Voting Conservative in Canada

Published by

Clarissa

March 22, 2013

I have to run, so I don’t have time to comment on this in depth but make sure you read this piece on the recent voting in Canada’s House of Commons:

The second, vote 631, was of tremendous direct importance to the entire country. The vote was to assert the government’s belief that scientific research is fundamental to sound public policy-making. Now, it’s not terribly surprising to me that this motion was defeated, since it was being used as a pretext to renew funding for a fresh water research laboratory in Northern Ontario which Harper, for some reason, seems hell-bent-for-leather on killing. But what really stood out to me on this one was how it broke down on partisan lines. When asked to stand-up for the principle that public policy should be informed by real world data, every single Tory MP said no.

Every. Single. One.

This is something that everyone should really bear in mind the next time a federal election rolls around.

If anybody can comment on this in any way, please do. I’ve let my understanding of Canadian politics slip for a while, so this complete and utter pig-headedness seems very confusing to me.

This is the text of the bill in question:

That, in the opinion of the House: (a) public science, basic research and the free and open exchange of scientific information are essential to evidence-based policy-making; (b) federal government scientists must be enabled to discuss openly their findings with their colleagues and the public; and (c) the federal government should maintain support for its basic scientific capacity across Canada, including immediately extending funding, until a new operator is found, to the world-renowned Experimental Lakes Area Research Facility to pursue its unique research program.

How can anybody with a brain – even a stupid little one – be against this? I mean, every single Tory? Why? They must have some reason. Does anybody know?

Rate this:

33 responses to “Voting Conservative in Canada”

Free Northerner

March 22, 2013

“But what really stood out to me on this one was how it broke down on partisan lines. When asked to stand-up for the principle that public policy should be informed by real world data, every single Tory MP said no.

Every. Single. One.”

Whoever wrote this is blisteringly ignorant of Canadian politics. Canadian parliament is a Westminster system; almost every vote (except a small minority of what are called “free votes”) in the Canada parliament falls along partisan lines. It is an exceedingly rare occurrence for someone to break party lines on any vote other that is not a free vote.

LikeLike

Reply
1. bloggerclarissa
  
  March 22, 2013
  
  This doesn’t realy clarify anything. Why are the Tories so opposed to something this reasonable?
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. David Gendron
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    Because their religious faggot Québec-hater base is opposed to this.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
  2. David Gendron
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    The religious faggotry mob is against science, so….
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
  3. David Gendron
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    The religious faggotry mob is against science and they vote/lobby/finance the con-serv-haters, so….
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
David Gendron

March 22, 2013

The religious faggot Québec-hater base of the CON-SERV-HATERS are against that, so Art-Peur asks his MPs to vote against a bill proposed by a NDP SOCIALIST ;).

LikeLike

Reply
1. David Gendron
  
  March 22, 2013
  
  As Free Northerner said, partisan lines are sticky in Canada.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
2. David Gendron
  
  March 22, 2013
  
  And even Art-Peur is not necessarily against this bill, but his religious faggot Québec-hater base is against that.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
thevenerablecorvex

March 22, 2013

“Whoever wrote this is blisteringly ignorant of Canadian politics. Canadian parliament is a Westminster system; almost every vote (except a small minority of what are called “free votes”) in the Canada parliament falls along partisan lines. It is an exceedingly rare occurrence for someone to break party lines on any vote other that is not a free vote.”

So…your defense is that Tory MPs couldn’t have opposed this because they’re all such cowards as to be unwilling to stand-up to their leader in support of what’s clearly best for the country.

I don’t think this defense is very good…

LikeLike

Reply
1. David Gendron
  
  March 22, 2013
  
  “So…your defense is that Tory MPs couldn’t have opposed this because they’re all such cowards as to be unwilling to stand-up to their leader in support of what’s clearly best for the country.”
  
  They’re not coward, they work for their personal interests.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. thevenerablecorvex
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    Not a glowing recommendation of any of them either way, really.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
  2. David Gendron
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    Of course.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
  3. David Gendron
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    @thevenerablecorvex
    
    Your post is very interesting. Even though I support the women’s right to have sex-segregated spaces, I’m against transgender discrimination.
    
    In this article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/transgendered-rights-bill-headed-for-defeat-in-tory-held-senate/article1902266/
    
    Some idiot said: “Bill C-389 is a danger to our children, If ‘gender identity’ is enshrined in the Criminal Code of Canada, any male at any time will be permitted in girls’ bathrooms, showers and change rooms as long as they have an ‘innate feeling’ of being female.”
    
    I do agree with some of his affirmation, of course, BUT this is not a justification to support ALL transgender discrimination. And as I pointed this week, it’s possible to have no transgender discrimination AND enforce sex-segregated spaces.
    
    Did Jacques Demers and Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu have voted against this bill?
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. bloggerclarissa
      
      March 22, 2013
      
      ” Even though I support the women’s right to have sex-segregated spaces’
      
      – Oh, now a ghetto is a right. Yip-dee-doo.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
    2. bloggerclarissa
      
      March 22, 2013
      
      All of these shared showers and change rooms are a barbarity that needs to go as soon as possible. Let’s stop pretending like the civilization will end without them. One reason why I stopped going to a fitness center that I actually liked (which is a miracle already) was because I felt extremely uncomfortable with all the naked people. I like my privacy and I really hate it when this forced form of intimacy is thrust upon me.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
    3. bloggerclarissa
      
      March 22, 2013
      
      “And as I pointed this week, it’s possible to have no transgender discrimination AND enforce sex-segregated spaces.”
      
