226

He says, she says


 

When Mr. Harper announced last April that Helena Guergis was the subject of serious allegations, he said that “pending a resolution, she will sit outside of the Conservative Party caucus.” But though the allegations against Helena Guergus are now confirmed to be those that have already been dismissed, she apparently remains unwelcome.

When asked Friday whether he owed Ms. Guergis an apology – after allegations of drug abuse, wild partying and attempts to secure illegal contracts all proved unfounded – Conservative Leader Stephen Harper was unrepentant. “There were, as you know well, a range of political problems around this individual,” he told reporters in Thornhill, outside Toronto. “They have been discussed by members of caucus. There is simply no desire to see the return of this individual to caucus…the decision is now in the hands of the riding.”

Ms. Guergis called a news conference today to lay out her version.


 

He says, she says

  1. I hope she sues his sox off.

  2. I hope she sues his sox off.

    • Well of course you do sweetie, shes a woman, you are a woman and now you both loathe Harper.

      • You liberal hack trying to make the conservatives look bad. If you support Iggy have the balls to say so!

        • ha ha ha

          Now it is the liberals fault when conservatives are pigs!

          • Surely it is not realistic that a rational person supporting the conservatives would make the comment Realistic did.

          • Key word is "rational". There are plenty of CPC supporters on this site for whom that would be a mild, almost non-partisan statement.

          • Hey. People who support the conservatives whine endlessly about some mythical media conspiracy against them. They are by definition irrational.

          • It's not rational to complain to a woman that she lacks balls. She doesn't care, criselis, so find a different metaphor.

          • Track Realistic's comment pattern. It's entirely realistic.

      • Are you TRYING to make Cons look bad??

    • on what grounds?

      • When you publically and nationally damage someone's reputation…to the point the person's name becomes a byword….on the basis of nothing at all….that's a sueing offence.

      • He went on the national news and basically suggested she was a criminal.

        I had lunch with a group of lawyers today. They all think she can sue and win big.

        • Ambulance Chasers?

          • It's called slander and wrongful dismissal (though I'm not sure if regular labour laws apply to party politics, so the latter may not be actionable).

          • Right you are. Ministers hold their office 'at pleasure', which basically means they can be fired for any reason.

          • I imagine this will be what she will pursue should she lose the election. Since being booted out, she's done little against, as she does not want to inflame Conservative supporters who might vote for her.

          • Who cares if they are? They know more about it than you.

    • Right. Let me be the first to introduce you to a little process called discovery.

      Ain't gonna be no lawsuit.

        • This one will doom Harper:

          Lastly and most importantly a reason for discovery is to catch you in a lie. As a party to the litigation your credibility or truthfulness is the most important part of your case. If the other side can show that you have lied once, they can attack everything you have said in the case.

          • LOL Harper has been caught in so many lies, so often…..

          • could just as easily doom her . . .

          • Oh, it's possible she has lied; but we already know Harper is a liar, and he would find it harder to keep his cool under cross-examination.

  3. The explanation for why she's still out but no one's will to say: She's still married to Jaffer and he's proven to be gaffe-central. Sorry, Helena, it's who you know and unfortunately this time around it's your husband. : /

    It's a shame for her.

  4. The explanation for why she's still out but no one's will to say: She's still married to Jaffer and he's proven to be gaffe-central. Sorry, Helena, it's who you know and unfortunately this time around it's your husband. : /

    It's a shame for her.

    • What a paternalistic, condescending attitude toward the relationships between a woman, her husband, and her leader — not her employer mind you, her constituents employ her, but her leader. Do you think she'd be better off to take her tiny baby and leave her husband, possibly facing unemployment? If she did that, you would feel more kindly toward the uppity woman gettng her comeuppance?

      You sound very conservative. Like fanny-pattingly, women-should-be-pregnant-and-in-the-kitchen kind of conservative.

      • that was a silly reply. . .

        • What do you expect from a mere gal?

          • what does male/female have to do with this. I had no idea of your gender, until now.

      • The British have a term for Harper and his ilk "Wanker"

    • I guess that's the moral of the story – don't marry a Con MP – you never know what trouble he may bring.

    • "it's who you know " … how does bruce carson and pals rate in Harper's book?

      • Too true; if guilt by association is the issue, why hasn't Harper resigned already?

        • And how about Diane Finley? Her husband is charged with breaking the Elections Canada Act.

  5. Where is the Liberal outrage over the release of an RCMP report during an election that may have an impact on the election. Oh wait this time it is in their favour so it is OK.
    Read Lorne Gunter's column for a picture of the other side of this story.

  6. Where is the Liberal outrage over the release of an RCMP report during an election that may have an impact on the election. Oh wait this time it is in their favour so it is OK.
    Read Lorne Gunter's column for a picture of the other side of this story.

    • it was a Harper leak to hurt Helena's electoral prospects, duh

      • Lorne Gunkner is the teacher for all the craigslist schmucks at con control.

    • Lorne Gunter… bwahaha. He writes for the National Enquirer, right?

    • It was not a leak. It was released to her as she requested under the Access to Information Act. They were required to release it.

      • What, was Togneri asleep at the switch?

  7. it was a Harper leak to hurt Helena's electoral prospects, duh

  8. I wouldn't even read Lorne Gunter's obituary which might be the only truthful article one could googkle under his name ( one day).

  9. What a paternalistic, condescending attitude toward the relationships between a woman, her husband, and her leader — not her employer mind you, her constituents employ her, but her leader. Do you think she'd be better off to take her tiny baby and leave her husband, possibly facing unemployment? If she did that, you would feel more kindly toward the uppity woman gettng her comeuppance?

    You sound very conservative. Like fanny-pattingly, women-should-be-pregnant-and-in-the-kitchen kind of conservative.

  10. I wouldn't even read Lorne Gunter's obituary which might be the only truthful article one could googkle under his name ( one day).

  11. Everything here is related to CONSERVATIVES… seems the problem Canadians have is with conservatives, past, present or future….

    Most evil of recent times and deepest depravity is due to conservatives misguided rule.

    Your finished Harpo.

  12. Everything here is related to CONSERVATIVES… seems the problem Canadians have is with conservatives, past, present or future….

    Most evil of recent times and deepest depravity is due to conservatives misguided rule.

    Your finished Harpo.

  13. So long, farewell, Auf wiedersehen, adieu

    Sounds like Con caucus did not like Guergis and are happy to see back of her, regardless of truth of alegations.

