More on the CWB
Some farmers are calling on a referendum on the Canadian Wheat Board's monopsony on wheat and barley sales. Responds Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz, we already had a vote on the future of the CWB. "It's called a general election," says Ritz.
So, in conclusion, the last chance you had to consult with this Government was May 2. They'll see you again October 2015 for their performance review.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Why does Stephen Harper hate farmers?
It's been clear for a long time that Conservatives hate the Canada Wheat Board. They've been trying to break the single-desk marketing board since they first formed government, but up until now, they've only really tried through the board itself, to convince the farmer-members to eliminate the Board, or the board's monopsony. Farmers have consistently elected pro-monopsony members to the board, frustrating the CPC. Of course, they argue that "real" farmers want open marketing options, just as they're sure that all workers feel enslaved by their unions.
If you want to see how the Conservative Party ignores democracy when the people don't produce the results the CPC wants, their behavior toward the Canada Wheat Board is an excellent example. Sure enough, they'll break the single desk from above, if the farmers won't do it themselves. The only question is if Harper will try to wait until the SCC is also leaning in his favour, because that's where this fight will end.
It's been clear for a long time that Conservatives hate the Canada Wheat Board. They've been trying to break the single-desk marketing board since they first formed government, but up until now, they've only really tried through the board itself, to convince the farmer-members to eliminate the Board, or the board's monopsony. Farmers have consistently elected pro-monopsony members to the board, frustrating the CPC. Of course, they argue that "real" farmers want open marketing options, just as they're sure that all workers feel enslaved by their unions.
If you want to see how the Conservative Party ignores democracy when the people don't produce the results the CPC wants, their behavior toward the Canada Wheat Board is an excellent example. Sure enough, they'll break the single desk from above, if the farmers won't do it themselves. The only question is if Harper will try to wait until the SCC is also leaning in his favour, because that's where this fight will end.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Thursday, May 05, 2011
I don't remember that promise from the campaign
A CPC member backpedals comments about an eventually completely voluntary census. Now that I mention it, I don't remember the destruction of the long-form census being discussed before it happened, either. Does the Secret Agenda begin to rear its head?
A CPC member backpedals comments about an eventually completely voluntary census. Now that I mention it, I don't remember the destruction of the long-form census being discussed before it happened, either. Does the Secret Agenda begin to rear its head?
Wednesday, May 04, 2011
Goody
Thomas Mulcair shows up to Ottawa smelling of truther.
Ruth Brosseau (NDP - Las Vegas) may have sketchy nomination papers.
Can we get all this shit out of the way now? A year of this, and we can invite the Liberals back to Stornaway.
Thomas Mulcair shows up to Ottawa smelling of truther.
Ruth Brosseau (NDP - Las Vegas) may have sketchy nomination papers.
Can we get all this shit out of the way now? A year of this, and we can invite the Liberals back to Stornaway.
And the winner is...
Dan Arnold, the Calgary Grit himself, has won the 2011 gaffe pool, with an entry of CPC 16 / LPC 8 / NDP 8 / BQ 2. Two remarkable things about this guess - hitting a record high score for the Conservatives on the nose, and forecasting a reasonably low-gaffe election generally. At just eleven points from correct, it appears I'll be making another donation to a Liberal candidate come 2015.
Edited to add the final scores of the parties, because it's time to take the picture from the top of the page.
Dan Arnold, the Calgary Grit himself, has won the 2011 gaffe pool, with an entry of CPC 16 / LPC 8 / NDP 8 / BQ 2. Two remarkable things about this guess - hitting a record high score for the Conservatives on the nose, and forecasting a reasonably low-gaffe election generally. At just eleven points from correct, it appears I'll be making another donation to a Liberal candidate come 2015.
Edited to add the final scores of the parties, because it's time to take the picture from the top of the page.
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
Dear economists:
If Harper's so fking good for the market, why is the TSX down 180 points in 90 minutes?
