course, if I'm looking at an incumbent government, I also look at what they've accomplished that arose outside of was in the platform.

[SummonHeather]

I really believe that people have a personal responsibility to vote. If they're not voting, then that is obviously not a good thing for our democracy. Many have studied and written about the root causes. Many of us who go door to door talk to people who say they don't plan to vote and we hear many answers. Turnout is just an indicator of the problem, of course, but it is a measurement. We don't stop there, of course.

[SummonHeather]

How do we judge anyone? Do we not judge them by their accomplishments as well as their intent?

[pinkshirted]

Basically everything. They should do everything different. Or better yet, let the Liberals or someone with more competence change the government.

[SummonHeather]

Wow. Bimbo. So volunteers giving up their time to facilitate the democratic process are bimbos. Wow. And you think that Harper has a disrespect for voters and democracy.