January 16, 2006

Martin implodes on TV -&- Globe & Mail endorses the Conservatives

Martin implodes on TV

Margaret Wente, a Globe and Mail columnist, wrote of her coverage of Martin on Friday. (G&M Sat, Jan. 14 A-21). She detailed his campaign day from hell. First, the PM was being interviewed on "Canada AM", where he fully admitted that he approved the "Harper will use the army to crush democracy" attack ad. Before he could get to his next appointment, Ujjal Dosanjh told the press that he agreed with that ad, as it portrayed Harper accurately. Mr. Martin had an easier follow-up gig, where he got to ladle out $180 million for advanced research. Some of it will go to the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Research. Later in the day, Howard Burton, the director of the Perimeter Institute, issued a press release in which he accused the Liberals of "political opportunism". He said it made him sick to even show up for Martin's announcement. Among other things derogatory, he claimed that the Liberals had no real interest in scientific research and it was "not the way to set public policy". Wow! Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

But Wente said the piece de resistance was when Martin went on CBC's Town Hall with Mansbridge. The initial question was about the Harper soldier ad and how Martin dared to talk about "drive-by smears". Then Martin gave a rambling defense of the attack ads, but claimed he didn't approve the soldier ad. A complete contradiction from the morning statement. Out here in LaLa Land, Keith Martin apologized for that ad, stating that whoever approved it was "an idiot". He got that right. Landslide Annie stated absolutely that Martin didn't approve that offensive ad. Pure verbal Keystone Kops so far, but it got better yet.

Wente and the other reporters were watching the Townhall from monitors in another room. They were rolling their eyes and groaning at Martin flailing about. Then the kicker statement, where the PM told a woman that he would have to abolish the Notwithstanding Clause because Harper would use it to prohibit abortion. One female reporter responded to this: "I get it now. Stephen Harper is sending in the army to round up single pregnant women and detain them under lock and key while they receive religious instruction." Another female reporter added, "Nobody but a blank slate would swallow that announcement. Wente went on to say that after all Martin's scheming to gain power, it had come to this debacle. She almost felt sorry for him; however, she concluded that Burton was right and this is no way for a serious man to run a country. Her coup de grace was "What we were watching was a political death without dignity." After the scrum, John McCallum,the former Liberal Defense Minister, apologized for the ad. A few more attempted hari kiri days like that and the Liberals will be trailing The Green Party in the polls.

© Bud Talkinghorn

The Globe and Mail endorses the Conservatives

The G & M (Saturday, Jan. 14) gave their blessings to a Conservative victory. For me, it was right up there with the Berlin Wall falling. This is not a paper that ordinarily espouses conservative viewpoints. The editorial did give the Liberals some credit for subduing the deficit--ballooned to a grotesque amount by Trudeau and Mulroney. However, they outlined the culture of entitlement that accompanied their long reign. It seems that no Cabinet Minister can dine on less than $120 meals--chased down with $95 bottles of wine. David Collonette, the man who hired Chuck Guite, was singled out as a prime example of this epicurean attitude.

The second major accusation was centered on how tired and ineffective the Liberals have become. There is no problem that the Liberals think can't be solved by throwing more money (and political correctness) at it. The Aboriginal problem gets honourable mention here. Finally, the editors argue that change is necessary to rejuvenate democracy. The level of cronyism, democratic deficit, and insider privilege has grown insupportable. It has become the ultimate "old boy's club", thus denying a fair distribution of tax dollars. As to the question, "Who is the real Stephen Harper?", the editors responded, "Who was the real Trudeau?" Let us find out what Harper and the Conservatives can do. They simply cannot be worse than the present crowd.

© Bud Talkinghorn


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home