ALBERTANICUS

I am toying with a WORDPRESS.com host for Albertanicus. If you wish to see my musings there go to:
http://albertanicus.wordpress.com

I find that the Wordpress template is more difficult to gimmick code in, but offers better concrete features like categories a better text editor for writing paragraphs, among other things.

There are some drawbacks, and I'm still figuring it out, so don't worry if I haven't linked to you on the new blog...it is not permanent yet.

The Harper Conservatives have won the war (barely) in the last election. Yet are they being diligent in winnning the peace? With close door meetings, and no-questions-asked photo ops they look smug, scared, or like they're hiding something.

I hope it is merely a case of being a bit lazy after a gruelling campaign. But now is not the time for slumber or sloppy thinking---the Conservative victory is far too threadbare for that.

For a party such as the Conservatives who have campaigned on their convictions, integrity and resolve, the greatest danger they face is to have their steadfastness viewed as self-righteousness.

The Conservatives have not always mixed humility with their convictions, and as a result, Canadians are quick to tear them down over issues of hypocrisy, betrayal or duplicity.

Now with the Emerson-Fortier yoke that the Conservatives have placed around their own neck, Canadians are engaging in the exercise which they have been itching to let loose on the latter-day Tories---knockin' 'em down a peg.

Of course the Liberals were full of hubris too. But their convenient excuse is that, they are "just human" and so should be left off the hook for indescretions. This is how their unaccountable arrogance and power has grown over the last decades.

The Conservatives do not have this dark luxury. They must speak the truth, hold to the truth, and respond to falsehood with truth.

Nobody will expect the Conservatives to be perfect, but deliberate choices such as the Emerson-Fortier type tell Canadians that the Conservatives want the Liberals free-pass but without the Liberal-spawned cynicism.

In one sinful act of self-righteousness the Conservatives have lost both. And among the electorate, such sins are not easily forgiven.

If we could erase the two cabinet decisions which appeared to undercut the Conservatives long-in-the-making integrity, the wisdom of the other cabinet choices would be the focus of our discussions.

So acting as if this were the case, we can speculate about the good that could have been. The apparent philosophy behind the choices seemed to be a taste of the other. Putting rural Solberg in charge of Immigration is odd, unless it puts the portfolio under the accountablity which it would never get from an urban MP. But then again, Lakeside in Brooks does employ a lot of Sudanese immigrants.

Solberg's buddy, Strahl is slated as Agriculture minister. This would not be surprising except that one would expect someone from the Prairies. Again, however, the portfolio can be held to better account from a BCer who is able to implement real changes to the Canadian Wheat Board, without the regional tug-of-war which an Albertan, SK, or Manitoban MP would face.

A final example is Gary Lunn, another BCer though in charge of Natural Resources. Does the same logic apply? I'm not sure. It may offer some distance from the clutches of Alberta Big Oil, but will he offer enough expertise to maintain the health of resource industries, while feeling the heat from the enviro-lobby in his home province.

The accountability strain through these choices and others would be a hallmark philosophy for the new government if it hadn't welcomed Emerson and Fortier. But it did.

So much for the good that could have been.

The transferrance of David Emerson from Conservative-basher, to Conservative-bandwaggoner is not as bad as many are implying. But it is still bad.

The comparison to Ms. Stronach is obvious, but not entirely the same. Stronach was still a neophyte in politics. She had been clearly partisan in running for the very leadership of a party. But her move across the floor of the House rewarded her with a cabinet post out of thin air.

Mr. Emerson on the other hand, was already in possession of a cabinet post, and simply continues in the same status in the new government.

At first glance it might seem the same, but it is a bit different.

The issue however, is whether it was right or not. The fact is that Emerson ran as a Liberal, and people voted for him as a Liberal. To jump ship and join the winners when it is opportune shows the kind of unprincipled pragmatism that the Reform/CA/ CPC has decried.

If Emerson sits as an Independent, or even as a Liberal (I assume he'd be able to do this), then his floor-crossing can be seen as the non-partisan recruitment of a capable minister.

However, if Emerson will sit as a Conservative, it would be right for him to run in a by-election out of principle.

Since a by-election is unlikely, the prospects of Harper being able to build on the bricks of integrity which he has long labored to lay, will disintegrate from the eroding nature of a new Emersonian cynicism.

In light of the threats against Denmark uttered by totalitarian Islamicists, it is ever more striking that the West can change governments without bloodshed.

Prime Minister Harper noted this in his address to reporters following his swearing in ceremony.

Such emblems, long taken for granted in a numbingly secure society, are becoming more significant in a world where meek peoples like the Danes (how different are they than Canadians?) are the objects of systematic hate-mongering by numerous adherents to Islam, who come from divers nations.

Canada could be in the Danish position. It no longer requires a military offense to rouse the retribution of Islamicism. The offense exists already. It is a case of being merely un-Muslim.

For all of Canada's 'sensitivity' (Making my point see Steyn, HT: SDA), it will never eliminate this offense apart from mass conversion to the religion of the Prophet, and the worship of Allah.

While Canada openly supports ridicule of a religion that helped to found the nation, namely the Christian religion that encourages the free belief allowing the very source of the antagonism---Islam will broach no free speech, nor free belief. Islam is defined by intolerance. And the Politically Correct West looks ever more impotent in confrontation with it.

Let us cherish each peaceful transition of government, for days may come when the convictions that preserve the peace will be put to the test.