This is Janet Neilson's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Janet Neilson's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Janet Neilson
Recent Activity
People keep seeing this sort of thing from Martin and asking why he ever left the Canadian Alliance/Conservatives. I feel comfortable saying he would likely not be allowed to speak out on any of these issues if he were still with the Tories.
1 reply
Good thing all those Conservatives worked so hard for so long to get P-203 passed.
1 reply
I am trying to figure out what on Earth publishing this is supposed to accomplish. The fact that it should be legal for the kid to write whatever he wants doesn't mean that he's entitled to be published somewhere. The Standard can oppose the CHRC without publishing everything that would provoke a CHRC complaint. Frankly, I find the article offensive.
1 reply
What so many people are overlooking is that the whole idea behind this coalition is to take the decision making process away from ALL citizens in this country and concentrate it in the hands of a very few. Posted by: Dennnis Wharton | 9-Dec-08 10:06:51 AM D-e-triple-n-is: That's the general idea behind all governments that do things in any way other than referendum. Also: mandate ≠ proper noun.
1 reply
Shane: Easy, killer. All I said was that they were elected. They were. Not only that, they were sworn in and everything! The whole argument here is whether the coalition would be democratic (it would), elected (they are - we elect representatives and not parties. if you want to move to PR and vote for parties I'm cool with it.) and constitutional (it's also that). If the argument is "are Canadians comfortable with the coalition idea?" or "would this particular coalition be good for Canada?" then the answer to either would be no - but those weren't the questions at hand here.
1 reply
To address the more general concern, a video would have to say "public schools suck, so I want to be able to take my kid out of them and send her to a private school, with tax money paying the bill." That is just an argument that a lot of people will resist, no matter how many Lexi's are out there. Posted by: Fact Check | 9-Dec-08 10:38:55 AM Most parents would likely keep their kids in the public school system given the choice. There isn't a general perception that public schools suck (some of them do, but many of them don't) and so that argument would be not only too broad to be accurate but also ineffective. It's certainly not "the general concern." Assuming that one school system will meet the needs of all different children is silly. The fact that it's also the general feeling when it comes to education is the real issue that we need to address. We can (and should) start by working on the really obvious cases like this one, and after move on to other, less drastic cases.
Toggle Commented Dec 10, 2008 on Why school choice? at The Shotgun
1 reply
It's interesting, but only as a curiosity as long as a majority of the House opposes it. It's not a ballot issue for voters, but it's a do-or-die one for politicians.
1 reply
Rocky, you piqued my interest, so I asked someone who knows more than me. Here's what she had to say: "The GG could not deny the coalition the keys to government on the basis that the separatists aren't loyal to Her Majesty as in order to be sworn-in as Members of Parliament, they have to swear an Oath to Her Majesty and her legal Heirs and Successors. Therefore, the GG would have to take them at their oath." Apparently, that's how much more simple it can get. Thanks for askin'!
1 reply
Were I a Conservative, I would probably qualify the willingness of Ontario voters to consider becoming "true blue" Conservatives more important than their willingness to tell a pollster. Talk is cheap, baby!
1 reply
So all the BS put out by the anti-Harper political twits have omitted the fact that the GG cannot, under any circumstance, take the power of govt away from the legitimate, duly elected, sitting govt, which is only 12 seats short of a majority, and give it to the unstable, temporary Koolaid Koalition which has as a member, a political party dedicated to the breakup of Canada. Posted by: Rocky Thompson | 4-Dec-08 7:38:35 AM This paragraph completely ignores the Canadian Constitution. You can disagree with it if you'd like (lots of people do), but if you're just talking about what the rules are, it's pretty clear that the opposition can take power if a minority government loses the confidence of the House. They would be able to do it if they were even one seat short of a majority. (Assuming floor crossings didn't happen first.) You could argue that if we were to follow the letter of the law the GG would have reason to reject anything involving the separatists, but by precedent we're talking about a party that was Her Majesty's Official Opposition back when they were a lot more serious about seperation. Jean might be able to use the fact that seperatists would break up the country as reasoning to call an election rather than allowing the coalition government but whether or not she would is up in the air for good reason. On a related note, please stop putting "K" where it doesn't belong. If you could also refrain from using "LIEberals" (yawn) as an alternative, that would be cool, too.
1 reply
I have to agree with the folks here who say that this does not amount to an endorsement of Harper or the Conservatives. Neither does he have to cross the floor to hold this opinion; he merely has to cast his vote the way he sees fit.
1 reply
This: >>"I'm told that (Bloc Quebecois Leader) Gilles Duceppe ran into Mr. Dion in the elevator and asked 'What the hell happened?' and Mr. Dion said, 'We're not used to being in opposition," Fife said.<< is disgusting.
1 reply
A dark day for democracy. Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 30-Nov-08 9:08:57 PM Canada's a parliamentary democracy, which is not at all the same as a straight one. It's fine if you disagree with the whole system, but most seem to only disagree with it when it doesn't go the way they'd like it to. Further, (and in spite of the fact that I think the only thing that this past election established was that Canadians overwhelmingly rejected the idea of Stephane Dion as PM) two groups representing more of the popular vote than the Conservatives forming government hardly seems like a dark day for democracy, but rather like a bright one. This is why democracy is the best of a bad lot, and not some higher ideal that ought to be defended at all times.
Toggle Commented Dec 1, 2008 on Liberal-NDP deal reached at The Shotgun
1 reply
Isn't it the Politically Incorrect Guide to Politics?
1 reply
If there was ever any doubt that Matthew Johnston is a Liberal Party of Canada sockpuppet, there isn't now. Posted by: Somewhat Amused | 27-Nov-08 4:26:50 AM PS, I'm more than somewhat amused (you see what I did there?) by the fact that suddenly eliminating laws brought in by the Grits makes fiscal conservatives into Liberal puppets. You should take this show on the road.
1 reply