Dec 03 2008

Globe & Post: Twittering Debate On the Crisis In Canadian Democracy

Published by at 3:47 pm under canadian politics,Globe and Post

At the risk of furthering a cliche, the blogosphere and social networks are all a-Twitter about the crisis in Canadian politics. What follows is a conversation on Twitter between me, fellow Vancouver-based geek Greg Andrews and blog-prolific Raul, with a quick message from Mr. Rally for Canada Stephen Taylor (and yes, I am going to the rally this weekend, along with a certain someone who didn’t vote Conservative in the last election, but who thinks Dion and the gang that couldn’t shoot straight are a bunch of dimwits). Enjoy.

The Adventures of a Bunch of Canadians Musing on Twitter about Harper and the Conservatives vs. the Unholy Alliance of the Liberals, NDP and the Bloc Quebecois

hummingbird604 My take on the demise of the Conservative government. Feel free to chime in. http://tinyurl.com/6xslwg 36 minutes ago from twhirl

GregEh @hummingbird604 Very right on Conservatives and fear. Even now, their only arguments against the coalition are fear. 34 minutes ago from twitterrific in reply to hummingbird604

GregEh Harper: “Dion does not have the right to take power without an election” is not an accurate statement about the Canadian Constitution 27 minutes ago from twitterrific

jnarvey @GregEh @hummingbird604 In this case, fear is warranted. Who wants a Canadian government with veto power by socialists and separatists? 25 minutes ago from web in reply to GregEh

jnarvey @GregEh Quite true, it’s legal. But do you not see something wrong with a guy utterly rejected by the voters of Canada becoming PM? 23 minutes ago from web in reply to GregEh

hummingbird604 Chime in on my “Harper and fear-mongering” post while I take a (much deserved and needed) nap. I was awake at 4 am! http://is.gd/a531 21 minutes ago from twhirl

stephen_taylor Overwhelmed by the number of people supporting our rallies. #canadarally 21 minutes ago from TwitterBerry

GregEh @jnarvey *waves hand* I do, I do! 19 minutes ago from twitterrific in reply to jnarvey

GregEh @jnarvey I didn’t vote for a PM, I voted for an MP. 18 minutes ago from twitterrific in reply to jnarvey

jnarvey @stephen_taylor Good to hear it. I’ll be in the crowd this weekend. 15 minutes ago from web in reply to stephen_taylor

hummingbird604 NEW BLOG POST Canada’s coalition government and the demise of the Harper government http://is.gd/a55u 15 minutes ago from twitterfeed

jnarvey @GregEh Fair enough. I expect most people in the country voted along party lines or for the leader, as usual. 13 minutes ago from web in reply to GregEh

GregEh This coalition drama reflects the desperate need for a better electoral system that won’t mangle the will of the people. http://stv.ca 12 minutes ago from twitterrific

jnarvey @GregEh I’m tempted to agree. I’m also afraid of throwing out the good with the bad. 10 minutes ago from web in reply to GregEh

jnarvey @GregEh Frankly, I think we ought to ban the Bloc and see all those votes go to a federal party. That might help. 9 minutes ago from web in reply to GregEh

jnarvey @GregEh There’s really no reason Canadian taxpayers outside Quebec should be funding a regional separatist movement. 8 minutes ago from web in reply to GregEh

GregEh @jnarvey yeah, I was never a fan of taxpayer funding any of the parties in the first place. 5 minutes ago from twitterrific in reply to jnarvey

jnarvey @GregEh Agreed. It’s a bad idea to give people money so they can pay for services to persuade us why we should give them money — and votes less than a minute ago from web in reply to GregEh

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

3 responses so far

3 Responses to “Globe & Post: Twittering Debate On the Crisis In Canadian Democracy”

  1. Earnest Canuckon 03 Dec 2008 at 11:39 pm

    I use the Jitter.com messaging service myself, boys, cos Jittering allows 16 typos per post. Sure, the Jitter architecture is shaky; but you gotta use the software appropriate to the times.

    This squabble is nervous-making mostly *because* of the times. Yeah, it’s legal and by the book. It’s deal-making, which is always unpalateable, but doesn’t normally constitute a “crisis”.

    But against the backdrop of a certain economic kerfuffle — the “Chaotic Unwinding” they’re calling it, maybe you’ve heard? — it’s a waking nightmare. Her Majesty’s Partly Loyal Opposition is *already* impoverishing the people, lunging for the wheel at a time like this, and it’s only gonna get worse.

    And then we’ll be back to the polls in months anyway, where the BQLPCNDP will be trounced, those *idiots*.

    And all this over their pogey cheques! Over the taxpayer lolly the factions suck up in lieu of raising support — but raising support is what parties *do*, by definition, innit?

    I strenuously oppose any subsidy to her Maj.’s Occasionally Loyal Oppo, and to any political party ever, because parties that take government boodle literally *cease to be parties*. From potentially valuable (if aconstitutional) *citizen* and *volunteer* associations, free money transforms parties like le NDPBQLPC into indistinguishable packs of welfare bums.

    Who’ll do *anything* — vandalize the state, disturb the Queen’s peace, knock the TSX into the crapper — to keep those cheques flowing. Obviously.

    Man, I get madder the more I think about this. Some math: $28, 000, 000 divided by the averageish annual wage of let’s say $40,000 = 700 Canadians who worked a full year to tip swill into a sty full of Bloquistes, Dippers and Grits who know damn well they are meant to earn their livings, and would if they had any honour. 700 real people!

    (I always find this a useful way to think about “measly” government expenditures. “Small” programme funding, ya know, “minor” budget items? The money involved is not at all trivial, to the men and women who have to earn it).

    OK, whoops, metaphors gettin’ extravagant; time to retire. I will say I feel duty-bound to oppose this. Terry Glavin is a bit peppier on the matter:

    http://transmontanus.blogspot.com/

    Thanks for the chatter, Twitterers.

    Cheers,
    EC.

  2. nancy (aka money coach)on 06 Dec 2008 at 9:35 pm

    Jonathon – there *has* to be a part of you that acknowledges that the opportunism Harper displayed in trying to un-fund all his opponents deserved a severe backlash, non?

  3. jnarveyon 06 Dec 2008 at 10:23 pm

    Hey Nancy. There is, indeed. I have no desire to be known as the blogger who can out-Harper Harper. The PM bungled this one big time.

    But I’ll reiterate that the opposition ought to get the lion’s share of the blame for our current crisis. Since they weren’t willing to compromise an inch after Harper made his concessions on the offending proposals, they showed themselves unwilling to make this parliament work.

    It will take goodwill from both sides to make our system work.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply