David Emerson to/has Crossed the Floor!!!

[MrPrax]

On the CBC morning show here in BC, their pundits (Rafe Mair and Moe Sihota) are saying that David Emerson will cross the floor and sit as a Tory to get a cabinet position..

Apparantly Emerson announced a few hours ago he is leaving the Liberals and so he is probably going into cabinet. He is apparantly with Harper waiting for the cabinet announcement.

I guess well see...

EDIT: Emerson to cross the floor to Tory cabinet

OTTAWA -- Former Liberal industry minister David Emerson will cross the floor and sit in the Conservative cabinet.

Stunned onlookers barely had a chance to ask a question of the Vancouver MP and former head of lumber giant Canfor as he strolled into Rideau Hall shortly before the Tory cabinet was being announced.
Nat comPost

Previously...!!

Easy win for Emerson
Vancouver Kingsway
Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Surprised by his sizeable margin of victory in Vancouver-Kingsway, David Emerson says he's ready to rattle cages in Ottawa.

At the Golden Swan, a Chinese restaurant on Victoria Drive, supporters chanted his name as Emerson arrived to deliver his victory speech.

"I feel very happy with the results," said the former cabinet minister. "This is traditionally NDP territory and to win again feels good."

The riding was expected to be close, but Emerson jumped ahead early and extended his lead on NDP candidate Ian Waddell by more than 4,000 votes.

Emerson added he is going to enjoy keeping tabs on Prime Minister-elected Stephen Harper.

"I'm going to be Stephen Harper's worst enemy," he warned. "We're going to stir
http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/News/2006/01/24/1408892.html

Wonder how close the win would have been if he had ran as a Tory, huh?

[Darth_Kitten]

1. interesting....

:)

[Manix]

23. In some ways this may be a good thing, as on their very

first day the CONS are exposed as being phony and duplicitious!

[Minstrel Boy]

2. Strategic voting enthusiasts, please comment.

Vancouver Kingsway, 2006:

David Emerson LIB 20064 43.35%
Ian Waddell NDP 15570 33.64%
Kanman Wong CON 8699 18.79%

[MrPrax]

3. Seems small potatoes...

This is Ian Waddell's reaction when interviewed by the local CBC on the phone...

I am thinking the attempt to basically undermine democracy and hold the public in contempt is far more important...

Living only a KM from that electoral boundary makes me livid actually--there must be a whole whack of people who really vote for Emerson coz they bought into the 'fear'.

On one hand, I say fuckem...but it is rather shocking and obvious. It is one thing to cross on principle, but this is quite another thing...FRAUD.

I don't think the law can do anything about this though...

[Minstrel Boy]

4. "Strategic Voting Guide"

From the "Election 2006 Strategic Voting Guide":

Are you voting against the Conservatives this election? This quick table takes the guess work out of your strategic voting decision. Based on the 2004 election results, the table below lists your best bet to defeat the conservative in your riding.

...

Vancouver Kingsway LIB

From BlogsCanada: the cost of strategic voting, (2004):

A friend was visiting from Toronto during the election campaign. She explained that although she was probably closer to the NDP, and her riding (Trinity-Spadina) was an NDP-Liberal race, she was still going to vote Liberal: at the *national* level, another Liberal seat instead of an NDP seat would increase the chances of the Liberals getting more seats than the Conservatives.

This may have been a factor in my riding (Vancouver-Kingsway) as well.

[MrPrax]

6. I am so furious...

Partly because I am listening to the Global/Corus BIG radio show and the show has decided that the Liberal Leadership race is a more important topic rather than the Cabinet announcements...amazing.

Norm Spector and their Ottawa pundits are spinning it: win-win for BC as BC gets a rep in Cabinet...!!!

The few calls they allowed were pure venomous outrage across party lines...this one will probably not go away.

BUT:
Emerson said himself that it was NDP territory...the mere idea that Emerson might think he won because he's David Emerson is pure mental illness.

HEY: here's a good spin...
When Emerson was head of Canfor, he would have had to sign 'conflict' agreements restricting his post-company employment? So why is public office any different? Shit, even floor salesmen at Future Shop can't go work for the competition for 2 years!!

Disgusting...Emerson is ALSO going to babysit the Olympics as well and is a Big Campbell-Martin liberal...sheez

The idiot's should vote NDP to be safe...next time.

