Tough questions: I've been offered a blogger interview this afternoon with Stephane Dion. As I haven't heard back from the campaign on the education issue I intend to explore that topic, but given as some have lamented that no one has asked the candidates the "tough questions" I wanted to open things up for suggestions. What question would you ask, that the media hasn't or won't? Be reasonable now, I'm not asking something like "When did you stop beating your wife?" Anyway, post your suggested question in the comments by 2:30 EST today and I might pick one or two to fire at Stephane.
Predicting the future: Let me gaze into my crystal ball and predict where this Wajid Khan thing might be going, and why I think Stephen Harper, while I dislike him and his policies, is crazy like a fox:
Say, one month from now, Khan and Harper hold a press conference to announce that Khan has crossed the floor to the CPC. "This wasn't my first choice," said Khan. "I was a loyal Liberal and a loyal Canadian, and I wanted to contribute to Canada in the spirit of bipartisanship by offering my help on the Middle East issue. But my Liberal colleagues have made it clear they no longer want me in their caucus, so, with a heavy heart, I have agreed to follow their wishes."
A somber Prime Minister Stephen Harper welcomed Khan to the CPC fold, saying it was unfortunate the Liberal caucus wasn't more welcoming to such a talented MP and supportive of his efforts to find a solution to the Middle East crisis, but added Khan will be a welcome addition to the government team.
Angry Liberals lashed out at Khan's move, calling it a betrayal and demanding he resign to run in a by-election. Kahn dismissed their complaints, however.
"How can they be mad at me for doing exactly what they asked me to do?" asked Kahn. "They forced me into this decision."
More then he bargained for? Still on Khan, reading the Toronto Star the other day I have to wonder if PM Steve maybe got more that he bargained for.
In an interview with the Star last night, Khan laid out a much more ambitious agenda for his mission, saying he hopes Canada can help broker peace between India and Pakistan and better communications with Iran. He hopes to visit Israel, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Iran, Pakistan and India, as well as Afghanistan.
"My father spoke fluent Farsi," he added. "I understand what Iran is all about."
Remember that tall fellow from the Maritimes, he used to lead the Progressive Conservative party, got dumped by an auto parts heiress? Whatever happened to that guy?
Silver lining: One final Khan note. Hey, it's not all bad for Liberals. In fact, it's pretty decent. You see, the Cons can no longer go after us for voting against their Afghanistan mission extension. Why? Because Harper's new special adviser on South Asia and the Middle East voted against it too.
Although Khan voted against extending the Canadian Forces mission to 2009 earlier this year in the Commons, Khan said in the communiqué, "I support the mission in Afghanistan."
…Reminded he voted against the extension of the Afghan mission, Khan said "at that particular moment it was too rushed ... but you can't have an exit strategy based on how many soldiers have died."
By bringing Khan into the fold Harper clearly agrees with this reasoning, which is what most Liberals have been saying all along: we support the troops, but the vote process was rushed, and there needed to be a proper debate, and that's why we voted no.
So thanks for clearing that up for us Stephen. I'm sure that's the last we'll be hearing from the Cons on that vote.Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers