Fuming leaves a stench

After the sometimes fuming Q & A by MPs on the parliamenty operations committee of flummoxed Rahim Jaffer (a.k.a. "Ra-ra-helena") and his business partner, what are we left with? A stench but no rotting corpse.

1. The Conservatives have washed their hands of their former colleague; thrown under-the-bus, banished, excommunicated. Jaffer went into the hearing expecting the Tories to circle-the-wagons around him. He left the Hill, after stumbling and bumbling before a scrum of reporters, to drift alone toward Disgraced Island where his fallen wife awaits; with no coke.  
2. His business partner, Patrick Glemaud is shady. The NDP's Pat Martin's questioning was particularly agressive, showing his distaste with numerous ad hominums. During one particularly testy exchange over Glemaud's dodgy answers about documents concerning the pair's three clients, Martin spat that he wouldn't trust Glemaud as far as he could throw him. Glemaud was offended by the whole process, quelle surprise.
3. Jaffer and Glemaud have bad memories. At one point Glemaud drew audible astonishment when he claimed he couldn't remember the names of their three clients.
4. The two are bad businessmen. They're ruined, and they only have themselves to blame for getting tied into a Gordian Knot that nothing will unloose.
5. The stink of influence peddling hangs over the government.
6. But, after today's televised entertainment, the reality showmanship from both sides - the judgement of the committee and the performances of the contestants - there remains no evidence and no connection between the pee-yew and the PMO. 

Photo credit: www.theglobeandmail.com

How is an abortion bill not an abortion bill?

“How is an abortion bill not an abortion bill?” said Liberal MP Anita Neville. “This certainly introduces discussion into the House of Commons and it is a rather sneaky way of doing it. The government hasn't got the courage of bringing it forward in a straightforward way to appeal to their base, so they are doing it in a back-door way and I think it is deplorable.”


As quoted in the Toronto Star, Neville's question was in response to ultra-Con backbencher Rod Bruinooge, chair of the all-party pro-life caucus in Parliament with a secret membership and, in all likelihood, a secret initiation rite and handshake. Bruinooge introduced a bill that would penalize anyone who “coerces” a woman into ending her pregnancy against her will.


An abortion bill is not an abortion bill when it is a bait-and-switch tactical maneuver by the Prime Minister's office to deflect attention from more serious questions surrounding the alleged complicity of Canada's military in the torture of Afghan detainees and, to a much, much lesser degree, the sleazy antics of former status of women minister Helena Guergis and her partner Rahim Jaffer - the neo-con celeb couple who are now and henceforth called "Ra-ra-helena," as befits the gossip-feeding  Canadian equivalent to "Bennifer" and "Branjolina." (And to be said in the style of 70s disco classic Rasputin by Boney M. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvDMlk3kSYg)


Prime Minister Stephen Harper has kept the 69% of anti-choice geezers in his Conservative caucus muzzled. He has also repeatedly stated that the abortion debate would not be reopened in the House while he is PM. At least he recognizes the Canadian consensus - the abortion debate is over. Done. Finished. You lost, years ago. Move on.


So how is this abortion bill not an abortion bill, despite Bruinooge's contrived explanation? When it suites Mr. Harper's political gamesmanship.


Photo credit:http://unrepentantoldhippie.wordpress.com/2008/12/