Seeing the Forest for the Trees from The Insomniac
I think it's Dr. Phil who says it doesn't matter how thin you make a pancake, there's always two sides. Well, if the term softwood lumber holds any meaning for you, you'd better stop in at Kate's: I Thought They [Read More]

Tracked on February 9, 2006 11:08 AM

What about the NDP supporters and Waddell? He lost by only a few votes. Did they get what they deserved?

There's a lot of credence to some of the claims that the Liberal brass were arrogant and this is the gander taking what the goose already got. But the flippant disregard for democracy in that commenters statement speaks volumes about the new regime and its supporters.

Out with the old and in with the old.

Ted
Cerberus

Oh Ted - LIGHTEN UP, for Chrissakes. I live in an NDP province. They're worse than the Liberals when it comes to sleaze.

Blah, blah, blah.
Flippant disregard for democracy indeed. Actually, this is democracy in action. We elect a member and they are able to cross the floor if they want.

Let us change the electoral system to make things easier for the lefties to get in, change things so circumstances never go against what the lefties think is the right way.

Think of the poor marxist-leninst candidate who lost, think of the poor communist party candidate, Oh woe is me.

Anyone gullible to vote for the above and the Liberals got what they deserved. This is democracy and it ain't always pretty.
enough

Haw, haw, this is becoming clearer all the time.

http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=hamilton/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1139439014212&call_pageid=1020420665036&col=1112101662670

Excerpt;

Here's the plot of a real-life political thriller: David Emerson defected to the Conservatives this week carrying a multi-billion dollar softwood lumber deal that Liberals, for political reasons, didn't finalize before the federal election.

...the powerful Prime Minister's Office was concerned an agreement would stop Paul Martin from using George W. Bush as a campaign punching bag.

Now that he has it, Emerson gets a second chance to complete the deal that diplomats say requires little more than signatures.

Right on, Kate!!

In my view, the CPC is was the benefactor of the "princess of Aurora" 's crossing the floor. Let's wait and see what Mr. Emerson brings to the table. The 'two-party-system' has always been a big problem, in this country, when it comes to functional voting and governing. Me, I'm waiting to see what Mr. Harper's team does.

As I previously said, it certainly can't be any worse than what we've seen for the last number of years!

So let me get this straight. Liberal sleaze = bad. NDP sleaze = bad. Conservative sleaze = good.

OK, now I got it!

cerberus
Protector of hell says
"commenters statement speaks volumes about the new regime and its supporters."

Your handle speaks volumes from hell,... literally.

If he wanted to change he should sit as an Independent.
Listening to Emerson from his news clip last night it sounded like he still thinks he is part of the Natural Governing Party.
He may be smart in some areas but ARROGANCE is definitely his major.
This will blow over but I hope Harper is truly a fast learner because the voters are starting to catch up on the learning curve.

Ted The Three-Headed Moral Relativist misled: "He lost by only a few votes."

Notice the truth deficiency so typical of The Liberal. Waddell lost by four thousand and five hundred votes; not a landslide, but not a close race either. To say he lost by only a few votes is not only misleading, but simply false.

I can keep pointing out your truth deficiency as long as you can pump it out, old chap!

Harper is going to come out of this smelling like a rose. Softwood lumber deal coming up. lol

Re Waddell being "close" to winning.

Close only counts in horseshoes, dancing, bows and arrows, and grenades. Also dung fights and nuclear wars.

I'd say, let's wait and see how Mr. Emmerson performs (along with the rest of the Harper government) before we get too critical.

Comparing Emmerson to Stronach is very humourous. Emmerson has ability and experience. Stronach has???????

Hey From North Sask
Here's an easier one that liberals are starting to understand.
Liberal = sleaze

"Ted The Three-Headed Moral Relativist misled:"

LMAO

I have been saying for years that the Libs and the NDP deliberately mishandled the softwood negotiations in order to promote big government AND anti-Americanism.

I hope that the truth wins out and the people of BC realize the costs for these blatant political moves were deliberately downloaded onto their citizens and small towns all across the province, but I am not holding my breath.

It is much easier and makes one much more popular to blame Washington than to blame Ottawa.

Mike's comment:
"Comparing Emmerson to Stronach is very humourous. Emmerson has ability and experience. Stronach has???????"

Nicer shoes?

Fun discussion at Andrew Coyne:

Tiberius Caesar? Roman senators?

Et tu Brutae?

Well I don’t think “Emperor Stephen” has called for the Christians to be thrown to the lions quite yet!

Nope, no roman crucifixtions either.

No send ups from the “Life of Brian (Mulroney?)”:

“Always look at the bright side of life.” sung in two step from the crucified on the cross.

(Aside: Something extremist Muslims might want to consider that Christians have endured without resorting to arms of violence.)

Maybe throw a couple of democratic gladiators in the ring to keep the mob entertained.

Truly delightful, AC you do keep us laughing.

Oh AC, in fact your killing me!!

Has it ever occurred to us maudlin commentators that we say we live in a hackneyed democratic system and thus we occasionally get hackneyed political decisions, that are systemic in nature and not necessarily personality related.

If the problem is the system and the system needs fixing, then on the way to fixing the system, some surface evidence decisions look crappy. The Fortier and Emerson appointments look that way.

I would like to hear from our new PM Stephen Harper the longer term game plan in addressing the “democratic deficit”; rather than the short term pot hole, which has put a wheel out of alignment in the democratic chariot. Being the policy wonk that PM Stephen Harper is, I am sure he has got his battle plan laid out; but isn’t ready to reveal all yet, as the troops are readied for battle.

I think I will take a wait and see approach; as the ink is still drying on the “Oath of Office”.
I don’t think he has had 13 years in the office of government to make one rush to judgement.

Further, I haven’t seen the Government Whip endorse the concept of:

Not respecting confidence votes.

In the words of the Genie to Yago the parrot:

Calm yourself.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/inf …

Yes, it is all legal and so on.

Some people I’ve chatted to in my riding basically are saying its just returning the Belinda Stronach favour and uncermoniously suggest: “Just stick a fork in the Liberals.”

It has been said before revenge is a dish best served cold.

While I am reluctant to be so crass; I think I can recognize ‘Liberal lifeboat’ talent shopping.

Moreover, if voters have long said that there is a democratic deficit then the problem is systemic as the above hyperlink suggests. Then you have to look beyond the headline and apparent ‘hypocrisy’. Well if you are going to get to an elected Senate, which Paul Martin even suggested in the campaign then you need some all party talent to get there.

As to Mr. Fortier, he says he is going to election next time out. OK hold his feet to the fire on that one.

After $500 billion in federal debt I think every voter understands the notion of debased currency.

Well if PM SH is purchasing some legislative elbow room; that doesn’t mean I can’t accept a little short term pain for long term gain.
If this behaviour becomes a HABIT then I would be concerned.

If the federal patient is just upgraded from the intensive care unit to critical care; who said the next dose of medicine had to taste good?

I’m going to wait for the longer term strategic roll out of democratic renewal before I start lobbing grenades and making comparisons to Tiberias Caesar. That latter appellation may well be directed to those formerly advocating:

NOT OBSERVING CONFIDENCE VOTES IN THE HOUSE.

Seeing as AC raised the subject of Tiberias perhaps contemplate the word of Calgacus said in respect of legions returning to Briton:

“….beyond us lies no nation, nothing but waves and rocks and the Romans, more deadly still than they, for you find in them an arrogance which no reasonable submission can elude. Brigands of the world, they have exhausted the land by their indiscriminate plunder and now they ransack the sea. The wealth of an enemy excites their cupidity, his poverty their lust of power. East and West have failed to glut their maw. They are unique in being as violently tempted to attack the poor as the wealthy. Robbery, butchery, rapine, with false names they call Empire; and they make a wilderness and call it peace.”

I don't care how this is spun by the Tories and how it works out in the end, but Emerson needs to step down and run again as a Tory. His crossing over just doesn't pass the smell test, and everyone who is doing backflips and contortions to justify it are being dishonest with themselves.

The people of Vancouver-Kingsway deserve better treatment than this.

Bye, Bye Byrdie!

Congress axes controversial Byrd Amendment tariff pay-out mechanism

WASHINGTON, DC - 02/02/06 - Congress repealed the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act - also known as the Byrd Amendment - on a close vote of 216-214 late yesterday.

Repeal of the Byrd Amendment was a provision of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 passed by the House of Representatives, which had already passed by the Senate.

Named for its primary sponsor, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia), the amendment called for antidumping and countervailing duties to be distributed directly to US companies which were found to have suffered harm from "dumped" imports and supported a petition for import relief.

Prior to the Byrd Amendment, those duties were paid into the US Treasury.

In January 2003, in a challenge brought by 11 WTO members and the European Union (EU), the WTO found that the Byrd Amendment breached the WTO Antidumping and Subsidies Agreements and its predecessor, the Generalized Agreement on Tariffs & Trade (GATT).

The WTO granted the US until the end of 2003 to comply.

President Bush says he will sign the bill, which contains a delayed repeal of the amendment under a compromise reached between House and Senate conferees. Under that agreement, the repeal will be delayed for two years with Byrd Amendment distributions continuing for applications made prior to October 1, 2007.

According to sources, repeal will restore the affected duties to the Treasury, but will not affect the assessment of the duties against unfairly traded imports or will it affect the US vigorous enforcement of the underlying US trade remedy laws.

Since 2001, the Byrd Amendment paid out more than $1.26 billion to US companies affected by low-cost imports.

The total amount authorized varied year to year in proportion to the amount of duties distributed and, at present, is $110 million for the WTO member countries that brought the original complaint.

To date, three of those countries - Canada, Japan, and Mexico - and the EU have imposed retaliation on selected US exports.

Last week, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported nearly half the tariffs collected under the amendment went to just five US companies with more than $476 million of that amount going to just one corporation - the Timken Co., an Ohio-based ball bearing manufacturer, and several of its subsidiaries.

Several US business groups including the Washington, DC-headquartered Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition (CITAC) are applauded the repeal of the amendment.

"As recently as last month, many experts were saying we would never obtain congressional repeal of the Byrd Amendment during the current session," said CITAC Executive Director Steven Alexander.

I think Concrete nailed it. The Libs could have settled this dipute long ago, but found it too convenient to use it to stir anti-american sentiment. They milked it as long as they could at the expense of the Canadian public.

Didn't Waddell came in third behind "no one cared" in Vancouver-Kingsway. If I recall voter turn out was about 62% in V-K meaning 38% did not care to Waddell's 34%. Correct me if i'm wrong on the turnout.

OOPS!!!! Miscalculation there. "no one cared" actually won! 43% of 62% for Emerson, 34% of 62% for Waddell. Hmmmmm.....

If the PMO forced him to delat the deal for expediency no wonder he jumped.

so $5 billion of mostly Western money and tens of thousands of mostly Western jobs in hundreds of mostly Westeren small towns - all was placed at risk because the Liberal Party needed to be seen as Bush Bashers to scare the Sheeple in Torronah into voting Liberal.

Some Public Policy.

Its called "Screw the West, only Toronnah counts"

sounds like a "complex file" . . wonder if Belinduhhhhh dreamed it up.

PMSH has shown more shrewdness, intelligence & forethought than any of us believed.

Undoubtedly, his previous relations with the USA had established his bona fides as a true conservative future leader. When Emerson's negotiations led to a near agreement on softwood lumber, but this was held from us by the libs, you can rest assured that Mr. Harper knew all about the agreement. Perhaps even that the libs intended to scuttle the near-agreement now that they no longer held power, and thus scuttle all the hard work put into the negotiations by Mr. Emerson.

Why did Mr. Emerson defect if not for the above? Give the man some credit for having some integrity. He saw that PMPM was using the softwood issue as a club he could bash George W with, and using the issue as another reason to cling to power. Mr. Emerson was involved in the negotiations for the good of Canada, not the good of any party. It was a no-brainer to cross the floor when the libs bombed out Jan 23rd.

