and the media (in this case owned by theTorStar Corp) leave out the direct ties to the Green Party of the 2 protesters.
Link to story at durhamregion.com with the somewhat cryptic " With files from Bruce Campion-Smith, Toronto Star" found at the bottom of the page. ( BTW Check out the picture; the arrows on their signs point the wrong way, LOL)
What the story left out:
Protester #1: Is Virginia Ervin, the "CEO Durham Federal Green Party Association and former GPC candidate for Durham.
Protester #2: Is Gail Bates, Green Party Candidate for Oshawa.
I guess they didn't think it relevant to reveal political ties when doing a political story. Maybe it is something in the water but there seems to be a lot of that going around lately.
Showing posts with label Star. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Star. Show all posts
Friday, February 25, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
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.
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.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Feeling paranoid? Have a baseless accusation to make? Contact the Toronto Star.
Because they will be happy to publish a story on it for you.
Check out this article written by Susan Delacourt/ Bruce Campion-Smith.
Highlights: ( alternate section title: find the speculation. Because there are few facts other than the on the record denial from the conservatives, but why let facts get in the way of speculation)
OTTAWA—Two University of Ottawa professors, vocal critics of the federal Conservative government, say they have become targets of a new political intimidation tactic, aimed at using their private, personal information against them.
...but Mendes and Attaran are convinced that it’s part of an academic witch hunt by the governing party — part of a wider campaign to silence university voices that may be critical of the Conservatives.
“I started thinking, my God, this is a McCarthy-like attempt to politically intimidate both of us,” Mendes said
Neither Attaran or Mendes know the name or names of the requesters, but they have suspicions about the motive.
“It seems like an intimidation tactic,” said Attaran
“The information makes me think it’s somebody who is essentially trying to amass a file on critics of the government,” he said in an interview. “I have a feeling it’s political.”
“It certainly set off some alarm bells,” Attaran said. “Somebody wants their sticky fingers on me. I just don’t know who it is.
Mendes: “If I knew who the person was and the person was politically connected, I’d be furious.”
“They (U of O) seem to agree that it’s meant to clamp down on academic freedom in some way,’ he said.
Heather MacIvor, a professor at the University of Windsor and a longtime researcher and commentator on the Conservative party, said she believes that there is a concerted effort to put a “chill” on academic critics of the Harper government,
“This government has a hostility toward people who think for a living or people who write for a living,” MacIvor said
MacIvor said she’s been told that Conservative operatives refer to her as “Liberal hack”
Here’s the thing. I don’t make that public. I don’t talk about the fact that I worked for the Liberals,” MacIvor said. “I can tell you that my employment record for Parliament Hill is (only) in the National Archives. It takes a lot of work to find it. Somebody found it.”
Nor did spokeswoman Andrée Dumulon want to speculate on why U of O has been receiving a disproportionate share of access requests in recent years. “We don’t know anything about the motives behind the requests,” Dumulon said.
I found one more in another story, this time in the Ottawa Citizen: "It does have a distinct political whiff to it," Attaran said.
An entire article based purely on speculation, feelings, and unconfirmed suspicions (unconfirmed suspicions seem to trump confirmed denials) published in the Toronto Star under a Susan Delacourt/Bruce Campion-Smith byline.
Not that I am surprised though, because with Delacourt we are talking about a 'journalist' who wrote another article based on the TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE notion of a Tuesday (Federal elections are held on Mondays) March 29th election.
You know what they say: If it is published in the Toronto Star, it is probably bullshit. ( If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.)
Related: Who is Amir Attaran?
Liberal supporter? Follow the money.
Other opinions:
BCBlue gives his thoughts here.
Blue Like You.
The National Post. ( I love the title: Possibly the lamest front-page “exclusive” in the history of Canadian journalism)
A Few Figs.
New Ekos poll out: CPC 37.3 LPC 24.8 NDP 14.2 GPC 10.7 BQ 9.9
Seems like the Liberals plan to steal the NDP platform has fallen flat.
Check out this article written by Susan Delacourt/ Bruce Campion-Smith.
Highlights: ( alternate section title: find the speculation. Because there are few facts other than the on the record denial from the conservatives, but why let facts get in the way of speculation)
OTTAWA—Two University of Ottawa professors, vocal critics of the federal Conservative government, say they have become targets of a new political intimidation tactic, aimed at using their private, personal information against them.
...but Mendes and Attaran are convinced that it’s part of an academic witch hunt by the governing party — part of a wider campaign to silence university voices that may be critical of the Conservatives.
“I started thinking, my God, this is a McCarthy-like attempt to politically intimidate both of us,” Mendes said
Neither Attaran or Mendes know the name or names of the requesters, but they have suspicions about the motive.
“It seems like an intimidation tactic,” said Attaran
“The information makes me think it’s somebody who is essentially trying to amass a file on critics of the government,” he said in an interview. “I have a feeling it’s political.”
“It certainly set off some alarm bells,” Attaran said. “Somebody wants their sticky fingers on me. I just don’t know who it is.
Mendes: “If I knew who the person was and the person was politically connected, I’d be furious.”
“They (U of O) seem to agree that it’s meant to clamp down on academic freedom in some way,’ he said.
Heather MacIvor, a professor at the University of Windsor and a longtime researcher and commentator on the Conservative party, said she believes that there is a concerted effort to put a “chill” on academic critics of the Harper government,
“This government has a hostility toward people who think for a living or people who write for a living,” MacIvor said
MacIvor said she’s been told that Conservative operatives refer to her as “Liberal hack”
Here’s the thing. I don’t make that public. I don’t talk about the fact that I worked for the Liberals,” MacIvor said. “I can tell you that my employment record for Parliament Hill is (only) in the National Archives. It takes a lot of work to find it. Somebody found it.”
Nor did spokeswoman Andrée Dumulon want to speculate on why U of O has been receiving a disproportionate share of access requests in recent years. “We don’t know anything about the motives behind the requests,” Dumulon said.
I found one more in another story, this time in the Ottawa Citizen: "It does have a distinct political whiff to it," Attaran said.
------
An entire article based purely on speculation, feelings, and unconfirmed suspicions (unconfirmed suspicions seem to trump confirmed denials) published in the Toronto Star under a Susan Delacourt/Bruce Campion-Smith byline.
Not that I am surprised though, because with Delacourt we are talking about a 'journalist' who wrote another article based on the TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE notion of a Tuesday (Federal elections are held on Mondays) March 29th election.
You know what they say: If it is published in the Toronto Star, it is probably bullshit. ( If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.)
Related: Who is Amir Attaran?
Liberal supporter? Follow the money.
Other opinions:
BCBlue gives his thoughts here.
Blue Like You.
The National Post. ( I love the title: Possibly the lamest front-page “exclusive” in the history of Canadian journalism)
A Few Figs.
New Ekos poll out: CPC 37.3 LPC 24.8 NDP 14.2 GPC 10.7 BQ 9.9
Seems like the Liberals plan to steal the NDP platform has fallen flat.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Compounding bad journalism: an example from this weekend.
It is bad enough when examples of poor journalism, not so much simple errors but the blatantly obvious stuff, gets published but when that same bad journalism gets cited or used in the works of others it not only exposes the laziness of our MSM, it also shows us the inside baseball, don't criticize/question those in the bubble mentality, that is prevalent among our so called professional journalists.
On Saturday Susan Delacourt filed a piece in the Toronto Star under the headline: "Tories planning a spring election?" in which she wrote that a source had told her that a Conservative Party fundraiser had called them up on the phone and let it slip that there would be an election on March 29, 2011; 'letting the cat out of the bag'. Delacourt went on to write that the CPC had denied the Mar 29 date but basically ignored the denial and continued on with the premise of a March 29th election going so far as to formulate just how a March 29 election date was possible by counting back the days on a calender and checking the House of Commons schedule before 'assuming' that PM Harper would be paying a call on the Governor-General asking for Parliament to be dissolved forcing an election.
When I initially read that story on Saturday morning I started a blog post where I Fisked the article line by line but soon gave up as it became clear that the entire story was too much of a joke for anyone to take seriously. It looks like I was wrong and that I have seriously underestimated the ability of some in Canada's main stream media to show even the most basic common sense in their reporting. (more on this later)
First off the entire article was based on hear-say, which should always raise red flags as to the reliability of the information. Hear-say evidence is so unreliable that rarely, if ever, is it allowed to be used a court of law.
Next the story is based on the totally implausible premise that a person working the fund-raising phone bank, who may not even be a party supporter, would themselves have such deep knowledge of the most secret party policy & time-lines and then would divulge that secret information to some random person who they have never met and who told them that they were not even a party supporter. (Seriously, that does not make sense in any way, shape, or form)
And lastly, the entire theory of a March 29 election is flat out IMPOSSIBLE because Canadian federal elections always take place on a Monday, unless it is a statutory holiday which is not the case. One might think that those reporting on Parliament might know that, but obviously they don't or this story would never had seen the light of day or had any type of afterlife.
But this blog entry is not about the Delacourt story, it is about how others in the media have decided to compound this bad journalism by using/citing her story with the (impossible) March 29 date in their own work ignoring the obvious problems and the many criticisms from out of the bubble.Delacourt's article was blasted in blogs and comments across the land within hours of its publication and one didn't even have to venture past the comments at the bottom of the page at the Star to realize that the story was bunk and its value questionable. Yet it lived on.
