Myth Number 2: Harper displays poor leadership
This is mainly revolved around the Belinda Stronach defection
to the Liberal Party. Now before we go any further let's take a closer look at Stronach's so-called "choice" is based on:
1. She claimed that Harper doesn't really understand how complex and diverse Canada is. *
2. She claimed that being a Financial Conservative and a Social Progressive, the Liberal Party was the best choice for her.
3. She was uneasy aligning herself with the BLOC.
4. Many Media commentators criticized Harper for "sidelining" Belinda since the leadership race.
5. Many people also stated that Harper should have seen the defection coming.
All 5 points are bogus and are easily refuted using some history and common sense. 1.
On what exactly? she never specifies. But let's just assume that she was talking about SSM (since as far as I know this was the major issue that put her at odds with Harper).
Now this argument doesn't really wash. SSM legislation isn't exactly the top vote getter for either parties if. However, the polls
did show that the Canadian population had more or less the same opinion as Harper regarding the issue (Civil Unions, while defending the definition of marriage). It didn't exactly swing the polls his way, but public opinion was on his side nonetheless.
On another note, when she came to describe her defection to the Liberals in he Globe and Mail she based her opinion on the fact that she's a "Urban Ontarian".
I am sometimes asked why I did not sit as an independent MP. The answer is simple. I came to realize that the Conservative Party was being led in a direction with which I was not comfortable, especially as an urban Ontarian. I became convinced that my vision of the country was more in sync with that of Paul Martin and the Liberal Party.”
Hmmm...what happened to "Canada" and how diverse and complex it really is?
*Didn't anyone see the irony of this quote coming from a unilingual, college drop-out, uber-rich girl who spent her high school days in Switzerland and barely lived anywhere other than Toronto towards a guy who's bilingual, has Middle-class upbringing, who lived in Ontario and Alberta and has family connections in the Maritimes, and how has traveled the country over and over during his days as Reform MP and NCC President. 2.
Can any Financial conservative really defend the 4.6 billion spending spree by Jack Layton with a straight face? Not only that but the expense of tax cuts for businesses that badly needed some relief in the Global Market (not to mention small and medium sized businesses).
So far I haven't heard any so-called "Financial Conservative" defend the spending, only sighs of relief that it prevented an election.
(To add matters worse, the Liberals then announced in the summer that the tax cuts will be given out in separate legislation. So in other words, more spending.)3.
So she defected to a party that votes with the BLOC on almost every single legislation.4.
Again, this is bull
. According to Conservative MP Helena Guergis, when a meeting was set up between the Mayors of Ontario, the CPC Ontario caucus and Stephen Harper, the women who made the decision as an "urban Ontarian" never showed up.
"Thirty-Nine mayors showed up. Even one of her [Stronach's] [NewMarket-Aurora] mayors showed up. She did not show up.".
Rona Ambrose adds that whatever so-called discomfort Stronach had, she sure as hell didn't do anything to change things. When it came time to draft policies for the Conservative Convention in Montreal last March, Stronach was MIA.
"We met around the clock for months to get all of our policies in place to take into the convention. I wrote seven of those myself...There was not one policy in that book that she wrote". 5.
Her own boyfriend at the time Deputy-leader Peter Mckay didn't even see the defection coming. He didn't even know that she was meeting with Martin the night prior to her defection. So unless you can convince me that Harper possesses some strange telepathic ability to read into his own MP's minds. That argument won't do.
Now again, I should remind anyone who is reading this that while I do support Harper's leadership, I'm willing to re-consider my stand if you can provide some solid evidence on why he makes a lousy leader. But the more I think about the accusations thrown at his direction, the more I realize that its based on bullsh*t.