Shameless Jack Layton....

[Viggo Rasmussen]

"The TV screen was up there, he moved her arm to be able to see...She was clearly not upset or anything like that. She is a friend of a former NDP candidate who happened to sit beside them for the game. They shared a great Canadian moment and enjoyed a few beers together."

—Jack Layton's press secretary Karl Bélanger

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/battle-of-olympic-photo-ops/article1485684/

lol

 

[landscaper]

Truth be told.....JAck reached out and innapropriatley touched that woman...without her consent.

He risked being charged with assault!!

How dare he 'force' her arm down to stymie her!!

Forget all the Harper stuff......this thread was about Layton...

WHY DID HE NOT CELEBRATE WITH HIS CONSTITUENTS???...where truly the VOTES ARE!!
and he clearly went there to BE ON TV.....I might add..OUT OF HIS RIDING!!!!!!!!

I don't think his wife is going to charge him with anything, yep thats Olivia CHow who had the shear nerve to get between Jack and a camera. Silly silly girl. I hope he has a comfortable dog house

 

[mattd40]

Since he shut down the government to show up on the podium, there's no way anyone can call it 'picking on' Harper. Nobody ever asked for it louder.

Because the line about hating your country is so idiotic, do tell us your opinion of the little guy from Shawinigan. Or Trudeau

your gonna hear it and like it

 

[ogibowt]

Layton is a publicity whore as is his wife. Seeing his mug did sort of ruin the moment but hats off to CTV for not acknowledging him.

As far as Harper being on tv the obvious difference was that it was either a part of being part of the official party or it was the network seeking him out in the crowd rather than him seeking out the camera. Layton knows, on the other hand, that no one will seek him out so he resorts to this amateur hour stuff.

gee train,,he must be the only politician who is an "attention whore"..the rest of them are shrinking violets i guess..

 

[Ref]

Was Jacko's sin going to the bar? Or was it not leaving when he saw the camera was there?

His sin was having to take his old lady to the bar with him........whipped!

 

[oldjones]

Actually, I do care.. I shouldn't have typed that.. I just don't wish to debate it here.

I don't feel it's careless to comment on a specific issue. You're one of the worst people on this board for single minded partisanship so I felt I needed to defend the PM in this case. I'm no fan of Stephen Harper but I'm open minded enough to know that all leaders of all political parties do some good things and some bad things.. in this case I felt you were unfairly slagging him off. There's many things he may be worthy of contempt for but this isn't one of them.
You said that "since you have" (commented on the other issues).. other than confirming that Jack Layton was at the bar, please tell me what I said.

Edit: I misread and saw that you said I should refrain from carelessly commenting on other issues, which I didn't do.

If you "…do not care to comment", but do so anyway, then you must be commenting care-less-ly. Sorry, guess my attempted play on words misfired.

Glad you're so fair-minded about defending Harper—who sure needs the defence—even though you're no fan. I feel the same (no fan) about Jack, but I still think he has the right to go to a sports bar, on his own time, with his wife. Whether or not CTV is there, and whether or not he knew they would be.

Even if it was calculated ploy to get on TV, when stacked up against shutting down the entire government—including killing all those oh so vital government bills that were in process—that's the merest peccadillo of pride compared to Harper's which amounts to dereliction of duty*. And, like you, I felt the guy needed a defence against the obsessed (single-minded implies thought, and there clearly was none) partisanship of the OP and his ilk.

I underlined the stuff "…other than confirming that Jack Layton was at the bar", in this post (similar in your others), since you asked.

* One of your 'other than Jack Goes To a Bar' points was that the PM of the host country has a "duty" to attend the Games. Beyond a courtesy welcoming address, I'd argue that duty might well be left to our Head of State while her PM goes back to work, especially with a budget to prepare, so difficult and important it was the other reason he gave for taking a time out. But that's just my opinion, and you did say you weren't discussing anything but Jack, didn't you? But if you are, my question about whether other PMs shut down Parliament when hosting in Montreal and Calgary is still on the table.

 

[train]

See, you think it is wrong to speak for others than yourself!!

lol and both of us like doing the "wrong thing" on occasion I see. Well at least we do it concisely instead of blathering on aimlessly about Harper in any thread regardless of topic like oldjones.

 

[oldjones]

lol and both of us like doing the "wrong thing" on occasion I see. Well at least we do it concisely instead of blathering on aimlessly about Harper in any thread regardless of topic like oldjones.

Concisely wrong is a hardly a virtue to boast of. But in a thread about the sin of going to a bar and getting caught on camera, anything goes.

 

[train]

Concisely wrong is a hardly a virtue to boast of. But in a thread about the sin of going to a bar and getting caught on camera, anything goes.

Better than blathering and still being wrong , but hey two sentences that's a big improvement. Congrats.

 

[Tangwhich]

If you "…do not care to comment", but do so anyway, then you must be commenting care-less-ly. Sorry, guess my attempted play on words misfired.

