This Is Awkward

The plot thickens.....

What? You mean we cannot trust what a former lame stream media talking head says? I'm shocked.

If PMSH still wants to abolish the Senate like he did 20 years ago, it looks like he appointed the right guy to bring that about.

Not sure what you're getting at. Duffy never got the cheque from Wright? He really did borrow the money from RBC? Or is it that he lied to "Chris Woodcock"?

The birth of a new word for disgraceful conduct by a gutter snipe politician/urinalist: Pulling a "Duffy" means turning on the party that tried to save you from your own malfeasance, all in a failed attempt to save your ruined reputation. What a shallow pool Mr Duffy turned out to be. I propose there be a new law that bans lawyers and urinalists from holding political office. Both are already paid liars and as such would be double dipping.

I think this is a "rope-a-dope" scandal. So far, the most damaging "factoid" on display is that a political party paid a Senator's legal bills. Who's going to remember that two or three years from now? Who would seriously consider changing their vote because of that? But a faux-scandal such as this is either cooked up by somebody with a hidden agenda, or tolerated by its supposed targets to create a useful diversion. In this case, it may be a perfect alignment of those two different motives. The real question is, who's doing the roping, and who's the dope?

Calgary is the rodeo city.

Also keep journalists out of the Senate. You can't trust them either.

The media are not going to let anyone forget. I don't think a lot of conservative voters will change their vote because of this, but it will make it next to impossible to pick up any further support. Of course, we are so polarized now that it should make little difference. Agreed, it is much ado about nothing but for the LIV that gets all their news from the msm, the conservative party and Harper are definitely wearing the black hats in this saga.

Interesting angle - your suggesting the conservatives taking it on the chin is perhaps deliberate? It's weird, who could be consumed to bother reading all this dreck - I scan the headlines that's it. Food for thought.

Agree also, the election is still 2 years off - this one will be forgotten by then and I 'spects there will two or three more media frenzies along the way as well. It's the nature of the media-progressive set. Oh well - yawn.

The sad thing is, this was all so avoidable.

Duffy's weak character (a shameless and pathetic self-promoter)was well known in Ottawa circles for years before he successfully sucked around for his senate seat.

As I said before: when you put a pig in a palace, don't be surprised if it continues to act like a hog.

Bob Fife will be devastated. A very sad day at CBC HQ.

It is absolutely true that there now exists a perfect opportunity for the Prime Minister; in one-fell-swoop he could both please his base as well as the population at large by using this fiasco to effect positive change to the senate. There has never been so much consent for such changes in many, many years.

Anyone else think Harper could be letting this play out the way it is in order to build support for senate reform?

Why isn't anyone upset with the Senator's respective Provincial citizens for not demanding of their government the ability to hold elections for senators before PM Harper had to appoint one for them?

The politicians that ran the country over a hundred years ago declined to let Alberta and Saskatchewan join confederation as one province; it would have been too powerful for Quebec and Ontario. If citizens want change by abolishing the Senate, let's do it properly and spit up Ontario and Quebec into two provinces each as well as amalgamating several Atlantic provinces in order to make things more equitable for all Canadians.

And still little if any MSM attention to who paid (unions - I wonder if union members thought that was a good use of their union dues?) the NDP's Pat Martin's legal settlement for his slander of a private citizen!

In my world the only individuals that get to claim victim status are:
1. Individuals that have been physically assaulted or
2. Individuals who rely on getting their daily needs met through the kindness of others - such as the frail elderly, children, or those with mental/physical disabilities.

Victims ARE NOT well-educated, well-connected, well-paid political appointees!! Shame on both Pamela and Mike!

It is being proposed here to ban lawyers and journalists from holding federal public office. Remember the concern over Dion and Mulcair holding dual citizenship for Canada and France because of their potential loyalties with another country should they become Prime Minister? Lawyers who wish to run for federal and maybe even provincial office should resign from the Bar to demonstrate that their loyalty is towards Canadian citizens rather than their brethren who stand to benefit from their lawmaking.

This whole putrid affair is nothing more than the proverbial tempest in a teapot. Admittedly, the conduct of certain senators is disgraceful and the entire useless body should be abolished as soon as possible but, at the end of the day, what was the cost to the Canadian taxpayer? PMSH may have shown poor judgement in appointing these privileged nitwits but how many of us can honestly say that we have never exhibited poor judgement at one time or another? And you can bet the farm that Harper won't make the same mistake twice. The media will continue to make sure that this fiasco remains on the front page until it runs out of gas at which time they will do their utmost to invent a replacement. This will continue from now until election time as the media will fling crap in all directions in a vain attempt to have some of it stick to the Prime Minister and his government.

I honestly can't see any conservative voters changing how they cast their ballots. After all, the fact that they voted conservative in the first place indicates a certain degree of intelligence and the ability to recognize bullsh*t when they see it. Those completely lacking in common sense will continue to vote for the thieving Liberals or the lunatic NDP.

It is unfortunate that Mr. Harper must continue to tiptoe around as he governs lest he or his caucus make the slightest misstep and provide ammunition to the media. But that's just the way it is.

So why is Pat Martin getting money from the Unions basically not the same as Duffy getting money from Wright? What is the difference really? The Martin thing is worse in a way since the Unions could expect pay-back. I don't think Wright was going to be asking for political favours of any sort from Duffy.

The comment below was removed from the CBC comments section yesterday.
Obviously I crossed 'a need to know' line somewhere./sarc

Content disabled
Senate leader mulls lighter penalty for Duffy, Wallin, Brazeau - Politics - CBC News
Strange, wall to wall coverage of 3 Conservative Senators.
Fontana, previous Liberal cabinet minister and current Liberal mayor of London Ontario was in court today for the start of his FRAUD charges.
Can't seem to find any reference to this important story anywhere on CBC.
Must be an honest oversight........

I had the radio on yesterday afternoon and started pounding the dash when Duffy said he had turned in a meal allowance receipt for
13.50$
Is ever last crumb that passes over some people's lips have to somehow be paid for by taxpayer money? Does the guy have no "moral compass" himself to claim such a small amount? And why do the same rules that CRA applies to truck drivers that only ONE meal a day can be claimed as an expense on the road, even when the fridge is 3000 miles away, not apply to the elite?
As for Wallen and her cry for sympathy for being a cancer survivor and whatever will she do if she loses her benefits? A very close friend had to cash in her RRSP's to PAY for her own cancer drug treatments. 30+ percent was taken off the top withdrawing those RRSP's to pay tax, the very same tax paying for all the freeloading freebies so boo-hoo Wallen if you lose the benefits.
The whole f&*^$# bunch(media included) reminds me of hogs squealing at a trough...wanting feed or they have upset the trough or sh*t in it.

Honestly. Do real Canadians care? It is simply one set of morally bankrupt patronage appointed politicians defending their sense of self entitlement and soaking the taxpayers for things that most of us can even dream about, against another set of cowardly and morally bankrupt situational expedient politicians soaking at the public trough being egged on by a morally empty, whinnying bunch of trough feeding scum-bag journalists, all who live in that detached from reality zone around Ottawa. I mean how relevant is that? Why is occupying so much time?

Just turned off CBC radio that was lambasting the Harper government for obvious wrong doing. Their so called expert contradicted himself half a dozen times. It makes no dif what the truth is as the talking heads simply move on like a bunch of grazing cattle. 90% of the people in Ottawa are eating off the taxpayers tit so why single out Duffy?

The truly comical aspect of this charade will be as a previous poster suggested that Harper runs a re-election campaign on abolishing the Senate. More inclined to think it will be a non-issue as a big budget surplus will mean goodies for all and total forgiveness for any perceived wrongs in the past. It will all be forgotten as the debate on how top spend a surplus gains traction. We will see whether Harper has the gonads to cut taxes rather than hand out goodies.

The Glengarrian "And why do the same rules that CRA applies to truck drivers that only ONE meal a day can be claimed as an expense on the road"

Don't make up B.S. Truckers claim whatever they spend or without receipts can claim $17 per meal up to 3 meals a day.

"...Anyone else think Harper could be letting this play out the way it is in order to build support for senate reform?....

Absolutely. Mr Harper knows you can lead a horse to water ... but can't make it drink.

Some things takes time. But by Gawd he better have a barn burner of a speech at the upcoming convention.

Liberals, before 2006:
- two budgets put 9 billion in untouchable "foundations" with no accountability
- 3.7 million to set up tattoo parlors in prisons
- AG Sheila Fraser said on top of AdScam, some $800 million in ad contracts since 2000 were questionable
- Cancelling contract to replace aging Sea Kings in 1993 cost $500 million and put troops at risk
- Gun registry supposed to cost $2 million, actually more than $2 billion
- Income trusts: Suspicious trading before Ralph Goodale’s Nov. 23
announcement, under RCMP investigation
- Adscam, Adscam, Adscam
- Allan Rock, Claudette Brashaw, David Anderson, Jane Stewart and Bob Thibault all accepted free fishing trips and/or flights from the wealthy Irving family of New Brunswick
- etc., etc., etc.
Google Linda Williamson, Toronto Sun, "218 Reasons not to vote for the Liberals." Once you reread all that and remind yourself about the unbelievable amounts of lost $ in fraud, waste, corruption and political "entitlements," then go over the Harper/Duffy business and you will realize those two are babes in the woods compared to the racketeers and mobsters that were/are the members of the Liberal Party. The media hardly salivated over what the Libs did back then, though.

"It is unfortunate that Mr. Harper must continue to tiptoe around as he governs lest he or his caucus make the slightest misstep and provide ammunition to the media. But that's just the way it is."

Or he could grow a set, and not give a damn what the media thinks.

Too much to ask though.

"Lawyers who wish to run for federal and maybe even provincial office should resign from the Bar to demonstrate that their loyalty is towards Canadian citizens rather than their brethren who stand to benefit from their lawmaking."

What makes you think that resigning from the "Bar" will make them more loyal to Canadians? They can still make "laws" that the "legal" whores will benefit from, not to mention they'd just go back to the "Bar" whenever they feel finished plundering us.

Another thought. Mulcair is looking very good in this situation. Justin is invisible.

The CPC would love a strong NDP to again split the leftie vote. A weak NDP is NOT in the CPCs favour.

The ONLY reason this is still being spun is that the media party needs to keep little Turdoh out of the spotlight.

I cannot understand why Conservative Senator Don Plett continues to defend Mike Duffy while he attacks Stephen Harper and then pretends he supports Stephen Harper.
It sure looks to me like Senator Don Plett is entitled to his entitlements.

Harper needs to let go of whatever sentimental feeling or overblown fear of Quebec he haas and finally put the senate down like a sick animal. It would erase this story in a heart beat and give Canadians what they want.

We've seen this before with Helium Voiced Helena Guergis.
Harper defends her and media brays for her blood.
Harper kicks her out of caucus for good reasons and suddenly she's on Mansbridge crying her eyes out on the National.

The Glengarrian "a family member that long hauls is limited to one meal expense per day"

Canada Revenue Agency says 3 per day - simplified method. You can have 10 meals per day with detailed method.

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns206-236/229/trnsprttn/mls-eng.html

Sorry - under the detailed method you can claim only 3 meals per day - per the CRA website.

I would guess that Mr. Duffy has more than three meals a day. Question- is if he earns a six figure salary, why the hell are we paying for any of them?

For what it's worth, when I worked for the Evil Feds ( retired 7 years ago), our allowed meal expenses were-
Breakfast- $7.50
Lunch- $12.00
Dinner-$30.00

Probably more now.

E. Fudd
with that kind of budget:

breakfast= a pack of smokes

lunch= one glass freshly squeezed o.j.

dinner= four beers at a Flames game (+$3)

belch

repeat

Four calls here today for PMSH to dump the Senate. Ain't happening.
The Senate is part of the Constitution and in order to amend the Constitution you have to open up the Constitution to virtually infinite change and get all the First Ministers(Premiers) together to agree.

Who remembers Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords?
That was the end of Brian Mulroney and the Premiers at that time tried to get all kinds of B.S. added to the Constitution that their individual parties wanted. It was a train wreck that we aren't likely to see again from any Prime Minister in our lifetime, especially from Stephen Harper.

Albertans don't want the Senate eliminated for reasons having to do with representation(Triple E), and the LPC don't want it eliminated because it's a patronage plum they like to traditionally appoint their loyal party soldiers to.

For me, the big story in this mess is the media. Not the fact that they're covering the story -- they're supposed to -- but that they're hammering on it day after day after day like it's the scandal of the half-century.

It's almost like there's an unwritten rule saying "If it's about the Conservatives, multiply the amount of coverage by 500 so it'll stick."

If you wanna know why, read Deb's 5:00 PM comment.

"Four calls here today for PMSH to dump the Senate. Ain't happening."

Good points Oz. The Senate isn't going anywhere for a while due to the difficulties involved in getting rid of it. As for the CBC ... now that's another parasitic organism that can be much more easily dealt with.