Grassroots, you say
Kevin Chalmers, David Emerson's former campaign coordinator, is spearheading the effort to have the floor-crossing cabinet minister "de-elected".
At his website, we learn that this is not motivated by partisan politics:
We are a non-partisan, grassroots campaign. We are not aligned with any political party.
They accept donations:
We welcome donations of all sizes -- every contribution helps.
Please make cheques out to:
Campaign to De-Elect David Emerson
As far as I can tell, this is not a registered political organization, or a charity. It is not a publicly traded company with shareholders. We're not in an election, so I'm not certain whether the so-called "third party" rules apply to restrict the amount of money spent. Kevin Chalmers is not registered as a lobbyist, so we don't know who he is talking to about this issue.
The bottom line is that we have his word for it that this is a non-partisan grassroots campaign. It might have started out that way, or maybe this Liberal Party organizer got the idea from somewhere else. He might be getting his money from somewhere else, too. Heck, the NDP came second in the riding -- who is to say money isn't being moved into this campaign from there.
We don't even know if Chalmers is making any effort to restrict donations so that only David Emerson's constituents are putting up the money, or if he is happy to accept money from any Canadian living anywhere in any amount who wants to meddle in the politics of Vancouver Kingsway.
Actually, if I were Chalmers, I'd probably want to keep that a secret too. Though partisans might be happy to accept help from any source as long as it advances their agenda, people who are not so sure about what to think about Emerson's move into cabinet would probably feel a bit angry if they learned that some outsiders were trying to force the issue and turf their candidate.
I wonder if anyone is looking into this.
Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary
Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!
Comments
I have sent off a couple of e-mails asking some of those exact questions and a couple more, I will let you know what kind of a response I get.
Posted by: Platty at March 14, 2006 01:07 PM
What is the chance that the Hon. David Emerson could actually have these guys charged with stalking and malicious defamation? Mr. Emerson did not break any rules whatsoever.
They say they are non-partisan???
Kevin Chalmers was a Liberal organizer who David Emerson inherited or had thrust upon him by the Martin camp when they parachuted him into the riding as a star candidate. The riding did not even have the democratic right to select their own candidate.
Methinks this guy is still part of the Martin regime's dirty tricks team. That is the only way they knew how to play politics - fear, smear and media manipulation.
This "incident" has been used to also defame and stalk our new Prime mInister - with Paul Martin waiting in the wings, arm in arm with Bernard Shapiro, hoping this ploy will give him a chance to take back the reins of power - or at the very least make our new PM look bad.
The Martinites egos seek revenge.
What is the chance Emerson could sue? Any lawyers out there with opinions?
Posted by: maria at March 14, 2006 01:19 PM
I went to the site and don't see any provision for comments in public view!
What th?? No point sending an Email to file 13.
They have an impossible obstical, if principle means anything. They have an obligation to campaign with equal vigor for the de-election of one Belinda Stronach!!
This is simply a personal vendetta. Not allowing open comment puts it at the criminal closed secrecy level. What a Crock! TG
Posted by: TonyGuitar at March 14, 2006 01:20 PM
Has anyone read Sheil Copps' column in the March 12, T.O. Sun? It's the PM's choice - Butt out, Bernard Shapiro -- good or bad, Stephen Harper's cabinet picks are his business alone. Between this and the National Post Editorial today deeming Stephen Harper, ' A PM we can be proud of'; I need to get my eyes checked.
Posted by: Cheri at March 14, 2006 02:18 PM
The Emerson issue is not going away because the Conservatives did not take the high road and pay back the Liberal Constituency for money raised under the Liberal flag for a Liberal candidate who then immediately upon being elected turned into a a Conservative.
Just because Liberals did the same thing does not make it right. This is an issue about process, and people have had enough of dishonesty, where one party uses the same dishonesty of another party to justify its own dishonesty. People expected more from the conservatives, given the rhetoric they offer canadians during the election. Hence, this Emerson issue will not go away.
To make it go away, the Conservatives need to show some sign that they are not the same as the Liberals in this regard. One such gesture would be to pay back the money raised under the Liberal banner to, de facto, 'elect' a Conservative MP under false pretenses. Square the money, and set a by-election 18 months from now. Then the Conservatives will have reclaimed some of the high ground in this issue. Without this, the Conservatives will continue to appear as arrogant as the Liberals ever were, and this Emerson issue will continue to fester and dog and weaken them in all the good that they may try to do for the country. So: They need to take the high ground. Pay back the money. Set a by-election 18 mo. from now.
Posted by: brock at March 14, 2006 02:19 PM
Well Brock, the Liberals should also show some sign that THEY will be paying back to the taxpayers of Canada the monies they received for each vote cast for Mr. Emerson.
You can't have it both ways...
Posted by: Don't Want To at March 14, 2006 02:54 PM
The Emerson issue is not going away because the Conservatives did not take the high road and pay back the Liberal Constituency for money raised under the Liberal flag ....
Ha! pay up or the media will get all them nakid photos, eh? Did the liberals pay up when Belinda changed sides? I dont think so.
If in the next election, they choose to elect a someone from another party, that will be up to the people of van-kingsway, there is no need for a by-election, as a general election is coming much sooner than 18 months.
Posted by: Curtis at March 14, 2006 03:21 PM
Boy there is a double standard here! While the crossing of Emerson took everybody by surprise he did not do anything ethically wrong. As we all know floor crossings have gone on for mega years. So for the V-K constituents and Liberal operatives to persue a de-elect Emerson campaign is pure harassment. Until the rules are changed by Parliament floor crossings will continue to happen. Harper said he didn't like them but was against outlawing them because it would give the leader too much power. So Mr. Chalmers and the NDP should get stuffed. Emerson is now a Conservative cabinet minister who is doing his job. When the next election comes around they can work to de-elect Mr. Emerson at that time. It is now all about silliness. Mr. Chalmers needs to get a life.
Posted by: Mervin Hollingsworth at March 14, 2006 03:31 PM
Hi Angry,
As usual, you have written a great piece. For those who are interested, go to radio station CKNW's web site and click into the 'Vault' for Bill Good's Monday (13 March) show between 10 am and 11 am. Norman Spector is regular guest at this time along with NDPer, Bill Tillman. From 9 am to 10 am, Bill Good had some ethics professors discussing the 'Emerson - Harper' subject. The left leaning profs found this a great ethic issue but one from Victoria said the Ethics Commissioner had no business looking into this. About half way through the 10 am programme Kevin Chalmers called in and seemed to demand that the news media keep this issue alive. The interesting point to me was that Norman Spector pointed out Chalmers doesn't even live in Emerson's riding.
Lance M. Jefferson
Richmond, British Columbia
Posted by: Lance M. Jefferson at March 14, 2006 04:00 PM
The "Double standard" criticism of expecting more from the conservatives implies one should hold the Conservatives to the same standard we have sadly learned to expect from the corrupt Liberals.
No, we elected the Conservatives because they led us to believe, and we hoped, they would raise the standard of governance FAR above the Liberal record. The Conservative 'higher ethics in governance' rhetoric led us to believe they would NOT act like Liberals in office, regardless of the Liberal precedents of arrogance, dishonesty in floor-crossing, arbitrary appointments etc.
The Consevatives cannot say: "Elect us, we are different." and then use the shoddy Liberal record to justify doing the same thing. Yes: There should be a double standard. We should never expect the conservatives to act like the Liberals have done.
Posted by: brock at March 14, 2006 07:10 PM
Brock, I often agree with you, but did you look at Janke's link above??
EmersoncampaignDot...
Misleading. de-electEmerson is what it should be called.
I wanted to refer to the site from memory and googled de-electEmerson...wrong! I had to come back here to see the site was deceptivly named.
This is a personal vendetta by Chalmers who has his nose out of joint.
Also the NDP phoned up *regulars* and had them demonstrate. They want the minority government leverage power as with the liberals.
So Brock, as none of your arguments take into account the personal vengance factor, you will have to try again with the facts in mind.
Let your subconciouse do that while you look at the backwards site. http://10Words.ca
Backwards, because you have to scroll down for new posts. I got a very nice reply to that Email to the Harper team and answered a USA lady who thought we and US citizens hated each other.
TG
Posted by: TonyGuitar at March 15, 2006 01:02 AM
Good design!
My homepage | Please visit
Posted by: Sarah at May 8, 2006 12:49 AM
Good design!
http://lkhrglyx.com/rjgt/lvdj.html | http://btjrfvdt.com/rtif/enzb.html
Posted by: Joan at May 8, 2006 12:49 AM
Thank you!
http://kawfvxzr.com/gzia/lrva.html | http://baxtdtog.com/jkfh/sexk.html
Posted by: Alice at May 8, 2006 12:50 AM
 
|
|
