Saturday, April 15, 2006

Who You Know In The PMO

While I'm hesitant to bump the 150+ comments in the Gerard Kennedy post further down the page, I have two little tid-bits I'd like to post this morning.

The first is of the appointment of former Tory MP Jim Gouk to the board of directors of Nav Canada. We are assured that it's OK because:
"I did not see any memo or any papers saying, 'please appoint this person,' " Huguette Guilhaumon said. "I know it makes for a good story in the paper. But it's a non-story. Everything is kosher and clean."

Well, at the very least the Tories are smart enough to not have memos saying "please appoint this person". I'll give 'em credit for that. However, Pat Martin takes direct aim at the claim that everything is "kosher", calling it "a pure patronage pork appointment".

In other news, I know I said I wouldn't post on leadership polls (even ones which show my guy doing well), but this final tid-bit in today's Globe story was too much to pass up:

The other potential candidates expected to throw their names into a wide-open race barely rated a mention. Nova Scotia MP Scott Brison was named by 1 per cent - about the same proportion that suggested comedian Rick Mercer; and MPs Joe Volpe, Carolyn Bennett and Maurizio Bevilacqua rated even lower.

I'm not sure if this means Scott is losing momentum, or that Rick Mercer is gaining momentum...


  • Is Rick Mercer a Liberal? Somehow, I'd find that at least mildly disappointing. :-)

    By Blogger Idealistic Pragmatist, at 1:02 p.m.  

  • I read a letter to the editor in Globe a while back that called him the "liberal court jester"

    I assume that he is Liberal..hey, I'd vote for him.

    By Blogger Zac, at 1:08 p.m.  

  • Oh-Oh,

    I may have backed the wrong horse...

    Can I jump on board the Kennedy bandwagon?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:39 p.m.  

  • From the land of BC.

    You gotta check out this blog. It seems Sean Holman is a guest writer and Harry Lali is doing the titanic with Carole James.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:42 p.m.  

  • Oh Richard Diamond, you cad you!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:50 p.m.  

  • Liberals have spent 12 years being shameless.

    As they learn more of Scott Brison, his arrogance and his strong sense of entitlement, they will return to normal human reactions and be simply embarrassed.

    By Blogger David M. McClory, at 2:05 p.m.  

  • I will crush you all at the DSM's!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:19 p.m.  

  • CG,

    That is a bit of a cheap shot at Jim Gouk, when you consider that Mr. Gouk is an air traffic controller by profession, as well as a private pilot and was a member of the transport committee for 13 years including the time when Nav Canada was created in it's present incarnation. That makes him more qualified than literally busloads of Liberal troughers.

    You would also do well to lighten up on commenting about qualifications, when you consider your boy and Terry Popovic have a lot in common. He "attended" university as well, funny thing about universities they're sticklers for that degree thing. I went to university with lots of attendees, but they aren't alumni.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:01 p.m.  

  • Anonymous at 3:01pm,

    All attendees at universities are alumni. As someone who holds a prominent position at a university, I would like to enlighten you that universities promote both degree and non-degree education. We are proud of all of our alumni.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:06 p.m.  

  • On a different note, Gerard Kennedy is already bringing former Liberals back from the NDP. If you haven't come across this page before, it will make you smile as this guy is featured on the NDPs former Liberals page (at least he still was when I checked today)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:28 p.m.  

  • Richard Diamond,

    How Dare U waver in your support 4 me. Have sum loyality to da Scottmeiester.

    U will b very happy soon once I SB is PM.



    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:57 p.m.  

  • Scott - I hear your campaign is in trouble.

    Would u consider supporting me?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:33 p.m.  

  • I'm a whack job, totally shocked that less than 1% of Canadians think I should be Liberal Leader. Granted, I'm incapable of being open-minded, am a complete and utter hypocrite, can barely string together 2 sentences in a public sentence and am ready for the looney bin... but I just thought Canadians would want a woman less stable than Kim Campbell's love life!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:44 p.m.  

  • I also read that Globe story CG and what popped out at me was this quote from what's-his-name the pollster, about Gerard:

    “He's the only one that has a positive score among Liberal voters, New Democratic voters and Conservative voters.”

    I say you were prescient.

    By Blogger Jim, at 10:56 p.m.  

  • I know its hard for a Liberal to accept the fact that some jobs are handed out to qualified people.

    Lets compare the Jim Gouk appointment to Nav Canada with the Cretien daughter appointment to Vanoc.

    1. Gouk, a fomer pilot, air tafffic controller and contributor to setting up Nav Canada is actually qualifieds for the job.

    Creitiens's daughter is not only unqualified but totally unsuitable.

    Harper and the Conservatives are doing such a good job so far that as a liberal I would be worried that by the time they get around to getting back into power most of you guys will be too old to even remember what it was like.

    Despite the formitable opposition of the MSM, Harper is proving that you can get along without them. The propaganda they spewed in the past went a long way to keeping the corrupt liberals in power. And now they have been neutured.

    Many people, conservatives included, underestimated Harpers capabilities. He is not only doing a bang up job but is also SEEN by the Canadian public to be doing a good job. And it can only get better.

    As a leader he is running rings around Layton and what-his-name the liberal guy, not to mention Duceppe.

    Things like the recent debate (discussion) on troops in Afganistan is a good example of how Harper comes accross to the Candian public.

    He suggested that not only was a debate not necessary but in fact was a bad idea. But Jack-off and what-his-name insisted so a debate was held. And what happenened. Most of the libs and dippers didn't even show up proving to the public that it was only a political ploy on the part of libs and dippers.

    So the libs and dippers look stupid(which they are anyway) and Harper comes accross as credible and an awsome leader.

    And the further along we go the more momentum Harper and the conservatives gather.

    You libs are lucky you have the leadership thingy going to take you mind off the total collapse we are seeing of the liberal party. It must be depressing.

    And after you get you leadershjip race out of the way you can then concern yourself on how your party is going to raise enough money for the next election. The Accountability Act limits corporate and union contrbutions. Conservatives have no difficulty with this as they are used to stepping up to the plate(A conservative value, if you will) but liberals have a tough time with individual contributions because, as everyone knows, one of the basic liberal tenants is to get someone else (like a big company)to do it. Methinks the libs are in for a rough ride.

    Liberals were right to think that Harper is scary. Liberals should be damned scared.

    Looks go on ya, though.

    Horny Toad

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:58 p.m.  

  • "Things like the recent debate (discussion) on troops in Afganistan is a good example of how Harper comes accross to the Candian public."

    Like a John Kerryesque flip-flopper?...He was against the debate before he was for the debate.

    And as far as the "formitable opposition of the MSM" goes, would that include the praise he received after his telegraphed trip to Afganistan?

    I said it to you before, and I might as well say it again...come next election, the Cons can switch their slogan from "Changeons pour vrai" to "Stephen Harper - For Politics as Usual"

    I'm not saying he hasn't performed impressively thus far...I'm just saying it is about time to stop pretending he is anything other than a standard "inside the Beltway" politician (with all the negative connotations society attaches to that).

    Nice work on connecting kosher and pork there CG, I totally missed that the first time around.

    By Blogger Leny Vilekoskytch, at 11:35 p.m.  

  • I'm not sure if this means Scott is losing momentum, or that Rick Mercer is gaining momentum...

    With Rick at the helm we would have a majority in the bag.

    By Blogger IslandLiberal, at 11:35 p.m.  

  • Horny Toad wrote:

    "So the libs and dippers look stupid(which they are anyway) and Harper comes accross as credible and an awsome leader."

    Every once in a while Paul Wells gives out an award for mindless partisanship. Horny Toad's 8:58 entry could be pretty tough to beat on that one.

    Harper might be good, but 'awesome'?

    The Last Trudeaumaniac

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:14 a.m.  

  • "Every once in a while Paul Wells..."

    I think you meant to say "... says something brilliant". In any event, please send me $10 for using my name.

    His Imperial Majesty Paul Wells

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:04 a.m.  

  • Before you get carried away with excitement over G Kennedy, I think that you should look closer at his true support levels throughout Canada.

    He is a total unknown - even here in Ontario. Perhaps that is why he receives fewer negative comments than other Liberal hopefuls. Trust me. Once people learn more about Kennedy, they will learn to be as unimpressed as I am.

    Not being able to pick up even one university degree does mean something. And as far as I am concerned, it means he is not qualified to be PM.

    Yes, Kennedy will attract a few NDP votes. But he will alienate many many more middle of the road voters. Sounds like a Tory plot to me.

    Bevilacqua has far more substance than Kennedy ever will have. I think Bevilacqua will outpoll Kennedy once push comes to shove.

