Previous  1  2  3  4  Next

Try pulling you head out of your ass long enough to contemplate how Shapiro's investigation of Emerson's defection is not political partisanship? At least Emerson has credentials for the post he is assuming. That's a whole lot more than you can say for Stronach's defection. Or even Shapiro's appointment for that matter. The kind of "positive change to canadian election(sic) democracy" which you seem to propose, will only be meaningful if it is entrenched in the Constitution. Otherwise, you can darn-well bet the next Liberal government (I'm guessing in 2023) will run roughshod over any positive change created to preserve our Parliamentary democracy.


Hardly. They'll give the appearance of eliminating another Liberal patronee who was unqualified and unsuited for the job he was assigned.


... and you were saying what about past partisanship?


Your hypocrisy and grade-school debate style (I know you are but what am I) betray you as just another convenient idiot. Unfortunately, that's about all you find anymore amongst the Liberal's rank and file.

   

clearly any further debate with you is useless, the tories have obviously blinded you from seeing anything but what the blue book preaches.
go grab some fresh air dude, it might help you see beyond the trees
it's not all about political partisanship and they did it so we can do it too type bickering.
that's only going to lead to more of the same hogwash which screws over the people who voted for a person because they believed in them and their party.

   

At least Emerson has credentials for the post he is assuming. That's a whole lot more than you can say for Stronach's defection. Or even Shapiro's appointment for that matter.

I don't know about you but I'm sick of the whole lot of them and I won't put up with any of this any longer . It's all meaningless and represents "NO" change what-so-ever.

   

Well, for one, the belinda issue is old news and she was RE ELECTED AS A LIBERAL. If emerson can do the same in a by, then everyone moves on. If a by isnt held then there is issue, is there not?

Just because there was no investigation into the belinda ship jumping (and make no mistake, there should have been) doesnt mean there shouldnt be now with emerson. This will do nothing but make people think twice before they decide to cross the floor, as it should be. So let the past go and move on. Lets see what comes of an investigation, if one is started, then anything from that point on anyone else who decides to go that way will have to face the wrath of the public.

   

oops I meant ...... oh f**k it .... > did you hear what he said Belinda , Emerson etc ...all of you ....

   

When Stronach and Brison (or Dave Kilgour for that matter) jumped to the good ship Liberal, there was no outcry that they should resign their seat until they were elected as Liberal's in a by-election. So why is it so necessary when a Liberal jumps off the ship? Seems hypocritical, to say the least. It's not like Harper enlisted Emerson to help bail water on a ship that was sinking. In fact, knowing that it would provoke controversy, he still had the balls to bring Emerson onboard because, quite simply, there was no-one more qualified for the post. Seems to me that Harper put aside partisan politics to deliver the kind of government Canadians should demand as a right.

What if Emerson had lost on January 23? He would still be the most qualified person for the job, and Harper could've appointed him to the Senate in order to make him part of the government. That would have put the Dippers and the Librano's between a rock and a hard place. Support the Conservative's plan to make all Senate positions elected, or concede that it is within the Prime Ministers Constitutional Right to appoint up to 8 temporary senators in addition to the 108 permanent seats.


I have no problem with a politician switching sides, as long as they make clear their reasons - chief among them: that they felt it was in the best interests of their constituents (and please don't say that Belinda Stronach does anything other than to further her own interests).

I also support the idea any crossover should be investigated, as long as all are investigated and are investigated to the same standard.

I also support the right of the constituents to recall their representative, if that is agreed to by the majority of the registered voters in the riding (the 700 who demonstrated against Emerson represent 0.02%[vice 0.5%] of the registered voters in Emerson's riding).

As for the voters in Emerson's riding, they got a sweetheart deal:
- their man continues to be an important part of the government, guaranteeing him opportunity to well-represent his constituent's concerns,
- he will play a key part in the ongoing softwood lumber saga, an issue that should matter to every British Columbian,
- he is the government's point man for the 2010 Olympics, again a key issue for people in this riding and the city it is in,
- they voted for the right man but the wrong party and still got a seat at the table. Unlike their compatriots who continue to waste their vote on the NDP.

   

Why? Because you have run-out of ill-thought banalities sniped from unnamed sources? Because the out-dated propaganda you still subscribe to has been discarded by all but the most brain-dead of your compatriots?

If debate with me is useless, blame it on your inability to form independent thought, not on your imaginings of my party loyalty.

But please, do go on demonstrating your utter and complete cluelessness. It's not a unique trait among the Liberal clique on this board, but at least you'll have many new navels upon which to gaze. Perhaps, some of them may even respond in kind.

   

Ya...I cant really agree on some of that.... why couldnt harper just appointed emerson to that seat and NOT have him switch parties? He could have easily stayed a lib and been appointed, no? And ANY vote is NOT a wasted vote whomever you vote for, whether I agree with who you vote for or not makes no difference, so dont throw that crap around.

And just to point out, just because 700 people only showed up for the demonstration does not mean that is all that are not happy. If you want to play the polls game, how much would that constitiute in percentages? I mean in all of Canada they poll like 1000 people and call it an accurate poll. So its like 70% want him out

Well, perhaps not, but the point stands that just because one doesnt show up for a rally doesnt mean they dont agree with the statement.

   

Well Belinda is a good looking woman so of course she gets a pass by the Media and the people she has to answer to.

