Bob Runciman is a quick study -

Bob Runciman is a quick study


The new senator, speaking to reporters this morning. “And what is worse, are politicians who say one thing while the cameras are running but do another when they think no one is paying attention … Michael Ignatieff wants you to believe that he is tough on crime, but when push came to shove, Canadians couldn’t count on him to protect their safety. After months of Liberal stalling and delays, Ignatieff’s Liberals gutted this important piece of legislation. Canadians are fed up with unelected Liberal senators doing Ignatieff’s dirty work and standing in the way of action to protect victims and get tough on dangerous criminals. Michael Ignatieff needs to explain to Canadian why his own unelected Liberal senators gutted this special measure and he needs to tell his Liberal senators to support it when it is reintroduced and Canadians expect nothing less.”

Conservative Party, Dec. 10, 2009. “When the cameras are rolling, Ignatieff wants you to believe that he is tough on crime. But when push comes to shove, Canadians can’t count on him to protect their safety. After months of Liberal stalling and delays, Ignatieff’s Liberals have gutted our Conservative Bill and put children’s safety at risk. Canadians are fed up with unelected Liberal Senators doing Ignatieff’s dirty work and standing in the way of action to protect victims and get tough on dangerous criminals. Michael Ignatieff needs to explain to Canadians why his own unelected, Liberal Senators gutted this important piece of anti-crime legislation and instruct the unelected Liberal Senators to reverse these changes – Canadians expect nothing less.”


Bob Runciman is a quick study

  1. I find it heartening that John Howard is still taking such an interest in Canadian politics.

  2. I would be a lot more comfortable with the Conservative's leading Senate reform if they understood that Senators do not answer to leader of the caucus in the House.

  3. Funny, 10 or 11 of those crime bills died when Harper prorogued … most had passed second reading or were simply waiting for royal ascent.

    Also, it seems that justice legislation was neither delayed nor gutted by the Senate.

  4. Nice to see Bob can memorize his lines. The theater awaits!

    • "And what is worse are politicians, those
      Who dare to say one thing while cameras run
      But do another, when they think no one's aware.
      Michael Ignatieff wants you to believe
      That he is tough on crime, but when push came
      To shove, Canadians couldn't count on him
      To shield their safety. After months of Liberal stalling
      And delays, Ignatieff's Liberals gutted this
      Important piece of legislation. No,
      Canadians are fed up with unelected Liberals
      Doing Ignatieff's dirty work, and blocking
      Action to shield the victims and get tough
      On dangerous criminals. Michael must explain
      Why his own unelected Liberal senators
      Gutted this special measure, and he needs
      To tell his Liberal senators to support it
      When it is introduced again; so much
      Canadians expect, and nothing less."

      • Jack, you rock.

  5. Runciman, putting the blank into blank verse.

  6. There isn't much white that Bob hasn't called black at least once. He's got it down to a fine art – and can seem so sincere too!
    Of course – the last time I saw a performer nick-named Mad Dog on TV – he was doing a great job of acting trying to bite Killer Kowalski's ear off…so i guess this is just continuing the tradition.

  7. Dammit Bob.. you realize it's folks like you that make it harder for me to argue in favor of us having a senate.

    My only hope is that you stick to your promise and leave in 8 years.

    • from your tapping fingers to God's email!!

  8. Well, when he opens his mouth to express his own thoughts, all you generally get is mouth-foaming rage or neandethal drivel (like calling Belinda a dipstick).

  9. Good catch, Wherry!

    • How did this comment merit a +6?

      • CR has friends in high places.

      • What, it was a good catch, and it was good of Conservative-leaning CR to mention it.

        • Jenn_, Jenn_, Jenn_, (by the way, you forgot to finish typing your pseudonym). I think we all realized it was a "good catch" the moment we read it.

  10. Harper sure picked a winner with this pig.

  11. Hilarious! Good eye, Wherry!

    Apparently Bob Runciman has no qualms about being a ventriloquist dummy for Stephen Harper. Funny, and yet pathetic…

    • And we thought Duffy was a sock puppet.

  12. It is pathetic, isn't it? Why do Ontarians have to go through so much of this twice?

  13. Wow. That's eerie. Very nice catch.

  14. Aaron, did you have a now-where-did-I-hear-that-before moment? If so, your memory is spooky. Well done.

  15. Everyone here should agree,
    this man does us all proud:

    New senator to donate salary to charity

    He'll be getting $132,300 a year but plans to turn it all over to the charity he founded.

