sage Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 There must be some reason Harper did this though, I mean the heat he's taking over this for one dinky vote in the house of commons doesn't make sense. They say it has something to do with the softwood lumber. This would make sense. At one point in time I believe this guy was on the board of the largest lumber company in Canada. Quote
sage Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 Has anyone heard Emerson's reasons for jumping ship? Is the HMCS Liberal sinking that fast? Quote
Argus Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 Emerson got Minister of International Trade.I'm extremely disappointed in Harper right now. Well, I've always liked that the conservatives had more principles than the Liberals. But let's face it - that hasn't gotten them much over the last forty odd years. A little bit more political slyness might help them to actually survive and prosper. And when all's said and done, you can be as noble as you like on the opposition benches, but if you want to actually get things done you need to get onto the other side of the House. I'm surprised no one has yet pointed out the obvious about Emmerson - his one extra vote means that the Tories don't need to deal with two parties to win a vote. If they can persuade that one indpendant MP from Quebec city to vote with them on whatever piece of legislation, they now need only 1 of the 3 opposition parties to vote with them. This gives the NDP a little more power. And if the tories can lure over one more Liberal or PQ MP they'll be in position to win a straight vote with any 1 of the 3 opposition parties supporting them - no matter what the independant MP does. Hmm, they now have a rep for Montreal, and one for Vancouver. What about Toronto? One wonders if the Tories are chatting with one of those Toronto area pro-life, anti SSM MPs. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Riverwind Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 You conveniently omitted Harper mentioning the Senate in the *blunder* to which you refer.Harper's comments were correct regarding Senate. If he had left the bureacracy and the judges out of it would not have been a blunder.Since the election both the Chief Justice and Liberal leader in the Senate (may have been a different Senator) have proven Harper's sentiments correct.I don't consider the Chief Justice's comments about the appointment process to be evidence of bias or obstructism. There are good reasons to keep the process as apolictical as possible. The process in the US is a farce.At most this *blunder* of Harper's cost the party 10 seats. Definitely didn't cost them a majority.But it was a mistake and it did cost him seats. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
fixer1 Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 I will say that yes this was a sleazy move on Emmersons part and Harper will also take some heat for it. But I think Harper would have taken more heat if he did not get some forum of representation within Canada's big cities. Toronto he has MP's that are that close to and have lived and worked in Toronto, and he assignned an un-elected person to the senate to give Montreal representation. He did this because he wanted to be fair in representing these cities if when they chose not to elect an MP from there. It is a gift to them nothing more, but yes it smacks of undercurrent, which I do not think they need. The opposition will use it to make hay and it will be a good guide as to just how much hay they will intentionally pile on here. He as well has said that his child bonus cheques will start this July and that is going to be on show down for all opposition as no one is ready or prepared to bring down the govt at that time. It is a line in the sand. I am not sure it was wise but it has been done. Quote
justcrowing Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 From listening to the news - it stated that Emerson was the best man to settle the softwood lumber dispute. Yes, he was a VP of one of the large lumber companies in B.C. Also, Vancouver had no representation and Harper campaigned upon fair representation from all regions. Since Vancouver went Liberal, it stands to reason Harper would seek out a right leaning Liberal for the position. What would any of you critics done in this situation - leave Vancouver hanging without representation? Are you wanting a parliament that works or one that is crippled? Seems the Liberals recruited Dosanjh from the NDP and gave him a key cabinet position - that did not make it right but Liberals were basically shut out and needed someone. Quote
tml12 Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 From listening to the news - it stated that Emerson was the best man to settle the softwood lumber dispute. Yes, he was a VP of one of the large lumber companies in B.C. Also, Vancouver had no representation and Harper campaigned upon fair representation from all regions. Since Vancouver went Liberal, it stands to reason Harper would seek out a right leaning Liberal for the position. What would any of you critics done in this situation - leave Vancouver hanging without representation? Are you wanting a parliament that works or one that is crippled? Seems the Liberals recruited Dosanjh from the NDP and gave him a key cabinet position - that did not make it right but Liberals were basically shut out and needed someone. Dosanjh was provincial NDP, Emerson was elected as federal Liberal although I understand your point. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
newbie Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 Harper's administration campaigned on cleaning up the government folks. It's irrelevant what Belinda did or Martin did. This is about what Harper promised he wouldn't do,yet did it on day bloody one yet. Can't wait for page two of the hidden agenda. Quote
tml12 Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 Harper's administration campaigned on cleaning up the government folks. It's irrelevant what Belinda did or Martin did. This is about what Harper promised he wouldn't do, yet did on day bloody one yet. Can't wait for page two of the hidden agenda. When did Harper say he wouldn't do this? Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
newbie Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 Again, he said he was going to clean up govenrment and you want a specific date??? Gee, cause he's such a good guy and all. Quote
sage Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 TML is doesn't matter so much what harper said or didn't say. As I said previously he in fact explicitly said that Stronach-like defections had to be accepted in our system. Quote
Vancouver King Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 Yikes, I'm posting at work! The people of Emerson's riding voted for him based on the campaign and platform of the Liberals. This is a betrayal of their trust. If they had wanted a Conservative MP, they would have elected one - 2 weeks ago! What was the basis of his campaign? How long has he been planning this crossover? He has treated the people of his riding like fools, and I doubt they will forget that soon. This is understatement. I live in Vancouver Kingsway and followed through with my posted intent to vote strategically to punish Liberal corruption. Thus, I voted for Emerson's only real opponent, Ian Waddell of the NDP. The Conservatives ran a distant third in this riding with 18% of the votes cast. Now the corrupt enemy is the new govts best friend. The political gods must be crazy. Quote When the people have no tyrant, their public opinion becomes one. ...... Lord Lytton
newbie Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 TML is doesn't matter so much what harper said or didn't say. As I said previously he in fact explicitly said that Stronach-like defections had to be accepted in our system. Even when they're at his request. But it's a little tacky on the day he's sworn in. Quote
geoffrey Posted February 6, 2006 Report Posted February 6, 2006 I wonder: will Emerson's move be met by accusations of political opportunism or worse, "political prostitution" from members of his new caucus? No? Uh...why not? If it was a sleazy move for Belinda to pull, its equally sleazy in this case. Kudos to geoffery for consistency. Apparently not. Women are whores, and men seem to be, at worst, ethically ambiguous. Go feminist power... Any reasonable person wouldn't call Belinda a whore, I know I didn't. Both are ethically lacking and did damage to the Canadian political process and electors confidence in the system. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
tml12 Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 Again, he said he was going to clean up govenrment and you want a specific date??? Gee, cause he's such a good guy and all. I agree it wasn't a great move overall. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
Melanie_ Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 This makes me wonder if this is a new Conservative election tactic. Recruit candidates to run under another party's banner, then once they are elected let them show their true colours. Must be comforting to know you have double the chance of winning a seat if you can hide a candidate in another party's platform. Quote For to be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others. Nelson Mandela
tml12 Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 TML is doesn't matter so much what harper said or didn't say. As I said previously he in fact explicitly said that Stronach-like defections had to be accepted in our system. Maybe it will be for the better. But the day the man is sworn in, and Emerson was in Liberal TV commercials saying the Liberals were the best party for the province. The whole thing just does not sit right with me. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
justcrowing Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 From listening to the news - it stated that Emerson was the best man to settle the softwood lumber dispute. Yes, he was a VP of one of the large lumber companies in B.C. Also, Vancouver had no representation and Harper campaigned upon fair representation from all regions. Since Vancouver went Liberal, it stands to reason Harper would seek out a right leaning Liberal for the position. What would any of you critics done in this situation - leave Vancouver hanging without representation? Are you wanting a parliament that works or one that is crippled? Seems the Liberals recruited Dosanjh from the NDP and gave him a key cabinet position - that did not make it right but Liberals were basically shut out and needed someone. Dosanjh was provincial NDP, Emerson was elected as federal Liberal although I understand your point. Dosanjh was unelected, I believe, and he did serve as Health Minister under Martin. Did I get it wrong? Quote
tml12 Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 From listening to the news - it stated that Emerson was the best man to settle the softwood lumber dispute. Yes, he was a VP of one of the large lumber companies in B.C. Also, Vancouver had no representation and Harper campaigned upon fair representation from all regions. Since Vancouver went Liberal, it stands to reason Harper would seek out a right leaning Liberal for the position. What would any of you critics done in this situation - leave Vancouver hanging without representation? Are you wanting a parliament that works or one that is crippled? Seems the Liberals recruited Dosanjh from the NDP and gave him a key cabinet position - that did not make it right but Liberals were basically shut out and needed someone. Dosanjh was provincial NDP, Emerson was elected as federal Liberal although I understand your point. Dosanjh was unelected, I believe, and he did serve as Health Minister under Martin. Did I get it wrong? I think so...I thought he got elected in 2004 as MP for Vancouver South. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
Melanie_ Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 One of the things that people criticized the Liberals about so much was their paternalistic attitude, not taking the will of the people into account when they made decisions "for the good of the country". Now we see the Conservatives do the same thing: "Oh, Vancouver didn't elect a Conservative, but we know they really must have meant to, so we will just fix that for them." Why bother having elections if the governing party can just change the outcome as they choose? Quote For to be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others. Nelson Mandela
Madman Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 What do you mean Dosanjh was unelected? He sits in the HoC. Quote
fixer1 Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 Well I will say that we should get used to seeing the liberals that are right leaning getting ready to jump ship. It amazes me that they got the 103opps 102 seats they got and that was only by with holding news about Dngwal etc. The Liberals are a devasted party if anyone cares to look at it closely. There are no core candidates with any true or compelling vision ready to take the lead as party leader. Hell, eveyone knows that the party is in melt down and that is why you can not find or bribe anyone of any consequence to run for party leadership. It should come as no surprise that if left rutterless for long that party infighting will again tear the party apart. They will be many, who will then see that it may well time to see what political stripes best fit, and that is where many future defections will come from. So, as much as you and I dislike these changing MP's. as Harper said that we all must recognize them as valid choices. He said this even when it was himself on the bad end of the stick. So now why when he is on the better end should he denounce such behaviour. It has little to do with cleaning up politics, as what the people want to see is those who cheat the tax paying people, they go to jail. Whather it be by lieing about firings and severance or by the adscam, and any otherof the 34 criminal invertigations into the liberal party actions. That is what cleaning up government is all about. Many more rats will abandon the liberal ship in the months to come. It may well yet become a CPC majority Quote
Madman Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 What Emmerson did wreaks from where I'm sitting... but I gotta say, the guy's got balls sauntering into the swearing in ceremony like it was just his own business and no one else's. Quote
BubberMiley Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 Many more rats will abandon the liberal ship in the months to come. It may well yet become a CPC majority I don't think he could come up with enough cabinet posts. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
tml12 Posted February 7, 2006 Report Posted February 7, 2006 Many more rats will abandon the liberal ship in the months to come. It may well yet become a CPC majority I don't think he could come up with enough cabinet posts. I wouldn't mind if the NDP just becomes the Opposition and the Liberal party seeks to become anything more than what we perceive of the Social Credit today. I think Conservative and NDP voters can agree that the Liberals either are left or right depending on the general tide of the day and seek to wrap themselves in the federalist flag. Trudeau easily could have been NDP while Martin could have easily been a moderate Conservative. The Liberals as a party have no unity not because Liberal members don't have strong opinions but rather because they do not have one clear, coherent position. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
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.