I wonder if Heather Mallick's employers have apologies pre-printed when they hire her.

Because it seems that they do have to make a few of them.

The latest comes from Mallick's latest employer, The Toronto Star:

"A column by Heather Mallick on July 28 contained a number of inaccurate statements about the well-known British journalist and author Melanie Phillips.

Ms. Phillips has expressed her horror at the slaughter at Utoya, Norway in a clear and unambiguous way, writing “there can be no excuse, justification or rationale whatsoever for the atrocity perpetrated by Anders Behring Breivik.”

The column made reference to Ms. Phillips’ writings in an entirely misleading and inappropriate manner.

The defamatory article has been removed from our website.

The Star and Ms. Mallick regret the errors and apologize to Ms. Phillips."



And here is a report from the CBC Ombudsman on a column Mallick wrote while she was an employee of the CBC. That too has been removed from the CBC website but is available to read here. Notice a trend?


HT to Blazing Cat Fur who has a screenshot of the text of the now deleted Star column which can be seen here. 

Heather Mallick for Governor General.

Heather Mallick for Governor General!

She is a media personality, she has worked for the CBC, and she is a Canadian woman.

Before you go running for the torches and pitchforks ask yourself; what did the last 2 GG's have for qualifications that Mallick doesn't?


Ok, you can go get those torches now.

Heather Mallick : yes someone pays her.

If there was any lingering doubt about the Toronto Stars leanings, may I present Heather Mallick's latest in all of its smeartastic, fear mongering glory. 

Canadian democracy Soviet style.



Related: Background on the baseless allegations her article is based on, also from the Star; some coincidence that eh!  BTW Toronto Star, repeating baseless allegations over and over again does not make them any more true.

A treasure of the left.

Just go away Maude

Like fellow moonbat Heather Mallick it seems that Maude Barlow is also ashamed to be Canadian.

From the Globe: "I am personally ashamed of my country as I travel internationally. In a world calling out for new models of justice, conflict resolution and environmental stewardship, Canada could be playing such a powerful role as it has done in the past. Stephen Harper with a majority frightens me."

You know Maude there is a solution to all of this. If you don't like the government chosen by the people of Canada, you could just go away to somewhere where you might be more happy. Cuba and Venezuela quickly come to mind.

If these types of reactions from Barlow and Mallick are not enough proof that the Conservatives are doing a good job, I don't know what is.


For added fun and glimpse into Ms.Barlow's thinking I present you with what she said last summer about the bombings of pipelines in BC when she suggested, without ANY evidence at all, that it was not the act of an eco-terrorist but that it might have been the gas companies themselves who planted the explosives to gain sympathy from the public. (link to related story)

Heather Mallick, proud to hate Canada.

Heather Mallick is at it again; this time she is telling us and that we should all be embarrassed to be Canadians. From the UK Guardian

Some excerpts:

Out of something as misty as mere indecision, Canadian voters have turned their country into a political freak show. Canada's Conservative government, run by an ideologue named Stephen Harper, does not represent Canadian voters on saving the air we breathe and temperatures we can cope with.

Yes, Canada's record on carbon emissions is disgraceful, shameful, loathsome etc. The tar sands of northern Alberta are an international scandal. But the problem is not in a former Prius of a country turning into a Hummer. Canada's dilemma is much more interesting that that. It is the decline of a democracy (partly as its media died, thank you Conrad Black) and the descent of a nation into a political stasis. ( AA Note: if you are too stupid not to know the difference between tar and oil you invalidate your opinions on the dumb factor alone)


First, no one disagrees more with Harper's refusal to slow climate change than Canadian voters. Indeed, more than three-quarters of Canadians say they are embarrassed that Canada hasn't taken an international lead on the issue, a recent poll revealed.

We hate green garbage incompetents. We love the Kyoto protocol, we want to prostrate ourselves in Copenhagen next month, but until we make our mind up about whether to make Michael Ignatieff prime minister, we can't.

May I humbly beg for patience with my country, which is stuck like a beaver in a dam of its own making.

American travellers used to shove a Canadian flag on their backpack for better treatment overseas. I'm sorry that the reverse has happened and Canadians now switch the conversation to Obama as quickly as possibly before the subject of clubbing seals arises.

We have shamed our better natures. But we Canadians will rid ourselves of Harper and rise again to be the decent and intelligent nation you Brits once patronised with such delight.

--------------

You know I do sort of agree with Heather. It is embarrassing to be a Canadian sometimes, particularly when Heather is out there representing us to the world.

Heather if you are ashamed of your country I feel sorry for you but that is your choice, but please do not go around and attempt to speak for the millions of others of us who are very proud of this great country of ours. You are truly an embarrassment to all of us.

A blast from the recent past: More slime from Heather can be found here. Note that this article was considered so far over the top that her bosses at the CBC deleted it from the web and issued an apology.

"On the whole, the CBC News policy handbook takes a very anxious view of any mixing of opinion in with the news business. It sees the two as nitro and glycerin, innocuous on their own but explosive together. This is a very healthy restraint for a public broadcaster.

But every news organization needs to have an opinion dimension. Access to different viewpoints helps readers, listeners and viewers make reasoned choices, especially during an election campaign.

As a public broadcaster we have an added responsibility to provide an array of opinions and voices to complement our journalism. But we must do so carefully. And you should be able to trust us to provide you with work that’s based on solid reporting and free from the passionate excesses of partisanship.

We failed you in this case. And as a result we have put new editing procedures in place to ensure that in the future, work that is not appropriate for our platforms, will not appear. We are open to contentious reasoned argument but not to partisan attack. It’s a fine line."

Charles Adler replies to Heather. Courtesy of Christian Conservative.

From the comments: You go Girl. http://www.cic.gc.ca/ENGLISH/information/applications/renounce.asp

Is Carolyn Parrish's pen name Heather Mallick?

Is Carolyn Parrish's pen name Heather Mallick by chance?

I am not saying... I am just sayin'.


Thank you CBC"Canada's national public broadcaster" and all of your advertisers. You have managed to embarrass not only yourselves but embarrass an entire country by paying for and allowing this hate filled entry on your taxpayer funded web site.

Gordon Sinclair must be rolling over in his grave.

Sorry - we can't find that page

Results on the CBC website for http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/09/05/f-vp-mallick.html

It looks like the CBC has had a change of heart.



To refresh your memory you can read what was on that lost page here.

Stay Classy Heather Mallick.

Reprinted in all of its taxpayer funded, anti American, Liberal, hate filled, CBC goodness.

Source

I assume John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential partner in a fit of pique because the Republican money men refused to let him have the stuffed male shirt he really wanted. She added nothing to the ticket that the Republicans didn't already have sewn up, the white trash vote, the demographic that sullies America's name inside and outside its borders yet has such a curious appeal for the right.

So why do it?

It's possible that Republican men, sexual inadequates that they are, really believe that women will vote for a woman just because she's a woman. They're unfamiliar with our true natures. Do they think vaginas call out to each other in the jungle night? I mean, I know men have their secret meetings at which they pledge to do manly things, like being irresponsible with their semen and postponing household repairs with glue and used matches. Guys will be guys, obviously.

But do they not know that women have been trained to resent other women and that they only learn to suppress this by constantly berating themselves and reading columns like this one? I'm a feminist who understands that women can nurse terrible and delicate woman hatred.

Palin was not a sure choice, not even for the stolidly Republican ladies branch of Citizens for a Tackier America. No, she isn't even female really. She's a type, and she comes in male form too.

John Doyle, the cleverest critic in Canada, comes right out and calls Palin an Alaska hillbilly. Damn his eyes, I wish I'd had the wit to come up with it first. It's safer than "white trash" but I'll pluck safety out of the nettle danger. Or something.

Doyle's job includes watching a lot of reality television and he's well-versed in the backstory. White trash — not trailer trash, that's something different — is rural, loud, proudly unlettered (like Bush himself), suspicious of the urban, frankly disbelieving of the foreign, and a fan of the American cliché of authenticity. The semiotics are pure Palin: a sturdy body, clothes that are clinging yet boxy and a voice that could peel the plastic seal off your new microwave.

