Even I don't always agree with my opinion


Guergis – Not A Victim

Posted May 16, 2010 by jim young in Politics

– jim young

There seems to be a growing and misguided trend of sympathy for Helena Guergis, former Conservative MP and Junior Cabinet Minister these days with the tendency to suggest she is the victim in the sordid scandal of her own design.

There has been speculation that had Helena been a male MP, the Charlottetown incident would have been a non-issue.

I wondered how long it would be before someone tried to play the “sexual discrimination” card.

If I were a woman I’d be as embarrassed by this line of defense as I am embarrassed as a man whenever I read of a wife-beating incident.

One might also suggest that had Helena been a male, she would not have had the opportunity to garner any sympathy with her crocodile tears she shed during her CBC interview.

But Helena as a victim in any sense of the word, for any reason, by any definition – please. That suggestion only diminishes the plight of real victims.

Many are using the Guergis scandal as a means to promote (or defend) their political affiliations.

For the record, I have no political affiliations. I could give a rat’s ass about the Conservatives, Liberals, NDP or any other party. I would rather our country be run by non-partisan independent politicians who had an allegiance only to the good of the country. But that’s a topic for another debate.

The Liberal & NDP parties called for Guergis’ head to roll just a short time ago and are now asking why the Prime Minister acted with such haste.
But of course their reasons are politically motivated. They will jump on whatever bandwagon to ride with the current direction of the wind in their quest to topple the Conservative Party.

They, being all the parties involved including the Conservative Party, could care less about Helena. She is nothing more than an insignificant pawn who has deluded herself into thinking she is a Queen.

Those who feel that Guergis has been unjustly treated by the PMO should remember that far more important politicians have fallen from grace for far less.

Just ask Senator Gary Hart or New York Governor Spitzer.

Take the Charlottetown Airport temper tantrum for example.

Peter Mansbridge suggested after viewing the security tapes of Guergis’ tantrum that he had “seen a lot worse happen.”

I wonder if the “worse” that Mansbridge has seen, involved other politicians?

Let’s not forget there is a higher degree of accountability for politicians.

So it’s likely that you or I may not have made the front-page news with such a story (although we may very well have been arrested and certainly not permitted to board the flight).

But as an MP and a Junior Cabinet Minister for the Status Of Women, Guergis should have realized that that kind of behavior was not acceptable.

You will recall that Guergis apologized only AFTER the incident was made public and then threatened to sue Air Canada for invasion of privacy clearly indicating her apology was less than sincere.

The Peter Mansbridge line of defense of “I’ve seen a lot worse happen” is akin to a 5 year old caught with his hand in the cookie jar proclaiming innocence because “Michael did it too.”

What right has Guergis to expect the privileges of entitlement to which she has become accustomed and NOT realize she must maintain this higher level of accountability?

She can’t have it both ways.

That alone was sufficient ground for the Prime Minister to boot her ass out of cabinet.

So just stop with this nonsense about “wrongful dismissal”. Guergis’ disgraceful discharge from the Conservative caucus comes under a completely different set of rules. Quit pretending that it doesn’t.

Guergis has been crying the blues that she has never been told why she was removed from cabinet and yet she claims the allegations that were made that led to this were “baseless” and “unfounded”.

Which is it Helena? Do you know or don’t you?

There may very well be only 2 people that know the true answer to that question. Guergis has been publicly inconsistent in her response and the Prime Minister isn’t saying.

Snowdy’s testimony that the information he provided to the Prime Minister did not include any allegations of wrong doing by Guergis, does not preclude that the Prime Minister did not have independent information that comprise these “allegations”.

Just as it’s not the job of a police officer to determine innocence or guilt when he lays a charge, so too it is not the Prime Minister’s job to determine if the allegations are unfounded or not. That’s the job of the ethics committee and the RCMP.

And if charges are forthcoming it will be the duty of the courts to ultimately determine to what extent Guergis is guilty and of what offences

THAT Helena is due process.

Consider some of Guergis’ recent faux pas
– the Charlottetown incident;
– the letter writing campaign of her aids;
– Guergis’ conflict of interest in promoting Wright Tech
– permitting her husband to use her parliamentary office and email accounts for private business.

We have seen sufficient evidence to at least provide allegations that are far from “baseless” and “unfounded” on all of these issues leaving Harper with not only a duty to the Conservative Party but to all Canadians to dismiss Guergis.

And that does not include the allegations of illegal off-shore accounts in Belize which, although have not yet been established, one has to raise an eyebrow about the circumstantial evidence that has been raised thus far.

In the meantime the perception becomes the reality. Too bad, so sad. As President Truman once said, “if you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen.”

There was no wrongful dismissal involved and due process is – still in process.

– 30 –


Be the first to comment!

Leave a Response