A half-hour interview with the late, lamented author that appeared on the former ZDTV program Big Thinkers that was filmed just eight days before he passed away in 2001. The ending is very poignant.
Who knew that the Conservatives were just so gosh-darned funny? First, Health Minister Tony Clement cracking wise at a swank lunch in Denver and now Gerry Ritz firing off some really snappy quips about the listeriosis crisis. Maybe Janke can tell us how deep the post-holes should be on that gallows…
Update: Liveblogging from Ritz’s apologia here.
You know, I think the whole purpose of this newser was to give the networks footage other than that airport clip, where he refuses to answer, and eventually someone – possibly Ritz – tells the reporter to “Get out of my face.” This twenty seconds of public penance was awkward, short and pointless…
Well, that’s what Bob Rae called Kenney today (and Harper too, I guess).
I prefer “witless dumpling” myself. No one has said that yet; but hey, why not be a trendsetter? Feel free to offer your own suggestions… I don’t think the Tories mind a bit of name-calling, right?
Rae’s epithet was in response to Kenney and Harper’s ludicrous attacks expressing astonishment and horror at the promises being made by the other parties. Mighty rich stuff considering the Cons have spent the last few months sprinkling about $20 billion in fairy dust of their own around the country. No, strike that. It wasn’t “fairy dust” — it was good old-fashioned, Grade-A pork.
So, Harper’s “never thrown a stone.” Geez! Does he even drink beer?
Thank goodness he doesn’t eat his hot dogs with a knife and a fork, eh?
By the way, I’ve been really down on Dion’s rather hapless campaigning during the first week, but I have to say that I was quite pleasantly surprised watching him on CPAC today at a town hall in Kitchener. Maybe he’s finally getting his groove. Having Rae and Dryden playing the role of attack dogs was quite effective. Good teamwork. Nicely done!
Note: Just so there’s no confusion, the above footage was from the 2007 Briar in Hamilton. The video however was only posted online the other day for whatever reason.
Perhaps I’m missing something, but I don’t see how this particular issue would be advantageous for either the NDP or the Liberals.
The Liberals initiated our involvement in Afghanistan, then approved of a more aggressive military role in Kandahar, and have since acceded to its continuation — not once, but twice. So they can hardly complain now about the enormous cost of the war (estimated to be $10 billion or more). If they use it to attack the NDP then they risk alienating many supporters that remain deeply unhappy about this aspect of Liberal policy.
For the NDP, the risk of bringing their longstanding and vociferous opposition to the war to the forefront of debate in the middle of an election would seem to be many, including attracting possible charges of crassly playing politics with the military (both those currently in the field and those that have sacrificed their lives), of undermining the war effort, and of failing to understand the national security challenges in a post-9/11 world, and so on. Seems like a real can of worms all around to me.
Update: A commenter raises the quite valid point that the NDP (presumably the Liberals also) are eager to raise the issue as it speaks to the matters of fiscal responsibility, accountability and transparency on the part of the Conservatives. Those are fair enough points, most certainly, but there’s still a significant political downside for the opposition parties if the Conservatives decide to ignore their perfectly legitimate criticisms and instead mutilate the discussion into one centered around patriotism, support for the troops and which party is stronger on national security.
Who knew that it meant an $85 billion bail-out from American taxpayers?
“Our business has gone out of business,” said CNBC’s Jim Cramer appearing on the Today Show this morning calmly discussing the death of capitalism. “And we’re better off because of it,” he added. Quite a different story last year…
A new TV ad by BornAliveTruth.org, a 527 political organization, in which the survivor of a botched abortion calls attention to Sen. Obama’s repeated opposition protecting such babies, has some on the right creaming themselves with excitement.
In the spot, Gianna Jessen, 31, calls on Sen. Obama to support born-alive infant protections because she claims that babies should have basic human rights “no matter how they entered our world.”
Yesterday, Obama fired back saying, “While I suppose all life eventually becomes precious, that woman just proves that some lives are more precious than others.”
“Apparently a well-meaning medical professional saved baby Gianna’s life, ruining her mother’s hopes for a successful abortion,” Sen. Obama said. “To make matters worse, three decades later Ms. Jessen has become part of the problem in this country — another vicious collaborator with John McCain in the epidemic of brutal, negative political advertising.”
The Illinois Democrat said the question that American voters should ask themselves is this: “Are you better off now than you were 31 years ago before Gianna Jessen was inadvertently born? I know that I’m not.”
Note: This is satire, shamelessly cribbed from Scrappleface.