First the Toronto Star: "Reports over the weekend said Prime Minister Stephen Harper is considering a federal election for this spring with a possible date of March 29." ( Not to be critical but shouldn't that read report, you know without the S?) Not that I am surprised that the Star would use the nonsense from Delacourt as they were the ones that published it in the first place, but considering all of the criticism her original piece garnered wouldn't you think that an editor somewhere might pick up that there might be a problem and that perhaps it would not be the best source to use in another story? Of course that would assume that they bother listening to any criticisms or even care about truth or accuracy.
The next example comes from Jennifer Ditchburn of the Canadian Press, but her use of the 'March 29th' date was not to come in print form as one might expect from the Canadian Press reporter with the Parliament Hill beat. Instead Jennifer would go on national television to tell the entire country about the March 29, 2011 election day theory based solely on Delacourt's article . Listen to what she said below.
She starts out by praising her "fine colleague Susan Delacourt" and then proceeds into the March 29 election date theory laughing with Jane and Craig. While Ditchburn seems to just be reporting what her colleague wrote and may not have known how badly that article had been trashed, although I find it hard to believe that a reporter could read that article and not have concerns or questions, she gets something fundamentally wrong about Delacourt's story. Listen to it again and note that it appears that she is saying that an election will be called March 29th and not held on March 29th. Interesting because if you read the article it is quite clear that it says an election would take place ON March 29th as the very first line reads: "The Conservatives are planning for a March 29 election..." and later on reads: "“She replied that the election would be on March 29th..." and still farther into the article reads: "A March 29 election would have to be called sometime before Feb. 22 for a minimum, 36-day campaign. But since the Commons is not sitting that week in February, it’s assumed the election would be kicked off simply by Harper paying a call on the Governor-General and asking for Parliament to be dissolved."
So what was Ditchburn really trying to say on during her Question Period segment? I was not so sure at first and thought that maybe I would not be able to use her comments for this blog post as she seemed to be just reporting on what Delacourt had written, as I and others have done, but I subsequently found out later Sunday evening what she did intend to say about the March 29th date and also answered my question about the suitability of using her comments at the same time.
It all came to be when she responded to a Tweet I had made earlier in the evening.
albertaardvark: To @SusanDelacourt @jenditchburn & others pushing the Mar 29 election theory... Elections are always held on a Monday! That is all.
Related: another fine example of journalism from Jeniffer Ditchburn. Guergis had a history in the clubs with the hometown playboy.
http://unambig.com/conservatives-to-call-election-says-unknown-person/
http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com/2011/01/who-*#*#-is-don-burroughs.html (NSFW)
and of course Blue Like You where you will find plenty of comments on this subject in the comments!
On Saturday Susan Delacourt filed a piece in the Toronto Star under the headline: "Tories planning a spring election?" in which she wrote that a source had told her that a Conservative Party fundraiser had called them up on the phone and let it slip that there would be an election on March 29, 2011; 'letting the cat out of the bag'. Delacourt went on to write that the CPC had denied the Mar 29 date but basically ignored the denial and continued on with the premise of a March 29th election going so far as to formulate just how a March 29 election date was possible by counting back the days on a calender and checking the House of Commons schedule before 'assuming' that PM Harper would be paying a call on the Governor-General asking for Parliament to be dissolved forcing an election.
When I initially read that story on Saturday morning I started a blog post where I Fisked the article line by line but soon gave up as it became clear that the entire story was too much of a joke for anyone to take seriously. It looks like I was wrong and that I have seriously underestimated the ability of some in Canada's main stream media to show even the most basic common sense in their reporting. (more on this later)
First off the entire article was based on hear-say, which should always raise red flags as to the reliability of the information. Hear-say evidence is so unreliable that rarely, if ever, is it allowed to be used a court of law.
Next the story is based on the totally implausible premise that a person working the fund-raising phone bank, who may not even be a party supporter, would themselves have such deep knowledge of the most secret party policy & time-lines and then would divulge that secret information to some random person who they have never met and who told them that they were not even a party supporter. (Seriously, that does not make sense in any way, shape, or form)
And lastly, the entire theory of a March 29 election is flat out IMPOSSIBLE because Canadian federal elections always take place on a Monday, unless it is a statutory holiday which is not the case. One might think that those reporting on Parliament might know that, but obviously they don't or this story would never had seen the light of day or had any type of afterlife.
