jbg Posted June 30, 2008 Report Posted June 30, 2008 Stronach at least had an excuse. She ran as "red Tory" but the party turned away from "red Tory" values. She said she followed the will of her constituents (and she was reelected).Stronach was out-and-out bribed. The Government faced the loss of a confidence vote, and it needed someone to switch in order to avoid that result. Stronach was given a Cabinet seat as her recompense to prop up the Government.Emerson wsa not needed for the new Conservative government to be able to organize. He was needed for his own unique abilities and merits in handling his portfolio. That's very different. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
madmax Posted June 30, 2008 Report Posted June 30, 2008 I really don't have a problem with Fortier, I do with Emerson though. He should either ignore regional issues, or take on more unelected cabinet ministers. Emerson was elected. Fortier was NOT elected. If we are going to put party hacks into the Senate and then give them Cabinet positions, then why bother with elections. My problem with both Emerson and Fortier are with regards to Stephan Harper and his betrayal of the better Reform policies. All the spinning and sweet talking and excuse making cannot hide the fact that Harper cast doubt upon the party within hours of taking office. An immediate loss of trust. So regardless of Emerson being a turncoat, the first thing you have to remember is he is a Liberal, so that is to be expected. There isn't alot of difference between the two governments and Emerson proves that point. He has been given two high profile positions, and he is from "the west" so, Harper didn't have to chose Emerson over another Western MP, because of Government Politics, more it was because of CPC party opportunism he choose Emerson. "Hey, look at us, we don't mean a damn thing that campaigned on and the electorate will forget." Regardless, one duffus is replaced. And two people who believe in a "party of entitlement" are given powerful portfolios. On the whole. Nobody cares a wit about the cabinet shuffle or this government. And so the free ride continues as it did when the Libs were in power. Harper should ignore regional issues as you suggest. But he has the talent pool to appoint Cabinet Ministers from the Elected Members. If he doesn't, he should pack in the government as unfit to govern, and their elected officials resign. There are some people that should be in and are not. There are some people in who have no qualifications for such a position. If it is so hard for the CPC to find someone competent, then they should look across the floor. I am totally against party hacks getting a free ride as unelected Cabinet Ministers. Quote
peter_puck Posted June 30, 2008 Report Posted June 30, 2008 Good point. I don't think what Stronach or Turner did was OK (Stronach because she crossed to a cabinet post instead of as a backbencher and Turner because he was so adamant that Emerson run in a by-election, but decided not to do so himself)...but I think what Emerson did was worse. I really don't think thats true. Turner has offered to resign he seat a number of times as long as Harper agreed to hold and immediate by-election. He has also offered to resign his seat if Emerson and Kahn would. Harper stated he felt if he quit, Harper would simply not hold the by-election. I don't know if thats true or not, but it would be easy for Harper to call his bluff. I don't really think it matters anyway. Turner would win. The other two would not. Quote
peter_puck Posted June 30, 2008 Report Posted June 30, 2008 Harper should ignore regional issues as you suggest.But he has the talent pool to appoint Cabinet Ministers from the Elected Members. If he doesn't, he should pack in the government as unfit to govern, and their elected officials resign. There are some people that should be in and are not. There are some people in who have no qualifications for such a position. If it is so hard for the CPC to find someone competent, then they should look across the floor. I am totally against party hacks getting a free ride as unelected Cabinet Ministers. I see you point, but I also think that the job should go to the right person. What are the chances that the "right person" just happens to be one of your 10 MP's from Quebec ? Or one of your 100 or so MP's ? Quote
gc1765 Posted June 30, 2008 Report Posted June 30, 2008 Turner has offered to resign he seat a number of times as long as Harper agreed to hold and immediate by-election. He has also offered to resign his seat if Emerson and Kahn would. I didn't know that. Do you have a link? Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
peter_puck Posted June 30, 2008 Report Posted June 30, 2008 I didn't know that. Do you have a link? He talks about it on his weblog: http://www.garth.ca/weblog/2007/02/07/resign/ "If the prime minister calls a by-election in Halton today, I will resign my seat today, so the people of the riding are without an MP only for a few weeks before the vote" I think this is a link where he makes the offer - but I get no sound for some reason, so forgive me if it turns out to be a discussion about something else. They also mention it here: ttp://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070207/turner_070207/20070207?hub=Politics "Turner once again offered to lay his Commons seat on the line if Prime Minister Stephen Harper would promise an immediate byelection. " Quote
jbg Posted July 1, 2008 Report Posted July 1, 2008 So regardless of Emerson being a turncoat, the first thing you have to remember is he is a Liberal, so that is to be expected. There isn't alot of difference between the two governments and Emerson proves that point. He has been given two high profile positions, and he is from "the west" so, Harper didn't have to chose Emerson over another Western MP, because of Government Politics, more it was because of CPC party opportunism he choose Emerson.***************** If it is so hard for the CPC to find someone competent, then they should look across the floor. I am totally against party hacks getting a free ride as unelected Cabinet Ministers. Remember, one President who is universally ranked among the greats, Abe Lincoln, filled his Cabinet with his current and former political rivals. Neutralizing your adversaries can be very clever. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.