Monday, February 06, 2006

Emerson Report

Come on dawg, you was supposed to be on that song
Talkin bout how bad you hate him, now you all on his thong?
I shoulda knew better than to listen to you
"I'm going to be Stephen Harper's worst enemy," he warned. "We're going to stir the pot and you better believe we are going to make a heck of a lot of noise."
--David Emerson

In a roundabout way he still could be..... Emerson switches, and now every Con with a keyboard or a mic is poppin' off.

AtC pulls out the zinger:
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.--cbc archives
Uh, yeah, like a whole party in revolt about a turncoat. Didn't we already see this movie last year? Remember the disgust? Anguish?
Personally, I'm in the "Holy Geez this is not cool!" camp. If the Cons are going to govern based on moral authority and a good chunk of "We're NOT Liberals" brand positioning, they might want to refrain from "We ARE Liberals" public relations campaign.

Having gotten that qualifier out of the way....
1.) I can understand in a way the need to get Emerson from the a media relations point of view. He represents a moderate, urban MP with tonnes of street cred academically, internationally and business wise. Still, this sucks and stinks, but it kills the media harping on the "The Cons haven't got one seat in the three biggest cities!" mantra.

2.) It is tit for tat. BUT, the Cons shouldn't have stooped. What can they say the next time this BS happens?

3.) You gotta wonder about the motivations of someone who says this:
"I fundamentally went through the thought processes many times over, and came to the conclusion I can be more helpful to the people of my riding, the people of my city, the people of my province and the people of my country doing this, as opposed to being in opposition and trying to become a powerful political partisan which I have never been," Emerson said.

This is pretty blind ambition. The political arena needs strong opposition voices, and stating that you aren't a "partisan" so you can change parties to maintain power is kinda like being a sychophant. Did I say "like"?

4.) The party still isn't in a position to form a majority with the NDP, at 154 between them. They still need one more seat......

Oh boy.

Tell me they aren't going to do this again.
The whole thing is ridiculous and Emerson just gave a huge middle finger to the political process by running as a Lib only to sit as a Con. He should hold a by-election and run as a Con.


Red Tory said...

But he'd lose. Sorry for pointing out the blindly obvious.

Shamrocks! said...

Try apologizing for a lame/anonymous comment. Maybe he would lose and maybe he wouldn't.

The point is that he should (nevermind if he can) get elected as a conservative.