Commons probe opposed by NDP!!

[Bragi]

Richard Brennan
STAR OTTAWA BUREAU

OTTAWA–The New Democrats say they will block efforts to have a parliamentary committee investigate the Chuck Cadman affair.

Instead, NDP Leader Jack Layton said yesterday, the matter should be investigated by the RCMP


Proud day for the NDP, eh. This shows very clearly that it's far more important for the NDP to keep the Libs from gaining on any issue than it is to have Parliament investigate bribery by the governing Party.

I hope voters remember this particular disservice to the nation next time they go to the polls.

For my part, I'm keeping this clipping to show NDP canvassers that come to my door next time why, as an anti-Harper voter, I simply can't support the NDP.

- B

[HEyHEY]

1. I said yesterday he wanted the RCMP to look at it

You said I was wrong.

[Tindalos]

2. I'm not holding my breath

The head of the RCMP reports to the PM. Good luck to anyone ever finding out the truth.

[Spazito]

3. Jack Layton does it again....

Forget principle, go for the expediency of protecting the unethical, destructive faux cons in order to mitigate any gains by the Liberals.

Jack Layton is the worst thing to have happened to the NDP party in a VERY long time, imo.

[daleo]

4. The Narcisism of Small Differences

The Narcissism of small differences is a term coined by Sigmund Freud in 1917, based on the earlier work of British anthropologist Ernest Crawley. The term describes the manner in which our negative feelings are sometimes directed at people who resemble us, while we take pride from the "small differences" that distinguish us from them.

The term appeared in Civilization and Its Discontents (1929-1930)<1> in relation to the application of the inborn aggression in man in ethnic conflict.

Glen O. Gabbard, M.D. suggested Freud's "Narcissism of Small Difference" provides a framework within which to understand that in a loving relationship there can be a need to find, and even exaggerate, differences in order to preserve as feeling of separateness and self. <2>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_differences
--------------------------------------------------------------
It seemed like the NDP and Liberals could co-exist better in the days when socialism was considered to be a viable political option. There was more of a distinction, socialist vs social democrat. But now that both parties are going after that label (or alternatively the label "progressive") the phenomenon noted above seems to apply.

I think this is also part of the reason that the infighting between Obama Democrats and Clinton Democrats has become so vicious. I don't really see much difference between them on policy.

[Spazito]

5. Very thoughtful response, much appreciated...

What confounds me, I must admit, is that reality says the NDP will not form the government in my lifetime, imo, and the Liberals, while centrist in their policies, are closer to the NDP in philosophy than the "New" Conservatives yet Layton continues to support harper in hopes of what? A few more seats? At what expense to the social fabric of Canada?

As to the viciousness of the infighting between the Obama Democrats and the Clinton Democrats, I find it appalling and destructive. I agree there is little difference between them on policy which, imo, is exactly why the fight has become so dirty, as you point out.

While the Democratic candidates take each other down to the gutter, empty their "bank accounts", the repubs replenish theirs, sit back and let the candidates do their trashing of the eventual nominee for them. Very short-sighted, imo.

I also LOVE our 6-week campaigns, more and more so as I watch the long, drawn-out campaign season in the US.

[daleo]

7. Well, there was the Bob Rae NDP surprise in Ontario in 1991

I think that slender reed gives NDP members some hope of a breakthrough, at some future date. Personally, I would put the odds against it at around 20 to 1.

I agree that the U.S. election puts paid to the idea that long campaigns are useful. At a certain point they just become a lot of tiresome, expensive wheel spinning.

[IntravenousDemilo]

6. And by Paul Szabo, too.

But even the Liberal chairman of that committee does not agree that it is the right venue for an airing of the facts in the Cadman case.

“The best outcome here to clear the water is for an RCMP investigation,” Paul Szabo said. “We're not a court. We can't lay charges. It would just delay, ultimately, the process.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080304.cadman05/BNStory/National/home?cid=al_gam_mostview

[Bragi]

8. Szabo's a dork... /nt

[Ravachol]

9. The Parliament would still be forced to...

Ask the RCMP to lead an investigation, anyway. The Cons would then argue that this was nothing but a politically motivated charge and go on with that excuse. I'm not a huge fan of the NDP, nor am I of the Libs, but I think that Layton just made a good move: let the RCMP investigate it, which was an obligatory step any way you put it. The result will be available for them to look at 'cause the head of the RCMP doesn't only answer to Harper but must file reports.

In any case, after the investigation is through, they can always summon the RCMP chief to the Commons to ask him a question or two, you know. They could even fire him if they unite and go on with another investigation.

I fail to see the big fuse there.