A while ago, at the time of the Canadian general election (remember that? Anyone?), I blogged about a slimeball politician by the name of David Emerson. As I wrote at the time:
"Our local member of parliament (MP) is one David Emerson. This scumbag ran as a Liberal in the last election, which was set to be a tight race. He won, with 44% of the vote. The NDP took second place, with 34%, and the Conservatives finished third, with less than 20% of the local vote. However, the Conservatives won the most seats nationwide, and therefore won the election.Well, he's back. The Provincial government (currently the BC Liberal party, whose connection (or lack thereof) to the federal Liberal party I don't really understand), just gave him what the "neutral" CBC is calling a "plum Crown position" as "CEO and board chair of the BC Transmission Corporation, a Crown corporation that works with BC Hydro to supply electricity across the province".
Just a few days later, Emerson switched parties and took up a cushy cabinet position in the new Conservative government.
The largely working class and/or immigrant local community, who traditionally hate the Conservatives, were outraged. There are still signs all over the area saying "de-elect David Emerson". But he was completely unrepentant. He's not standing as an MP anywhere in the country this time around, but is deluded enough to think that he would have won in this riding if he'd been on the ballot sheet. (Fat chance, mate). He's also saying that he was never a Liberal. I'd have more (i.e. some) respect for him if he said that he had changed his mind based on Liberal policies X, Y and Z. But he somehow thinks it's better to admit that he was a liar from the start."
This
Fortunately the BC Liberals are increasingly unpopular, and a Provincial election is coming next year. I wasn't around the last time the BC NDP were in power, but I understand they were booted out of office a few years ago for making some very high profile mistakes regarding some expensive but useless ferries, among other things. I hope they've been forgiven... and I know I keep saying this, but I really hope I'm able to vote by then.
----------------------
*my original three insults were rejected due to the fact that these words represent things that are actually useful.
haha I should set you and DMac up - he actually met Emerson yesterday and LIKES him. I'll send him your way :)
ReplyDeleteYeah, but then he's a hard-core Star Trek fan who'd never heard of Galaxy Quest, so what does he know?! ;)
ReplyDeleteI did not agree with what David Emerson did in regards to the party switching. However,I believe that he did the switch so that he could make sure the lumbar trade issues could be dealt with. He doesn't like to waste time, and he sincerely believes (whether you agree or not) that he as doing what would able him to make the most difference to the country. I don't think its fair to judge someone on a single decision, especially someone who has done alot of public service. Again, whether you agree with what he did or not (I did not), he was the best person to get a deal on the lumbar issue.
ReplyDeletehm, I need to read up before joining the chant. In general though, I am a bit too idealistic to like anyone who changes party affiliation without stating why they gave up their old one and why they have change thier mind. Afterall, changing one's mind is allowed - it is just nessesary to explain why. I mean, how can you expect others to follow your example (as one would like them to?) if you don't tell why why why....
ReplyDeletehappy thanksgiving. I'm off to indulge in turkey and more food than I should ;)
A good point - with qualifications!
ReplyDeleteIf Emerson had a solid case that he had switched parties only in order to effect a specific change, I would have liked to see him stand for re-election on that basis.
But, of course, whatever Emerson achieved while in the Conservative cabinet, you have to admit that he also obtained substantial personal gain by switching sides...
Your comment about not judging someone based on a single decision definitely has merit, but of course it depends on how you perceive the magnitude of that decision. I once read a funny quote by someone (can't remember who but it might have been Bill Bryson) saying something along the lines of "Lee Harvey Oswald could quite legitimately say that he wasn't the kind of guy who usually did such things"! Personally I think Emerson broke the trust of his constituents, and of his (original) party, who spent a large amount of public and donor money on his election campaign. How each person perceives the magnitude of that decision will obviously depend on their own political views!
Chall, your comment arrived while I was replying to SM. I think maybe I'm too idealistic too - how much can one really expect from a career politician, after all?!
ReplyDeleteHave a happy Thanksgiving!