Edited to add: 242.14 at close. I'm not saying this is all, or even partly, caused by Conservative majority government. But I guarantee that had there been any other election result, the business media would be talking about the effect of uncertainty (or of socialism) on the market.
If Harper's so fking good for the market, why is the TSX down 180 points in 90 minutes?
Edited to add: 242.14 at close. I'm not saying this is all, or even partly, caused by Conservative majority government. But I guarantee that had there been any other election result, the business media would be talking about the effect of uncertainty (or of socialism) on the market.
Monday, May 02, 2011
Moods
I guess I should be relieved that the Prime Minister no longer needs to tear up the constitution to rule like a dictator.
I suppose I should be thrilled about the historic NDP breakthrough.
I know I'm supposed to be happy that the BQ has essentially disappeared from the political map.
I feel I should be happy that Stephen Harper is going to be holding the bag when Vancouver's housing market takes much of Canada's housing market, and eventually consumer spending, down with it. When interest rates expose the problem of unsustainable consumer debt, no one will be able to blame socialism for the problem, and that can't be bad, right?
But I'm not happy, for a single clear reason: Stephen Harper is not going to be less dangerous with more power. The next few years are going to be about watching this man like a hawk.
I suppose I'm supposed to be saying something about "the people have spoken, blahdy-blahdy-blah." But I'm not the leader of a political party, I'm not a representative of a political party, and I'm not a member of the paid media. So I can just say it - what a terrible mistake for Canada.
I guess I should be relieved that the Prime Minister no longer needs to tear up the constitution to rule like a dictator.
I suppose I should be thrilled about the historic NDP breakthrough.
I know I'm supposed to be happy that the BQ has essentially disappeared from the political map.
I feel I should be happy that Stephen Harper is going to be holding the bag when Vancouver's housing market takes much of Canada's housing market, and eventually consumer spending, down with it. When interest rates expose the problem of unsustainable consumer debt, no one will be able to blame socialism for the problem, and that can't be bad, right?
But I'm not happy, for a single clear reason: Stephen Harper is not going to be less dangerous with more power. The next few years are going to be about watching this man like a hawk.
I suppose I'm supposed to be saying something about "the people have spoken, blahdy-blahdy-blah." But I'm not the leader of a political party, I'm not a representative of a political party, and I'm not a member of the paid media. So I can just say it - what a terrible mistake for Canada.
Sunday, May 01, 2011
Smear
It looks increasingly like Sun Media's Layton smear (I couldn't be bothered to link it) has backfired, so that makes for one essential ingredient of a gaffe. The other requires a source from a political party, and I think the chance of that is near zero, because I think this was probably Sun Media on their own. So, congratulations, Ezra Levant, on finally collecting some payback from Stephen Harper for his callous treatment of you in Calgary Southwest way back when. I'd like to believe the entire Western Standard / Sun News Network right-wing media nonsense has been part of your plan for this moment, when you could take something from Stephen Harper that he wanted as badly as you wanted that seat. Revenge is a dish best served with a side of Mohammad cartoons, I hear.
It looks increasingly like Sun Media's Layton smear (I couldn't be bothered to link it) has backfired, so that makes for one essential ingredient of a gaffe. The other requires a source from a political party, and I think the chance of that is near zero, because I think this was probably Sun Media on their own. So, congratulations, Ezra Levant, on finally collecting some payback from Stephen Harper for his callous treatment of you in Calgary Southwest way back when. I'd like to believe the entire Western Standard / Sun News Network right-wing media nonsense has been part of your plan for this moment, when you could take something from Stephen Harper that he wanted as badly as you wanted that seat. Revenge is a dish best served with a side of Mohammad cartoons, I hear.
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Leader gaffe goes almost unnoticed
I don't know why it's so hard to find Layton's direct quote in his interview with Thomson Rueters, wherein he expressed an opinion about interest rates, leading to criticism from other parties and a mea culpa from Layton on Friday.
