Tom Mulcair clarifies


Just kidding!


Tom Mulcair clarifies

  1. Saw the blog title via Twitter. Assumed it would be Feschuck. Way to keep us on our toes Macleans.

  2. that's hilarious. I would have expected that the first major NDP gaffe would be from one of their faux-candidates, not Mulcair.

    • This is all part of the training process. Mulcair is teaching his young rookies about foreign affairs and diplomacy.

  3. Big election, big win….why was he even talking about bin Laden in the first place?

    • Big win indeed. Win in the "did better than last time sense" instead of "did better than all the competitors" sense. The NDP certainly won seats, but they lost influence.

    • This comment was deleted.

      • You forget that Solomon is a future Senator. Watch his interviews with Liberal and NDP members and compare them to interviews with Conservative members. He likes to play gotcha with the first two groups, not so much with the third.

  4. Man alive! You are not kidding with the 'just kidding!'

    Clear as mud, now. Apparently Mulcair was not trying to start conspiracy theory, he was alluding to war crimes!

    • Helmet Schmit is also claiming the US has broken international law.

  5. Oh God…. I am having an early margarita : )

  6. This is just a fabricated non-story by the biased right-wing media! #EveryoneCanPlayVictimNow

    • Yay!

  7. It's comforting to know that deputy leader Mulcair is ready to take charge if anything should happen to Jack.

    • I, for one, look forward to a potential Foreign Minister Mulcair in the nightmare scenario of 2015.

      • Or even worse, Prime Minister Mulcair. Suppose an orange wave in 2015 sweeps the NDP into power, and then PM Layton resigns for health reasons.

        • CR – Crikes, that sounds a bit like the McCain-Palin scenario

  8. The context of the conversation is not what Mulcair now claims. As a key member of the new Opposition, he was asked by Evan Solomon about whether the pictures ought to be released. Mulcair responded by saying that he didn't think the pictures existed.

    There was no meandering. Solomon asked a second time whether Mulcair really thought that the pictures didn't exist., and got the same response, and then some additional comment about it they did exist, then there was more to the story, which I honestly did not understand.

    The international law stuff came towards the end and was somewhat unrelated to the initial question about the pictures. Basically, he was suggesting that President Obama, or at least his administration, was lying about the existence of pictures.

  9. Well, on the basis of the Finnerty interview on CBC Montreal, I wouldn't say "Just kidding" so much as "I blew it with a confusing collection of words when I was really trying to talk about something else, and I should have done better and known better."

    And that could well be a fair and accurate description of his brain cramp the day earlier. Or it could be the best his fixers came up with for him overnight.

  10. The NDP is no good….

  11. Jesus, can't the guy say anything clearly? He's the most long-winded, vague, indirect and confusing speaker in history. Not only that, for someone who can't say a single thing clearly, he sure does interrupt a lot.

  12. Who knows. This guy could give 10 more interviews about it and you still wouldn't know.

    • I suppose that's a fair criticism.

      Maybe this says more about my low expectations for politicians than anything else, but I was actually pleasantly surprised to see him say he was the one who screwed up and that he accepts responsibility for it, regardless of how much he danced around the issue (which is par for the course, for a politician).

      • I suspect that he realizes that accepting humiliation for a misunderstanding is not quite a bad as being humiliated for being a conspiracy nut!

  13. In repsonse to "do you accept that there are problems with the nomination papers of your candidate in Berthier-Maskinongé?"

    He managed to respond with about 200 words, and not a single one of those words was "yes" or "no".

  14. "MULCLAIR: …Y'know, we went door-to-door Mike. when you get signatures for nomination papers you can go to a shopping centre for example."

    Whatever happened to asking members of your EDA to endorse the papers? Does the NDP always hangout in public spaces trying to push nominations papers on passersby?

  15. The media clearly has a centrist bias. Why are we tolering this fair and balanced covrage? Listening to Dean del Maestro standing up for Obama – surreal.

    • The media are overwhelming centrist and employ people all over the spectrum. My comment was directed to the perpetual media victim crowd.

  16. This is a non-story. I understand that with the election done and Bin Laden’s killing a few days old, this was exciting for the media to pick up, but it’s been given enough legs. Either Mulcair was hung over or was misunderstood, either way he’s made a clear statement on it today so let’s move on.

  17. .
    The OBL operation and the international ethics involved are important but have little to do with Mulclair's serious task at hand. Now that the NDP is the official opposition they no longer have time for political chat-room prattle.

    Canada now has a root-kit installed in the PMO, and a very clever and tightly coded one at that.

  18. “FINNERTY: Thomas Mulcair you’re really good to come on the air and to clear up things to address these questions and we appreciate it very much.”

    Yep, that cleared it right up.

  19. Ha! That's been my first LOL since the election!

  20. He was talking about the wrong thing because the NDP is still pretty much amateur hour. So Cons are going to eat them alive for breakfast (insert as many other metaphors as you like here). The Commons is now made up of a disciplined majority Conservative machine doing loop-de-loops around a vocal but completely laughable NDP opposition. This is why the Libs aren't quite dead yet.

    • The election is over. Ixnay on the commercials.

      • ? Commercial for?

  21. Amazing. This is not the first time this week I have seen/heard people claim the NDP have lost influence.

    Five years of minority government gamesmanship seems to have made people loose sight of the short-term value of a swing vote in a minority parliament, versus the long-term value of being the official opposition in a majority parliament.

    Rather than being accused of “playing political games” and “buying votes” the NDP now have four years to construct an opposition narrative to the CPC without having to worry about always being at election readiness. Sure, the CPC gets to govern freely for four years, which is all right and good, but the NDP has four years to make themselves into a true alternative government – setting themselves up for the ultimate influence position – governing.

    Both Stephen Harper and Jack Layton came out ahead on election night because they have been working at the long-term strategy for their respective parties for years.

  22. What exactly are we dumping on Mulcair for? The official American story is: we flew to Pakistan, shot Bin Laden in the head either during or after a firefight, took a picture, bundled him up and took him for DNA testing in another city, bundled him up again and dumped his body in the sea and turned all the witness over to the intelligence services. Oh, and the picture is too gruesome to show you. Why didn't we take another, less gruesome picture somewhere between the DNA test and the burial? What are you, some kind of conspiracy nut?

    Like Mulcair, I'd prefer to believe the Obama administration, but the US record on secret evidence related to the war on terror isn't encouraging (anyone want to buy some yellowcake?).

  23. A non-story picked up by the Washington Post? I don't think they'll quote Mulcair very often!

  24. It really could happen… but I think my fellow quebecers will do what they did to the ADQ next election. That is, one day they elect them as opposition, the next they desintegrate the party back to insignificance.

Sign in to comment.