Do we need Michael Chong to reform the At Issue panel?

On Thursday evening I was on a United flight somewhere over south-western Ontario, so I couldn't watch the week's At Issue panel on CBC's The National. I could read the transcript though, which is often more amusing than the live video anyways.

It seems on Thursday Chantal Hebert and Andrew Coyne really went at it over the Maclean's Quebec corruption issue. And understandably so, given where each of them is coming from.

As I read the transcript though, I was reminded of a bit they used to do on the Daily Show: great moments in punditry as read by children. They would take a particularly ridiculous segment from Crossfire or one of those shows, give the transcripts to children, and have them read it out. It really seemed to add a certain perspective.

I think this exchange between Coyne and Hebert would be a really good fit for a punditry as read by children segment:

ANDREW COYNE ("MACLEAN'S"):

... But to suggest this is some sort of beyond the pale and an assault on Quebecers' dignity or that it has no foundation, as Chantal said, I just think does not itself have any foundation.

CHANTAL HÉBERT ("TORONTO STAR"):

Well, you… then I guess the onus…

ANDREW COYNE ("MACLEAN'S"):

Hang on, let me finish, please. Let me finish, please. Let me finish, please.

CHANTAL HÉBERT ("TORONTO STAR"):

No, no, but the onus is…

ANDREW COYNE ("MACLEAN'S"):

I'm sorry, I'm going to finish.

PETER MANSBRIDGE (HOST):

One at a time, one at a time.

CHANTAL HÉBERT ("TORONTO STAR"):

No, no, no, no. You've had the stage all week.

ANDREW COYNE ("MACLEAN'S"):

I'm going to finish. I'm going to finish, Chantal, I'm going to finish...

Somehow I think reading this exchange in transcript-form really underlines the absurdity. And where's Michael Chong when you need him? Clearly we need comprehensive reforms to bringing civility back to the at issue panel!

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Budget videos: Ignatieff's scrum, plus Coyne & Hebert

I've skimmed my way through a day's worth of television news and next I plan to skim the budget itself, so my wide thoughts on the budget will need to wait a little. I'm like the Senate with the sober second thought and my not really living in the area I'm supposed to represent.

In the mean time though, here's video of Michael Ignatieff scrumming with reporters this evening, following the budget speech:



And here's a few clips of Macleans' Andrew Coyne and the Toronto Star's Chantal Hebert reacting to the budget.



Coyne's body language just screams pissed-off, and so do his words. "The end of any kind of Conservative era in Canadian politics," says Coyne. "The end of an era....Thomas Mulcair could have written this budget." Ah, Andrew. I feel your pain, but I also think it's cute that, three years-in, you can still manage to be disappointed by Stephen Harper's ideological failings. Don't you ever change.

And Chantal, whom I don't always agree with, makes a great point on the "wack-a-mole" nature of this Conservative budget. "The government," said Hebert, "faced with a number of buttons to try to achieve something, decided...to push every single button and see what happens."

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers