Monday, February 6, 2006

Never trust a politician

Hypocrisy is a necessary feature of government.

First off, read Bob Tarantino's "Handy-Dandy Guide to Today's Events."

Then consider the following justification put forth by newly appointed former Liberal, now Conservative cabinet minister, David Emerson, for his decision to defect from The Party - again, via Let it Bleed.


"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.

Emerson said he originally entered politics at the behest of former prime minister Paul Martin. At that time he was not a Liberal, but decided to enter politics to serve the people of his riding.

He said he would have "absolutely" stayed on in Paul Martin's cabinet if the former PM had been re-elected.
Stephen Harper's response to Belinda Strumpet's floor mopping:
"We don't go out of our way to romance MPs to get them to cross the floor. Liberals will do anything to win.

"We are trying to create a principled party where people act in a principled way, and obviously we're fairly cautious about encouraging party jumping, because that's the kind of thing that generates cynicism.

"And frankly, when someone jumps, once you're not sure you can trust them the next time, so I would always handle that with an extraordinary degree of caution."


basil said...

Fortier's posting suggests what I'd already suspected: same shit different pile. But to make things worse, these guys think smoking pot causes crime.

Glad I never voted for them.

CuriosityKilledTheCat said...

Why Harper’s Cabinet Matters – A Question of Trust.

Remember Nixon? Remember the question his opponents raised during an election: Would you buy a used car from this man?

Are we in the same territory now with Stephen Harper, the policy wonk with broken promises in his first day of becoming Prime Minister?

Harper’s Achilles heel over the past two elections has been the question of trust. Many voters examined his views, going back several years, and came to the conclusion that this leopard had not changed his spots. And when he tried in the latest election to sidestep the issue of his beliefs, by simply saying he had “evolved” but his fundamental philosophy was unchanged, may voters were stopped in their tracks. Had he changed? Can this man be trusted?

Then he ran an election campaign designed to focus more on the Liberal’s record – perfectly justifiable – than on his party’s platform. A tightly controlled election that even had some rightwing candidates hiding in kitchens to avoid interviews with the press about their social beliefs. And a leader who avoided questions, sidestepped some, ignored others.

The pattern of avoidance, selective discussion, and ignoring of legitimate questions by the fourth estate, raised yet more concern among many voters: Can this man be trusted?

Now, his cabinet, with surprising choices in at least two cases, and omissions in other areas. A Liberal is elected and immediately joins Harper when Harper asks him to leave the party that elected him and join the minority Tories, now in need of more votes in Parliament. Doug Beazley of the Edmonton Sun puts it in context:
“But political scientist David Taras of the University of Calgary warns Harper is risking the wrath of the backbench. "Two weeks ago, Emerson was saying the Harper Conservatives were heartless. Now they've got to work with them. How can they trust him?" he said. “
But it not just whether the Tories can trust Turncoat Emerson, but whether Harper kept the faith with voters, and honoured promises made during the election. So once more voters are asking: Can this man be trusted?

And Harper’s response to the justifiable outbursts – by Tories and others – simply underscores the concern. To brush the criticism aside as simply being “superficial”, implies the voters who now feel dismayed by the Harper actions, are not capable of forming rational judgments and should leave it to Big Daddy Harper to make those decisions for them.
So the question lingers in voters minds: Can this man be trusted?