But this blog entry is not about the Delacourt story, it is about how others in the media have decided to compound this bad journalism by using/citing her story with the (impossible) March 29 date in their own work ignoring the obvious problems and the many criticisms from out of the bubble.Delacourt's article was blasted in blogs and comments across the land within hours of its publication and one didn't even have to venture past the comments at the bottom of the page at the Star to realize that the story was bunk and its value questionable. Yet it lived on.
First the Toronto Star: "Reports over the weekend said Prime Minister Stephen Harper is considering a federal election for this spring with a possible date of March 29." ( Not to be critical but shouldn't that read report, you know without the S?) Not that I am surprised that the Star would use the nonsense from Delacourt as they were the ones that published it in the first place, but considering all of the criticism her original piece garnered wouldn't you think that an editor somewhere might pick up that there might be a problem and that perhaps it would not be the best source to use in another story? Of course that would assume that they bother listening to any criticisms or even care about truth or accuracy.
The next example comes from Jennifer Ditchburn of the Canadian Press, but her use of the 'March 29th' date was not to come in print form as one might expect from the Canadian Press reporter with the Parliament Hill beat. Instead Jennifer would go on national television to tell the entire country about the March 29, 2011 election day theory based solely on Delacourt's article . Listen to what she said below.
She starts out by praising her "fine colleague Susan Delacourt" and then proceeds into the March 29 election date theory laughing with Jane and Craig. While Ditchburn seems to just be reporting what her colleague wrote and may not have known how badly that article had been trashed, although I find it hard to believe that a reporter could read that article and not have concerns or questions, she gets something fundamentally wrong about Delacourt's story. Listen to it again and note that it appears that she is saying that an election will be called March 29th and not held on March 29th. Interesting because if you read the article it is quite clear that it says an election would take place ON March 29th as the very first line reads: "The Conservatives are planning for a March 29 election..." and later on reads: "“She replied that the election would be on March 29th..." and still farther into the article reads: "A March 29 election would have to be called sometime before Feb. 22 for a minimum, 36-day campaign. But since the Commons is not sitting that week in February, it’s assumed the election would be kicked off simply by Harper paying a call on the Governor-General and asking for Parliament to be dissolved."
So what was Ditchburn really trying to say on during her Question Period segment? I was not so sure at first and thought that maybe I would not be able to use her comments for this blog post as she seemed to be just reporting on what Delacourt had written, as I and others have done, but I subsequently found out later Sunday evening what she did intend to say about the March 29th date and also answered my question about the suitability of using her comments at the same time.
It all came to be when she responded to a Tweet I had made earlier in the evening.
albertaardvark: To @SusanDelacourt @jenditchburn & others pushing the Mar 29 election theory... Elections are always held on a Monday! That is all.
Related: another fine example of journalism from Jeniffer Ditchburn. Guergis had a history in the clubs with the hometown playboy.
-------------------
As stated earlier, many bloggers had written about the Delacourt article. In time I will try to link to them all below. (let me know in the comments if there are others)
http://unambig.com/conservatives-to-call-election-says-unknown-person/
http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com/2011/01/who-*#*#-is-don-burroughs.html (NSFW)
and of course Blue Like You where you will find plenty of comments on this subject in the comments!
Saturday, March 06, 2010
This guy is going to get himself fired from The Star...
Thomas Walkom is going to get himself fired from the Toronto Star if he keeps writing stuff like this.
Some excerpts from "How Harper won the recession":
"International finances remain wobbly.
Some excerpts from "How Harper won the recession":
"International finances remain wobbly.
Governments around the edge of Europe, in countries like Spain, Portugal and Greece, are in danger of defaulting on their debts. Questions are being raised even about Britain's debt load.
Spooked European governments are being pressured to cut back on the very spending that has kept these nations from collapsing into depression....
...However, in Canada, all of this seems very far away. In Toronto, housing prices remain hot. Interest rates are at rock bottom. Inflation is low. Unemployment, while high, remains below the levels experienced in the recessions of the '80s and '90s.
Unemployment is America's number one topic. Here in Canada, pundits fret not about joblessness but the federal deficit.
The Harper Conservatives have used all of this to shift public discussion into what they hope will be more optimistic channels.
That story, sketched out in Wednesday's Throne Speech, is that the bad times are effectively over and that the country can now set its sights on a brighter future – one in which, under the leadership of a far-sighted Harper government, Canadians will be able to replicate the achievements of their Olympic athletes and create a brand new tomorrow.....
....None of this means that Harper is necessarily fated to win the next election. Much can happen between now and then.
What it does mean though is that, barring a second economic crisis, he will not be blamed for this recession. He may even be credited for any recovery.
And that is a very big plus."
Read the entire article at the Star, and wish Thomas luck. He might need it.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
CP. Just one question.
