Nothing To See Here. Move Along!

<p>Nothing to see but a corrupted party succceeding in buying itself out of an election. <p>Paul Martin even had to run to Bay Street to explain how it was the only way to stay in power. One vote did it and it has cost Canadians billions of dollars. <p>This is a very sad and disturbing event. So please, do move along ! For those Canadians who still wanted to believe in a caring government, for all those Canadians who still believe in a democracy for the people and not for the sake of power alone, for all Canadians who are blind to the fact that they are being led by corruption and bought with their own money, please move along and let us feel the shame in peace. We are not worthy of democracy and justice. There is nothing to see here but the status quo. Canadians have just proven to the world their inability to roll up their democracy and justice sleeves when required.

Canada, the land of the Liberal Party. (or is it The Liberal Party, the land of Canada.)<p> From the Montreal Gazette: <p> They say the only two things certain in life are death and taxes. In post-Mulroney Canada, a third item has joined that list: federal Liberals in power. Whether in a majority or minority government, whether their leader is Jean Chretien or Paul Martin, Liberals hang on to power like destiny owes it to them. In the wilds of Canada, no political animal is a fiercer survivor than a federal Liberal. <p> After the results of the 1995 referendum sent editorialists throughout the rest of Canada demanding Chretien's resignation, he played the national-unity card and manoeuvred the country into two early elections to ward off the Canadian Alliance and the Conservatives. Anybody today remember Stockwell Day in his wetsuit?<p> Only another Liberal, it seems, is allowed to unseat a Liberal prime minister, acting or former. Martin did it to Chretien. Chretien did it to John Turner. Someday, somebody will do it to Martin. Nothing can shake their grip on the country. The sponsorship scandal? Although Liberals were reduced to a minority government, it wasn't enough to kick them out. <p> This year, even with the Gomery commission and its stories of corruption and illicit cash-filled envelopes exchanged in restaurants, Stephen Harper's Conservative Party barely managed to threaten the Liberals electorally, and then only for a couple of weeks. <p> Ontario, the all-powerful election-deciding province, got a little upset for a while, then quickly went back to sleep in the Liberal fold. What many in the ROC still see as a mainly Quebec-based scandal among a bunch of crooked Quebecers couldn't make a lasting dent in Liberal support, according to the polls. <p> What will it take to bring the Liberals down? Jean Lapierre eloping with Jack Layton? Not even the daily election promises, nor the astoundingly opportunistic defection of Belinda Stronach, revolted enough Canadians to send the Liberals into the free fall in the polls that they deserve. <p> So the conventional wisdom du jour says it's all Stephen Harper's fault. Bad, bad Stephen Harper. Yesterday, Calgary Herald columnist Don Martin wrote his list of advice for the "charismatically challenged" Tory leader. Globe and Mail columnist Lawrence Martin tried to portray Peter MacKay as the knight in shining armour who could replace Harper and get the Conservatives in power. Recently dumped by Stronach, it's more likely MacKay will have to suffer the comparison with the other leader-in-waiting, Premier Bernard Lord, whom Brian Mulroney wanted to head the new Tories in the first place. <p> Stronach and a bunch of commentators accused the Tory leader of not treating her with enough respect. Bad manners toward women, Mr. Harper! Funny how no one noted Stronach defected to a party whose leader had treated his own former female leadership rival, Sheila Copps, with the refinement of a pitbull - going as far as having her defeated at her nomination convention. Now that's respect for women in politics? Good luck, Belinda. <p> Yesterday, a Globe and Mail/Leger Marketing poll swept these musings aside. The problem, it says, is not Harper per se. It's the party's position on issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage and relations with the United States. Even with the more mainstream Lord or MacKay as leader, Tory support remains unchanged. As the final blow, although 36 per cent of respondents view Harper as "more honest" than the 26 per cent who say the same of Martin, 46 per cent still think Martin can better manage Canada. Who said honesty was a prerequisite to govern? <p> Still, one finding in that poll told the real story of Liberal endurance. Half of respondents found Martin to be better at preserving national unity, as opposed to only 26 per cent for Harper. This perception explains why Stronach defected, alleging she did it to save national unity, and why Liberals and the NDP spent the past months accusing Harper of sleeping with the separatists. Against all reason, it's obvious the Liberals have succeeded in posing as the only ones capable of containing the separatist threat. <p> When he testified at the Gomery commission, Benoit Corbeil, former Liberal president of its Quebec wing, tried to explain the real origins of the sponsorship program. With this greater visibility, Chretien wanted voters in the ROC to equate the Liberal Party with Canada and federalism. Looking at the Leger poll numbers and seeing how the "sleeping with the separatists" accusation against Harper stuck to him, Corbeil was bang on. <p> Posing as the guardians of national unity, with the NDP propping them up and Stronach giving the signal that Bay St. is still painted Liberal red, Liberals have it made in the shade. The only tool missing in their survival kit is the Gomery report. Yes, the Gomery report. Here's my prediction: It will absolve the Martin clan and crucify the Chretien clan. Come next election, why would Ontarians punish a bunch of ghosts?

"Come next election, why would Ontarians punish a bunch of ghosts?"

Yes, why?

The liberals keep on winning because their political ideology accomodates the
largest number of voting Canadians. With first-past-the-post, many would
like to vote for another, more narrowly-cast party option but cannot, because
jeez, if we did that other narrowly-cast party whose platform is 180 degrees
from us might win. The Liberals are the definition of least-worst political
compromise in first-past-the-post.

I'm not apologizing for Liberal party corruption, but how soon we forget
Mulroney. There were and are competing factions within that party, as in any.
Blaming a single "clan" might well be entirely and legally accurate, while not
satisfying the angry Canadian who has been somehow (foolishly) convinced
that the Liberals alone manage the brand-name for corrupt politics. There
are lots of un-corrupted people who have membership in the Liberal Party of
Canada, and given the state of affairs, you can be that a good many of them
remain because they stand behind the platform, not the individuals or their
deeds (especially when selfish with respect to the party as a whole).

Just like business, politics is a high-stakes game about power, control and
sometimes wealth. These things are the fertilizer for corruption, and
Canadians should not delude themselves into thinking they can *ever* elect
people able to govern who are immune to these tempations and unrequiring
of vigilant oversight. That so many Canadians believe in handing over
economically critical institutions to unaccountable, private--even foreign!--
interests, as part of the *antidote* to the natural corruptions of power and
wealth shows just how *deeply integrated* our distaste for the realities of
parliamentary democracy, and our responsibilities thereunder, have become.
And thus we are getting only as much from our politicians as we are
pretending to expect. Funny how things work like that.

Does nobody see the next predictable collision when the Liberal
government sends the know-nothing, speaks-no-French Stronach
into Quebec to implement the Gomery recommendations?

Quebec has been mesmerized by the daily revelations of the
Gomery Inquiry. They're angry, hurt, and looking to Ottawa for
answers. And they'll send Ms B.S. to speak for Canada. Suffering
Ratzinger.

As Chantal Hebert said recently, "It's hard to think of a swifter way
of sending Quebecers into the waiting arms of the Bloc."

So, right, move along ... nothing to see here any more.

You know, it is somewhat akin to someone saying that since OJ got away with murder, there is "nothing to see here, Move along!" It is simplistic to the edge of pollyanish and childish. Surely, theft and corruption by any citizen of Canada is reason to pause, nevermind the Government that passes the laws, we must obey to remain a civilized country. So, they stole some money and Belinda betrayed her beliefs to enhance her personal career. Surely if she believed so firmly in what she was doing, no purchase of her vote with a Ministerial appointment was necessary!

Okay so we should now let every criminal out of jail, especially, Mr. Latimer, who was doing what he thought best to unify his family and his daughter with her maker. He rots in jail, while Martin gleefully bribes every Member of Parliament and Party without a soul or morals in to supporting his corrupt government. Not corrupt or bias in my opinion, but by sworn testimony.

There is lots to see here, but better to blind yourself to the truth, than face the tough choices to stand for it!

I believe that heroes are those that do that right thing in spite of the consequences when it has to be done. Belinda and Martin, the two richest, trust fund kids in Parliament, just seek power for power's sake, and we should all just look the other way, as that is the easiest thing to do. No wonder the biggest cheat in the history of the Olympics, Ben Johnson, heralded from Canada. We seem to care little about how you play the game, but just whether you win or lose. So nothing to see here, at all, move along in to the the abyss of a first world country with third world morals. It certainly is the easiest thing to do, and why make life difficult with morals or justice, just win at all costs!

Has Canada really sunk this low in to moral bankruptcy? We can do better, but I guess we just don't want to put forth the effort.

"There is lots to see here, but better to blind yourself to the truth, than face
the tough choices to stand for it!"

Just what are the tough choices?

"Belinda and Martin, the two richest, trust fund kids in Parliament, just seek
power for power's sake, and we should all just look the other way, as that is
the easiest thing to do."

No, you keep an eye on them as they provide the public service for which they
were elected, using every legal means. They are elected to serve Canada, not
rule it. Canadians should be at least moderately proud of several features of
the sponsorship scandal: 1) we caught them 2) unlike many other countries,
we can do something about it 3) some members of the accused party are
helping

"No wonder the biggest cheat in the history of the Olympics, Ben Johnson,
heralded from Canada. We seem to care little about how you play the game,
but just whether you win or lose."

Yeah, there must be something in the water. This exemplifies the tendancy
for a certain type of Canadian (unlike you, I don't mean to imply we are so
homogeneous) to turn frustration with the dirty details of our parliamentary
democracy (including the inevitable and almost invariable paths to
corruption) into national self-loathing. Every country, political system, school
board and quilting bee suffers from the temptations of those who hold
power, and corruption scandals happen, and are dealt with, throughout
history. This will be on some museum plaque some day, along with notes
about which war or other important event it either helped start or avert our
participation in, and what *that* ended up costing us.

A lot of people on vive have one opinion or another of David Orchard. But
look what he did. A party on the ropes, and while many others were taking a
scorched-earth attitude towards the post-Mulroney PCs, he read the rules,
bought a membership, got others to do likewise, and worked for change.
Sure, he got screwed by Mackay, but given what you believe about heroes,
you have to admire his spirit.

Sorry but a bit convulted logic, here is it not? Read what you write.

"No, you keep an eye on them as they provide the public service for which they
were elected, using every legal means. They are elected to serve Canada, not
rule it."

Now if they (Belinda and Martin) were elected to provide public service and to serve Canada, not rule it, then why was Belinda elected to serve under Stephen Harper as the Conservative Party and yet served herself up a Minister's job by trading her vote and those who voted to elect her to serve for it? If the same was true of Martin, then why as Finance Minister, did he allow the disservice to Canadians of their tax dollars being stolen by Adscam? I met a young man whose Father ran for the Liberals in Quebec and two years before the scandal broke he told me about it, as a layman. Yet, the Finance Minister, who parties and socializes with the very same Ad men, did not know about it? Another great man once said, "The only thing it takes for evil and corruption to suceed is for good men to do nothing."

Again another complete about face in your next statement.

Yeah, there must be something in the water. This exemplifies the tendancy
for a certain type of Canadian (unlike you, I don't mean to imply we are so
homogeneous) to turn frustration with the dirty details of our parliamentary
democracy.

I see nothing in my text that suggests that Canadians are homogeneous? As a matter of fact, Ben Johnson, in case you had not noticed is from a different cultural background and different social class, than the two trust fund kids. And Ben Johnson, at least worked hard for what he did accomplish and unlike the certainly not homogenous Belinda, did not have it bought for him.

Now there is no reason to turn this in to "self loathing" as you or I did not take steroids, we are not homogenous, remember? And you and I did not trade Daddy's money for a seat at the Cabinet table on fast track. On top of the above Canadians did not realize, that the Liberals were stealing millions to buy two elections or that Belinda or Ben were lying to us about their real use of devious means to achieve their goals, did they? So no, it is not about "self loathing", it is about seeing some that is wrong and standing up against it. You see this way we say "vive" la difference and do not become "self loathing, homogenous" Canadians.

Now read the illogical diatribe you wrote and realize, it is simple, nothing complicated here at all. Ben Johnson taking steriods was wrong and he was punished. Belinda switch hitting is wrong and hopefully she will be punished for it. Martin knew we were being cheated and did nothing about it.

Please don't gloat because we caught the thieves, we did not. It was an audit that is mandated that caught their thievery, not us. What country is it in the world, that corruption can not be corrected or punished? Now, we should jump up and down that some members of the thieving party want to help. Well I failed to see them stand up to defeat a corrupt party during the vote of confidence, so what help is that they want to give? Oh I see, they want to promise not to do it again, well isn't that exactly what Ben Johnson said before he got caught the second time. Have you ever caught or child and had them tell you that they would do it all again. This is illogical and rambling defense of an indefensible theft and corrupt Government.

However, you should run for politics, cause they way you spun it, it almost sounds believable to the uneducated or oh let's see, a Liberal Party supporter!