Emerson,

I guess he decided to change the system from the inside...

In the words of Spinal Tap, the more things stay the same, the less it changes.

Here we have a minority government, bolstered by a defector, whose political life depends on the support of the NDP plus one independent MP. Where have I heard this one before?

The math: Cons 125 + NDP 29 + Ind 1 = 155 out of 308. Libs 102 + Bloc 51 = 153 out of 308.

The conspiracy theory: The NDP made a secret deal with the Conservatives to help bring down the Liberals under the condition that Harper would bribe/blackmail Liberal defectors using secret, altered tapes made by Gurmant Grewal; thus allowing the NDP to gain seats and maintain the balance of power, while handing rule to the Conservatives.

Chuck Cadman did not die, but had a face transplant and moved to Quebec to live life as radio shock jock - cum Independent MP Andre Arthur. A year from now, he will once again save the minority government from defeat while wearing jeans and chewing gum. This will be his act of contrition for not scuttling the Liberal minority last year.

First I have to say this like all other floor crossings is intolerable.

Second I have to admitt I laughed my ass off when I heard. I'm saddled at work with a blowhard who kept going on about what a wonderfull thoughfull thing Belinda did. Of course when she did it it was ok, because she did it for the correct reason(In reality only because she crossed to his party) Today he is outraged. te he he he.

I guess that Harper doesnt need to be ethical until the accountability act has been passed. The Liberals better vote for the law and soon before more rats look for dry ground.

I wonder if Jim Harris has tried to bribe André Arthur to join the Green party with organic poutine. It's an idea worth investigating. That may be the only way of getting into the next debate.

To me, what it is, it's a little rich boy basically whoring himself out to Harper.

David Emerson, a true Canadian political whore, immoral, corrupted by power, and lacking in moral fibre, sits in good company. What little respect I had for our politcal system, is gone. The complete parlimentary democracy system in Canada is a farce and it boils down to this. Those with power and money get elected and they stay elected. The populace are treated like sheep and are trotted out every 2 to 5 years in a show election that rivals the old Soviet union.

The whole system is corrupt and those taking part are the new 'evil' empire. Until the public take over the government by force, nothing will change because it can't change as the rot controls everything.

We live in truely evil days where people (the homeless) wander aimlessly on the streets, drugs are openly sold everywhere, and all levels of government pervert themselves with lies and deceit on a daily bsais.

What kind of a country do we live that allows politicians to double cross their constituients by the likes of the totally deceitful Emersons of the world?

Other things to pay attention to. The mantra being tossed around by the Cons and repeated like a chorus by the media, and more disappointing to me, by the opposition parties -- that no one wants an election any time soon -- is alarming. Is that so? Well, I for one, wouldn't mind. This "talking point" came up so often immediately after the election, I smelled a concerted campaign to have this "fact" lodge in the electorate's brain.

Why would the Cons want to do that? Pretty simple. Having been voted in with the thinnest majority in Canadian history, the Harper government would normally be on shaky ground, easily brought down by a collaboration of the three opposition parties.

However, by lodging in people's brains that "no one" wants an election "any time soon" the Cons can govern almost as if they had a majority because they figure no party would dare bring their government down. Nice trick. In fact, just another one of their dirty tricks they'll be pulling until we can pull the plug on them. The Dirty Tricks Party.

I hope the three other parties give the Cons a taste of their own medicine, and collaborate behind the scenes to bring them down (with our without the Libs having chosen a new leader). I realize that big business will go all out to prevent that from happening, but man, if we give up, we really will be giving up our country, plain and simple.

And we'd best agitate for an election sooner rather than later because contrary to the other mantra being tossed around so casually (that the Cons can't do much because they have a minority) is just so wrong. They can do plenty (and are).

For example, just heard Gary Lunn say he has given his approval to do oil and gas exploration on the west coast. Some of their deeds will be public, others will be hidden til long after. They figure Canadians (and the NDP) haven't the gumption to do anything but sit around and whine. And the media are already out with their "not everyone is outraged" stories.

The Cons have carte blanche (just like Gordon Campbell's party) despite having the smallest minority government in Canadian history. Do we just give up, or do we fight this bullying imperialism masquerading as "grass roots?" What have we got to lose? Why not become a kleptocracy like the United States, where "ordinary" people live in fear of a major illness or injury bankrupting them, where the chosen few live in gated, armed communities and rail against the increasingly impoverished working poor and growing armies of homeless. Wake up people, please! Don't let them just rape and pillage our country. Be vocal, demand answers, make a stink.

Well!!!, that has to be the shortest honeymoon any new government has ever gotten in Canada.

Ha, Ha, Ha, Inf---ingcredible, the electorate got it right again. Harper got a new bicycle with training wheels(a mini-mandate). Another election, called the soonest, will be cheaper than the price Canada will pay once the Harper/Mulrooney mole in the Senate starts doling out the lolly. And, Emerson's Red parachute turning to Blue, WOW! The man has no shame. he,he,he, political ethics he,he,he, mandate for change, he, he, he, Gordos pleased, HA, HA,HA, I have to stop, I can't take it any more.

David Emerson has struck a new low -- crossing the floor before Parliament is even in session.

But what of this OUTSOURCING of cabinet positions!!?

On Jan 23 Canadians voted for the individuals or PARTY we most trust to determine the future of the country.

Stephen Harper, a self-proclaimed champion of the UNAPPOINTED senate, makes his own senate appointment in private businessman Fortier then names him to a cabinet position and, adding insult to injury, gives him Public Works.

Imagine what we'd be seeing with a majority Conservative government.

Gotta fix this fast, people.

Time to elect our Governor General. You know, the person who is actually suppose to appoint Cabinet.

Emerson is not a political whore. He's a "respected" big business executive and did the usual thing every big business executive has to do to be "upwardly mobile": LICK UP AND KICK DOWN, which is the only way to the corporate pissoire!!

He followed the natural steps of business competition: Misleading the public and employees, cheating, lies, fraud, robbery, theft, the destruction of humans and the environment, with the only purpose of increased profits.

In short, he did what comes naturally to any good executive and the Mafia. As will the Harper government.

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

Was not the western call for an elected senate stem from a feeling of under representation?

Harper would not have gotten away with such an appointment in Alberta but in Quebec they have never called for an elected Senate and a recent quote I saw, showed Charet quite indifferent to the whole idea.

If he appoints in a province that does not mind appointments then it's really not much of an issue and was certainly safer than trying to poach a Bloc member.

What goes around comes around. I'm sure we'll be reading wonderful things on this site about what a great leader of the Liberal party Scott Brison or Belinda Stronach will be--who also double crossed their electors. But both of them were rewarded by their respective electors--go figure. What this shows is that Harper knows how to play the game, and that electors understand that politics has, to paraphrase Geoffrey Rush in "Pirates of the Caribbean"--guidelines, but no immutable rules of conduct.

A man of ethics and principles speaks:

"Of our two legislative houses, the Senate, our upper house, is appointed, also by the Prime Minister, where he puts buddies, fundraisers and the like. So the Senate also is not very important in our political system."
--Stephen Harper.

Whoops. Sorry. Wrong man.

After he ran claiming not be be one of those game players.

Harper has set new depths of hypocrisy and deceit. Some "leader".

How does Emerson in anyway represent the 81% of the people in Vancouver/Kingsway who did NOT vote for him as a Conservative?

First test-does Harper call a byelection?

The tight rope walking begins. And remember all three of Layton/Martin/Duceppe are trying to cross the rope from the OTHER side.

Duceppe cannot possible WANT to let the Conservatives get inroads into Quebec and Layton supported the Liberals for a National Childcare Program NOT the Mickey Mouse program of the Conservatives.

Interesting, too, that there are fewer cabinet ministers in the west now than there were under the Liberals.

AND remember Paul Martin is STILL around as an MP and STILL the party leader!!

The Conservatives Justice Minister and defence Minister are both loose cannons ready to sink ships.

Not to mention that the Finance Minister is from the "Common Sense Revolution" that had no common sense, that gutted social programs in Ontario which thety are still recovering from!!

This could be WILD!!

Dolphin said

nice standard we hold , so if the conservatives get involved in big time corruption we just say, well gee the Liberals
did it to, he's just playing the game. congrats Stevie is a big time scum bag to, you win.

But lets talk about David, (star candidate, to important to run for his nomination) It took him less than 2 weeks to jump ship, not one day on the job. Disgusting on two fronts.

1) The conservatives finished 3rd in the riding, 77% of voters did not vote conservative. So David shoots his finger at 77% of his constituents and says , sorry , so sad to bad.

2) He takes a cabinet position over all the long time serving members of the conservative party ( I wonder how other party members feel about the new man whore)

But the good news is, Stevie has a tiny minority gov and the other parties should demand a bi election if they approved the new ethics bill. In short the government falls if they don't force a bi election in the riding.

Who are MPs working for? In the case of David Emerson, we know from the reactions to his move that it is not for the regular folks in Kingsway who elected him. David Emerson's real constituency is made up of the Vancouver Board of Trade, Vanoc and the promoters of the Gateway program. They are quite pleased with the move. That he was elected in Kingsway as a Liberal is irrelevant to them, as long as he is now in a position to promote their interests. The Harper government will now fund the megaprojects in Vancouver and B.C., and come the next federal election, the happy folks in Vancouver will vote Conservative.

And people ponder why some Canadians do not bother to vote!

I agree with the posters who say that Emerson is a political whore (learned from being a whore in business).

I suppose his cabinet role will be to tell BC's Campbell government (on the sly of course, low down, slithering from under a rock), don't worry about Olympic cost overruns, you have the Minister responsible who will ensure big business and developers still get rich off of an event paid for by tax payers!

Emerson is a fraud, a liar (get in Harper's face eh!). If he is such a good man that was running for a dubious Liberal Party then he should have ran as an independent.

At the very least resign and watch your seast in the parliament and beloved cabinet position disappear as the electorate would toss you out like compost!

Political cynacism, really? Why?

How can he expect to be referred to as Honourable?

Is anything he says a truth? When Emerson says the electorate will have a chance to judge him when the next federal election is called and he runs as a Conservative can anyone believe him? Does his wife believe him?

Honourable my ass! Emerson stole people's votes!

Damn! This puts Ignatieff even closer to being Prime Minister, and he's just an enzyme for American empire-building. (Ignatiase?)

I think one has to ask: Why did Emerson really think it was so important to remain in a position of power? What obligations did he develope as Minister of Industry for the libs?

Especially when there was a fairly decent chance of him becoming Liberal Prime Minister in a few years?

Interesting to see Herr Harper repudiate all his Holier than Thou rants the first f-ing day of his government! Even worse was appointing a Quebec Mulroney hack to the senate and them giving him a cabinet post. What do his Alberta bible-bashing flunkies think of this kind of Quebec ass kissing?

What a hypocrite! Me thinks Herr Harper will not last too long.

Where is Ron Erwin now, eh?

Ron would be out getting the ass implant readjusted so that it is no longer proprietary.

Floor crossing is certainly nothing new to us in this province, we only have to look back to Jumping Jack Weisgerber and Mr. Neufeld.

I did not agree then with it but each case is decidedly different. While some may subscribe to the opinion that Mr. Brison and Ms. Stronach were wrong in crossing the floor and some may subscribe to the opinion that it was political expediency. To both their credit, they at least attempted to work within their initial caucuses. I expect that considering the temper of the Conservative caucus at the time it was extremely difficult to be gay or a progressive woman in those units. To be candid, considering that it was a case of a minority government, resigning and running for re-election under their new banner would have been an unneccessary step as the government was continually under the threat of immenent failure so the voters would ultimately have their say in the matter.

In the case of Mr. Emerson, whom I have met, I am certainly disappointed. Unlike the former members mentioned, he did not wait for the ink to dry on the ballots. In my opinion he committed the worst kind of fraud electorally. He deserted the ship before even testing the waters. In business and in politics, you have to have a degree of trust and certainly by his actions there is no trust possible. It will be interesting to see how he fares in the House in April, I am expecting that it will be very difficult for him to be able to sit. I expect that he will be under constant pressure from the Opposition virtually to the point of harrassment of the member.

As to his electability in the future, well the only riding possible would be Vancouver Centre and only if Hedy does not run again. Even if she does it would be a very close contest either way. Of course he may decide not to run in future in which case Gordon would certainly find a soft landing for him. That's the way it is with these folks.

Any respect I have for Mr. Emerson is gone and I certainly wish him to receive the many political attacks that are now due him. He has had his defining moment in public life, his place in history. Such a shame that it is not positive.

Ronnie has probably copied all of his Tyee posts and run off to Ottawa to see if they are enough to get him a patronage appointment. "See what a good boy I am"

Unlikely Emerson would get elected here in Vancouver Centre. The last election showed pretty clearly what we think of thieves and liars and by an 8,000 vote margin at that.

There's an elephant in the House. Follow Google for the clues to David Emerson ... follow the dots from University of Calgary into B.C. as Deputy Minister of Finance ... banks ... Finance again ...

David Emerson attended the University of Alberta and obtained his Bachelor of Economics degree in 1968 and his Master of Economics degree in 1970. He then went on to Queen's University where he received his Ph.D. in Economics.

In 1975, after working as a researcher for the Economic Council of Canada, he moved to British Columbia and joined the public service. In 1984, he became Deputy Minister of Finance.

In 1986, he was appointed President and Chief Executive Officer of the Western and Pacific Bank of Canada. He transformed it into the Western Bank of Canada- the only regional bank to survive and prosper. Four years later, he returned as Deputy Minister of Finance and was quickly promoted to Deputy Minister to the Premier and President of the British Columbia Trade Development Corporation.

From 1992 to 1997, he was President and Chief Executive Officer of the newly created Vancouver International Airport Authority, transforming the airport from one of Canada's most congested to one of the most modern and efficient in the world. Today, the airport is a major economic generator for the province due to his vision and expertise.

In 1998, Emerson was appointed President and Chief Executive Officer of Canfor Corporation, a leading integrated forest products company and Canada's largest producer of softwood lumber. With 8,100 workers and annual revenues of $3.2 billion servicing 10 % of the U.S. market, Canfor operates pulp and paper mills as well as 19 sawmills across B.C., two in Alberta and one in Quebec. Despite US duties and a higher Canadian dollar, Emerson managed to increase profits and raise share prices through a major acquisition deal and efficiency upgrades, which increased capacity by 30% while reducing production costs by 24%.

Emerson's directorships included: Terasen Inc; Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Company of Canada; Vice-Chairman of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives; Chair, British Columbia Ferry Services Inc.; and Chairman and Director of Genus Resource Management Technologies Inc.

Political career

Emerson was [Paul Martin's political appointee]elected in the riding of Vancouver-Kingway during the 2004 Canadian federal election. He served as Minister of Industry in Prime Minister Paul Martin's minority government.

He ran again as a Liberal in the 2006 Canadian federal election. He attracted some media attention with a comment that NDP leader Jack Layton had a "boiled dog's head smile". While the term is translated from the common and mild Cantonese insult "“zènãÁì™", Emerson said that he believed it to be a humourous phrase indicating a person with a "overextended grin". Emerson said that his wife, a Cantonese speaker, used the phrase to describe him when he posed for pictures. [2].

On Election Night, January 23, 2006, Emerson was quoted as saying "I'm going to be Stephen Harper's worst enemy,"..."We're going to stir the pot and you better believe we are going to make a heck of a lot of noise."

On January 26, 2006, Emerson was interviewed in a newspaper discussing the rebuilding the Liberal Party needs to perform and his role in creating a new Liberal Party.

On February 6, 2006, less than two weeks after Emerson was re-elected as a Liberal, he accepted an offer by Stephen Harper to become the Minister of International Trade in Stephen Harper's Conservative government.

Crossing the floor can be condoned by the electorate on a point of principle or a strong moral issue, such as corruption, police investigation etc. Crossing the floor before even parliment sits, is a sign of utter corruption and if I was a voter in Vancouver Kingsway and voted for Emerson the Liberal, I would check and see if a charge of political fraud is in order.

I understand Democracy Watch is applying to the Federal ethics commissioner (fat chance that he will do anything) to see if any ethical law has been breached.

Emerson,a true politcal whore and corrupt politician, sets a new standard of wanting to make one upchuck at our political system!

BC Mary
That certainly establishes what Emerson is. I guess his conversation with Harper was just haggling over the price eh!

What I really think I see now is the start of a true backlash against the 'system' we are using to govern.

The ad-hoc patchwork put on-top of proper parliamentary democracy has finally shown enough cracks. An appointed GG is wrong for a head of state. The all-powerful PM can only be held in check by having a minority parliament position (I can only hope that the electorate of Canada can keep this sort of math going). Meaningless MP's sitting like fenceposts with hair on the back benches because the committee system was scrapped during the Trudeau era...

I can only pray that the current government continues to mess-up thier 'base', piss off PQ'ists, anger Martimers and ignore BC enough that during the coming Quebec referendum ALL OF CANADA decides that we have had enough and ALL separate.

Murdock, I agree completely! If Canadians do not rise up and set their hair on fire, it will only confirm to the 'fence posts with hair' that they can get away with anything.

Excellent observation mjf!

The REAL backers of POWER do not care what color or stripe or logo any MP's wear, so long as they get results!

Murdock and Grumpy please don't insult fence posts at least they do their jobs. :-)

I really do read with interest and a certain amount of envy that so many of those that post are for the most part thoughtful in putting out their point of view. Some are too long winded at times for my liking but so be it. This particular thread is a case in point. Why must we always be so Canadian? I have a friend who has suggested that the likes of Mr. Emerson should be shot. Not just one of his ilk so that he/she is martyred but one a month and maybe they would get the message that we really are pissed.

Grumpy ... what you said. You're absolutely correct that the Emerson move is political fraud. I'm mad as hell and can only guess at how angry the people of Vancouver-Kingsway riding must be.

Now, what can the public do about this? Serious. Think of something we can do: Small, large, specific, incoherent, something... we can't just let this pass us by, like cows watching a passing train.

Shooting is too merciful and quick. I'd rather see all economists, as the causes of most human suffering in the world, with brooms in their hands sweeping the Trans Canada Hwy. from coast to coast, on Third World diet.

Ed Deak.

Sorry to fence posts everywhere!

What is needed in Canada is a 'quiet revolution' one where the public ignore politicians, laugh at them, what ever. When the public wake up and see that the whole system is corrupted and denouce politicans all the time, maybe, just maybe that the politicos will understand.

More is needed, the media that supports this grand illusion of Candadian democracy, should be shunned; the companies that advertise with them boycotted. Only a mass, but peaceful, uprising will have any effect on this puss infected, corrupted institution, the Canadain Parliment.

Only the will of the public can change things and it will be ugly, but it must be done or we will rot forever in a morass of corruption and fraud, better known as Canadian democracy.

BC Mary writes:

Agitate, no really agitate: not just writing blog posts and email and letters etc. Get out there like raging grannies and get in Emerson's FACE every time he shows it. No meeting, no speech, no advertisment, nothing goes unpunished by an immediate reaction against what you think he has done. Takes time, insiders (to get the accurate itenerary) and LOTS AND LOTS of volunteers (but then you may find some in that 77% of the riding that got 'Martinized').

More credibly, end your facination with the stupid Canadian parliament, stop calling yourself 'Canadian', since that connects to the Nationalism that is dieing all over the world (yes it is dieing like a bloated red-giant star puffing itself up ever-larger until it explodes). Take up actions that support your own community controls, and take POWER back into the smaller hands of the Provinces, or better yet the coming city states.

Or you could join the FLQ and pull on your boots and pick up a bayonette...

Sure fence posts do their job, until the rot at the bottom and fall over (they tend to have a lot of moss-'hair' on them by then too!), then they have to be DUG OUT and REPLACED.

Grumpy has a start, but in the end the only thing that will get Ottawa's attention will be to cut off the money supply.

Support any action that takes more power and control into local offices and away from Ottawa. Either we get our $$$ away from them or they will use it against us.

I don't remember this kind of uproar when Belinda crossed the floor to give the NDP the balance of power. All I heard was praise. Funny.

It great to see the "tolerant" left wingers talk about torturing and shooting someone because they disagree with them.

Soon enough we can probably expect to see some justification offered by Mr. Harper or his startled supporters in some reference to his often cited mentor Edmund Burke. Burke was a famous 18th Century gas bag and parliamentarian. He is frequently cited for the view that a Member of Parliament is not obliged to follow presumed obligations to those who elected him but is supposed to use his best judgement.

Such a spin on Mr. Emerson's deed might not be successful. After all, Burke only won a single election, and was thrown out at the next one when the electors had seen enough of him. He was only able to come back and pile up 14 years in the British House of Commons as the stooge of a big landlord who "owned" a seat, what was called a rotten borough. Burke talked, and talked, and opposed just about everything of value in modern society. Talk was all he left behind, opposing the great world that was opening up for all.
His political credentials were not all that was hard to take about Burke, but it does tend to confirm that if you betray those who elected you, it is not likely they will support you again and it is hard to function usefully without the good opinion of the people around you. Mr. Emerson has surely committed the first, and will now discover the second. In a corporation it is one dollar one vote, the big owner actually dictates, and this is Emerson's world. But in politics you need a lot more than that to be more than just present, in my opinion. Let us see how long Emerson lasts.
After all, we will want to blame somebody for the 2010 Olympics which are sure to be a huge disaster and pretty soon there will be hardly anyone left in BC who openly favors the wildly destructive bridge and highway scheme.

Could this be Harper's silent cunning, Emerson as the King's taster?

JIm, get some perspective here. David Emerson didn't "cross the floor" ... he didn't display a flicker of ethical courtesy toward his former Liberal colleagues ... he simply showed up, unannounced, at Rideau Hall where amidst gasps of surprise he got himself sworn in as a Reform/Socred/BCLib/Conservative Cabinet Minister. Stop trying to make him out to be a victim, for pete's sake.

Lets not tar all politicians with the same brush. Most have certain ideas on how things should be run and end up in the party, mostly stay there unless their thought pattern and ideas change. Emerson is an opportunist and couldn't care what anyone thinks of him so he didn't even bother to tell his leader he was moving on.
I like the letter to the editor in the T/C today. "A old socred said. I shovelled shit for this party for years and in rides this guy on a shiny pony" The rank and file of any party must get distressed when this sort of thing happens.Lots of workes stop working. Wonder how the other long or short term conservative MP's view their straight as a arrow leader now as they head for the back bench one more time? We can't compare this hacks performance to any others who crossed. at least they spent some time before leaping. Do we expect any more? Who knows. Money and power really talks.

Murdock: I guess we need to make our fences out of stone or steel....

Garhane: interesting read... I, too, think that Harper is being deceiptive, manipulative. Maybe like a slight(sp?) of hand con artist, pickpocket, or magician.

Jim;
Would suggest you do your homework before you step into it. There were some very nasty comments made by the fundies including one elected pastor. Quite frankly the comments were sexist and unbecoming of these so-called gentlemen. Had Ms. Stronach been a male, they would never have been made.

too bad BC Mary, all JIm is doing is clearly pointing out that what is good for the gander is good for the goose.

The nasty words for Belinda made me laugh, so now the same nasty words for Emerson bring the same laughter, perhaps more since Emerson was a parachute *STAR* candidate and the electors of Vancouver Kingsway fell for deception.

If you do not like this BC Mary, then run for parliament yourself in the riding and see what it is like to get any kind of organization going. Emerson is simply an opportunist, he took the opportunity offered by PMPM, now he is taking another offered by PMSH.

Just like every other self-promoting Political Opportunist.

I would suggest the following to get politicians' attention and to display disgust with the current electoral system and process:

Next election start a campaign to have all voters spoil their ballots. If some ignore this and choose a candidate, and a candidate "wins", well that "successful" M.P. (or M.L.A. or M.N.A.) would have to state that he/she has a mandate to sit in parliament, despite only receiving 1058 votes out of a possible 23,675 votes (for example).

I am fed up with the lies, deceit, swindling and sales of snake oil!

For BLONDE PITBULL

Steel rusts and stone can crumble over time. All fenceposts need replacing over time.

Better that we take the time to sort out what we want for a governance structure now, than take what we are handed later.

(ps: sleight-of-hand)

Agreed on both points but it seems to me that those that do the maintenance (the public) should have the control of the maintenance not the fence (politicians).

Prime Minister Harper will be introducing an Accountability Act on the first day of parliament.

Idea: Why not the opposition get together, and introduce an amendment: you can only sit in cabinet if you are elected by the voters in a riding that voted for your party.

That would dispatch with David Emerson, not elected as a conservative, and "Senator" Fortier, who has a powerful position but not elected at all.

And nice comuppance to someone who ran on integrety but hasn't demonstrated it, so far.

So Harper's telling us that he doesn't have much respect for the country or the people who got him elected. He's telling Vancouver voters to shut up because he can buy their favorite politician. He's telling the people of Coquitlam that their schitbag candidate doesn't match up to a Liberal who never had the 'moral authority' to be in government in the first place. He's telling the people of Revelstoke that their vote doesn't matter because they can never elect an MP from Montreal or Vancouver. Harper says he needs Emerson to help with the softwood lumber file. To date, Emerson has failed to achieve anything we can skip to the bank with. Perhaps Harpo doesn't want to settle the dispute.

Murdock, you are too kind, explaining JIm to me like that.

Now please explain how everybody who doesn't like David Emerson's political fraudulence is now a candidate for parliament?

When you've done that, please explain how David Emerson's shortcomings have become my fault?

Next, check old postings by BC Mary to see the reputation of Ms B.S. reviewed ("Stockwell Day with hair," is the worst I ever called her; although I did not admire her, as you suggest).

This helpful exchange has revealed much about you, so (for your own good, of course) may I suggest you take a flying leap off the back of the next BC Ferry at about the halfway mark between Tsawwassen & Victoria.

Emerson was at a meeting, two weeks before the election, with the editorial board of the Van Sun. There he was quoted as saying a vote for the conservatives was like voting for a black hole. He also said that the con policies "were scary."

Who does this man think he is? The deciet is overwhelming and an insult to every Canadian voter. My fervent cry for years has been 'up the revolution' and I feel that more strongly now than I ever have. To me it is very simple. They were elected by the people for the people. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't know how to do it but that fact has to be driven into their collective heads and we have to take back our power. We labour under the illusion we live in a democracy. Nothing could be further from the truth. So, how do we take back our power and have true representation in Ottawa? I write and email continuously, all the while knowing it is a futile effort. Not one of those arrogant people in Ottawa cares and I know this. I keep on though and I don't like the level of rage it creates in me. I know I am not the only one but how do like-minded people get together and let these arrogant bastards know they are nothing but employees paid for by us?

Harper has scared me for years and now he is in power I fear for this country. My instinct with him, as it was with Mulroney, is on high alert and screaming. The man and his ego will destroy this country and her people. The fact he is some kind of "christian" makes it all the more galling. I don't want to play nicely anymore. I think our placid easy going nature has to be ramped up or we are all screwed. The new bully on the block has to be beaten up and cast aside. Reasoned discussion will not work with him or that party. The hidden agenda, always referred to, will come to pass and what then? That twit hasn't spent all these years writing policy that will do anything for us. His secret little clubs and associations have to be exposed and the people have to care, damnit. I was ready for another election the minute the CBC announced it's prediction that it would be a minority conservative win.

Sorry for the rant, but my God, this madness has to stop. And I don't mean mine!! Up the revolution.

murdock, BC Mary,

Not sure, but isn't there some kind of recall mechanism for federal MPs?

Joseph de Maistre:"Every nation has the government it deserves".

I think Emerson's thinking was thus:

1. He does not intend to run in any election. His post will greatly enhance his private-sector success and prestige and he will get out after one term.

2. In the odd chance the Conservatives are looking at a landslide next election, he will consider running.

No matter how you can cut it, his actions are selfish in the extreme. Furthermore, his claim that he can 'better serve his constituents" in cabinet is philosophically bankrupt in a multi-party system. If what he says is true, then there is no need for political parties as constituents are better served simply having local candidates in power.

While I do not support violence, he should be egged at every public event for the rest of his political career. Shame the F**ker.

We need some champagne socialist to fund a civil suit against emerson. Find a relevant cause of action so as to use discovery to the max to get lists of all his telephone (e-mail, blackberry etc.) records and those of his people. If we can find any evidence he did have contact with Reynolds or other conservatives prior he is done.

