Monday, April 19, 2010

Mandryk stretches to echo Sask. Party talking-point.

For quite some time now, Saskatchewan political op-ed writer Murray Mandryk has been regurgitating the Sask. Party line about the NDP being "vitriolic" and "mean", and his column today again illustrates the lengths he's now having to go to maintain it.

The example he provides of "vitriol" is a series of questions that MLA Kevin Yates asked in the house regarding the Sask. Party's association with Grant Devine's Saskatchewan Progressive Conservative Party.
"Consider the tenor of New Democrat Kevin Yates's questions in the house.

Why, he asked, were members of the Saskatchewan Party "taking funds belonging to the Progressive Conservative Party of Saskatchewan?"

Was it "appropriate for the Saskatchewan Party to deny the Progressive Conservative Party of Saskatchewan its money in order to prevent its participation in provincial elections?"

Does the premier "believe taking money belonging to another political party is legal?" and, "Did the premier, his deputy premier, or any member of his caucus ever conspire to take the Progressive Conservative trust money to fix the outcome of the 2007 general election?"

For added measure, Yates told the assembly: "The premier has a pattern of taking things that don't belong to him."

Mandryk goes on to acknowledge that it's "valid" to ask questions about the issue in the house, particularly in light of the courts already acknowledging that the lawsuit is not a frivolous one and within the context of the Sask. Party's inconsistent efforts to distance itself from Grant Devine's Sask. P.C.'s. Yes, Yates' closing claim was made without sufficient substantiation. But if that's the kind of thing that Mandryk is now having to rely on to toe the Sask. Party's line, it's pretty thin at best.

...Or is the suggestion that willingly sharing Brad Wall's glass jaw is unbecoming for a reporter also "mean" and "vitriolic"?



No comments:

Post a Comment