      – Why would anybody want to enforce seraglios?
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
  4. David Gendron
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    A summary of my position on the “twanzphobia issue”.
    
    1) Women have the right to have sex-segregated spaces, like women sports, women schools, women bathrooms, women fitness centres, women prisons, women locker rooms, women changing rooms, women sororities, YWCAs and non-women should not invade these spaces.
    
    2) But I support wholeheartly the idea that we don’t need sex-segregated places, but women don’t seem to agree with me in general. I hope that someday, humans would have enough respect for themselves to not have those sex-segregated spaces anymore. But we’re not there now, unfortunately.
    
    Oh, and I agree that shared showers and shared changed rooms are a barbarity. This is horrendous.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
David Gendron

March 22, 2013

The main goal in a politician is to be re-elected.

LikeLike

Reply
David Gendron

March 22, 2013

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/02/19/pol-ambassdor-office-religious-freedom-announced.html

LikeLike

Reply
David Gendron

March 22, 2013

http://www.greenparty.ca/video/2012-09-14/scientists-rally-victoria-against-harper-conservatives-assault-science-environmenta

LikeLike

Reply
David Gendron

March 22, 2013

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2013/03/18/harper_governments_reckless_and_undemocratic_muzzling_of_scientists_editorial.html

LikeLike

Reply
BBJ

March 22, 2013

Speaking as a conservative intellectual, Harper is probably looking at the blatant liberal bias in academia and fears the perversion of science for liberal political purposes. (Global Warming, anyone?)

Secondly, we can no longer trust the product of the universities. Where we used to get trained critical thinkers, we are getting papered morons being taught by other papered morons today. They tend to be biggotted and intolerant progressives – and we have suffered at their hands long enough already.

Thirdly – at best this would just be pork for eastern d-bags and would come at the cost of the productive western provinces. It would likely divide the nation even more than it is now. Virtually the entire nation hates quebec with a passion, and 2/3rds of the nation hates Ontario as well. They are viewed with the same contempt that America views New York, Washington DC and Massehussets.

Hey – don’t get mad at me chickie….you asked.

LikeLike

Reply
1. bloggerclarissa
  
  March 22, 2013
  
  And this is what happens to people who were dropped on the head once too often in infancy.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
2. thevenerablecorvex
  
  March 22, 2013
  
  “conservative intellectual”
  
  I shall add this to my list of oxymorons.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. bloggerclarissa
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    In these past two days, I’m getting very disappointed with Canadians. I don’t remember this vicious anti-intellectual trend in Canada when I was still living there. Is this a contagious wind from across the border?
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. thevenerablecorvex
      
      March 22, 2013
      
      Harperites are always hilarious when they try to provide intellectual justification for the Leader’s policies.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
  2. David Gendron
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    Clarissa, Québec is not the Rest of Canada (ROC). The ROC (especially at the west of Toronto) is even rednecker than red states in USA.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
  3. David Gendron
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/story/2013/01/28/pei-abortion-policy-morgentaler-584.html
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
3. David Gendron
  
  March 22, 2013
  
  “blatant liberal bias in academia”
  
  What are you talking about?
  
  “fears the perversion of science for liberal political purposes. (Global Warming, anyone?)”
  
  This is not perversion of science, this is not science, this is liberal politics. The problem is not science, nor scientifics, it’s politicians. And con-serv-haters like you need the support of creationist religious faggots who are against science because science is against the creationist myth.
  
  “Secondly, we can no longer trust the product of the universities.”
  
  First, why do you say that? Second, I fear WAY MORE anti-intelligence ideologist retards who are very common in con-serv-hater circles than university academia.
  
  “Where we used to get trained critical thinkers, we are getting papered morons being taught by other papered morons today.”
  
  Critical thinkers are silenced by con-serv-haters who hate them frantically. They are very common in the universities today, but con-serv-haters don’t like them because they’re not in their ideologist mob gang.
  
  “They tend to be biggotted and intolerant progressives – and we have suffered at their hands long enough already.”
  
  Please name those bigoted progressives. And, yes, I have no problem when liberals are intolerant against religious faggotry and woman-hating sexist propaganda.
  
  “at best this would just be pork for eastern d-bags and would come at the cost of the productive western provinces.”
  
  So, why don’t you kick the Québec’s ass and let them separate?
  
  “It would likely divide the nation even more than it is now.”
  
  That’s exacty what Québec separatists want. That’s a good thing!
  
  “Virtually the entire nation hates quebec with a passion”
  
  This is almost the only intelligent thing you said. You just confirmed what I know for long.
  
  Die of a generalized cancer as fast as possible, dickie! Our world doesn’t need fucktards parroting the right-capitalo-statist elite like you.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. bloggerclarissa
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    Liberal bias in academia = translation: professors don’t watch Fox News and ridicule the fools who do.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
  2. Youknowwho
    
    March 22, 2013
    
    @David
    
    You need to marry Pauline, you seem like a good fit. 🙂
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. bloggerclarissa
      
      March 22, 2013
      
      It’s OK, Titfortat, I have unbanned you. Make sure you behave.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
Paranoid

March 22, 2013

I know nothing of Canadian politics, but couldn’t they support parts 1 and 2 of the statement but vote against it because they didn’t support part 3?

LikeLike

Reply