Stronach crosses the floor

[Hakan]

Listening to the live press conference now on CBC radio 1.

Belinda Stronach has crossed the floor to the Liberal party and has taken over the position of Minister of Human Resources and development.

Says she disagrees with a "conservative government beholden to the seperatists."

Agonizing decision but does not agree with conservative party for other issues as well.

This is pretty stunning.

edit:


http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...rals050517.html

[CaptainCrunch]

wonder how much the Liberal's paid her to compromise herself.

I went to the conservative leadership debates and she was the worst public speaker that I've ever seen.

Maybe she should have gone over to the NDP, she could have had the party leader slot that she wanted so badly.

Nice timing Brenda

[jonesy]

I guess now we know at least one of the Conservatives who the Liberals were promising jobs to.

[RedHot25]

Originally posted by fotze@May 17 2005, 02:53 PM
Doubt they could pay her enough to make a difference to her already sizable wealth.

Agreed.

Interesting timing, but now that I think of it, it doesn't really surprise me.

A) she just doesn't agree with some of the Conservative things that they have done.

OR

B) She sees a "brighter future" for herself in the Liberal Party if you will....

Which one is it?

[jonesy]

Originally posted by fotze@May 17 2005, 02:53 PM
conservative government beholden to the seperatists

What is that referring to?

Doubt they could pay her enough to make a difference to her already sizable wealth.

I think it means that the BQ might vote with the Conservatives on the budget issue?

The fact is the BQ vote with the Liberals on most other issues, so that doesn't make too much sense.

I would say that the Liberals are extremely beholden to the Separtists. They spend all kinds of money, time and political patronage in order to apease the separtists. (note to liberals: it is an insatiable appetite)

hah, this the day after martin tells all the parties to 'raise the tone' what a weasel.

[KevanGuy]

This is unreal. I cannot believe she would pull BS like this so close to a confidence vote. What an absolute slap to the face of democracy. Selfishly selling out her constituents for power and, presumably, money. Just sickening.

Where is that article from last week about Conservative MPs being offered cabinet positions by the Liberals? I guess the proof is in the pudding.

What a disgusting individual.

[Reaper]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch@May 17 2005, 08:48 AM
wonder how much the Liberal's paid her to compromise herself.

I went to the conservative leadership debates and she was the worst public speaker that I've ever seen.

Maybe she should have gone over to the NDP, she could have had the party leader slot that she wanted so badly.

Nice timing Brenda

From the sound of the CBC article, she was uncomfortable with the social agenda (i.e. same sex marriage) of the Conservative Party and wanted to see the budget passed because it contained funding that would benefit her constituents.

Good job, Belinda.

[Hakan]

Yeah those corn-fed rednecked hicks from the reform party have consistently been played out by the blue blood upper Canada College liberals for years. This really isn't that surprising.

To the points about the conservatives being beholden to the seperatists, in this instance it is largely true. The conservatives are going to force an election which will only seriously benefit one party, the Bloc Quebecois. That's what she disagrees with, the Conservatives are playing into the hands of the Bloc.

She recognizes, as I do, that Conservative support is a mile wide and an inch deep. Conservative support numbers are mashmallow soft while the Bloc's numers are chiseled in stone.

[jonesy]

Originally posted by Reaper+May 17 2005, 03:03 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Reaper @ May 17 2005, 03:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-CaptainCrunch@May 17 2005, 08:48 AM
wonder how much the Liberal's paid her to compromise herself.

I went to the conservative leadership debates and she was the worst public speaker that I've ever seen.

Maybe she should have gone over to the NDP, she could have had the party leader slot that she wanted so badly.

Nice timing Brenda

From the sound of the CBC article, she was uncomfortable with the social agenda (i.e. same sex marriage) of the Conservative Party and wanted to see the budget passed because it contained funding that would benefit her constituents.

Good job, Belinda. [/b][/quote]
That is a ridiculous reason. She knew the policies that going into the election. She should have ran for the Liberals if she was 'uncomfortable' I presume that the people who voted for her knew they were voting for the conservatives.

I agree this is a slap to her constituents. It shows a real compromise in character. I can't believe she would risk her reputation like that.

Wonder if she will drap mackay along?? That would be the icing on the cake eh?

[CaramonLS]

I can't beleive that the liberals just "bought her". Seriously, if you wanted to cross for ideological reasons, ok. But she just sold her soul for a cabinet position.

[KevanGuy]

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/index.php?showtopic=10873

There is the thread about the Lib buying PCs.




Also, nice of Belinda to slap Harper on the way out while patting her little snookums MacKay on the back.

[jonesy]

Originally posted by Hakan@May 17 2005, 03:05 PM
Yeah those corn-fed rednecked hicks from the reform party have consistently been played out by the blue blood upper Canada College liberals for years. This really isn't that surprising.

To the points about the conservatives being beholden to the seperatists, in this instance it is largely true. The conservatives are going to force an election which will only seriously benefit one party, the Bloc Quebecois. That's what she disagrees with, the Conservatives are playing into the hands of the Bloc.

She recognizes, as I do, that Conservative support is a mile wide and an inch deep. Conservative support numbers are mashmallow soft while the Bloc's numers are chiseled in stone.

All of which are reasons she should have ran in the Liberal party in the first place, not pull a benedict arnold.

[Resolute 14]

The hypocrite knew the social agenda when she joined the Conservative party. That is a very weak excuse. As is the excuse that she disagreed with the idea of the Conservatives being "beholden" to the seperatists, because, as mentioned, the Liberals often vote with the NDP on this issue.

She was bribed, bought, paid off, etc. Just another corrupt politician completely lacking in morals and honor. In other words, the perfect Liberal.

Though if I am the Conservatives, I make a very big deal out of all of this "dont work with the evil seperatists" angle of attack by Layton and Martin. Just flood Quebec with posters highlighting that these two parties think Quebec is evil.

[Hakan]

Originally posted by KevanGuy@May 17 2005, 08:02 AM
This is unreal. I cannot believe she would pull BS like this so close to a confidence vote. What an absolute slap to the face of democracy. Selfishly selling out her constituents for power and, presumably, money. Just sickening.

Where is that article from last week about Conservative MPs being offered cabinet positions by the Liberals? I guess the proof is in the pudding.

What a disgusting individual.

Did you read the article?

She said her concerns were exactly FOR her constituents, the definition of democratic representation. If she voted against the government then all the budget lines for city funding would be cancelled. Coming from Toronto she didn't want to see that. Also, she was increasingly unsupportive of the party's policies. That's democratic representation as well.

I for one am very glad. Not to see the conservatives screwed but to see the actual really good work of Parliament over the past 6 months not go to waste. When was the last time parliament was so progressive and deliberative? It would have been a shame to see all that work flushed down the toilet.

[Radically Red]

Convenient excuses really...

Funny how she crosses over and gets a nice Cushy Cabinet job right away.

Guess there were not Martin Liberals to give this job to.

I always dislike when politicans do this. She was voted in by her riding as conservative Thats what they wanted. IF they wanted a Liberal they would have voted liberal.

If you dont agree the become and independent. Dont go and join the enemy you spent an election and months critizing. Brutal. Nothing short of Brutal. More reasons the Liberals should go. I hope this ends her politacal career as well. Shows she will just Sell out to who ever makes her the best deal..
:angry:

[Reaper]

Originally posted by jonesy+May 17 2005, 09:06 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (jonesy @ May 17 2005, 09:06 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

From the sound of the CBC article, she was uncomfortable with the social agenda (i.e. same sex marriage) of the Conservative Party and wanted to see the budget passed because it contained funding that would benefit her constituents.

Good job, Belinda.

That is a ridiculous reason. She knew the policies that going into the election. She should have ran for the Liberals if she was 'uncomfortable' I presume that the people who voted for her knew they were voting for the conservatives.

I agree this is a slap to her constituents. It shows a real compromise in character. I can't believe she would risk her reputation like that.

Wonder if she will drap mackay along?? That would be the icing on the cake eh? [/b][/quote]
Perhaps she thought she could live with the majority of the policies at the time of election but when the Conservatives became more obsessed with bringing down the government she felt it was the last straw for her.

BTW, I voted Green in the last two elections so I'm not defending her decision in support of the Liberals.

I'm simply trying to add more possiblities to the discussion than "she's a traitor" or "she's selling out her constituents."

[CaptainCrunch]

Here's hoping that somehow an election is called and she's tossed out on her ass. What a snake.

She didn't go over for any kind of idealogical reasons, or because she was uncomfortable.

The Liberal's bought her plain and simple.

The fact that she was a conservative, and campaigned as a conservative, and then found out she wasn't going to be the party leader in her first year, she basically jumps into bed with Paul Martin.

If I voted for her, I am p*ssed.

She's just further proving that democracy dosen't work.

I loved when she talked about integrity, its apparently a term she's not familiar with.

At least prostitutes have the the ability to say what they are. She dosen't

[jonesy]

Originally posted by Snakeeye@May 17 2005, 03:09 PM
The hypocrite knew the social agenda when she joined the Conservative party. That is a very weak excuse. As is the excuse that she disagreed with the idea of the Conservatives being "beholden" to the seperatists, because, as mentioned, the Liberals often vote with the NDP on this issue.

She was bribed, bought, paid off, etc. Just another corrupt politician completely lacking in morals and honor. In other words, the perfect Liberal.

Though if I am the Conservatives, I make a very big deal out of all of this "dont work with the evil seperatists" angle of attack by Layton and Martin. Just flood Quebec with posters highlighting that these two parties think Quebec is evil.

You bring up a good point. The Liberals do every thing they can to smear Harper regarding Quebec policy, than try and have it both ways by calling him out if they work together.

I also am terribly dissapointed in Mr. Martin's speech regarding 'raising the tone' in the House, in which he lamented that the terrible conservatives have gone offside by telling Canadians that the Liberals want to wreck the country.

Is he that much of a hypocrite? That was his ONLY campaign message last election. He harped on harper for wanting to wreck Canada with health care reform.

I am frustrated with this.

edit: missed a word

[Resolute 14]

Originally posted by Hakan@May 17 2005, 08:09 AM
She said her concerns were exactly FOR her constituents, the definition of democratic representation. If she voted against the government then all the budget lines for city funding would be cancelled. Coming from Toronto she didn't want to see that. Also, she was increasingly unsupportive of the party's policies. That's democratic representation as well.

She also said she was a Conservative... well, right up until Martin bribed her with a better paying job.

If her constituents favor a corrupt individual in a corrupt party, then that is just another sign of how stupid Ontario is.

Though, of course, you are right in one respect. If this budget is defeated, Toronto might not get it's money anymore. Toronto only got it in the first place because Martin is trying to bribe Ontario with it's own money in a desperate, and pathetic attempt at staying in power. If he were to win another mandate, that money will vanish right back into the Liberal party's piggy bank.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally posted by Hakan+May 17 2005, 09:09 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Hakan @ May 17 2005, 09:09 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-KevanGuy@May 17 2005, 08:02 AM
This is unreal. I cannot believe she would pull BS like this so close to a confidence vote. What an absolute slap to the face of democracy. Selfishly selling out her constituents for power and, presumably, money. Just sickening.

Where is that article from last week about Conservative MPs being offered cabinet positions by the Liberals? I guess the proof is in the pudding.

What a disgusting individual.

Did you read the article?

She said her concerns were exactly FOR her constituents, the definition of democratic representation. If she voted against the government then all the budget lines for city funding would be cancelled. Coming from Toronto she didn't want to see that. Also, she was increasingly unsupportive of the party's policies. That's democratic representation as well.

I for one am very glad. Not to see the conservatives screwed but to see the actual really good work of Parliament over the past 6 months not go to waste. When was the last time parliament was so progressive and deliberative? It would have been a shame to see all that work flushed down the toilet. [/b][/quote]
Allright, I'll give you that.
But if she is doing this for her constituents then why did she completely switch parties and take a cabinet position.
Seems to me she can best help her constituents in this case by becomming an independant. She doesn't screw over all the people in here riding who voted for a conservative, and she can still vote for the budget. She was bought.