Just yesterday, I made this call:
A good deal of the squeaking and squawking from Canada's Dumbass-o-sphere this morning reads something like, "How dare they publish that private conversation between Raitt and MacDonnell? That was private, and private stuff has an expectation of, you know, privacy. 'Cuz it's, well, private!" The bitching and moaning goes on and on, but rest assured, the word "private" plays a prominent part in most of it.
And Blogging Tory "ChuckerCanuck" obliges:
Today, Michael Ignatieff joined the media in abusing the content of a private conversation. They have, together, conjoined, taken a private conversation at violated that privacy. Privacy is fundamental human right and need; without privacy, human beings will go insane. It shouldn't be futzed with unless Michael Ignatieff can demonstrate a meangingful, clear, present ramification for public duties. Is Lisa Raitt collaborating with terrorists? Is she on the take? Is she selling state secrets to the hermit kingdom? No? Nothing like that at all? Then the content of a private conversation - no matter how juicy and gossipy - isn't something Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition should touch.
Thanks for playing, Chucker. By the way, Hunter called -- she wants her thought processes back.