Friday, February 10, 2006

McKay Strikes Out

Note to Stephen Harper. If, in the future, another controversy arises, refrain from asking Peter McKay to clarify. McKay offers lame and just plain bizarre rationalizations to prop up Emerson:
International Trade Minister David Emerson's controversial leap to the Conservatives was "different" from past party defections and suggests a politician who was "obviously very disillusioned" with the Liberals, Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay said Friday...
Mr. Emerson, he added, has said "quite clearly he is dedicated to the people of his constituency."

"He wants to continue work on the government side," Mr. MacKay said.

Obviously disillusioned? I don't remember Emerson expressing this sentiment during the campaign, but I do recall a lot of Conservative bashing. McKay implies that Emerson has felt this way for a long time. If what McKay suggests is true, I would argue it just makes the hypocrisy that much more pronounced. Don't the voters have a right to know that you don't support your Party? So, were you just hedging your bets that the Liberals would be elected?

McKay says that Emerson wants to continue work on the government side. Whoa? Who wouldn't? Someone call Martin and ask him if he is still interested in the PM job. Give me a break, what a lame rationale. This statement also suggests that Emerson was quite proactive in getting this job, which serves as further proof that voters where mislead. I guess Emerson is a political free agent, wherein he has the unique position of always signing on with the winner. Ideology is irrelevant, just get give me some power. What a terrible commentary on the idea of conviction and core principles.

Emerson was never a Liberal, he was a mercenary. McKay claiming that his decision has something to do with dedication to his constituents is hilarious. What is clear to everyone, is that the voters are well down the decision making process, merely serving as a vehicle to a personal agenda.

If McKay represents the best Tory spin on Emerson, it is a sad state indeed. Maybe McKay's weak defense is a testament to the fact that privately he sees the hypocrisy and can't must much passion as ally. Damage control, but unfortunately so weak it actually strengthens the other scenarios. I guess it is hard to cobble together a theory with no factual basis.

2 comments:

Mark Dowling said...

Emerson was never a Liberal, he was a mercenary.

Precisely - and this is why the only ones with the moral high ground are (gag) the NDP (in the Commons at any rate - the Greens have no chance to be betrayer or betrayed).

The Liberals have zero since Brison and Stronach walked into the cabinet and Dosanjh (parachuted into cabinet like Emerson) at least appeared to be happy to assist Grewal and his wife into a better situation.

Steve V said...

mark

Yes, the Liberals are mainly silent for obvious reasons. The NDP is now the only party that can claim purity.