Why the champagne socialist? Cause we better be prepared to pay costs.

And the body wasn't even cold. They thought they were voting for a candidate but, instead, got a raised middle finger. It showed absolute contempt for the voter and the democratic process.

If Emerson disagreed with the those who elected him, he should have retired. A vote should then have been taken among the losing candidates only.

Electoral reform is desperately needed end this abuse of the system.

After an eight week election and half of that in the rain and dark. If Mr. Emerson can get over reading the Tyee blogs he can likely get over anything. Well, so be it-

On James Moore, the independent who ran against him in PM/Westwood/Poco/ bought numerous full page ads. There remains a well healed man/woman marriage group that has targeted James Moore not just in this area but generally. Indeed, at the start of the election there were some overtures our way ($$$$) to 'spin' Moore out. My response was that we didn't do that-and if we did we could not because James Moore is simply too talented and too well liked.

Although Mr. Emerson is extremely talented and his history as CEO with Canfor makes him APPEAR a good bet on softwood lumber issues, -----as someone who knows----the Bush White House with elections coming next fall, are in no hurry to rattle the Democratic lumber lobby in the southern states simply because Mr. Harper obtained 126 seats---. Mr. Bush right now could care less about Mr. Emerson's pedigree, however if the rationale was all that was required for retail consumption-well fine.

Speaking of wood, I would hazard a suggestion to Mr. Shreck's (no relation) comments about Mr. Emerson's new found relationship with Mr. Campbell, that it is Mr. Campbell politically who now needs Mr. Emerson's ear and not the other way around. (If we are going to talk about the game let's at least pretend we know how it really works). That a federal Liberal from Vancouver would be so quickly converted to a Conservative squad in any other democracy would speak volumes to the foreshadowing of things to come in BC politics, particularly as these relate to Mr. Campbell's bona fides as Premier at this time.

To attempt to suggest that Mr. Emerson is somehow a federal BC Liberal goes against the tide. Because Mr. Emerson is a federal Cabinet Minister in a Conservative Party, and he is from Vancouver, where Mr. Campbell is from- a second year political science student could tell you that Mr. Emerson's recent defection just made Gordon Campbell redundant.

Ethics especially political ethics where a man or woman’s words were his bond are long gone. I am beginning to wonder why I voted. B.C seems to now be a place where all a politician has to do is lie enough to get elected but then is not made to pay for his lies. B.C. seems to be home for unethical politics federally or provincially. From the prime Minister to our Premier and on down the line. Voter Apathy is getting a big step up. Why vote so you can get spat upon in the end. A proud Canadian sort of But a proud Vancouver Island separatist. B.C. can go its on way. Lower mainland 13 Billion rest of B.C. peanuts. Federally Central winners west loser.

It is hard to see how Emerson's move to the Conservatives can be good for BC, unless of course one is of the view that democracy is bad for BC. Sure Emerson may have the ear of the Campbell government, but so does the CEO's of any number of major corporations. The whole point of an election was to ensure that taxpayers, often poor and usually ordinary people, also had a voice. What difference does it make what Emerson has to say when he speaks only for himself. His betrayal of the democratic process will do lasting damage ...

Take back democracy. Recall this guy to face his betrayed constituents. You can Help ! Sign the petition at http://www.PetitionOnline.com/RDE/petition.html

This is rather amusing. The conspiracy theories and venomous comments regarding Mr. Emerson's actions are in poor taste. First of, I do not claim to know this man nor do I condone his actions, but let's not assume this man made this move out of personal greed. For goodness sake he was a banker and has lots of corporate relationships, if he wanted money and power I am sure there would have been more then a few suitable options for him in the private sector.

First of all he was not a card carrying Liberal before Paul Martin approached him to run in 2004. They are friends and political allies and recruiting him can only be viewed as arming himself with a social liberal and fiscal conservative. There were no alarm bells going off when the Liberals brought him on board in 2004, even though he was not active in the Liberal party. The reason nobody cared was because everyone was to busy trying to paint the Conservative party as some 18th century draconian doomsday party.

The Cons have much to prove and the first day in power proves one of two things. Either PM Harper is as many on this board claim, a dishonest person who has no ethics and can NEVER be trusted, or he is a very smart person who has been dealt a hand and is making the most of this opportunity and will position his party for the inevitable next election. Time will tell, but many of the comments being posted are utterly biased against the Conservative’s and any perceived misstep is being magnified and judged immediately based on preconceived opinions of the man and the party.

Mr. Emerson has stated in other articles that the Liberals need new blood and that the next leader should be hitting their prime in the next 5-6 years. If Mr. Martin had retained power Mr. Emerson has already stated that he would have stayed on with the Liberals, but since they did not AND Mr. Martin stepped down I am sure he decided that the best way to serve the riding of Vancouver-Kingsway and more importantly British Columbia would be to take the offer from the Conservatives and become the Minister of Intl Trade which is a vital and important position. He is in his 60’s and can do more good in a position of power now especially with the Olympics just around the corner which will inevitably need additional funding to ensure a successful games. There are many ways this move can be spun and spin masters will be working hard on both sides of this issue, but at the end of the day true leadership is about making HARD decisions and living with the consequences. We shall see how this plays out.

http://www.mytelus.com/news/article.do?pageID=news_home&articleID=2151921

The kinder gentler harper, created for gullible public consumption by corporate spin doctors, is quickly showing his true colors along with the rest of the conservative party. (i.e. 3 mike harris hacks in cabinet)
What did people expect? Is any of this actually a suprise(or the horrors to follow)??
Luckily they may have over-stepped their bounds so audacious and repugnant were their initial sleazy, revealing gambits! Remember they do not have a majority.
This betrayal was to be expected and was predicated by corporate control of the conservative party. Already corporate hack gary lunn is talking about revisiting the pacific off-shore drilling moratium (much to the glee of his sleazy provincial counterpart dick "nixon" neufeld)and the so-called "gate-way" project and boondoggle olympics are now under the direction of reprehenshible, morally bankrupt david emerson.
Just prior to the "election" the same emerson made a comment to the effect that he would present great difficulties for a conservative, steven harper(cheney/haliburton)government!
Let's hope WE keep this election promise as mr. emerson clearly will not.

I agree whole heartedly with Fiat Lux that this man is not a whore insofar as his entire raison d'etre is only to have, display, and exercise many qualities of a whore. In one particular, and subjective, quality he falls even lower and so is something less than: I would much rather share a room with a whore anytime. Emerson does as so many do. And without apologies. This is absolutely farcical. GOD, how words fall short in this instance. Never mind Harper's appointment of Fortier.

And JIm: we all show our partisan stripes here but can you please show a smidgin of humility? Or just stay shamefully hidden away under that gi-normous rock. Few here praised the personal qualities of B.S. Most called her what she showed herself to be but smiled at the opportunity that her defection presented. Give her credit for trying to make her situation work at least. This Emerson's a reptile and you know it. How do you like your blue-eyed boy, now? Just fine, I suppose. F'ing joke.

mcdull- I remember sitting with my father when I was in my teens-quarter century ago-and he was like I had never seen him. It turned out a business partner for some time had broken a handshake deal with him.

He didn't whine or complain-but in retrospect-it broke his spirit. Navy guy, seven kids-work hard-ethics...all of this was how he was.

Whether he was perfect or not is a matter for history, but I remember my father introducing me when I was very young to WAC Bennett whilst on a ferry crossing.

I asked who that man was...and my Dad answered.. "he is a very great man". That is the only time he spoke like that of anyone.

Nobody is perfect in politics-it is a maleable 'thing', but never so maleable as to force one to forget their integrity, (not to be confused with pride).

The greater public good would come from one political actor stepping down based on integrity-than one stepping up based on what's good for this situation or that.

Whether Emerson was a "card-carrying Liberal" for his entire life or the entirety of three minutes makes no difference. Check that: if he had been a Liberal hack for his entire life I'd be more reflective on this suddent defection. But he's a reptile. And the notion that he could be rolling in the dough and power as a private businessman alone carries no weight. Many people are attracted to the power of making public policy, regardless of how much cake they're eating already as a corporate welfare bum. You're not suggesting Emerson joined the scrum for the "people" are you? Guess it depends on what or whose people and how shifty that concept is. Go make your half-assed apologies elsewhere.

What has been funny here is how the right-wing press has been down-playing Emerson's party change after being crazy wild when Belinda Stronach crossed the floor.

Belinda had a reason, her boss - Stephen Harper - told her she had no future.

While many MP's change sides, I have never seen anyone do what Emerson has done so soon after an election.

BC Mary,

Ladies first...

jimmy_laroux asks:

NOPE

only if they die, resign their seat or a general election is called.

They can be charged with a crime, but unless convicted of an indictable offence even that is not enough to force any MP out (remember sticky fingered Svend?)

No recall mechanism per se but as others have suggested above, constant protest and getting in the face can force a hand, even the hand of someone as straight-faced as Emerson

Mel from Calgary comments:

Playing DOWN?!?! - heck it has been the lead item in each broadcast from Newsworld to CKNW!

I'd put it in the same category, there are some other bloggers that want Emerson offed!

Belinda may have been told that, but Emerson heard his benefactor on national TV, during the concilliatory speech, tell him that he would no longer help him in the 'party'.

Emerson knew his days were numbered and that he would have to either suck-up to the new leader (in an opposition role), run for re-election in the riding association (what you mean actually talk to the electorate?!?! ewwwww!), or accept his back bench meaningless position as a LiEberal fence post with hair on the opposition benches. Emerson is not a career politician, he has taken a pragmatic action and seized the brass ring when offered (same as he got when he accepted the LiEberal parachute in the first place).

Murdock, our new federal justice minister was convicted of election fraud in Manitoba but because is was a provincial charge he was allowed to join Harper's cabinet.

Ladies first ... ? Believe me, Murdock, you and I aren't travelling anywhere together.

Mel from Calgary notes:

COOL!

How many other little tidbtis about the current 308 occupants of the federal nuthouse do you have?

As I pointed out to the question of shoe-horning out an MP, it is not possible unless the MP is DEAD, resigns their seat or a general election is called.

The indictable offence is a FEDERAL indictment and so far none have had to face that since they are smart enough to resign before the writ is served to them.

David Schreck's quote:
"Emerson has the ear of Premier Campbell and he should be able to deliver much needed funding for overruns facing the 2010 games, transportation projects and port improvements."

That's my view. Help them all to steal our tax dollars.

Political Thoughts:
Your quote:
"I am sure he decided that the best way to serve the riding of Vancouver-Kingsway and more importantly British Columbia would be to take the offer from the Conservatives and become the Minister"
Are you sure, as in dead certain, or are you sure as in likely, or sure as in your phycic, or it fits well into your thinking that you are sure...

Here's a spin. There is an election within a year, he wins running in Alta (cause he won't win in his old riding) and he doesn't get to finish what he started cause the Cons lose, all for what you believe is "in the best interests of the country".

Emersons past goes to the Liberal treasury of our beloved Campbell regime as BC Mary's post cut out points out... its a treatese to voters to look beyond the flags they fly. Its like saying Harpers words as a Reform western separatist or President of the National Citizens Coalition mean nothing now, "he's changed, different, moderate, center, one of us now and blah, blah, blah..."

I don't see Harper pushing any petition agenda's to get MP's removed from their seats any time soon, or put in legislation that prohibits MP's crossing the floor as he "promised" he would do. Who was Harper before he was a Con? A political activist with the NCC and a politician with the Reforms, and a political activist and knowitall brainwashed economist from Calgary before that. His flags he flies means about as much to him as flags mean to a banker. Just ask David Emerson.

Murdock, you forget. Harper was going to do things differently. Toews, Emerson and Fortier knock Harper off his high horse.

It will be interesting to see what the opinion polls at the end of this week reveal.

62% of the people in this country did not vote conservative. We would be happy for an election.

There's a petition on line for the recall of David Emerson.

PetitionOnline.com/RDE/

Ed Deak.

And the comments on the dangers a minority government can pose... Gary Lunns latest comment as pointed out by Sunny Samson speaks volumes for the crimes they can commit without passing a bill. Just let other things happen uncontested.

As for a speedy election, as much as I want the Cons out of there, even I have to wince at the prospects. The Liberals need to regroup, it takes time, and the Cons know it. And the NDP? Not fond of Jack, sorry. We need a guy who can tell the truth full time, for a change. This is a bad thing, whats happening, because minority governments really do have power, just by occupying the space of those who would otherwise, not be as corrupt.

Not only did Harper snare (30 pieces of silver Emerson), he laso promoted a conservative hack to the Senate and gave HIM PUBLIC WORKS TO BOOT! This means no scrutiny of this corrupt office. A trifecta of broken promices in one day, lovely. As suspected Harper's a crook, no better than Creighten and Martin, lovely...........and I though it would take at least two months for him to prove that!

Yes emerson is going to funnel out tax dollars to the Board of Trade's favourite projects, the now $2.8 billion RAV and the Olympics!

We need .45 calibre recall!

Mel from Calgary, seems to think I am a conservative supporter...

It will be interesting to see what the opinion polls at the end of this week reveal.

62% of the people in this country did not vote conservative. We would be happy for an election.

I would gleefully see another election-go-round. Waste more federal money on another election! WHEEE! We at least would make darn sure that the coffers of all the main line federal parties would be properly wiped out. Excellent.

I am one of that 62% that did not vote conservative. I'll be one again.

My only concern would be to have enough time to get more INDEPENDANT candidates organized. Sadly a fast run again will cut them out.

The only real effect that a fast run at another federal election will do is to get the buckets of $$$ flowing from the corporate offices into the coffers of the 'new' Conservative party. The LiEberals are an albatross now and I very much doubt that Bay Street would even talk with Martin. The NDP? they will gain the most. BQ? they will loose the most.

So YES lets get another election next month, then 3 months later we can have another one; and so on, and so on, and so on....

Hi Ladies & Gentlemen,
We do not have to be miserable when a scum did it to us. I have a solution. It has been well documented and announced by all the potential candidates for the leadership of the Liberal party are backing out. No body wants the job. Now what we have to do is to get all the NDP to cross-over to the Liberal; and the Liberal will become the minority government; and Jack will beome the leader of the party; and the scum will have no cabinet job. In other words let the Liberal be swallowed up by the NDP just like the conservative swallowed by the Reform. This is a feasible solution.

