The Balls-i-ness of my Adversary

Upon seeing rumoured story on http://www.bourque.com/ about decision to cut Pol Part Subsidies,

I teased my politically-wired Daily Digest friend with the comment:
"fabulous rumour"

Joe replied,

"For why (unless you are a Harperite)? "


Today we know what was only rumoured yesterday

1) Harper-ite? - God Forbid. but I am beginning to admire his 'balls-i-ness'

-Breaks his 'election dates' promise and calls an early election because his insider info told him he'd have to 'wear' the monetary collapse if waited any longer

-called that election knowing, knowing, knowing he needed to grab some/most of Bloc's seats in quebec to go majority and knowing that was not likely

-asks for HUGELY POPULAR cuts from civil service, MP's ottawa-perks, top managers (who figured they were blissfully above this little hiccough among the plebes )and asks for prudence and frugality from parties by cutting the subsidy - also public popular, but so under-the-radar that the prime beneficiaries were sure it was an untouchable or at least a not-to-be-touched-nudge-nudge -- see Bloc & Green below

-DEFIES the opposition idiots to defeat his measures (non-confidence) and doesn't care if they do because:
a) it's an election that he can ONLY do better in "firm hand on tiller" "devil we know" etc"
b) the GG doesn't grant dissolution and a cobbled-together mishmash fails in 2-6 months - he sweeps back in a la Trudeau 1980
c) the big party opposition knuckles under citing 'extenuating fiscal, economic, monetary and personal-party" issues but gets concessions from Harper on a phased-out/phased-in electoral subsidy scheme for parties with 1-12-15 elected members



2)Because - the subsidy is a B*LLSH*T Chretien "permanent financing for big parties - without being beholden to big donors" policy of self-perpetuation.

I say parties can raise their own money AND only in writ periods should it be tax-creditable

The rest of the time parties can get money by doing something worth the public's payment. Failing that go away. And stop thinking/saying you perform a public service - it's all self-promotion.

The power of the party machine has:
1) destroyed the importance of MP's in the House - they think they'll never get elected w/o the party machine - so they better toe the line in the House
2) destroyed the Senate - only/mainly only partisan hacks populate the other place - most unqualifed to sit there if we ever adjusted-for-inflation the 1867 property ownership and net-worth qualifications/disqualifucation standard of $4000

3) isn't that enough to object to? wouldn't you prefer 308 thinkers bringing their constituents views forward? sort of like the original intention 1867?


From Kelly McParland. NatPost in the most recent DD
Stephen Harper Evil Genius

"Elizabeth May gave him no end of annoyance in the last election, sitting directly beside him at the debates while delivering insults. A party that's never elected a single member dictating to the Tory leader where he went wrong. Let's see how insulting she is when she can barely afford train fare to Ottawa. And the Bloc -- that might be the sweetest blow of all. The Bloc depends on public financing for almost 80% of its income. Here's a party that has spent 20 years in Ottawa lecturing Canadians on how unworthy they are to host a province as incomparable as Quebec, and which survives only thanks to the income from taxes paid by those same unfathomably tolerant Canadians. "

"But more critical is the question of how much voters are likely to care. Party funding is hardly a galvanizing concern. "