  14. So long, farewell, Auf wiedersehen, adieu

    Sounds like Con caucus did not like Guergis and are happy to see back of her, regardless of truth of alegations.

    • Agreed, and I think the caucus is absolutely within its rights and has done the correct thing.

      She doesn't have a constitutional right to be a member of a political party, and the party doesn't need proof of anything to give her the boot.

      And if I have to listen to her whimper one more time I'm going to throw a shoe.

      • Oh don't throw a shoe, because then you won't be able to put your foot down on Emily:)

        • That wouldn't be possible, not even if he wore army boots….but it's nice to know you think women should be stepped on.

      • They have a right to throw her out – but she has a right to know the reason why. And even if you assume that the Cons, at the time of expulsion,actually believed the assertions now proven false and kicked her out on those grounds, there is no reason why they should not at least apologize and then be frank as to why they still don't want her back.

        I wasn't a fan of Guergis before, but her speech here has earned her some respect (from me anyway). She is standing on her principles; is not deserting her party, despite the party abandoning her; and – now that she is not gagged by party discipline – has clearly enunciated what I suspect a good many [C]onservatives (big-C and small-c) already think: the party's long-term electoral success requires the removal of certain large, cancerous organs.

      • Harper said 'the caucus'; those toeing the party line — which includes embracing plagarism, fraud, misappropriating quotes to fool both elected officials and public, liars extraordinaire — will say what it takes to keep their jobs. They know there's no more $1-million dollar bribes available for their vote, since Harper already holds the right of pulling their sheets. Michael Chong, as principled as he acts, still stands behind Harper. Power for power's sake. I believe that there are caucus members from the CON party who secretly feel Guergis was wronged and want her back, but they've got not chance of speaking their mind while the emperor penguin is still in charge.

    • Yeah but so what? She was voted in by the majority of the constituents in her riding; that means she won the job democratically. Removing her from caucus during an investigation was the right thing to do pending the outcome of the investigation. Although how anyone could entertain those salacious allegations as credible is anyone's guess — maybe harper was onto the fact that prosties were already partying at 24 Sussex and wanted to distance himself from the goings on at his house. (Can you imagine having prosties over to the home you share with your kids; having your wife take tea with them? Of course, maybe he didn't know what they were; maybe it wasn't obvious that the old geezer Carson had remarkably good luck with younger women).

      Point is: Once she's cleared, she should be allowed back in.

      It's not about whether or not harper and her fellow MPs like her.

      • "It's not about whether or not harper and her fellow MPs like her."

        "True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.” K Vonnegut

  15. I guess that's the moral of the story – don't marry a Con MP – you never know what trouble he may bring.

  16. "it's who you know " … how does bruce carson and pals rate in Harper's book?

  17. Lorne Gunkner is the teacher for all the craigslist schmucks at con control.

  18. Lets just for a moment imagine what would happen if Harper had not done what he did, and these allegations came to light.

    Let's have fun writing the headline that would have appeared in the Star, Globe, or from the Canadian Press on the news that Harper was aware of the allegations against Guergis. Let's write the Mansbridge / Robertson sign on to the nightly national newscast.

    Who wants to start?

  19. Lets just for a moment imagine what would happen if Harper had not done what he did, and these allegations came to light.

    Let's have fun writing the headline that would have appeared in the Star, Globe, or from the Canadian Press on the news that Harper was aware of the allegations against Guergis. Let's write the Mansbridge / Robertson sign on to the nightly national newscast.

    Who wants to start?

    • "Harper lets guy friends play with hookers: gal pals left out in cold"

    • Which brings to light Guergis' point that this prime minister would trample the principles of justice and the due process of law for political expediency.

    • How would you like to work for a company for 5+ years, only to be sacked via unproven allegations?
      My guess is that you would lawyer up…

  20. Well of course you do sweetie, shes a woman, you are a woman and now you both loathe Harper.

  21. You liberal hack trying to make the conservatives look bad. If you support Iggy have the balls to say so!

  22. Harper… Visionary misanthropic psychopath…. how's that for an historically relevant 'start' :)

  23. on what grounds?

  24. Harper… Visionary misanthropic psychopath…. how's that for an historically relevant 'start' :)

    • AWESOME… hahah, i will never remember him as anything more articulate….!!!…. EVER :)….

      "Visionary misanthropic psychopath…."

      !!!!

    • Where did you get the "visionary" part?

      • Maybe it was meant in the senseof "having a vivid imagination". You know, looking in the mirror and seeing a god…

  25. that was a silly reply. . .

  26. Right. Let me be the first to introduce you to a little process called discovery.

    Ain't gonna be no lawsuit.

  27. Lorne Gunter… bwahaha. He writes for the National Enquirer, right?

  28. The media shamelessly turn on a dime, from portraying her as an evil witch while she's in the CPC, to a poor victim of the "Harper machine" when she's appropriately anti-Harper.

  29. "There were, as you know well, a range of political problems around this individual," and "They have been discussed by members of caucus."

    Boys club! No girls allowed!

  30. The media shamelessly turn on a dime, from portraying her as an evil witch while she's in the CPC, to a poor victim of the "Harper machine" when she's appropriately anti-Harper.

    • Absolutely! It's shameful how this thing has played itself out.

      And although I can see Ms.Guergis difficulty in overcoming this sordid state of affairs, I think it is petty the way she now plays to the sentiment of the voters. I don't like that kind of performance. You don't do your healing therapy in public. You heal first and get strong and then get even.

      • She looks pretty strong to me, and she's definitely geting even.

    • As someone who does not think much of her, I find Harper much more repugnant. The media, as did I, believed that Harper had made his decision based on facts. I feel like a fool for ever believing he made the right call. What he did was use that information to purge her as an undesirable. What a scum bag. This is the same man who appointed a barbie doll to represent women, and paraded her as eye candy for TV footage. What a sexist piece of turd that man is.

  31. "There were, as you know well, a range of political problems around this individual," and "They have been discussed by members of caucus."

    Boys club! No girls allowed!

    • Unless they come through the back door with Brucie.

      • Or are otherwise ^NOTy…

    • This individual… almost get the impression Mr. Harper would have said 'this thing' if he could have…

  32. AWESOME… hahah, i will never remember him as anything more articulate….!!!…. EVER :)….

    "Visionary misanthropic psychopath…."

    !!!!

  33. Fact: a leader can boot any member of the party out. No reason needed. No wrong was done, from the CPC side.

    This video is a teary attempt to win the election.

