Friday, December 14, 2012

Peter Van Loan

I sometimes like to post my reflections of yesterday's news. Peter Van Loan made headlines recently for waddling across the floor of the House of Commons Chamber to wag his finger in the face of NDP House Leader Nate Cullen, chastising him for having raised a procedural challenge during voting on one of the harpercons' atrocious omnibus bills. While Van Loan was doing this, Speaker Scheer was looking the other way like a referee in a professional wrestling match instead of the referee in a chamber of democratic debate like he's supposed to be.

A little later, both Van Loan and Scheer made headlines for Scheer's rejection of Van Loan's attempts to limit democratic debate. Van Loan decided that a majority is a majority and just because the harpercons are using their stolen majority to ram through phone book-thick omnibus bills, it is the Opposition that is abusing the process by proposing multiple, no doubt frivolous, amendments. Van Loan wanted the Speaker to bundle up the proposed amendments into more convenient packages to be mindlessly voted down, and to prevent MPs who do not have enough fellow MPs that they sit on Parliamentary Committees to have one chance only to propose substantial amendments. Scheer won plaudits for rejecting this asinine proposal. Sort of the same sort of thing when a man thinks he's a good husband for not beating his wife to a pulp even once during their marriage.

Both of these tools are stephen harper's lap-dogs. (They must love the smell of his crotch or something.) My first instinct was that this whole thing was staged. Van Loan is a whipped cur who wouldn't do anything harper didn't want him to do and the same thing goes for Scheer. Van Loan's proposal and Scheer's ruling are like harper having some Christian-fundamentalist backbencher propose to criminalize abortion while some harpercon cabinet minister is allowed to speechify on the importance of a woman's right to choose. Just by having the debate you chip away at the overall structure.

But now I'm thinking that Van Loan's anger and frustration are genuine. Sitting there in the House of Commons, forced to corral harper's disgruntled nutbar troops and incur their abuse, all in return for the cold disdain of his cruel master, Van Loan was seeking to externalize his anger and direct it elsewhere. He looks across the aisle and sees these other politicians making their futile protests against his own party's undemocratic abuses of democracy and the witless turd decides its they who are the villains. Can't they see this is pointless? Why are they wasting his and everyone else's time? In the "mind" of Peter Van Loan they should just show up to establish quorum, vote straight up or down, and let the magic of majority government do its work. Completely unaware that he's a total fucking idiot, Van Loan explodes in frustration and the rest is history.

What a sickening display he and the regime he serves are.


bcwaterboy said...

What is it about these guys and their double chins anyway? To me, it's a sign of years of abusing one's body and a lack of attention to fitness. I'm thinking thwap that this was staged. If you watch harper's smug mug during question period, it's very clear that he's using his precious stolen majority to belittle all opposition. I also don't believe for a second that any of this bunch utters a word or acts out without his approval. He is their master.

thwap said...

BC Waterboy,

As I said, that was my first thought too. And you might be right, but I guess I can at least see Van Loan having such repugnant thoughts all on his own.