Are Tory MPs being muzzled?

[Topaz]

Just read were Tory MPs are saying they won't be talking to the media and some may not do debates, UNTIL AFTER the election. Well, I guess one can't blame them, its going to be hard to defend their parties time on the House and all the scams and schemes but I wonder what their constituents think of that? My MP is a Tory and last election they didn't want to show up to a debate and they felt the blow back from the voters in the local paper telling them what they thought of the MP, so the next debate they did show up. http://www.thestar.com/news/federal-election/2015/08/26/tory-candidates-told-to-avoid-debates-media-during-campaign.html

[PIK]

A good friend of mine is a MP and he laughs at that. They are just more careful of what they say. And yes harper expects that of them

[waldo]

A good friend of mine is a MP and he laughs at that. They are just more careful of what they say. And yes harper expects that of them

Harper Conservative Openness, Accountability and Transparency™ --- if you actually bother to read the article, you'll see references to Harper Conservative candidates being told to avoid formal debate... to not attend local constituency all-candidate forums... to avoid speaking to the media.

[Queenmandy85]

All parties have been faced with the problem of candidates saying (or having said in the past) something that seems like a good idea in the moment, but later comes across as not such a good idea. I want politicians to say what they think and I don't hold gaffs against them. We all say things that later appear as stupid. It does not mean we are stupid. Our politicians are a reflection of ourselves. However, new technology has allowed opponents to grasp everything we say and use it against us. Hence, candidates are wise to say nothing, unfortunately. In the words of the great Norman Wolf "Let your words be wiser than your silence or be silent.

I never voted for Pierre Trudeau but he always gave me the impression that he was never afraid. I remember the 1968 St. Jean Baptiste parade where separatists began throwing bottles at Trudeau's box. His companions and his RCMP Security tried to pull Trudeau away. He shook them off and sat alone to face the attack. No fear. That is what I want to see in our politicians.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Queenmandy85

[PIK]

All parties have been faced with the problem of candidates saying (or having said in the past) something that seems like a good idea in the moment, but later comes across as not such a good idea. I want politicians to say what they think and I don't hold gaffs against them. We all say things that later appear as stupid. It does not mean we are stupid. Our politicians are a reflection of ourselves. However, new technology has allowed opponents to grasp everything we say and use it against us. Hence, candidates are wise to say nothing, unfortunately. In the words of the great Norman Wolf "Let your words be wiser than your silence or be silent.

I never voted for Pierre Trudeau but he always gave me the impression that he was never afraid. I remember the 1968 St. Jean Baptiste parade where separatists began throwing bottles at Trudeau's box. His companions and his RCMP Security tried to pull Trudeau away. He shook them off and sat alone to face the attack. No fear. That is what I want to see in our politicians.

That was a set to show that trudeau was not a separatist, which he was.

[Argus]

All parties have been faced with the problem of candidates saying (or having said in the past) something that seems like a good idea in the moment, but later comes across as not such a good idea. I want politicians to say what they think and I don't hold gaffs against them. We all say things that later appear as stupid. It does not mean we are stupid.

Unfortunately, it only takes one poorly thought out sentence to end someone's political career. You might not hold gaffs against them but the press certainly does!

Look, Harper was with that batch of neophyte MPs who showed up in Ottawa with stars in their eyes long ago. They were going to do everything different. They were going to be cooperative, and adult, and not insult people in the House. They wouldn't boo or disparage others, and openly discussed with reporters whatever the reporters wanted them to.

The Ottawa press gallery reacted like a bunch of starving wolves set loose amid a herd of blind sheep. They delighted in baiting Reform MPs, in laying out verbal traps before them or posing theoretical questions, then big headlines trumped how ignorant, how racist, how bigoted the party was based on either what one MP, or an MPs staff member said or could be interpreted to have said. It was a stellar performance of a group of smug, sanctimonious, elitists who didn't want a bunch of ignorant yokels from the west anywhere near power.

Is ANYONE surprised Harper came to loathe the media and give them no cooperation in their still eager quest to find quotes and misstatements they can use to embarrass conservatives?

[PIK]

And the one time harper opened up in a interview with mansbridge ,he said he is for capital punishment for heinous crimes only. He also said he would not bring it up as PM and he was raked over the coals for it.

[cybercoma]

Harper's not interested in anyone's votes other than the people who decide who to vote for like they decide who their favourite hockey team is. The throw on their blue jerseys and don't even bother to make a decision. Harper doesn't want nor need anyone outside of his base because there is no rightwing alternative to the Conservatives. Those on the right have no choices. There is no decision to be made.

[waldo]

Is ANYONE surprised Harper came to loathe the media and give them no cooperation in their still eager quest to find quotes and misstatements they can use to embarrass conservatives?

even if one were to accept your premise, does that then give Harper/Harper Conservatives the further/additional latitude to purposely take, out of context or with missing context, the words of other political leaders... or to take misstatements, solely intended to embarrass? Oh right, to you, that's just politics, hey!

in actuality... I will posit that Harper can't help himself in regards his own 'foot-in-mouth' past. Harper is certainly no master of responding to ad-hoc questions - that's certainly been showcased over the years. Why else would the media be so controlled so as to ensure only 'vetted questions' from 'vetted media' are ever asked in daily formal gatherings... notwithstanding, of course, Harper's penchant for ignoring actual questions and reverting to his script should any question ever squeak by his handlers!

.

[Moonlight Graham]

All MP's from the major parties are muzzled by their parties. Tell me how many MP's you've actually seen publicly break ranks and speak their own opinions or stand for the opinions of their constituents that was contrary to party policy at the time? If you were lucky to see it, they were surely punished for it. That's how our system seems to function. If an MP disagrees with party policy, they must only express it during closed-door caucus meetings, away from the media and voters. Once caucus breaks, they must tow the party line, both in speech and while voting legislation, or be punished. Welcome to Canadian democracy.

Harper is the worst of them all, a total control freak. He has muzzled scientists because he's fully aware that the science will be contrary to his environmental policies. Now this. Harper has consistent disdain for the fourth estate, the news media, because they dare criticize him, ask him tough questions, or report his shortcomings. Those bastards!

Edited August 27, 2015 by Moonlight Graham

[On Guard for Thee]

I suspect Harper has put his foot down even heavier than usual with regard to any openness to the press in the wake of the recent bad PR he has acquired on the campaign trail while the Duffy trial was at top of mind for a lot of the public, as well as the press. Especially the horror show that occurred even within his own vetted people with one of his supporters giving the "lying piece of s&*t" description to some of the press. I guess when you have those types of people among your ranks it probably is better to hide under the bed.

[Derek 2.0]

All MP's from the major parties are muzzled by their parties.

Exactly, within the past weeks several NDP candidates were tossed for voicing their opinions which run counter to their party, Likewise, the two past NDP MPs that left the party after voting with the Government on the removal of the LGR..........the meme of Harper's trained seals is rich when all parties that want to form Government require message control.......

[waldo]

hell ya! Harper Conservatives sure don't want the likes of this guy speaking his mind to the media... or taking questions at an all-candidates forum:

Tory Candidate Deletes Facebook Page After Violent And Sexual Posts Come To Light

Edited August 27, 2015 by waldo

[Argus]

even if one were to accept your premise, does that then give Harper/Harper Conservatives the further/additional latitude to purposely take, out of context or with missing context, the words of other political leaders... or to take misstatements, solely intended to embarrass? Oh right, to you, that's just politics, hey!

Yes, that's politics the way the people of Canada WANT it. They might claim otherwise, just like they claim they want small, environmentally sensitive cars, but show a marked preference for big gas guzzlers.

in actuality... I will posit that Harper can't help himself in regards his own 'foot-in-mouth' past

I don't know that Harper's ever been the direct victim of the media's gotcha game. Do you have a cite?

Harper is certainly no master of responding to ad-hoc questions - that's certainly been showcased over the years.

I don't remember any particular case where he's screwed up. Refresh my memory.

Why else would the media be so controlled so as to ensure only 'vetted questions' from 'vetted media'

Because he doesn't trust the media. I thought I already said that.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Argus

[Argus]

hell ya! Harper Conservatives sure don't want the likes of this guy speaking his mind to the media... or taking questions at an all-candidates forum:

Tory Candidate Deletes Facebook Page After Violent And Sexual Posts Come To Light

"Never get into fights with ugly people, they have nothing to lose."

That August, he posted, "Karma takes too long. I'd rather beat the shit out of you now."

Meh. Typical college boy stuff pulled from the internet and re-quoted. Terming it 'violent' or 'sexual' is the type of hysterical overexageration the media is famous for.

