I challenge anyone to find an amusing line in today's column in the Post. Even his most fantatical left-wing moonbat supporters may discover that the task is daunting.
But here is something that struck me as just plain tasteless. Read through these paragraphs:
It makes sense that you should be allowed to call up your buddy in Quebec and give him a Cabinet position. This is, of course, an old boys' club, and so this is exactly what the Prime Minister did. Instead of giving the job to an elected Member of Parliament like Diane Ablonczy he called up Michael Fortier, private citizen, and gave him the big gig.
By the way, I'm not suggesting that giving his pal the gig was an easy move for Harper. It can't be easy having to look your MPs in the eye and basically tell them they're imbeciles. Even for Harper that's got to hurt a little bit.
And pity the poor caucus. Imagine getting elected, your party forms the government, and then your leader basically tells you that you have a better chance of ending up with a disability cheque based on your mental incompetence than you ever do of seeing a minister's salary. That's a tough day at the office.
Did he just call Diane Albonczy an imbecile? And what about all the women in the caucus. Is he calling them mentally incompetent?
Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise on a Point of Order!!!
28 comments:
Mean-spirited? How 'bout simply calling it as he sees it: Harper parachuted an unelected man into the Senate and a Cabinet position, passing over many presumably qualified MP's, with the understanding that Fortier would run when a seat became available.
This tells me that Harper looked around his caucus and decided that none of those MP's were qualified for a Cabinet position, and slapped each and every one them in the face by appointing Fortier. Message: none of you are worthy.
And to top it off, there is a by-election in Montreal - the very place that Harper felt so needed Cabinet representation, that he went against literal years of whining about unelected Senators to appoint one himself.
There is the exquisite hair-splitting coming from Fortier: oh, I said I'd run in a general election, not a by-election. Of course, we all know the real reason - Fortier won't win that seat. Message to voters: you're too dumb to vote in the right people, so we're not going to give you the chance.
Don't get me wrong - I would expect this kind of behaviour from any party with a minority government. They're all no better than they should be, and if Mercer wants to call them on it, well, good on him.
V.M. - Well, maybe that's it then. Maybe Mercer wasn't even trying to be funny. Maybe it is a career change.
Rick Mercer, Political Pundit for the National Post.
Mmmm.
Cherniak_WTF said...
So Johanne, how do you suspend reality faced with the Harper hypocrisy?
Tue Oct 31, 03:24:24 PM EST
Our posterior orifices are better than your posterior orifices?
Joanne, what I see is that column is the truth. Was there no one elected who was fit to take a Minister's job that Harper had to bring in an unelected guy?
And why won't he run in the coming by-election in Quebec?
To afraid to face the voters?
You want mean-spirited, here's David Warren slandering every gay, lesbian and transgendered Canadian.
Get it? Every Canadian in favour of SSM is on the side of indecency and wrong, propped up by the Devil himself.
Mean-spirited - that's me.
And why won't he run in the coming by-election in Quebec?
It's a Bloc stronghold. Harper said from the beginning that Fortier would run in the next general election.
Having said that, there were many conservative bloggers who had a problem with the whole thing.
from cbc article on Feb 6:
Harper said Fortier will run for a House of Commons seat in "the next federal election" rather than seeking one before that in a by-election.
It is an odd decision for Harper, who campaigned on a promise of an elected Senate and spoke against the idea of unelected ministers.
"If you look carefully at what I said in the election campaign, I did leave open that possibility," he told reporters after the cabinet was sworn in.
== end quote
We certainly will be looking carefully, since he has more or less admitted he was not plain talking in the last election campaign.
I think the confusion over the by-election is that in the context of appointing to Cabinet, or newly chosen leaders (such as Mulroney, or the next liberal leader), one sometimes has a by-election where a member of caucus gives up their seat to cause a byelection, so the appointee can run and be elected there. That is what is readily understood to have been ruled out.
But if we are to look carefully at what Stephen said (as he suggests), then he did say "in the next federal election". A byelection at the federal riding level is, in fact a federal election. It is not a general election, but it appears Stephen never said that Fortier would run in the next general election, but rather in the next "federal election".
Since this byelection was not forced in order to get Fortier an elected seat, he could pass since it is not a safe seat. But the words of Stephen do make it look like he should be running.
