It was only last spring when Conservative supporters were posting here and elsewhere asking why “honest Liberals” were standing by the corrupt. They were openly hoping one or two more might just turn their backs on Paul Martin to help bring the government down.
Today, one has chosen to walk away from the corrupt to strengthen a Conservative government with a clean slate – and the same people receive the news with handwringing and angst.
I live in a province in which the conservative party of the day once won both the highest number of seats and the popular vote – only to watch two Liberals take cabinet positions in a Romanow government as their price for keeping the NDP in power. And they still have power.
There wasn’t much the SaskParty could do about it, but at least the purity of their principle kept conservatives warm at night.
Well, no it didn’t, come to think of it. A lot of our best and brightest left the province and they still do. While dippers nationwide swoon at the mention of Romanow today, Saskatchewan’s economy endures crumbling infrastructure, declining population, rising crime rates, predatory crown corporations and the worst business tax environment in the Western world.
So, here is some very old advice, from a source many will recognize –” Don’t strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.”
I’m glad a Liberal MP crossed and I hope more of them do. David Emerson’s a big boy, he can face the deserved criticism from the electors. But should he become the first floor-crosser in modern Canadian history forced to run in a byelection just to prove a point about “Conservative principle”?
Are we nuts??
Certainly, I’d have preferred he’d gone to the back benches and earned his way into cabinet – but then, I don’t have the task of building a larger tent, quelling a persistant media theme on the “lack” of urban MP’s, balancing regional representation, and finding the experience and talent to solve long standing international trade disputes.
I expected there would be decisions made by Harper I wasn’t going to like, and I expect there to be more.
Pragmatic politics isn’t always done tastefully, and sometimes you swallow when you’d rather spit – but the parliamentary rules allowed what was done today, and as has been pointed out ad nauseum, Harper has done nothing particularly novel when compared to previous administrations.
However – if there is to be any hope of the type of democratic renewal possible only under a majority government, we had better get a grip on the very real fact that the present rules are the ones everyone else plays by, and that they lend themselves to crass political opportunism because they have been crafted and refined by crass political opportunists.
For the Conservatives not to use all legal parliamentary precedents to their advantage because of concerns over principle and optics, will only ensure the return of power to a Liberal Party proven to have no such reservations.
But, by all means, if gnats such as these cabinet appointments are this unpalatable to you – wrap your lips around that big, red beast until it’s been sucked back into power and any hope for meaningful change in how we are governed, protected and taxed is swept away for another decade.
For now, let’s hope Harper employs every legal loophole, every opportunity, every bit of leverage at his disposal to keep the Liberals as disorganized, dazed and confused as possible.
Anything less would be political malpractice.
john,
That’s the whole point – ethics did not need to be thrown out the window to build the cabinet. There were other qualified candidates to fill cabinet positions. Harper had to pay off a favour in Quebec with Fortier and used the Liberal back door to do it. I don’t know what he was thinking.
Lew,
“Harper had to pay off a favour in Quebec with Fortier and used the Liberal back door to do it. I don’t know what he was thinking.”
Please post the information that shows Harper “had to pay off a favor in Quebec”.
I don’t think the “Liberal back door” was used. The Prime Minister has been quite upfront about all this. Yes, the Prime Minister probably had other options but he chose this path for a reason. You are quite right in not knowing what he was thinking but I’ll hazard a guess he knew what was coming…..
It’s one thing to be pissed but please stop blowing smoke. It’s very unbecoming.
Politics, last refuge of the scoundrel. Well, sorta.
Whining and a looney might get you to Tim’s.
But aside from Msrrs. Emmerson and Fortier, we now have Toronto as the odd man out. Lots of cabinet opportunities still available. So who wants to be Minister of the Waterfront? Hello Ken? Tony? Michael?
Applications available. Line forms to the right.
POWER…Myyy Preciousss…
DC In YOW.
I will stop blowing smoke when I get an explanation from Stephen Harper why it is now OK to govern like Liberals when it wasn’t OK a few months ago.