[Darth_Kitten]

29. His own constituents repudiated the tories....

what a phoney ass. :eyes:

[Spazito]

5. No different from Stronach crossing from the faux Cons to the Libs

We will see how his riding feels at the next election, about a year away. The Libs don't have a leg to stand on, imo, if they even try to criticize this given Stronach. It really is a non-event, in this case, because the one seat doesn't really change anything re a weak minority government as opposed to the Stronach move which screwed the faux Cons royally.

[glarius]

7. Don't you think there is a difference because Stronach had a year to

evaluate the Harper Conservatives before she decided to cross the floor...With Emerson he was just elected a couple of weeks ago and said at the time, "I'm going to be Stephen Harper's worst enemy." To me the Emerson deal is really a hypocritical move....

[Spazito]

12. Not really, I believe Stronach crossed the floor for the same reason

Emerson did, to get a cabinet post which the Libs promised her and the faux Cons promised Emerson. Stronach ran for the leadership of the faux Cons so she was well aware of what the party stood for, imo, and when she knew Harper would keep her in the background, she jumped.

This is certainly not new, has happened before, will happen again I have no doubt. I am not concerned about it, to be honest, because in the big picture, it changes nothing except for his constituents. I will be very interested in how his riding responds to this.

[glarius]

15. Well, I think there is a huge difference in someone jumping ship after a

year and someone jumping who was elected as a Liberal 2 weeks ago and at that time said,I will be Harper's worst enemy."I guess we disagree on this. :)

[Spazito]

19. LOL, I agree, we do disagree on this re there being a difference

or not. I respect your opinion and see where you would come to this conclusion. I will agree that the two week 'turn around' is more egregious in timing that that of Belinda but not in both of their real reasons for doing it, that being the promise of a cabinet position which both received.

[Spazito]

20. self-deleted, posted in the wrong spot

[Minstrel Boy]

8. non-event?

I should think that such an action sends a pretty strong message re the hollow ploy to "vote Liberal to stop the Conservatives."

[Spazito]

13. LOL, it is a non-event in that it changes nothing of consequence

and the Harper government is still a shaky, minority government. Such moves are not new, have happened before and will happen again I have NO doubt. I am more interested in how his riding reacts, to be honest.

[Minstrel Boy]

17. I think Canadians looking at this cabinet

will be inclined to agree: "it changes nothing of consequence." Liberals, Conservatives? shrug.

And with former Conservatives now likely leading contenders for the Liberal leadership, the Liberals will be hard-pressed to play the fear card next election, opening up some terrific opportunities for the legitimate party of the Left.

Harper's proving himself a much savvier politician than most expected, and it will be fun to watch the Liberals flounder trying to out-maneuver him.

[Spazito]

18. It also changes nothing of consequence for the NDP, imo

Canadians still do not see the NDP as a credible alternative, that was clear yet again by the last election, imo. This move does nothing to change that either. It will, however, be interesting how Layton reacts given the NDP previously held the riding.

I don't get how you think the Libs can't play the fear card due to this move, they are totally separate issues, imo.

[Minstrel Boy]

24. Everything's changed, for everyone

Liberal support has been kept inflated the past 13 years because Liberals were able to persuade enough Canadians that it was them or a Reform/Alliance/Conservative apocalypse. Harper, however, is styling himself smartly as a centrist, and his cabinet is about as moderate a one as we could expect given the materials with which he had to work.

Also, the Conservatives won 10 seats in Quebec and finished second in 40 others. They have replaced the Liberals as the federalist option in the province, and stand a good shot of winning many more next election. (Quebec is likely to elect a PQ government next year, and many Quebec voters, being highly strategic, will likely want to balance that with increased federal representation. Meaning, most likely, electing more Conservatives.)

The Liberals have lost their trumps of "Oooh - Conservatives scary!" and "we're the only national party."

During the Mulroney years, the NDP rose to lead national polls before and following the '88 election. (Turner clawed back support in '88 with the "fight of my life" business on Free Trade, and the NDP made a strategic blunder by conceding the issue to the Liberals.) I see the conditions developing for a similar historic opportunity for the NDP. One condition still uncertain is the Liberal leadership, but that little universe appears to be unfolding as it should, too. ;)

[Spazito]

26. The election changed things, not the particular move we are discussing

and it was in the narrow context of this move that I posted it changed nothing. I understand your dislike of 'strategic voting' because when it happens and the Canadian people are ticked at the Liberals, they 'park' their votes with the NDP to show their displeasure and readily move it back to the Liberals after they feel their message has been heard.

The percentage increase in the NDP vote this election over the last was less than 2% which, imo, shows the vote change did not mean Canadians were moving over to the NDP because they saw them as a more credible alternative than the Liberals as a governing party.

Do I wish it were otherwise, yes, actually, I do but the fact remains, Canadians, by and large, still see only two alternatives, the Conservatives and the Liberals. They do see the NDP as a check and balance to the two powers when they feel it is necessary, imo.

[Minstrel Boy]

30. Which is why, in the post-election context,

this can't be fobbed off as just the same as Belinda. The optics may be the same, but the dynamics of federal politics is much different.

[Spazito]

31. Belinda Stronach's move made a big difference, this one does

not. Her reason for moving is the same, a promised cabinet post. It is as simple as that, imo. Whether the move happened later, in the case of Stronach, or in the immediacy of an election, as in this case, the reasons for both remain the same which was what I was and am pointing out. I said it was no different than Stronach in that context.

[MrPrax]

9. Hardly the same?

With Stronach she apparantly blew them off because of their 'social' conservatism...OK, that floats.

So what principle did Emerson object to with the Liberals?

Another important question...when did Emerson know? When was this deal first talked about? This isn't just crossing the floor...it could be criminal fraud, you know?

That riding can't be won by a Tory ever. That is an important key, along with the fact that the Tories are desparate for urban exposure, that they can't have with their current party.

[glarius]

10. Not to mention Emerson said "I'm going to be Harper's worst enemy"

when he was elected as a Liberal 2 weeks ago!

[daleo]

40. Stronach could claim she did it on principle

Even though the explanation may not be accepted by a lot of people. To do this days after an election, however, when there is no parliamentary vote in the balance seems like pure opportunism.

It's like marrying someone extremely wealthy and splitting after a week, versus splitting after a year.

Or if you like, it's like marrying your recently deceased spouse's sibling one day vs one year after the funeral.

Nonetheless, it's all part of the game. Voters will get their chance to judge him soon enough.

[Minstrel Boy]

11. So now the House looks like this:

Conservatives 125
Liberals 102 (101 if Milliken is again Speaker)
BQ 51
NDP 29
IND 1 (Andre Arthur, ideologically rightwing)

Majority = 155

Peter Milliken wants to be speaker again, and I imagine Harper would be happy with that.I think he'll be re-elected by secret ballot. Which will reduce the Liberals effective bench strength to 101.

In a minority parliament Emerson's jump certainly does change the possible equations.

[Manix]

14. This is BS! There should be a minimum standard for jumping.

This close to an election result should force a by-election.

[glarius]

16. I agree.....2 weeks ago Emerson said he was "Harper's worst enemy"

This is the height of hypocracy!

[Spazito]

21. Hmm, was just thinking it might be worthwhile to dig up the faux

Cons statements about Stronach's move and throw them in the faux Cons' face as proof of their hypocrisy.

[MrPrax]

22. Doubtful...

The corp media (Global and it's minions) already soft playing it...funny Global and Corus radio networks blew a headgasket when Stronach crossed the floor...it went on for weeks.

Now crickets chirping and some BS about how BC should be happy that a LIAR and fraud artist is at the cabinet table representing us...

Funny these same investor-types would be calling the Securities Commission and the RCMP commercial crimes squad if one of their CEOs cut out and worked for a competitor the very next day.

Funny these elites think so little of the public and no wonder I didn't give a partisan shit and dumped on all these clowns and the voters that take this shit seriously...

Look at all those people in the riding (both parties) that wasted their time and were lied to...NOBODY would have voted for a Tory, simple.

[Spazito]

25. I agree re the ridings vote

It was previously an NDP riding and went Liberal which shows very clearly the faux Cons were NOT wanted. I wonder if the riding can recall him? I don't remember if recall can be done on an MP as opposed to an MLA.

