More Karlheinz Schreiber/Brian Mulroney

Sorry, this is all I can write about these days but Rick Salutin has a good analysis of Brian Mulroney's testimony the other day which I will copy and paste here, rather than paraphrase poorly.

Aren't I adorable?

by Rick Salutin

I was skeptical about treating those huge cash payments by Karlheinz Schreiber to Brian Mulroney as the core of their fiasco. Too superficial. I wanted more range: how the Dump Joe Clark movement was financed by right-wing money from Germany; how a nexus of greed and policy operated in the Mulroney years. But after hearing the official Mulroney explanation yesterday, I'm into it. Let's talk about that cash.

What's his explanation for taking those payments? “I made a serious error in judgment ... I apologize and I accept full responsibility for it.” That isn't an explanation, it's a chastened restatement of the facts: I took cash and wish I hadn't.

But what was the error in judgment? An error isn't a random event that just happens; there's a thought process. Taking an envelope stuffed with thousand-dollar bills isn't like slipping on a banana peel. Oops. You're thinking something. What was the judgment that erred? Then you did it again. And again. What were you thinking, what did you judge? And the judgments that followed. Not putting it in the bank. Not giving a receipt. Not telling your law firm. Not declaring it on your taxes. Based on thinking ...?

As an explanation, it says way less than it claims to. He called it embarrassing to admit, but we didn't feel it was really embarrassing or he was really embarrassed because all he said was, I made a mistake and I'm a big boy and admit it. You're supposed to get credit for that in this society, all the PR geniuses will tell you it works.

Give us something that is embarrassing, like: I judged I could fool you and keep the money tax-free, but I got found out. (Just an example, class.) That would be embarrassing and take guts to admit. Saying it was a mistake, outs nothing. We got no explanation at all — only an admission of what we knew, and an expectation of applause.

Because there's been no real explanation, everything that follows from it doesn't seem to follow, it sounds shifty and inadequate. Why did he pay taxes on what he says were expenses? Why didn't he keep the records he says he made? Why won't he reveal his tax returns? Why didn't he go to the police when he got a “blackmail and extortion” note from Karlheinz. He says that's how Karlheinz works, he threatened to sue the CBC. Huh? Threatening to sue media institutions isn't illegal. Brian Mulroney definitely knows that. The more he gets into details, the more it sounds like an edifice constructed afterward to explain a set of things, not a real-time account of them.

In place of specifics, we get what journalists used to call the Mulroney blarney, which might clinically be viewed as narcissism and grandiosity. Self-pity. “I struggled to understand this unfolding catastrophe.” Self-dramatization. “Here we are again ... 10 years later.” As if “we” are all on call as backdrop for his life. Self-importance. Boris Yeltsin said to me, “Brian ...”

Sitting back, not answering a question, because he assumes the committee chair will rule it out of order, as if the whole hearing is happening inside his head. Narrating and storytelling: “I ask you to take a minute and ask you to consider how you and your families would feel ...” Doing voices, pauses, colour commentary and rhetorical questions (“Where did they get the information? They got it from her.”) as he reads from letters and articles. And spending way more time recounting and explaining Karlheinz Schreiber's behaviour than his own, which is reduced to a “mistake.”

Karlheinz Schreiber seems like a liar. He doesn't admit it but implies it tacitly in all he says about what he does. When you ask if he lies, he smiles and says, No. That's useful. You know where he stands. It doesn't mean he never tells the truth, but you're forewarned, you must examine it. Brian Mulroney swears that “every allegation” against him is “completely false.” That he tells the truth and nothing but. You decide who's more believable.

There is also a good Linda McQuaig article about the whole affair at rabble where she makes the point that I think has been missing from most analysis: that Mulroney's behaviour is being held to a lower standard because of his "elite" status. We are expected to allow him to act poorly/dishonestly/illegally because of his "lifestyle expectations". It is complete insanity.

Saturday Night Risk Game

I don't know what makes me cooler, the fact that I spent roughly ten hours on Saturday night playing an unfinished game of Risk, or that I am publishing pictures of it now. Anyways, here you go!

matti and eric

tyler and eric

the game when we finally gave up at 5am

Happy Birthday to the Horseshoe Tavern!

This month marks the 60th anniversary of Toronto's Horseshoe Tavern, the "legendary" Queen Street West live music venue and bar. Oddly enough, the Horseshoe didn't really play a huge part in my band-obsessed/debauched teen years, or twenties, or even the recent past. Erin and I have spent many afternoons drinking cheap beer there over the years (checking out the cute boys coming in for soundcheck), and of course I have seen many bands there, but the venue didn't have the impact on me that say the Bovine, the Reverb, the Elmo, or even Club Shanghai (!) did during the 90s. My perception was that the Horseshoe had an elitist booking policy, and they seemed to be booking endless Halifax/American bands throughout the 90s and not really paying attention to the Toronto scene. I may also have held a grudge against them for their strict door policy while I was underage.

This afternoon on cbc radio, someone was talking about the Last Pogo, a 1978 concert that marked the end of the punk era for the Horseshoe. I found a little Toronto Star article written at the time by Viletones frontman Steven Leckie about the event - sorry, if you can't read this try clicking on it:

Sounds about right. And while I'm reminiscing, I'll tell a nice Steven Leckie story. Back in about 1996 (?? Erin, dates?) Steven had resurrected the Viletones, and was also collaborating and playing shows with my boyfriend of the time and his band The Millionaires. Because of this brief friendship, we were hanging around with him quite a bit for a few months there. Around the same time, the Millionaires needed to rent-to-own some equipment from Long & McQuade, and since I was the only one with a valid credit card, I was asked to arrange the financing. The only problem was that I had to provide some personal references on my application and everyone we knew in those days owed Long & McQuade money. I ended up using Steven as my reference. When John Long came downstairs to scrutinize me (anyone who has rented equipment at Long and McQuade will know what I mean) he looked at my application and started laughing. He told me that while he was growing up in Toronto in the 70s, Steven used to defend him against the local bullies, and he always had a great deal of respect for him because of that. I always thought that was a good memory of someone who was alternately known as Nazi Dog in those days. There are some good pictures of Steven and the Viletones from their website here.