More on the leaders’ debate.
We at Birth Pangs are all about choice. We think all the party leaders should debate. There are only — what?– 18 of them?
OK. Sure. Four leaders ‘debating’ is usually chaotic enough. Fourteen more mostly nutbar fringe candidates all shrieeeking at once?
*shiver*
To save us from that horror, the Christian Heritage Party ‘has filed an injunction in federal court to stop the Leaders’ Debate because it violates the Canada Elections Act and the Broadcasting Act’.
The argument is: let them all debate or none.
Complete chaos or censorship.
Religion. Just what our society and government needs more of.
That’s an interesting development. A local Christian Heritage candidate was interviewed on local radio the day it was announced that May would be included in the debates. She was THRILLED. She said it would open the door for their party to be included in future debates.
My vote would be for “None.” But that’s on a personal basis, because I hate noise pollution, and that’s all political campaigns are.
Ideally, I guess it should probably be “All.” That way, anyone who really wants to subject himself to all that crap is free to do so. Just so long as everyone else is free to not listen.
But I don’t equate the lack of a debate with censorship, either.
Chimera: I wouldn’t equate lack of debate with censorship either. I’d equate it with relief. But we at Birth Pangs have a rep as Xian-bashers to maintain.
An a right foine job ye’re makin’ of it, too, lass! Carry on, then!