[MrPrax]

28. I don't think so...

Peter Stoffer's private members bill didn't get passed (YES...Emerson, the Grewals, Stronach, Brison, all voted against it)...

http://www.howdtheyvote.ca/vote.php?id=241


The ghastly part that makes this glaring is that...82% didn't vote Tory, but they now have a Tory representing them...who gives a fuck about the spin as to whether he will 'bring BC's concerns to the table'...



http://www.davidemerson.ca/

Still up...get that HTdig going before it's gone...

[Spazito]

33. Thanks for the info re recall, it's too bad it didn't pass

I checked out emerson's site but wasn't sure what you meant by HT dig, what is HT? (Am probably going to smack myself for not getting it after you tell me, lol.)

[MrPrax]

37. Oh...being too obscure...

HTdig...an open source web caching/indexing tool that is one of the best...

http://www.htdig.org/

Some of the web caching extensions in Firefox use a modified version of it in Open Source distros. You can compile it for windows32 if you are using cygwin.

Or you can use the Spiderzilla Firefox extension for Windows that uses HTdig and HTTracker codes..
http://spiderzilla.mozdev.org/

or use some other indexing/offline browser...like pfft


(edited: to post Spiderzilla link...checked the windows Firefox copy for the name)

[Spazito]

54. Thanks! n/t

[Swede]

27. I wonder if Maurice Vellacott is calling him a whore like he did Stronach?

Hypocrite that he is.

[SixStrings]

32. Here's the old link for when Belinda did the same thing...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=190x5244


VERY interesting reading...love the smackdown of Magna. Glad to see someone posted about their 'board' and it's members...

Hypocrisy anyone???

[Minstrel Boy]

34. Buzz Hargrove on David Emerson, Dec 2 2005:

"And I want to mention David Emerson, who is not here but boy, did he play a key role in some of these agreements."



liberal.ca

Thanks for all your hard work, Buzz, and for another brilliant example of strategic voting.

[Minstrel Boy]

35. Layton on Emerson, Feb 6:

OTTAWA – NDP Leader Jack Layton congratulated new Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government on their swearing-in today but noted that the NDP believes that any Member of Parliament who crosses to another party should return to their constituents for a by-election.

...

"...We believe that any MP who crosses the floor should return to their riding and face a by-election. Clearly, Mr. Emerson has taken that decision and if Mr. Harper intends to keep his commitment to make government more accountable, that suggests an appropriate course of action."

Layton noted that the while campaigning as a Liberal in Vancouver Kingsway, Mr. Emerson regularly attacked the Conservatives only to now turn his back on voters who thought the were casting a progressive vote.

"The day after the election Mr. Emerson was quoted as saying he would be Mr. Harper’s 'worst enemy.' It certainly appears that what we have here is yet another example of Liberal values of convenience. The NDP has introduced legislation that would require any MP who chooses to cross the floor to either resign their seat outright or sit as an independent until such time as a by-election can be called for that riding."



NDP.ca

[SixStrings]

36. Why is this not law already?

"The NDP has introduced legislation that would require any MP who chooses to cross the floor to either resign their seat outright or sit as an independent until such time as a by-election can be called for that riding."


Just makes sense. Should of been the rules decades ago. Guess the sitting MP's always want to leave themselves an out...

[ClusterFreak]

39. "Liberal values of convenience" , Jack??

How about David Emerson's values of convenience? How about putting down that broad brush of yours for once in your life?

[Minstrel Boy]

43. Perhaps "Liberals of convenience" is more appropriate.

And I think there's a lot more where Emerson came from - people glomming onto the party as an electoral machine. But what do they stand for, besides winning?

[ClusterFreak]

44. I don't see this as a "liberal" issue....I see it as a David Emerson issue

By the same token, if Jack Layton says something stupid...such as he has here with his conclusion that what has happened here is typical of the Liberal approach...then I conclude he ALONE has said something stupid. I don't conclude that all NDP'ers are extreme left wing ideologues, tax and spenders, etc., etc. That's just stupid, and untrue.

[V. Kid]

45. Oh, it's a Liberal and Emerson issue...as a constituent...

...of his, I can assure you that many voted for the Liberal, him, assuming that he'd "stop the Conservatives". In BC, and many other places, Liberal and Conservative are interchangable, only signifigance being that they are there to stop the "socialist hordes".

