Tuesday, May 17, 2005

Liberal Family Compact

Now that the dust is settling, where do we go from here?

It doesn't matter that Belinda is a lightweight, or that she loses credibility by crossing the floor, or even that she was never really a conservative anyway.

All that matters is how this looks.

In her brief, oh-so-angst-filled statement today, Belinda took a few good parting-shots at Stephen Harper. These shots are just the beginning. This is a woman who is intimate with the insiders of the Conservative Party. She would have been privy to strategy and planning. No doubt her new party will benefit from her insights.

In one swift act of hypocrisy Belinda Stronach may have done what a million dollars worth of attack ads couldn't -- solidified the perception of Stephen Harper as both scary, and a separatist.

At the time she vied for the leadership, it seemed Belinda thought she was young and hip, she could work within the party to move it further to the left. I worried that it would work. With her family's ties to the Liberal Party, why did she choose the Conservative Party in the first place?

She couldn't have done better for the Liberals if she'd been a ringer all along. Hmmmm . . .

Cheers,
canadianna

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Harper is for the budget, then against the budget, now he's for the budget. Harper is for ballsitic missile defence then against it. Harper is against corporate welfare but will support corporate welfare(bombardier and auto industry). What the hell does this guy stand for? The liberals say he has a hidden agenda. He flip flops so much he really has no agenda. It's pathetic.

Anonymous said...

You guys always say that someone is "not a real conservative" when they disagree with you. Heck, even in Alberta Ralph Klein is "not a real conservative. Of course, you conservatives insult us non-cons when you say that...

VW said...

Frankly, I think Belinda damaged herself more than she did Harper. Pretty much everyone can recognize rank opportunism, and any critical statements she makes about Harper at this stage can be discounted as the usual slings and arrows made to justify a defection.

Canadi-anna said...

Pathetic is someone who posts as anonymous.

Bill said...

We are better off without Belinda. She has gone back to her liberal roots. I hope she finds happiness with the 2 Pauls: Martin and Desmarais. Better to lose her now than during an election campaign.

Goodbye and good riddance. Let us now focus on promoting a truly conservative agenda.

'Peg City Kid said...

Ha, you make it sound like a conspiracy! What makes you think the Liberals are after the Conservatives strategy and planning? Is it because they've been so successful? Is it because every attempt by the Conservatives to overthrow them has failed?

Seriously, sit down and think about it, Harper is the one who is losing credibility. Look at him, now that his chances of defeating the budget have pretty much evaporated, He's all of a sudden willing to support it. Why is that? If he agreed with the budget and not bill C-48, why didn't he say so? Why was he trying to vote down the whole thing? Hmmmm, If I didn't know better, I'd say it was a power grab. And this man who has the nerve to talk principal.

The dust is settling, indeed.

Canadi-anna said...

Get a life 'peg city kid.

'Peg City Kid said...

Pathetic is someone who can't accept there wrong.

Pathetic is someone who answers questions with "Get a life".

Canadianna, I feel sorry for you. I feel sorry you can't see things the way they are. I'm sorry you are blinded by the shadow of a old stale party with a new face.

Cheers

Anonymous said...

"Harper is for the budget, then against the budget, now he's for the budget. Harper is for ballsitic missile defence then against it. Harper is against corporate welfare but will support corporate welfare(bombardier and auto industry). What the hell does this guy stand for? The liberals say he has a hidden agenda. He flip flops so much he really has no agenda. It's pathetic."

It's a good thing these trollers have an original thought in their heads... wait...

oh, and... "If he agreed with the budget and not bill C-48, why didn't he say so?"

Well, actually he made several statements (that didn't make the sexy soundbite reel) regarding the budget (ie. supporting the Atlantic Accord but NOT if the NDP horseshit was cobbled into it).

and almost forgot...
"You guys always say that someone is "not a real conservative" when they disagree with you."

You know what offends me anonymous? Liberals saying 'Canadians' want this budget. I'm Canadian and I don't want this budget passed. Much like many of my fellow Tories/Canadians.

Les
thecomputergeeks.ca

Canadi-anna said...

Thanks, Les. I'm getting bored trying to explain things to these people who don't even know how to spell, let alone formulate a coherent argument.
Cheers.

Anonymous said...

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Calgary/Ezra_Levant/2005/04/25/1011573.html

"I believe Paul Martin. I believed him Thursday night when he said he wants to wait until Judge John Gomery's inquiry into AdScam is over before calling an election. I believed him last year, too, when he said he didn't want to wait until Gomery's inquiry was over before calling an election.

I believe Martin when he says he deeply respects Gomery. I believe he showed his respect when he led the Liberal caucus in a standing ovation for Jean Chretien's display of open contempt for Gomery. I believe Martin wants no stone left unturned. I believed that when he ordered Liberal MPs to shut down the Public Accounts Committee's investigations last year, before the last election. I believe if the Liberals get a majority government again, they wouldn't shut down the committee again, or interfere with Gomery, as they have with other inquiries."

Anonymous said...

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Calgary/Ezra_Levant/2005/04/25/1011573.html

"I believe Paul Martin. I believed him Thursday night when he said he wants to wait until Judge John Gomery's inquiry into AdScam is over before calling an election. I believed him last year, too, when he said he didn't want to wait until Gomery's inquiry was over before calling an election.

I believe Martin when he says he deeply respects Gomery. I believe he showed his respect when he led the Liberal caucus in a standing ovation for Jean Chretien's display of open contempt for Gomery. I believe Martin wants no stone left unturned. I believed that when he ordered Liberal MPs to shut down the Public Accounts Committee's investigations last year, before the last election. I believe if the Liberals get a majority government again, they wouldn't shut down the committee again, or interfere with Gomery, as they have with other inquiries."