For other mean spirited Mercer material, look at his blog, say September 2005. There we see him talking about David Dingwall, "chewing gum aficionado". Rick suggests that the Conservatives might be enlisted to pack David's golden parachute, and that he be dropped over a golf course.
What a rapid Liberal partisan!
Then in October, of course he was visiting the troops in Afghanistan.
rapid=rabid
I hate typos on puch lines...
L.S. - He usually packs a little joke in with the ribbing. This time it's just dull and mean.
Ah well... perhaps he's heard his funding is on the line or something... I generally like Mercer, and I have to admit Joanne that while I didn't find last night terribly tasteful, he probably made others laugh.
I do agree though, he seems slightly bitched out lately.
Just for Joanne (true blue),
Holy crap Rick,
You not getting laid or something??
While I can understand the disgruntled viewpoint regarding Fortier, who is Harpers ONLY Senate appointment, vs Martins 18 Senatorial appointments in under two years, nine of which were on the same day, the last of which was just one day prior to the writ that wrote his sorry butt off.
This despite Harper having said that the appointment was solely for representation of Montreal in the Cabinet, and that Fortier would run in the next election... unlike Mr. Martin,who "recognized" the imbalance in the Senate, had "desire" to ammend it's design, but believed in appointing Senators by the six-pack.
I dunno Rick, but I think you gave the guy a pretty hard rap here myself.
You've been particularly bitchy in your last few shows, or maybe it's just because I'm a Tory that I'm missing the humor in some of your rants... although I think implying that Stephan Harper thinks Dianne Albonzy is an imbecile is a little beneath you... here I thought you liked and respected woman, apparently not.
Listen, I know they don't pay much at CBC... but surely even on minimum wage, you can afford to save $20 bucks a month until you have the price of a hooker... not a Calgary hooker, or a Toronto hooker mind you. You wouldn't have enough in your pocket after 6 months of frugal saving, but perhaps a Windsor hooker, or a Hamilton hooker, or I'd imagine a Saint John's hooker...
What am I saying, your a Canadian actor.
Listen, next time your coming to Calgary, drop me a note, and I'm sure we can arrange one for of those $250 imbeciles they have wandering the streets at night here to drop by your hotel and fix you up. You've obviously been working way to hard, so we'll pass the collection plate around the Church of What's Happening now, and get you sorted out boyo.
After all, if 3.3 million male and female people in Aberta voted for Harper, they must all be imbeciles eh?
Stay good Rick, and maybe start looking for a day job, your night one is looking a little rough these days.
Bill M.
Calgary, AB.
Joe!! That's hilarious! Where did you get that?
You listen to Rick Mercer?
I find this interesting, because I truly do not see anything mean spirited in this, at least not in the version on his blog. I didn't read the National Post version, if it is different. I don't see him calling Dianne an imbecile, in the way it is being bandied about here. He certainly calls the entire caucus imbeciles, mainly because an outsider is parachuted into cabinet while those who have "paid their dues" in the back benches, and in Opposition, are passed over. But that is not quite the same as specifically calling Dianne an imbicile.
Is the "diatribe" on David Dingwall from last September somehow mere softballs?
But it completely explains the times the folks over here will be smirking and snickering over jokes and ridicule that doesn't seem particularly humourous to me.
Guffawing over calling that bitch a bitch, smirking over suggestions that Mercer needs to patronize prostitutes, but indignation over Rick running two polls, one called "Run, Fortier, Run" and the other called "Stay, Fortier, Stay"? Arf!
I think it's all pretty funny. Not roll on the floor hilarious, but funny.
If you wanted mean spirited comment, I would offer this: this blog generally thought Mercer was funny, until Lorrie Goldstein wrote a column which he declared Mercer is not funny anymore. In the discussion here, it was revealed that Mr. Mercer is gay. It wasn''t a secret, I looked it up, but I'd never heard it before. And now we see the hatchet job intensifying.
We even have a quote from "Bill M.", who seems to have detailed in depth knowledge of the geographical distribution of prostitutes and their fees. With such detailed knowledge, you would think he would know that Mercer is unlikely to visit "hookers".
But it's all good fun. And we're learning the new talking points being tried out by CPC fans. It's all about "bitter". Make fun of the government? Bitter. Make fun of the opposition? It's funny and you need to relax and stop being so bitter if you don't like it.