Excellent post Kate.
The hysteria over these moves is so bloody bizarre.
Perhaps all the pure virgins out there should wander off and form a new party.
It seems like a lot of you can only handle being in PERPETUAL OPPOSITION.
“Isn’t the job of the CPC to convert people to our cause?”
I’d sooner convert Liberal voters than Liberal politicians. And how do we do that when, on our very first day in power, we pull a couple of tricks right out of the old Liberal playbook? We sold ourselves in this election in large part on doing things differently from them, on being better than them, on giving Canadians a government they could be proud of again. Now we just handed the “Well, they’re all the same,” crowd a big reason to not believe another word we ever have to say on the subject. Some start!
“Strike One” says I. I’m not going to go tear up my card but I don’t want to see us swing right through the next ethical pitch.
“Today, one has chosen to walk away from the corrupt to strengthen a Conservative government with a clean slate…..”
You can’t possibly be serious. Do you really believe this?
“I will stop blowing smoke when I get an explanation from Stephen Harper why it is now OK to govern like Liberals when it wasn’t OK a few months ago”
Thanks Lew. Please let us know when you get that explanation so we know you are no longer blowing smoke.
Kate: Well said; knock out, them main stream media types and Liebranos.
DC In YOW,
I won’t be blowing smoke at you anymore. There are better places to discuss these issues than with Conservatives who don’t believe in their own party platform.
I can see what has got the liberal party in a rage over this.
Its not that Emerson crossed the floor, its that now they realize they are not dealing with some boyscout.
Stephen Harper is not Joe Clark and Paul Martin is definitely not PET.
Stephen is not going to play nice with the liberals.
I suspect the next surprise will be when the RCMP charges the liberal party under the elections act for past misdeeds….another gift to Canada courtesy of the Gomery Inquiry.
Then its not really necessary to have a leadership race if there’s no party to lead now is there?
Lew,
I am actually on your side. However, you statements that “Harper owes Quebec ” are flat out false and provides no basis for discussion.
I have stated that I would have preferred Emerson be independent and Fortier to be elected but I am going to give the benefit of the doubt to the Prime Minister. He had nothing to gain from this politically and he knew he was going to take a ton of grief. It is possible he just wanted experienced people in Van and Mon and he went outside the box. No one is being watched closer than the Prime Minister (well except maybe Belinda…..). I doubt his motives are sinister. He might have lost a few here but he may have picked up a few more elsewhere.
This is hilarious.
Firstly, does it not strike any of you die-hards that in order for the Conservatives to get someone accomplished and competent that you had to look at a mid-level Liberal Minister?
Let me give you a clue – there are actually several more there on the Liberal side who are much more qualified than any of your guys (including the top one), so why don;t you go for them as well, starting with Paul Martin?
I have no particular issue with Emerson – he is a good and capable man with broad relevant experience – the kind of person we want in public life. It’s just a shame that until he joined up with your party, Conservatives universally disparaged him and his colleagues and tarred him with the same broad brush you tarred all LIberals.
What you apologists seem to be missing is that the problem is with your freshly minted new little PM. It is now glaringly obvious to all observers that he played the likes of you for fools and that all of his righteous indignation on so many issues was false and just playing for the cameras. I would have thought that it would be with sadness that you would have greeted his abject hypocrisy on issues I had been led to believe you felt very strongly about.
It seems that your “principles” are extremely flexible indeed, to the point that it is a complete joke to call them such.
Wow… you have incredible insights.
I’m glad that you realize something I have always know, too. That Conservatives can entice people to cross the floor, or appoint Senators, or change rules with honesty and integrity… because we’re conservatives and that means somethings.
Liberals are small minded and bad.
Keep up the good work.
“Kate, You are dead on. Public school boy honour and ethics will not get far in national politics. If the party were to insist on taking a moral stand on every issue the Tories would not have won.”
Right on. Screw the voters of Vancouver Kingsway. So Harper and Emerson conspired to defraud them. Boo hoo! Grow up, people! Politics is war. What do you think this is supposed to be — a democracy or something?
