I give it 6 months.

Yes, first they come with the "take your order" paper, next they come with the ribs. Ooops, sorry, taht's the Outback.

I can't figure out if the guy needs a cherry belly or a wedgie.

Harper likes to fight.

He's been petulant; the press gallery has been petulant. It goes.

What's a cherry belly?

Harper likes to sook. This isn't fighting.

freaking outrageous and the g&m should run the headline "harper - too scared (or is it stupid?) to take questions." the next day "harper still to scared to take questions" and the day after.......and so it should go. big sook is right. what an idiot.

And the opposition should ask questions only of other mermber of the caucus during question period finishing everyone with a follow up question "you want to check that with Steve?"

I don't have this problem in Annexia. Here the people have always already agreed with me. Hence no need for questions. The People, The Party, Flea!

What bugs me the most is the unnecessary nature of the stance. He has a plan, so play out the plan. It might even be a good plan. But why all the touchy grudgey stuff. That is only going to shorten his lifespan in the office and the chances of the plan being put in place. No one likes a sook in a suit.

I am glad the Flea is not a sook.

Harper takes his cues very well from Dubya down South. It won't play up here, but apparently, he's not smart enough to realize that.

I do not agree. This is his own doing. I still think he needs me as a surrogate pal to tell him not to be so foolish when he does stuff like this. Gary, too, to feed him cheeses.

Maybe it was because I saw the demise of Agent Smith last night but I am starting to feel for he-who-needs-a-cherry-belly. Look at the Globe this morning:<p><center><img src="images/2006b/klein.JPG" vspace="2" border="1"></center><p>I thought we were going to be past all this in the new era. What can be done to help the poor fella?

Ol' George started stacking White House press conferences with friendly plants and favouring Republican papers in his first term, Alan.

I can't even remotely picture the "logic" behind "avoiding the national press", though. How does he figure that he'll win the country over if the only reporter he speaks to is Scoop McScoop from Podunk, AB?

The option given by the press gallery is that they get to pick who asks the questions.

Is there another option?

What's his beef with your ribs? Are they not Albertan?
Spare me! Don't be so saucy. He has no bone to pick with you.
The press will get to the meat of the issue, after a slow roast and some raking over the coals.
Then you can liberally post as many carnivorous pictures you want, regardless of chief sitting bull.

More plants. Good, Gordo. We have to be positive about these things.

Hmmm...free press...seeking information frre from government interference...hmmm...somehow the penny just does not drop for me...back to you Don.<p>I am thinking some easy to manage leafy greens that can travel with him. Then we will get used to the plants and gain a measure of comfort.

The Press gallery is there to keep the Government honest and shine the brutal light of day into the dark corners that they want ot hide from us. If he doesn't wan tot play ball with the press, the press had better get digging into why and what's he afraid will shrivel and burn in the sunlight of public examination.

As usual with Canadian politics, the question down here is 'what the hell are you people talking about?'
Alan, what sort of cheese should it be? Maybe some sort of horseradish infused something to clear the sinuses and knock sense into the bastard.
I'd vote Flea, early and often.

And Chretien referred to himself as a street fighter. He was an amateur:
<blockquote>
Harper made clear on Wednesday that he would focus on local media and ignore the Ottawa press. Many journalists this week reacted to the dispute by boycotting an announcement by Harper after it became clear that he would not take questions.
<p>In response, Harper's office circulated a memo to friendly lobbyists asking them to make the point that the journalists who walked out were lazy.<p>
"It's clear that some reporters are complaining about too much work," said the note, which was obtained by the Globe and Mail newspaper.
</blockquote>
Wow

I'm having a good laugh here at the Liberals and NDPers who will never vote CPC [because of the brand, not policy] providing all this excellent advice about how to appeal to NDP and Liberal reporters who, in a million years will never give the CPC a break.

To quote a friend from back in the late 80's: "If the Martians are monitoring the airwaves here, they'd think the biggest story on Earth is CBC cutbacks".

Your assumption (which you hold dear and repeat somwehat) that there is an NDP and Liberal media is fairly faith-based, David. Prove it. I would tihnk the same would be said about CBC Newsworld and the state of business as being the state of the nation.

Harper calling people he walk away from from lazy would be rich if it were true.

He[Harper] just needs to have the balls to hire someone that is possibly smarter and who will disagree with him when he is out of line.

That is why he is doomed even if he gets to a majority. Sooner or later his own will eat him and apologize for his control freak nuttiness. The renamed <i>NDP Toronto Star</i> has a funny take on this:<blockquote class="smalltext">Without a managed and cowtowing media how would these "leaders" of our nation disseminate the propaganda? The person responsible for making decisions that affect the lives of 32 million Canadians won't answer reporters' questions because they might be too tough. Let's give him an easier job. Apparently, Wal-Mart is looking for greeters. And he'd get to wear the Tory blue.</blockquote>What is most maddening is what he really said:<blockquote class="smalltext">"Unfortunately the press gallery has taken the view they are going to be the opposition to the government," Harper told London's A-Channel TV.</blockquote>Apparently the A-Channel, that media outlet of record, is not caught in a NDP and Liberal cartel. But note that the press should not in opposition. Maritime Canadians will recognize the tactic of Buchanan and Binns, the cornering of the press to be a government press release outlet. That is where cherry-to-be wants the free press to be place - in it's place. See because he is the sort of guy who tell others what there place is. He has those powers because, well it's a constitutional thing you would not understand. Get with the program.

Then we get this sort of sorta pathetic self-censorship to ensure you remain an insider:<blockquote class="smalltext">You're right. It's amazingly tiresome. If the prime minister were feeling less stubborn, many of my colleagues would feel less stubborn too. And, yes, vice versa. It's like Kissinger's famous take on campus politics: the mood is so acrimonious because the stakes are so low.<p>I'm about ready to give up and sign up for the prime minister's stupid lists. But it's only fair to point out that, when I test-marketed that attitude with colleagues this afternoon, I didn't find many takers. And I file once a week; my more combative colleagues file daily, if not more often, which goes a long way toward explaining why they're more combative.<p>One thing's for sure. I've spared my print audience this debate because the larger audience for our paper product does not deserve to be tortured with our exquisite beltway debates. That means readers of this blog have had to bear the burden of my breathless updates on the latest spat between Harper's PMO and the emboldened scribes.<p>But by now, I'm sure even my blog audience wants relief. So I won't be writing about this feud any more. Past a certain point, some plotlines are just too tiresome to pursue.</blockquote>So now you should take what Mr. Wells has to say on the PMO with that grain of salt one always give an approved spokesperson.

I wonder how long it will take Harper to change his mind? Once he sees all government business being focussed through the lens of the Opposition (who, naturally, are very willing to talk to the Press Corps). Whether he likes it or not, he needs the Press Corps <b>more</b> than they need him. Far more.

The reporters aren't the story. Politics may be show biz for ugly people; but reporters are still at outside the window looking in. If there's some great scoop they need to get at and they feel they're being denied that crucial 45 seconds in a press conference, they can always feed the question through a friendly politician. If there's some "question that's really an assertion" (and we've discussed this before Al, with regards to Bush), well, they can go eat sh*t.

<p>
This is why, even if Harper wins a majority, he will lose. Look! They all lost, quit (or maybe died?).

As long as you think the role of reporters is to receive and copy out press releases, you will find those 95% of journalists who have no interests in doing that will always disappoint you. But seeing as they are one of two professions with constitutional standing, I would tend to think someone else around here forgot to scrape their shoes on the way in.

Because what you are saying is investigative reporting is evil which, when taken along with Europe and socialism, starts to be displaying a fairly self-distructive attitude to the western culture which gave you life. What next? Fair trials? Or are "court room" lawyers already evil, too.

"Are you still beating your wife?" is not investigative reporting. Give me one scoop, one story broken -- and I'm setting myself up here -- that came from asking the PM a question in the last, say, 30 years.

No, but I will give you the work done to root out John Buchanan in Nova Scotia, though. And the Liberal leader of the opposition at the same time. I had a pal of mine describe the confrontation with one of the two when they presented the information before going to press. <p>There must be the question period moment, though. We can both think about that. And I am not saying they are good all good so much as necessary - levelers - and the idea of the PM saying those that don't like his way are "lazy" speaks only to his own grasp on things, a man who could use a bit of levelling...especially as his own achievements to date amount to exactly nada.

