October 18, 2005

NDP = Hypocrites

The claws are out. NDP MP Bev Desjarlais lost her nomination for the Manitoba riding of Churchill. I have never seen anything more outrageous outside of Hamilton in my life. I won’t lie to anyone, the Liberals have had their outrageous nominations as well, but the least I can say is nobody was thrown out for what they believed in.

I don’t decide what goes on in the House but I believe the Liberals are better off fighting an election than taking orders from a bunch of hypocrites. Before gays and lesbians fought for the right to marry, blood was shed for the cause of having a freely-elected parliament that could freely express its opinion. The rights of freedom of expression are what same-sex marriage is all about. Gays and Lesbians want the right to express their love for each other in matrimony. It’s also about equality of the person, something we Liberals happen to know enough about.

The difference between the Liberals and the NDP is that we hold equality of the person JUST AS HIGHLY as freedom of expression. The NDP have shown themselves to be dogmatic, and willing to hold a government hostage to meet their demands. Blackmail is the only way they can ever have a role in Canadian government and we all know what happens when the NDP gains power….we have seen the results.

I think the Liberals should tell the NDP they don’t negotiate with people who blackmail them and if the NDP brings us down they will have to justify to the population how blackmail is effective parliamentary strategy.

3 Commentaires:

Blogger Mike a dit...

" but the least I can say is nobody was thrown out for what they believed in."

Bev Desjarlais lost her nomination to a very qualified young candidate. It was a decision at the local riding association level. Unlike the Liberals, that's how the NDP works - our local riding association nominated candidates, they aren't 'okayed' or dropped in by the national office.

Yes, its a hard concept to follow, but it is called democracy.

"The difference between the Liberals and the NDP is that we hold equality of the person JUST AS HIGHLY as freedom of expression."

Which is why cabinet ministers had to vote for it, despite their personal feelings. Right.

I don't know why Bev lost in Churchill. You'll have to ask the people in the Churchill riding association. When she violated party discipline, she was punished by losing her critic portfolio. That was it, that was the punishment for voting against the party. I realize that not holding a vendetta and seeking revenge is a foriegn concept for some Liberals but that is really it. I would have guessed that after the next election, had she won her nomination, she would have gotten it back, since SSM would have been history. Has the Liberal party never punished a member for not following the party line? You know, Carolyn Parrish perhaps? Sheila Copps?

You are assuming that she was booted from the party because of her vote on SSM last spring, because that's what the Liberals and the Conservatives would do. Guess what, the NDP aren't the Liberals and we do things a little differently and democratically. And we accept the consequences of that policy even when we don't like them. Bev lost at the local level, not with the direction of the national office. If you have evidence to the contrary, present it, otherwise you are simply engaging in unfounded attacks and hyperbole that is more along the lines that the CPC would engage in rather than the Liberals.

"The NDP have shown themselves to be dogmatic, and willing to hold a government hostage to meet their demands."

Well, Paul Martin could have taken his chances and gone to the polls. Jack Layton made an offer and Paul Martin took him up on it. That sound like negotiations, not blackmail. But by all means, run on with the idea that you were blackmailed - that you were so weak and desparate to cling to power at any costs that you would do or say anything to prop yourselves up, even if you didn't agree with it. That will garrantee the CPC wins the next election.

"the NDP brings us down they will have to justify to the population how blackmail is effective parliamentary strategy."

Well, with $4.5 billion in extra spending to cities and post-secondary education, creating thousands of contruction jobs alone, it won't be hard at all. In case you missed it, the budget became MORE popular with Canadians (and the Mayors of most cities) after the NDP amendments, than before. You remember the budget before, when it was a "Conservative budget" according to Steven Harper?

Now which budget would you rather run on?

I have spent a great deal of time defending the Liberals on occasion from unwarranted, hyperbole-filled rant attacks from the CPC supporters out there. And then to get this kind of treatment from a Liberal? Wow, the NDP must really be a threat for you to go ovber the top like this...

10/18/2005 1:41 PM  
Blogger Antonio a dit...

The Liberals changed their constitution to state one cannot run against a sitting MP because once an MP wins the eat they have to worry about Parliament and their constituency and hardly have to fight to stave off challengers. The lack of support from the NDP leader after the vote and before the nomination shows how far the NDP is willing to go to ensure their dogma is more important than the opinions of their MPs.

As for Cabinet, solidarity is necessary because a vote by a government minister against the government is a vote of non-cofidence in the cabinet itself. British Parliementary tradition is quite clear.

The 4.6 billion dollars was negotiatied and then released, and it agreed with Liberal values, so the Liberals voted for it...but now a "Support this or else..." attitude is anti-democratic, anti-Canadian and attempt to blackmail the Liberal Government.

I would rather face an election than put up with this nonsense.

10/18/2005 2:44 PM  
Anonymous Matt a dit...

"The 50-year-old MP blames party officials for her loss. She says the NDP wanted her out because she was the only caucus member to vote against the government's same-sex marriage bill, which the party supports."
-CBC News

I just wanted to be clear that there is somebody out there - besides a Liberal - who believes that she lost the nomination because of the NDP's "higher ups," and that is the MP herself.

So Mike, your claim that the NDP's national office is the defender of local democracy is fallcious at best, dangerously ignorant at worst. If you are able to delude yourself into believing that the national headquarters of a party wields no influence in a nomination battle of one their 17 MPs then you are definitely in the right party.

10/18/2005 4:25 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home