Dr. Dawg:
If Jack Layton and Olivia Chow were paying “market rate” for their Hazelburn co-op apartment, then why oh why did Layton agree to pay an extra $325.00 per month after the issue was exposed by a Toronto newspaper? And even at that rate, his rent was $1125 versus the market rate of $1500. At the time JAck and Olivia’s combined income (from the public purse of course), was $120K.
The best thing about Champange Socialists like LAyton is that they tend to accomplish absolutely nothing positive but feel really good and pious about their great intentions.
Garry P.: Best I can do at this point.
“Layton and Chow were also the subject of some dispute when a June 14, 1990 Toronto Star article by Tom Kerr accused them of unfairly living in a federally subsidized housing cooperative, despite their high income. Layton and Chow had both lived in the Hazelburn Co-op since 1985, and lived together in an $800 per month three-bedroom apartment after their marriage in 1988. By 1990, their combined annual income was $120,000, and in March of that year they began voluntarily paying an additional $325 per month to offset their share of the co-op’s Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation subsidy, the only members of the co-op to do so. Average Toronto market rent in 1989 was $782 per month, although the Vancouver Province newspaper claimed a comparable dwelling would have been worth $1,500.
“In response to the article, the co-op’s board argued that having mixed-income tenants was crucial to the success of co-ops, and that the laws deliberately set aside apartments for those willing to pay market rates, such as Layton and Chow. During the late 1980s and early 1990s they maintained approximately 30% of their units as low income units and provided the rest at what they considered market rent. In June 1990, the city’s solicitor cleared the couple of any wrong-doing, and later that month, Layton and Chow left the co-op and bought a house in Toronto’s Chinatown together with Chow’s mother, a move they said had been planned for some time. Former Toronto mayor John Sewell later wrote in NOW Magazine that rival Toronto city councillor Tom Jakobek had given the story to Tom Kerr.”
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Layton
Dr. Dawg,
Thanx for the update….plse allow me to complete my own research before savouring the “crow-under-glass”, should that be necessary.
The hew and cry is of course delightful, from the Liberal encampment decrying the floor crosser.
I didn’t see them having a sudden case of ethics when Scott Brison or Belinda Stronach came their way.
So now PM Stephen Harper returns the divide and conquer favour to the Liberals; and they are smarting for being visited with their own behaviour? The kettle calling the pot black eh?
Well better a floor crosser, than a cross (angry?) dresser (read Belinda Stronach). So Stephen Harper has used LEGAL rules of the game to construct the cabinet.
The Liberals used ILLEGAL means to retain their grip on power over a 10 year period, a la ADSCAM.
I have yet to see anyone accuse the Conservative Party of being “on the take” with taxpayer monies. The Liberals were “window dressing” their illegitimate hold on power for 10 years and attempted to ignore confidence votes in May 2005; even to Karen Redman Liberal Government Whip suggesting they “were considering not observing future confidence votes between now and the end of the spring session.(May 25th, 2005)” NOW YOUR VOTE TRULY MEANS NOTHING.
So PM Stephen Harper slapshots the Liberals a blistering puck; the referee rules the goal keeper was ALSLEEP!!! The audience who misjudged where the blue line was was suddenly cry foul? The democratic foul occured in May and June of 2005 folks; time to wake from your slumber and get the coffee of your choice!!!!
Now for the zinger Belbimbo Strumpet, has endorser Buzz Bunny hail from the NDP, joins the Liberals and advocated voting for the Bloc Quebecois while the former PM Paul Martin and Belinda Stronach look on and say nothing.
Belinda of course crossed the floor ostensibly to stop the Conservatives who were in league with the SEPARATISTS. Now one of the Liberal parties chief endorsers Buzz Bunny makes this statement in front of Belinda and she says “I don’t care where I get my supporters from.”
Well guess what? PM Stephen Harper doesn’t worship at the church of Our Lady of Perpetual Stupidity.
Belinda meanwhile can check out the confessional for her sins of ommission to federalism. Yep I’m going to take my lessons in democracy by suggesting:
WE WILL NOT OBSERVE VOTES OF CONFIDENCE IN THE HOUSE OF PARLIAMENT.
So the nation was almost on the deathbed of democracy with ADSCAM and votes of confidence and separatists at the throats of the country and people are worried about DE coming to his senses after “Slagfest 2006”.
A little perspective people, as Michael Bliss noted historian suggested in May 2005 we were launching a “Proto-Tyranny”.
So PM Stephen Harper starts to build some bridges to redress western alienation, Quebec separatism by including a few sharp shooters from Vancouver and Montreal in his cabinet and we are going to get all exercised with faux outrage.
Well spare me, where the HELL was your outrage when it should have counted back in May and June 2005??
MSM your outrage is misplaced for all the wrong reasons. In my democratic lexicon the notion of unity in the country and respecting confidence votes takes precedence over the floor crosser.
Well if we are now going to play Justice Kanga and Justice Roo running the new donkey and camel show; save me your dirges.
What the hell happened to denying opposition days, ignoring motions that the House adjourn etc.? Are our memories so short that the Liberals have been playing a viper’s game?
Time to grow up and get over the faux outrage and false pieties.
BTW maybe you should be thanking Jack Layton you got the chance vote democratically in any case.
Or perhaps you would like to continue to have the Libs dictate the divide and conquer tactics for another 10 years?
So perhaps PM Stephen Harper is building bridges to the city state communities unlike the divide and conquer strategy employed by the former Libs in the West and Quebec for how long?
Get some blessed perspective and at least have a memory of what has just occurred!!
Systematic subversion of the democratic process
In your ballot boxes
In your cities
In Canada
We are not making this up.
Why the Mainstream Media is despised…
…almost as much as lawyers.
Prime Minister Harper invites a David Emerson, a member of the opposition, to join his governing team for the express purpose of continuing the work on behalf of Canada that the Emerson was doing before his party lost p…
to everyone rationalizing these new backroom deals and unelected appointments… you’re frikkin hypocrites. Besides the liberals you’re the other half the reason this country has no spine. The Belinda deal was for the “greater good” of the Liberal agenda if you want to paint it with the same brush, but you don’t because of your blindness of greed which was the same thing the libs were appeasing in themselves which you claimed to despise before… As for the ones patronizingly pronouncing that politics isn’t pretty and a different set of ethics apply… kiss my arse. MP’s and ministers damn well better be ethical and ELECTED!! bloody pea-brained sychophants…the lot of you. Have another sip of the kool-aid.
Harper saved Canada from the separatist threat in Quebec that was created by Liberal criminality … how quickly Liberal stooges forget and then attack the very person that brought Quebec back into Canada …. except for those stupid west island Montrealers who elected their beloved Liberal criminals … and now Harper is trying to save their sorry arses by appointing Fortier to a temporary Senate seat to represent those Morontrealers …. and all they do is attack him for trying to repair the damage the Liberal traitors to Canada have done.
Harper is bravely trying to unite Canada with his cabinet appointments …. but the Liberal slime are true to form trying to attack Harper for his heroic decision to bring Canadians together …. !!!
Liberals are certainly proving their disloyalty to a united Canada by attempting to attack Harper the person rather than thinking about the welfare of all of Canada.
Liberals are so out of touch with Canada and Canadians and deserve the oblivion they are marching towards … believe it … !!!
I have been doing a lot of reading on the blogs on this subject and have distilled the arguments down to two basic arguments.
(1) David Emerson was elected because he ran as a Liberal and therefore it is unethical for him to join the Conservative government without seeking a new mandate from his constituents. This is the “we elect political parties” argument.
(2) David Emerson is primarily an MP and therefore has been given a mandate to exercise judgement on behalf of his constituents, even if that means crossing the floor. This is the “we elect individuals to represent us in parliament” argument.
The reality is that both arguments are valid depending on which voter you are talking to.
