The clown car is on fire! Again! Everybody run!

[theweaselking]

Canada's Interim Placeholder Government MPs are once again demonstrating why *they're forbidden to speak, ever* by the party administration:

Tory MPs are denying they ever planned to watch the film "Young People F**king" even though several of their names appeared on an RSVP list for an Ottawa viewing Thursday night.

An assistant to MP Gary Goodyear from Cambridge, Ont. was fired after Goodyear's name showed up on the screening guest list. She had in fact ordered the ticket for herself.

"I do not want to see his reputation harmed over something so trivial and untrue," wrote Victoria van Eyk in a clarifying e-mail early Tuesday to The Canadian Press.

Tory MPs Patrick Brown, James Lunney and Carol Skelton also say their names were listed in error and they have no plans to see the film. Assistants in the offices of Brown and Lunney denied even ordering tickets and said their bosses were otherwise busy.

Skelton said she authorized a staff member to attend since she has to be in Saskatoon on Friday to give a speech.

"I kind of laughed," she said of seeing her name on the RSVP list. "I said: 'Oh yeah, I'm going to be in the air and everybody thinks I'm going to be at a movie."'

Skelton was nonplussed to learn of the dismissal in Goodyear's office. "A staffer has been fired?" She has no problem with her own assistant's attendance, she said. "You know, this is a free country."

Newsflash, dumbasses. This is CANADA. I know you're hicks, bigots, and terrified of "those urges" you've been getting since you started growing all that extra hair on your nasty, unclean bodies, but not everyone is as embarassed as you, and we certainly don't give a shit about your sex lives, let alone whether or not you watch a documentary about Canadian culture.

Sheesh.

(There's a reason I say that, in Canadian elections, your choices are Separatist, Socialist, National Socialist, or Liberal. And, historically, someone else only gets in when the Liberals are being punished for taking their "the only not-totally-stupid party" position for granted, and are made to sit down and be quiet for a few years)

Comments

[kadath.livejournal.com]

Your politicians' idiotic bullshit is cute and almost endearing when compared to our politicians' idiotic bullshit.

[mightycodking.livejournal.com]

You can also now vote for Tree.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

Ah, yes. "Vote Green! We may, possibly, eventually, SOMEDAY get a single MP!"

[squizzlzilla.livejournal.com]

national socialist ?

[squizzlzilla.livejournal.com]

wow, there actually is a national socialist party of canada.
I'm surprised they aren't worried about being confused with that other national socialist party

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

The CPC, formerly the Canadian Alliance party, formerly the CRAP (no, really! That was their name!), formerly the Reform Party.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

There are dozens of minor third parties in Canada, including just about anything you can think of. And the National Socialist Party Of Canada aren't *worried* about being confused with Nazis, they *are* Nazis.

However, when I refer to your four choices in Canada, I am referring to the Bloc Quebecois, the New Democrats, the Conservatives, and the Liberals, which are the only four parties who actually matter, being the only four parties who get seats in the House.

[opaqueplanet.livejournal.com]

Much as I dislike Carol Skelton (I'm from Saskatoon and was in her riding last year), I must say her response was a pleasant surprise.

[matgb]

a documentary about Canadian culture

Fairly short I'd imagine?

*ducks*

The mind boggles how you guys still get by on Simple Majority with your party system, I'd have thought especially after 1993 that someone would have turned around and pointed out that four party systems really do need to use the Irish electoral system.

But, y'know, not my country. Fun to watch though.

[jerril]

I'm not sure how we do it either, other than the fact that Canadians generally just vote for the Liberals. Every now and then we throw them out, because if you let them take root for too long they get too comfortable and start forming elaborate, poorly planned schemes to get money to their friends, rather than the usual simple schemes to get money to their friends.

It's like brushing your teeth. You're never going to stop the plaque forming on your teeth, but if you disrupt it every 12 hours or so, you stop it from getting wildly out of control.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

It's not that complicated. Anything other than simple majority would require that:

A) the people who win with simple majority *want to change it*
and
B) that Canadians be willing to give up *actual* control of the government to someone other than the Liberals. And given the unmitigated disaster that all the non-Liberal governments, provincial and national, in the last 25 years have been? Nobody wants to take the chance of a "Doris" Day or Mike Harris or Bob Rae running the country *with a majority*.

[matgb]

Every now and then we throw them out, because if you let them take root for too long they get too comfortable and start forming elaborate, poorly planned schemes to get money to their friends, rather than the usual simple schemes to get money to their friends.

Oh, absolutely, without occasional removals from office, pretty much any Govt becomes corrupt, so it's important to give the other guys a turn every so often (although explaining this to some of my anti-Tory Left friends is hard work at times, the electorate get it).

Of course, the way the Spanish did it might be considered a little extreme...

[matgb]

A) is the biggets problem, always, not helped by the regional grouping nature of some of the parties.

But B)?

FPTP makes it more likely you get minority govts, a decent system means any party has to actually get the majority of the vote across the country to win power (I could quote Goebbels on the subject but it's an internet discussion, even relevent points invoke Godwin, right?)

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

Godwin's Law is about *inevitability*. All usefulness discussions are secondary.

But yeah. Changing the current system leads to the possibility that the NDP + Bloc could win enough to run the country without the CPC, or the Bloc + CPC without the NDP. As it is now, the only possible governments are
A) Liberal
B) Liberal + (CPC or Bloc)
C) CPC + Bloc + NDP

In A, the sane party gets sane things done.
In B, the sane party needs only to convince ONE of the insane parties to get sane things done.
In C *all three diametrically opposed insane parties must agree* in order to overrule the sane party and do insane things, even if the sane party can't necessarily get sane things done.

We're in C, at the moment, because every decade or so the Liberals get cocky about A and B.

[sivi-volk.livejournal.com]

I'm actually willing to accept a certain degree of graft and corruption from the Liberals. I'm not happy about it, but it's going to happen anyways and it's better than the crazy shit the Conservatives get up to.

[opaqueplanet.livejournal.com]

seconded. From a purely financial standpoint, combine all the recent (ie. past 30 years) Liberal scandals and pork-barrelling, and they still come out wasting less money than the Conservative/PC/whatever governments. Mulroney implemented GST, cut social programs and spending, and STILL ended up with our hugest deficit ever. That takes some kind of skill.

Then we can get into the actual laws and policies that the two parties enact, and it becomes even more clear who has their head on straight.

[anton-p-nym.livejournal.com]

The mind boggles how you guys still get by on Simple Majority with your party system, I'd have thought especially after 1993 that someone would have turned around and pointed out that four party systems really do need to use the Irish electoral system.

Heh. In the provincial election in Ontario last October there was a plebecite on whether to change from "first past the post" to a "Mixed Member Proportional" electoral system. It was voted down by a super-majority... the proponents of the move did a lousy job of promoting the benefits of complicating the ballot.

-- Steve'll point out that the current/ancient system makes elections decisive while still being quickly, accurately, and verifiably tabulated, though perhaps the latter wouldn't hold if the population was much higher.

[matgb]

Aye, followed that one a bit—MMP isn't a brilliant system anyway (too complicated for less gain) and it was badly sold. I much prefer STV, fairly simple to sell, proven effectiveness, works in small and large countries and has Wetsminster System precedence.

It's still better than FPTP, but not better enough for people to vote for a change unless they really want it.

system makes elections decisive

Which is fine until it's decisive with the wrong result, which in a fractured party system is fairly likely.

[sparkindarkness.livejournal.com]

Sweet gods how can any adult be so utterly terrified of being associated with sex?