    Just my two cents

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:11 a.m.  

  • Two cents,

    Sounds like your attempting to set up a dream scenario for your candidate. Good Luck.

    Kennedy has plenty of support, true substance and a 10 year political record to back it up.

    Sorry, no one is looking to you as an information source for Kennedy.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:27 p.m.  

  • Bevilacqua has no chance. He is running pretty much just because he hopes it will raise his profile and get him into cabinet under whoever wins the leadership.

    Kennedy is 100 times the better candidate than Bevilacqua. At least I can pronounce his name, and Kennedy was born in Canada.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:38 p.m.  

  • Anon 10:38, that was rather ignorant. Being able to pronounce one's name and being born in Canada are not prerequisites to becoming Liberal leader. Bevilacqua, though his chances of winning are small, is a decent candidate despite not having an Anglo-Saxon name.


    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:49 p.m.  

  • Wanna bet that "two cents" isn't really a Bevilacqua supporter and that Annon10:38 isn't really a Kennedy supporter?

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 12:58 p.m.  

  • "Wanna bet that "two cents" isn't really a Bevilacqua supporter and that Annon10:38 isn't really a Kennedy supporter?"

    I'll bet you two cents. :D

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:37 p.m.  

  • Canadian voters would never support a non native born Canadian as Prime Minister. No one from Italy, India, the Phillipines or wherever should be allowed to run the country as Prime Minister.

    It's bad enough our GG is from Hati by way of France.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:59 p.m.  

  • The Liberal Party could easily have a foreign born leader.

    The Liberal Party allows non-Canadian citizens to become a member of its party and vote as delegates.

    All it takes is some brainwashed Sikhs to be bused in and told who to vote for and the Liberal Party could be lead by some Sikh from India.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:22 p.m.  

  • very clever anonogross

    By Blogger Jim, at 4:31 p.m.  

  • The somewhat odious comment about brainwashed Sikhs does however highlight one of my objections to the current leadership selection system.

    Many candidates for leadership and nomination have relied on "brainwashing" some special interest group or other, and we are constantly being trumped by these. In fact, the party was almost hijacked (excuse me I mean won over) by the anti-abortionists in the 1990 leadership who, except for a crucial couple of tactical errors, came a lot closer than most people realized to capturing the leadership of the party.

    Whether or not you consider their position on abortion to be "brainwashing," the fact remains that the current process leaves the party extremely vulnerable to capture by various special interests.

    I don't consider this to be a flawed result, as we have had low profile variations of this sort of thing controlling nominations, annual meetings, and leadership contests for years. There is just usually little public knowledge of who the groups are, or who got in using them.

    I don't, as I say, consider the results to be flawed. I consider the process itself to be deeply flawed.

    Any group with say, 10 thousand reasonably dedicated members spread evenly across the country could take over the party. There's probably that many Scientologists out there. I watched as some ridings got taken over in 1990 by groups as small as 100 people in a riding. And the sloppy organizing from some of the mainstream campaigns sometimes made it that much easier. In Alberta or Quebec you probably wouldn't need more than a couple of dozen per riding. or less. In fact, given the current state of the liberal party, and the skills some liberal organizers have at shifting ringers around from riding to riding, you could possibly pull it off with a lot less than ten thousand. A lot less.

    And this is only one of the many problems with this process.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:48 p.m.  

  • And that is Joe Volpe is going to win the leadership.

    He must have 10,000 Volpe-Manics spread around the country looking to support Joe.

    They might even be Scientologists too.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:22 p.m.  

  • Brison can choose to run. Stronach can sit this one out and run further down the road. But each suffers from the turncoat syndrome. I may be mistaken, but I suspect that life-long Liberals will balk at having either of them as a future leader.

    By Blogger O'Dowd, at 12:27 a.m.  

  • Actually, I am a member of the CPC and a strong Stephen Harper supporter.

    I just like Bevilacqua.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:40 a.m.  

  • I'm backing Rick Mercer this time, but only if he promises to ditch Question Period in favour of rants delivered daily while he walks the halls if parliament.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:40 a.m.  

  • Rick Mercer for next G.G.!!!

    By Blogger Joanne (True Blue), at 10:45 a.m.  

  • Tory line on Jim Gouk.

    "Nothing to see here folks, move along."

    Nice try boys.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:42 a.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home