This is no different from the Stronach switch - in fact, probably a little better.

Stronach defected and cost them a non-confidence vote.

As a conservative supporter, I don't like this. However, this is no different than the Stronach switch - so don't say otherwise.

That being said - this is great for B.C. - end of story. Emerson has dedicated himself to BC and will continue to do so with the Tories.

He shouldn't be trusted to tell the truth, but he can be trusted to do a great job!

This is where I draw a line in the sand, any MP that does this needs to sit as an independent for 30 days and then
face a bi election . I don't like it on either side of the house. David is shooting the finger to almost 80% of the
riding, this is just wrong folks.

I say we do sit inn's in his office, follow him around and dissent him in every way. F**ucking whole.

Lets get upset and stop this corrupt process,

This is a minority gov, the first ethics bill must state that David will run in a bi election. If not we go to the polls as
an entire country again in 60 days. The good news is that the first thing Harper has done has made himself Canada's biggest hypocrite, he does not have the political capital to pull this off.

The Conservative Party's justification for Emerson's treachery--dutifully taken up by the corporate media, and by Gordon Campbell--is that Vancouver needs representation at the cabinet table. If they are serious about addressing the problem of regional disparities in political representation, they should embrace electoral reform. Emerson's double-cross is really just another example of the kind of perverse behaviour to which our dysfuntional electoral system routinely gives rise. Strategic voting is another affliction of the voting system, as is the tendency of prime ministers from time to time to appoint Senators to the cabinet in order to fill in gaping holes in the government's ranks from key regions of the country.

These problems arise from the failure of first-past-the-post elections to create a Parliament that mirrors the voting intentions of the electorate, both at the national level and regionally. If we had a proportional voting system, all regions of the country would have appropriate representation in the caucuses of each of the national parties--representation that corresponded to the actual voting patterns in those regions. Consequently, the prime minister would be able to assemble a regionally balanced cabinet from among his own MPs and, in the case of a coalition government, from among the ranks of his coalition partners.

Electoral reform isn't a panacea for all of Canada's political ailments. In particular, it's no guarantee against morally reprehensible behaviour like Emerson's. But it would rectify much of what's wrong with the political process in Canada.

"That being said - this is great for B.C. - end of story. Emerson has dedicated himself to BC and will continue to do so with the Tories."

This of course is not the end of the story. Emerson is far more interested in the perks, the nice cars driven by some underling, and of course POWER.I see no dedication to BC although our writer a few up seems to know more than any of the rest of the folks who were amused by his or her attepts to snow us all on the great man. There was a old expression. Fool us once, shame on you, fool us twic, same on us. when this sorry collection falls, and it shouldnt' that long as even two days after the swearing in things are being reported. (Gosh I sort of broke the electon act, and got caught, but no problem I'm sorry and will be really good at making bigger jails, removing the gun registry and maybe attempt to bring back capital punishment. Ssame sex marriage wasn't an iddues to they won, now it's in the news.) The liberals better get their house in order before these characters remove a lot of things folks have taken for granted.

Sorry guys, no need to be surprised at Harper's making that phone call.This is Stephen's Policy, in his own words:
http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/yourview/your_turn_conservative.html

From the CBC's Your Turn with Stephen Harper:

Colleen Belisle:
Hello, my name is Colleen Belisle and I have a question for Stephen Harper regarding the accountability issue. In the past 18 months, I have noticed a number of MPs crossing the floor after the election. This makes me wonder why I should, as a voter, go and vote when my MP can change parties after the election. Mr. Harper, are there any policies that you plan to enforce after the election regarding this issue? Thank you.

Stephen Harper:
My short answer is no. And I understand the voters' frustration. You can imagine I feel that frustration as much as anyone. I was the victim of a number of the particular incidents that the voter is referring to, that Colleen's referring to, but the difficulty, Peter – I know that many members of Parliament have put forward various proposals that would restrict the right of MPs to cross the floor, force elections, or whatever. I haven't seen one yet that convinces me that it would create anything other than a situation where party leaders have even more power over the individual members of Parliament. And, as you know, I've said that, of course, I've said that for a long time that I think our members of Parliament need more authority, need to be able to represent their constituents' views, and they may make very bad decisions in crossing from a good party to a bad party or, more particularly, a winning party to a losing party. But that all said, I haven't seen one yet that I'm convinced creates a bigger problem than it's actually trying to fix.

Peter Mansbridge:
Do you think voters are as uncomfortable as Ms. Belisle points out when these kinds of things happen? Because if they are, one assumes that they are looking for direction from their political leaders to prevent this from happening. As you pointed out, some parties, the NDP has said it would force an immediate election. Do you think something has to be done?

Stephen Harper:
Let me give a concrete example of an alternative situation. The Conservative Party of Canada, the new Conservative Party was created because people left actually no less than three separate old caucuses, two old parties, and joined with a new party, and I think there is widespread consensus among not just members of the old parties, but members of the public as well that this was a good thing to create a stronger opposition, to end the fragmentation of the conservative movement in the country.
Now, you know, this kind of law could have forced us into a situation where we were having 75 byelections. So, you know, that's a problem with any of these proposals. We understand, I understand why people want them, and, believe me, there's a couple of cases that have happened where I'd love to have a law like this, but there's also a lot of downsides when you think it through. As I say, in a practical matter, I could see how party leaders could really abuse that particular provision to make it even more difficult for members who may disagree legitimately with their party to operate within the party.

Harpers quotes:
"I know that many members of Parliament have put forward various proposals that would restrict the right of MPs to cross the floor, force elections, or whatever. I haven't seen one yet that convinces me that it would create anything other than a situation where party leaders have even more power over the individual members of Parliament."

Or one that suits him solely.

"As I say, in a practical matter, I could see how party leaders could really abuse that particular provision to make it even more difficult for members who may disagree legitimately with their party to operate within the party."

And as for Chuck Cadman leaving the Reforms and sitting as an independent even until there is a by-election in 30 days? What's stopping any MP from doing this with or without legislation? His entire pretext to his arguement for doing nothing "in the short term" is false. At the very least, any PM should consider legal petitions especially now, since nothing like this has ever happened before.

Even his example cited of three parties not merging was false as votes to merge could have waited until the next election for them to do it officially. It would have been a matter of formality as he put it to his own support base, back in the day. Harpers still full of it, just snowing us with bull again.

God Bless David Emerson!!! You can`t possibly think that Waddell would do NEAR as good a job as Emerson. C`mon people. Get real.

I`m sure most of the voters in the riding voted for the man - not the party.

Perhaps the answer is to bar floor-crossers from cabinet posts until such time as they are elected under the banner of their new party.

How could you be sure? I don`t think I`d be that happy if I`d have voted for the porker.

The brain
But one can't argue that Harper's done and said something in the event which is inconsistent with what he'd stated earlier during the election campaign; to wit: that defections should not be met with some other remedy such as a byelection. The irony is that, as you pointed out, it is a fairly orthodox example of what he actually decries with his further statement about a party leader behaving abusively. Of course that understanding would require one to reason from the inverse of what Harper actually says - but you know what I mean.

He is, in effect, stating the libertarian position and while it makes his squeals at Belinda's treachery seem pretty disingenuous, you have to admit he's being consistent.

murdock
GIven Harper's musings - set out above - does that make you a supporter of his libertarian point of view?

jtothemfk writes:

"Many people are attracted to the power of making public policy, regardless of how much cake they're eating already as a corporate welfare bum."

Emerson is just one of a long line of corporate whores. His time in what he will fraudently refer to as public service is a means to an end. He will do the bidding of the capitalist class and will be richly rewarded when his day at the public trough is over. Witness one Lyin' Brian Mulroney at the corporate reward trough. That is when the serious dough will roll in.

mabellbc writes:

"That being said - this is great for B.C. - end of story. Emerson has dedicated himself to BC and will continue to do so with the Tories."

See the above mabellbc. Emerson is dedicated only to himself and will whore himself in any way necessary to enrich himself. He did not represent working people as a lieberal, and does not represent working people as a neo-con. I suggest you have a blood test done, mabellbc. The steroid damage is beginning to show.

How about this ... the Liberal Party forked out quite a few $$$s to get their guy elected in Vancouver-Kingsway and 13 days later, before he's done a lick of work for the Liberals, this guy sneaks off and starts working for the competition ... like ... the Liberals get the bill, the Conservatives get the new M.P.

OK, so that's democracy ... or a free market economy ... or some damn thing ... but who pays that campaign bill? Maybe the Liberals should send David Emerson's campaign bill to Stephen Harper. What say you?

There is a big difference between Belinda and Emerson. Belinda won her seat in the next election confirming that the voters approved of her switch. However, as Rafe points out about Emerson: "That he won't resign and run in a by-election is no doubt due, in part, to his knowledge that he'd get his ass kicked."

Emerson would have absolutely no chance of winning that seat as a Conservative. Whatever good he has done in life will be forgotten now. His legacy will be one of a political opportunist and traitor.

The Liberals should quickly elect a leader and find a way to make the government fall. They could run on this alone. Corruption? Looks like the Conservatives have their own ethical problems.

G West: I hear yah. Try this one.

http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/yourview/your_turn_conservative.html

And CBC’s Carolyn Ryan also writes:

“He has said pick up on some of those in the future. he is proud of his role creating the Reform Party of Canada, but it is mentioned nowhere in the biography of him that appears on the Conservative Party of Canada. Nor is his stint as president of the National Citizens' Coalition."

She later writes:

“But Harper himself carried some regional baggage that raised questions about his priorities once in power. In 2001, he co-signed a letter proposing that Alberta build a "firewall" around itself by getting out of the Canada Health Act and creating its own pension plan, freeing the province from interference by a "hostile" federal government. He once described Atlantic Canada, where his Harper ancestors had settled after arriving from England in the 1770s, as suffering from a "culture of defeat."

Only a dummie would argue that exclusion is a poplular thing in politics. The exclusion of who the members are in his prized NCC, the group he presidentially controlled for 5 years and went without a president for 4 more with him as the "silent leader" at the helm, the exclusion of third party organization donors to political parties, the bill that Harper fought and won as reigning NCC president. Ironically, it was Stephen Harper VS the government of Canada in the federal courts.

We can look at the same speech and find it as full of contradictions when we look at these sites.

http://www.morefreedom.org/
http://www.nccnhr.org/
http://www.answers.com/topic/national-citizens-coalition
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/10/15/ncc031015
http://www.nupge.ca/news_2003/n27ja03a.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20020802104305/www.morefreedom.org/new_page_3.htm
My favorite.
http://www.stephenharpersaid.ca/pdf/ncc.pdf#search='www.national%20citizens%20coalitio n'

I think you know what I mean.

Correction, nccnhr.org doesn't belong on that list, there is a national citizens coalition in the U.S. that has nothing to do with the one in Canada (I assume).

Rafe re:

That he [Emerson] is a very capable person is beyond argument

So political ethics being what they are in this country, it's not going to happen, so we must console ourselves with these thoughts:he was an excellent public servant, a capable businessman and a competent Liberal cabinet minister - and he is from British Columbia.

All in all, it's a good political cabinet.Every region has ministers, Peter MacKay has a big job, Stockwell Day is at least in the room, there are cabinet ministers from Quebec, there are ministers from Southern Ontario, there are two visible minority people and there are five women - and there are four from BC.
But, you might well ask, are these the best Mr. Harper has?
Who knows ? Unfortunately, under our system, competence is well down the list of requirements for the job.

That closing line is confirmed by the bulk of opinions which follow your and David's commentaries.

Fortunately, it appears that Prime Minister Harper is highly competent.

Once again he has deflected the ravings of naysayers - this time from minute focus on the lack of governing experience of Canada's newest set of Cabinet Ministers - to outrage that the CPC would make room for someone who does have cabinet experience !

In doing so, he has placed the credibility of his support base in the cross-hairs, and many of those have responded ably by showing solidarity with those who question the ethics of Canadian politics.
Talk about unifying Canadians to a cause !!

Even prior to the first sitting of the house, PM Harper has gained huge credibility with those Canadians who value a leader who knows how to play high stakes politics.

DPL, you are dreaming in technocolour if you think David Emmerson has devoted himself to BC.

That man is dedicated to himself and absolutely nothing else.

Suddenly he realized he might have to actually do the real work of an MP rather than play on the free-lunch circuit at our expense and like the silver-spooner he is, he abandoned any of the principles his lips have been forming for the past two years.

His constituents ought to now understand the dangers of electing parachute candidates who have nothing to offer the riding other than the usual fawning chamber of commerce style press releases.

Let's face it, if this starched shirt had run as a Conservative in his riding he wouldn't get elected as a dog catcher.

I truly hope disgruntled Liberals in Burnaby can cause this traitor lots of grief.

And to them I would say, be patient, there will be another election soon and then you can toss this out guy with the trash.

The Brain,
Absolutely, all I meant was that it appears Harper really is a bit of a libertarian at heart and I noticed hints of the same thing in some of your posts. Wasn't trying to say you had to accept all of his variegated positions. (Thanks for the other links, btw).

I do think that his remarks mean one has to analyze the Emerson affair in a different light - because Harper wouldn't see it as a problem on account of other considerations which are more important than party loyalty to him. I think that's pretty inconsistent given the Reform party's principle of seeing the MP as a kind of puppet who's in Ottawa to do the bidding of his/her members back home. And I think it's kind of ridiculous for him to believe what he says he believes given the way he responded to Scott Brison and Belinda Stronach. But hey, who ever said politicians have to be consistent, right!

In any case, my only point is that you can't really condemn him from an ethical point of view because he's honestly said that defections are okay as expressions of an individual person"s feelings about the party he or she happens to be a member of.

DO you agree with that, as far as it goes?

maikeru

As you might expect, I disagree. I think Mr Harper's just proved how cynical he is and I think the whole country knows it - not just the folks in the clubhouse. Nothing to be proud of, in my opinion. Furthermore, he's shown he believes that the end justifies the means and confirmed everything I'd said about him earlier - with one exception, which you should be able to see from other comments I've posted here. I don't think his statement (posted above) however, absolves him of responsibility - it just puts it into context.

Political musings.