From all accounts, Paul Martin was a control freak and micro-manager. If Emerson was delaying something as important and politically sensitive as the softwood deal, Martin was behind it.

Hmmmm so David Emerson was running the show, not the PMO?? More powerfull than Martin!!! Welcome aboard Dr. Emerson! And thanks for not selling out our lumber industry.

HE's your guy now. You can have him.

HArper said he would do things differently. What a liar.

Stupid, circular, specious are the words that come to mind with the featured "private" e-mail justifiying a betrayal of constituents because they were voting to be betrayed.

And very embarrassing for a "conservative" blog and for any true conservative/libertarian.

Coyne got it right: Burnt again.

I always thought it was generally accepted knowledge that the Liberals were fundamentally obsessed with suppression of the economy. The only function their beloved "Kyoto" has is its potentially devastating economic consequences, don't try to tell me the Liberals were actually concerned about the environment, what did they do that actually improved environmental conditions? Suppression of the economy to create more dependancy on a massive federal bureaucracy was what the Liberals were all about. The softwood lumber issue and the MacKenzie Valley pipeline are two big economic issues that the Liberals would have blocked and stalled on forever, they stalled on the mad cow-related beef export problems as long as they could. Anything to prevent economic growth and privately-held prosperity, that was the Liberals. That's part of the reason they can't find a decent leadership candidate, "liberal" was never meant to mean "socialist". According to my studies, Liberalism originated as a reaction to Karl Marx... capitalists evolving a social conscience. That's my personal theory as to why the Liberals are currently in a bit of a shambles, leaderless, out of power. They tipped over the edge into some kind of socialist madness. I predict their return only after a purge of the party, those too far off the center must go.

Who can we get to cross the floor from the 416(Toronto)?

So David Emerson negotiated a deal, he was forced to hold back on that deal by EX PMPM and the Liberal's are now crying why? Because of their own stupidity, because they sold someone a car and they had the nerve to drive off with it?
And they thought they would just leave this until after they won the election? Wow,no arrogance here folks, move along.

It is so interesting to see this story develop.

Liberals make a bad call to keep a deal (that Emerson says now he didn't really like) under wraps till after the election for political reasons, assuming they would win the election.

Harper finds out about the near deal (from Emerson after the election? from the US? from God?) and asks Emerson to come and finish it. Seriously miscalculates the reaction of everyone on both sides and the media.

Questions?
Is the story accurate and a deal was done? Close to done?
Did Emerson really think the deal could have been improved on before the election? Or did he think it was a good deal?
Who was the main decision-maker for post-poning the deal?
Will Harper's apparent better US relations help Emerson improve on the deal? Or will we get the deal that Emerson says isn't good for Canada in it's current form?
Will finishing the file quell the firestorm?

Fortier seems to be slowly blowing over with everyone except aredent reformers. Even Bert Brown, Alberta Senator-in-waiting, is okay with Fortier.

Emerson is not blowing over. Will the story of Liberal interference in the deal prior to the election help or hurt Emerson?

By the way, the questions I have are not rhetorical. Anyone have any answers for me?

calgarian "I always thought it was generally accepted knowledge that the Liberals were fundamentally obsessed with suppression of the economy. "

If that was indeed their goal then they didn't do a good job. They couldn't even rack up massive deficits. Pure incompetence really.

Whether it hurts Emerson is utterly irrelevant. He's elected. He probably won't run again.

How it makes Paul Martin and the Liberal Party look, isn't. That's the huge, huge story here. Elephant crap sized story. Softwood lumber has dominated the US bashing meme for months and now Canadians are about to find out the Liberals delayed the deal on purpose.

What!! The Liberals deliberately delaying the resolution of the softwood lumber agreement to gain political advantage. What an outrageous thing to say! As outrageous as suggesting that the Liberals would deliberately delay the awarding of the contract for new helicopters for our armed forces to avoid political embarassment, risking, and causing the deaths of some of our military people. Oh wait a minute, that was in fact the case, wasn't it??

Kate,
Bob Fife on CTV Newsnet today was hacking at Emerson and brought up the delayed deal at the end of the segment referencing the Toronto Star story.

He was painting it as negative-Emerson and not negative-Liberal.

Paul Martin holding back on softwood lumber deal...

IF this is TRUE...Paul Martin has a LOT of explaining to do...

HE and ONLY HE had the power to resolve this thing.

But NO!

Paul Martin decided it was more expedient to use the softwood issue during an election ...use it to bash the big bad U.S...to make HIMSELF LOOK GOOD...at the EXPENSE of the softwood lumber industry!

ALL the more reason to throw the Liberal bums OUT!

How it makes Paul Martin and the Liberal Party look, isn't. That's the huge, huge story here. Elephant crap sized story.

And the best part is that anonymous Liberals let it out in an effort to make Emerson look bad.

"Gang that couldn't shoot themselves in the foot straight", is right.

Haw, haw, haw...

In fact CTV is reporting now that Emerson blocked the deal.

Seems to me that Stephen has outsmarted everyone on this. Good for him. After all the shit and abuse he's taken, I'm willing to overlook a few dubious, but totally legal moves. Liberals didn't bother about the legal part to often, and the NDP... well, even if the NDP candidate came in second, the reality is not a lot different than in Stronachs case is it. She won handily this time round because many conservatives voted for her, not the party, and so they voted for her this time too. I have no doubt that Emerson would kick the crap out of the NDP guy in another race. Many of the LIberals who voted for him are Lib/Tory provincially, so they would vote for him again, and the Tories would vote for him.

Yep, he'd hand a very substantial victory to the Tories in a by-election.

Should be grateful to Harper for sparing us the cost of a fait accompli.

There the fight is on.Them Libranos are full of Bovine droppings!

My gut reaction has been against Emerson's defection. This new revelation has the big potential to change that.

If everything's as the article says, then Emerson ran under the Liberal banner, knowing about PM's desire to not get this deal set before the election. Likely, it was too late to change/drop his party affiliation. If he's an honest guy (and the little I've read seems to indicate this), he may have held to party loyalty during the campaign, but been so fed up about it, that should the CPC win, he'd be willing to cross to get the deal through.

As I said, my first reaction is against it and even against Harper for welcoming it. But this sheds a whole new light on it for me. It may be a welcome slap-down for a clear instance of Liberal/Martin politicking AGAINST the country's interests for his own personal/electoral gain. In my mind, that's a type of treason.

The big question for me now is who delayed the deal?

Did Emerson say "This deal is done but will lose us seats in BC is we close it now"?

Did Emerson say "This deal is not done and if you close it now you will lose seats in BC so let me finish it after the election"?

Did Emerson say something else that my poorly formed brain cannot think of at the moment? Any other possible suggestions as to how it went down?

Do you think the Liberals can spin the first one fast enough and make it stick? It looks like they have a head start.

Ah, proud, true blue, small-c conservative, undoubted Prairie populist, Blue Tory Andrew Coyne fighting for ending the democratic deficit by attacking the hypocrisy of the new boss being the same as the old boss (and Caligula) and the selling out of true conservatism. Surely Dief is looking down from heaven now with a tear in his eye. I can hardly wait for AC to repudiate all of those columns saying that the SCOC is better than the rest of us and should be running the country, along with the other literate elite of the MSM and the universities, instead of the Great Unwashed Masses. It will undoubtedly come directly after his newest column calling for a Triple-E Senate. I can type no longer; the emotion has affected me too much. 8=^(

Typical of Martin & Co. Screw the taxpayer any which way you can!, earlier in the week we here about the DINGWALL PAYOUT, Oh No Nothing said before THE ELECTION. Let's hope we win, the taxpayers will forgive & forget anyways! No wonder Emerson got the hell out, You can bet on it, he was going to be the fall guy allright & he knew it. Martin, Chretian all the same, blame somebody else for their *%#%-up's & get the media to do the spinning. For all we know Emerson disagreed with the (Dingwall) payout & with- holding info on the talks. A nice little payback would be if anything at all was revealed to him in his short stint, can we say ADSCAM. iS THIS WHY NONE OF THE HIGH PROFILE LIBERALS DO NOT WANT TO RUN FOR LEADERSHIP? GET SOME POOR LOWLY SMUCK THAT THEY CAN MANIPULATE? & btw "RIGHT ON KATE" I agree "LIGHTEN UP TED"

An insightful article by Peter O'Neil, CanWest News Service, excerpt:

"I expected some of the superficial criticism I've seen," Mr. Harper told The Vancouver Sun in an interview. "But I think once people sit back and reflect, they'll understand that this is in the best interests of not just British Columbia but frankly of good government."

Mr. Harper referred to his statements on Monday, when he said he recruited Mr. Emerson to Cabinet to give Vancouver -- which didn't elect a Tory MP in five city ridings -- a voice in Cabinet.

He used the same rationale to explain why he appointed Tory national campaign co-chairman Michael Fortier, a Montreal businessman, to the Senate and as Minister of Public Works. Montreal, like Vancouver, did not elect a government MP. "I think I was clear what I did and why I did it," Mr. Harper said yesterday.

His two unexpected appointments drew strong criticism in much of the national media coverage yesterday, though the Emerson recruitment was praised by B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell.

The Emerson appointment was also endorsed in editorials by the province's two largest-circulation daily newspapers.
...
Mr. Harper also said yesterday he has already sought and received Mr. Emerson's advice on -- and support for -- the new Tory government's decision yesterday to cancel the planned Liberal privatization of a Crown corporation in northwestern British Columbia.
...
Mr. Harper said he decided during the campaign the sale was a bad idea after meeting in Prince Rupert, B.C., with Ridley management and local business leaders.

"I was convinced that it was the correct decision," Mr. Harper said yesterday.

"Conversations I had, frankly, with Minister Emerson and others, subsequently, convinced me it was the correct decision.

"So we just decided to go ahead and implement it. I think this is in the best interests of northern British Columbia in particular, but also the Canadian economy."

http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/cnspolitics/story.html?id=31021416-faed-43bc-98b0-6181e73c35e8
*************************
I want to point out that Harper didn't say all of the criticism was superficial, and anyone who infers otherwise is being disingeuous. To suggest that Harper said that all criticism of the Emerson deal is superficial is not only deceitful, it is simply false.

Take down the names of the people who try to sell that crap. Let's see if these people have a pattern of being deceitful (see Cerberus The Three Headed Moral Relativist's misleading comments in this thread) and consider whether they belong at the grown-up table, talking politics.

Did Emerson say....

Whatever he said, Paul Martin made the decision to delay the deal until after the election. That much can't be disputed. At least according to the anonymous Liberals; (just love these semi-colons:)

...the powerful Prime Minister's Office was concerned an agreement would stop Paul Martin from using George W. Bush as a campaign punching bag.

So liberals and conservatives are whining about PM Harper's first move as Prime Minister, crying crocodile tears over actions in any other government would get two days play in the media at best.

Meanwhile, the Liberals have possibly destroying the lives of average Canadian workers by playing politics with their livelihoods. Withholding the deal to solve the softwood lumber issue is treason.

Yellow Journalism is a disease spreading throughout Canada. If CTV and the media-elite want to pin this on Emerson knowing that the PMO delayed the deal to end the softwood lumber issue, effectively, they're no different than the National Enquirer.

I think the Liberals actually scotched the softwood deal years ago (2002?) when they sent Pierre Pettigrew to Washington with nothing but Timbits and Hockey jerseys.

Bob Fife was spinning it that Emerson blocked the deal.
Kate Wheeler and the reporter from the TSX outright said it was Emerson that blocked the deal.

I'll be interested to see how it's reported over the course of the day.

If this deal is the juicy plum that the liberals claim, I find it hard to believe that anyone but Martin and his Made Men (re-election team) would delay or scuttle the deal. Given that Martin is no different than Chretien, who after all apprenticed under Trudeau, was when it comes to control, the whole idea is absurd.

No single minister would have the power to delay an agreement as important as this. The only thing that might have made Martin back down on anything would be the spectre of a caucus and/or cabinet revolt.

Cheers

Gerry

Over at AC's blog... at Emerson's constituency office there was a demonstation...public anger...
Showing up were 14 members of the media to cover this 'event' and 2, count'em, 2 demonstrators! lol The Star still ran the photo of one of them holding a sign... (I'm still laughing)

I now understand martins ranting and apparent breakdown during the election. He stalled the SWL deal to bash Bush, win the election and then take credit for the deal. When he saw his loss facing him he tried everything, knowing Emerson would tell the truth about the deal, produce evidence of such deal, and again show the public how corrupt the libs were. If he lost the election, he thought no one would find out and he could skuttle it. So, the lib war room decided to mount an attack on Emerson, forgetting they are no longer important. Emerson knows the deal was done and surpressed, and some liberal has let the cat out of the bag. Is there another crossover after April 3, with no cabinet post. Has it been Emersons plan and Harpers plan to appoint him till the deal is done, and then resign, leaving Vancouver out in the cold. Harper is not stupid, just watch him.
What is the time limit for a by-election to be called. A lot can be accomplished in that time with one less opposition member. Vancouver voters better give their head a shake and wake up.

Oh Ted - LIGHTEN UP, for Chrissakes. I live in an NDP province. They're worse than the Liberals when it comes to sleaze.

Ha! This from someone who's so tightly wound my laptop snaps shut whenever I visit her site.

...oops. Sorry. *ahem*...Right on, Kate!!!!1!

I always love the "a reader emails privately..." Not as lame as cutting and pasting anonymous comments from other blogs, or, you know...making up stuff.

Oh this is sweet indeed. Emerson blocks the softwood lumber deal because it would make him look bad in BC (apparently the deal, if was really there, was not what BC lumber was looking for), and suddenly everyone here is saying it was Martin who blocked it and THAT'S WHY EMERSON DEFECTED!!

Um, so please explain why ONLY YESTERDAY Emerson was saying that if Martin had won the government he would have stuck with the Liberals? Anyone? Anyone?

I think this will probably blow over eventually, leaving a lot of stink in the air around the current government but relatively unharmed (Fortier is the much bigger deal). Emerson, however, comes off bad every single way you look at it. Worse than for Stronach or Brison or O'Brien or Kilgour because he can't and isn't claiming principle. He admits it was because he didn't want to sit in the opposition benches, i.e. he did it for power and influence. For the good you may try to claim, but it's naked politics of power any way you cut it.

Ted
Cerberus

I thought that David Emerson was the Industry Minister in the former Government.

Where the hell was the former Minister of International Trade (was it Jim Peterson?) in this alleged softwood deal that was appears to have been scuttled by the former (and further disgraced) PM Paul Martin?

Off topic... but does anyone know what time Olivia Chow is having her press conference today?
Mike Duffy hinted last night that it would be the NDP putting a gun to Harper's head over childcare.

Nobody is going to buy that one Ted, at the end of the day only one person sign's the cheque. No wonder Martin bailed it's all coming out & the pieces of the puzzle are starting to fit. BTW when you lose by a few votes there is an automatic recount, Has that started in Emerson's riding Yet! Nice try anyway.

From Jose's previous comment:

calgarian "I always thought it was generally accepted knowledge that the Liberals were fundamentally obsessed with suppression of the economy. "

If that was indeed their goal then they didn't do a good job. They couldn't even rack up massive deficits. Pure incompetence really.
----------------------------------------------
---I would say the Liberals might have falsified the numbers or something... entirely possible. Been done before. In Canada.

Besides, they enjoyed a global economic boom, rising exports due to a crappy dollar, the economic power of Alberta contributing to the fed treasury, yet overall Canada has remained economically flatlined. Because the Liberals kept it shackled with their socialistic policies and high taxes. We could've done far, far better. But nope. Trust me. I've been waiting for economic expansion since 1993, but all that happened was a modest recovery from the early nineties' recession and restructuring. Per capita income didn't improve. Fewer high paying full time jobs than before, certainly in NB. More Mcjobs.

Yep, they suppressed the economic potential of Canada.

This whole thing just illustrates the problems which occur when people start frothing at the mouth and get their knickers in twist, before they know the whole story. My recommendation: stayed tuned.............lots more juicy details to come, about this and many other things.

The National enquirerer broke the story of who killed John Belushi.
CTV and their lobbiest Bird ran Martins election here in Ontario and they swept Toronto.

CTV could'nt hold the National Enquireres underwear while it dressed.

The public is still confused over Prime Minister Stephan Harper’s cabinet appointments. The media and talk shows are saturated with condemnation of the appointments. There are now critical expressions flowing from Stephan Harper's caucus and from conservative constituency associations across the country.

The public’s cynicism regarding politicians has been deeply eroded by Stephan Harper. It was Harper and the conservatives who repeatedly argued that it was time to rid the country of a corrupt liberal government and the partisanship that was embedded in the liberal party. Stephan Harper has proven that he can be as devious and disgusting as any liberal. He is a true politician and the public is completely disillusioned. From a purely political perspective the public has every right to feel betrayed and confused.

Now look at this same issue from a parliamentary and democratic perspective. When a person is elected to parliament they become independent Members of Parliament we refer to as Parliamentarians or politicians. On Election Day Canadians elected our 39th parliament and from that parliament a new government was created. In reality, Stephan Harper was free to choose his cabinet members from any elected member of parliament. He was not constrained by political association. The elected liberal, David Emerson was a case in point. It was politically disgusting, but it was parliamentary correct. In theory, David Emerson could have remained a liberal and served in the conservative cabinet of Stephan Harper. The Prime Minister also has the freedom to choose unelected persons to serve in his cabinet. Michael Fortier is a case in point. Here again, it was politically disgusting, but parliamentary correct.

Many Canadians feel a rule should be implemented to prohibit elected Members of Parliament switching from one party to another. On a purely partisan political basis I would agree, but remember they are individual Members of Parliament and should be free to do what they feel is best for their constituency and for their country. This should include free votes on all matters before the House of Commons without the interference and intimidation that leaders of political parties place on individual Members of Parliament. If any rules are to be implemented it should be a rule to prohibit the coercion of individual Members of Parliament to vote along party lines.

As it respects the democratic perspective, the voters can exercise their right to vote and to pass judgment on the performance of all Members of Parliament seeking re-election. Implementing parliamentary rules to deal with these matters would have the effect of diminishing the right of any new Prime Minister to choose his best cabinet from those he felt could best serve the country. It would also diminish the democratic right of individual Members of Parliament to make their best decision as to how they will best serve their constituents and their country. The democratic process then provides for the voters to judge all these decisions at the next election when Members of Parliament seek re-election. This would include turncoats, traitors and those who simply were not earning their bloated salaries. Clearly, there is a distinction between the rules of parliament and the rules of democracy.

The depth of Prime Minister Harper’s dilemma may be the beginning of the end for him and the conservative party. I disagree with how Stephan Harper chose his cabinet and I know he couldn’t care less what I think, but I defend his right to make the parliamentary decisions he made in selecting his cabinet. Setting the issue of hypocrisy aside, Prime Minister Stephan Harper has ignored partisan politics and believes he has chosen the best people from parliament to serve in government. The talent Stephan Harper required for the best cabinet was apparently not available from his own conservative caucus. He may be right! If our new government under Prime Minister Stephan Harper serves our county and our individual expectations then we will soon forget Harper’s tawdry tactics in choosing his cabinet.

Time will tell and the voters will have their say soon enough.

Analogue: Why as Emerson so adamantly anti-Harper in the campaign. Phrases like, "I will be his worst nightmare" etc.

Analogue: Why was Emerson so adamantly anti-Harper in the campaign. Phrases like "I will be his worst nightmare"?

Ah, the beginning of the end. On the first day.

The crackpots come out of the looneybin at the first sign of blood. Should have waited for something of substance. Much like the Democrats in the US, frothing at the mouth for any perceived opening all the while squandering political capital. All we need is our own Howard Dean.
enough

Pedro; it may help to remind you of Harper's words about Jack Layton after the election; he said something to the effect that " he doesn't take personally what Layton did and said during the campaign because he was 'playing to win'. Maybe he feels the same about the Liberals?

What a pompous, arrogant slimeball Emerson is.
Now, he's dragging his kids into this...a problem he set in motion.

If he is at the point where he thinks he can use his kids after screwing his voters, his right to moral authority escaped this planet's gravity quite some time ago.

I also think the same about Dosanjh, Belinda and Brison.

Hey Kate,

Don't you have some sort of contest going re media spin? Check out this headline from Bourque:

TORY CABMIN SKELTON TARGETS TURNCOAT EMERSON

If you follow the link, it takes you to Carol's website - the part where she lists all of the private members' motions from the last parliament!!!

I know. Bourque also states he had 7 million readers in January, so.. eh..

Pd: Bourque is not the media. It's just a blog dressed up as a media aggregator. He'll link to any press release, personal/political website that expresses his views or massacre a story with an over the top headline spin. Like every blog, he's entitled to his opinions and spin, that's his right and I don't object to that, I just wish more people would realize that he has no intention of being "fair and balanced" and is making no attempt to be a journalist.

Ted
Cerberus

Ted: RE bourque, something I finaly agree with you about.

Can someone explain something for me?

How would delaying a deal to put to end the softwood lumber dispute be a bad thing for a government? This has been a festering sore for some time, I would think getting the issue resolved quickly would be what the government of the day should be trying to achieve.

Okay

I just answered my own question.

The Martin goal wasn't ending the dispute, it was using it as a political football to demonize George Bush.

My next question is, what other deals did Martin keep from Canadians?

Someone suggested that Emerson should sit as an independent. Why, pray tell?

Emerson wasn't part of a scheme to subvert a confidence vote in Parliament by crossing the floor. He didn't decide on his own to jump ship. He was asked by the Prime Minister designate of the day to join the Cabinet in order to give the people of Vancouver a louder voice in government. Sounds like a good deal for the people of Vancouver to me.

Although the system of government in the U.S. is not exactly the same as ours I was impressed several times when living in Washington, D.C. to watch the incoming President of a new party offer one seat in his Cabinet to a prominent member of the opposing party (Both Clinton and Bush did so). In one case, for pete's sake, the new Cabinet Secretary became the Defense Secretary!

This doesn't mean that the person asked to join the Cabinet is giving up his/her political identity. It only reflects the fact that it is an honour to serve in the Cabinet of your government and when your head of government asks you to do so, a responsible person is obliged to take the request seriously.

Just my two cents.

Ted. As usual, you miss the point. I'm quite aware of what Bourque's website is (and it isn't a blog). And having seen him on TV, I'm aware of where his "objectivity" (or lack thereof) lies. However, as far as I can tell, he rarely if ever makes "journalistic" comments on his site.

The point is that this "headline" is an outright, blatant lie. It is not spin. (what you usually post is spin) The link has nothing to do with Emerson.

Actually he does, not often but not all that infrequently (maybe once every two weeks), make his own direct commentary. Click on "Notes".

Plus the headline gambit - make it seem like a big scandal but the text of the linked article has no connection or says pretty much the opposite? That's pretty standard Bourque MO. He's been doing that to conservatives for a while and, because he hated Martin and The Board, he turned his "7 million a month" strong missiles at the Liberals during the election. Lies/spin, all the same to him when he wants to make a point.

Ted
Cerberus

What I don't get is WHY the Liberals didn't use the Lumber issue in a positive spin.

It could have just as easy worked for the Liberals bashing.

"See we got the US to bow to our pressure". It would have shown the Liberals were indeed working and putting the screws to Bush over something that has gone on and on. Remember Martin told on national TV (and US) that he was willing to turn off the oil supply to the US and sell to the Chinese if things weren't done with the softwood.

