Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Blow and Blowhards

Although it looks painful and terse, proof that yes, NDP MP Pat Martin can smile:


He can also decry the circus, then assume the role of "ring leader".

16 comments:

Jymn Parrett said...

To me, the circus began and ended with Jaffer and Glemaud. Their stonewalling, misdirection and outright lying were the big tent. Martin was just an amusing juggler between the main acts. While Martin was the most blunt, I found the Conservative members on the panel to be the most accusatory and angry - and unforgiving of J & G.

Steve V said...

It was very interesting, and rare, to see a committee, where a witness had no safe harbour.

RuralSandi said...

Pat Martin's constant sanctimony turns me right off. I don't know how he gets away with some of the things he says. He has people guilty before knowing for sure.

Fred from BC said...

RuralSandi said...

Pat Martin's constant sanctimony turns me right off. I don't know how he gets away with some of the things he says. He has people guilty before knowing for sure.


He performs for the cameras, throwing out sarcastic innuendos and slanderous accusations that would get him sued outside of Parliament. Brian Mulroney called his bluff and refused to appear after it became apparent what a circus the whole thing was; I hope Jaffer and his partner do, too.

RuralSandi said...

Good grief, Fred from B.C. - you're defending the Jaffer/Glemaud duo? Are you crazy?

Tof KW said...

Sandi's got you there Fred, even your CPC colleges on the committee gave Jaffer no save haven. The guy was sleaze just the same when he was a sitting MP; the reason his old party now shuns him, and why he was the only Alberta CPC MP to lose his seat.

Sir Gallahad said...

Steve,

I thought Fred was banned?

Steve V said...

I don't like deleting if people respond.

Frunger said...

I don't know who it was, but the more pathetic commetn was when Jaffer was asked if he sleeps in the same bed as his wife.

I would have shot back that I didn't think it was their intention to know what my wife and I did at bedtime, and that it wasn't my intention to come to the committee and make them blush.

I want to say it was a Liberal MP, but I'm not certain.

Gene Rayburn said...

"I want to say it was a Liberal MP, but I'm not certain."

Then why did you say it? In what language does Frunger mean moron?

Sir Gallahad said...

Frunger, is your garden variety tory troll.

It feels the need to spread his butt cheeks wide, and drop hot steaming turds, all over the net.

I find tory trolls particularly, instructive, as their stupidity, and lack of common sense, has no bounds.

Steve, you have to keep a few morons around.

Tof KW said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tof KW said...

Sir Gallahad said...
I find tory trolls particularly, instructive, as their stupidity, and lack of common sense, has no bounds.

Just a minor point of correction Sir Gallahad, though your overall assessment of these hive-minded, populist, yahoo trolls is quite valid; they are not Tories.

They've been granted that moniker thanks in no small part to the media (mainly due to the need for headline brevity), but these loudmouths carry precious few (if any) of the philosophies, traditions and views of Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Churchill, or Sir John A.

Hell - Joe Clark, Robert Stanfield and the Chief himself are all 'lefties' by their standards. And their 'Lefty Standard' for all intensive purposes is applied to anyone who disagrees with whatever verbal diarrhea comes out of Harper's mouth.

Now I consider myself a Tory - a Red one, but still a Tory. I’m not exactly enthusiastic about the Liberals, but given the choice between them and the firebrand populist, tea-bagging GOP wannabes in power right now; well Mr Ignatieff and company are definitely the lesser of two evils.

My own preferred terms for these trolls include; Reformatories, Rightwingnuts, Harperbots, and various other more derogatory terms …I think you get the gist of it. But I will never grant these turds the dignity of being called a Tory; they are unworthy of it.

Sir Gallahad said...

TofKW,

I stand corrected.

Your assessment is bang on.

I have relatives, and some friends who were traditional "Progressive Conservatives", and like yourself can not bring themselves to vote for this new brand.

From now on I will call them what they are.

Scotian said...

T of KW is exactly correct, these are not Tories, and should never be referred as such regardless of the media conferring this title upon them. Indeed, the hostile takeover of the PCPC via traitor MacKay's actions were designed to fool people into thinking the new Harper led entity were nothing more than the modern Tories, when in fact as has been shown by their actions ever since that they are Reform/CA in Tory drag. I always refer to them as CPCers myself.

As to the hearing itself, I was incredulous that Martin was going on and on about not wanting to see a circus, to see things be high minded and not in the gutter yet was not just the first but the only MP to actually go there with the cocaine reference. As much as I find Martin to be obnoxiously sanctimonious and preachy I thought this was a new low for him given his constant flapping of his gums right before this hearing about the need to first have it and keep it on target and then to not have it so as to not interfere with possible criminal actions down the road and then to go to trying to argue Jaffer was paid by Guillani with cocaine.

Bottom line, Martin blew his own credibility with all but his hard line supporters with this one, Jaffer and his partner did themselves no favours appearing (and Jaffer clearly felt betrayed by his side, I wonder given his former position whether he has documentation of CPC improprieties he can strike back/blackmail with, I suspect Harper doesn't think so or he wouldn't throw Jaffer overboard like this IMHO) and raised more questions than they answered. All in all not a good day for them at all and further guarantees this scandal is not going away anytime soon.

Fred from BC said...

RuralSandi said...

Good grief, Fred from B.C. - you're defending the Jaffer/Glemaud duo? Are you crazy?

Not at all. If they're guilty (and they probably are) they will be held accountable. There is no excuse for what Pat Martin does, though. None.