    She could have been booted for many reasons. She could be a bad MP. There may be more 'allegations', but not enough proof to move on. That is a scandal in the future. It was reported that Jaffer was using his MP business cards after he was out, and that he was using Helen's MP email address. That enough is reason to not want her around. They were a couple, and it was obvious that Jaffer was using this to his advantage. Heck, there was an article in Maclean's that alluded that Jaffer was attempting to use his political contacts to promote a business he was involved in. Harper was right to run screaming from this couple.

    I noticed that she didn't offer any information in regards to her husband. Is he the white elephant in the room. She is a true politician.

  34. Fact: a leader can boot any member of the party out. No reason needed. No wrong was done, from the CPC side.

    This video is a teary attempt to win the election.

    She could have been booted for many reasons. She could be a bad MP. There may be more 'allegations', but not enough proof to move on. That is a scandal in the future. It was reported that Jaffer was using his MP business cards after he was out, and that he was using Helen's MP email address. That enough is reason to not want her around. They were a couple, and it was obvious that Jaffer was using this to his advantage. Heck, there was an article in Maclean's that alluded that Jaffer was attempting to use his political contacts to promote a business he was involved in. Harper was right to run screaming from this couple.

    I noticed that she didn't offer any information in regards to her husband. Is he the white elephant in the room. She is a true politician.

    • It would sure be fun to tally up all the smears that the media lobbed against Guergis over the years, then wonder why they are coming to her defence now.

      * Brenda Martin
      * Leaking Stephane Dion's itinerary on his Afghanistan trip
      * Charlottetown airport meltdown
      * Jaffer's using her office
      * Jaffer using her blackberry
      * Jaffer's shady business partners
      * Her staffers writing letters to the editor without identifying themselves.
      * Probably lots more I can't think of

      But now everyone is rushing to her defence because even though her husband was caught with cocaine on his person, there is no proof that she snorted cocaine off a #bustyhooker's breasts.

      No bloody wonder the media still wants her to be a part of the CPC.

      • I hope she gets elected – if for no reason other than to serve as a burr under Harper's saddle…

    • I definitely think she should have been booted out of cabinet. No question about that one. I have a real problem with her being booted out of caucus–temporarily advised not to attend caucus meetings would be fair, I think, but only until she was cleared of wrong-doing.

      That said, I understand the party gets to decide who is in the party. Yet another spot in which our democracy needs some tweaking. You have to be LIKED? Part of the clique? Even in high school they don't kick you out of class for being nerdy or whatever, and this is supposed to be where we run the country.

      But what they don't (or shouldn't) get to do is destroy her character just to get her out of the party. Surely there was a better way.

      • Look at that list Jenn_. You think her character wasn't already destroyed?

        • No, it was only seriously damaged. She could have probably gotten a job in a flower shop or gone into real estate. Assuming she loses her seat, just where do you think she can find a job now? Does her family still have substantial business interests, such that she could be useful in some back office somewhere?

        • Jason Kenney failed on a number of your examples. What's his standing these days?

      • I think Ms.Guergis is doing some character destroying herself at this point in time, no?

  35. Funny how poor Helena had zero people on her side when the liberals were calling for her to be fired. Mr. Ingontiief actually said that she should be fired. And that was before the RCMP inquiry! Nice to see everyone is on her side now that it's over. Except, I infer by his comments, that Mr. Wherry agrees with Mr. Harper's decision.

  36. Funny how poor Helena had zero people on her side when the liberals were calling for her to be fired. Mr. Ingontiief actually said that she should be fired. And that was before the RCMP inquiry! Nice to see everyone is on her side now that it's over. Except, I infer by his comments, that Mr. Wherry agrees with Mr. Harper's decision.

    • What is the difference between Cabinet and caucus?

      Look it up.

  37. Ol' Shark Eyes has survived all the evidence of incompetence and general weirdness
    that have , so far, been revealed. Can he survive making a pretty lady with babe-in-arms
    cry in public ? Hard to see why not.

  38. Ol' Shark Eyes has survived all the evidence of incompetence and general weirdness
    that have , so far, been revealed. Can he survive making a pretty lady with babe-in-arms
    cry in public ? Hard to see why not.

  39. And now our headline chasing Iggy, has decided to hitch his political wagon to the Guergis horse:
    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/artic

    Ahhh, remember the good ol days when Guergis herself was "lambasted" for berating a security officer at an airport, and when the media was salivating at the unsavory shenanigans of her and her husband?

    Iggy sure has great political instincts. Defending Guergis is the way to go!

  40. Agreed, and I think the caucus is absolutely within its rights and has done the correct thing.

    She doesn't have a constitutional right to be a member of a political party, and the party doesn't need proof of anything to give her the boot.

    And if I have to listen to her whimper one more time I'm going to throw a shoe.

  41. And now our headline chasing Iggy, has decided to hitch his political wagon to the Guergis horse:
    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/artic

    Ahhh, remember the good ol days when Guergis herself was "lambasted" for berating a security officer at an airport, and when the media was salivating at the unsavory shenanigans of her and her husband?

    Iggy sure has great political instincts. Defending Guergis is the way to go!

  42. So Canada:

    – is coming out of a devestating recession
    – has soldiers overseas risking their lives to defend others' freedom
    – is at a crossroads in terms of healthcare spending

    and Iggy spends is last few precious days on the campaign trail

    talking about… Helena Guergis.

    So centered. So in touch with what's important to Canadians. So ready to be PM.

  43. So Canada:

    – is coming out of a devestating recession
    – has soldiers overseas risking their lives to defend others' freedom
    – is at a crossroads in terms of healthcare spending

    and Iggy spends is last few precious days on the campaign trail

    talking about… Helena Guergis.

    So centered. So in touch with what's important to Canadians. So ready to be PM.

    • Well none of those things are true….so it's okay to discuss yet another Con goof, chet.

    • "So centered. So in touch with what's important to Canadians. So ready to be PM."

      Wow, chet – never knew you were such an ardent Guergis supporter! LOL!

  44. It would sure be fun to tally up all the smears that the media lobbed against Guergis over the years, then wonder why they are coming to her defence now.

    * Brenda Martin
    * Leaking Stephane Dion's itinerary on his Afghanistan trip
    * Charlottetown airport meltdown
    * Jaffer's using her office
    * Jaffer using her blackberry
    * Jaffer's shady business partners
    * Her staffers writing letters to the editor without identifying themselves.
    * Probably lots more I can't think of

    But now everyone is rushing to her defence because even though her husband was caught with cocaine on his person, there is no proof that she snorted cocaine off a #bustyhooker's breasts.

