11.24.2010 04:27 PM

So, wearing rubber gloves all day is a burden?


You know, on a day when:

(a) A young girl’s violation at the hands of CATSA is front page news across Canada

(b) Everyone – left/right, Canadian/American – is pissed off, and justifiably so, at CATSA and the TSA, and

(c) It is already known that CATSA and TSA are scrambling to back away from their idiocy

…I’m not sure I’d be all jokey-jokey about it, and coming to the defence of the goons wearing rubber gloves. That doesn’t seem like the smartest strategy, to me.

I mean, the only thing worse than that would be…oh, I don’t know, flip-flopping on the war.

Oh, wait.


  1. Art Williams says:

    Wouldn’t it be easier, cheaper, and more effective to stop occupying “terrorist” countries and killing their people? Just how much liberty needs to be given up to make us safe?

  2. Namesake says:

    Oops; sorry to have reignited the feud by alerting you to this in the other thread. But in your defense (against the Jasons), WK, I looked at the first set of 30 or so comments on this on the full page v. of this story, and at least 2/3rd of them were from pissed off Liberal supporters angry about how tone deaf that response was, no matter how much it tickles the reporters.


    • Warren says:

      It is just such an insensitive thing to say. A Con saying it, I can see. But us?

      I don’t know when this downward spiral is going to end, but I hope it does.

      Some will say that me and other Liberals should just suck it up and say nothing about stuff like this, of course. But they tend to be found only in OLO, these days.

      • Lance says:

        “But they tend to be found only in OLO, these days.”

        Perhaps for now. But I am beginning to think that with the way things are going right now in the Liberal party, as time goes on, you are going to be getting more and more company. Just don’t stop being that guy.

        I know how the spiral ends; the same way a toilet does – when flushing something (or someone) that needs to be gone.

      • George says:

        it IS absolutely an insensitive things to say, and I’m pretty sure not even “A Con” would say something so stupid. Ignatieff just keeps providing the fodder for discussion on blogs of all political stripes today. For an aspiring leader of our country to make light of something as personally intrusive as this is just as bad as folks who continue to make fun of Movember. Same boat.

  3. MississaugaPeter says:

    Friggin’ wild.

    And yesterday I was telling my wife Ignatieff should:

    1. Come out and criticize the government on this policy
    2. Suggest that money spent on the jet fighters should be used instead to develop drone technology in Canada (give a few universities a few $B; we could have a lot more drones protecting us than jet fighters)

    I guess I can now expect him to say that we should cut the business cuts so we can double the jet fighter order.

  4. bell says:

    I can’t think of any scenario where saying “I have people touching my private parts all day long” is politically smart thing to say. Even if people support the security measures, why would any politician make a comment like this? This isn’t an issue of Tim Horton’s vs Starbucks. This is more a question of Tim Hortons vs WTFplanetdidhecomefrom.

    It’s such a destructive statement I don’t think Harper’s people can even create a negative ad around it. People wouldn’t believe he said it.

  5. bell says:

    Pierre Elliot Trudeau 1963 – “The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.”

    Michael “MC Hammer” Ignatieff 2010 update – “The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation however they can touch my private parts all day long.”

    Sorry, couldn’t help myself.

  6. MCBellecourt says:

    A new leader is needed for the Liberal Party, not now, but right fricken’ now. Up until now I’ve supported Iggy, but that’s been wiped out today. Very, very stupid scrum statement.

    Got a question for you, WK. What do you think of Siobhan Cody? From this corner, she seems to have her head screwed on straight, and I’ve been seeing her name pop up on some pretty significant issues–and seems to be able to think on her feet.

    I know she’s relatively unknown, but does anyone here think she might be leadership material?

    Oh, and WK, I love your blog. From one musician to another, I love the diversions you offer up from time to time. Good stuff!

  7. JenS says:

    Who on earth is touching his parts??? And all day long? C’mon, now. I can’t suspend my disbelief to quite that extent.

  8. Iris Mclean says:

    I wonder if Iggy or any of his “inner circle” visit this site. There would be much for them to learn. It’s all so sad considering the hope we had just a couple of years ago.

  9. gretschfan says:

    Evidently he has confused “touching my balls” with “looking for leadership with balls.”

  10. Mulletaur says:

    The Opposition’s job is to oppose. The Opposition’s job is not to weigh everything responsibly as if it were still in government. Perhaps one day they will get it.

    Effective security at airports is based on intelligence and good judgment, reading the body language of those passing through screening and developing a fine instinct for things that just don’t seem right. Mindless blanket searches are bound to produce errors. CATSA is an embarrassing disaster which puts us all at risk. The federal government needs to seriously rethink airport security.

  11. wannabeapiper says:

    Maybe its me, but people doing airport screening, and I do not mean to be disrespectfull, appear to be not much more than mall cops and I don’t feel confident about them whether they are checking my shoes, standing me up naked or have their heads and flashlights past my sphincter.

    Speaking of rectal sphincters, Ignatief looked like one with his comment about having his private parts touched all the time. I bet he wishes he could take that one back.

    Just sayin……….

  12. allegra fortissima says:

    Just relax… pleeze! Apparently it was a joke. If Berlusconi had said it in Italy, Italians would have laughed out loud. If Sarkozy had said it in France, French would have laughed out loud. If Westerwelle had said it in Germany, Germans would have rolled on the floor laughing.

    Ignatieff said it in Canada – and the country hisses. Sheesh…

    • james Smith says:

      AF, you have it wrong. This is about far more important things, SO much more important than:
      – a Mr Day who don’t know how much he spends on Spas for civil servants
      – How the Ont. provincial Lib’s have turned two good news stories into bad news stories – in one week
      – How the PQ almost toppled the majority Liberals in la belle province.
      – the guy who who was the point man for the 1 bil G20 fiasco who don’t do all candidates (have not seen one post on that here eh?)
      why is that not THE issue of the week on this screed – hmmm?

      Methinks some should get out more.

      As a 23 year member of the ABC may I ask suggest this has something to do with deflection?

      Look over there it’s Elvis!

  13. I don’t think you should be too critical of Ignatieff for a tasteless joke. The reporters thought it was funny. That is a least 5-6 votes.

    • Warren says:

      And just wait until the Tories steer a compliant reporter towards the parents of the girl who was mauled by CATSA, and urge them to give their views about his “joke.” That’s next, usually.

      • I am NOT a fan of the leadership for many reasons. Can’t get excited if my team decides to play up this tasteless joke. Both parties are guilty of destructive politics. We are tuning out in large numbers to the real stories.

      • james Smith says:


        Can’t wait to see cookie in a box

      • orval says:

        He has definitely made a fool of himself. Save the off-colour jokes for the Faculty Club, not for a scrum in the foyer of the House of Commons. And if it was a joke, it was not funny. Could this be the “Niagara River flows South” moment for Ignatieff? It already appears that Bob Rae has taken over the LPC for all intents and purposes.

  14. jon evan says:

    Perhaps, I’m slow but I don’t really get why people are upset about MI here.
    He is just saying that yes let’s all be mature: that’s the price of flying these days. You don’t like it then don’t fly period. What’s so hard to understand? Yeh, it is a burden to wear rubber gloves all day (try it). These people should be commended for doing their job to try and prevent bombs from going off on planes. That’s the reality unfortunately that we find ourselves in 2010. What other option is there that is as effective? Now I hate it like everyone else but I don’t want my plane to go boom!

    • MCBellecourt says:

      There’s a fine line between “being mature” about it and standing around watching nonchalantly while a CHILD is searched in this manner, by a “guard” who may lack the proper training for this sort of thing.

      You have to keep in mind that this work, like so much other work in this country, is contracted out and the management of the airport do not take part in training these guards. They only tell the contractor what they want, and the contractor does the training. My experience with contractors told me long ago that shortcuts are too often taken in this regard.

      How well are these glorified mall cops being screened for past criminal behaviour, or psychological problems?

      Would you tolerate having your six-year old probed this way?

      That’s what makes Ignatieff’s joke so inappropriate. In fact, it left me rather angry. For the parents of that young girl, this is no laughing matter.

      It’s time for Donolo to recommend a leadership convention. The Liberals cannot afford to screw around like this, and we can’t afford this ineffective opposition. The next election is coming fast, and a Harper majority will happen if nothing is done.

      We deserve better. It’s time to DEMAND better.

    • Doug says:

      Jon perhaps you are a younger man than I but I recall the many terrorist incidents involving loss of life on airplanes in the 1980s. These incidents did not prompt a hysterical overreach by security forces yet we all kept flying. Why is today different? Governments and bureaucrats have lost the plot. This intrusive security regime is not about prudent policy. In my view it is about maximum ass-covering for those responsible for security.

      It’s not that Ignatieff is wrong so much as that his instinct is to mouth an empty piety rather than speak to people’s actual concerns. Ignatieff might not be willing to take a stand on your right to be secure in your person, but golly gee he sure does support the troops. I for one am fully sick of his leadership.

  15. Happy says:

    Sorry Iggy, Bobby kicking you in the junk all day long doesn’t count as ‘touching’.

  16. Bryan Peeler says:

    So, are we no comparing CATSA workers to Grant James? This seems far fetched to say the least. Given what happened with the planned “protests” (b) is just false. I haven’t seen video of the comment but was he making a joke or a statement of fact that the press then laughed at? Finally, there just is no flip-flop

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *