Part of debate is to understand where people are coming from and that involves parroting back your understanding of the other person's opinion. That said, I used the rhetorical device of putting words in your mouth to call you out for pretending to be upset on we Conservative supporters' behalf when that's clearly not your goal here.
To sum up, there are a couple of points of view that we share:
- You and most Conservatives are against an undemocratic Senate in general, though I don't really know how you would like it changed.
- You and most Conservatives are against partisan hack appointments in specific
...and one we don't:
- You have have a clear dislike of the Harper government and want to make hay with unpalatable but by your own admission necessary appointments. I don't think your pretending to speak on behalf of Conservative supporters is genuine and if it is, you are probably mistaken about how we feel.
In my opinion, we need to move the debate forward. As I've said before, that involves holding our nose and using the Senate as it always has been used. Then, we pass some reform bills (in the next year or two), waiting for the SCC challenge and see where we are after that. The PM is on record in saying that abolition should be up for discussion if reform is impossible but pretending that the system is different than it is or appealing to impossible solutions like "opening the constitution" are fallacies.
|