"Lazy" is an excellent summation of the political press for the last 15 years. The PM using the RCMP to arrest the head of a crown corporation who wouldn't give his buddies a loan? A certain very powerful individual or one of his family members escaping the greatest health care system in the world to go to the Mayo clinic to be treated for skin cancer (while claiming a "ski trip")? Hundreds of millions of dollars of overruns in programs that were supposed to cost in the 7 figure range? Who is Maurice Strong [though the CBC helpfully gives us programs on Dick Cheney]?

Did the tame and captured press do anything in the last 15 years besides hang around in bars and waddle up to Parliament once a day to lob softballs? And more recently, moan who they don't like the new way of things?

A bit of levelling is an excellent phrase. It's no suprise to anyone that the press rank only slightly above Sand People in popularity and trust ratings (though still well below Jawas).

As much as I despised Martin and Bob Rae (for example), I didn't think their accomplishing winning first minister positions were "nada".

Oh dear. That is a sad statement. You expect the press to be the leaders and accept politicians who have achieved little to be revered due to their status as opposed to their works. No wonder you are impressed by the victor over paper bags.

This is the world you wanted, Al: CBC headline -- "<i>Harper and McKay publicly disagree on policy</i>" over some trivial inconsistency in statements. If you think "gotcha" is reporting, well then its well known how to do deal with that -- media management. You're claiming that this OK because the because the Tories haven't earned respect, but more likely reason is that <i>you and most of the press corps want the CPC to lose the next election</i>.

All major corporations do media management, you can pick up your yellow pages if you want to do it (many lawyers do I'm sure), and now the government is doing it because the press considers its relationship to this government to be 100% adversarial.

Oh yes, and what Jay said.

Of course you realise all major corporate bodies are not public entities so that of course is a left hook of the slowest variety. It is the government that has taken this new tack - you can look it up if you care to. "No one would treat a Liberal like this": Boo Hoo! No one is so pure as the lamb as Stevie Harper "They are really all lazy": Boo Hoo! No one works as hard as Stevie Harper.<p>Is it that you don't care what the Tories do just because they or Tories or is it that you actually buy their clap-trap because if you think of disagreements in a shacky coalition like the present conversative government is "gotcha" reporting, you must really have a problem with everything in the paper other than the classified and maybe Sally Forth.<p>Please sign up to the restricted answering terms and conditions provided for in the adminsitrative section of this blog before you do.

(1) I just think this is a non-issue, just like someone who was lecturing me several months ago about Harper's Chef was an example of how he was Hitler was a non-issue. I don't really care that much that a bunch of reporters have their panties in a knot

(2) As I listed further above, we just passed a decade of explosive scoops that were non-reported by the parliamentary press, so quite frankly, fuck em.

So much for freedom of the press, then. Hope it's around when it is convenient to you. Just remind me of this next time we have to deal with a property right rant. Your constitutional arguments will come in handy.<p>So besides that...have you ever played the banjo? It is by far the most fun I have every had with five strings.

Freedom of the press? What does this argument have to do with freedom of the press? "Haper won't let us into Sussex Dr. to take stool samples; therefore the constitution is null and void?"

No. I've kept my acoustic guitar in a different tuning and if I had free time I'd record and post O Suzanna for you.

Freedom...hmmm...autonomy...government not to control...<p>It is a positive power as against state interference. There is no magic to that. Making up new rules now that the press has to dance to the government's tune is exactly the sort of thing governments of any stripe love and, especially coming of the mess the Grits made of the second half of their administration, exactly what we should be suspicious of now - especially given Harper's control freak habits.<p>Buy the banjo. We need to start the Free Blogger Banjo Orchestra of the Eastern Great Lakes Region.

Liberal media giving Liberals easy time. Disgusting.

Today, "Inkless" Paul Wells spanks the Globe and the Gallery for their hypocrisy on this one.

see: http://weblogs.macleans.ca/paulwells/

Ouch!- for chrissakes, Paulie, that's going to leave a mark!!

Yeah, nothing like the guy who sold out to the state approved list coming down hard for the cause of the state approved list. Except maybe a neo-con libertarian sort sticking up for the state approved list.<p>[Ed.: <i>Gee, I hope this doesn't put us on some sort of list that the state approves.</i>]

I thought you were all about the state approval, Al?

Oh yeah, I am. Nevermind.

All is forgiven.