   

Here's a thought. How about instead being forced to place half assed political hacks into jobs of major importance we actually find people that are qualified from all parties and put them in charge....Ooops! Harper tried that and see what happened. Little whinny Liberials cried wolf...after doing the same damn thing with that porn star Belinda. Yt for some reason the ethics commissioniare can't investigate her actions. Talk about playing politics. this asshole needs to be fired.

The fact Harper was willing to appoint Ed Broadbent to the post shows to me that he is willing to put the best person for the job in the job. The Liberals are only showing me how absolutely fucked up they are. They can't give away the leadership position of their own party and any asshole that jumps into the driver's seat at this point is nothing but a lamb given up for slaughter!

I realize that many here are haters of the right, but consider for two minutes that Harper has crossed the floor to the best to ensure we get out fair shake at the table when dealign with the yanks.

As for Emerson running as a Conservative in the next election. He will run and he will win. A small portion of those in his distrct are welfare bums and those of limited intelligence. The majority will vote for the person who can do the most of them. Any fool can tell you that having a sitting MP in Cabinet is far better for your distrct than some hack like those crying about Harper picking a Liberal for a prime job. Fucking socialist dogs are brainless. Makes you wonder how they manage to breath on their own.

   

I think Broadbent did Canada a disservice by not taking that job. Here was a chance to put good governance ahead of partisan politics and he was the perfect candidate.
The media is loving this Shapero crap because this way they can retaliate against Harper because he's not giving them free media access.

Get Emerson to fix the softwood deal then have a by-election with him or someone else as CPC. Leave aside the partisan crap for after.

   

That's a bit (o.k. VERY) naive. To be a functioning, elected member of a party you need to attend caucus. But Emerson as a Liberal would not be able to attend either caucus if he were part of a Conservative government. There's issues of conflicted loyalty and cabinet secrecy and, likely no-one from either party would TRUST him. It might seem a warm, fuzzy notion but it has nothing to do with reality (political or otherwise).


What is crap is that is that the NDP does not now, nor at any time in the past, have the inclination to become a governing party. That would require moderating their most controversial positions so as to appeal to the mainstream (see also: Reform Party, RIP). At best they seem to relish playing the part of spoiler. In the end they can collect nice pay and perks packages (courtesy the Canadian taxpayer) and look forward to plump pensions. All that without ever having to worry about the responsibilities and risks that come from being a player. At worst, they are the political equivalent of the armchair-quarterback, with generous remunerations for their effort (or avoidance of it). IF you accept that constituents elect MP's to represent their interests in Ottawa, what better representation could they hope for than to have their MP be a part of the government (or to a much lesser extent, the opposition). Vote for the NDP if you must, but don't ever complain that your concerns are not taken seriously by the government (which the NDP will never be part of).


No, the point that stands is that in a riding with over 35000 registered voters, only 700 protested Emerson's defection. That makes easy the assumption that the other 99.98% either, did not disagree with his switch or didn't give enough of a darn to consider it worth protesting. The 0.02% that did protest are an insignificant part of the whole and they should not presume to represent the issue for the rest of the riding. The fact that the NDP had to do a lot of organizing to get just 700 people to protest, indicates this was more about partisan grandstanding than it was about getting the best representation for the constituents (one suspects that: without the Dippers cheerleading, this issue wouldn't even have created a whimper). Perhaps the more naive among the protestor thought they might force a byelection and that the NDP might win it. Realistically, most of the voters in most ridings will choose a candidate who they think will offer them the best representation in Ottawa (and Emerson's cabinet post guarantees he can deliver that).

   

an editorial in today's sun on the investigation...very interesting

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/ ... 79240.html

   

Here's another little tidbit about Mr. Shapiro, among many which the media is blatantly overlooking.

Last fall, the Conservatives asked Shapiro to investigate the questionable land dealings that had been conducted by former Liberal cabinet minister Joe Volpe and his father, to ascertain whether Volpe's actions violated Parliament's conflict of interest guidelines.

Shapiro responded to the complaint by stating it was not his mandate to investigate MP's when Parliament is not in session. That, of course, is pure bull crap, the Ethics Commissioner can investigate the conduct of Members of Parliament at anytime they hold a seat. However, it really beggars an answer as to why his made-up standard does not apply now, when the next sitting of the House is still three weeks away.

Clearly this Liberal asswipe needs to be removed tout suit. Fortunately, his past and present conduct supplies an abundance of evidence to justify his dismissal.

Final note: A number of media outlets have reported that Ed Broadbent turned-down Steven Harper's invitation to become the next Ethic's Commissioner. They have, for the most part failed to mention why Broadbent declined the appointment - leaving their readers to speculate that Broadbent simply did not want to be associated with the Conservative government. In actual fact: Broadbent retired completely from politics to devote all his time to his seriously ill wife. And that is also the reason he gave Harper for turning-down the post that was being offered. While you may not have liked Broadbent's political leanings (I never did), you could not ever question his integrity or his principles. Here's hoping his wife recovers and that she and Ed continue to enjoy many more years together. And hopefully at some point, Mr. Broadbent will receive just reward for his many years of decent, moral and, ethical public service. Even if he does not return to a political role, his sense of duty and his commitment to fairness willl benefit any role he assumes. Then again, he may decide to enjoy retirement after 40 years of involvement with Canadian politics. It seems strange to think of this always energetic man as being eligible for CPP benefits, but I guess it can happen even to the best.

   

Thanks for the clarification on Broadbent. I retract my comment about him. Good job covering the story. To bad the MSM are not as good.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  Next