Bitter is the word. "Bitter" is the new "liberal". Don't say "you liberal imbecile", say "you bitter imbecile". Or during the transition, "you bitter liberal"
Just watched Mercer with Steve Harper. Now that was hilarious.
Ah-hah. Joe Calgary, I just checked out Chuckercanuk. Now I know what's going on. Just a bit slow on the uptake here. Thanks for your letter!
L.S. With such detailed knowledge, you would think he would know that Mercer is unlikely to visit "hookers".
Are you saying only women are hookers? You're as bad as Mercer!
joanne,
it was terrifically unfunny and not exactly pointed.
his imbecile stuff is an attempt to get the Tory caucus riled up.
to me, the question is: why does the National Post carry this? Why isn't it in the Star?
Afterall, when he goes after the Libs, he only goes after easy targets.
I could not agree more with Valiantmauz. Oh, and I have posted a response to this absurd bit of tripe.
"Are you saying only women are hookers?"
Of course not, and perhaps Bill M. is not, either, but since over 90% of the population is not gay, I presume Bill M. is not gay, and therefore would likely only know the locations and prices of female prostitutes (even if he does not frequent them himself, he would likely only know about those that he would frequent, on the off chance that someday he might wish to).
Aside from that, the specific term "hooker" generally applies to females, due to the claimed derivation (disputed, but popular) that it came from "Hooker's girls", prostitutes that followed General Joseph Hooker's army.
Chucker, the Post bit was pathetic, but I just watched the Mercer-Harper segment that alias dictus referred to. It was hilarious!!
What happened to Rick in the meantime?
the PM was hilarious.
Chucker, he sure was. I wish I had taped that. Harper had a chance to showcase his humourous side, and he looked very natural. I loved the way it ended! The bits with Rick playing with his kids were cute too. They looked like they were all having a blast!
Mercer's much better on the screen that in the written word. Facial expressions and newfie accents don't translate well in a newspaper.
The Post narrative was run in the second half of the show, but shown as his 'walking editorial', complete with what I suspect was canned laughter. Still not funny though.
The original Post article was published alongside a clip from the show, with Harper reading to Rick in bed. The caption was, "Stephen Harper and Rick Mercer in happier times".
Wonder what happened?
Tory Time has a link to the clip!
Great clip Joanne. But I wonder... IF there was a Liberal PM at 24 Sussex and Rick Mercer was doing the same sort of bit, would you find it as funny or would you accuse him of being in bed with the liberals? Humour and people's senses of it seem to drift to and fro with the partisan winds, it seems. On an aside, I was at a Liberal fundraiser a few weeks ago (although I am not a member of any political party) and a book written by Bob Rae was being auctioned off. I joked, "what's it called? How I Ruined The Ontario Economy?"
I'll admit I spout a fair share of stinkers at social events -- but honest to God this was a good joke. The majority of the bidders at the table I was sitting at just stared at me like I'd insulted their mother, religion, or dog, or all three.
2. Doesn't praising Rick's ability to make a bed-in at 24 Sussex funny completely contradict your previous post that condemned him for taking career tips from the Liberals' one tonne challenge campaign?
And how does this figure in with what I wrote elsewhere:
"Unfortunately for us, many of Mercer's skits/antics/stunts require the participation of politicians -- so he can't stray too far from the gravy train, lest he be cut off and have to perform without the cooperation of anyone on Parliament Hill."
My apologies for the interrogation ;)
LaRoche - The majority of the bidders at the table I was sitting at just stared at me like I'd insulted their mother, religion, or dog, or all three.
Too funny! I love your quip. You're better than Mercer, that's for sure.
Doesn't praising Rick's ability to make a bed-in at 24 Sussex funny completely contradict your previous post that condemned him for taking career tips from the Liberals' one tonne challenge campaign?
Rick didn't get paid by the government when he got in bed this time.
"Unfortunately for us, many of Mercer's skits/antics/stunts require the participation of politicians -- so he can't stray too far from the gravy train, lest he be cut off and have to perform without the cooperation of anyone on Parliament Hill."
Humour is an essential element in a comedy skit.
My apologies for the interrogation ;)
Not a problem. You do it very nicely.
Cherniak wtf... you use someone elses name to post??? What kind of loser are you anyways?
As for Prostitute rates, they publish the comparisons twice annually in the Calgary Heralds twice annual rant on the problem...
Hey Joe Calgary, thanks for indulging me with that Mercer slam. That was great.
Post a Comment