Belinda.ca manouever

[The Terrible Sweal]

On reflection, I find myself in awe of the sheer machiavellian brilliance of both Belinda.ca and Martin's strategists. What a coup for each of them!

Martin staves of the election, gets a high profile outsider to lead on Gomery, gobsmacks Harper hitting him directly in exposed vulnerabilities.

Belinda gets a real job, in a real party, with potential to establish social prgrssive credentials. She gets the Liberal party of Canada in her debt. She proves to voters she's tough and smart. And she gets to stick it to the Alliance cement-heads who waged a wispering campaign against her.

Meanwhile, the disgraceful spectacle of conservative caracter assassiation has @most certainly alienated vast numbers of moderate voters.

Sweeet.

[cybercoma]

And she continues her quest to never becoming a party leader ever, in her entire career.

It's a good move for the Liberals, but they're simply going to use her and throw her to the curb when they're done with her.

All's fair in politics and it makes for good ratings.

[August1991]

On reflection, I find myself in awe of the sheer machiavellian brilliance of both Belinda.ca and Martin's strategists.  What a coup for each of them!

Martin staves of the election, gets a high profile outsider to lead on Gomery, gobsmacks Harper hitting him directly in exposed vulnerabilities.

Belinda gets a real job, in a real party, with potential to establish social prgrssive credentials.  She gets the Liberal party of Canada in her debt.  She proves to voters she's tough and smart.  And she gets to stick it to the Alliance cement-heads who waged a wispering campaign against her.

Meanwhile, the disgraceful spectacle of conservative caracter assassiation has @most certainly alienated vast numbers of moderate voters.

Sweeet.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The only one to lose is the ordinary taxpayer who gets a high school graduate to supervise the Department of federal largesse and a unlingual anglophone to supervise the clean up of the Quebec wing of a corrupt federal party. But the optics are sweet, as you say.

Sweal, is this the kind of Canada you want? Have you really thought this one through?

[The Terrible Sweal]

Sweal, is this the kind of Canada you want?  Have you really thought this one through?

What kind exactly?

[I miss Reagan]

Hey how about sticking to one thread rather than cluttering up the forum with duplicate topics.

[PocketRocket]

Hey how about sticking to one thread rather than cluttering up the forum with duplicate topics.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, for one thing, the original thread hit 10 pages in less than a day.

Many, if not most, of the posts are simple bickering between a few people who simply re-write the same statement over and over again, as do their protagonists, trying to get the better of each other on some insignificant point of wordplay.

It gets to the point where it's like trying to swim through molasses just to get all the way through the thread.

Individual comments also get buried under a sea of partisan bickering which tends to wander off topic.

So, for those reasons, I'll place my first comment about the issue here.

While I found Belinda's move a complete surprise, it really isn't all that surprising.

The CPC seemed to be keeping her around for decorative purposes only.

Evidently, she feels she can make an impact on the political landscape.

I, as many others, have viewed her as a lightweight.

She's switched over, and now, with a cabinet position, will get a chance to prove herself.

She'll swim, or she'll sink.

It can't be denied that we need some younger blood in higher government positions.

Her level of success in her new post will go a long way towards determining how far she goes in the future.

If she does well, good for her.

If she flops, then she'll probably disappear from the political scene within a few years.

In this regard, it's a win-win situation for the country.

Gotta admire her guts, though. She knew perfectly well walking into this that she would be ostracized loud and long, and publicly, by her former compatriots.

How she maintains her composure in the next few weeks or months will tell a lot about her fortitude.

[Guest eureka]

I'll go along with that, PR.

[takeanumber]

a unlingual anglophone

August:

What I don't think you understand is how this all looks from Ontario's point of view.

To them, the perception is, rightly or wrongly, that the Quebec scandal is just another product of Quebecois political culture.

When people hear about Gomery in Ontario, they don't remember any of these names...they just hear a never ending string of french last names, and french liberal party officials, and the BQ/PQ getting money, and they conclude that the scandal is confined to Quebec, and to the French wing of the party.

The solution becomes clear, get the English Canadian liberal party -- which is still perceived as being semi-good, to clean up the French mess, and better yet, slap such stern controls on parties so that nobody, not even Quebeckers, can screw it up again.

Moreover, to many people, the Quebec corruption is just that: another issue, one of many.

And they don't want what Harper is selling.

[kimmy]

My initial reaction is that I'm quite pleased to see "Belinda.ca" sticking. Please make royalty cheques payable to Kimmy.ca

I think only time will tell how much of a genius move this was for Ms Stronach. If one is of a mind to view her move from a personal ambition standpoint, I'm have a hunch that it's going to work out well for her. She's not even 40 and now has one of the top cabinet posts... so she's certainly fast-tracked herself in that sense. It might have taken her decades to get there the old-fashioned way. Look how many years Lucienne Robillard had to work to build the credentials she brought to the position, and 10 years with the Liberal party, and now discarded in favor of Stronach. hmm. At least Mme Robillard gets to stay on as Intergovernmental Affairs Honk, which I would guess is probably about as desirable a job as the guy at Customs who has to sift through human feces searching for baggies of cocaine.

(half-hearted attempt at pot-stirring: "Maybe it's just as well that the HR department is not in the hands of someone from Quebec anyway.")

As for PM PM, I'm not sure how this makes him a brilliant leader. Not any more than winning the lottery makes you a brilliant financial planner. He had an unbelievable stroke of good fortune delivered into his hands by Mr and Mrs Petersen. This does nothing to enhance my opinion of Martin.

-k

[The Terrible Sweal]

kimmy -- 'Belinda.ca' is delightful.

Re giving credit to PM, here is a pearl of wisdom for you: It is no small talent to know how to use good fortune.

[kimmy]

Re giving credit to PM, here is a pearl of wisdom for you:  It is no small talent to know how to use good fortune.

So... how well has he really used this astounding good fortune?

Appointing her directly to a high-profile cabinet post certainly left her open to the attack that she did it out of ambition rather than principle. And it has left him open to the attack that he bought her loyalty rather than earned it.

Here's an alternative situation which, just maybe, could have had better optics for the both of them and worse optics for Harper.

Belinda announces just prior to today's vote that she has to vote in favor of the budget because of her principles. She votes with the government side.

Harper has little choice but to publicly blast Stronach. In doing so he has to outline why he's so all-fired intent on bringing down the government, which has been a weak point for him for weeks. Stronach responds by reiterating her principles. Harper can really only come out of this looking like a bully who's having a hard time controlling his own MPs, not a good impression for a leader. Belinda looks sympathetic and principled. Having this blow-up occur publicly rather than in Harper's office can only be bad for him.

Belinda, after confrontation with Harper, has either been kicked out of the party or leaves to sit as an independant.

Later, she can go sit with the Liberals. Give the same speech she did yesterday about having much in common with PM PM. (She does, of course. Difficulty finding good caviar in Canada; peeves about the gardeners and butlers; tax shelter tips; that sort of thing. )

And after the Gomery report comes out, and you're honoring your promise to call an election within 30 days, that's the best time to announce that you're putting Stronach in charge of dealing with its recommendations.

Then after everybody's all elected and happy, you can give Belinda.ca her cabinet posting.

Just an idea. I think its fair to wonder whether they could have managed the cross to get more political mileage out of it. They certainly made a huge splash with it on Tuesday, but one might wonder whether that huge splash was the political equivalent of spending half your lottery winnings on booze, cars, and a gambling binge in Vegas. Tuesday was not a particularly significant day in terms of government timetable... the big splash Tuesday doesn't help them as much as a big splash at the start of an election campaign would have.

-k

[Technocrat]

The only one to lose is the ordinary taxpayer who gets a high school graduate to supervise the Department of federal largesse

You know what i found funny about this? I seem to remember the conservative party appointing a highschool dropout to be the education minister in ontario . Hell at least they graduated from highschool .