Wait. Ok, so why all of the sudden decide not to show things are working out. I "would have" voted for the Liberals if all I knew was they managed to get a 11th hour deal out of the Yanks.

Meaning, if Emerson 'convinced' Liberal hacks not to say anything, that shows me two things considering the timing - the Liberals at the time weren't doing well in the polls:
1. He's dangerous
2. He's got more pull than we know of.

This is too much for me - my head hurts.

Just what is/has/will be going on??

Oh, yawn. People, this is what we in the States call "August in Washington". Ain't no nothing going on in the capital, so the media chase everything that possibly sounds like a story . . . things get blown up out of proportion. Harper's cabinet *is* a story, but, jeez, get over it already. I hate to break it to you, but if you win an election, "purity" ends that night. What are you people going to do when he (first) cuts a deal with Jack? OR with Bill Graham? But gets a decent bill passed? "Well, it's decent legislation, but at what price?" What have you all been working for all these years? OR have any of you even been working? Do you just bitch about stuff at Tim's and here in comboxes?

Harper made his decisions and he knew the shitstorm would come. He was pragmatic and these things will blow over after Parliament starts. And yet it's turning Andrew Coyne into a lather-mouthed Reformer? You all are frankly the worst winners I've ever seen in my life, and if this keeps up and you all are typical of the Canadian conservative base, this government definitely won't last. Harper is smart and pragmatic and that's HOW he united the right, and now he's being knifed for it. What if we in the States had treated Reagan this way? 'Cause he disappointed the base in many ways. Oy.

Or perhaps I can't get so upset about it b/c we currently have a Democrat cabinet secretary, and Clinton had a Republican cabinet secretary . . . woo hoo. I know it's not quite parallel, but still.

Belinda won in this election because she got Buzz baby up there to campaign with her shortly before the election....don't forget at Daddy Dearest's company are 14,000 auto parts employees!
IMHO that is.

A Liberal blogger is hellish irate/mad/turned off/ & whatever at ex-PM Martin,Jr.

He has seen the light and does not like what the light exposes. It's so sad to have one's hopes/bubbles ... smashed, burst, broken by your own leader.

Junior is missing: SOS. SOS. SOS. SOS.

"Here's a question: Where the hell is Paul Martin in this firestorm?"

February 9, 2006 - Here's a question: Where the hell is Paul Martin in this firestorm? He did say that outside of the House of Commons, he was still the leader of the Liberal party. So, since parliament isn't currently in session, shouldn't he be the one that comments on David Emerson's departure?

Oh wait, he's the guy that thought he should throw Liberal memberships at anyone and everyone.

Former BC premier and staunch NDP ideologue? Check.

Former IWA-Canada President ingrained in the labour movement? Check.

Former forestry executive with Conservative leanings? Check.

Hell, he even welcomed in 7 separatist candidates, and justified it in his typical style of nonsense:

"The fact is that none of those people are separatists. Every single one of them is a Canadian federalist. They're nationalists, but they are not separatists and they have committed themselves very, very strongly to the unity of our country." - April 5, 2004

Martin watered down the Liberal party so that the concepts of loyalty and core beliefs are non-existent,

and now when one of his experiments blows up in his face, he is nowhere to be found.

Yup, he's definitely still leading like he always has. >>>
http://www.tdhstrategies.com/home.html

He's hiding in a hole right now.

"What I don't get is WHY the Liberals didn't use the Lumber issue in a positive spin. It could have just as easy worked for the Liberals bashing.
"

Tomax: you need to ask that? Were you not following the recent campaign? Did you see this campaign team do a single smart or logical or completely obvious thing all campaign long?

"He's hiding in a hole right now."

Kate: hiding or buried/locked in?

Ted
Cerberus

maz2 on Paul Martion " and now when one of his experiments blows up in his face, he is nowhere to be found."

He isn't PM anymore, he's just keeping a seat warm. Besides Harper's base is doing a good enough job taking pot shots. If Martin steps in they'll stop firing. Its Politics 101: Don't interrupt your enemies internal battles.

Paul Marting is hiding in a hole like Saddam was hiding in a hole when they found him.

http://www.petitiononline.com/RDE/
The Liberals in Vancouver are so mad they want a recall???? Should I let them know that The Federal Goverment does not have recall?

**ATTENTION PLEASE!**

Jose wrote:

"Harper's base is doing a good enough job taking pot shots. If Martin steps in they'll stop firing. Its Politics 101: Don't interrupt your enemies internal battles."

For all the so-called "loyal" Consevatives out there please pay attention to what our liberal friend has just said.

You don't like PM Harper's first move, well thats understandable i guess, but can i ask you all a question? Would you rather have the Liberals back?

Right now ask we speak the media is using all of your negative comments about this situation to fuel the fires of controvery. Can I just say we get it, your pissed, you placed Harper on a pedistal and he didn't live up to your expectations. OK, lets all take a deep breath and hope for the best.

Harper let you down on this one, but that doesn't mean we should drag him out of office. Can we all agree that even at slightly less than perfect we prefer this government to the previous? We're trying to create momentum in this country toward a more rational form of government, why are you so eager to hamstring that movement before it can even begin?

For all the pissed off Conservatives out there, I'm sorry but I don't know how to put this politely.

SHUT UP!

Here's a thought-
What if the dispute is solved rather quickly and Emmerson steps down to run again as a Conservative?
He really probably doesn't need the job, just the satisfaction of completing the assignment.
Anyway, would the good folks of Vancouver be satisfied and re-elect him?

Ryan, you are correct. If we are ready to dump him over this and stay true to our principles, we'll stay in opposition forever. This is the big leagues and we'd better be ready to play hard. In fact, it's all within the rules. Just, some think the rules need to be changed. Fact is, the majority are satisfied to leave the rules as they are

Am new,so bear with me,please!
Anyone else noticing the eastern reporters anger? Am thinking they are not used to actually going out to investigate anything on their own,are only used to having Liberal "leaks" told to them,and are now being shut out by the Conservatives.They are coming across as very irritated!

Stephen Harper has the liberals on the run.Have to love the miserable socalist maggots aka msm for going completly bonkers when set up by emerson for a no show on public t.v.

cheers dave.

Lord..have mercy on the verbose ignorant. On second thought..DON'T. Would that many would be struck deaf and dumb until this 'made in media heaven' firestorm subsides. This is ALL liberal dirty dealings. They cannot stand for anybody to play the game of politics UP FRONT and CLEANLY and beat them. But Stephen Harper has done JUST THAT.
Now they employ drive by shootings from the lip hoping the mud and shit will stick ..trouble is there is a mighty wind blowing and it covers them in their own barrels of sticky and smelly goo.
Cows should fly and know where every liberal operative works and lives!
That Emerson had a deal in his back pocket on Softwood lumber, credit would be more to his own efforts than anything PMPM could ever come up with on his best day.
Anytime a Canadian government sends a greasy haired frenchman to Washington to negotiate, they simply ARE NOT SERIOUS about settling anything and the Americans know it. It has been bait and stall , bait and stall. The US has a strong lobby but not that strong, especially when the giants in the lumber industry DEMAND superiour BC lumber for their housing market.
The Canadian government DID NOT WANT a settlement with the Americans, no matter how many Canadian lumber workers got put out of a job.
They don't care and never have. It is all about 'perception' 'optics' and NO substance.
All the screaming and hollering about ETHICS was not nearly as loud and frenetic when we sat and put up with YEARS of out right theft, corruption, criminal actions. Putting people out of their jobs in Ottawa when they dared to object to this criminal activity.. we all sat on our hands ( either that or wrung them fretfully) And when we had the chance to turf the bums out? They end up wiht 103, now 102 seats??!!
And now everybody ( seemingly) is up in arms over a political, legal and parlimentary tactic used since Confederation to excoriate a decent man and a fine new Prime Minister?
90%of the people mouthing off know nothing of Canadian political history and parlimentary rules , but they are sure ready to speak and remove all doubt of their ignorance.
I just love Kate's article and comments regarding Bob Fife and the lib operatives... "putting the barrel in your mouth" .. priceless and right to the point. If they pull the trigger all the better but I will settle for them SHUTTING UP and packing their pathetic political duds and slinking home. They don't run the place anymore.
They think they do and they expect the media to help them see to it they are back making the rules and shaking us down VERY SOON.

Just one more thing.....

gamesmanship:

n : the use of dubious (although not technically illegal) methods to win a game

This is all about using the current rules to ones advantage, it doesn't mean reform can't take place later, but until it does it would be irresponsible not to use whatever legal advantage one has.

Nice guys finish last, when you enemy is down don't ever let your foot off his throat.

TB, well to be honest, I didn't follow the elections at all. I just remember the good (bad) job they did last time of torpedoing the Conservatives and figured with the early CPC ads were as lame as Grade B sci-fi movie.

Remember the conspiracy with the cup handles facing to the right...

After that I gave up on them. But glad the Conservatives won.

If people want to change the rules for MP's changing parties between elections then they should work towards that goal. However until that happens nothing has changed and SH has the same rights as previous PMs to do what he wants to insure the success of his government and improve the chances of his re-election. The hypocrisy of liberal supporters is nauseating.
They should put their country first and political
party second. (as we all should)

Stockwell Day and John Duncan were in the opposition when the Cretian and Pittypants were refusing to negotiate a new trade agreement with the U.S. before the then currant deal expired. Cretian and pittypants snubbed the 'ready to deal' envoy from the U.S. It was just another attempt by the CENTRALIST government (Liberano) to break the Western and Eastern and Atlantic economies. Lots of people lost everything they owned because of the Liberanos deliberate moves NOT to do their jobs as Public Servants - yet - some still voted for them!! Lets hope that there are many more people like David Emmerson, people who have enough brains to admit that they were shooting themselves in the foot by voting Liberano/Dipper and proceed to move there boots to another camp. The Conservative Party will welcome all reformed Liberals and Dippers and Blocers.

Crap! There was no holding back by Martin.

A win in the softwood dispute, or even some settlement would have meant a better chance of winning the election.

Power is priority ONE! Delay = crap. TG

What a disaster for Kingsway. Probably only a handful of happy folks there.

n.

I am pro NDP and I campaigned hard for Svend Robinson, but as a westerner I had high hopes for Stephen Harper at his swearing in. I was proud of him. Sadly for Canada and the west he squandered every gram of moral authority in one fell swoop by stealing the hard fought votes of Vancouver Kingsway. I have heard every morally twisted argument by tories from across Canada as to why it was okay to steal Emerson from the people of Vancouver Kingsway, a riding that has only gone conservative once in its history, and then in 1954, but they all ring hollow. Kick the bas*d David Emerson out and call a new election. Otherwise Haiti will look like a glowing bastion of democracy in comparison to Canada.

Tony, by the time PMPM got the job the damage to the softwood deal was done.

The dispute is still headed to the SCOTUS in regards to the "dispute mechanism".

If that is found to be unconstitutional then the LIBs and Dippers have a basis that could still tear ALL of NAFTA down.

BC and Canada need a deal and they need it soon.

I think PMSH is going to get one too. :0)

The country needs people like David Emerson ,we can,t have lifetime politicians in Ottawa.I respect someone who stays a short length and gets the hell out

overseas car insurance car insurance price http://pidorovtut.net/car_insurance/car_insurance_kansas.html car insurance policy form car insurance quote coverage carriers http://pidorovtut.net/car_insurance/car_insurance_information.html and .... car insurance discount uk car insurance quotes http://pidorovtut.net/car_insurance/car_insurance_rates.html budget car insurance car insurance certificate http://pidorovtut.net/car_insurance/pennsylvania_car_insurance_companies.html california car insurance rate privilege car insurance http://pidorovtut.net/car_insurance/progressive_car_insurance_quote.html .Thanks.