It's good that he took the step back. He's right, that interest rates are going to strangle a generation of debt-addicted Canadians, but that's at least partially the fault of the historically-low interest rate we've had in Canada since the recession started. Too many Canadians have purchased houses and increased other personal debt based on the affordability of the carrying cost, without considering what happens when rates reset to normal. But holding the rate low would extend the problem, and start to produce unsustainable inflation. It's the debt itself, not the interest rate, that's the real problem.
On the larger scale, governments can only take hold of so many levers of the economy at one time without breaking the entire machine.
I can be pretty forgiving of Layton for a while yet, because he did back away from involving himself in Bank of Canada decisions so quickly. He's never governed, and no one in the NDP has any institutional memory of governing federally, so there's no one to steer him away from this sort of mistake. If he ends up Prime Minister, he's going to have to put some extra trust in the civil service, particularly in the Department of Finance, until his cabinet gets some experience under their belt. I think he's smart enough to know this.
Nonetheless, it exposes a real weakness about the NDP, and the other parties have used Ralph Goodale and Jim Flaherty to stress the point. It's a gaffe, no matter how ignored the story is. Prom 3, Sig 1 = 3 for the NDP. Sig should be higher, but the media's eyes tend to glaze when there's math. It's kind of pathetic.
I don't know why it's so hard to find Layton's direct quote in his interview with Thomson Rueters, wherein he expressed an opinion about interest rates, leading to criticism from other parties and a mea culpa from Layton on Friday.
It's good that he took the step back. He's right, that interest rates are going to strangle a generation of debt-addicted Canadians, but that's at least partially the fault of the historically-low interest rate we've had in Canada since the recession started. Too many Canadians have purchased houses and increased other personal debt based on the affordability of the carrying cost, without considering what happens when rates reset to normal. But holding the rate low would extend the problem, and start to produce unsustainable inflation. It's the debt itself, not the interest rate, that's the real problem.
On the larger scale, governments can only take hold of so many levers of the economy at one time without breaking the entire machine.
I can be pretty forgiving of Layton for a while yet, because he did back away from involving himself in Bank of Canada decisions so quickly. He's never governed, and no one in the NDP has any institutional memory of governing federally, so there's no one to steer him away from this sort of mistake. If he ends up Prime Minister, he's going to have to put some extra trust in the civil service, particularly in the Department of Finance, until his cabinet gets some experience under their belt. I think he's smart enough to know this.
Nonetheless, it exposes a real weakness about the NDP, and the other parties have used Ralph Goodale and Jim Flaherty to stress the point. It's a gaffe, no matter how ignored the story is. Prom 3, Sig 1 = 3 for the NDP. Sig should be higher, but the media's eyes tend to glaze when there's math. It's kind of pathetic.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Thank goodness for alert readers
This one completely escaped my notice, and Google alerts. (I might need to tweak my search.) Cam Stewart, a Liberal candidate in Calgary, complains that his south Asian opponent has his workers intimidating and threatening opponents' volunteers - fair game to call that out - "like Indian Politian's" - whoops!
The press release came out following an altercation between South Asian CPC supporters who gathered to support their candidate at a nearby Pakistan Canada Association meeting, and what appears to be South Asian campaign workers at the Liberal candidate's campaign office. Here's more of the press release, as reported in the story:
Anyway, he took responsibility, and immediately apologised, and he's not going to be winning the seat anyway. 1x1 = one point for the LPC.
This one completely escaped my notice, and Google alerts. (I might need to tweak my search.) Cam Stewart, a Liberal candidate in Calgary, complains that his south Asian opponent has his workers intimidating and threatening opponents' volunteers - fair game to call that out - "like Indian Politian's" - whoops!
