I get it now. Stephen Harper really has employed a devious strategy in his attempt to reform the Senate.
Since becoming a Senator, Mike Duffy has already managed to demonstrate contempt for the institution of which he is now a member and for the taxpayers who now pay his generous salary. By spouting offensive crap and using his new soapbox for purely partisan purposes he'll surely convince us all that the Senate desperately needs to be reformed or abolished so that, if for no other reason, at least Duffy will lose access to the microphone.
It's a brilliant maneuver, isn't it? And the Duffster certainly deserves our respect for being willing to lay his reputation on the line and make himself look like a contemptible buffoon for the cause.
Duffy has certainly convinced me. I'm a Dipper who has long resisted the party's policy that the Senate should simply be abolished, but Duffy, Brazeau, Eaton, etc have pretty much overcome my resistance.
I'm open to arguments about why we might need a second house. My first thought is that it should be the House of the Editors -- you know, the people who actually read every word of the bills that get sent to them, as MPs seem not to do.
"willing to lay his reputation on the line"
that's so rich!
i like the senate quite a bit and it has served nobly as the house of editors. and that is exactly why we need them, more now than ever. had it not been for the senate during the last sessions some pretty regressive and retrograde con scat would now be law. it was the senate that sat down and actually looked over the con's big omnibus and sent it back to the commons with notes from the adults. that is also why it is important that their terms not be limited too drastically and that they remain appointed rather than elected. that way they are isolated from the worst of partisan deal making as they are not beholden to the party, lobbyists or business for campaign finances. they are at liberty to tell the truth, even if it sometimes a message that is unwelcome, without fear of the electorate or donors.
harper chose to vet his dozen and a half new senators not by their accomplishments, wisdom and experience but rather he set a standard of loyalty to his party and to his policy of senate reform. his picks are a conservative clusterfuck bomb. funny thing is, given recent history on the right, there might not even be a steve harper's conservative party to remain loyal to. the progressive conservatives still exist provincially and i would be shocked if there weren't a lot of thoughtful conservative voters wishing there were an alternative to the clown show that harper has delivered on the national and international stage.
not to forget that the constituency that put harper in the hall of self portraits feels left behind because there aren't even public lashings for brazen women or faith based prisons for teen agers caught bathing with the lights on and without modesty garments to cover their shame parts. having spent such effort building the party on the image of the leader and given that the cpc has never had another leader, when steve goes down there will be no glue left to keep the fractures from coming undone. the centre doesn't trust him and the zealots feel betrayed on their social issues agenda. will the conservative party of canada as currently constituted survive to have a second leader? slim pickins.
...his picks are a conservative clusterfuck bomb.
That's for certain. Having worked on writing and shepherding a piece of legislation through two Houses, I discovered a profound respect for the Senate and the role they play. They do their homework on the issues, examine a bill line by line, and invite Canadians to express their views on legislation. They don't speak from Party talking points like MPs do in the HoC.
Harper has made a mockery of Parliamentary procedure and has twisted public perception of how our system works just to attack his adversaries. His en masse appointments to the Senate are an insult to our intelligence and an injury to whatever credibility the Senate had.
had it not been for the senate during the last sessions some pretty regressive and retrograde con scat would now be law
And here's hoping some of them continue to pay attention. I read this morning that the budget implementation bill is 551 pages. Since Ignatieff has already instructed the other 76 probation officers to vote in favour of it and the Conservatives do what they're told, I somehow doubt that many MPs will sit and read it line for line. I would hope the Dippers will but they've missed a lot in recent years, too.
"probation officers" -- lol. May I steal that at will?
Absolutely.
Check DAMMIT JANET FOR A PIC OF WHAT MAY BE ONE OF OUR NEW SENATORS
I believe you're referring to this.
Indulge me for a bit, ... who the fuck is Mike Duffy?
Yes, he's this unattractive little round fellow who works for CTV and is evidently a harpercon.
But who is he? What the fuck did he ever do? He's been around forever and I don't understand it. Did he have some talent at some point?