Monday, June 8, 2009

My issue with Lisa Raitt and why Prime Minister Ignatieff might not be so bad afterall

Oh Lisa, Lisa, Lisa. You let me down. Not that I had incredibly high expectations. What ould I expect of a candidate Stephen Harper handpicked to run in Halton? A progressive champion of human rights? No. An intelligent, accountable member of Parliament who would, from time to time, demonstrate she was somewhat capable of independent thought? Yes.

Unfortunately what I expect from a member of Parliament isn't what Stephen Harper expects from a member of his caucus, especially a cabinet minister. You've been a good little mouthpiece and toed the party line. When you came under the scrutiny of the media you threw your aide under the bus much like Stephen Harper did with Rona Ambrose. You died your hair darker, presumably to appear more serious and credible. Contrived and transparent. Sadly that describes your tenure as a member of Parliament. Contrived and transparent.

Here's the thing. Whether I like it or not, whether you like it or not, as a female cabinet minister you have a lot to prove. Rather than demonstrate intelligence, innovative thought and capability you've demonstrated that you follow orders really well. FAIL.

Michael Ignatieff also comes across as contrived and transparent. So why wouldn't I cringe at the thought of him becoming Prime Minister? Because we know what motivates him. He wants to be Prime Minister. That means he'll allow his policies to be influenced by voters. I don't fully understand what motivates Stephen Harper and, by extension as one of his mouthpieces, what motivates you. Harper Cons play their cards very close to the vest and disregard public opinion, courts and democracy time and time again.

I'd love nothing more than an MP who listened to and represented her constituents and a Prime Minister who cares more about what voters want than forcing his own agenda and forcing his ideologies on Canadians.