    No bloody wonder the media still wants her to be a part of the CPC.

  45. Oh don't throw a shoe, because then you won't be able to put your foot down on Emily:)

  46. When you publically and nationally damage someone's reputation…to the point the person's name becomes a byword….on the basis of nothing at all….that's a sueing offence.

  47. Are you TRYING to make Cons look bad??

  48. Is there anybody, anyone, any person who actually 'likes' Ms. Guergis? Bueller?

    No. But that's not quite the point of this circus of tears and smears, is it? For conservative supporters, it's "good, well done, she was a pain in the posterior. Good riddance." Fair enough. She prolly was all that.

    But in all fairness, doesn't this reveal a ruthless streak, a willingness to tie up a neat little package, even when the string is short, to destroy someone who's kinda 'old and in the way'?

    The woman may well be a total dolt, Heaven knows,all benches are thick with mediocrity. But this is the leader of the governing party using falsehoods and unproven allegations – fed to him by his chief fart catcher, Young Ray Novak – which now turn out to be apparently baseless and unfounded, to basically immolate someone. "Hey Chief, I've got this gas. Want a match? Here let me get that for you. Ooooh…blue flame!"

    It sure does look pretty ugly, mean and petty. Character-wise.

  49. Is there anybody, anyone, any person who actually 'likes' Ms. Guergis? Bueller?

    No. But that's not quite the point of this circus of tears and smears, is it? For conservative supporters, it's "good, well done, she was a pain in the posterior. Good riddance." Fair enough. She prolly was all that.

    But in all fairness, doesn't this reveal a ruthless streak, a willingness to tie up a neat little package, even when the string is short, to destroy someone who's kinda 'old and in the way'?

    The woman may well be a total dolt, Heaven knows,all benches are thick with mediocrity. But this is the leader of the governing party using falsehoods and unproven allegations – fed to him by his chief fart catcher, Young Ray Novak – which now turn out to be apparently baseless and unfounded, to basically immolate someone. "Hey Chief, I've got this gas. Want a match? Here let me get that for you. Ooooh…blue flame!"

    It sure does look pretty ugly, mean and petty. Character-wise.

    • Well said very eloquent.

    • Agreed. The most disturbing aspect of this is that she represented the status of women, and was paraded like a barbie doll. But when the doll was no longer fashionable, she was chucked like garbage. What a message to send to Canadians – Women are but toys in a mans world!

      As much as Helena as an MP makes me cringe (my god – that voice), she did in fact serve loyally for many many years. And even when she was chucked, she still supported those who fed her to the wolves. That takes balls.

      Harper is a disgusting pig who would whore out his mother if he could gain something in the process….

  50. Well none of those things are true….so it's okay to discuss yet another Con goof, chet.

  51. What do you expect from a mere gal?

  52. It's politics, Chet. And you know it's politics. Quit being disingenuous.

    Helena knows she was tossed because of Jaffer. Ignatieff knows she was tossed because of Jaffer. Ignatieff wouldn't, for a second, consider welcoming into his party, because he knows the optics around her husband, regardless of whether or not she's involved, are terrible.

    Helena knows she's got a fight on to get re-elected. Ignatieff knows that if she turns in a credible showing and splits the small-c vote in her riding, his candidate has a better shot. He also knows that the CPC doesn't poll well with women, so by playing up the "they jobbed this woman" angle, he's got a shot at capturing the votes of more women. And it also lets him mention the Carson story and try to continue the narrative of CPC corruption. The media reports all this, because that's what they do: report on things that hapen during the campaign.

    It's no more, or less, politics than taking a quote that says "Are we ready to stand up for Canadian families? Yes! Yes! Yes!" and implying the sentence before it was "Are we going to unseat the government because we want power?" It's playing the game. Almost chess-like, if you will. I believe this one's called a fork.

    Honestly, Chet/Biff/Kody, it's awesome that you're so partisan and all, and the sad thing is, you're obviously reasonably intelligent and can probably debate on substance, but this brutal schtick of yours of ignoring the points other posters make, regurgitating half-digested talking points, channel-changing, and posting top-level comments so you don't have your points collapsed into a tree below them reminds me a lot of the die-hard Leaf fans who look at their roster of scrubs, third-liners, rookies, and underperformers and proclaim that this year they'll win the Cup…year after year…regardless of, you know, reality.

    Cheering for the home team is good, but sometimes you've gotta open your eyes and admit they're less than perfect.

  53. .
    The problem is that issue at stake is subtle enough to be missed.

    Harper willfully turned an optics issue into serious allegations issue.

    He traduced her last year by indirection. Conservatives want to view that as trivial. Liberals want to make it like he beat her with a stick.

    What it's like is eating in a well-rated restaurant and seeing a cockroach scuttle across the floor. Just one. You just have to see one, and you run out the door trying not to throw up.
    .

  54. It's politics, Chet. And you know it's politics. Quit being disingenuous.

    Helena knows she was tossed because of Jaffer. Ignatieff knows she was tossed because of Jaffer. Ignatieff wouldn't, for a second, consider welcoming into his party, because he knows the optics around her husband, regardless of whether or not she's involved, are terrible.

    Helena knows she's got a fight on to get re-elected. Ignatieff knows that if she turns in a credible showing and splits the small-c vote in her riding, his candidate has a better shot. He also knows that the CPC doesn't poll well with women, so by playing up the "they jobbed this woman" angle, he's got a shot at capturing the votes of more women. And it also lets him mention the Carson story and try to continue the narrative of CPC corruption. The media reports all this, because that's what they do: report on things that hapen during the campaign.

    It's no more, or less, politics than taking a quote that says "Are we ready to stand up for Canadian families? Yes! Yes! Yes!" and implying the sentence before it was "Are we going to unseat the government because we want power?" It's playing the game. Almost chess-like, if you will. I believe this one's called a fork.

    Honestly, Chet/Biff/Kody, it's awesome that you're so partisan and all, and the sad thing is, you're obviously reasonably intelligent and can probably debate on substance, but this brutal schtick of yours of ignoring the points other posters make, regurgitating half-digested talking points, channel-changing, and posting top-level comments so you don't have your points collapsed into a tree below them reminds me a lot of the die-hard Leaf fans who look at their roster of scrubs, third-liners, rookies, and underperformers and proclaim that this year they'll win the Cup…year after year…regardless of, you know, reality.