If I was MP Cummins of Delta, I would consider sitting as an independant. Why?
1) The Conservative fisheries minister is an idiot and knows nothing about the West Coast, including the upcoming fishfarm fiascos, better get out with a high profile.
2) Harper has proven that he will take Liberal's as cabinet ministers over long time Conservatives/reform types. (oh yes, Reform is long dead now, best call Presto!)
3) Sitting as an independant in this parliment, will give you a lot more power (a la Cadman)than in the back bench. In fact, you will be invisible in the back bench.
4) By all accounts this parliment wil be longer than the last and you will be nearing retirement anyways, best go out with a bang, tha a whimper.

Just a thought.

Vortigern writes:

It is just this sort of 'party' line stuff that the soviet union was built upon.

Better would be to act more responsibly as voters and pay more attention to whom will be doing the representation as a MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT than what color suit they wear.

dave stills works for the big corps....interest, wake up...just like gordo a liberal...who cares about party policey...what a big shock!

G West asks:

nope.

I think that the main problems with the Canadian parliamentary system lie in the PMO and the concentration of powers there. Ones like appointment of GG or any senator or any judge.

TOO MUCH and not libertarian at all.

Better that the social experiment known as Canada end sooner rather than later.

By all accounts, Mr Emerson is a Big Business hack and coffee-table insider.

This makes him ideal fodder for either party, just because the LiEberals head-hunted him first does not mean he cannot be later head-hunted by the CONformers. This is business as usual in Ottawa.

Speaking of business as ususal, I suspect it was some of Darth Cretinous' left over mandarins in the PMO that put the little idea of senate appointments and making offers to any of the big city MP's to see whom might 'bite'.

The entire affair is so very much like the start of the Truedeau era...

Mabellbc, you state

Isn't that precisely the point?

Somebody explain this to me: When Ujjal Dosanjh was accused of enticing Grement Grewal to cross the floor in return for a plum post, all Hell broke loose and the RCMP looked into it and the Ethics Commissioner investigated and last week released his report. So when PM Harper does what Mr. Dosanjh was accused of, what? Nothing. No RCMP or EC. What gives?

For Ron_H

The RCMP were, at that time reluctantly yanked into the situation by the then PMPM and opposition leader.

Now they will not be called in, since their current boss, yes the real BOSS of the RCMP is the PMO, since the Comissioner is APPOINTED by him and holds an ADM position in the Bureaucracy, will not ask the RCMP to get involved, the 'leader' of the opposition is still dithering...

OK that clears that up...just wondering... Gotta love living in a democracy

Maybe the Liberals and Conservatives are secretly all members of another party that the voters don`t know about. This way if you vote for either, you`ll still pick a winner.

What I heard was Harper's rage at Stronach, and his pious claims to want to fight "corruption" in Ottawa.

Then he turns around and buys Emmerson with a cabinet post.

There are hardly any lower depths to which one might sink, except perhaps the depths of the so-called "conservative" voices on this forum trying to justify the plainly unjustifiable.

Ron H:

Gurm the Worm tried to incriminate others by playing detective, albeit very poorly.

Harper asked. Emerson accepted, and the RBBF (Reverse Belinda Back Flip) was complete.

Just going to reiterate one above mention:

PROTEST
4PM WEDNESDAY, FEB. 08TH

2148 KINGSWAY, EMERSON'S OFFICE

Wish I lived in the lower mainland, someone please go for me too. Thanks

Yep I remember it well Jeeves. Like the RBBF -if it becomes an Olympic event - the Canadian team will cop the gold real easy.

Why are you guys so surprised? What is the difference between the Liberals and Conservatives anyhow? Party of Big Business with a human face, party of Big Business with a few rough edges. Emerson saw himself as a "small-c Liberal" and decided to shift slightly to the right. The great advantage in this is that the NDP are now not just al;so-rans, but can start to do a little horsetrading - so the mildly pink party suddenly is not irrelevant. Hey, not a bad outcome if you ask me.

And that organic poutine idea would be great, just to get a little less of Tweedledumb and Tweedledumber in there!

Best

Sam Wagar

Emerson's website is now suspended due to lack of payment.

http://www.davidemerson.ca

There was a huge uproar from Conservatives. So if it was so bad with Belinda, why is it excusable with Emerson? Consistency, people!

I'm fairly consistent, I think, in that I have no problem with people crossing the floor. It's in a grand tradition in our parliamentary democracy. But I still think this particular one reeks a little because of the timing. He ran for two months under the Liberal banner, and didn't even sit in the house to gauge the current government or his new situation.

Either way, though, the scorn here is mostly being heaped on Emerson. Yes, he deserves it, but the real creep is Stephen Harper. And only because of the fuss he made when Belinda crossed over. If he had just accepted it at the time as part of the political process, then I'd say turnabout is fair play. But he's wanting his cake and eating it, too. Not a good start for the man.

If Canadians have any sense, this episode will be seen as the moment Harper "jumped the shark".

What is most disturbing to me is the amount of intolerance many here have for any other party other then the Liberals. The Conservatives are not at their political prime and have many hurdles to overcome before their policies are 100% inline with the majority of Canadians, but this is a process that will be achieved one step at a time. I do not support floor crossing from any party and I feel that better judgement should have prevailed, but I am also not blind to high stakes politics.

The obvious is that PM Harper will never do anything right in the eyes of some. There will always be something for them to critisize, let's not be so quick to point out his faults when we have just finished enduring 12+ years of Liberal rule with scandals of all sorts. PM Harpers rap sheet pales in comparison to Liberal missteps over the that time, and I for one may not agree with every policy he wants to put forth, but I think it is healthy for a DEMOCRACY to have change.

ROBBINS Sce Research says...

Just want to alert people to this guy Robbins who purports to run a polling firm. His website is full of surveys supposedly taken with tens of thousands of people across Canada and the U.S. Beware, these are bogus. This guy has posted his "polling results" on this website. This is not a legitimate polling firm. It's some guy out of the Lower Mainland who is very cagey about who he is and who has paid for these very dubious "polls."

This "pollster" is a fraud.

But alas! My good friends, you are missing one key factor: the pillar of political integrity and the all time, biggest party leapfrogger of them all (was it four or five parties - I've lost count): John Reynolds, is loudly/proudly shouting to the world that it was HE who materminded Emerson's quick shift. Need I say more. I guess one more little tidbit wouldn't hurt: Patrick Kinsella, ("best friend" of Jack Poole)Conservative, now key advisor, lobbyist to B.C Liberal Gordon Campbell was singled out by JR as being his Best Buddy in B. C. Business Mag. Unfortuately, it would appear that David Emerson was huddling with the wrong guys.

More on Gurm the Worm. His claim of influence was declared ambiguous at best. Harper then claimed Gurm was on the B-List. Then I hear on the David Berner Show, during Superbore Sunday, about an email from Gurm explaining that Emerson has defected. The email is dismissed as "rumor". My question is... just how far down the B-List did Mr. Grewal find himself? And what else is Harper hanging onto this guy for?

You're right, and that's a shame. That's the problem with partisanship -- you can discount what anyone says when they just toe the party line. I was on record here as supporting Harper's comments towards the U.S. ambassador. I gave him his props at the time. This floor crossing, though, is another matter entirely. It stinks. Not because it was a floor crossing but because of the timing and because of Harper's and the Conservative's comments on the previous floor crossing.

So don't just take anything negative towards the man and his party as knee-jerk ramblings from Harper-haters. Look at the particular argument being offered. Attack the argument, not the person.

grw

While I don't disagree that there's a certain off-putting smell to what PMSH is up to with David Emerson, I don't think it's simple and straightforward.
I did initially, but when I found Harper's answer to a direct question about members who play musical chairs and move from one party to another I had to re-assess my feelings about what Harper's done.
Source: CBC forum during the election is available here http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/yourview/your_turn_conservative.html

I think one has to give Harper at least some credit for being superficially consistent. I think there are fundamental internal contradictions between what he said he belives in philosophically and what he's willing to do from an expediency point of view - but that's not the question here.

As much as I disagree with what he's done, I shouldn't have been surprised. Not because he's failed to sustain high ethical standards - but because I, as a member of the electorate, wasn't paying close enough attention. I think we should have been warned and I think we shouldn't be surprised if it happens again.
What do you think about it looking from that point of view?

No, he has not taken political cynicism to a new level... for two reasons:

1. There really isn't any difference between the two parties, at least as they framed themselves in the last election and in their policies over the last twenty five years (at best the Liberals are Conservative Lite)

2. The only party whose members still represent their constituents is the NDP. Everyone else is in there for the salary and the pension. Period. (Yeah, o.k., and then there is Svend as an exception...)

Think back over the years... BC Liberals Pat McGeer and co, for example... or Jack Horner... or Reynolds.. or... or...

Ed Deak: bingo.

Working man: Don't expect to much from Ron Erwin...These right wing blowhards would sell their mother to the Arabs for a nickle... (yeah, I know, it cured her asthma...)

Why is everyone so surprised that Harper is revealed for what he was? Didn't anyone hear him carrying on about the Supreme court????? I'm just enjoying all the fandancing we see from the right.

R. Smiley

The Conservative Party should pay the Vancouver Kingsway Liberal riding association back their 100,000$ of campaign money and a rough calculation of the value of the volunteer's time.

G West:
I agree with you on his consistency within the last month of his latest interview with the CBC and floor crossings. But lets face it. He's been inconsistent with his own preaching on ethics, and criticisms in the past with anyone crossing the floor from his own party, or anyone who would appoint unelected officals and so on...

You all want to know how we spend our tax dollars? Take a peak at this report on timber resources across the entire province of B.C. et. el, wood volumes, who's corporately hot, who's not, mill numbers, whats left to cut, everything is in this report. It was done for the BC Trade development Corporation of which our Honorable David Emerson was then president of for the province in 1991, 1992.

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/D...021/RC021_3.pdf

This website contains the report with information on forest industry prepared for our "honorable" David Emerson and explains how and why our "honorable" David Emerson got so rich with Canfor. He had intel no one else had.

Honorable Emerson had intel that only a few were privy to as deputy finance minister of BC in 1984 as well.
It was no mistake that led him to the only survivor as President and CEO takeover king of the Western and Pacific Bank of Canada in Vancouver (now the Canadian Western Bank after he successfully merged his bank with another one to make a killing in shares. This is where he made millions and he moved right back to Goverment for more).

As some will recall, the BC Trade development Corporation was a big part of the Federal Liberal trade missions back in the 90's. Remember those? There were all kinds of reports done on our resources here and what we had to offer. Honorable Emerson sat on information few had anywhere in the world with this region.

His involvement with banks and Canfor, and the Vancouver airport were all about money. Honorable David Emerson has been a Fed government researcher since 1974. His intel through to the 80's led him here and its no surprise that his background, his ambitions and his dealings have made him a millionaire many times over, and at the taxpayers expense, as this is about as blatant a conflict of interest as it gets.

It reminds me of university professors who get genious from the odd student only to take it to the markets to pad their wallets with untold millions. Its the same conflict of interest we allow even now, unknowingly....

Honorable Emerson's directorships included : Teresen Inc, Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Company of Canada; Vice-Chairman of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives; Chair, British Columbia Ferry Services Inc.; and Chairman and Director of Genus Resource Management Technologies Inc.

Each directorship relates to what he knew from government intel, and reflects where these same corporations headed. Look at Teresen alone and tell me that his government intel didn't have anything to do with Teresen buying everything out. Nice U.S. corporate sellout.

He was right on top of coordinated market research and drafted major reports on the food industry in China, drafted energy sector briefing notes used by Premier Harcourt during Team Canada’s 1995 trade mission to China, with follow up to identify energy projects suitable for pursuit by BC companies.
Why did he have a chinese vote? Ever heard the slogan "vote for the Republicans, their good for business." Honorable David Emerson was synomymous with this term in Chinese, only it was "vote for the Liberal, good for Business".

Honorable David Emerson has enough intel on Gateway and Whistler to make millions more. It should be no secret as to how many conflicts of interest he really has.

It begins with petitions and the press, with clips like these, and the facts, people, are out there. Honorable David Emerson was high profile for a lot of years. Its about time someone should be asking why he was so sucessfull as a CEO for Great Western and Canfor, and who's filling his pockets now.

Votes for our Honorable David Emerson:

David Emerson (as a Lib) 20,064
Ian Waddell NDP 15,570
Kanman Wong Con 8,699
Amo Schortinghuis Greens 1,301
Matt Kadioglu 277

Yup! This riding had a fat chance of going conservative, especially in light of how much love we had for our Cons in the three largest cities of Canada. But the Cons tried.

The 2001 census found just one-third of residents here listed English as their mother tongue. More than 55 per cent are immigrants. Nearly 40 per cent are ethnically Chinese – the second-highest such proportion of any riding. this explains Con strategy.

Even still, this was the best the Cons could do, given that Emerson even tried to give them a bye. Remember his "Boiled Dog's head smile" comment? Its unsurpizing that he said this knowing that it would bond with the chinese vote... we should have known how unethical he was then...

I'll say this much about David Emerson. As most will attest, he knows what he's doing. There isn't a CEO alive that doesn't get shares issued to them directly in any company. Millionaire? I guess so, many times over. He was there plundering this provinces intel (and possibly its coffers) as deputy finance minister of BC in 1984.
As president and CEO of the Western and Pacific Bank of Canada in Vancouver (now the Canadian Western Bank after he successfully merged his bank with another one to make a killing in shares). In 1990 he returned to the B.C. civil service as deputy minister of finance, and was soon named deputy minister to the premier, in to our public intel for more, and then to the corporate big time as president of the B.C. Trade Development Corporation. In 1998, he was appointed president and CEO of Canfor Corporation, B.C.'s largest forestry company. He drove up profits through raping the resources Canfor held, while streamlining costs, and all the while, he pumped up share value and issued shares to himself like every CEO does. There's so much dirt on this guy, his name should come up when we look up "conflict of interest" in the dictionary.

Even most Conservatives in his riding won't like him. He was a no show MP as a Lib, doing nothing for riding that suffers heavily from drugs and crime. He knows what he's doing all right. Glad he found his way home. And it's just the beginning, for there's more to come.

The reality is that Canfor's records of share's issued to David Emerson, as well as any issued to him while he was with the Canadian Western bank (but not prior) can be found with ease. It would be a great service To Canadians if anyone looked to find just how much he's made off of our sweat and devastated forests to support his greed in relation to his share issues to himself. Especially considering the job he now has with this country. A possible 15 billion could flow through his hands.