Glad you're so fair-minded about defending Harper—who sure needs the defence—even though you're no fan. I feel the same (no fan) about Jack, but I still think he has the right to go to a sports bar, on his own time, with his wife. Whether or not CTV is there, and whether or not he knew they would be.

Even if it was calculated ploy to get on TV, when stacked up against shutting down the entire government—including killing all those oh so vital government bills that were in process—that's the merest peccadillo of pride compared to Harper's which amounts to dereliction of duty*. And, like you, I felt the guy needed a defence against the obsessed (single-minded implies thought, and there clearly was none) partisanship of the OP and his ilk.

I underlined the stuff "…other than confirming that Jack Layton was at the bar", in this post (similar in your others), since you asked.

* One of your 'other than Jack Goes To a Bar' points was that the PM of the host country has a "duty" to attend the Games. Beyond a courtesy welcoming address, I'd argue that duty might well be left to our Head of State while her PM goes back to work, especially with a budget to prepare, so difficult and important it was the other reason he gave for taking a time out. But that's just my opinion, and you did say you weren't discussing anything but Jack, didn't you? But if you are, my question about whether other PMs shut down Parliament when hosting in Montreal and Calgary is still on the table.

Yet again you've asked me a question that goes beyond the scope of what I wrote. Your second to last sentence has me confused so let me make it clear.

My posting was regarding a very specific issue. You twice made reference to the PM attending the games at the expense of taxpayers as a negative. I defended that action as I felt the PM (doesn't matter who it is) had a duty to attend the games and the public should be expected to pick up the tab.
With exception of confirming a FACT about Jack Layton I made no other comments or gave any opinions. I may agree with your other positions in this thread or I may not. I never said nor am I going to say now.

The one thing you said that relevant to my topic is suggesting that the Head of State attend rather than the PM. It's a fair point but in my opinion I don't agree. If I'm of another nationality somewhere else in the world watching the games and I see that the host nation couldn't be bothered to send their leader to the games I would think that rather odd. I would hope that if my nation were to host the games that my leader would have the courtesy to attend.

 

[oldjones]

Tang,you repeatedly said, "…I don't care about the other issues, I was just confirming that it was indeed Jack Layton at the bar." then in spite of that, posted about 'other issues', like what PM's should and shouldn't do. But it's now apparent that it was the actual topic of the OP: Layton's shamelessness that you meant we should understand as the "other issues". How foolish of me to miss that.

To summarize: we both agree Layton was there. Neither of us criticizes him for it. Whoopee.

Moving on to Harper at The Games: Frankly I don't care a fig whether he was there or not, but I do care that he said the business of Parliament had to stop while he and his cronies went. A point you've chosen to ignore.

Presuming to read the minds of other nationalities is even more dubious than those who imagined they could read Layton's. There still are people in the world who appreciate the difference between the Head of State and his or her hired chief minister. F'rinstance it would be a serious breach of protocol, and an insult for Harper to be first, or the only one to welcome an American President (who combines both functions).

But even if we concede that the PM must attend the games, not just show for the opening, because it would insult the world, how does he do that? Was he at every event everyday? Is it OK to insult lugers? Was he there watching Bilodeau win that first gold? If he can miss any, he can be in Ottawa. It's really an unmakeable point, and trying to underscores the one real point being resolutely ducked: Partytime in Van over Parliament. Other PMs managed to be gracious hosts, and do their job. But isn't that another point not addressed w/ your 'he was only there because he had to be' defence? That he's the only PM who can't do the Olympic walk and chew government gum at the same time?

When that huge fault of Harper's remains unaddressed, questioning Jacko's lust for TV facetime is more trivial than anyone but a desperate con could come up with. And so's arguing about a PM at the Olympics. Whether he should be in the House doing the business of our democratic government, now that's a worthy topic.

So far it would appear you think it's an 'other issue' you don't care to talk about. But I'll be here

 

[Tangwhich]

Tang,you repeatedly said, "…I don't care about the other issues, I was just confirming that it was indeed Jack Layton at the bar." but in spite of that, posted about 'othere issues' like what PM's should and shouldn't do. But apparently it was the actual topic of the OP: Layton's shamelessness that you meant we should understand as the "other issues". How foolish of me to miss that.

To summarize: we both agree Layton was there. Neither of us criticizes him for it. Whoopee.

Moving on to Harper at The Games: Frankly I don't care a fig whether he was there or not, but I do care that he said the business of Parliament had to stop while he and his cronies went. A point you've chosen to ignore.

Presuming to read the minds of other nationalities is even more dubious than those who imagined they could read Layton's. There still are people in the world who appreciate the difference between the Head of State and his or her hired chief minister. F'rinstance it would be a serious breach of protocol, and an insult for Harper to be first, or the only one to welcome an American President (who combines both functions).

But even if we concede that the PM must attend the games, not just show for the opening, because it would insult the world, how does he do that? Was he at every event everyday? Is it OK to insult lugers? Was he there watching Bilideau win gold? It's a silly point, and making it underscores the real point you have resolutely ducked, which is the shutting down of Parliament to do it. Other PMs managed to be gracious hosts without doing so, but then they also knew how to get stuff done democratically. But isn't that another point you haven't addressed w/ your 'he was only there because he had to be' defence.

