Having watched the entire Manbridge-Guergis interview, I was surprised just how often the former Tory MP pleaded ignorance in response to a question. If you were playing the "I don't know"/"what are you talking about" drinking game at home, there is a really good chance that you had to be rushed to the hospital with alcohol poisoning. She did not come across as the least bit intelligent, and she pleaded ignorance nearly every difficult question. Meanwhile, the government says that in fact she knew much more than she let on.
Personally I think it is massively hypocritical for the same media who made wild accusations about the activities of Helena now being those rallying around her as a victim. I believe that she was mistreated by the media, but I reject the idea that the Prime Minister is to blame for the media gone wild. They say that the Prime Minister should have publicly released all allegations the moment they were made, and that he did not absolves the media from making uneducated guesses.
I watched the interview over 24 hours ago and had a very negative opinion of what I saw. I didn't want to write about it, but if the media is going to dwell on it, I feel that I need to discuss it. Personally I'm a little embarrassed that I ever considered her competent enough for cabinet. Also, I don't think her emotional breakdowns are helping quash any negative stereotypes about women being too emotional to hold political office. If a politician gets bad news and then starts crying and goes into shock (as Helena claimed she did), then that is not someone with the constitution to sit in Cabinet and make responsible decisions. I believe she is making women look bad.
There is nothing wrong with crying. Everybody cries sometimes. I just think it is a joke for the same people who contributed to chopping her down now holding her up as a victim that proves Stephen Harper is evil to women. He is leading a minority government, and accusations surfaced that Rahim was lobbying government without a license. The government checked their logs, and saw that Rahim was indeed lobbying government from his wife's office. What was the PM supposed to do?
Just watch her response to Peter’s questions about how cocaine found its way into Rahim’s pocket; it was a vacuous we have no idea. Also Rahim never lobbied government, and we know this for sure because he promised her that he would never hurt her career. So if he did, deny, deny, deny would seem to be the order of the day. Plead ignorance, claim to understand nothing, and cry victim over being unfairly cut loose by a Prime Minister who did exactly what he should have done. Will playing the crying game sway anyone?
' Will playing the crying game sway anyone? '
ReplyDeleteNo.
And our Harper-hating media and Libs and Dippers who were her executioners a few days ago,
now having a giant pity party for her,
is laughable.
Canadians are not stupid.
Personally I'm a little embarrassed that I ever considered her competent enough for cabinet.
ReplyDeleteYou shouldn't be embarrassed. You weren't the one who named such an incompetent to an important cabinet post. The day before she got the boot, the PMO made an statement to the press that she was doing a good job in her portfolio. Now, her former colleagues in cabinet can't even remember how to pronounce her name.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oKlXjqEzaA
I'm certainly not swayed by her act. I find it ridiculous, as others have pointed out, that she does an interview with the CBC about this whole thing, after THEY were the ones cheer-leading the oppositions cries for so long to have her ousted from cabinet.
ReplyDeleteI don't think she's a bad person, and she was probably doing a good job at her position. But she IS naive, especially when it comes to her slippery husband. I think her unbridled faith in him is quite misplaced and that it was actually good for the PM that Helena said Harper didn't like him at all. Again, I don't think Jaffer's that bad of a guy either, but he is definitely on the fine edge of skirting laws and rules, and he definitely knows how to sweet talk to his wife (who buys it a little to easily).
Although I think she was treated very unfairly by the media, she herself has now picked up the hammer, and put the last few nails into her federal politics coffin.
Helena did do a good job.
ReplyDeleteAnd the Opps and media did not even try to prove otherwise.
The attacks on her were personal,
and in that department she fell short.
It is an issue of charactor,
something that proves out when put to the test.
Just like Iffy,
she failed that test.
Was she coached and did she try to get from under the bus? Is it too little too late?
ReplyDeletePleading ignorance, do not remember is professional advice.
Voters in her riding have the opportunity to re-elect an independent. They will have the final say. See Bill Casey, John Nunziata, Andre Arthur.
I hold her responsible for her decision for not running out in front of the bus. A review of the airport tape months later? Was this a trap set by the CPC to let her get pummelled? If she had invited the press a day after the hellhole incident to view the alleged "security incident" as alleged behind parliamentary privilege would the taser jokes had a life of their own?
Tiger Woods also waited too long to hold a conference.
Bad advice, misguided loyalty and realizing how expendable you are in the big picture?
Crisis management: Every rule broken along the way. It her political career and she is personally responsible for it, not her party, leader, "friends" in/outside the party.
Winston Churchill switched parties, extended his political career as a decision to be responsible to his own beliefs.
She became emotionally upset about her marriage, makes sense to me her priority beyond politics.
o/t
ReplyDeletewho is the liar?
Amir Attarans client,
or Ed Jager, a Foreign Affairs officer
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/afghan-officer-did-not-suggest-shooting-prisoner-diplomat-says/article1566277/
Well as a CPC member in Simcoe-Grey I was disappointed that she choose to go on CBC to plead her case. The main network that consistantly attemps to smear anyone or anything conservative, next only to CTV's Barney Fife and Gigles Taber, now feels sympathetic towards her point of view. Not likely. With this submission she has burnt her last bridges, made herself look cheap and vindictive, has given CBC and others the chance to change the channel and has made up my mind to cut her lose as my choice as Simcoe-Grey's PC candidate.
ReplyDeleteI had posted before, shortly after April's AGM, that I felt she had been poorly treated both by the media and our party to some degree. At that time I stood by her and thought that should worst come to worst she would do the honourable thing and step down. I now believe I was mistaken in that viewpoint.
BTW I think I recall one Dalton McSquinty also crying tears on national television during the last election. It worked out better for him.
The bottom line here is, whatever the fairness of the allegations, Helena would not have been able to continue to do her job as Minister, Status of Women. She would never be seen to be credible until the dust settled. She has not even taken her MP seat yet. The PM probably could see that the time frame would not be short, and she should know that too.
ReplyDeleteComing forth much earlier might have worked, but her appearance on CBC was rather spiteful, in a passive aggressive way, motivated by the new knowledge that her Simcoe-Grey EDA was not going to be able to support her either. CBC just used the interview to assist with the "mean, secretive PM message". Again, a wrong move on her part... Magnum PI was right on one thing - optics are important.