How this works

by Aaron Wherry

Moments after Thomas Mulcair was declared the new leader of the NDP, the Conservative party sent its supporters a series of talking points that deemed him an “opportunist” with a “divise personality,” who would unleash “dangerous experiments” upon the country and put “Canadian families and their jobs at risk.” The next day, the Prime Minister called Mr. Mulcair to congratulate him and to say he “looked forward to their dealings together.” And yesterday, Mr. Harper stood in the House and publicly congratulated Mr. Mulcair at the first opportunity.

Also yesterday, Craig Scott, the newly elected MP for Toronto-Danforth, formally took his seat in the House of Commons. Ten minutes later, the Conservatives sent Eve Adams up to demand that Mr. Scott be “disciplined” by the NDP for “radical soft on crime comments” he had apparently once made. A half hour later, Mr. Scott asked his first question and, in response, Heritage Minister James Moore took the opportunity, “on behalf of all members of the House,” to “welcome” Mr. Scott.

(Afterwards, Mr. Scott stood on a point of order to suggest that Ms. Adams was out of line. Ms. Adams then stood, welcomed Mr. Scott—”Happy first day”—and said “no smear was intended.” She then suggested he should apologize and explained that she was only trying to bring attention to the NDP’s “hug-a-thug attitude.”)




Browse

How this works

  1. The psychotic, back and forth, battering about the head technique – abuse, then praise, then abuse –  seems well integrated by the CPC foot soldiers.

  2. Aw….poor little NDP, you have to play nice with them, their feelings are easily hurt.

  3. If the NDP really had a “hug-a-thug” attitude, the government side would never get any work done, what with all the hugs they’d have to endure.

  4. And Stephen Harper’s a monster who’s destroying Canada as we know it, etc., etc.

    That’s just how politicians roll.

    • “That’s just how politicians roll.”

      Sad, isn’t it?

  5. Mr. Wherry seems to have forgotten the biggest back and forth, wishy-washy action taken yesterday. That was Mr. Mulcair sending out two different press releases concerning the Budget, one for Quebec, and one for English Canada.

    I can`t imagine how this story could be over looked.
     I would think opportunistic divisive reactions by the Leader of the Opposition, that more resemblance that of the BQ, than a National Party would be more important than the common banter of individual politicians.

    •  It’s worse than that. They also put out a release for British Columbia.

    • I saw that this am!  So now we know that Bruce wasn’t gone away anywhere; he just has his head up harp’s arse.  What a suck up article, eh?  From a criminal, no less.  Yeah, we all know who the real hug a thugs are…

    • I didn’t read his article.  Did he directly ask for his piece of the pie?  :)

  6. How THIS works:

    Wherry clandestinely receives a internal Conservative “talking points” communication intended to ensure all Conservative MPs had something to say in the highly likely event a journo sought a reaction from them to Mulcair’s win.  Knowing exactly what it was, Wherry nonetheless described it as the Conservative’s “congratulations” to Mulcair and, to ensure maximum negative impact, posted it immediately after he blogs about the Liberal “congratulations” to Mulcair, which was, in fact, exactly that.

    Wherry does all of this with the presumptive knowledge that Harper would do exactly what Harper eventually did – call Mulcair personally “the next day” (i.e. a few hours after Mulcair officially won and probably at the first opportunity, given Harper was in Korea at the time) to congratulate him.  Wherry fails to mention this official personal congratulation from Harper until now, and then buries it deep in a blog post about how the House of Commons is, regretably, not a model of decorum.

    • Surely you’re not suggesting that Wherry is a partisan hack lamely masquerading as a journalist?

      • Gawd! I wish he could at least put it as succinctly as that. 

      • I suspect Aaron Wherry would be a thorn in the side of the government benches regardless of their political stripe. He loves to point out hypocrisy and preys on foolish comments whether they be from robotic toadies or reckless free spirits.
         I also suspect he likes to punch back at bullies – no matter their political persuasion. 
        You may not like him, but he provides insightful analyses of the HoC and you have to give him a thumbs up simply for being able to sit through session after session of inanity in that hallowed house of indignity

        • I had to smile the other day when I heard some Conservative whining about Terry Milewski(sp?) of CBC who, they swore, was ‘out-to-get the Conservatives.’ Such short memories. It was only a little more than a decade ago that Jean Chretien tried to get the CBC to muzzle Milewski (with some success) because of his ‘bias’ against the Liberals. 

          Good journalists have a strong bias about the truth and that puts them in conflict with all folks who mislead and distort. The problem with partisans of all strips is that they think the other guy lies whereas they just try to “control the message.” It’s worth noting that the CPC government employs 1500 people in an effort to keep their story straight.  And their top communications guy quit today because -even with all those resources – it’s just too hard a job for a guy his age. 

          • I really don,t think Mr. Wherry`s partisan style has anything to do with ” a strong bias about the truth “.
            If you believe his motivation is truth and accuracy, then you are naive.

    • Your constant whining is really insufferable. Wherry has opinions about the items he posts and he expresses those opinions with varying degrees of sarcasm. His opinions are different than yours. If you want to counter his opinions then stop dribbling snot and outraged tears all over the place and write something intelligent, or witty, or cutting, in response.

      Listening to a 4-year old weep and wail about the injustice of the world is tedious, but a 4 year old at least has the excuse of inexperience and a limited facility with the language. Raise your game, GWF, try to sound like you’re at least 12.  

      • Dear me – I do seem to bring out the ad hominem in you.  Perhaps you’re still smarting from the fact the budget turned out to be the budget and your predictions of the day before proved sadly inaccurate.  If I’m right and you’re melancholy because you fear your credibility has dropped as a result,  fear not.

        • You clearly don’t know what  “ad hominem” means.
           But I’m curious, what are those predictions you’re talking about?  Were they based on the Cons pre-budget misinformation.
          There’s a word for the deliberate spreading of false information, and it’s not a word used to describe innacurate predictions.

  7. class and crass, together again

  8. I’m confused. I thought “Hug a Thug” was the name of the Liberal policy agenda.

    I just can’t keep all of these crazy, Canada-hating, non-Conservative parties straight.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *