Senate appointments tomorrow

I’m hearing that the Prime Minister will be naming nine new senators tomorrow by 2:00pm.

Here are the party veterans that I’m hearing are sure bets
Manitoba – Don Plett
New Brunswick – Carolyn Stewart-Olson
Ontario – Doug Finley
Nova Scotia – Brooke Taylor
Quebec – Jacques Demers

In the running:
Ontario: Bob Runciman, David Braley
Quebec: Judith Siedman
Nunavut: Dennis Patterson

I’m still digging on this. If you’ve got any tips (anonymity guaranteed) please send them via email or bb pin.

UPDATE: Appointments will be announced between 1 and 2pm tomorrow
UPDATE: Brooke Taylor is a surer bet than Macdonald for NS from what I hear. Finley upgraded to a sure bet now that I’ve heard from more than a few sources.
UPDATE: Brooke Taylor sure bet for NS
UPDATE: Added David Braley to the shortlist of potential senators from Ontario
UPDATE: hearing rumour that the PM will only appoint 8 of 9 tomorrow, but cannot guess why
UPDATE: Senate seat from Nunavut open. Hearing that the PM met with appointee last week while on the northern tour
UPDATE: Added Dennis Patterson and Paul Okalik from Nunavut. Bet on Patterson.

Comments

comments

91 thoughts on “Senate appointments tomorrow”

  1. The slur about Prime Minister Stephen Harper catering to the religious right is laughable and reveals the desperation of the Liberal supporters on this blog.

    Both east of eden and Liz have answered this slur very well, but I'd like to add that, last time I looked, the right to freedom of religion was protected in Trudeau's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As we know, however, from grim experience, is that rights and freedoms are protected only for me (Liberal$) but not for thee (Conservatives) in this Deranged Dominion engineered by too many years of the LPC in power.

    Either rights and freedoms exist for ALL Canadians, regardless of race, nationality, religion, or political views, or it's a complete sham. Remember that, Liberal apparatchiks, next time you make disparaging and dissembling remarks about others' religious affiliations — because, when you do, you make a farce out of your hero PET's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

  2. Addendum to above post: When I referred to “nationality” in this sentence, “Either rights and freedoms exist for ALL Canadians, regardless of race, nationality, religion, or political views, or it's a complete sham,” I meant original nationality if one is an immigrant to Canada.

    One other thing: I don't understand the order in which these comments have been posted. A reply I gave to a comment by Liz J last night, and which originally posted under hers — which made sense — has now been posted after two other comments — which makes no sense. What's up? Can't comments be posted in sequence, so we can make sense of them?

  3. Batb, you and I seem to be the only ones who have voiced any concerns re: the format, both here and at Janke's – apparently to deaf ears.

    I particularly find the ever-narrowing space allotted to threaded conversations really annoying, as well as the fact comments are not listed chronologically. Whenever I return to this site, I have to reread from the top to see which new comments have been added, since a commenter may have recently responded to a comment made 12 hours ago.

    Steve J and Stephen T, you can improve your own site. Yes you can!

  4. Me, too. Last year and this year, I've made comments to that effect on his blog. I don't know why Steve uses that format – it's highly cumbersome and following threads is challenging.

  5. I guess we conservatives like to see user-friendly and sensible organization of things – be they the senate, or blogs, eh?

  6. Hahahahaha. Good one, my friend. Since about a month ago, this blog is asking for a sign in for each comment. Very annoying. I like Joanne's design the best – everything is in sequence. With this site and Janke's, the threads move to the right with each comment – kind of annoying. Great content in both blogs but the format kind of…well…bites.

  7. I hear you, Gabby and eoe: 'highly annoying the format here and at AGWN; if the content wasn't so good, I'd say fawgettaboutit. Like you, Gabby, I have to reread ALL of the comments to see if there are any new ones — and if there are, they often don't make sense in the position they're in.

    Yikes. With all this techno razz-ma-tazz, surely it shouldn't be difficult to put comments in sequence so we can make sense of them … or am I being too much of a Luddite …?

    One other comment to add to the Liberal supporters' disparaging remarks about the religious beliefs of politicians on the right:

    These slurs only serve to support my suspicions that Trudeau and his Liberal$ had no intention, when they brought in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (CRF), of actually protecting the rights and freedoms of all Canadians, only of certain groups — those who were in lockstep with their agenda.

    It's clear that with the institution of the CRF, they intended to use the judiciary, which they crammed with their guys, to ram their socialist agenda down the throats of the hapless Canadian electorate. They knew they couldn't use the elected Parliament to enact most of the changes to our laws they had in mind, because they knew that the majority of Canadians wouldn't buy it.

    So, they erected a Trojan Horse to do the job instead. Some democratic process. Some “rights” and “freedoms.”

  8. Gabby: “One consolation, East … 'the threads move to the right with each comment'! 😉

    LOL!!!! 😉

  9. You're right, Batb. The lofty intentions set down in the Charter appear to apply only if the people involved have views congruent with the Liberal mindset.

    BTW, chafing at the format doesn't make you a Luddite, IMO!

  10. I love the selections for Senate!!! Well deserved for all. And all are True Conservatives. Thank goodness!

    RM99

  11. Trudeau's CRF sounds so protective of our stipulated rights and freedoms. However in a Democracy governed by the rule of law it seems more like stating the obvious. We have challenges sent to the Court for interpretation and damn any government who disagrees with their decision. Like the Senate the Court is appointed, like the Senate the deck can be stacked there as well. Surely Judges having such power to interpret our laws and Charter should be elected along with the Senate.

    Democracy is supposed to be about political, legal and social equality but if you start ceding to all challenges, special interest groups, some become more equal than others.

    Then we have the HRC's to add insult to injury……

  12. rm99, would you like to tell us who the new senators are?!

    I just Googled “Harper's new senators” and came up only with old stories and no new list.

    I'd love to know who they are, and apparently, Google ain't saying …

  13. And all are True Conservatives.

    Which not to be mistaken with the similarly spelled but completely different species “true conservatives”. The capitalized “c” makes a big difference, sort of like adding a “u” to Iqaluit. One is a real, identifiable absolute and the other is a dirty bum.

  14. Holey smokes – good catch, BatB. Good stuff – I can now embrace the comment thread shifting to the right. Thanks for this – to the right, to the right, to the right. Yesssss.

  15. Yawn. Heard all that drivel before. Move along and let somebody with at least half of a wit get into place. Next, please.

  16. So Stephen, you don't supposed we can trade up from “terry1” and get a liberal troll who actually has something intellectually stimulating to say? Being a little fish trying to navigate those blue rivers can be a bitch.

  17. Hmmm, disguising ‘patronage’ as ‘reforming from the inside’.
    Well, it seemed to work when Reformers got themselves elected by promising to opt out of the ‘goldplated parliamentary pensions’ (and are of course now enjoying those very pensions they railed against!)
    Yes, reforming from the inside it is! We’ll all beleive!

  18. Hmmm, disguising ‘patronage’ as ‘reforming from the inside’.
    Well, it seemed to work when Reformers got themselves elected by promising to opt out of the ‘goldplated parliamentary pensions’ (and are of course now enjoying those very pensions they railed against!)
    Yes, reforming from the inside it is! We’ll all beleive!

  19. Hmmm, disguising ‘patronage’ as ‘reforming from the inside’.
    Well, it seemed to work when Reformers got themselves elected by promising to opt out of the ‘goldplated parliamentary pensions’ (and are of course now enjoying those very pensions they railed against!)
    Yes, reforming from the inside it is! We’ll all beleive!

  20. Hmmm, disguising ‘patronage’ as ‘reforming from the inside’.
    Well, it seemed to work when Reformers got themselves elected by promising to opt out of the ‘goldplated parliamentary pensions’ (and are of course now enjoying those very pensions they railed against!)
    Yes, reforming from the inside it is! We’ll all beleive!

  21. And you're a true progressive liberal, I suppose?
    If you've got nothing of substance to say, revert to talking about people's nether regions, right?
    How droll. How clever.

  22. My boss just gave me a rather frightened look as I burst out laughing at your comment. Excellent, Cat. Absolutely excellent. Gotta watch out for them thar blue rivers. LOLOLOL.

  23. Well count yourself lucky, you learned a new word for dirty bum. If this mistake hadn't been made you never would have known about it and wouldn't be able to make such a comparison. However, do try to make your comparisons relevant.

  24. I was reading the love in mesages on this blog today as I was driving as a passenger between several meetings. Some of the travel was across farm country and the smell of fresh manure made me feel like it was coming right from this blog.

    Holy cow what a bunch of garbage.

  25. cat, have you read the latest EKOS poll that shows reformatort numbers down almost 8% from the Ipsos reid poll you all raved about. This one has much less factor of error also.

  26. you were hearing Iffy's speach about how wonderful it was and what a good thing they closed the Asbestos mines in Quebec…. right afterwards he managed to alienate hiimself from 1/4 of Eastern Quebec townships that survive off of the Asbestos mines

  27. Gabby. Some people seem to forget or deliberately distort the facts. Mr. Mulroney was never charged with ” taking a bribe” If that had been the truth you can bet he would have been charged.

  28. It appears Mr. Harper would not have needed to appoint any Senators if the Liberal Senators had not been going into a massive filibuster. Not to mention the disgusting display during the Mulroney/Schreiber investigation. The Liberals were only to glad to trott out any garbage Mr. Schreiber came up with. You have only the Liberals to blame for Mr. Harpers change regarding Senate Appointments

  29. Omanator… so instead of “sober second thought” you are saying the senate should just stay asleep and pass anything the Harperites want to get through the house.Your Mulroney example was very weak as he himself admitted to taking cash from Schreiber while still in office. That commission was very weak and was there simply to try and discredit schreiber whom we all knew was a crook.

    Ih Harper wa sserious about the senate he would have also appointed some independents as the Liberals had done in the past as there are 6 of them there although at least one is still listed as a Progressive Conservative.

  30. The Senate for the last few years has been anything but a cchamber of second sober thoughts. It has been a battle ground for the Liberals since they lost the elections.

  31. That's the way it works in a democracy isn't it. There needs to be two sides to a debate or we would all be under one party rule, something Harpo drools about.

  32. Omanator… so instead of “sober second thought” you are saying the senate should just stay asleep and pass anything the Harperites want to get through the house.Your Mulroney example was very weak as he himself admitted to taking cash from Schreiber while still in office. That commission was very weak and was there simply to try and discredit Schreiber whom we all knew was a crook.

    If Harper was serious about the senate he would have also appointed some independents as the Liberals had done in the past as there are 6 of them there although at least one is still listed as a Progressive Conservative.

  33. The Senate for the last few years has been anything but a cchamber of second sober thoughts. It has been a battle ground for the Liberals since they lost the elections.

  34. That's the way it works in a democracy isn't it. There needs to be two sides to a debate or we would all be under one party rule, something Harpo drools about.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *