Unfortunately, the only time SH wants to talk is when he is in total control. He does avoid the media. He likes a script because it eliminates gaffes and minimizes chinks. But in denying us the option of hearing him openly defend his decisions in the face of tough questioning, his credibility is undermined. I think he has a responsibility to face the Press, not just when it is necessary to deliver his message, but on an ongoing basis; especially in a minority government What happens if he gets a majority? Does he just shut the door?
To be honest, his style has a certain "Dubya" quality to it, and I don't understand it, because SH is a very sharp guy. During last years leaders debates, he faced a very hostile gang assault and held his own quite well. That is the guy I'd like to see more of – am I asking too much?

(ditto Martin, Chretien, Campbell, Mulroney…)

I don't even know what you're demanding to be perfectly honest. I don't really see what door Harper chooses to enter the House from as important. Especially since he goes there to answer the questions you're insinuating he's ducking.

I guess he just meant to say: "We don't comment on security"

Give it up TwoYen, unless of course you're paid by the word to do this red herring stuff, in which case, feel free to continue.

"No Prime Minister has ever avoided
the front entrance to the Commons and
no one, at least outside of Harper’s inner
circle, understands why Harper does. Is
it part of his strategy for media management,
avoiding unwanted camera shots or
shouted questions, or is it for security; the
war in Afghanistan?"

The question you should be asking is why Wherry consistently quotes out of context from other sources in order to make the PM look bad.

As you are likely aware, security and 9/11 are just red herrings in this discussion. But nice try!

While Daniel's experience in the lion's den may have worked out for him it isn't something many would recommend others emmulate. If you had control of the high ground and continued to make gains and what you considered to be your enemies had all the valleys, how much time would you spend in the valley?

Or maybe he just doesn't want us to see his belly move like a bowl of jelly when he comes down the stairs. Chrétien and Martin were in great shape, as was Mulroney. Who knows, maybe Harper can't do it without talking stopping three times to catch his breath.

Seriously, and I know Harper's fans will get very upset here, I think it's because Harper doesn't speak English very well. Chrétien had a thick accent but he had a quick wit. Harper is not at all eloquent or quick on his feet. He'll read a scripted text all right, but unscripted he is a boring speaker. Also, he lies a lot, and that always makes it difficult to keep your story straight.

Wow.

Actually, it's simple: because he can.

Running around the country, speaking to the press only when you want, staging photo ops, controlling who asks questions and who has access is, simply put, every PM's fantasy.

The difference between this PM and the ones who came before him is that he actually acted on it. And he dared the press to cry foul. In this game of chicken, the press blinked. Harper won. The press is, sadly, whipped.

It will remain that way until someone, in the press or in politics, finds a way to make the case for better responsiveness on the part of the Prime Minister in a manner that resonates with Canadians.

''The media acts so high and mighty (Don Martin is the worst)…'' – bettie

''We have been infiltrated by a gotcha mentality…'' – peter

I know this Government of ours enjoyed styling themselves as ''Canada's New Government'' but are they that wet behind the ears that they do not understand the nature of media? Has Harper been the first to be (self-perceived as) ''taken outrageously out of context''? No, this has been the norm for virtually all politicians. Harper is simply the only one who's choice is to hide from the press gallery.

To single out Don Martin, as if Mike Duffy was any less ''high and mighty''… It is no different than the comedy of singling out some mainstream media for their bias, as if the other side didn't have their own outlets. All one has to do is compare a same subject story in the Toronto Star and the National Post… All have their cheerleaders, the playing field is level.

Oh, the gotcha mentality! I'll flip that and call it the victim mentality, a card well played by the CPC (played best while already having ''won'' their point).

As far as I'm concerned, the gotcha mentality has existed since scribes began recording their perspectives. In the United States, Sarah Palin often complains about the unjust gotcha mentality… As if Obama is not ever preyed upon for gotcha moments by the other side (Rev. Wright, Obama song in elementary school, various alleged proof of foreign birth, etc…). In Canada, Chrétien had his fair share of gotcha moments. It could be said electoral gains where made by Harper on account of Stéphane Dion gotcha moments (one in particular officially deemed malicious). But, as I said, for the CPC, playing the victim/hero card works with the base.

However, in my book, the victim/hero will never hide.

So true. One seasoned reporter who has been infected with the gotcha disease is Craig Oliver. It is a shame because he used to be a quality reporter.

Uh, because he's gutless? Or because he's completely dismissive of the public's (through the media) right to ask him questions and hold the PMO accountable? Probably both.

How many city hall, board of education, county or regional district or health district committees are covered in your local paper? (free rag or paid circulation). Does your local community or region have its own bureau in your provincial capital? Did it used to? Do any of the big dailies in your province have their own national bureaus in Ottawa?

Do you think the interests of freedom are better served by fewer voices of more? It ws never perfect like "Pravda" but a far wider range of opinion used to be expressed than is today

….Toronto police claimed their goals were:
blowing up the Houses of Parliament, the CN Tower,
the headquarters of CSIS (the Canadian Security Intelligence Service) and the CBC,
and beheading Stephen Harper…

That quaint notion seems to have fallen from grace in the 24/7 new cycle. Combined with a need for ratings/readers "news sources" have finaly just become vehicles for advertising and the more eyes you get the more dollars there are.

Sadly those dollars are going to bankers and hedge funds to pay interest on acquisition costs instead of going to into "quality content". Look at how many bureaus have been closed, at how many beat reporters have been "down-sized" and how poorly this vehicle of finance has served the public.

We have some difficult decisions to make as a nation. We have been infiltrated by a gotcha mentality and a notion that what an individual does is somehow someone else's business and most ominously, that what once made us great (our system of commonlaw rights and our notion of property rights) is now just a quaint notion.

Is the Parliamentary Press Gallery that different today than it was five years ago? I don't think so.

They should begin by informing you of the difference between the Parliamentary Press Gallery that Harper is ducking and newspaper columnists.

I believe the media's role is to inform, not to oppose.