Canadian Cynic: Time for another line of work, Steve.

Sunday, February 07, 2010

Time for another line of work, Steve.

Dear Stephen:

Please fuck off and resign so you can do whatever the hell you want. And leave the governing to people who are actually interested and want to do it well.

Yours truly,
Someone who wants you to fuck off and resign

18 comments:

sooey said...: I wonder if he's leading us to Armageddon first?; 8:50 AM
The Seer said...: King Stephen is actually the Anti-Christ?; 9:22 AM
sooey said...: No. I mean his marriage is rumoured to be on the rocks. Maybe he's decided now is the time for Armageddon.; 9:55 AM
CC said...: If he's headed for a divorce, I feel intensely sorry for Laureen. The instant something like that is confirmed, you know that Canada's Wanker-sphere will launch into a carefully choreographed campaign of character assassination against her.

Stephen will still be the hero, and Laureen will suddenly be a skanky, disloyal, cheating, sleazy leftard. Or something like that.

I'll give you odds. Seriously.; 10:13 AM
The Seer said...: Yeah, sure. What do the rats do when the ship starts to sink?; 10:48 AM
CC said...: This has been another installment of "What the fuck point is Seer trying to make this time"?; 10:56 AM
Backseat Blogger said...: hmm. what's the difference between what the PM did and bill clinton, to take one example, playing the sax on late night tv?

the comments about the status of the Harpers' marriage are really beyond the pale. In canada a politician's private life is just that, private. afterall mackenzie king's oddities were never mentioned in public while he was alive.

or does the privacy rule apply only to Liberal politicians?; 12:31 PM
CC said...: Yo, BB:

When your entire political career is founded on yapping on about your superior morality and the sanctity of marriage, you are totally fair game when your marriage is rumoured to be on the rocks.

Don't like it? Tough shit. Go whine somewhere else.; 1:18 PM
sooey said...: Gosh, how soon some politicos seem to forget Maggie and Pierre.

No one has a private life. That's nonsense. But no one's got a gun to anyone's head saying they have to defend their private life, either. Politicians will do what they do. But the rumour is, Harper's marriage is just for appearances sake at this point.; 2:30 PM
Backseat Blogger said...: cc your're confusing american politics and canadian politics. for sure american politicians - particularly of the holier than thou set - deserve exactly what's coming to them when they caught with their pants down.

Canadian politicians generally don't engage either that moralizing nor do their wives enter the public sphere beyond pro forma events like conventions or christmas cards.

harper has said and done a lot of things worthy of snark and criticism but acting holier than thou(in the moral sense of the word) and his family life is as quiet as those of past PMs.

what has harper and his wife have done to deserve the double standard?

and no, this is not a whine. i'm just really curious is all.

i'll wait breathlessly for your response. please do include real, documented examples.; 5:00 PM
sooey said...: "Canadian politicians and their wives" - spoken like a true Conservative.

What double standard?; 5:58 PM
Niles said...: That would be the woman who went from using her own name to taking her husband's surname because it looked like he was on the verge of taking real power, to improve his conservative optics?

That would be the woman who is on the 'pro forma' stinky arts elite boards that her husband and his party spit on for being non-real Canadians?

That said, I hope IF and I say IF, there is a parting of marriage partners imminent, that she (and even he) is not pressured unduly to keep on with the marriage solely for political and theocratic optics.

That way lies madness. No spousal unit of either sex should have to endure the gender role pressures involved in a farcical illusion presented only to preserve some bastardly version of 'family values' in our society.; 4:18 PM
Metro said...: @Backseat:
Well for one thing, Clinton's wife wasn't the president of the network. Harpo's wife organized the gala he played at.

Comments about the status of the Harper's marriage are simply rumour, as sooey said. But it's a rumour that seems to have a lot of traction in civil service circles, for some reason.

And if you want a comparison, why not look at Trudeau's divorce, when many politicians--Not all of the PCs--claimed it made him unfit to lead the country?; 7:23 PM
bocanut said...: "CC said...
Stephen will still be the hero, and Laureen will suddenly be a skanky, disloyal, cheating, sleazy leftard. Or something like that.

I'll give you odds. Seriously."

Seriously,What kind of odds?
I see you didn't miss a chance to sneakily demean another woman,this time one with whom you have no issue except you don't like her husband.
Only a coward would stoop so low.; 1:43 PM
The Seer said...: My dear boconut:

One wonders if you read the same comment I read.

I took our mentor to predict that you and yours would treat Laureen the same way you treat everyone else who disagrees with Our Lord the King. I did not read CC's comment as criticism of Laureen.

Take another look; maybe I've just got another one of those dish problems.; 2:16 PM
The Seer said...: Talk about different folks taking different strokes from the same thing! Down in the USA, GOP Chairman Michael Steele just shared that he thinks the bad press the Republican National Committee is getting is because of Steele's race! http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/02/this_happened_last_week_but.php?ref=fpblg Truly nuttier than boca.; 2:23 PM
CC said...: Just ignore bocanut. He likes to show up and pretend he wants intellectual discourse, even though he described me in someone else's comments section as a "delusional narcissist."

If you really feel that way, boca, what the fuck are you doing here?; 4:52 PM
bocanut said...: What odds are you giving?; 7:53 PM

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)