A public servant serves the public trust. Period! This is what a public servant is supposed to do. Maybe David Emerson is a nice guy. Who knows? He might have a warm, bright, funny sense of humor and when you walk into his office, you'll get bowled over by his confidence and his status and position and all that, and when he doesn't take the baby from your sister and start eating it, but instead makes fond comments, we begin to think a guy like David Emerson is like one of us, just got lucky, right place, right time....

But when we examine the truth... what David Emerson did was betray the public trust and he didn't do it just days ago, here. He sold his soul to profit on information from government intel provided to him in the 80's and 90's, while he was on goverment salary, to serve the publics trust and what he did with his intel in becoming the CEO for Great Western Bank and Canfor, is a complete conflict of interest, a complete violation of the public trust.

We pay tax dollars to people like him in the hope that he wouldn't exploit us or business with what information the goverment provided him, "to serve the public trust." What we got in return was just another politician serving himself. The case of David Emerson should be the case made to prevent in any future accountability laws coming in the future. It is the "conflicts of interest" that are tearing this country apart. And its not just top down, its down top. There are tons of voters who vote the same way. For themselves. Not for the good of the country, or life or the world, but for the good of themselves! And while this might justify supporting Conservative NCC agenda's, and tax cuts to the rich and corporate agenda's like the Liberals are also guilty of, TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT. They never have, they never will, and there will never be any good coming from it.

Its time to make an example and my pick for such a lucky man in the right place at the right time? Honorable David Emerson. The accountability act should be designed to keep people like him from exploiting what he learns from Government intel. Don't hold your breath for anything remotely of the sort from someone like our honorable Stephen Harper.

Brain
One thing is pretty obvious, and thanks for all the digging, business is gonna do just fine under the new govt. They won't even miss a beat!
Any odds on the chances of real electoral reform (for the House of Commons) anytime soon?

The only reform we can count on is reform that will make the system more corrupt. The thing we have to realize about business, is that if we don't regulate it, big business, especally U.S. corporations would have this country destroyed and picked apart inside of 20 years. Its just the nature of identities without souls, regardless of the greed filled souls that run them. In other words, there is nothing to keep them honest. Look at what Monsanto would try without resistance. Lord knows what they've done with resistance. The examples are countless now.

The brain
Naw, it's not that hopeless! Instead of trying to get David Emerson recalled, which is a fruitless quest even if it succeeded since, as you've often pointed out, he's only one of many from that cookie cutter, it might actually do some good to circulate a national petition calling on Mr Harper to institute some real electoral reform.

Properly organized (and using the internet)that kind of effort, if it came from all across the country and wasn't associated with any political party, would be hard for him to reject - particularly given the old reformers twin hobby horses of initiative and recall, remember. You could even impress a useful leader to head the charge - somebody no longer in politics who has always believed in electoral reform..like: oh I don't know...Preston Manning or Gordon Gibson!!

Hell, how many votes did Rick Mercer get in his call to change Stockwell's name to Doris?

Why Tories Can't Win
Link Address: http://thetyee.ca/Views/2005/06/06/WhyTories
Published: 2005-06-06 09:40:00

ByÂ*Rafe Mair

TheTyee.ca

Sorry BC. It's all about Ontario appeasing Quebec.

Don’t blame me, folks, I am merely the messenger, but Stephen Harper and the Tories are not going to win the next election. No way.And I ask you to destroy this after reading in case I’m wrong! But let me tell you why I think the bad old Grits will win again.

First of all, while Stephen Harper might make a great front man for a funeral parlour, he’s no political leader. He can’t control his own caucus. Losing Belinda Stronach was a big owie and it should have been avoided. If not avoidable, it was predictable, and any handling of the situation would have been better than how the Tories did it.

Well, how about that - the Tories present themselves as the great democratic reformers, then cooperate (even encourage) an electoral fraud of the very kind that many of their members have advocated formal policies against. i.e. that representatives should be culpable as judged on the wishes of their constituents and subject to recall if they do not. The absence of recall legislation at the federal level isn't the Tories' fault; but they're sure willing to take advantage of the situation, aren't they? Offering a cabinet post to cross the floor? Makes the whole Grewal affair look boring by comparison, doesn't it? Especially after all their whining and bitching about Belinda....

Worth mentioning that until a certain parliament - Laurier's I think - all cabinet appointments had to be tested by byelection, including the Prime Minister's own seat (which is how Sir John A. became MP for Victoria, incidentally, as he had been defeated in his own seat in the East).

But here's the rub: public discord over Emerson's defection is rising, and may turn into the Big Issue of the spring, with the Tories having to live up to all their electoral-posturing guff about democratic reform and respect for constituents.

But we know Harper is not an honourable man, or he would have either turned down Emerson or instructed him that only a byelection was suitable in this situation - especially because the Tories placed a distant third in Vancouver-Kingsway, not even a respectable second.

I thought Emerson was a political opportunist and carpetbagger since he was first inducted into the Martin government; it's not surprising that someone who's more interested in the power of a cabinet position than a backbench slot would jump parties if they get the chance for upward mobility on government benches. But a week after the election? This smacks of something he was contemplating before the election, which means that he campaigned knowing what he was going to do if the Liberals didn't form the next government.

Guess is he's going to be in charge of federal largesse to Vancouver and the Olympics and the Tories figure they can launder or massage the vote to get him re-elected. Or not. People are pretty choked about this, and BC of all the Canadian provinces is the one where democratic reform and the accountability of members is a hot-button issue (red hot).

With any luck, the Tories are going to have to come up with recall legislation as well as reinstating the old practice of calling byelections to confirm cabinet appointments. Either that or "the bloom is off the rose" and we know that all that fine talk about making Canada more democratic was just smoke-and-mirrors to pretend to the moral high ground. But you can't claim the moral high ground when you've encouraged an MP to betray is own constituents right after they elected him.

Why should anyone be surprised that Emercenary moved his digs to a bordello that caters to a clientele with higher standards?

maikeru
And your point is?

Skookum1
Dunno, from everything I've heard and read Harper wanted Emerson and got John Reynolds to act as the go-between.

There was an item on BCTV, that by using the precedents of the Grewal case, Harper is in conflict of interest and, according to Waddell, and according to the existing rules, could lose his seat in Parliament, because he inticed Emerson with the promise of a portfolio.

Of course, now that the lawyers are involved, this could drag on forever and every new disclosure brings more dirt on Harper.

I wouldn't the least bit be surprised to read of Emerson's resignation pretty soon to divert attention from Harper. Harper will just change the rules. Like a good economist using imaginary figures to come up with the desired results.

Ed Deak.

"I think Emerson ought to give his head a shake and ask himself how many votes would have even come to the him if he had run as the conservative. One does not have to be a economist to know Emerson would have lost. One must admire Emerson's arrogance in telling the constituencies of Vancouver-Kingsway he and he alone knows best, that he is their saviour and of the provence of British Columbia.Ye all bow down now."
What Emerson has not realize is that he is still swimming in the pond scum that the parliament cesspool has become.
We can see his fat cat ministers salary enough to keep him happy and a the ruler of the Vancouver-kingsway realm oh and those poor peasants whose democratic vote is worthless. In away he is a liberal he just has learned how to suck on another tit at the parliamentary trough. And this is just the beginning.
What arrogance for Emerson to think he is the only one who is indispensable.

Losing David 'Tyee' Emerson was a 'big owie' for the folks that bought Canada with Mulroney's GST windfall - and it should have been predicted.

Any handling of the situation would have been better than how the Grits are currently handling it. They should be proud to have one of their own in Cabinet - it's a minority government fer crissakes !

The last minority government we had tried to run 39 Cabinet Ministries on a 'business as usual' basis despite obvious and growing concern by Canadians that they were incompetent governors.

Prime Minister Harper is 'The Canadian of the Year' - and it's only February ...=)

maikeru

It may be a little early for that, don't you think - the award I mean? It's a bit hard to see this as a good week for the new government, but they do seem bent upon setting new standards for incompetence from everything I've seen and heard, maybe that's the kind of award you're thinking of.

February 10, 2006

Glen P. Robbins
robbinssceresearch.com

Mr. David Beers

McGrady, Baugh and Whyte

Dear Sirs

I conduct public opinion polls and have done since 1998.

Under the recent Tyee ‘blog-article’ Emerson: The Power and the Tory, a blogger under the name Sammy Samsun has defamed and or libeled me. I do include my polling name and my real name in these blogs.

My polling firm has a history of accuracy in public opinion polling which is irrefutable, and would be considered irrefutable by anyone who reviews our results against real events.

Under the blogsite Pickton Trial: Who were the Victims? I write a little about what I perceive the law to be relative to that particular discussion.

I have a degree in Political Science, however in 1996 a BC Supreme Court Judge Ordered that “I be treated as a lawyer at all times”.

As you know the Tyee is responsible for what is written on its website. In fact, within the blogstream article involving Mr. Emerson, another ‘blogger’ makes reference to the fact that ‘bloggers’ have been kicked off the site, presumably for one indiscretion or another.

Mr/Mrs. Samsun whoever he or she is, (as I am sure you will acknowledge) is playing pretty fast and loose with the Tyee’s assets. Not only is one case of fraud difficult to prove but also 150-200 cases would be impossible, particularly against our history of accuracy, which is virtually unmatched.

I would ask that the appropriate protocols be instituted here including a written apology, and I would expect a banning of the person who wrote the defamatory comments.

Sincerely,

Glen P. Robbins
(604) 942-3757

Sammy Samsun has been nominated by a fellow Tyee keyboard comrade as ' Immoral and Cynical Canadian the Year', after posting one too many defamatory opinions about 'Robbins Sce Research'

I wish I could second that nomination, but in all honesty only ever read a couple of paragraphs by Sammy Samsun before adding that poster to my 'ignore this idiot' filter.

Great. So we can indict John Reynolds on influence-peddling and sale-of-benefits charges, too? Because it's obvious that SOMEONE offered Emerson a benefit, no? And it certainly wasn't the janitor at Tory National HQ, nope, not him.

No wonder Harper wants to clean out the Supreme Court and replace it with his own appointees, huh?

And this Fortier thing...weren't the Tories promising to fill Senate vacancies by appointing elected Senators? So why didn't Harper ask the Quebec government to hold a senate election to fill this seat, instead of parachuting his "boy" into it? Can anyone around here spell hypocrite? I don't think there's any doubt that Senate Reform - an elected Senate - is just like it was for the Reform Party; all puff'n'stuff that when they're finally confronted with it they back away from.

Same with accountability of elected officials (Emerson) and electoral reform (proportioanl or otherwise). The Tories want a plurality-based majority government and all the sweeping power that implies; installing a reformed democratic process before the next election, or the election after that, is just not going to happen unless we indict the bastards for the Emerson affair. And I do mean indict.

Fraud. Sale of benefits. Influence peddling. Or are politicians exempt from these laws somehow?

maikeru

Not sure you shouldn't nominate Harper for that

award. That's certainly the way an awful lot of people feel about him these days, alas!
The road to hell is often paved with good intentions.

Who's taking the nominations, by the way?

Skookum1 re
And this Fortier thing...weren't the Tories promising to fill Senate vacancies by appointing elected Senators? So why didn't Harper ask the Quebec government to hold a senate election to fill this seat, instead of parachuting his "boy" into it?

a) Time was of the essence in getting the guvmint up and running
b) It gave the Senate credibility as a useful limb of governance
c) It gave Canadians good reason to ponder an elected Senate
d) It gave 'scared' Canadians a comforting sense of continuity

G West re:

Not sure you shouldn't nominate Harper for that [Immoral and Cynical Canadian the Year].

Who's taking the nominations, by the way?

I'm not sure which Court would hear the case, but Tyee is the co-nominee. I suspect you missed the hastily-pulled Robbins post, and the referenced Samsun posts.

Having actively read and replied to Samsun's posts, including those which publicly defamed Robbins Sce Research, you will be among those salmon fry most able to offer up eye-witness testimony in this fish farm frolic.

Will Tyee live up to it's promise to bring it's readership the best in investigative reporting - especially on local issues ??

btw ...as long as we're in nomination mode here - I'll nominate you, G West, as the Tyee keyboard comrade most likely to 'cross the floor' in 2006... =)

Maikeru
Nope didn't miss them at all. Saw the whole thing as it transpired. I was eating my breakfast. Agree SS was out of line and, if you'll go back to my post ( in response to the things he'd said) you'll see what I told him too and I trust you won't have any trouble with what I said.

I think the Tyee did the best it could under the circumstances by pulling both the offensive material and Glen's reaction which may have been (given what I'll say later in this comment) just a trifle overwrought.

Finding a way to respond to stuff that goes too far without having a fulltime staff to police these posts before they're published is a bit of a Gordian knot I think.

In the event, I suspect that SS's reaction was at least partly the result of his unfortunate tendency to go overboard about things, in this case statistical analysis, that he doesn't always really understand. But that's just me, I always try to look for the best in people as I'm sure you know. By the way, I've emailed Glen privately with my thoughts.

As to the nomination, thanks for the thought but I'll continue to be what I've always been - a careful thinker who tries to keep his promises and doesn't say things he doesn't believe. Someone who'd be more likely to look for the good in another human being than condemn the bad: I don't mean that to be taken the wrong way - just don't assume you know very much about me.

Wot? The Tories had no qualified politicians knowledgeable in international trade, or intelligent enough to step up to bat? What were they claiming they had a plan etc for if they had to raid another party's benches to form a cabinet? There weren't any qualified members of the caucus who could have had Fortier's job, for that matter?

Time is not of the essence in getting a party's regime up and running, because the actual government is the bureaucracy which continues on seamlessly as before. Harper would have done better to wait a week to consider other options in both cases.

Hosepatootie and balderdash. Fomenting yet another Senate appointment while having campaigned on an elected Senate, and calling to a higher order of political vision in doing so, is a big yawn. Are you a spin doctor for the Tories, maikeru?

If the Senate is such a useful limb of government, surely one of the old fruits, er nuts, perched on its branches (stretching the metaphor, I know...), then surely some of the Senators appointed by Messrs Mulroney and Clark (if Clark got the chance) must be qualified in international trade. Or are Senate Tories somehow less trustworthy than Commons Tories, and it's better just to create a Senator than actually picked from the roster you said you'd form your government from. But apparently two key posts you had no talent for, Stephen.....If you were going to raid the Liberals for talent, you could have at least found a Senator instead of an outgoing cabinet minister from the hated Liberal enemy.