[ClusterFreak]

48. Thing is, Layton was trying to suggest that this kind of behaviour...

...crossing the floor, switching political allegiance for political expediency, was a Liberal "value". That's just nonsense. Liberals don't hold a monopoly on doing what is politically expedient, they sure as hell indulge in it, but they aren't the only ones to indulge in the cynical practice of it.

[V. Kid]

69. Oh, of course it's not just something Liberals do...

...its just that they've been doing it the most in the last few years, as highlighted by one of my posts on this issue.

[Minstrel Boy]

47. Can you imagine an NDP MP doing this?

That a Liberal MP did it makes this a Liberal issue.

[ClusterFreak]

49. So does the fact that Svend Robinson stole a ring....

...make it an NDP issue??? Of course not. Same as the fact that he immediately came clean and apologized doesn't make it an NDP issue. Or a virtue of all NDP'ers. It makes it a Svend made a mistake and fessed up to it issue. Individuals do bad things, and individuals are responsible for making amends or for suffering the consequences.

[Minstrel Boy]

50. c'mon, this is about politics

And this sends a big message to progressive voters, and not just in Vancouver Kingsway, who believe they've been voting against the Conservatives when they've held their nose to vote Liberal.

[glarius]

51. This was the act of an unscrupulous individual....not a party.

When Svend Robinson stole the ring, I didn't hear anyone from any of the other parties saying it was a holier than thou NDP thing. For god's sake...can't there ever be something that is done by someone just because that person is unscrupulous and not because of the party they belong to?....Sheesh.

[ClusterFreak]

52. I never said it wasn't about politics....

...in fact, it's totally about politics. I thought the issue here was that you were defending Layton for saying what Emerson did is an example of "Liberal values", while I was saying it was about Emerson. He is a weasel. Not all Liberals are weasels. Don't like the Svend analogy? Why not? This is about politics, he was an elected politician at the time, it's fair game. I also don't recall anyone, of any political stripe, making hay over Svend "the NDPer" committing the crime. Svend did what he did because of a certain lapse in judgment, which by the way, he admirably owned up to and denounced. He accepted total responsibility. That doesn't make it the "NDP" thing to do. Emerson fucking over the Liberal party and much more importantly every single person who voted for him 14 days ago, doesn't mean he was "doing what Liberals do".

[Minstrel Boy]

53. Why was Emerson a Liberal?

For any reason other than to get elected as a member of the "natural governing party?"

Did he share "Liberal values"? What are the values of the party?

I read a lot of Liberals whine recently about Layton saying, quite correctly as a parliamentarian, that he could work with the Conservative government. I've yet to see a Liberal show anything like shame that one of their own could join the Conservative government.

Hold our nose and vote for what?

[ClusterFreak]

55. Why is it always "us" versus "them"?

I don't get it. Sometimes, a person does something rotten. Sometimes that's all it is. Do you really think that Emerson did what he did, because he is a Liberal, and therefore all Liberals are traitors or backstabbers or at the very least low quality people? It seems to me that that's what you are saying. And why is it necessarily shameful for a Liberal to join the Conservative government? It isn't, necessarily, but in this particular case, it is. Emerson actions are an example of the worst in political opportunism. He just got elected and he immediately renounced the political brand which helped get him elected, all so he could serve his own self-interests. That is indeed shameful. And I don't know what media you have looked at today, but I have yet to hear or see or read any comment made by any Liberal saying that what Emerson did was just okay with him or her.

[glarius]

56. I'm with you on this one C.L.S....I've voted for all 3 parties at one time

or another and there are good and not so great people in ALL parties. It's ridiculous to ascribe the unscrupulous actions of an individual to a whole party.

[Minstrel Boy]

57. Emerson did what he did because he's a "small-c Liberal"

in his words. He also said today, "The overlap between the Liberals and Conservatives leaves a little ground where people can be comfortable in either one."

I suppose people like Ujjal Dosanjh, Chris Axworthy and Bob Rae would say something similar about their move from the NDP to the Liberals. But there's a difference, in that the NDP's right-wing overlaps with the Liberal's left. The NDP has no similar point of congruity with the Conservatives. As Layton's asked, is it the Liberals or the NDP which is most likely to defend the principles of a progressive society?

BTW, a Vancouver Kingsway voter's comment from the CBC link above:

"I think there's going to be a lot of people who are really disappointed because I think a lot of people voted strategically, so that they could not get the Conservatives in."

