Mr. Harper's got some 'splainin' to do!

So it's been a while. Not so much an indication of the lack of brain activity in J, but moreso the spinning nature of the plethora of interests being consumed.

There were a couple of weekend spent mindlessly drifting the pages of wikipedia, firstly researching Greek and Norse Mythology, then another the largest stadia in the world. Fascinating stuff... alternatively occassionally (in the "I never would have guessed that!" sense) and often (in the tangent following sense) surprising. Such as learning about The Ashes series (England vs. Australia cricket competition) when crossing paths with famous grounds in which the contests are played, fuelled by the reference to this competition in a) BBC Sports blogs b) Douglas Adam's The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

Still, the major issue that has perplexed my brain - well, at least of interest to anyone who is not I, your humble author - is the handling of the Helena Guergis affair. It is troublesome no matter how it is spinned: if there are legitimate "serious allegations" that warranted her removal as a Minister of the Conservative Government cabinet, that obviously raises all kinds of questions about the Conservative Party's ability to govern adequately. If the current set of circumstances prove to be true, one has to question why she would have been publicly removed not just from this public office, but also booted out of the Party. Seems to me that many many Ministers in the past have had legal issues to deal with, and at the very minimum were supported by their particular party enough to remain a member as a back-bencher. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong on that point, but to my current knowledge the removal from their portfolio and/or ejection from the party hasn't historically occurred until such allegations have been proven.

So, if there are legitimate serious allegations as Mr. Harper likes to assert... why did such a scoundrel ever make it to a position of such power? Did the Conservatives not do their homework, and check the background of Guergis and her husband, Rahim Jaffer? Should we not expect that such due diligence would be commonplace when considering a candidate for such a high-level job? The essence is: if these drug, fraud, and improper business practice allegations are correct, I can't imagine they would have been hard to find if one would have engaged in a slight uncovering of these people. Then again, perhaps I am wrong there, as all the opposition parties seem to have been caught off-guard on this as well.

Perhaps even scarier - although this would only be yet another arrow of incompetence in his opponent's arsenal - is the possibility that these accusations based on innuendo and half-truths are proven to be exactly that. Why then would our Prime Minister strip a party star and cabinet member not just of the Ministry post she enjoys, but also eject her from the party as well just because someone said she might have done something bad? Do we really truly think that this is good government and good leadership? When one of your best, most talented individuals is barely accused of something, they get abandoned at the drop of a hat? I don't think so. I thought this country, this society, and if not the whole world, certainly Western civilization was based on innocent until proven guilty. This smacks to me of guilty until innocence is proven - which, as an aside, I also believe is the ditch the NFL is going as evidenced by what is happening with Big Ben in Pittsburgh - and that scares the heck out of me.

Of course, I am NOT a Conservative fan, nor have I ever believed that Mr. Harper posesses a single leadership gene. So take my words with that grain of salt. I do believe, no matter the outcome of this, that Mr. Harper and the Conservative Party he leads horrifically mis-managed this whole affair.