I just enjoy a good debate.

Really, Catherine, I am interested in the discussion on how to engage the electorate.

I still do not see where I attacked you, and I never used the term “harping”
I did say your argument was vapid, but that is a judgement of your argument, not you.

Thanks for the update on national voter participation. I have not seen the latest numbers. It is encouraging that it is up from 2004, but still makes little difference to your comments on how many voted in Van.-Kingsway, and the line that dismissed the election of a Liberal because only 25% of the riding backed him (as compared to about 6% of constituents who voted for the Conservative candidate).

I am curious as to what riding you reside in that had a 75% voter turnout. That is very good. I think that perhaps the turnout is related to socio-economic conditions, and perhaps ethnicity. Out of those two circumstances, we could look at education, and language.

How do we engage the electorate? I would think that working towards diminishing the cynicism regarding politicians would be a good start.How to do that? Mr. Turner is taking some very good steps to that. I have had more chance to confer with Mr. Turner than I have had with my M.P. – David Emerson. Mr. Emerson has been in hiding. He does not reply to e-mails, phone calls, demonstrations at his constituency office, requests from the media, etc. I am not cynical, I am outraged. Put yourself in the shoes of a Vancouver-Kingsway voter. I didn’t vote for any of the “Big 3″. My vote went to where I intended it. People of all political flavours are very ticked off about the Emerson and Fortier situations. Comments about voter turnout have absolutely no bearing on these situations, and using that argument is simply disingenuous.

If you want to talk about increasing voter turnout, talk about that, and not how only 25% of Van.-Kingsway eligible voters voted for a Liberal, so what difference does it make that we got a Conservative?

Most are being hoodwinked if they think that Harper coaxed Emerson because of the softwood lumber dispute with the U.S. Emerson recused himself from any dealings involving Canfor (he is the former CEO, and reportedly a large shareholder)in 2004. The softwood dispute very much involves Canfor – to the tune of a billion-odd dollars. Emerson will be in a conflict of interest as much as Martin was while being Finance Minister, and still being involved with Canada Steamship Lines.

Let’s let Mr. Turner decide if I have been attacking anyone. It is his blog after all, and you are personally involved in your own perception of what an attack on you is.

Hey kids, let’s play nice. — Garth

first maybe it’s time to stop party directives on matters other than money bills. So if an MP is representing his riding, then, he can truly represent his riding!

Second, I did not respect how Garth used the media to get his message out 2 days after the cabinet appointments – on the surface, it certainly looked like he wanted to become a one man show. Did Garth try to speak with Mr. Harper first? Did Garth speak with Mr. Emerson first? It appears not. So giving the media some “delicious” news bites, did not solve anything. Some curtesy and protocal should be followed or we will have total kaos (the liberals would be salivating on this).

I believe Canada needs people who try to what’s right for Canada and not for an “I”.

While I don’t fully understand all the workings of parliament and can’t begin to understand the PM’s duties and responsibilities, I can try to understand that building a cabinet is not to be taken from a purely partisan close circle approach. Mr. Harper could have just appointed all his close alies to his cabinet but he choose to lead and make very tough decisions. Maybe some will be very good and some not so good, but, he certainly did not chose the easy way!
And for that I do respect the man.