    Cheering for the home team is good, but sometimes you've gotta open your eyes and admit they're less than perfect.

    • We have Wherry here, reams of commenters, an unhinged press, all repeatedly going into hysterics about Harper,

      and my job is to join in and "admit" what now?

      I have to do no such thing.

      I choose to point out the out-of-touch hysterics of those who act as if Harper's evil incarnate. And in particular, those in the press who choose to abuse their positions to propagandize for their preferred leftist team rather than to inform in a fair and balanced way.

      I

      • "I"

        Solemnly alone against the confederacy of dunces. The scandal of a generation.

        Your intestinal fortitude is admirable.

        (Bagpipes out)

  55. .
    The problem is that issue at stake is subtle enough to be missed.

    Harper willfully turned an optics issue into serious allegations issue.

    He traduced her last year by indirection. Conservatives want to view that as trivial. Liberals want to make it like he beat her with a stick.

    What it's like is eating in a well-rated restaurant and seeing a cockroach scuttle across the floor. Just one. You just have to see one, and you run out the door trying not to throw up.
    .

  56. This one will doom Harper:

    Lastly and most importantly a reason for discovery is to catch you in a lie. As a party to the litigation your credibility or truthfulness is the most important part of your case. If the other side can show that you have lied once, they can attack everything you have said in the case.

  57. That wouldn't be possible, not even if he wore army boots….but it's nice to know you think women should be stepped on.

  58. Here's Canada's Sweetheart taking care of business 24/7/365
    http://www.helenaguergis.com/

    There is not a man among us who could stand up against the Big Blue Harper Political Wrecking Machine it took a lady to open our eyes and show us what real strength means.

  59. Yeah but so what? She was voted in by the majority of the constituents in her riding; that means she won the job democratically. Removing her from caucus during an investigation was the right thing to do pending the outcome of the investigation. Although how anyone could entertain those salacious allegations as credible is anyone's guess — maybe harper was onto the fact that prosties were already partying at 24 Sussex and wanted to distance himself from the goings on at his house. (Can you imagine having prosties over to the home you share with your kids; having your wife take tea with them? Of course, maybe he didn't know what they were; maybe it wasn't obvious that the old geezer Carson had remarkably good luck with younger women).

    Point is: Once she's cleared, she should be allowed back in.

    It's not about whether or not harper and her fellow MPs like her.

  60. Unless they come through the back door with Brucie.

  61. Well said very eloquent.

  62. "Harper lets guy friends play with hookers: gal pals left out in cold"

  63. LOL Harper has been caught in so many lies, so often…..

  64. Nobody has a right to be in cabinet or to be in caucus. This are political posts.; As the PM said "there is a range of political problems with this individual." As in, she and her husband were politically embarrassing to the Government and the party.

    She should be pleased that the RCMP did not lay charges. She was personally exonerated. But the PM owes her nothing. Her performance on Peter Mansbridge (crying, demanding action from her former boss the PM) did her in."There is no crying in baseball".

    As Michael Ignatieff said today, this isn't about Guergis, this is about Rahim Jaffer. This is the first thing Ignatieff has said in months that I agree with. Guergis and Jaffer thought they were big shots around Ottawa, but then it all came crashing down. Life is like that sometimes. Live with it. No charges were laid against Guergis by the RCMP and Jaffer got off with a plea bargain. They should consider themselves lucky.

    BTW, what is it about "busty hookers" and this couple?

  65. ha ha ha

    Now it is the liberals fault when conservatives are pigs!

  66. Nobody has a right to be in cabinet or to be in caucus. This are political posts.; As the PM said "there is a range of political problems with this individual." As in, she and her husband were politically embarrassing to the Government and the party.

    She should be pleased that the RCMP did not lay charges. She was personally exonerated. But the PM owes her nothing. Her performance on Peter Mansbridge (crying, demanding action from her former boss the PM) did her in."There is no crying in baseball".

    As Michael Ignatieff said today, this isn't about Guergis, this is about Rahim Jaffer. This is the first thing Ignatieff has said in months that I agree with. Guergis and Jaffer thought they were big shots around Ottawa, but then it all came crashing down. Life is like that sometimes. Live with it. No charges were laid against Guergis by the RCMP and Jaffer got off with a plea bargain. They should consider themselves lucky.

    BTW, what is it about "busty hookers" and this couple?

    • "Allegedly"?

      Might be something they have in common.

  67. He went on the national news and basically suggested she was a criminal.

    I had lunch with a group of lawyers today. They all think she can sue and win big.

  68. It was not a leak. It was released to her as she requested under the Access to Information Act. They were required to release it.

  69. "It's not about whether or not harper and her fellow MPs like her."

    "True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.” K Vonnegut

  70. My theory:

    Harper wanted to get rid of her. She was a liability. But if he did so it would be a tacit admission the opposition were right, and Harper was wrong. In the time he has been PM, has Harper ever admitted he was wrong about anything? Has he ever taken personal responsibility for anything that went wrong?

    No. Harper does not admit when he is wrong. So, faced with this problem he finds a way out – trumped allegations of criminal behaviour. Now he can fire her without it being on the basis of what the opposition are saying. So he goes out and tells the country about these serious criminal allegations, tells Canadians the RCMP are involved, and washes his hands of her.

    The fact he destroyed her reputation in the meantime is apparently of no consequence.

  71. My theory:

    Harper wanted to get rid of her. She was a liability. But if he did so it would be a tacit admission the opposition were right, and Harper was wrong. In the time he has been PM, has Harper ever admitted he was wrong about anything? Has he ever taken personal responsibility for anything that went wrong?

    No. Harper does not admit when he is wrong. So, faced with this problem he finds a way out – trumped allegations of criminal behaviour. Now he can fire her without it being on the basis of what the opposition are saying. So he goes out and tells the country about these serious criminal allegations, tells Canadians the RCMP are involved, and washes his hands of her.

    The fact he destroyed her reputation in the meantime is apparently of no consequence.

    • Has Helena ever considered if her actions have been wrong? I certainly would have liked to be a fly on the wall in the Jaffer house when all of this came down on the preppy couple.

      The Jaffers, as a team, had a responsibility as well.

      • None of which has anything to do with Harper trumping up allegations against her because he is too egotistical to admit when he is wrong.

        But that was a nice try.

  72. Where did you get the "visionary" part?

  73. I definitely think she should have been booted out of cabinet. No question about that one. I have a real problem with her being booted out of caucus–temporarily advised not to attend caucus meetings would be fair, I think, but only until she was cleared of wrong-doing.

    That said, I understand the party gets to decide who is in the party. Yet another spot in which our democracy needs some tweaking. You have to be LIKED? Part of the clique? Even in high school they don't kick you out of class for being nerdy or whatever, and this is supposed to be where we run the country.

    But what they don't (or shouldn't) get to do is destroy her character just to get her out of the party. Surely there was a better way.

  74. What is the difference between Cabinet and caucus?

    Look it up.

  75. We have Wherry here, reams of commenters, an unhinged press, all repeatedly going into hysterics about Harper,

    and my job is to join in and "admit" what now?

    I have to do no such thing.

    I choose to point out the out-of-touch hysterics of those who act as if Harper's evil incarnate. And in particular, those in the press who choose to abuse their positions to propagandize for their preferred leftist team rather than to inform in a fair and balanced way.

    I

  76. This individual… almost get the impression Mr. Harper would have said 'this thing' if he could have…

  77. The title of the video is "Guerguis Responds to Harper Smear Tactics". Being classy again eh, Wherry? Gettoing internet trolls to do your reporting job does have some drawbacks I guess. Here's how the normal people viewed it:

    Guergis fires back at Harper in news conference termed 'pathetic'

    "COLLINGWOOD, Ont. — There were tears in front of the cameras and a photo op with her new baby as Helena Guergis, in the midst of an election drive in which she is running as an independent, lashed out at the Prime Minister's Office for running a "destructive campaign" against her."

    Using "Damsel In Distress Tears" – she's like 40 years old by the way – and your newborn baby as a stunt prop just screams gravitas and stability. Just kidding, Harper's decusion to bounce this freak looks more justififed than ever. Serving in cabinet is not a right requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt to remove, cabinet is at the pleasure of the government.

    Dear female candidates for office: using tears as a tool to get out of political jams isn't working for you, neither is dyeing your hair brunette. It makes your gender look unfit for office.

  78. The title of the video is "Guerguis Responds to Harper Smear Tactics". Being classy again eh, Wherry? Gettoing internet trolls to do your reporting job does have some drawbacks I guess. Here's how the normal people viewed it:

    Guergis fires back at Harper in news conference termed 'pathetic'

    "COLLINGWOOD, Ont. — There were tears in front of the cameras and a photo op with her new baby as Helena Guergis, in the midst of an election drive in which she is running as an independent, lashed out at the Prime Minister's Office for running a "destructive campaign" against her."

    Using "Damsel In Distress Tears" – she's like 40 years old by the way – and your newborn baby as a stunt prop just screams gravitas and stability. Just kidding, Harper's decusion to bounce this freak looks more justififed than ever. Serving in cabinet is not a right requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt to remove, cabinet is at the pleasure of the government.

    Dear female candidates for office: using tears as a tool to get out of political jams isn't working for you, neither is dyeing your hair brunette. It makes your gender look unfit for office.

    • Unless, of course, one is an 'Yvette'. Then it works. Gangbusters! That's what you call 'em, right? French-Canadian women?

      'Yvette'.

      "she's like 40 years old by the way – and your newborn baby as a stunt prop just screams gravitas and stability. Just kidding, Harper's decusion to bounce this freak looks more justififed than ever. "

      Creeeee-eeepy.

      Emily was right, you are like a suicide bomber.

      • You're probably not old enough to get the Yvette reference: "Cabinet minister Lise Payette denounced women supporters of the "No" side as Yvettes (the name of a docile young girl in an old school manual). She went so far as calling Claude Ryan's wife, Madeleine, an Yvette. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1

        What's creepy is a 40 year old woman politician holding up a picture of her kid – with whom she became pregnant at an amazingly convenient time polticially if not physiologically – and using tears to get out of a jam, conjuring up memories of Martin Sheen holding up a baby as a human shield in The Dead Zone (you're probably not old enough to get that reference either).

        Guergis is the Can't Take A Hint Psycho Ex Girlfriend of Canadian Politics, she's borderline stalking the CPC and Harper at this point.

        • Oh, I am old. Not hippie old, but punk old. Aged enough to have cast a first, tentative vote for Mr. Clark, Still red tory. Still 'Rock Against Racism'. Old enough to recall both Chuck Angus and Andrew 'Andy' Cash on the stage of the Beverly Tavern. Maybe even opening for them.

          So, old. But not bitter.

          The point was, though, the full-on body slam delivered to Ms. Geurgis was seriously over-the-top. Ruinous, even. Arguably indicative of this gang's scorched-earth M.O. You may like it. Most don't. Suggesting her child is a prop is, frankly, beneath contempt. Beneath crappy Crronenberg, even.

          "Psycho Ex Girlfriend of Canadian Politics". You, however, do sound like a bitter ol' fella.

        • "… with whom she became pregnant at an amazingly convenient time polticially if not physiologically…"

          So now you're saying she deliberately got pregnant to win sympathy? She was kicked out of caucus on April 9, 2010; her son is four months old. She'd have to have been clairvoyant to plan a pregnancy for sympathy in advance of the accusations…

  79. In all of this, I find myself for the first time thinking Jaime Watt is a jerk. He's one of the few cons I usually respect. I found him bullying of her, and whiny at the same time.

  80. In all of this, I find myself for the first time thinking Jaime Watt is a jerk. He's one of the few cons I usually respect. I found him bullying of her, and whiny at the same time.

    • I don't agree with Jamie Watt on pretty much any of the issues but he is an excellent debater. Maybe it's because it usually comes across as bantering rather then attacking. His bully tactics backfired badly on P & P and I was it was refreshing to see Alfred Apps take him down several pegs over how the Conservatives and Jamie have smeared Ms Guergis. He came off looking more like John Baird or Dimitri Soudas and I think tarnished his own image in the process.

  81. "I"

    Solemnly alone against the confederacy of dunces. The scandal of a generation.

    Your intestinal fortitude is admirable.

    (Bagpipes out)

  82. what does male/female have to do with this. I had no idea of your gender, until now.

  83. "Allegedly"?

    Might be something they have in common.

  84. Unless, of course, one is an 'Yvette'. Then it works. Gangbusters! That's what you call 'em, right? French-Canadian women?

    'Yvette'.

    "she's like 40 years old by the way – and your newborn baby as a stunt prop just screams gravitas and stability. Just kidding, Harper's decusion to bounce this freak looks more justififed than ever. "

    Creeeee-eeepy.