There is an old convention (that I don't have a problem with) that cabinet members can be drawn from the Upper House. It was used in the same timeframe which demanded that all cabinet ministers resign their Commons seats and run in byelections to confirm their appointment. IIRC cabinet ministers appointed from the Senate had to run for election to the Commons when vacancies emerged (or junior backbenchers would resign to make way).

They're both good ideas. The Tories have chosen to only cite one and very pointedly ignore the other, and also violate the traditions surrounding floor-crossing (at least wait until after the Speech from the Throne, OK?). Their rambling and increasingly obscurantist excuse-making -sounding more and more like the spun-lie language spoken by Beltway Republicans - is almost comical. Maikeru's glibness is symptomatic of this kind of NewThink. It's all in how you look at evil, you see; just a change of angle can make it all the more palatable, don't you think?

(I see I missed the 'r' in "horsepatootie" above)

Even better it gave Canadians good reason to ponder throwing Harper out at the first chance, as he's shown right off the bat that none of the ideals he was claiming to in order to get elected he has any faith in at all.

Pandering to Emerson's ambition - or actually recruiting Emerson (even without a holiday package and a car for the wife the whole still smacks of offering a benefit and not just a job, and high-handing the public and ignoring the outrage of the riding's voters are all icons of patronage, the blase arrogance of our politicians once they've won election (so suddenly this time - though very reminiscent of G. Campbell's refusal to recognize an Opposition in 2001).

That the implication used in all the justifications offered is that a riding is going to do better on the government benches, and in the cabinet, than it would in opposition points to a further evil of our system. The admitted statement here is that it is perfectly OK for governemnt spending to go proportionately more to ridings held by the ruling party, and even more to those with its most important ministers, than to other ridings.

David Emerson shouldn't have had to be in the Tory cabinet to get the best possible deal for his constituents. THAT's the true outrage here - that the justifications and the wheedling are all done in the name of benefitting the public through the exploitation of the pork barrel system known as cabinet.

Now I'm starting to think you're being disingenous or tongue-in-cheek. Are you sure you're not the Iraqi Information Minister or his distant cousin or something?

How comforting it is to have an incoming PM accept the defection of a member who obviously ran with mercenary intentions. AT what point had Emerson considered this as an option? During the campaign? Before the campaign? When did Stephen Harper call him and what did he say? Did David Emerson call him?

All big question, and as yet no real answers. But the bigger questions about the pork barrel, patronage, an elected Senate and political accountability to constituents are now hot-button.

Canadians in Vancouver-Kingsway had voted for David Emerson because they wanted continuity (a continued Liberal regime), not because they wanted an MP who had run under false pretenses and had such low moral fibre that when offered his old job back he jumped at it, forgetting everyone around him and wrapping himself in the flag in the process, and joining with the very party he railed against during his campaign - after getting around conventional nominations in the first place. And then, as said, wrapping himself in the flag and saying he did it for the good of the country and the province and Vancouver Kingsway. That he, David Emerson, knows better than the electorate, who do not matter other than providing their usual useful function as SUCKERS. That the media and the voters and the political ethicists and his ex-volunteers/backers are all nuts and stupid or just sadly misguided, and only he is right.

Ah yes, megalomania is such a wonderful isn't it? I suppose that light on the horizon is David Emerson getting up in the morning?

I'm surprised maikeru didn't add a rider that:
e) Canadians have been impressed by Harper's leadership and high standards of ethics and respect for the electorate. NOT.

'Scared' Canadians were anything but comforted by Harper's behaviour in the Emerson Affair, and insulted by the Fortier appointment. All those who got massaged into believing the Tories could actually be the knights in shining armour they claimed to be through the campaign (well, actually they let the media claim it for them, as they really didn't campaign, did they?)
are now taking a long, cautious look. It doesn't seem likely that these events are going to be unique.

Rather, I think we can all except them to set the tone for the next year and a half of political insanity and probably, quite probably, pompous arrogance and amazing attempts at constitutional chicaneries in the guise of reform. Emerson's recruitment/defection, and Fortier's appointment (and not election) are signs of things to come, and probably will be the least of the many follies of the Harper regime about to entertain us for the next year or two....

This just reported yesterday in our local paper:

The man Harper appointed as Canada's new Minister of Justice, Vic Toews, was convicted of breaking the law about campaign financing in Manitoba. He pled guilty, no contest.

Is there no end to the lack of respect Harper will show for the people of Canada? How do we explain this to our kids?

And this is only the stuff we get to see, the stuff above the surface. I shudder to think of what they are doing that we won't discover til it's too late. Let's urge the opposition parties to bring this government down, and fast.

Skookum1

Nicely done! It's heartening to see somebody else stepping up who's not afraid to tell it like it is without getting too partisan, which, as I've said elsewhere at least a dozen times, takes the sharp edge off the criticism and reduces this thing to politics as usual. Which is exactly what the PM is counting on happening - I'm sure you heard Emerson's comment this morning. It's absolutely vital not to let up but equally vital not to just rely on other politicians to make the case. This government has its boot in the fact of the whole electorate, not just the people of Vancouver-Kingsway - to borrow a figure of speech from Jack London.

The point is that this whole 'conservative' government is illegitimate given its background and the promises made in its compact with all the people of this country. In fact, to even call it a conservative government is really a contradiction in terms for anyone with a sense of history and tradition - these guys are not conservative.
The fact that Garth Turner appears to be the only one of the caucus who has the jam to stand up on the government side of the fence is the really 'scary' thing that Maikeru and the like ought to be sweating about.

The focus has to be kept squarely where it belongs: Do you really think Stephen Harper is 'honouring our trust and keeping its committments to the people of Canada'? Wasn't that the phrase he used on election night?

Skookum1 re:
AT what point had Emerson considered this as an option?

My guess is 050517.

maikeru

Why be so enigmatic? If you're implying collusion between the Provincial Liberals and David Emerson why not come out and say it. No matter how one tries to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear honest men know what's going on here and honest men, and women, are ashamed and disappointed. We should all hang our heads that our supposed leaders take our high opinion of them so lightly.

No matter what gold David Emerson brings back to British Columbia for his masters, whether in Victoria or Ottawa, he cannot redeem his reputation. Mr Harper can pretend he hasn't betrayed his own moral compass but you and I both know that's not true..what's worse, he isn't man enough to admit it and that's a shame because once he showed promise as a moral agent.

Jefferson put it this way: "Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on them (official positions), a rottenness begins in his conduct" [From a letter of 21 May 1799]

[b]G West{/b] re:
"
Why be so enigmatic? If you're implying collusion between the Provincial Liberals and David Emerson why not come out and say it. No matter how one tries to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear honest men know what's going on here and honest men, and women, are ashamed and disappointed. We should all hang our heads that our supposed leaders take our high opinion of them so lightly."

What's so enigmatic about the day Stronach 'came out of the closet' and announced herself a Liberal - and Cabinet Minister no less ? That sort of political manoevre would hardly have escaped Emerson's attention at the time.

Whether it may have been more appropriate for David Emerson to cross over to the Tories then - rather than after re-election as a Liberal - is a moot point.
He is clearly an exemplary Cabinet Minister working in the best interests of his country, and was likely appalled by Paul Martin's musical-chair orchestrations and bloated Cabinet.

His 'pull the goalie' comment in the dying days of the election campaign fell on deaf ears within a Liberal election war-office intent on backing Martin's belly-flop to the bitter end.

I have no problem at all holding my head high when regarding Prime Minister Harper's choices for Cabinet - including David Emerson.
It's far more honourable than having to have held one's nose to vote Liberal.

Those who re-elected David Emerson as MP are to be commended for choosing a candidate so highly thought of by his former adversaries that he would be honoured with the opportunity to continue serving as a Canadian Cabinet Minister - for all the right reasons.

maikeru
First of all, May 17, 2005 was the date of the last provicial election in BC, posting that date didn't ring any Stronach bells for me - that's hardly surprising.

I think the Stronach/Brison thing, and especially the moral indignation with which 'your' party (since you insist on being partisan about this - despite my best efforts, if you've been following, not to do that) makes anyone's use of those events as a justification for the way the Emerson thing has gone down pretty weak.

I don't think I've ever said that David Emerson is not a talented human being. He may well be a valuable addition to a lack-lustre cabinet.
If I were a conservative supporter (or a potential cabinet member from the caucus for that matter) I'm not so sure I'd find this a significant vote of confidence in the colleagues with whom I'd been fighting the good fight for much of the last decade - but that's another matter.

If the presence of Mr Emerson were so vital to the future of this government and the country there were ways Mr Harper could have availed himself of that talent that wouldn't have stirred up any moral outrage. I can suggest several if you're interested but I think you are intelligent enough to figure that out for yourself.

But those things are not the problem here, at least they're not the problem for me and, given the kind of reaction this is stirring, I don't think I'm the only one who thinks Mr Harper and Mr Emerson are phoneys, dissemblers and unworthy of the trust the Canadian people have placed in them.

I think you, and every other Canadian who holds their head high after this nonsense, this compete moral meltdown, ought to shake their heads instead of holding them high.

I have seldom seen a better example of corrupt 'lifeboat' situation ethics in my life and I think if you're honest with yourself you must be embarrassed too - I just wish you were able to admit it. Confession is, after all, good for the soul.

There's no honour for anyone in this mess. If we are going to use other's bad or questionable behavior as the only yardstick for our own actions, then this country, this whole society, is headed down a slippery slope to oblivion. I think you may know that in the back of your mind and that's why you keep coming back here to a kind of side dialogue with me. Today though I'm surprised you even bothered submitting such a weak case. I have to go to Mass.
Cheers.

Pls insert the words 'dealt with it' after brackets in 2nd graf, sorry!

Oh? Now the people Emerson betrayed should be "honoured" by his new role, instead of disgusted by his betrayal of their democratic intention. You Tory spin doctors get more and more twisted all the time. Were Belinda Stronach's constituents also "honoured" when she decided to "do the right thing" and distance herself from the rabid social conservatism of the Tory caucus?

"Honoured"? Such a cheap word, maikeru, and cheap because it's been debased by newspeakers like yourself. The people of Vancouver-Kingsway are outraged, not "honoured".

It's increasingly clear that Tory-oid lie spinners have been assigned to work on this one overtime: Emerson's defection must be portrayed as an HONOURABLE DEED, no matter how much convoluted posturing is required to pretend to the moral high ground. Yikes. Why not just have Harper dissolve Parliament and declare himself king, "for the good of the country and his constituents"? I'm sure Stephen knows better than the rest of us, having a direct pipiline to God (and Ralph Klein, and the White House) that the rest of us do not have.

Maikeru, are you a paid Tory supporter? Are you an unpaid Tory dupe? Are you a party organizer? A spin doctor, aka "communications consultant"? What's your gig, maikeru. A few weeks ago you would have called David Emerson every name in the book; now all of a sudden Vancouver-Kingsway should be "honoured" by his conversion to Harperism.....you're really screwed up, do you know that?

My guess is 050517 wote maikeru

And that's what you call a freudian slip. Maikeru is now trying to pretend he meant Stronach's defection but that is the date of the BC Provincial election.

Ohhh, I'd guess he's a BC Liberal, Skookum1,...because the above is a perfect definition of one. These so-called Liberals vote for the ultra-right Harper Conservatives...and they see no irony in that or any lack of political principle ot integrity. That's why they can't see Emerson did anything wrong...everything... absolutely everything is looked at as a business deal.

skookum1 re:

Why not just have Harper dissolve Parliament and declare himself king, "for the good of the country and his constituents"? I'm sure Stephen knows better than the rest of us, having a direct pipiline to God (and Ralph Klein, and the White House) that the rest of us do not have.

The 'rest of you' have a direct pipeline to the same hookah, imho.

Maikeru, are you a paid Tory supporter? Are you an unpaid Tory dupe? Are you a party organizer? A spin doctor, aka "communications consultant"? What's your gig, maikeru. A few weeks ago you would have called David Emerson every name in the book; now all of a sudden Vancouver-Kingsway should be "honoured" by his conversion to Harperism.....you're really screwed up, do you know that?

I'm a Canadian and native Vancouverite. I post my own opinions gratis to help my fellow Canadians recover from the malaise of mind evidenced in your writings.

A few weeks ago my foremost concern about the coming election was that Vancouver Center might actually wind up represented in Parliament by NDP guru Svend Robinson.

lynn re:
Ohhh, I'd guess he's a BC Liberal, Skookum1,...because the above is a perfect definition of one. These so-called Liberals vote for the ultra-right Harper Conservatives...and they see no irony in that or any lack of political principle ot integrity.

Your opinion is worthless.
The irony is you believe it has enough value to share it with others.

maikeru

Skilful rhetorical device that, when you can't defend your own case any longer, change the subject. In formal reasoning it's called 'Ignoring the Issue'. It frequently works when you're in a group of likeminded individuals - and it's a favourite of George Bush's - not quite so effective in circumstances like these.

It won't work here. What's happened with Mr Harper and Mr Emerson isn't honourable, it's shameful and you know it.

G West re:
First of all, May 17, 2005 was the date of the last provicial election in BC, posting that date didn't ring any Stronach bells for me - that's hardly surprising.

It's understandable that the date Stronach become a Liberal Cabinet Minister would not register with any who passed the event off as a tempest in a teapot - even when the question raised begged a relative answer.

If the presence of Mr Emerson were so vital to the future of this government and the country there were ways Mr Harper could have availed himself of that talent that wouldn't have stirred up any moral outrage.

The only moral outrage I'm willing to accept as other than moral posturing would be that evinced by any who actually changed their political support to the CPC due Stronach crossing the floor.

I certainly don't see any evidence of that on these threads, and point directly to this statement as classic 'moral posturing'.:
I have seldom seen a better example of corrupt 'lifeboat' situation ethics in my life and I think if you're honest with yourself you must be embarrassed too - I just wish you were able to admit it. Confession is, after all, good for the soul..

One comment of yours I do agree with, if not in whole:
"this country, this whole society, is headed down a slippery slope to oblivion."
You continue to paint youself as one who represents a 'non-partisan' view of politics, but I believe you have more need than I for a confessional to marry your own beliefs with those of your fellow Canadians.

