From the archives: Martin Patriquin is a corrupt, over-refreshed scumbag
Always has been, too.
The passage below is from this web site, on September 26th, 2010, as passed along by Dan Shields.
I actually forgot I wrote it. Patriquin didn’t, I guess, and iPolitics gave him a platform to pursue a personal vendetta against those who have the temerity to criticize him.
They probably shouldn’t.
Martin Patriquin is one of the biggest scumbags in Canadian journalism. This week, we’re going to be hearing all about Patriquin, because he has written Maclean’s cover story [about how Québec is corrupt].
If that seems familiar to you, that’s because it is. [He’s often claimed Québec is corrupt.]
So, not only is he scumbag, he’s not very original. He’s also a phony, turns out.
Here’s what Patriquin wrote in the National Post on January 5, 2007: “Sorry, I’m not going to blog. Life, any life, is just far too mundane a spectacle. With any luck, the journalist blog trend will follow the faux-hawk into the giant dumpster of bad ideas and everyone, journalists included, will figure out the advantage of knowing when to shut up.”
You guessed it: Patriquin then started a blog, in Maclean’s. You know, the one he said he’d never do, because it’s a “bad idea.”
My personal experience with Patriquin is not dissimilar. He reprints government talking points, is regarded as a cynical no-talent by his more-accomplished colleagues, and sends over-refreshed emails to people in the middle of the night. He thinks he’s clever, but he isn’t. He’s a loser.
So how is it that he’s employed at Maclean’s? Beats me.
As Norman Spector has pointed out, Patriquin’s “story” declines to provide the reader with a study – any study – that proves that Quebec is “the most corrupt province in Canada.”
They won’t, either, because no such study exists. Patriquin just made it up, and someone at the magazine went along with it. Personally, I hope every person in Canadian public life – and every person – kicks the living shit of Matrin Patriquin this week. He richly deserves it.
Oh, and corruption? Corruption is defined as “a lack of honesty or integrity.”
By that definition, the rest of us know who is really corrupt, don’t we, Martin?