"...it is hypocritical to hold principles and apply them only when convenient."

That's right. It is.

The quote in the title is from Peter Goldring's website.  In that particular post, Goldring expresses his opposition to proposed legislation changes that would allow police to screen all drivers with roadside breathalyzer tests, whether or not officers suspected the drivers had been drinking.

Itis safe to say everyone is opposed to drunk driving – but there are civil liberty issues involved. There is the presumption of innocence and the right to not self incriminate. That may seem odious when we’re talking about a crime such as drunk driving, but it is hypocritical to hold principles and apply them only when convenient.  

Yet Peter, being a tough-on-crime CON is a real law-and-order guy, right?  He assures us he is (emphasis mine):

Whenthe Conservatives came to power in January of 2006 we committed to change things. In our very first Speech from the Throne we said, "This Government will tackle crime...And we have.

Over the past 5 years we have passed 18 laws (12 Justice, 6 Public Safety) that have toughened the rules and made our communities safer. Now we have tougher laws that crack down on any crimes involving guns, gangs, violent or repeat offenders, sex offenders, impaired driving and car thieves.

Well, maybe not everyone is opposed to drunk driving - 

Edmonton East MP Peter Goldring has voluntarily resigned from caucus after being charged with failing to provide a breath sample following a weekend fundraising event.

Without the breath sample, the cops may not be able to prove the guy was over the legal limit - if he was, and I guess that's why he refused.  Now he can claim he simply refused on principle, but if that had been the case, why not state so then and there, and why no comment even now? 

Sounds like kicking principles to the curb for convenience to me.