John Chuckman
COMMENT POSTED TO A COLUMN IN THE NATIONAL POST
Christie Blatchford seems to have become The Conservatives’ chief apologist.
Her apology here though seems totally unneeded.
I believe in these two cases of dropped candidates, the bone-headed people involved would have made perfect Conservative candidates.
Pranks? Isn’t this the party of robo-calls and frat-boy negative advertising?
Isn’t this the party of never telling the truth to people?
Of never giving a straight answer?
The party of not complying with officials attempting to investigate misdeeds?
The party of hiding the many stupid things it has done?
The party of Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin, Nigel Wright, and other charmers?
The party of slavishly catering to special interests?
The party of giving the finger to many of the world’s serious concerns?
The party of John Baird who resembles nothing so much as a mad dog when he argues with people?
The party of Peter MacKay, a man who had an affair with a subordinate, later harassed her and called her a dog in public, and then lied about it as well as a man who has demonstrated incompetence in almost every portfolio in the cabinet?
The party of the absolute thug, Patrick Brazeau?
The party of Maxime Bernier, who left top secret NATO papers at his biker girlfriend’s house for weeks?
The party of Pierre Poilievre, perhaps the most seriously twisted sister ever in Parliament?
I just cannot believe what an opportunity the party has missed with these two new fellows, each surely potential minister material.
It’s a shame, I guess that’s the price you pay for political correctness.
JOHN CHUCKMAN
POSTED RESPONSE TO A COLUMN BY RICK SALUTIN IN TORONTO’S GLOBE AND MAIL
It is in such an ugly struggle that we often see the true characters of people who normally manage to keep a relatively benign face to the world.
Richard Colvin is calm, articulate, brave, and clearly someone who took his responsibilities towards others seriously.
Peter “my word ain’t worth spit” and “my Ex is a dog” Mackay once more displayed his deeply flawed character.
His sputtering, arm-waving attacks on an honest man truly had the tone of accusations from the prosecution at a witch trial.
But we already knew Peter lacked the ethical stuff we teach our children.
A new and unexpected actor in this orchestrated passion play of attack bowed in with an astonishingly nasty performance a couple of days ago.
The high-water mark in sewerage overflow was reached a couple of days ago, on CBC Radio’s show The Current, when Pamela Wallin gave an interview on the subject.
Her words simply dripped with the noxious stuff of obtuse dishonesty serving politics, truly enough to induce nausea, including her much-repeated claim she just simply could not fathom Mr. Colvin’s motives.
Ms Wallin apparently lacks the moral radar to perceive when other people act bravely out of decency, ethics, and humanitarianism. Either that or she was flat-out lying on national radio to attack a decent man whom she regards as a threat to her party.
Hers was another version of kicking someone who is down, ironically enough put to the service of a matter involving the torture of prisoners.
She convinced me only of one fact, one for which I needed no convincing, and that fact is the banality of evil.
And that phrase, “the banality of evil,” best characterizes the entire matter from the original acts in Afghanistan to the efforts to throw dirt at those revealing them.