Dear Canadian Press: Since your story about pictures of the PM being removed from a government website has proven to be totally false; I think in the interest of openness, fairness, and public information that you should provide your readers with the names of these 'critics' who spawned this story spawned this story and headline? (edit: added 'and headline' to my poorly worded question. Thanks M)
Harper Photos Removed from Government Website.
"Critics have complained that the website, actionplan.gc.ca, looks like a partisan promotion – complete with a Tory-blue colour scheme, glowing third-party testimonials, more than 40 photos of Harper and repeated references to "the Harper government" rather than the Government of Canada."
I think it is a valid question to ask and even more-so since we all still have this made up story so fresh in our memories and who there was that other time........
So let us know CP we will be waiting.
Remember it is your job to cover the news, not be the news; or worse, create the news.
Update: This is the so-called evidence found at Impolitical.
Case solved:
The picture still remains on the site and can be found here.
Harper Photos Removed from Government Website.
"Critics have complained that the website, actionplan.gc.ca, looks like a partisan promotion – complete with a Tory-blue colour scheme, glowing third-party testimonials, more than 40 photos of Harper and repeated references to "the Harper government" rather than the Government of Canada."
I think it is a valid question to ask and even more-so since we all still have this made up story so fresh in our memories and who there was that other time........
So let us know CP we will be waiting.
Remember it is your job to cover the news, not be the news; or worse, create the news.
----------------------------
Update: This is the so-called evidence found at Impolitical.
Case solved:
The picture still remains on the site and can be found here.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
First comes the endorsment, now comes the call for him to be replaced
The Toronto Star.
Then and Now
update:
The Star has changed their headline as it turns out they were wrong, again.
Then and Now
update:
The Star has changed their headline as it turns out they were wrong, again.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Paid for by the Official Agent of the Liberal Party of Canada
Paid for by the Official Agent of the Liberal Party of Canada. Ok maybe not, but after reading the following, and only endorsement that I have seen for Dion, I think it should have the above disclaimer written across the page. You want your Liberal talking points, please read the following.
From the Toronto Star (big surprise) I was going to Fisk the entire thing but it is so full of holes and out right lies that it isn't even worth the effort; other than to comment that if the Star thinks that imposing a carbon tax on Ontario's manufacturing sector would be a good thing, then they are truly too partisan to be taken seriously and should be considered as nothing but an extension of the Liberal Party of Canada. Take note advertisers, the Star wants to destroy the Ontario economy.
From the Toronto Star (big surprise) I was going to Fisk the entire thing but it is so full of holes and out right lies that it isn't even worth the effort; other than to comment that if the Star thinks that imposing a carbon tax on Ontario's manufacturing sector would be a good thing, then they are truly too partisan to be taken seriously and should be considered as nothing but an extension of the Liberal Party of Canada. Take note advertisers, the Star wants to destroy the Ontario economy.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has run a government that has put partisanship and ideology ahead of the public interest.
In fiscal policy, Harper has pursued a neo-conservative strategy to cut the GST – not, as economists had recommended, income taxes – in order to reduce dramatically the role of government. He inherited a $12 billion surplus from the previous Liberal government (under Paul Martin) and has squandered almost all of it. His moves have left the government with little room to manoeuvre in the current crisis.
In foreign affairs, Harper has diminished Canada's reputation as an independent voice and aligned his government with George Bush's White House on a range of issues, from the Middle East to the "war on terror." He has also worsened relations with China, the world's biggest emerging economy, and fallen behind other Western countries in developing ties with India, the second biggest.
Taking a cue from the Ontario Conservative government under Mike Harris, Harper has pursued policies of deregulation. He has either allowed sectors to be self-regulating (food, for example), or he has fired the regulator (Linda Keen at the nuclear safety commission).
On the environment, Harper scrapped the Kyoto accord and came up with a new plan that allows greenhouse gas emissions to continue to grow, especially in his home province of Alberta.
In federal-provincial relations, he has spent 33 months in power without once holding a conference of first ministers. And he has managed the neat trick of alienating the governments of both Quebec and Ontario. Even Pierre Trudeau didn't do that. Furthermore, his finance minister, Jim Flaherty, has unapologetically dissed Ontario as the "last place" to invest in Canada.
On the cities front, there have been some grudging moves by Harper's government to help municipalities cope with the enormous infrastructure challenges they face. But the federal Conservative attitude toward cities was best summed up by the aforementioned finance minister, who said dismissively that Ottawa is not in the business of "fixing potholes."
On the aboriginal file, while Harper extended a meaningful apology over residential schools, he also ripped up the Kelowna accord, thereby dealing a severe blow to relations with native communities.
And having castigated the Liberals for being anti-democratic when he was in opposition, Harper ran a government that was secretive and controlling to an astonishing degree. Independent voices in the Conservative caucus were expelled, ministers prohibited from saying anything much, and the media frozen out (until the election neared).
To top it all off, in calling this election Harper broke his own law fixing the election date for 2009.
Harper did all that with a minority. If he got a majority, there are very real concerns that he would go much further and pave the way for two-tier medicare, pursue more military adventures with the Americans, scrap the gun registry, and introduce more Bush-like tax cuts that would hamper any future government's ability to govern.
Harper's campaign has been no less mean-spirited than his government. It has been dominated by attack ads that ridicule his chief rival (Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion) and misrepresent the key plank in his platform (the "Green Shift"). The Conservatives have also pursued wedge issues such as youth crime and funding cuts for the arts.
Latterly, during the market meltdown, with Canadians fearful for their jobs and their savings, Harper sounded more like a broker than a prime minister with his message that "some good buying opportunities are opening up." And when Dion, who has a hearing problem, stumbled in a television interview because he had trouble comprehending a question, Harper absurdly seized on this as proof that the Liberals "really don't know what they would do on the economy."
For all these reasons, Harper and the Conservatives do not deserve to be re-elected on Tuesday.
We prefer Dion and the Liberals.
Dion, to be sure, has his faults. His communications skills are wanting, his approach can be somewhat academic, and he did not do his job as leader to make sure his party was fully prepared for this election. Mid-campaign, it appeared Dion might be leading the Liberals to a defeat of historic proportions.
But Dion has shown growth in this campaign and appeared finally to be connecting with voters at the end. He has also demonstrated strength of character in withstanding a withering negative ad campaign that would have brought lesser leaders to their knees.
Dion's intelligence is beyond question, as is his love of country.
As well, the Liberal team is definitely stronger, with candidates in the GTA like Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff, Ken Dryden, Gerard Kennedy, Martha Hall Findlay, Navdeep Bains and Ruby Dhalla. Tellingly, Harper and the Conservatives failed to attract any name candidates to their local banner in this election.
Finally, the Liberal platform has much in it to like, including an emphasis on building infrastructure, fighting poverty, expanding child care and working with the provinces (especially Ontario).
The Green Shift, so ridiculed by the Conservatives, may seem complicated to the average voter. But it is actually simpler and more transparent than the Conservatives' own cap-and-trade plan, with "intensity-based" targets. The Conservative plan would also involve higher costs for consumers, but they would be hidden.
The New Democrats have an attractive leader in Jack Layton – articulate and knowledgeable. And the NDP platform is very similar to the Liberals', with one notable exception: its reliance on hiking corporate taxes by $50 billion. That could scare business away from Canada and is at odds with the direction taken by other liberal and social democratic governments.
As well, in Ontario at least, a ballot cast for the NDP would split the opposition vote and allow the Conservatives to go up the middle to victory – except, that is, in ridings the NDP already holds.
As for the Greens, their leader, Elizabeth May, has brought a feisty new presence to the campaign trail. But in this province, where the Greens are trailing well behind, a vote for them will clearly be wasted. It would be tantamount to voting for Ralph Nader, the Green candidate for U.S. president in 2000, who drew just enough votes away from Al Gore to allow the climate-change- denying Bush to win.
In summary, the re-election of Stephen Harper and the Conservatives would be bad for Toronto, bad for Ontario, and bad for Canada. Stéphane Dion and the Liberals are the best alternative.Thursday, September 25, 2008
Fear Mongering on Abortion, What took them so long?
Even though it is totally baseless we all knew the smear was going to show up some time during the election campaign.
And today in the Toronto Star we get this:
The Conservative government is eroding women's reproductive health and right to abortion "by stealth," a group of advocates representing labour and women's rights charged this morning. "There is a clear anti-abortion hidden agenda at work that puts women's health at risk," said Carolyn Egan, of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada.
Don't you just love this line "There is a clear anti-abortion hidden agenda at work that puts women's health at risk"
Damn that PM Harper is one shrewd dude. Only he can have an agenda that is both clear and hidden at the same time while in contrast Dion seems to be having trouble tying his own shoes without help.
Keep it coming lefties; the campaign of fear worked so well the last few times that you might as well go for it yet again this year.
H/t to Joanne
And today in the Toronto Star we get this:
The Conservative government is eroding women's reproductive health and right to abortion "by stealth," a group of advocates representing labour and women's rights charged this morning. "There is a clear anti-abortion hidden agenda at work that puts women's health at risk," said Carolyn Egan, of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada.
