'Waffling' cost Martin job: PM

[CHIMO]

BUCHAREST, Romania - Paul Martin’s second-guessing on Afghanistan is a perfect example of why the ex-Liberal prime minister is no longer leading the country, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said today.

But aide Jim Pimblett said Martin would not respond to the personal attack from Harper.

“His perspective is based on policy, not personal differences,” Pimblett said in Ottawa.

He said Martin believes the Harper government has almost completely abandoned the original mandate in Afghanistan.

“He stands by his decision to send our troops to Afghanistan but believes the government has altered the nature of the mission as it was originally constructed.”

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1159351402590&call_pageid=968332188774&col=968350116467

[MrPrax]

1. Did someone say waffles!!!

I don't know why the waffle is on the bunny
...but it's cute!

Martin and Harper...are just shooting 'bunny bullets' at each other!

But I don't get the 'waffling' part?
The word isn't quoted by Harper in the article?

BUT --

In a updated story at Torstar with the headline:
Martin waffled on mission, PM says (Link),the waffling quote is attributed to Jack Layton:

But personal attacks persisted.

If Martin was so concerned about the changing focus of the mission, why was he a no-show last spring when MPs debated the military presence in Kandahar, and narrowly voted to extend the mission by two years, NDP Leader Jack Layton asked.

"It is appalling to me that he is now waffling on the very mission that he took us into, but he didn't find the time to come to the House to vote on it last spring," Layton told reporters.

"The fact that Mr. Martin, who took us into the south of Afghanistan, couldn't even show up for the vote in the House of Commons along with 11 of his Liberal MP colleagues is something they still have to explain before they start trying to enunciate new positions," he said.

Confirmed from the Globe and Mail:

Mr. Layton criticized Mr. Martin for being absent when the House of Commons voted in May to extend the mission to 2009.

“It is appalling to me that he is now waffling on the very mission that he took us into, but he didn't find the time to come to the House and vote on last spring.”

Glob -- under the headline, "PM slams Martin over Afghan comments"


:shrug:

Come on TorStar, I hate Harper as well...but making up quotes is a little much...


I should get a blog...then I could post pendantic shit like this and people will think I am a keen political observer...maybe Mike Puffy will phone me to talk about the influence of the blogosphere and the threat it poses to Mike Puffy... :smoke:

(on edit -- NOW! With 18% More Metaphorical Content)

[Spazito]

3. Martin had NO guts, imo, and Canadians knew they could not

trust him to stand behind anything.

“It is appalling to me that he is now waffling on the very mission that he took us into, but he didn't find the time to come to the House and vote on last spring.”


The fact that he would not show up and vote on this is exactly why he lost the last election. The fact that he would NOT say what his position was regarding Chretien's decision not to join bush in the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq was the first indicator to me that the man HAD very few principles.

Edited to add a crucial missing word, that being the word NOT in my last paragraph, big oops on my part.

[MrPrax]

4. Agreed...

Martin has no credibility with anyone, so why Harper wastes his time trying to score a point speaks volumes about the man's pettiness and lack of political imagination.

I agree with Layton -- he makes the point. Layton motives for wasting a quote on Martin is to contrast his party -- so that makes sense, he would attack Martin and the liberals.

But both Harper and Martin were wrong and so this spat is irrelevent to what Harper is doing at the moment, which is destroying this country's reputation, resources and military for purely ideological motives in a mission that has changed into a civil war.

Your right about Martin -- without the precedent set by the previous Chretien's government which politically turned out to be a brilliant decision in hindsight, then Martin would have be no different than say Iggy...he would have grabbed some of that Iraqi action and try to ride it all the way to a majority gov't using the same BS 'cut and run' soundbytes as Harper and O'Connor.

No doubt about it and good point, Spatizo

[Spazito]

5. Say what one will about Chretien, we ALWAYS knew where he stood

regardless of whether we agreed with him or not. I NEVER trusted Martin and neither did Chretien when it came to who should lead the country. Chretien knew Martin would be a very good Finance Minister because of his beliefs, etc, but those same beliefs and "waffling" nature would not be gain the support and trust of Canadians. Chretien was right in that.

Edited to correct typo. Man, today seems to be my "typo" day, lol. I best lay off the coffee!

[daleo]

2. It used to be dithering

But I guess waffling is the neo-con insult word. They used it against Clinton all the time.