The press release came out following an altercation between South Asian CPC supporters who gathered to support their candidate at a nearby Pakistan Canada Association meeting, and what appears to be South Asian campaign workers at the Liberal candidate's campaign office. Here's more of the press release, as reported in the story:
Devinder Shory is running his campaign like Indian Politian's do, intimidating and threatening opponent candidate's volunteers and supporters. This behaviour is not acceptable in our civilized democracy.Would I be wrong in saying that doesn't sound like the sentence construction and word choice, much less the spelling and apostrophe use, of someone who writes in English as a first language? I think it's possible Cam Stewart is covering for a campaign worker's mistake here.
Anyway, he took responsibility, and immediately apologised, and he's not going to be winning the seat anyway. 1x1 = one point for the LPC.
Monday, April 25, 2011
The West Wing election
Once again, the campaign is starting to have eerie parallels to the 2006 Presidential election. You know the one: Santos - Vinick.
Okay, maybe not a lot of parallels. But we did have the chickens. Now it turns out, the best opposition research is done by one's own people. Thanks, Tom Flanagan! Forget everything I said about you. Oh, except that thing where you called for the murder of Julian Assange. I stand by that being entirely dickish. But still! This makes up for it some!
Once again, the campaign is starting to have eerie parallels to the 2006 Presidential election. You know the one: Santos - Vinick.
Okay, maybe not a lot of parallels. But we did have the chickens. Now it turns out, the best opposition research is done by one's own people. Thanks, Tom Flanagan! Forget everything I said about you. Oh, except that thing where you called for the murder of Julian Assange. I stand by that being entirely dickish. But still! This makes up for it some!
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Burying the lead
Pogge has expressed his frustration at the clear disparity between what Michael Ignatieff said to Peter Mansbridge, and how it was reported. Now let me express my concern that Stephen Harper's interview is being likewise misrepresented:
Here's the headline:
- The 2004 letter to the G-G. The reason Peter assumes the letter must be to request a shot at governing following a defeat is because there's no other practical reason to contact the G-G at that moment. Harper et al wrote a letter telling the G-G they are going to try to influence the government's agenda? "Good for you!" replies the G-G, "but what's this got to do with me?" "Oh, nothing," says Harper. Yes, that sounds like an entirely likely scenario.
- He implies earlier in the interview that he intends to introduce the same budget the government introduced before the government was defeated. He then says here that Canadians don't want another election. So, if the budget is immediately rejected by the other parties, representing the views of the pluralities that elected those members, either result - another party tries to gain the confidence of the house, or we go to another election - is antidemocratic. Therefore, the only democratic choice for opposition parties is to go along with what the government says. Neat!
- He thinks he can turn down a request from the Vice-Regal representative of Her Majesty. Stephen Harper is a republican, in the truest sense of the word. But we already knew that, didn't we, when he successfully pressured our last G-G to prorogue Parliament, in the face of the single guiding principle of a Westminster parliamentary system - the supremacy of the individual member. Stephen Harper either doesn't understand that, or doesn't approve of that, and Stephen Harper is a pretty smart guy, so one of those seems more likely than the other. There's your lead.
Pogge has expressed his frustration at the clear disparity between what Michael Ignatieff said to Peter Mansbridge, and how it was reported. Now let me express my concern that Stephen Harper's interview is being likewise misrepresented:
Here's the headline:
Harper vows not to form government without most seatsAnd here is my transcription of the key part:
Peter Mansbridge: What if the situation was reversed, and Mr. Ignatieff or Mr. Layton was in first place....So, the headline is strictly true, but not the most interesting thing here, I don't think. Let's parse this a little:
Stephen Harper: Right.
Mansbridge: ... with the most seats...
Harper: They will form the government.
Mansbridge: They will form the government.
Harper: Yes.
Mansbridge: And they...
Harper: Now, I shouldn't speculate that, because I'm – we’re in this to win, and I think we're going to win. But that's, that's…
Mansbridge: I appreciate that, but you've raised the issue of the hypothetical situation, so...
Harper: Yeah.
