04.09.2010 05:51 PM

Power Play April 9: The Rahim and Helena Show


Warren shows how thick Reformatory integrity is. As in, not very. Link here.

UPDATE: Josh sends a better link, here.

17 Comments

  1. MJH says:

    How can a Liberal operative dare criticise anyone for lacking integrity after adscam? How quickly we forget!!

  2. Mr. Harper is a mean spirited person and everything he does is political and so be it. They continue to bring up past sins of the opposition and during the last election employed the RCMP to investigate the Income Trust. This was a political manouvre that many believed did Mr. Martin and the Liberals in. Mr. Harper, being arrogant as he is, shows poor Leadership and this is not 20/20 hindsight. It seems everyone agrees there is much more to this sordid affair of Geurgis and Jaffer. Every explanation prompts more questions. This happening will not improve Trust in Harper and Conservative/Reformers.

  3. Elizabeth says:

    The only thing the Cons can drag up is Adscam – the ONLY thing – and that was investigated, dealt with and I believe jail terms were handed out. It’s over. That was then, this is now.

    This is really bad – because of the *types* of people Jaffer was involved with. I don’t think there were any issues with cocaine addicts during Adscam, or anyone abusing the Government of Canada’s websites, cellphones, etc.; or using an MP wife to advance a crooked business with thugs, and apparently, hookers.
    I wonder if the ladies of the night were paid for with Government funds? Was the cocaine paid for with taxpayers’ money? That’s just the surface stuff. Who else in the Tory party benefited, and what sort of graft did Jaffer and Guergis get from outside businesses?

    Drugs bring an entirely different problem along; because now you’ve got involvement with dealers, and whoever else is involved in bringing along the cocaine – where did it come from? How much and who was using it? Although it’s not necessarily so in this case – cocaine involves the mob and bike gangs.

    I do have some concern about whether this was an emotionally abusive marriage because of the drugs; and what is happening to their child. I think Guergis needs to really come clean, perhaps in a book, after therapy.

  4. Elizabeth says:

    This
    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/793273–analysis-more-woman-trouble-for-stephen-harper-and-his-cabinet

    is what’s bothering me about what’s happening to Helena, although I think she’s useless as a minister – I doubt very much she was hired for intelligence and what she’d do for women – she’s a good distraction; and Harper gets to look stern and patriarchal when he’s disciplining one of his women/scapegoats.

    Why didn’t he pick up on Jaffer years ago? He never would have made it past Ignatieff.

  5. JStanton says:

    Surely we need to be focusing on the real issue here – Mr. Harper’s consistently poor judgment, in terms of appointing mere ciphers with no ideas other than his, rather than the best possible people to govern the affairs of Canadians.

    Poor Ms. Guergis didn’t have a chance. She has no education, and her experience working in retail and then as a political staffer and operative for members of the two most narrow and repressive governments in out lifetime, hardly prepared her for cabinet-level responsibilities. So how can Mr. Harper possibly justify those appointments? How can he possibly justify putting the affairs of Canada and Canadians at risk like this?

    In fact, most of his political appointments follow the same pattern, albeit not quite as extreme. Mr. McKay as the senior manager, firstly of Canada’s foreign policy and its implementation, and then of Canada’s defense and implementation of foreign policy tactics, is a real stretch. Military or diplomatic credentials, experience or training? Evidently not. A need for Mr. Harper to keep him on the road, and out of Ottawa as much as possible? It would appear so.

    Mr. Cannon is hardly different. In fact, the diplomatic corps remains aghast at his inability or unwillingness to engage in proactive diplomacy, as opposed to simply acting as Mr. Harper’s administrative functionary. Perhaps this explains Ms. Clinton’s recent acerbic responses to the Harper government’s diplomatic faux pas.

    The story here, surely, is the discussion of whether Mr. Harper suffers from ineptitude or megalomania. Either way, Canada and Canadians are being poorly served as a consequence.

  6. jon evan says:

    The innuendo, the vitriol, and the obvious hatred of Mr. Harper in some of these musings is stunning to me!
    As a physician I can tell you that some of you will not live into your golden years with this much angst in you.
    And a change in gov’t won’t bring you peace. No it won’t.

    • Martin Partridge says:

      The vitriol and hatred are responses to treachery, deception, character assassination, mismanagement, entitlement, defiance of the constitution, the cover up of crimes likely including torture and battlefield murder, and the insidious replacement of traditional Canadian morality with a Republican-style face to the world. I refuse to be complacent even if it harms my health. A change in government will indeed be a welcome tonic.

    • Nobody mentioned hate but you. Give your head a shake and are you from another planet or have your head in the sand? A change in government will allow me to feel better and look forward to golden years. Have a good week, Doctor.

    • Eugene Parks says:

      Jon certainly over prescribed with that one.

  7. Mary Holmes says:

    Has anyone made any investigations into Helen Guergis’s record of accomplishments as Minister of State for the Status of Women? Curious to know if she takes her direction on improving or dismantling women’s rights from the PMO’s office. We’ve all heard reports about Harper running a tight ship and not tolerating independent thinkers in his caucus. Let’s see more about her past Ministerial work. The news bits that I have seen make her look like a puppet on a string.

  8. Alex says:

    I reside in her riding and have known her personally for over a decade. The general feeling in the Riding is that she is a lightweight, and totally not qualified to be a Minister. All she has ever done is rhyme off Party talking points and hand out cheques. She was unemployed when elected the first time, and was a junior “coffee fetcher” in a Harris Cabinet Ministers office prior tho the election. She was put into Cabinet because she looks good behind Harper, and recites the party line at every opportunity. What I don’t understand is the apparent lack of activity by the local Liberal association. Although a trained seal could probably win as a Conservative here, as most vote for the Leadership, not the local candidate, that may be changing. There is blood in the water in this Riding, and it seems to be ripe for a change, and yet the local Libs are nowhere to be found

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*