Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

Also, why can't our politicians behave more seriously?

by Aaron Wherry on Tuesday, September 21, 2010 11:05am - 0 Comments

The Globe and Post this morning publish competing investigations of the Prime Minister’s recent decision to change eyewear. Mind you, they were both beaten to this story by the Star, which looked into this subject more than two weeks ago.

The Globe reports that the change is due to dry eyes. But they don’t fully explain why the Prime Minister’s eyes are in fact dry—Allergies? Stress? Climate change? Constant crying over the expected failure of C-391? Heightened seething toward his political adversaries?

Hopefully one or both of the national television networks will pick up and advance the story.

Tags: Stephen Harper, Whatever

More by Aaron Wherry

Reverend_Blair

Those of us who live in cold places know that when it gets really cold, things get dry. It only makes sense that Harper's eye-moisture issues are caused by his cold, dead eyes.

Jan

As they say, you can't get water out of stone, but they have these things called lubricating eye drops. However, given his history of vanity and stylists, I think it's a new look – preppy, ivy league, intellectual. He's hoping it will wow them down at the UN.

Emily

Age – and by the look of him he's aging rapidly lately.

Blue

Maybe it would be a good requirement that anybody who negatively comments on the physical appearance of any public figure should be forced to expose their own selves to the scrutiny of the blogosphere.

No, on second thought, we don`t need to start that.

Emily

So, you've given up on Iggy's eyebrows have you?

hollinm

Emily….not at all. Those eyebrows are always in revolt. Along with the flicking of the tongue and licking of the lips adds to the creep factor.
In todays day and age appearance means a lot whether we like it or not. Look at your criticism of Harper's appearance all the time.

Emily

So then what was your complaint again?

LynnTO

Also, why can't our politicians behave more seriously?

Have you ever tried to be "serious" after having to survive on four hours' sleep every night, twelve hours of work a day, six cups of coffee, and people yelling at you constantly?

I don't know about you, but my bag of marbles falls apart after about 48 hours of that.

ahm

I could do it in my 20's when I coordinated funding drives for a college radio station. Not any more.

Jenn_

Yes, hopefully. :)

Are you Macleans guys ever embarrassed to admit what you do for a living? With the way your media brethren chase down the important stuff, I mean.
Holly Stick

It's due to climate change of course. He is constantly looking away from what is right in front of him.
Mark R

As a famous blogger notes many times…
The world has too many reporters.

Mark R

I recall an argument by Wells??? Don't shoot me if I'm wrong. That under staffing means there are not enough resources to chase heavy stories.
Uhm maybe its what reporters are focusing on is what matters.

WDM

Get Coyne to bring it up on At Issue.
hollinm

DESPERATION!!!!!!!!!!!! Thy name is Wherry and the Liberal posters on this board.
LdKitchenersOwn

I don't even know what this means.

Wherry's post is clearly an attack on the (not so) "serious" media wasting ink on stories about Harper wearing glasses, and Ignatieff not wearing a tie. How is this post, mocking our very unserious media's occasional calls for POLITICIANS to act more seriously (pot, meet the kettle) even related, in any way, to our various partisan flame fests?

MISSING THE POINT!!!!!!!!! Thy name is posters who strike out blindly at Wherry's partisan posting, whether the post in question is remotely partisan or not.
Dave

Work on that reading comprehension.
hollinm

Dave….look at how Wherry ends his comments….He wants the story advanced. Dry eyes? Give me a break.
LdKitchenersOwn

Look up hollinm.

That's Wherry's point flying above your head!!!

Wherry doesn't "want the story advanced", lol. He's MOCKING the fact that all three of our major newspapers have wasted their time on this non-story by SARCASTICALLY calling for our television broadcasters to pick it up and continue to run with it. I know sarcasm and irony and facetiousness can be hard to detect online, but honestly, Wherry's not exactly being super subtle here.

I'm afraid Dave's right. You get the steak knives on this one (Also, please note: no one is LITERALLY going to send you any steak knives).
hollinm

LdKitchenersOwn….you may be right but given Wherry's other postings it is hard to tell when he is being facetitious or actually serious. You are saying he was being sarcastic but given the state of the media in this country it is very hard to tell.
I'll readily accept the steak knives but like I say Wherry's reputation precedes him. He will post anything that is anti Harper and to get the lefties on this board commenting.
Stewart_Smith

The politicians all understand that politics is part theatre. Whether it is commenting about the PM's eyewear, or marveling at his latest musical rendition these are the sort of normal interactions that go on between people who know each other. Do any of us know Stephen Harper? I would guess not, but the public craves some sense of knowing the person and so the media provides fluffy articles. The people love it, they read, they click on ads, life is good.

Then the media finds out some people don't like certain fluffy articles. A few write articles about the dumb stuff their brethren write about. More people read, some feel superior, some feel defensive, (some miss the point) but they read, they click on ads, life is even better.
LdKitchenersOwn

He will post anything that is anti Harper and to get the lefties on this board commenting.

Or, the "righties" just assume everything that Wherry writes is anti-Harper comment bate, even if the post in question really has nothing to do with Harper (I mean, honestly, I sometimes wonder if some commenters even bother to read the posts anymore before going off on Wherry).

You're free to believe that Wherry is making a serious call here for the nation's media to pull up their socks and use all of their investigative powers to really get to the bottom of why the PM's eyes are a bit drier these days, but I'm going to stick with my presumption that he was being facetious, and doesn't actually want a W5 investigation.