[Argus]

Exactly, within the past weeks several NDP candidates were tossed for voicing their opinions which run counter to their party, Likewise, the two past NDP MPs that left the party after voting with the Government on the removal of the LGR..........the meme of Harper's trained seals is rich when all parties that want to form Government require message control.......

The fact we're not hearing complaints from any of the NDP members about his 'conservative' campaign and how he's tossed the party policy manual is a pretty good indication that Mulcair has a type lock on his people.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Argus

[Topaz]

That was a set to show that trudeau was not a separatist, which he was.

Can u proof Justin is a separatist? How about a PM that seems more of a divider of a country.

[SpankyMcFarland]

All parties have been faced with the problem of candidates saying (or having said in the past) something that seems like a good idea in the moment, but later comes across as not such a good idea. I want politicians to say what they think and I don't hold gaffs against them. We all say things that later appear as stupid. It does not mean we are stupid. Our politicians are a reflection of ourselves. However, new technology has allowed opponents to grasp everything we say and use it against us. Hence, candidates are wise to say nothing, unfortunately. In the words of the great Norman Wolf "Let your words be wiser than your silence or be silent.I never voted for Pierre Trudeau but he always gave me the impression that he was never afraid. I remember the 1968 St. Jean Baptiste parade where separatists began throwing bottles at Trudeau's box. His companions and his RCMP Security tried to pull Trudeau away. He shook them off and sat alone to face the attack. No fear. That is what I want to see in our politicians.

What is the point of an election if candidates won't explain themselves? Why bother with all this expensive democracy stuff?

[Bryan]

I know three of our local CPC MPs fairly well, two of them go to my church. The idea that any of them are muzzled is ludicrous. They stay on and (for the most part) go along with what the party says, for the same reason they joined the party in the fist place. They share the many of same values.

Not all the same values though. One of these MPs in particular has been a thorn in PM Harper's side bringing forward several private members bills and attending rallies for things the party does not endorse and wishes he would not do. Has Harper told him that he doesn't like it? Absolutely. But he kept doing it, and there absolutely were no consequences.

[Moonlight Graham]

Exactly, within the past weeks several NDP candidates were tossed for voicing their opinions which run counter to their party, Likewise, the two past NDP MPs that left the party after voting with the Government on the removal of the LGR..........the meme of Harper's trained seals is rich when all parties that want to form Government require message control.......

I'm sorry but your party is still the worst offender. Likely the worst in my lifetime. There's no excuse for it.

[Derek 2.0]

I'm sorry but your party is still the worst offender. Likely the worst in my lifetime. There's no excuse for it.

How so? By what measure are you using?

Social Conservatives can still voice their opinions, but their social agenda is marginalized by the party for the most part......

[On Guard for Thee]

I know three of our local CPC MPs fairly well, two of them go to my church. The idea that any of them are muzzled is ludicrous. They stay on and (for the most part) go along with what the party says, for the same reason they joined the party in the fist place. They share the many of same values.

Not all the same values though. One of these MPs in particular has been a thorn in PM Harper's side bringing forward several private members bills and attending rallies for things the party does not endorse and wishes he would not do. Has Harper told him that he doesn't like it? Absolutely. But he kept doing it, and there absolutely were no consequences.

That's because they are relatively low level, and I'm guessing, but probably in CPC safe seats? Don't try that at the higher levels or you end up under the bus with the rest of them. Could Novak be next?

[Moonlight Graham]

How so? By what measure are you using?

Harper has an unhealthy, undemocratic disdain for anyone who dares question him or get between him and his agenda. He's a control freak. Muzzling government scientists, muzzling the press corps, muzzling his own MP's, his disdain for the UN, his refusal to participate in the main consortium debates, proroguing Parliament to prevent a vote of no-confidence, proroguing to prevent questioning on the Afghan detainee scandal.

[Derek 2.0]

Harper has an unhealthy, undemocratic disdain for anyone who dares question him or get between him and his agenda. He's a control freak. Muzzling government scientists, muzzling the press corps, muzzling his own MP's, his disdain for the UN, his refusal to participate in the main consortium debates, proroguing Parliament to prevent a vote of no-confidence, proroguing to prevent questioning on the Afghan detainee scandal.

Could not many of those same charges not be leveled against Mulcair too?

[jacee]

What is the point of an election if candidates won't explain themselves? Why bother with all this expensive democracy stuff?

Yup. No point at all in a party running for election if the candidates won't speak to the people.

Ludicrous.