Sunday, March 02, 2008

Charles Adler: Maybe it's Chuck Cadman's fault

At least that's the impression I get from Charles Adler's "Questions that need to be asked about Cadmanscam." And by the way, I don't like that name for the affair, it seems to imply Chuck Cadman did something wrong.

But on to Adler, and a few of his particularly insulting theories:

  1. Could this be a deathbed confection manufactured by the wounded pride of a man who in a moment of high vulnerability was being asked for something very valuable — his vote — and offered nothing more than a pig in the poke?

Ah, so Chuck made it up then, did he? Lashing out from his deathbed with a manufactured fairytle, lying to his family during his last days?

  1. Is it possible that Chuck Cadman in his conversations with the Tories (We don't know how many there were. We can only speculate that the Tories couldn't have gone back to the well over and over again and then had two of their chief lieutenants pay him a formal visit unless they thought Cadman was giving them a window of opportunity.) simply couldn't get the Tories to meet his reasonable price?

Forget this stuff about Cadman being a man of honour I suppose, maybe Cadman had a price and the Conservative pockets just weren't deep enough.

  1. Is it political correctness or just sloppy sentiments that persuade us that Cadman, a man of great integrity, had no price?

Apperantly someone actually having honour and integrity is a foreign concept to Charles Adler. He just can't process it. Maybe he's running in the wrong crowds.

  1. Is it possible that when the Tories told Cadman they couldn't do a serious money transaction because doing so would have exposed them to charges of criminality, the entire episode left him feeling cheap, dirty and violated.

No, I guess Adler does believe in honour and integrity. Maybe Cadman wanted to be bought, but it was the Conservatives that had too much honour and integrity to do the buying.

It seems the right wingers, or at last one of them, have developed a new line of attack, after the other five or ten got shot down as more facts were exposed. Rather than defending Chuck Cadman and implying his wife, daughter and son-in-law are all liars, now they're going after Chuck Cadman himself.

I'd like to think even the Conservative Party won't be stupid enough to pick-up on Adler's theories, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

UPDATE: KNB also has some thoughts on Adler.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers


Gayle said...

I read that column and found it revolting.

This shows how truly desperate the con supporters are. This column was a complete work of fiction, dressed up as "legitimate" questions in order to give the impression Cadman was actually seeking a bribe. You will note he very carefully does not actually accuse him of anything.

Of course if this were true, the easy answer for the cons is to say so.

Mind you, Adler never impressed me as an intellectual heavyweight, so I suppose I should not be surprised he would be so obvious in his desperation.

Saskboy said...

Let`s shorten that to `Cadscam` and let that catch on while we retake the government from the corrupt bribers.

kenchapman said...

Thx for the post Jeff.

This is a perfect example of the kind of people that all too often seem to drive so much of the sick "value set" (sic) of the Harper Cons. They are disgusting.

leftdog said...

I too read it in the NP ... disgusted! They simply are without any ethics whatsoever.

RossK said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RossK said...

Re-posting (with sloppy drums removed)


"I'd like to think even the Conservative Party won't be stupid enough to pick-up on Adler's theories....

In the spirit of the thing, let's turn this around and ask Mr. Adler a few questions of our own:

First, given the envelope push on the HarperCon talking points, is there any reason, Mr. Adler, for us to actually believe that those were 'your' theories?

Second, is there any truth to the rumour, Mr. Adler, that you are in the process of having your given name legally changed to the moniker used by the power trio consisting of Geddy Lee, Neil Peart and Alex Lifeson?

Third, when, exactly, did you, Mr. Adler, stop making those alleged conjugal visits to barnyard sows?



burlivespipe said...

It's just another showing of the CONs swift-boat tour, preparing for the big show... I refuse to listen, read or even browse these rags/radio dregs and the advertisers that fuel them. It's funny how even Bourque had his marching orders, appearing on CKNW here FRiday alluding to all kinds of theories -- starting with the ol Who would give a Dying Man an Insurance POlicy? (the bank of Stephen, apparently - and you should see his mortgage rates!), Why is Dona Cadman doing this and what is she GAining from it? And what does Paul Martin have to do with it? It's muddy the waters time...
But there is a possible theory somewhere under all this goop -- I'm thinking STeve Harper had taken too much asthma medication the day that he ok'd his goons go to talk to Cadman, and that the day he walked up the Cadman driveway and met the reporter? He was under the heavy influence of a couple Boston creme donuts.

These people are real scum. But we can see now who are their messengers and real friends, and that there is no level to which they'll stoop. Here's hoping good triumphs over evil, like in the comic books.

RuralSandi said...

I suggest calling it "BribeCam" and leave Mr. Cadman's name out of it.

Adler is a big blowheart - Duffy used to have him on all the time.

No one questioning that perhaps the three who went to see Cadman would be lying to save their sorry asses - think about it, are they going to admit to bribery?

RuralSandi said...

Whoops - meant to say "BribeScam" - it's early. Sorry.