Friday, June 06, 2008

But ... but ... but ... that's DIFFERENT!


Blogging Tory Jarrett Plonka separates himself from the braying, drooling pack of his BT colleagues long enough to make a cogent observation:

I'm perfectly fine making fun of Dion for failing to pay off his leadership debts. But fercrissakes, shouldn't the party making such remarks at least not be guilty of that same sin?

Not surprisingly, the first comments on that post are how that's clearly different:

The difference is this is the guy who wants to lead our country...

So PM Harper, the leader of the CPC, has not paid his debts?? ...

Of course, if if turned out that Stephen Harper had failed to pay off his debts, that would still have been different. Because it would have been. Somehow.

5 comments:

Ti-Guy said...

So PM Harper, the leader of the CPC, has not paid his debts??

That "Platty" thing is Hunter-level dumb.

...Anyway, if we have to play that stupid game, who exactly financed Harper's leadership campaign for the Canadian Alliance?

Greg said...

It would be nice to know how Harper paid off his debts. He still hasn't revealed who donated to his leadership campaign.

Red Tory said...

That's different.

Cameron Campbell said...

Very different.

See one is just shitty accounting and bad fund raising...


the other one lacks transparency and allows people to imagine all sorts of bad shit.

Cameron Campbell said...

Oh, and the first is completely legal.. though it bugs me that MPs have such leeway with paying back debts...

I can imagine the conversation with my bank

Me: well I can't pay my mortgage this month.
Bank: Why?
Me: It's been a bad fundraising quarter for me.
Bank: Tough shit, we're seizing it in 30 days.