    Meet one of Canada's newest senators — Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu.

    • Where's that remote again? Can't find gilligan's island, eh wilnut? Try changing another channel. even some of your on-the-con-dole posters above see this as some delicious irony….

    • How is this about Runciman being a parrot?

      • Perhaps the translation will help: Look! Over there! A bright shiny object!"

      • Your blinders must be twisted – they're blocking your forward vision.

    • Is that the same victim's rights group that suddenly stopped being critical of Harper's prorogue that killed all those urgent crime bills?

  16. A truly brilliant post sometimes needs no comment from the poster. Nice job, Wherry

  17. Wherry kicks butt once more…even the G and M figured out the Pro-rogue-er was the problem not the opposition Senators.

    From the G and M: Reality check – Did Liberals obstruct agenda?

  18. It's just a coincidence!

  19. My big question, that I can't wait to see, is whether Mr. Runciman is about to start calling himself an, "unlelected Conservative senator" every time he does, or doesn't do, anything.

    • LOL ! You must admit it has a nicer ring to it than "hand-cranked music box."

      • Apparently, the Law of Unintended Consequences strikes Stephen Harper once again.

        Jacques Demers – Offside!

        As it's the weekend permit me to highjack Aaron's blog briefly:

        French to English translation [Courtesy of Google Translate.]

        The Stephen Harper's attempt to increase penalties for young offenders will be a formidable adversary: Jacques Demers. In an interview with LCN, the conservative senator voted against this key measure of his own party.

        Asked about this by the host Denis Lévesque, Jacques Demers has been unequivocal. "I believe in rehabilitation. I am all for it. (…) Should be given a chance, even more opportunities to people. "The former Canadiens coach also believes that sending the young offenders prison would do more harm than good. "I will not send a boy of 14 or 16 years to be assaulted in prison."

        According to documents obtained by the agency QMI, the Conservative government is preparing to table a new draft law on young offenders. This would include stiffer penalties and revoke the bans publication given to serious sex offenders.

        Jacques Demers also said that if the Liberals had approached before the Conservatives for Liberal senator, he would have accepted the offer.

        • There goes Quebec,again. Toughening up juvenile sentencing is not popular there at all. And there's a couple of other Conservative senators that are not supportive of the sentencing bill. Good luck herding your Senators, Harper.

        • Perhaps he failed to read the fine print in his offer of employment?

          • Perhaps, instead, he read the Constitution.

      • ""hand-cranked music box."

        Jenn_ doesn't know what that means.

        • Oh, is it a euphamism? Because if so, you are right. I HATE not getting a joke.

          • Only accidentally, I fear. I just meant that Runciman resembles a music box, and I put "hand-cranked" in there for rhetorical effect.

            Great point about the truly staggering hypocrisy of a CPC Senator denouncing LPC Senators for being Senators. Let Mr. Runciman henceforth be known as "unelected Senator Bob Runciman."

  20. From "Make Me Poorer":

    "stories always trump statistics, which means the politician with the best stories is going to win: "One of the fallacies that politicians often have on the Left is that things are obvious, when they are not obvious."

      • Well, apparently so. I don't follow American politics (just hear things on the news that I didn't think I paid much attention to) and I did better than 58% of Americans. I'm quite sure most of the commenters here would do better than that. But, it may be that following Canadian politics has conditioned me to take note of some of these things, even when I didn't think I was.

        I do wonder how we (we, as in Canadians, not Maclean's commenters) would do on similar-type Canadian questions.

        That was fun, Sisyphus, thanks.

      • Well, if the facts show that voters are educated and informed and aware of the facts, why is public discourse carried on so effectively at such lesser levels

        • Obviously, the facts show anything but educated, informed, and aware voters. But as your link substantiates, politicians cannot educate, inform or make voters aware. Nor would it be a good political move to say something like, "I can't help it if you people are idiots" or some similar truthiness.

          So, that's identifying a problem. But what is the solution?

  21. Correct me if I'm wrong but, when Bob Runciman was Minister of Correctional Services, I seem to recall that he was charged under the Provincial Offences Act with having open liquor while enjoying a ride in his boat with guests.

    • Big deal.