Don't you just love this line "There is a clear anti-abortion hidden agenda at work that puts women's health at risk"
Damn that PM Harper is one shrewd dude. Only he can have an agenda that is both clear and hidden at the same time while in contrast Dion seems to be having trouble tying his own shoes without help.
Keep it coming lefties; the campaign of fear worked so well the last few times that you might as well go for it yet again this year.
H/t to Joanne
Monday, October 29, 2007
More bad news for the Liberal Party of Canada
I was going to post a little roundup on the misfortunes of the LPC over the last couple of days when I came across another one to add to the list.
Stephen Taylor has some questions for Garth Turner about how he is raising money. It is a must read about how our old friend Garth might be in violation of Election Canada rules. Interesting timing since Garth and the Libs have been trying to stir up the pot over CPC practices. I will be watching this one carefully over the next little while.
The sponsorship scandal is again raising it's ugly head courtesy of former PM Jean Chretien. It looks like JC has had his lawyer busy trying to quash some the Gomery Commissions findings that placed some blame with the PMO and hurt JC's feelings. JC has never been happy about the entire sponsorship issue; in his book he stated that Martin made to much of a deal out of it and should have swept it under the rug instead of calling an inquiry. As usual, in the Liberal Party, the buck stops nowhere. H/T Christian Conservative
Some big news out of BC where the MP Blair Wilson,Liberal critic for revenue (the irony here is priceless) is in some hot water for spending allegations in the 2006 campaign. Wilson resigned today after first denying anything was improper, but it looks like someone upstairs was trying to do some damage control and Wilson's tune changed a bit. I wonder how Stephane will deal with the above mentioned Garth Turner allegations? Better keep that Press Release handy; just cross of one name and add another.
So much for the big plan of painting the conservatives as a crooked party. It was a dumb idea to begin with, but now with the Wilson story, Garth's potential troubles, and of course JC bringing up the grand daddy of all, the sponsorship scandal, the Liberals continue to look like buffoons.
This last one may not be much, but having just read the Star, where everything seemed to be coming up roses for the Libs in the GTA area*; the president of the Sarnia-Lambton federal Liberal association, Anne Marie Gillis, has resigned because of the poor leadership of Dion. The Liberals are desperately hoping that the major cracks and trouble seen in Quebec wing will not pour cross over the border into their last major area of support in the country, but didn't those cracks in Quebec just start out small as well? Here's hoping.
*How could a survey of the Liberal party's 47 riding presidents in the GTA possibly be representative of anything? It would be like asking the Board of GM what type of vehicles are the best, or asking Leafs coach Paul Maurice who will win the cup. The entire story looks like a sad attempt at cheer leading that the Star, and Delacourt, should both be ashamed of.
Late update: It seems that Blair Wilson at one time was contemplating running for the LPC leadership and the entire country into the ground with his management skills. H/T KerPlonka
Stephen Taylor has some questions for Garth Turner about how he is raising money. It is a must read about how our old friend Garth might be in violation of Election Canada rules. Interesting timing since Garth and the Libs have been trying to stir up the pot over CPC practices. I will be watching this one carefully over the next little while.
The sponsorship scandal is again raising it's ugly head courtesy of former PM Jean Chretien. It looks like JC has had his lawyer busy trying to quash some the Gomery Commissions findings that placed some blame with the PMO and hurt JC's feelings. JC has never been happy about the entire sponsorship issue; in his book he stated that Martin made to much of a deal out of it and should have swept it under the rug instead of calling an inquiry. As usual, in the Liberal Party, the buck stops nowhere. H/T Christian Conservative
Some big news out of BC where the MP Blair Wilson,Liberal critic for revenue (the irony here is priceless) is in some hot water for spending allegations in the 2006 campaign. Wilson resigned today after first denying anything was improper, but it looks like someone upstairs was trying to do some damage control and Wilson's tune changed a bit. I wonder how Stephane will deal with the above mentioned Garth Turner allegations? Better keep that Press Release handy; just cross of one name and add another.
So much for the big plan of painting the conservatives as a crooked party. It was a dumb idea to begin with, but now with the Wilson story, Garth's potential troubles, and of course JC bringing up the grand daddy of all, the sponsorship scandal, the Liberals continue to look like buffoons.
This last one may not be much, but having just read the Star, where everything seemed to be coming up roses for the Libs in the GTA area*; the president of the Sarnia-Lambton federal Liberal association, Anne Marie Gillis, has resigned because of the poor leadership of Dion. The Liberals are desperately hoping that the major cracks and trouble seen in Quebec wing will not pour cross over the border into their last major area of support in the country, but didn't those cracks in Quebec just start out small as well? Here's hoping.
*How could a survey of the Liberal party's 47 riding presidents in the GTA possibly be representative of anything? It would be like asking the Board of GM what type of vehicles are the best, or asking Leafs coach Paul Maurice who will win the cup. The entire story looks like a sad attempt at cheer leading that the Star, and Delacourt, should both be ashamed of.
Late update: It seems that Blair Wilson at one time was contemplating running for the LPC leadership and the entire country into the ground with his management skills. H/T KerPlonka
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Mayor Miller, Jim has a foolproof idea for you.
Attention Mayor David Miller.
Jim Travers from the Star has a great liberal idea that is guaranteed to solve your money problems.
You see, and the statistics do not lie, because the crime rate is down there is no real need to worry about crime in general, and subsequently there will be no need for Toronto to have such a large and costly police force. You could cut about 25% right off the top, and save the city MILLIONS of those badly needed dollars.
Simple, and how can it fail? A great liberal idea, carried out by a liberal mayor; a dynamite combination for success if there ever was one.
It could get even better once this country wakes up to Harper's secret agenda and we return the Liberals to their rightful place in power. With the Libs back in power it is obvious that an even greater drop in the crime rate will be sure to follow, and the police force could again be easily cut to a size of about half of what exists today.
Just think what you could do if you had 50% of that police budget to do the things that really matter.
Jim Travers from the Star has a great liberal idea that is guaranteed to solve your money problems.
You see, and the statistics do not lie, because the crime rate is down there is no real need to worry about crime in general, and subsequently there will be no need for Toronto to have such a large and costly police force. You could cut about 25% right off the top, and save the city MILLIONS of those badly needed dollars.
Simple, and how can it fail? A great liberal idea, carried out by a liberal mayor; a dynamite combination for success if there ever was one.
It could get even better once this country wakes up to Harper's secret agenda and we return the Liberals to their rightful place in power. With the Libs back in power it is obvious that an even greater drop in the crime rate will be sure to follow, and the police force could again be easily cut to a size of about half of what exists today.
Just think what you could do if you had 50% of that police budget to do the things that really matter.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Another example of Social Justice
The daily antics of the Liberal party continue to amaze me. They have hit rock bottom and the more they whine the more support they lose.
From CTV : A Commons security guard forced the Conservative research employees to leave Thursday while one mingled with reporters to record a scrum with Liberal Leader Stephane Dion.
Unbelievable. How will this be spun by Dion and his "crew"? I do not think it can be spun but we shall see in good time.
Limiting who can or can not be at a public event is not the best way to display that you are the party of social justice.
I feel that even the most rabid Liberal is starting to see that Dion was a mistake, and spinning this crap is becoming a increasingly difficult thing to do. Well, at least if you want to look in the mirror that is.
Does anyone remember the CPC meeting in Toronto recently? A private function where a Star reporter got into a snit because she was not allowed in. Oh the outrage, I just wonder what the Star will say about this story.
Better yet, I wonder what Garth has to say about this one?
Stay tuned, more to come I am sure.
Al
From CTV : A Commons security guard forced the Conservative research employees to leave Thursday while one mingled with reporters to record a scrum with Liberal Leader Stephane Dion.
Unbelievable. How will this be spun by Dion and his "crew"? I do not think it can be spun but we shall see in good time.
Limiting who can or can not be at a public event is not the best way to display that you are the party of social justice.
I feel that even the most rabid Liberal is starting to see that Dion was a mistake, and spinning this crap is becoming a increasingly difficult thing to do. Well, at least if you want to look in the mirror that is.
Does anyone remember the CPC meeting in Toronto recently? A private function where a Star reporter got into a snit because she was not allowed in. Oh the outrage, I just wonder what the Star will say about this story.
Better yet, I wonder what Garth has to say about this one?
Stay tuned, more to come I am sure.
Al
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Are the blinders off?
Is it just me, or are MSM stories about Dion's lack of leadership/political skills becoming an almost daily occurrence? We on the right have always known that Dion was lacking, but seeing this type of sentiment is now coming from much of the MSM, I think Mr. Dion may want to start work on a knife registry program soon for his own protection. Those Liberal brand knifes hurt when stuck in your back.
Have the blinders come off, or is it more of a case that the MSM can no longer cover for or attempt to speak for Dion when public opinion seems to be in agreement on how well he is doing in his leadership roll.
The honeymoon is indeed over; time to re-write some history to prop up support for Dion, or as Cherniak likes to call it an "artistic licence"[sic] with reality.
Have the blinders come off, or is it more of a case that the MSM can no longer cover for or attempt to speak for Dion when public opinion seems to be in agreement on how well he is doing in his leadership roll.
The honeymoon is indeed over; time to re-write some history to prop up support for Dion, or as Cherniak likes to call it an "artistic licence"[sic] with reality.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
