Jody Wilson-Raybould's letter to Liberals and other citizens is uplifting, inspirational and very conflicting.
Much as I agree with her sentiments, I find they don't mesh well with staying in the party. It seems incongruent to me that she could find they behaved so egregiously that she quit cabinet, but that she feels she can somehow work within the party for change.
Trust has eroded -- that's a two way street. Just as she (apparently) lost trust in those within the highest level of her party, surely she must see that they have lost trust in her as well, and therefore, she will have no voice.
Had there been a stampede out the door following the resignation of Jane Philpott, I might say there was something to the concept of change from within. Instead we've had support for the Prime Minister from the rest of cabinet, and from the rest of caucus, yawns and shrugs and support for the status quo.
We've just had a Liberal dominated committee refuse to hear the rest of the details of her story -- I'm sorry. I just don't get it.
While I believe the allegations of the former AG, in my opinion, she discredits herself by continuing to pledge support for the brand.
The brand is the problem. How does she not get this?
You might like the Carbon Tax, and support action on climate change -- you might agree with every plank in their platform, but if the leadership of the Liberal Party still doesn't get why its behaviour in the SNC-Lavalin affair is wrong, how can she reconcile working along side these same people?
This is not a government problem. This is not a Canadian problem. This is a Liberal problem.
How can something your company's leadership has done, be so bad that you would quit your position, but then with no changes, no admissions of culpability, no acts or words of contrition -- you still feel that it was a worthy enough company that you want to maintain your relationship, and to represent the brand.
Doesn't compute.
canadianna
Much as I agree with her sentiments, I find they don't mesh well with staying in the party. It seems incongruent to me that she could find they behaved so egregiously that she quit cabinet, but that she feels she can somehow work within the party for change.
Trust has eroded -- that's a two way street. Just as she (apparently) lost trust in those within the highest level of her party, surely she must see that they have lost trust in her as well, and therefore, she will have no voice.
Had there been a stampede out the door following the resignation of Jane Philpott, I might say there was something to the concept of change from within. Instead we've had support for the Prime Minister from the rest of cabinet, and from the rest of caucus, yawns and shrugs and support for the status quo.
We've just had a Liberal dominated committee refuse to hear the rest of the details of her story -- I'm sorry. I just don't get it.
While I believe the allegations of the former AG, in my opinion, she discredits herself by continuing to pledge support for the brand.
The brand is the problem. How does she not get this?
You might like the Carbon Tax, and support action on climate change -- you might agree with every plank in their platform, but if the leadership of the Liberal Party still doesn't get why its behaviour in the SNC-Lavalin affair is wrong, how can she reconcile working along side these same people?
This is not a government problem. This is not a Canadian problem. This is a Liberal problem.
How can something your company's leadership has done, be so bad that you would quit your position, but then with no changes, no admissions of culpability, no acts or words of contrition -- you still feel that it was a worthy enough company that you want to maintain your relationship, and to represent the brand.
Doesn't compute.
canadianna
2 comments:
Much to the disappointment of too many CPC'er I know who thought JWR would cross the floor,she remains a loyal and true Liberal,as she always was.
JWR is deep down liberal, (small "l" intended), just as are most activists. Outside the Rebel Media,I can't think of a single Conservative activist, at least not on the scale of the Left-wing types,like JWR's Dad.
I wonder if JWR believes she can parlay her position in the LPC into something greater, perhaps Prime Minister? Or has she just come to her senses after showing "the boys" in the PMO she can't be pushed around.
JWR may be even more machiavellian than Butts,and better at it as well. She would never be acceptable to the Quebec Cabal as PM,and I'm sure she is sufficiently intelligent to realize that, so what is she after?
THAT as they used to say, is "the 64 dollar question".
I am looking forward with great interest to next week,when the Budget is brought in,and with the stance of the farcical justice committee,it looks like the LPC is just going to try and brazen it out.
The "goodies" will be flung out by the scoop shovel full, like manure from a barn cleaning,so it remains to be seen how effectively they can bury JWR/SNC. With the co-operation of the media,I believe they will be quite successful.
Remember an old song,"It's a Long While from May to December", in politics it's a much longer while from March to October.
Don Morris
It's definitely going to seem like a long time, Don. I'm not really looking forward to it. I have this sense of dread.
I'm glad Wilson-Raybould didn't cross the floor. You're right it would have been out of character. I read someone on Twitter thinking she might be aspirational, but I don't see that here. I think she knows her limitations. I've also read the knives are out for Trudeau in a quiet way, and that she might have more supporters internally that we're aware of. The Liberals are a secretive bunch, but it will all come out at some point.
You're right though, they're just going to brazen this out and watch it slip away-- I don't get the Globe, and i haven't read anyone who's explained the lawyering up beyond that the top Libs have -- so maybe... .maybe. Lol -- best to just watch I guess.
Post a Comment