    Emily was right, you are like a suicide bomber.

  85. Look at that list Jenn_. You think her character wasn't already destroyed?

  86. Surely it is not realistic that a rational person supporting the conservatives would make the comment Realistic did.

  87. could just as easily doom her . . .

  88. So, can someone answer the question as to why a Canadian who has been accused publicly of such serious accusations that the RCMP have to be brought in to investigate, needs to resort to an Access To Information application to find out what the accusations are? If this happened to you, would you find it appropriate that you had to proceed to the Access to Information process to discover what you were accused of !? Or would you question the whole legal system? Luckily we have a PM who is a strong Law and Order advocate to protect us!!

  89. So, can someone answer the question as to why a Canadian who has been accused publicly of such serious accusations that the RCMP have to be brought in to investigate, needs to resort to an Access To Information application to find out what the accusations are? If this happened to you, would you find it appropriate that you had to proceed to the Access to Information process to discover what you were accused of !? Or would you question the whole legal system? Luckily we have a PM who is a strong Law and Order advocate to protect us!!

    • i thought it interesting that harper's been reading kafka…

  90. Ambulance Chasers?

  91. Venacular Baby, just venacular

  92. If you mean 'vernacular', then I think it's time you updated to today….baby.

  93. If you mean 'vernacular', then I think it's time you updated to today….baby.

    • You are right Honey. Vernacular. You are doing well 1/566 comments.Keep up the good work.

      • Shrug….you old guys are always complaining about SOMEthing.

  94. .
    Just tone it down a little, lady. You reviled the airport workers.

    So he he took advantage of an indebted gumshoe,
    slandered you,
    and abused the RCMPs name and function for political advantage,
    and claimed 'serious allegations'.

    OK? Zero-sum game. Don't expect an apology.

    He would have to explain what he was apologizing for. Then even his base would leave him.

    Move on and join the side of truth.
    .

  95. .
    Just tone it down a little, lady. You reviled the airport workers.

    So he he took advantage of an indebted gumshoe,
    slandered you,
    and abused the RCMPs name and function for political advantage,
    and claimed 'serious allegations'.

    OK? Zero-sum game. Don't expect an apology.

    He would have to explain what he was apologizing for. Then even his base would leave him.

    Move on and join the side of truth.
    .

  96. You're probably not old enough to get the Yvette reference: "Cabinet minister Lise Payette denounced women supporters of the "No" side as Yvettes (the name of a docile young girl in an old school manual). She went so far as calling Claude Ryan's wife, Madeleine, an Yvette. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1

    What's creepy is a 40 year old woman politician holding up a picture of her kid – with whom she became pregnant at an amazingly convenient time polticially if not physiologically – and using tears to get out of a jam, conjuring up memories of Martin Sheen holding up a baby as a human shield in The Dead Zone (you're probably not old enough to get that reference either).

    Guergis is the Can't Take A Hint Psycho Ex Girlfriend of Canadian Politics, she's borderline stalking the CPC and Harper at this point.

  97. Key word is "rational". There are plenty of CPC supporters on this site for whom that would be a mild, almost non-partisan statement.

  98. What, was Togneri asleep at the switch?

  99. It's called slander and wrongful dismissal (though I'm not sure if regular labour laws apply to party politics, so the latter may not be actionable).

  100. No, it was only seriously damaged. She could have probably gotten a job in a flower shop or gone into real estate. Assuming she loses her seat, just where do you think she can find a job now? Does her family still have substantial business interests, such that she could be useful in some back office somewhere?

  101. Too true; if guilt by association is the issue, why hasn't Harper resigned already?

  102. They have a right to throw her out – but she has a right to know the reason why. And even if you assume that the Cons, at the time of expulsion,actually believed the assertions now proven false and kicked her out on those grounds, there is no reason why they should not at least apologize and then be frank as to why they still don't want her back.

    I wasn't a fan of Guergis before, but her speech here has earned her some respect (from me anyway). She is standing on her principles; is not deserting her party, despite the party abandoning her; and – now that she is not gagged by party discipline – has clearly enunciated what I suspect a good many [C]onservatives (big-C and small-c) already think: the party's long-term electoral success requires the removal of certain large, cancerous organs.

  103. Hey. People who support the conservatives whine endlessly about some mythical media conspiracy against them. They are by definition irrational.

  104. Who cares if they are? They know more about it than you.

  105. Maybe it was meant in the senseof "having a vivid imagination". You know, looking in the mirror and seeing a god…

  106. Or are otherwise ^NOTy…

  107. I hope she gets elected – if for no reason other than to serve as a burr under Harper's saddle…

  108. Right you are. Ministers hold their office 'at pleasure', which basically means they can be fired for any reason.

  109. "So centered. So in touch with what's important to Canadians. So ready to be PM."

    Wow, chet – never knew you were such an ardent Guergis supporter! LOL!

  110. Oh, I am old. Not hippie old, but punk old. Aged enough to have cast a first, tentative vote for Mr. Clark, Still red tory. Still 'Rock Against Racism'. Old enough to recall both Chuck Angus and Andrew 'Andy' Cash on the stage of the Beverly Tavern. Maybe even opening for them.

    So, old. But not bitter.

    The point was, though, the full-on body slam delivered to Ms. Geurgis was seriously over-the-top. Ruinous, even. Arguably indicative of this gang's scorched-earth M.O. You may like it. Most don't. Suggesting her child is a prop is, frankly, beneath contempt. Beneath crappy Crronenberg, even.

    "Psycho Ex Girlfriend of Canadian Politics". You, however, do sound like a bitter ol' fella.

  111. "… with whom she became pregnant at an amazingly convenient time polticially if not physiologically…"

    So now you're saying she deliberately got pregnant to win sympathy? She was kicked out of caucus on April 9, 2010; her son is four months old. She'd have to have been clairvoyant to plan a pregnancy for sympathy in advance of the accusations…

  112. You are right Honey. Vernacular. You are doing well 1/566 comments.Keep up the good work.

  113. Shrug….you old guys are always complaining about SOMEthing.

  114. Absolutely! It's shameful how this thing has played itself out.

    And although I can see Ms.Guergis difficulty in overcoming this sordid state of affairs, I think it is petty the way she now plays to the sentiment of the voters. I don't like that kind of performance. You don't do your healing therapy in public. You heal first and get strong and then get even.