G West re:
Skilful rhetorical device that, when you can't defend your own case any longer, change the subject. In formal reasoning it's called 'Ignoring the Issue'. It frequently works when you're in a group of likeminded individuals - and it's a favourite of George Bush's - not quite so effective in circumstances like these.

Your aside reference to President Bush illustrates your own falsehood, and echoes it's source.

maikeru

Look, you're wasting my time. Changing the subject referred to you moving to a discussion of fighting the good fight in Vancouver Centre instead of dealing with questions that are actually under debate.

By situation ethics, I refer to the case when somebody decides that what they said they belived in doesn't have any traction now that the situation's changed.

It's also a kind of Post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning that suggests that because a thing happened similarly in a prior time it is therefore justified every time in the future.

And if you don't think George Bush changes the subject every time he's asked a difficult question then I can't help you - this discussion is over!

I've tried to be respectful and listen to what you have to say but this is just nonsense.

G West re:
I'd be more inclined to believe your claim of trying to be respectful if I saw reasonable evidence that you were capable of thinking outside the box. But as yet I have not.

You simply soft sell the same old stocks and bonds where others bark loudly.

I'm not trying to sell anything. You're the one who keeps coming back here to try and change my mind. I'm just surprised at the weakness of your arguments, that's all. If you'd simply admit that Mr Harper has let a lot of people down who had a right to expect him to step up and stand by his principles instead of sinking to the level he's spent his political life railing against then you and I would have nothing to argue about. You can't seem to figure that out so there it is, in black and white. If you go and look at the comments on Garth Turner's website you'll find there a lot of conservative voters writing comments who aren't afraid to step up and admit he's let them and their shared principles down. You should be so honest.

Thanks for answering my question, maikeru. It's clear now that you are an unpaid party dupe, instead of a venal, lying, confabulating paid party hack.

'he's' in second last sentence should be 'Harper's', obviously.

When the Reform party was imploding under Stockwell Day and various MPs left to sit as "Democratic Alliance" members were they not doing what they felt best to serve their constituents even though they were a "traitor" to their party? Reading Stephen Harper's answer to Colleen Belisle in this transcript shows that this is at least consistent with what he said before the election:

http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/yourview/your_turn_conservative.html
(Thanks "G West" for the above link)

Looking at the positive side hopefully the amount of fuss raised over this will help pass a bill that will outline what needs to be done when an MP can cross the floor that balances constituent's concerns with too
tight party control. If you make it too difficult to cross the floor then you will have increased the power of the party over the MPs. It would be hard for the Liberals and Conservative members to vote against any reasonable bill given their history. In a minority government there's a good chance for a private member's bill to be proposed and passed.

A new law on what has to be done to recall a Federal member such as what we have at the Provincial level could also help remove excessive abuses of constituent's wishes.

rotlin re:
Reading Stephen Harper's answer to Colleen Belisle in this transcript shows that this is at least consistent with what he said before the election:

I believe that's an important facet for folks to consider.

Looking at the positive side hopefully the amount of fuss raised over this will help pass a bill that will outline what needs to be done when an MP can cross the floor that balances constituent's concerns with too tight party control.

There I'll point to with Prime Minister Harper's opening and conclusion

" My short answer is no."

"But that all said, I haven't seen one [proposed policy restricting floor crossing] yet that I'm convinced creates a bigger problem than it's actually trying to fix.

Our parliamentary system relies on an effective and hard-working Loyal Opposition to ensure all Canadians are properly represented.

The PMO's office bestows enormous advantage on the sitting government, not the least of which is to make appointments unavailable to the LO.

Canadians are certainly more alive to floor crossing at this juncture than 9 months ago when a prominent member of the LO accepted similar offer.

That's a good thing, and if Canadians are to be saddled with yet another law, it's best to have it out in the open and with the public alerted to it's overall implications.

Again, the only folks in Canada I believe have a genuine right to be morally outraged about Emerson's appointment are any who switched to the CPC due Stronach's crossing the floor to sit in Cabinet.

It must be remembered that Prime Minister Martin's cabinet was compelled to vote as directed by the party on Bill C38 "The Civil Marriage Act" - a devisive and contraversial issue for all Canadians.

Whether MP Stronach would have voted differently than directed on the matter is immaterial - the implication is clear. The PMO's office carries with it an ability to impose legislation through offering of incentives unavailable to the LO.

It really doesn't really matter if it's immediately after an election or immediately before a crucial vote in Parliament - the issue bears the current scrutiny even if no law is introduced to curtail the practise.

maikeru
You're as cynical, jaded and totally without scruple as Harper and anyone else whose moral sense goes out the window the minute they gain power. God help us! He's worse than Mulroney, Chretien and Martin rolled into one. All good people have to do is turn the other way for evil to have its way in the world. We might as well have that phoney Pat Robertson for PM.

maikeru

What utter nonsense. As if moral outrage is something you have the right to apportion. Have you got a one way line to God too? The moral outrage is generated by the ethical blackhole that Stephen Harper apparently has for a conscience:the idea that he could promise the moon and deliver Davie Emerson.

To pretend that you (or anyone) can decide who has the 'right' to be angry about his behavior after you and Harper's supporters have been crying from one end of the country to the other about 'immoral' people and their 'evil' attitudes and lifestyles is so beyond the pale of normal ethical standards and public discourse that it beggars the imagination. Have you no shame?
As long as you get things back to your blessed C38 you're happy. Get over it. This society has moved on, praise be to God.

G West re:

maikeru quoted:
"Again, the only folks in Canada I believe have a genuine right to be morally outraged about Emerson's appointment are any who switched to the CPC due Stronach's crossing the floor to sit in Cabinet.'

What utter nonsense. As if moral outrage is something you have the right to apportion.

I have every right to believe what I want.

I don't believe for a moment that, say, Rafe Mair is 'morally outraged' by floor-crossing - after dismissing Stronach's passage as a 'big owie', describing the then LO leader Stephen Harper's objections as 'squealing like a stuck pig', and publicly announcing his vote for Greens (due wanting to contribute $1.75 to their election coffers) ?
I would, however, believe his 'moral outrage' if he learned that the Green's used such funds to buy Hummer's for their executive.

Have you got a one way line to God too?
That brings to mind the line by Peter O'Toole's character in 'The Ruling Class'. Convinced he was Jesus reincarnate, his reply to a demand for proof was " It's simple really - when I prayed I found I was talking to myself ".

The moral outrage is generated by the ethical blackhole that Stephen Harper apparently has for a conscience:the idea that he could promise the moon and deliver Davie Emerson.

That's just more moral posturing, imho.

To pretend that you (or anyone) can decide who has the 'right' to be angry about his behavior after you and Harper's supporters have been crying from one end of the country to the other about 'immoral' people and their 'evil' attitudes and lifestyles is so beyond the pale of normal ethical standards and public discourse that it beggars the imagination. Have you no shame?

Surely you jest.
What truly beggars the imagination is that over 16000 Vancouverites voted to have a snivelling jewel thief represent Canada's crown jewel in Parliament.

As long as you get things back to your blessed C38 you're happy. Get over it. This society has moved on, praise be to God.

God protects fools and children (after exit).
Bill C-38 isn't blessed - it's passage was a by-product of political manipulation from start to finish.

maikeru

I thought I dealt with your logical inconsistencies yesterday.

It’s understandable that you'd try to change the subject because you can't sustain a logical case for what Harper's done. If you don't want to admit that so be it, I can’t force you to be self-critical and honest. But, don't pretend you have the right to set the agenda for the whole country based upon your interpretation of a subjective matter like religion. That's really what this is all about in my opinion. You can't countenance the idea that everyone doesn't share your prejudices and when your prejudices threaten others' human rights that is both wrongheaded and dangerous. I can think of several precedents where that kind of thinking turned this country into a prison for people from various minorities. I'm ashamed of Canada's record in that respect but I'm proud of the country we've become today. At least I was until a certain extremist who doesn't keep his word in either spirit or letter came to power.

The Liberals may have been a disaster but at least they had a heart and they understood a basic Christian principle that you don't seem to grasp. For you to judge who is a sinner and deserves to be treated as a second-class citizen I would have to accept you and Stephen Harper as my God and that’s not going to happen any time soon. Kindly leave the judging to the being upstairs and you and I will get along just fine.

G West re:
I thought I dealt with your logical inconsistencies yesterday.

Apparently not.

I'm increasingly amused by all the moral posturing that's gone on herein - over 4 threads which degrade 'theTyee' claim to offer 'investigative reporting' not covered by MSM, and especially the blustering outrage at the latest example of 'Stronaching' the LO.

I'm tired of you hypocrites who failed to raise righteous clamour against Robinson's sudden and pathetic born-again recovery from 'temporary' mental illness - but who would have loosed the hounds of hell had any 'Conservative' tried to run the same dodge, then pronounced themself fit to run for Parliament.

You accuse me of 'unshared prejudice' - then judge your own accusation and pronounce the verdict that I threaten other people's human rights ! - HAR!

Your attitude is ignoble - worse - you're a liar arguing words unspoken by me - a cheat arguing values you ascribe to me - and a blatant bigot boldly proclaiming Canada's Prime Minister an 'extremist'.

I'm comfortable with my views, and comforted by the knowledge that this fine country is currently governed by those whom you despise rather than those whom I despise.

maikeru

But Maikeru, you're the one who brought up Sven Robinson. And don't accuse me of being inconsistent - If you check you'll find my posting to this site (or any other for that matter) is something I never did before the current kerfuffle around this election. If you're happy with the intellectual paucity of your case don't blame me. As to putting words in your mouth, I don't think so...go back and check what I've actually said. As for despising anyone, those are your words, not mine - I never expected a savior to come from the government - not this one and not the one it succeeded - and I never will - you're the true believer, not me!

I'm prepared to render unto God that which is God's and unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. You're the one who wants the government up to its neck in matters that should be left between their God(s) and themselves.

Further, if you want to throw around accusations of cheating at anyone, I'd be careful. You're not important enough for me to sue but not everyone might feel that way. And, finally, just from the point of view of definitions, how does my calling the PM an extremist make be a 'bigot', does that come from Wikipedia?

You should take a cold shower when you get up! Sorry my friend, I expected better, maybe you belong on that other site where people throw verbal bombs at anyone whose questions they can't answer.

G West
I don’t address your inconsistencies so much as point to your consistencies.

What’s the great stir around Emerson really all about - ‘betrayal’ of constituents, or alignment with an ‘extremist’ ?

In Stronach's case your sort pass floor crossing off as mere betrayal of constituents.
The values of the Party joined were whatever pleased whomever whenever elections rolled around AND "at least they had a heart and they understood a basic Christian principle that you don't seem to grasp'.

In Emerson's case it's the far more dastardly alignment with an extremist - who only last year was considered quiet as a churchmouse and about as great a cause for excitement - but who this year threatens the very foundations of Canada itself.
"We might as well have that phoney Pat Robertson for PM.

You become more sanctimonious and tiresome with every post.

maikeru

That's the statement I'd like you to come to grips with. It's those kinds of attitudes that trouble me. If you don't think you're doing that then I can't understand why you won't deny it. It is a simple request. DO you or do you not believe that the government has a role in telling people how they should choose their life partner as free individuals who don't necessarily subscribe to the principles of one particular religion? It is a simple question.

And who, pray tell, is the churchmouse?

maikeru

You're calling mesanctimonious! Jeez, I thought this was a friendly discussion. Guess not! I'm a cheater, a bigot and now sanctimonious. When you can't sustain a case any other way it's always a good idea to start calling people names.
Oh, I forgot, I'm ignoble and a liar too!
You might also want to look up the definition of 'sanctimonious' because that label surely doesn't fit too well with all the others you've tagged me with, in my view.
No hard feelings, really, you're entitled to your opinion - I just thought you might be able to defend it a little more ably.
Cheers

G West
Keep hunting - you'll eventually find your match.

maikeru

I know you probably won't believe this but I hold you no ill will. Never have. I just don't believe any of us has the right to judge his fellow human beings and find them guilty or tell them how to live or whether or not their life style has value. Political criticism is quite another matter.

But if having human rights and basic equality doesn't at least mean this then we're all in real trouble. I don't like Svend Robinson either but I'd never attack him as a man in the judgmental way and with the vehemence you have. He too is one of God's creatures and deserves every right and freedom just like the rest of us as citizens and sinners in this country.

I think any other attitude is unworthy of the traditions and beliefs I ascribe to and it's certainly not what I think any leader of this country should promote and espouse. That's why I believe what I do on this issue and on religion and politics in general. I think they make strange and dangerous bedfellows. On the other hand, I have no right to judge you and if you think I was too harsh I'm truly sorry.

God Bless!

G West

I trust you're a reasonable person with a desire to engage fellow Canadians in online discussion - even when some posit views different from from your own.

Those who seek to magnify the importance of their own opinion by speaking on behalf of the multitude are charlatans.The best counsel I can offer you is to avoid the trap of doing so yourself.

I do not harbour ill will towards you or any other keyboard comrades, give what I get when flamed, and try to pack the most meaning into the fewest possible words when opining.

Cheers !

Whereas you, on the other hand, are only presuming to speak on behalf of the Tories....

skookum1 re:
Whereas you, on the other hand, are only presuming to speak on behalf of the Tories....

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
- Erasmus -

My, aren't we a vain little thing, huh? So anyone who doesn't agree with you is blind? And you are presuming yourself a king by comparison to those others around here who make so much more sense than you do?. Pretending to intellectual superiority in place of actual arguments is an old Tory/Reform habit; you're flying your party colours again.

PS why don't you just use "Michael"? Why the Japanese form of the name?

An evening with Jack Layton to discuss the David Emerson issue and what you can do about it.

Date: Thursday, February 16, Time: 7:30 pm

Place: Mackenzie Elementary School, 960 East 39th Avenue, Vancouver
_________________________________________________________
De-elect David Emerson campaign gathering

Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2pm

Place: David Emerson's constituency office, 2148 Kingsway, Vancouver

There’s little merit in arguing with a blowhard like yourself, skookums.

You’ll read into other poster’s opinions whatever suits your fancy, ask questions to make statements, and use $2 worth of words to frame an opinion that ain’t worth a plugged nickel.

fwiw, maikeru is easier to prononce than the alternative - khatsilano.