'Turn your guns on Levi, ma'am'

Palin has a toned-down version of the porn actress look favoured by this decade's woman, the overtreated hair, puffy lips and permanently alarmed expression. Bristol has what is known in Britain as the look of the teen mum, the "pramface." Husband Todd looks like a roughneck; Track, heading off to Iraq, appears terrified. They claim to be family obsessed while being studiously terrible at parenting. What normal father would want Levi "I'm a fuckin' redneck" Johnson prodding his daughter?

I know that I have an attachment to children that verges on the irrational, but why don't the Palins? I'm not the one preaching homespun values but I'd destroy that ratboy before I'd let him get within scenting range of my daughter again, and so would you. Palin's e-mails about the brother-in-law she tried to get fired as a state trooper are fizzing with rage and revenge. Turn your guns on Levi, ma'am.

Palin has it all, along with being vicious and profoundly dishonest. Just hours after her first convention speech, the Associated Press did a good fast listing of her untruths and I won't dwell on them.

I did promise to watch the entire convention so you wouldn't have to, but I discovered a neat trick. I switched between the convention and the 2003 folk music mockumentary A Mighty Wind on Bravo.

They were indistinguishable. Click on a nervous wreck with deeply strange hair doing a monologue on society today and where it all went wrong. Are you watching Christian belter Aaron Tippin singing Where the Stars and Stripes and Eagle Fly in the Xcel Centre in St. Paul or the actors from Spinal Tap remixing the 1966 version of Potato's in the Paddy Wagon?

Who delivered this line: "To do then now would be retro. To do then then was very now-tro, if you will." Was it Rev. James Dobson of Focus on the Family talking about Bristol Palin's shotgun wedding or was it a flashback to the Kingston Trio?

The conventioneers are nothing like the rich men who run the party, and that's the mystery of the hick vote. They'd be much better served by the Democrats. I know Thomas Frank answered this in What's the Matter with Kansas?; I know that red states vote Republican on social issues to give themselves the only self-esteem available to their broken, economically abused existence.

Lie works for Palin

But surely they know Barack Obama is not planning to finish off the ordinary hillbilly when he adjusts tax rates. He's going to raise taxes on the top 2% of Americans and that doesn't include anyone at the convention beyond the Bushes and McCains and random party management. So why cheer Palin when she claims otherwise?

Is it racism? I'm told that it is, although I find racism so appalling that I have difficulty identifying it. It is more likely the dearly held Republican notion that any American can become violently rich, as rich as those hedge funders in Greenwich, Conn., who buy $40-million mansions unseen and have their topiary shaped in the form of musical notes.

When Palin and Rudy Giuliani sneered at Obama's years of "community organizing" — they said it like "rectal fissure" — the audience ewww-ed with them. Republicans dream of a personal future that involves only household staff, not equals who need to be persuaded to vote.

So I'm trying to imagine the pain of realizing, as they all must at some point, that it is not going to happen for them. It's the green light at the end of the dock. It's the ship that never comes in, gals, as Palin would put it. But she won't because the lie works for her. It helps her scramble, without compassion, above all those other tense no-hoper ladies in the audience.

American politics isn't short of smart women. Susan Eisenhower, Ike's granddaughter, who just endorsed Obama, made an extraordinary speech at the Democratic convention (and a terrific casual appearance on The Colbert Report as Palin was speaking). The Republican party has already consumed nearly all of its moderate "seed corn," she said aptly. Time to start again.

Eisenhower, a scholar and journalist, has a point. Or am I only saying that because she's part of the thoughtful demographic that I'm trying to reach here? Think, Heather, think like a Republican! The Skeptics, shall I call them, are my base, and I'll pander to them as ardently as the Republican patriarchs tease their white female marginals.

This Week

Mad Men is scaring me (AMC on Sunday nights). What has Matthew Weiner, a writer from The Sopranos, created, a period soap opera about reality and façade or a horror series on a localized war between men and women? Was Episode 6 of Season 2 a costume drama about the Madonna/whore complex or the operatic rendition of one simple thing, human cruelty?

Or maybe I'm seeing too much into it and it's just a sexed-up version of the Republican convention.

Wow!.



ht SDA.


The aftermath: CBC Ombudsman Report.