[Guest eureka]

An a university dropout as Premier.

[The Terrible Sweal]

kimmy -- I agree your strategy would have had better overall optics, but it would not really have changed the essentials of the deal, ethically speaking. (Which I see no problem with (on a 'Parliamentary level' anyway).

[PatM]

kimmy -- I agree your strategy would have had better overall optics, but it would not really have changed the essentials of the deal, ethically speaking.  (Which I see no problem with (on a 'Parliamentary level' anyway).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd rather see MORE "normal" people in Parliament myself. We've let political finance and PAY get to the point where "normal" people cannot afford to break into politics at all. Unless they have some previous noteriety and support from an existing party (Ala Chuck), the blue collar types of this country are simply excluded from politics.

Is it any wonder we have a government FOR the rich? Our government is OF the rich.

[I miss Reagan]

Is it any wonder we have a government FOR the rich? Our government is OF the rich.

I think this is sad too. It seems like a real class system consisting of lawyers and rich elites who buy their position, at least in the Liberal government. What I think is really bad are the Rockafeller, Kennedy, Martin, and Stronach types which are born into the money. I don't think they can truly appreciate the value of a buck. They don't realize how hard it is to make money. IMHO, this is why these same people have no problem with high taxes and taking money from the middle class to buy off the poor. Notice that these are also the same type of people who believe they can buy anything with money.

[PatM]

Is it any wonder we have a government FOR the rich? Our government is OF the rich.

IMHO, this is why these same people have no problem with high taxes and taking money from the middle class to buy off the poor. Notice that these are also the same type of people who believe they can buy anything with money.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Popular misconception pushed by the Reform types.

Social spending as a portion of GDP has declined drastically for the last 30 years. Money is being taken from both the poor and the middle class and given to the rich - and every year the process is being accellerated.

Here's yet another graph of wealth distribution changes since the '80s

Its hard to see because the wealth is so small but, the poorest 10% have actually declined drastically in net worth.

As of 1999 the upper 50% of our population has 94% of all wealth in the country, the lower 50% has 6% of the wealth. Since then there have been many more tax cuts to business and rich and the distribution is now closer to 96% and 4%.

Now explain to me just how the politicians are stealing from the middle class and giving to the poor?

edit: I said wealth change since the '70s, its actually since the '80s.

[I miss Reagan]

Lies, damn lies, and statistics as it goes. Right? Then I counter with stats on the increase of tax rates, increase in standard of living and buying power of all segments of society. The fact is all of us have more wealth than any generation in history. Home ownership is at an all time high. But also higher than ever is the percentage of our income taken by the government and squandered away on useless programs. Not that Canadian philosophy is anything the same, but when the founding fathers in the US discussed taxation there was a collective gasp in the room when they suggested a 1% tax. Where are we now? Not that this really has anything to do with the original premise. That being that spoiled elites have no concept of the value of a buck, and thus, have no qualms about high taxation.

[kimmy]

kimmy -- I agree your strategy would have had better overall optics, but it would not really have changed the essentials of the deal, ethically speaking.  (Which I see no problem with (on a 'Parliamentary level' anyway).

But the question wasn't about the ethics of the deal. The question was whether Paul Martin's handling of it shows him to be a brilliant leader... and in my view it doesn't. Just lucky.

-k

[Guest eureka]

Those are not lies, IMR, and I am pleased to see that someone else is saying what I have for some time - and backing it up with references.

Also, we do not have an improved standard of living. Again, as I have posted in other discussions, incomes beagn to decline in Canada in 1979, and did not recover until the late 90's. The small increase that we nor enjoy comes at the cost of two income families and longer hours of work. That is the heritage of Right Wing behaviour.

Also, as I have posted before, the total tax take before the lsat round of cuts for the wealthy, was, in Canada, about 36% compared to about 30% in the US. When healthcare is factored in, there is a good argument to be made that all Canadians, except the top ten percent are actually in a favourable position compared to Americans.

[August1991]

Partying Liberals were treated Thursday night to the incredible sight of Belinda Stronach, Canada's new human resources minister, and Tim Murphy, the Prime Minister's chief of staff, dancing atop a speaker at an Ottawa bar.

The tune? "Material Girl," by Madonna.

....

BlackBerries were buzzing all over Ottawa bars on Thursday night with descriptions of the dancing scene. Some Liberals, especially the younger ones, were dazzled.

Toronto Star

Draw your own conclusion but I'll go with this quote: "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac."

[bigdude]

Linda McQuaig praises Stronach for allowing the budget to survive amid vicious attacks from outraged right

At the risk of giving short shrift to the juicy themes of betrayal and treachery in the great Ottawa morality play, I'll deal first with the substance.

By crossing the floor, Belinda Stronach — hero or political whore, depending on your perspective — allowed the budget to survive.

With the extra $4.6 billion in social spending insisted on by the NDP, this is the most progressive federal budget in 30 years. So this is a very good thing — even if it turns out that Stronach defected because she couldn't think of a gentler way to dump Peter MacKay.

The mad rush to denounce Stronach was striking. When she decided a year-and-a-half ago to take a run at the Conservative leadership, it didn't seem to matter that she was an inexperienced little rich girl impulsively grabbing at the brass ring.

She had the wind at her back, the media at her feet.

Those good old Alberta boys were happy to have the handsome blonde head to use as a battering ram against Liberal strongholds in Ontario.

But when that same inexperienced little rich girl impulsively grabbed at a brass ring last week, no scornful epithet was spared — sell-out, whore, dipstick, political slattern, blonde ambition, Judas.

Suddenly her wealth became an issue.

The same crowd who never condemn the unfairness of inherited wealth, abruptly began disparaging Stronach for her inherited wealth.

It was fine when all that money was being used to finance her run at the Conservative party leadership, so she could champion more tax cuts for the rich.

But now that she was helping NDP leader Jack Layton deliver more than a billion dollars in affordable housing for the poor, her wealth apparently became annoying.

"I will not be lectured to by some poor little rich girl," snarled Christie Blatchford in The Globe and Mail. After interviewing Stronach, a CBC radio program played the song "She's a rich girl and she's gone too far ..."

She was also denounced as ambitious.

Yet, for years the media encouraged a nakedly ambitious Paul Martin as he plotted against Jean Chrétien.

Nor did pundits accuse Martin of betraying his principles for abandoning the social spending promises he made in the 1993 Liberal Red Book.

As long as politicians veer to the right, pundits seem satisfied they're acting on principle.

How sick is our media in Canada anyway?

[mcqueen625]

Since the exposure by the Auditor General- Ms. Fraser, I have held the opinion that the Liberal Party of Canada is a corrupt entity, and they will do anything or say anything to hold onto power. It was a pretty sad day for Canada when both Ontario and Atlantic Canada voted overwhelmingly to elect Liberal MP's to office. What does that say about Canadian's? To me is says that we would rather have a group of known thieves and liars running our country than take a chance on an unknown and untested person in Stephen Harper. Sure he followed Brian Mulroney and everyone was sick to death of ly'in Brian, but Maul Martin followed Jean Chretien, and Chretien was every bit as bad or worse than Mulroney. At least Brian made a committment to replace helicopter's that were killing our serevicemen, while the first thang that Chretien did was to cancel the order for helicopters, and then bought us some inferior submarines to go along with the old helicopters, so that more servicemen would wind up dying.

Paul Martin knew that Canadians were not smart enough to figure out that instead of heading in a new direction from his predecessor, Jean Chretien, he simply carryied on with Jean's agenda. If he were serious about distancing hiself from Chretien's policies, he would have immediately gotten rid of every cabinet minister sitting under Chretien's rule. While he did get rid of a few, most he kept, and they just carried on with business as usual. Paul Martin had no intentions of changing the way business was being done, and he still is not about to change things, because obviously Canadian's are either too dim to know the difference or have become so apathetic that we could care less.

As for Belinda Stronach's motivation for joining with this band of thieves, I would suggest it does not say much about either her morals or ethics, simply because up until midnight on Monday the person she was dating did not even have an inkling of what she was up to until after she had met with Martin, brokered her deal with the devil for power. Only then did she tell Peter about her decision, talk about a cold and calculating personality! As for Martin, if I were him I would not turn my back on her for long. In fact if I were in Anne McLellan's shoes, I also would n't turn my back to Belinda, after all isn't Anne second in command? Belinda used all those phrases about how she couldn't support Conservative policies, etc, etc. Well she was there when those policies were written, and in fact helped formulate those policies, how can she now say she couldn't support them? She would like Canadian's to think that she was taking the high moral road, when in fact what she has done is sold herslf for power, and nothing more.

My opinion is that Belinda was born with a gold spoon in her mouth and is used to daddy buying her anything she ever wanted, but he couldn't buy her the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, and Belinda simply cannot accept the idea of losing to anyone. When she found out how popular Stephen Harper was, and the fact that he would not be going anywhere for a long time, she simply made up her mind to seek other means to climb that political ladder. Her pundant's tout her as this brilliant business woman, when the fact is that she took over a business from her father with an executive team already in place, and as in most businesses it is the employees who actually do the work to make the CEO look as if they are really competent individuals. I am a firm believer in that old sayine, "Waht goes around, comes around." she will get her's eventually as do all treacherous, unethical people.

[Riverwind]

Since the exposure by the Auditor General- Ms. Fraser, I have held the opinion that the Liberal Party of Canada is a corrupt entity, and they will do anything or say anything to hold onto power.

The Liberal party consists of thousands of workers and volunteers. Maybe 10 are implicated in the sponsership scandal. There is also evidence at the Gomery inquiry that some Liberals attempted to clean up the mess long before it became a public necessity. In short, there is no evidence that the Liberal Party itself is a corrupt entity - this is a fiction created by the Bloc and the CPC to satisfy their own lust for power.

My opinion is that Belinda was born with a gold spoon in her mouth and is used to daddy buying her anything she ever wanted, but he couldn't buy her the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, and Belinda simply cannot accept the idea of losing to anyone.

Convervatives were thrilled to have her join the CPC party - her personal background was not an issue until she decided to join the Liberals. Face it, if ambition was the only thing driving Stronach she would have been better off waiting until Harper loses another election and then push for the CPC leadership. Even, if Harper won she would have been given a cabinet post. The only logical explaination for Stronach's move is that she truely believed that the CPC was risking the country with its push for a quick election. You may disagree with her opinion but you should at least acknowledge that her feeling were likely sincere.

Regards

[Argus]

The only one to lose is the ordinary taxpayer who gets a high school graduate to supervise the Department of federal largesse

You know what i found funny about this? I seem to remember the conservative party appointing a highschool dropout to be the education minister in ontario . Hell at least they graduated from highschool .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You don't actually need to graduate from either high school or university in order to be a capable, knowledgeable person. The world is full of self starters, ambitious, A-level personalities who made themselves multi-millionaires on their smarts.

Even though they probably weren't up on their trigonometry.

But there is no evidence Stronach is one of those people. She is, by all accounts, someone far more interested in fashion than in learning, someone to whom reading a book is a largely unfamiliar chore. Her knowledge level of even basic issues during the leadership contest was embarrassing. Frankly, anyone who made a habit of reading the daily newspaper would have done much better.

Her speaking ability is poor, and her ability to think on her feet and answer questions is even poorer.

Her unilingualism is less important, I think, because the "clean-up" of the Liberals' Quebec wing will not really be in her hands, and will not be serious in any event. I am one of those who believes that the only reason the focus is on the Quebec wing is that they were the ones caught. I think that if you really put government spending under the microscope you would find that the actions in Sponsorgate were typical of how this government has operated over its lifetime in all areas of the country and in all departments and agencies.