[ClusterFreak]

58. Here's my point....

The issue of whether there can be a comfortable philosophical overlap between the right wing of the NDP to the left wing of the Liberals, or from the right wing of the Liberals to the left wing of the Conservatives, isn't the debate. These things are true. The issue is the timing of this particular jumping of ship: Two weeks after being elected under the Liberal banner. Not a month after Harper is sworn in, not six months, not a year.... Two weeks. In two weeks time, he went from saying Harper's Conservatives would be his "worst enemy", and that voting for them would be like going down a "black hole", to a Conservative cabinet minister. Must have been an awful sudden epiphany.

Emerson said these things, not the homogenous entity known as the Liberal Party.

[Minstrel Boy]

59. certainly

I never said the homogenous entity known as the Liberal Party did. I never said it was homogenous. And though I wouldn't want any party to be so processed, perhaps what I'm saying in part is that a David Emerson happens because the Liberal Party can appear all things to all Liberals: both progressive and conservative at the same instant.

When I vote, I don't cast it into the black hole called the "centre" and cross my fingers.

[ClusterFreak]

60. So, you have to expect this kind of thing.....

It's understandable that this happened, because Emerson was a Liberal?
Oh, well, he was a Liberal...no wonder he got elected as one and then jumped ship like that. He was a Liberal. I dunno, what I see here is a man lacking a true set of convictions, who opted for expedience over loyalty in a heartbeat. And if Liberals are both progressive and conservative, it's not at the same instant. It's on different issues, at different times. It may appear to be 'not standing for anything' to some on the far right or the far left, but it strikes a balanced chord with most Canadians. 139 years of history have shown that. It may be more glamorous, more romantic to affiliate with a leftist or a rightist cause, but it's not practicable over the long haul to govern this country that way.

Ultimately, I respect you and your opinions, I just disagree with the ones you have made in this thread. Not all threads, but this thread.
Perhaps we ought to leave it there.

[V. Kid]

65. I don't think tit's completely unfair to say the Liberals are a party...

...with principles of convenience as they've been the recent beneficiaries of various people crossing the floor in both MP and other elected capacities, and a few non-elected ones who were clearly working for other parties. In BC alone there's former Richmond Alliance MP Joe Peschlido, former Alliance MP now Liberal MP for Esquimalt-Juan De Fuca Keith Martin, former NDP Premier Ujjal Dosanjh, in Alberta there was former PC MP David Kilgour, in Saskatchewan there was former NDP MP for the Desenthe-Missinippi Churchill River (sp?) riding, and of course former NDP provincial cabinet minister and federal MP Chris Axeworthy, in Manitoba there was the former NDP'er, the Mayor Glen Murray, and then former PC MLA John Loewnen, and then of course plenty in Ontario and Quebec, such as Belinda Stronach, that former Bloc MP whose name escapes my mind, Gary Carr who as I understand was a major Mike Harris backer, in New Brunswick John Herron, in Nova Scotia Scott Brison. Look, all of these except for David Kilgour, who left the Liberals, after joining them, defected to the Liberals. Does that mean that every Liberal is corrupt? No, but it means that they're willing to accept people jumping back and forth, just like anyone else. Look, I know you like the Liberals, that's fine, although I disagree with likeing them. But the fact of the matter is that in the last five to ten years, sans Kilgour who did this in the early 90's, the Liberals were the beneficiaries of all sorts of people defecting to them, claiming that they now shared "Liberal", not liberal, but capital-L Liberal principles.

[ClusterFreak]

67. Once again, I'll say it again....it's about the timing.

Two weeks after successfully running under the Liberal banner, Emerson bolts. And this is just another example of a Liberal with values of convenience?? This is NOT the same thing as any of the laundry list of people you mention. It should surprise no one that politicians from the right and the left have migrated to the centre. The centre is where the Canadian electorate resides. We can quarrel about the sincerity of these converts, and whether it's ethical for them to leave behind the people that brung them to the dance. In fact I would support banning the practice in the future. That is, if you want to bolt parties you have to run for your seat over again in a by-election. But lets also point out that long-term, committed Liberals aren't leaving the party in droves for greener (bluer, orange-r?) pastures. It's a relatively rare phenomenon. The Liberals have indeed benefitted far more than they have been victimized by defections. Does that mean they have no real values or beliefs? Of course not. It's a specious argument.

[V. Kid]

68. Its a matter of principles....

...and I don't know that any of these people, who commit themselves to public life, and present themselves in a certain way, then play musical chairs have any. Some have mitigating circumstances, most do not. I'll agree, the timing of this move is really quite insulting, more so to the constiuents than anyone else. But the point I'm trying to make, that you try to dismiss as a "laundry list", is that the Liberal Party has consistently bennifited, by either encouraging, or easily accepting people without condemnation who defect to them. Fine. But do they seriously think that they have a moral leg to stand on when criticizing others for doing the same? I think a few, like ironically enough, Belinda Stronach, do for pointing out she was personally attacked by the very same Conservatives who are now playing kissy face with my MP, but by and large it's all just a silly game.

Now, I'm going to give you a little rant:

As for the "the centre" if it was so important, why had all these people who so viehmently decried the Liberals, and probably got into public life, because of actions by other parties, Liberals included that they view as un-helpful to the public discourse, decide "well I'm a centrist now, the Liberals attract me"? Is "the centre" just some mythical place determined by whatever's consider left and right at the time? I consider myself moderate, by Canadian standards, but would be pretty left-wing by American standards. Does that mean I'm more of a "centrist" here. Does that last sentance make sense? Not really, not in my view, and that's the point. It's all just a show. Who cares about "the centre", have some princples and act on them, radical, moderate, and anything or everything in between, but mooshy-"centrism" is just a triangulating bore. It's the reason that the Democrats, other than maybe a little fraud, and a piss-poor media, don't get anywhere. All they (well, the "mainstream" leadership) seem to want to do is go "ooh, we're centrists". And that's what the Liberals have offered. Other than "we good, Harper bad". I think Liberal success over the years was based on seeming to be comptent, and playing off that, and pushing others to the fringes a bit, but mostly comptence. Once they lost that, they lost their trump card. People may have been untrustworthy of Harper, but one can't rely on their opponent being pretty unattractive for ever if one wants to win.

Rant off.

But, now the other boss is in power. So, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

For a group of people, the Conservative Party, to claim ethical purity, and then spin to the point of making Karl Rove proud, is just quite a joke. This crew started contradicting themselves before their party was born! And I assume, we can at least agree on this last paragraph.

[daleo]

61. He is now a Conservative of convenience

I suppose this could be seen as validation of the idea that there isn't really a lot of difference between Liberals and Conservatives.

Of course, the talk of Bob Rae running for the Liberal leadership (which I don't actually expect to happen) would draw a prominent NDPer into this circle as well.

[Minstrel Boy]

63. The difference there is

that Rae didn't jump to the Liberals after having been elected as a New Democrat. He just governed like he had. ;)

[daleo]

64. Touche.

I worked in the Ontario civil service from about 1987 to 1991, as a statistical analyst. I was excited when Rae was first elected, but he was a disappointment to most people inside and outside the government, I think. I know he came in at a tough time, but still...

[tuvor]

38. And his constituents have NO RECOURSE?!

Am I correct in assuming that voters a riding can't have their MP recalled?

[HEyHEY]

42. This soon after, they should be able to

[HEyHEY]

41. I thought the Cons weren't going to allow this!

I thought they were going to enact legislation forbidding it? What the fuck???? Not even sworn in and he's already fucking lied... amazing.
And in the process, James Moore, a major threat to Harper, and a DAMN good MP, was fucked out of his post. Harper just put an opportunistic fuck, in a cabinet position and made a four time parliamentarian of the year a backbencher... BULLSHIT.
This may also have something to do with James voting for gay marriage.

[V. Kid]

46. Perhaps, Emerson did too though...and probably will again...

Harper should watch out though, Moore is young and popular.

[daleo]

62. Emerson might still be Harper's worst enemy

If it wakes up people who took Harper's integrity claptrap seriously.

[HEyHEY]

66. I'd like to know why five people get cabinet positions

When they've never even served as an opposition backbencher?

Plus, as someone pointed out, our new defence minister is an ex-defence industry lobbyist.

[Darth_Kitten]

70. Because they are rich white conservative males?

Just guessing.... :shrug:

Though I may be wrong. ;)