When that huge fault of Harper's remains unaddressed, questioning Jacko's lust for TV facetime is more trivial than anyone but a desperate con could come up with. And so's arguing about a PM at the Olympics. Whether he should be in the House doing the business of our democratic government? That is a topic worth the time.

Again, my point was very, very specific. The use of tax payers money to fund the PM and his family attending the games. I'm not ducking your questions, they are not relevant to what I'm saying. House of commons open or not, I have no problem with the PM attending the game at the expense of tax payers.

 

[danmand]

Again, my point was very, very specific. The use of tax payers money to fund the PM and his family attending the games. I'm not ducking your questions, they are not relevant to what I'm saying. House of commons open or not, I have no problem with the PM attending the game at the expense of tax payers.

Me neither, although one could with some reason argue, that if Harper is too
"otherwise engaged" to go to parliament, it is hard to understan that he has time to
show his ugly mug at the games.

I agree with oldjones that the issue of shutting down parliament for partisan
purposes is INFINITELY more important than who is on what channel of TV.

 

[fmahovalich]

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO ISSUE WITH THE PRIME MINISTER BEING AT THE GAMES.

YOUR CRITICISM WOULD HAVE ONLY BEEN LOUDER IF HE WERE NOT THERE.....I CAN HEAR IT NOW

"Where was the leader of our country..in our host nation...he chose to spend time with his family rather than represent our country...."

So for you anti Harperites...it seems he is in a no win in your mind!!!

As for Parliament shutdown


Ignatieff has dropped 2% in popularity since Parliament stopped. And he is not below Layton in Popularityy.

New poll suggests that HArper would win another election if held now.

And that was before the feel good aspect of the games is polled.

As for Layton....The TV he was watching was in fact behind him.....And then when he noted that GRetzkys was being braodcast..he turned to the CAMERA.....NOT the TV.

Again I ask...why did he not glad hand/celebrate with HIS CONSTITUENTS.....in HIS RIDING????

 

[Tangwhich]

Me neither, although one could with some reason argue, that if Harper is too
"otherwise engaged" to go to parliament, it is hard to understan that he has time to
show his ugly mug at the games.

I agree with oldjones that the issue of shutting down parliament for partisan
purposes is INFINITELY more important than who is on what channel of TV.

Points worthy of debate, but I'll let other people duke that out.

 

[fmahovalich]

PERHAPS THE RUNNING OF PARLIAMENT...SHUT DOWN OR NOT...

more important THAN LAYTON MUGGING FOR THE CAMERA. Im sure it is...

But this theead was about JAck Layton being shameless.....HE SURELY WAS!!!!!!

 

[Captain Fantastic]

Again I ask...why did he not glad hand/celebrate with HIS CONSTITUENTS.....in HIS RIDING????

Grow up. And stop shouting.

He was at Gretzky's, which is in Trinity-Spadina - the riding of his wife, Olivia Chow. Which also happens to be the riding they live in.

I don't like Jack's politics or his public persona. But anyone who jumps on him for being at a bar that was "the place" to be during the Olympics with his family (not just his wife, btw) are blindly partisan asshats.

Particularly when they defend Stephen Harper being at every possible event in Vancouver because "that's his job as Prime Minister." Bullshit - you can't have it both ways. Mr. Harper's job as PM is to run the country - that could extend to being a part of the Opening and/or Closing Ceremonies. Not showing up at every event a Canadian was expected to medal in, including three events in three different locations in one day. THAT, partisan denizens of TERB is even more shameless and grandstanding than Mr. Layton acting like a goofy kid ("Look at me, I'm on TV!") in a bar in Toronto.

 

[train]

I agree with oldjones that the issue of shutting down parliament for partisan
purposes is INFINITELY more important than who is on what channel of TV.

Yes and that has its own thread which seems impossible for you and the old fart to comprehend. It this thread is so unimportant to you one has to question why you are so actively participating.

BTW I would have had no problem if Layton had gone to some of the events in Vancouver it somehow seems less pathetic than jossling to be on camera at Gretsky's

 

[danmand]

Yes and that has its own thread which seems impossible for you and the old fart to comprehend. It this thread is so unimportant to you one has to question why you are so actively participating.

BTW I would have had no problem if Layton had gone to some of the events in Vancouver it somehow seems less pathetic than jossling to be on camera at Gretsky's

grow up.

 

[oldjones]

Again, my point was very, very specific. The use of tax payers money to fund the PM and his family attending the games. I'm not ducking your questions, they are not relevant to what I'm saying. House of commons open or not, I have no problem with the PM attending the game at the expense of tax payers.

Nor do I, but neither of our views on that very small, very specific and quite precise matter you have reduced your concern to is relevant to this thread, about how a politician should conduct him or herself publicly.