Mansbridge: ... that's one as well. Whoever, whichever of those two parties does not gain the confidence of the House. The Governor-General comes to you, because that's the way it has to happen, and says "Mr. Harper, second-place party, the first place party couldn't achieve the confidence of the House. I’d like you to try"
Harper: Well, look, I think if the other guys win, they get a shot at government, and I don't think you challenge that unless you're prepared to go back to the people. And I think one of the reasons...
Mansbridge: So you would say no to that.
Harper: Yeah, because I think one of the reasons...
Mansbridge: You'd say to the Governor-General "No, I wouldn't do that."
Harper: (over Mansbridge) Yeah, absolutely. No, because I think, no, because I think one of the reasons, people don’t want another election. And that's another thing about this whole discussion...
Mansbridge: No, but that would be a way of preventing another election.
Harper: ... But Peter, these guys throwing up these scenarios, where govern... party may win, but we’re not going to let the government govern, we’ll be into another election before too long. That's why I think we need a majority mandate. I think this has gone on long enough. I think we’ve got a good record, so obviously we're appealing to the people to get behind us, and let's move the country forward. We have some pretty important economic challenges that remain in the world, in this country, and I don't think we can afford to continue to go around in circles like this, with any kind of minority.
Mansbridge: Alright, alright, I just want to be clear, because it is a different position than the one that you suggested in the letter that you wrote with Mr. Layton and Mr. Duceppe in 2004 about the Martin government, when you wrote the Governor-General suggesting there were other options, and one can assume that had to be the option you were talking about.
Harper: One doesn't assume that, because the option I was talking about, Peter, was that we try to influence the government's agenda, and if we want to defeat the government, we have to get our own mandate. I never suggested otherwise.
Mansbridge: Why do the two of them swear up and down that there was no question that what was on your mind was to become Prime Minister.
Harper: Why are they saying this now, instead of saying the opposite, they didn’t say this in '04. The reason, Peter, is because they're considering the option of combining with the Liberals to form a government without an election. That's why. That's why they changed their story.
- The 2004 letter to the G-G. The reason Peter assumes the letter must be to request a shot at governing following a defeat is because there's no other practical reason to contact the G-G at that moment. Harper et al wrote a letter telling the G-G they are going to try to influence the government's agenda? "Good for you!" replies the G-G, "but what's this got to do with me?" "Oh, nothing," says Harper. Yes, that sounds like an entirely likely scenario.
- He implies earlier in the interview that he intends to introduce the same budget the government introduced before the government was defeated. He then says here that Canadians don't want another election. So, if the budget is immediately rejected by the other parties, representing the views of the pluralities that elected those members, either result - another party tries to gain the confidence of the house, or we go to another election - is antidemocratic. Therefore, the only democratic choice for opposition parties is to go along with what the government says. Neat!
- He thinks he can turn down a request from the Vice-Regal representative of Her Majesty. Stephen Harper is a republican, in the truest sense of the word. But we already knew that, didn't we, when he successfully pressured our last G-G to prorogue Parliament, in the face of the single guiding principle of a Westminster parliamentary system - the supremacy of the individual member. Stephen Harper either doesn't understand that, or doesn't approve of that, and Stephen Harper is a pretty smart guy, so one of those seems more likely than the other. There's your lead.
Don't you people know how to dog whistle?
A Conservative incumbent candidate from Saskatchewan thanks local anti-abortion groups for the signatures that helped defund Planned Parenthood International. Bring on the conversations about the hidden agenda!
My short read of Brad Trost's history seems to suggest he's one of the useful idiots the CPC likes to have around. They don't want to be seen as social conservatives, but they do want social conservatives to be motivated to vote Tory. And so, a fellow like this gets a long leash to complain about his own government's financial support of Toronto's Pride Week, for instance.
Anyway, I suspect he's been told by his party that there's a right time for talk like this, and that the writ period isn't it. A prom of one to a backbencher who will never be anything else, but a sig of two (or three? Discuss) for bringing hidden agenda talk to the fore.
A Conservative incumbent candidate from Saskatchewan thanks local anti-abortion groups for the signatures that helped defund Planned Parenthood International. Bring on the conversations about the hidden agenda!
My short read of Brad Trost's history seems to suggest he's one of the useful idiots the CPC likes to have around. They don't want to be seen as social conservatives, but they do want social conservatives to be motivated to vote Tory. And so, a fellow like this gets a long leash to complain about his own government's financial support of Toronto's Pride Week, for instance.
Anyway, I suspect he's been told by his party that there's a right time for talk like this, and that the writ period isn't it. A prom of one to a backbencher who will never be anything else, but a sig of two (or three? Discuss) for bringing hidden agenda talk to the fore.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Inevitability
Thank goodness I'm not scoring the Green Party, or we'd have to have some discussion about this jackass:
Don't get me wrong - it's a terrible metaphor. But the conversations are nonsense unless we admit that it is a metaphor. The story describes the line as "... a comment about rape...". Hey, remember when Ignatieff was attempting to say nothing about coalitions, and the media would talk about the elephant in the room? Yes, I certainly enjoyed all those news articles about elephants.
I heard Newsworld anchor Carole MacNeil suggest candidates should consider sensitivity training before running, and perhaps that's true. But meanwhile, the media should take some courses in literary devices and comedy, because they seem completely deaf to both.
Edited to add: CBC reporter Kris Reyes did acknowledge the candidate's explanation a few minutes after noon MDT, but dismissively. My favourite part what when she explained that the candidate had been told it was a quote from Confucius "... but I hardly doubt that," she helpfully gaffes. I believe the candidate has confused the real historic figure and the old joke construction suggesting barroom wisdom of some sort, "Confucius say...". In fact, two minutes of Google searching turns this up:
Thank goodness I'm not scoring the Green Party, or we'd have to have some discussion about this jackass:
A Green Party candidate in British Columbia has resigned after concerns were raised about him posting a comment about rape on his Facebook page.So, here's the thing. This probably isn't meant as literal advice, but as a metaphor - rape standing in for some terrible or at least unpleasant inevitability beyond one's control. The specifics of Saldanha's use here, I can't imagine - the story doesn't make it clear. Maybe Saldanha didn't specify. (Maybe he didn't get it as a metaphor either, which brings up other concerns about the candidate's competence.) But others who have used the same line have traditionally been more specific.
Alan Saldanha, who was running in the riding of Fleetwood—Port Kells, resigned Wednesday afternoon after it was revealed he posted, "If rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it!" on his Facebook profile. The comment has since been taken down.
Don't get me wrong - it's a terrible metaphor. But the conversations are nonsense unless we admit that it is a metaphor. The story describes the line as "... a comment about rape...". Hey, remember when Ignatieff was attempting to say nothing about coalitions, and the media would talk about the elephant in the room? Yes, I certainly enjoyed all those news articles about elephants.
I heard Newsworld anchor Carole MacNeil suggest candidates should consider sensitivity training before running, and perhaps that's true. But meanwhile, the media should take some courses in literary devices and comedy, because they seem completely deaf to both.
Edited to add: CBC reporter Kris Reyes did acknowledge the candidate's explanation a few minutes after noon MDT, but dismissively. My favourite part what when she explained that the candidate had been told it was a quote from Confucius "... but I hardly doubt that," she helpfully gaffes. I believe the candidate has confused the real historic figure and the old joke construction suggesting barroom wisdom of some sort, "Confucius say...". In fact, two minutes of Google searching turns this up:
22 July 1971, Winnipeg (Canada) Free Press, pg. 1, col. 6:So, in conclusion, I think the CBC should be better funded, so it can afford some fancy Googling contraptions. Or something.
Winnipeg Police Chief Norman Stewart countered municipal opposition to one big Greater Winnipeg police force Wednesday with the flat statement that such a force is inevitable.
(...)
Quipped the chief:
“To them I say what Confucius said: ‘When rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy it.’”
Set dressing
A Tory operative sends out a letter asking local ethnic organizations to bring members wearing "ethnic costumes" for tonight's event with the Prime Minister in Etobicoke. I might have let this slide, if the Conservatives hadn't already treated brown faces as props, rather than as voters. 1 x 1 = 1.
Edited to add, Friday morning: I underestimated the ire this was raising among ethnic voters. This dominated a news cycle that included post-debate analysis. SIG = 2, though I have no choice but to take the CPC at their word about who was responsible, so PROM remains 1. Going forward, the Tories may have to carry a "very ethnic" penalty for any perceived cultural insensitivity, because that's become a big part of this election narrative.
A Tory operative sends out a letter asking local ethnic organizations to bring members wearing "ethnic costumes" for tonight's event with the Prime Minister in Etobicoke. I might have let this slide, if the Conservatives hadn't already treated brown faces as props, rather than as voters. 1 x 1 = 1.
Edited to add, Friday morning: I underestimated the ire this was raising among ethnic voters. This dominated a news cycle that included post-debate analysis. SIG = 2, though I have no choice but to take the CPC at their word about who was responsible, so PROM remains 1. Going forward, the Tories may have to carry a "very ethnic" penalty for any perceived cultural insensitivity, because that's become a big part of this election narrative.
Monday, April 11, 2011
Twitter is the "no zone defense rule" of the gaffeometer.
Is the basketball reference too obscure? How about "Twitter is the removal of the red line"? Twitter makes scoring more likely, is what I'm saying right here.
Anyway, an attentive reader notes another Tory twitter dimwittery, this one from an Ontario incumbent. Stephen Woodworth insensitively uses the word "crippled" in the punchline of a joke, leading to much faux outrage and a faux apology, and then the deletion of the Twitter account. The joke was not funny, not because of the insensitive language but because it wasn't funny, so overall it seems like a big waste of ink (well, electrons) to me. If you want to see actual insensitivity married to actual comedy, may I suggest Gilbert Gottfried's recent twitter work?
Anyway, another 1 x 1 for the CPC.
Is the basketball reference too obscure? How about "Twitter is the removal of the red line"? Twitter makes scoring more likely, is what I'm saying right here.
Anyway, an attentive reader notes another Tory twitter dimwittery, this one from an Ontario incumbent. Stephen Woodworth insensitively uses the word "crippled" in the punchline of a joke, leading to much faux outrage and a faux apology, and then the deletion of the Twitter account. The joke was not funny, not because of the insensitive language but because it wasn't funny, so overall it seems like a big waste of ink (well, electrons) to me. If you want to see actual insensitivity married to actual comedy, may I suggest Gilbert Gottfried's recent twitter work?
Anyway, another 1 x 1 for the CPC.
Friday, April 08, 2011
Non-gaffe (so far)... edited to add, now a gaffe.
Montreal Conservative candidate Larry Smith says it's normal for government-held ridings to see more government largesse. "Normal" is interesting, but the rest, that it happens thusly, is objectively true, even if you aren't supposed to say it out loud. So we'll see if he backpedals, gaffing it up in the process.
Edited to add, Saturday morning: He hasn't apologised or changed his tune that I've seen, but Harper is contradicting him, thereby saying something objectively false. This one might turn into a score yet.
Edited to add, Monday morning: I rethought this over the weekend, and decided if the leader of your party has to contradict you, it's gaffish enough. 1 x 1 = 1.
Montreal Conservative candidate Larry Smith says it's normal for government-held ridings to see more government largesse. "Normal" is interesting, but the rest, that it happens thusly, is objectively true, even if you aren't supposed to say it out loud. So we'll see if he backpedals, gaffing it up in the process.
Edited to add, Saturday morning: He hasn't apologised or changed his tune that I've seen, but Harper is contradicting him, thereby saying something objectively false. This one might turn into a score yet.
Edited to add, Monday morning: I rethought this over the weekend, and decided if the leader of your party has to contradict you, it's gaffish enough. 1 x 1 = 1.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
times since January 6, 2003.