  115. I think Ms.Guergis is doing some character destroying herself at this point in time, no?

  116. What a bunch of baloney, Dave-O. I am a women but I too can read b a l o n e y !

  117. What a bunch of baloney, Dave-O. I am a women but I too can read b a l o n e y !

  118. Has Helena ever considered if her actions have been wrong? I certainly would have liked to be a fly on the wall in the Jaffer house when all of this came down on the preppy couple.

    The Jaffers, as a team, had a responsibility as well.

  119. When did Harper start discussing anything with his muzzle-bound caucus? As usual the self-proclaimed "accountable and transparent" Stevie's trying to blame everyone else.

  120. When did Harper start discussing anything with his muzzle-bound caucus? As usual the self-proclaimed "accountable and transparent" Stevie's trying to blame everyone else.

  121. Harper said 'the caucus'; those toeing the party line — which includes embracing plagarism, fraud, misappropriating quotes to fool both elected officials and public, liars extraordinaire — will say what it takes to keep their jobs. They know there's no more $1-million dollar bribes available for their vote, since Harper already holds the right of pulling their sheets. Michael Chong, as principled as he acts, still stands behind Harper. Power for power's sake. I believe that there are caucus members from the CON party who secretly feel Guergis was wronged and want her back, but they've got not chance of speaking their mind while the emperor penguin is still in charge.

  122. Jason Kenney failed on a number of your examples. What's his standing these days?

  123. i thought it interesting that harper's been reading kafka…

  124. None of which has anything to do with Harper trumping up allegations against her because he is too egotistical to admit when he is wrong.

    But that was a nice try.

  125. She looks pretty strong to me, and she's definitely geting even.

  126. Geurgis came across very well in her press conference. And the hypocrisy of Harper exposed in the Carson versus Geurgis cases is striking.

  127. Geurgis came across very well in her press conference. And the hypocrisy of Harper exposed in the Carson versus Geurgis cases is striking.

    • She did do a very good job, and also representing herself on Power and Politics. I hate that little girly voice but it may work for her now. Certainly I have a hard time believing some of the more salacious allegations that were made; I'm not sure how to reconcile the hoity toity beauty queen with some of the activities she purportedly was doing.

  128. Which brings to light Guergis' point that this prime minister would trample the principles of justice and the due process of law for political expediency.

  129. The British have a term for Harper and his ilk "Wanker"

  130. She did do a very good job, and also representing herself on Power and Politics. I hate that little girly voice but it may work for her now. Certainly I have a hard time believing some of the more salacious allegations that were made; I'm not sure how to reconcile the hoity toity beauty queen with some of the activities she purportedly was doing.

  131. I imagine this will be what she will pursue should she lose the election. Since being booted out, she's done little against, as she does not want to inflame Conservative supporters who might vote for her.

  132. I very much agree. I posted this in another thread, but will include it here as well:

    Just to clarify – I'm totally not a fan of the former barbie doll cabinet minister.
    I think she is a total ditz, and that she has simply been following the family path of entitlement.
    The fact that she was a cabinet member representing the status of women was almost a sick joke,
    keeping in mind how she was always strategically placed behind the PM to serve as eye candy.

    When the poop hit the fan, I was calling for blood, and was thrilled when Harper cut her loose.
    Finally, he seemed to be willing to do the right thing despite the possible negative consequences.

    Alas – as has been the case several times, I gave him far too much credit. You can love or hate Helena,
    but she really did not deserve to be treated the way she was treated. She was/is an elected MP for her riding with many years of service, during which she loyally towed the party line, and did as she was told. Does all that time and service mean nothing? Does it not in the least warrant more loyalty and support than she was given? When Harper ditched her, I thought he had done this based on actual evidence, where in reality, he kicked her down when she was at her weakest, and all on the basis of allegations. Like a leech, he sucked all he could out of her, and when there seemed to be little left, he crushed her. As much as I dislike Helena, I find Harper's behaviour much more repugnant.

    I very much disagree with your analysis of her patience. If anything, I was actually impressed/confused by how loyal she remained to Harper and the Conservatives, given that she had been thrown under a bus by them. I wondered how hard it must have been for her to restrain herself from lashing back. Instead, she kept voting alongside the party, even when the gov't was brought down. I felt sorry for her, and identified with her vulnerability, for what it is like to be a woman living in a mans world, where one has to subject oneself to different rules in order to try and survive.

    Too many women are used and abused in a world that is still largely ruled by men. And while I think Helena is herself a fool and NOT at all a strong role model for women, no one deserves to be treated as such. In my life, I've been in positions of power where I worked with people that I did not like and often did not agree with. There were times when these people were at their weakest, where I could have easily smothered them. I think I am a better person for not doing so. It's just not the right way to do things…

  133. How would you like to work for a company for 5+ years, only to be sacked via unproven allegations?
    My guess is that you would lawyer up…

  134. As someone who does not think much of her, I find Harper much more repugnant. The media, as did I, believed that Harper had made his decision based on facts. I feel like a fool for ever believing he made the right call. What he did was use that information to purge her as an undesirable. What a scum bag. This is the same man who appointed a barbie doll to represent women, and paraded her as eye candy for TV footage. What a sexist piece of turd that man is.

  135. Agreed. The most disturbing aspect of this is that she represented the status of women, and was paraded like a barbie doll. But when the doll was no longer fashionable, she was chucked like garbage. What a message to send to Canadians – Women are but toys in a mans world!

    As much as Helena as an MP makes me cringe (my god – that voice), she did in fact serve loyally for many many years. And even when she was chucked, she still supported those who fed her to the wolves. That takes balls.

    Harper is a disgusting pig who would whore out his mother if he could gain something in the process….

  136. It's not rational to complain to a woman that she lacks balls. She doesn't care, criselis, so find a different metaphor.

  137. Oh, it's possible she has lied; but we already know Harper is a liar, and he would find it harder to keep his cool under cross-examination.

  138. And how about Diane Finley? Her husband is charged with breaking the Elections Canada Act.

  139. Track Realistic's comment pattern. It's entirely realistic.

  140. I don't agree with Jamie Watt on pretty much any of the issues but he is an excellent debater. Maybe it's because it usually comes across as bantering rather then attacking. His bully tactics backfired badly on P & P and I was it was refreshing to see Alfred Apps take him down several pegs over how the Conservatives and Jamie have smeared Ms Guergis. He came off looking more like John Baird or Dimitri Soudas and I think tarnished his own image in the process.

  141. Well put!

  142. Well put!

  143. with what proof do you base any of these comments on?

Sign in to comment.