"Angry"

Sigh. Another day, another bit of canned outrage from Paul Martin:

An angry Paul Martin said Stephen Harper went “beyond the boundaries of reasonable discourse” when he suggested the Liberal Leader would like the Parti Quebecois to be elected in Quebec.
On Tuesday, the Tory Leader attacked the Liberals on national unity, saying Martin wants the separatist Parti Quebecois to gain power so Liberals can “stand up for federalism” and fight to save the country.
Although Martin yesterday called the remark “ridiculous,” he said today that he didn’t fully understand its context until he watched Harper on television last night.
Martin came armed with a prepared statement when he spoke to reporters in Dartmouth, N.S. this morning, saying he has stood beside provincal Liberals in a fight against separatists since he’s been in Quebec and that he has fought for national unity all his life.
“Yet yesterday, Mr. Harper, either out of anger or out of calculation, accused me of hoping for a separatist win. Well let me say to you that is not within the boundaries of reasonable discourse. As different as our views might be, I would never for a moment suggest that Stephen Harper would prefer for partisan political reasons to see a separatist victory,” said Martin.

Oh please. This, from the guy who launched his campaign by insinuating that Stephen Harper did not love Canada. This from the guy whose minions regularly fill reporters’ heads with similar slurs or worse. And yet the media persist in pretending that these stagey simulacrums of emotion (“an angry Paul Martin”) are somehow related to emotions as they are felt by real people.

UPDATE: More unreasonable discourse! Harper says Liberals hate farmers!

Accusing the Liberals of indifference to rural Canada, Tory Leader Stephen Harper said Wednesday that a Conservative government would introduce a new disaster relief program for farmers and create a more flexible income stabilization program.

Indifferent to rural Canada? Why, I've never been so outraged in all my life.

EMOTIONDATE: In the Globe, it's "an emotional" Paul Martin. Probably sounds better than "angry," especially to that key female demographic.

It's funny, isn't it, that it took him a full day to get so emotional? And that he needed a prepared statement to express it? I wonder why? Oh, Anne Dawson explains:

The Liberals believe Harper has made a mistake in his campaign strategy as significant as when Harper accused the PM of supporting child pornography in the 2004 election campaign...

You mean there's a strategy involved? One they feel the need to brief reporters on? It's not just about the PM's hurt feelings?