I imagine I would have felt betrayed if I was from Aurora and had voted for Belinda Stronach in June 2004 simply because she happened to be the Conservative candidate. But the fact is, I despise the party system, even though I find it very difficult to vote without taking party affilation into consideration. And because I am so fed up with our party system I lean towards siding with argument 2, because I believe that ideally we would choose individuals to represent us, and ideally parties would not exist because I believe political parties undermine representational democracy.
Having said that, I think that Emerson excercised poor judgement in his campaign and I don’t support the notion that simply because he has the best resume and is willing to wear the Conservative coat that he is the best MP to represent Canada in our International Trade ministry. Obviously, other important facts played into Prime Minister Harper’s decision to bring Emerson on board, the least not being that the CPC was shut out of the metropolitan cities.
I have no particular issue with Emerson – he is a good and capable man with broad relevant experience – the kind of person we want in public life. It’s just a shame that until he joined up with your party, Conservatives universally disparaged him and his colleagues and tarred him with the same broad brush you tarred all LIberals.
Well duh, he was supporting a corrupt regime. Why wouldn’t be be tarred with the same brush?
Hoss, details… details…
I would like to see Harper spell out why he did this. Make him answer hard questions.
However, having said that, so far in all the news I can get in Vancouver, they think it’s a great thing.
I’ve been trying to get info on how Emerson’s riding really feels about this. Maybe they’re relieved, maybe not. That should be foremost on everyone’s minds. How do those who live there and voted for him feel? Harper also talks about free votes, if that’s the case, is
Emerson always going to vote with the Conservatives?
I’ve been reading a lot of knee-jerk reactions, and emotionally I agree with them. However, despite the fact that we live in an informational superhighway, some things do take time to sort out, to get ACCURATE information.
Let’s give this time, before we barf out more rhetoric.
Hoss and Maple Stump – now remember, drink ALL of the koolaid, and remember that your little hero PMSH is INFALLIBLE – that’s right – INFALLIBLE.
If exhibits the same behaviour he once decried as contemptible, undemocratic, corrupt etc… it is ok because he spouts the same ideology as you.
In fact, it is not only ok, but it is noble and honourable because everything he does is done in the “best interests of the country” because he is our little hero, even it is exactly the same or worse than what has previously caused he and his brethren to spew venom and foam at the mouth in the past.
I would feel sorry for you poor little sods for worshipping false idols, but you (well at least the apologists like the above 2) are so completely juvenile and stupidly partisan that it is difficult to feel bad for you.
So much for getting more info before BARFING more rhetoric. Good one Jimbo
so what are we going to call this newly amalgamated Cons./Lib. party??….How about the Coalition of the Non-ethical Quasi-right…….The more things change…..the more people you find who make bad errors in judgement
David Emerson is a big boy; if he wants to show that he has got jam why not do a by-election?
Tequila Sheila did in the dust up over the GST.
Doing so would show a touch of class not to mention accountability.
Maybe the electorate in his riding will agree he left the Liberals for all the right reasons.
Maybe his riding should have an election on whether they want a by-election 😉
There was no mention of a byelection when Belinda switched sides. The prospect of an election is not much less now than it was when she left (her departure all but secured the passage of the budget).
Quit crying like babies my fellow conservatives.
And well said as always Kate!
“purity of principle” Could someone explain just what conservative “principles” are and how they are acted upon in the public square. I hear a whole lot of talk, but we all know that’s the cheapest thing going. At best, the gum-flapping one hears from those who call themselves conservative is as delusional as it is side-splittingly laughable. At worst, it’s nauseatingly hypocritcal.
Your correct in stateing that there is nothing novel about what Harper has done in comparison to previous governments, but unfortunately this the very reason it is so disturbing. He is turning his back on supporters who came into the fold beleiving that old style politics of cronyism where you appoint your friends to plum jobs was over. He was going to herald in a new era of rewarding talent. But faced with his forst real decisions he has completely reverted to the sratus quo. The lure of power has put lofty principles on the back burner once again. These actions reinforce the critics that say he can’t be trusted with complete control. It has done nothing to convert the voters who cast their ballots against him, but has only softened his own support. The Liberals and NDP have to be licking their chops at this amazing stumble out of the gates.
I agree that bringing David Emerson on board had strategical significance when you study the numbers of votes in the House and I could hold my nose and swallow given the obvious strengths that Mr Emerson will bring to his new Portfolio. However, the clear patronage appointment was absolutely unneccesary and could end up being the achilles heal of his government. The simple fact of the matter is that it was a payoff for the results Mr Fortier brought in Quebec.
Personnally if I new things were going to be same old same old, then my vote might be migrateing south with the ducks.
Lets study the reason for this appointment that goes against everthing Mr Harper has been preaching. He needs representation from Montreal, what about the notion that the Government should work for all Canadiands independant of their voting preferences. Has this not been the root cause of Western Alienation. If you don’t vote with the Government we aren’t going to pay attention to you.
Also don’t underestimate the optics of 3 cabinet members in Alberta with 28 seats verses 5 cabinet posts in Quebec with 10 seats.
The hill suddenly got very steep for Mr Harper lets just hope this incompetence does not continue.
It would also appear that the infiltration of the Mulroney gang and the progressives would prefer the status quo in our Democracy.
Jim, PMSH called Quebec the heart of Canada, right? I mean, isn’t that the most important part? Well, surely that deserves special consideration?
It is part of business, as we all know companies steal employees from other companies all the time. Time to grow up people.
I was bought, took a much better offer from a competitor. It happens all the time. Everyone knows someone who moved to another job for a better offer.
I see that Harper is treating his position as a business leader and is making decisions on best fit for the job.
Come on, every company is pissed when they lose a star employee. Everyone expects loyalty but we all chase higher expectations for ourselves.
Pretty convoluted justification proferred to justify the unjustifiable Ms Werk. Harper has a reputation as a skillful strategist but sometimes his political antennae do seem to just go on the fritz (witness the stupid child porn accusations during the last election).
What a waste of hard and honestly earned political capital though. Still I’m pretty confident Harper will be cut some slack due to the need perceived even by the liberal MSM for an alternative to the Natural Governing Party, and the understandable greenness (new word � dsk_5) leading to the occassional misstep that might be expected from someone who’s never held real political power.
Et tu, Brute?
Paul Wells asks whether David Emerson is Harper’s Harriet Miers. Well I guess superficially all the furious conservatives may seem the same, but no, it’s not the same thing, because: David Emerson was still a card-carrying Liberal when he got…
Et tu, Brute?
Paul Wells asks whether David Emerson is Harper’s Harriet Miers. Well I guess superficially all the furious conservatives may seem the same, but no, it’s not the same thing, because: David Emerson was still a card-carrying Liberal when he…
James Moore:
“I think it shows there are two kinds of people in public life — people with principle and people like Belinda Stronach,”
Pierre Poilievre:
“It has everything to do with the fact she was offered a plum job and Paul Martin is offering every bribe he can to cling on to power,”
Tony Abbott:
“To me, what it is, it’s a little rich girl basically whoring herself out to the Liberals,”
Bob Runciman:
“I think she sort of defined herself as something of a dipstick — an attractive one, but still a dipstick — with what she’s done here today,”
Dave Hancock:
“It’s appalling,”
Bernard Lord:
“This is just another action, another moment, that breeds cynicism of electors,”
And, of course, there’s Harper himself:
“There’s no grand principle involved in this decision, just ambition.”
Harper said Stronach’s fellow MPs “are feeling quite devastated, quite betrayed by this”
And then there is appointed to the Senate without being elected. That’s not just disappointing, it’s a shame.
I am not making this up. This happened. On Feb 6, 2006. In Canada. With Harper’s Con government barely minutes old.
This whole commentary reminds me of the one and only single thing I like in the American System. Why can’t Harper put Emerson in the cabinet and he still stay a Liberal? Is there a sanction or something preventing this? That is why I think after some thought Harper concluded preventing Stronach from jumping would put too much power in the hands of the party and ‘party leaders’.
Part of democratic renewal would be to marginalize the parties. There was actually a few ridings including my own where independents made a strong case for not electing a party member. I am glad that argument worked in one riding.
As far as appointing someone to the senate like he did … pure genius. Quebec doesn’t give a damn about where their leverage comes from.
len…good point! I believe partisanship to Party(as opposed to partisanship to constituents) is the weakness in present governments.
I used this past election time to try and start a new political party. I call it the Representative Democracy Party of Canada, founded on one precept..”that the elected representative, on any issue, will always respect the majority opinion of his constituents”
Kate: your implication in the second paragraph that Emerson is some corruption-smashing, noble man of principle standing up against the mafia-esque Liberals is laughable and groundless. Do you forget that barely a few weeks ago Emerson claimed he would be “Stephen Harper’s worst enemy”? Funnily enough, in a way you could say he now is. In any case, this is not a quote from a man loyal to principle. This is a man saying what he needs to say in order to get re-elected. And now he is a man doing what he needs to do to gain power, even if that means betraying his constituents.
White paint is literally seeping from your keyboard.
Harper believes Liberal ways are best
Mr. Harper had two options this week to ensure that the Conservative party could win a majority in the next election.
1) Follow in the foot steps of the Liberal party � appoint friends to Senate, bribe other party members with pay raises and power. The brain trust around Harper saw that people in ridings don’t vote for your policies but to get local power. Thus appoint someone from Montreal and Vancouver to gain votes in next election.
2) Harper could have decided that people will be impressed when they see him bring in real policies that help them. Forget the political games � live up to your promises and people will respect that. People will vote because they realize that the new Government is not scary, is accountable and functions differently than the Liberal party.
The brain trust around Harper, including Harper, decided Liberal political games are the way to win votes � not policies.
Link to holding Conservatives accountable
After his 2004 election loss Harper immediately started to plan for the next one. When winning a minority on Jan 23, he immediately started planning for a majority in the next one. We all know how his plans worked out, so give him a chance. I imagine most of the conservative voters on here voted for the NDP or Libs, and are trying to manipulate a backlash in the Harper caucus. The remind me of all those terrorists protesting a cartoon, when in fact it is now coming out that it was a planned protest action. Where and how did all those Dannish flags come from in those countries that are burning them. Who bought them and gave them to the protestors. Were these flags a common item in stores in muslim countries. It is nothing but an attempt to start a world war, or to win by getting all the leftists in the world to feel sorry for them. A cartoon upsets them, but beheadings don’t. Wake up Canadians before it is to late.
From a commentor above:
“Perhaps all the pure virgins out there should wander off and form a new party.”
Yes, it was called Reform.
From the same commentor:
“It seems like a lot of you can only handle being in PERPETUAL OPPOSITION.”
Thats what happens when, as a conservative party, you fracture the right.
What this Emmerson episode has reaffirmed for me is that ALL politicians lie. I’ve got to learn to lower my expectations.
Martin arranged Stronach’s cross-over and her cabinet seat to survive a political crisis of the hour — a vote of confidence. Harper arranged Emerson’s crossover to strengthen the Conservative Party in BC, for the long term Whether or not it will do that only the long term will tell. But reasons do matter
Kate,
Are there any other of your values that you’re willing to give up in the name of a politician?
Adrian
I believe all the whiners about Emerson leaving to join the Conservatives are angry and upset Liberals or wannabes. Yes, that includes the following Conservatives that attack their own party based on their own belief of what they think is right. We have all these so-called Conservatives that think they know what is best for Canada and the Conservative Party.
GUESS WHAT MORONS, IF YOU THINK YOU CAN DO A BETTER JOB, GET OUT AND RUN FOR LEADER OF THE PARTY.
Right, I see so many of you standing up and willing to make the difficult choices.
Have some faith in the early decision making and see the how the Conservatives govern over the next 4 months until they get to a budget bill and then you can cry and complain if things don’t work out.
Grow up.