hit counter script
« Leave Leftdog alone!
Oh Danny Boy! »

September 12, 2008

Green Party wilts, tape was not doctored

Concerning this story,

John Bennett, the director of communications for the Green Party as reported by thetyee.ca:

Fiction: “TVO is considering legal action as well”

Fiction: “It’s an attempt by the Conservatives through a front website to attack the credibility of Elizabeth May”

Fiction: “They took what she said, cut it up, then put it back together.”

From TVO.org:

Fact: “TVO confirms that the audio of the clip in question is intact”

Fact: “TVO is not and will not be pursuing legal action of any kind on this matter”

and finally (from me),

Fact: stephentaylor.ca nor Buckdog Politics are fronts for the Conservative Party. I am a conservative and want to see the Conservative Party elected.

Perhaps the first lesson of doing damage control against a viral message is to stop fuelling it. By threatening legal action and making a video even more interesting by trying to make it forbidden will only drive people’s interest. Of course, the interest will lead people to watch the video of Elizabeth May in her own words.

I’ve met Elizabeth May, I think she’s a nice person and I believe she is quite committed to her ideas, and this is in itself admirable. However, as my motive was questioned in an interview today, “why would you do this to May if you think she’s a nice person”, I responded by saying that May has gone prime-time and she’ll hit the national stage in the leaders debate and though she is not running for Prime Minister (she has already endorsed Dion), she is running to elect Members of Parliament to the legislature. May deserves scrutiny. My motive is that I support the Conservatives and wanted to put up May’s words, undoctored, for Canadians to understand. I think that May is wrong on the issues and wrong on her support for a carbon tax. Does Elizabeth May say Canadians are stupid? From the video, that was and is my honest interpretation of her words. What did it for me was her statement of agreement with the assessment that comes right after the words “[I/they] think Canadians are stupid.”

Perhaps May was expressing frustration in her belief that Canadians cannot understand the complexity of a complete reconfiguration of the Canadian government’s system of taxation. Poorly considered quips, asides and gaffes can happen to us all. Do I believe that May believe in her heart of hearts that Canadians are stupid? No.

And through this exercise, my credibility has been questioned and prior to their backing down I was called a liar by the Green Party of Canada. This isn’t the first time I’ve been on the receiving end of this sort of kneejerk smear but this usually occurs when leftwing partisan bloggers don’t want to believe what clearly sits in front of them on their computer monitors. As for the Green Party, Kady O’Malley quotes another GPC spokesperson Camille Labchuk who says that this “was a misunderstanding on John Bennett’s part about the way that YouTube works”.

Lying about TVO’s legal intentions, accusing me of doctoring audio and threatening bloggers with legal action from the Green Party? And it’s my motive that is questioned?

I’m still waiting for my apology John.

This entry was authored by Stephen Taylor at 04:18 PM | Tweet this | Add a comment
| Feedback | #
  • The truth hurts. Iv'e got 20 yrs experience in the audio field, specifically editing and phoenetic editing. I knew right away the tape was real, and I'm not surprised they tried to squash it. That statement alone should cost her the leadership of her party.
  • RagingRanter
    I wouldn't worry about an apology. An apology that needs to be coaxed from someone is no apology at all. He made an ass of himself, and is doing himself no favours if he does not apologize on his own accord.
  • batb
    ST: "Lying about TVO’s legal intentions, accusing me of doctoring audio and threatening bloggers with legal action from the Green Party? And it’s my motive that is questioned?"

    Well, yes, Stephen. Don't you know that as a "partisan Conservative blogger" (TVO's description of you on their Web site advertising Elizabeth May's appearance on The Agenda tonight) you're fodder for all of the other parties' commentators?

    It's such an obvious and transparent bias that I'm astonished the perpetrators seem to be blind to it. I've never heard of or seen Liberal or NDP bloggers referred to as "partisan" Liberal/NDP bloggers--I guess because if you're in the MSM, the default position is left-of-centre.

    As you are right-of-centre--a position that is belittled by the other more-to-the-left-of-centre parties and the Canadian MSM--of course your motives are suspect and it's up to you to explain yourself, not the other way around.

    That's the stark reality in Canada.

    But I agree with you. The ball is clearly in the Green Party's court and it is clear that John Bennett owes you an apology. You did nothing wrong. The same can't be said about the Green Party's Director of Communications.
  • yep(s). I was thinking the same.
  • nbt
    I agree with your analogy 100% Stephen. A political leader without scars and criticism is like a football player without one spec of dirt on their jersey. And let me tell you, both stick out amongst their peers for all the wrong reasons.

    Anyway, I'm sure if May is a competitor, she would relish in the attacks. Most politicos do (well, as long as they don't go too far). And this didn't. Period.
  • Kelly
    Interestingly, there has been little to no coverage of this Green Party gaffe in the MSM, just as there has been little to no coverage of Robert Thibault's Pig comment. I am not surprised by this, but I can't understand why it is getting so little coverage when Dion said his party would not stoop to the level of name calling.
  • Funny how I said it was real 2 weeks ago. But no one listened to Me...
  • jad
    Duffy has just been talking about John Bennett. Seems he has been causing trouble by harassing Duffy's producers, demanding to be included in the various panels since "we're now in the debates."

    What a class act.

    PS. Duffy is trying to get him on the later MDL show tonight.
  • Stephen, check out Elizabeth May's inteview with Steve Paiken tonight. She said that her words were that "I fundamentally DISagree..."
  • Gabby in QC
    From The Agenda website:
    "Taylor took an audio clip of May off this website, and created a 24-second anti-May video, which he posted to YouTube and blogged about ..."

    Maybe I'm a little hypersensitive to words and their basic meaning, but if you simply put an excerpt of a public statement which is available on the internet to anyone who knows how to access it, how is that creating "a 24-second *anti-May* video"?

    As for those who say the MSM didn't cover the May stray in the fray, it did make a local Montreal talk show, and it did make the CBC's Ormiston Online site.
  • Maybe I'm a little hypersensitive to words and their basic meaning, but if you simply put an excerpt of a public statement which is available on the internet to anyone who knows how to access it, how is that creating "a 24-second *anti-May* video"?

    Good question, Gabby. How is the truth 'anti-May'?
  • real conservative
    Threatening lawsuits with no basis in fact is harassment.
  • Gabby in QC
    I guess the reply function has been disabled.

    To Joanne's "How is the truth 'anti-May'" -
    I'm glad the different faces of the Green leader are beginning to be shown, that's the truth.
    I have heard her begin interviews with the sweetest Mother-Earth voice she could muster, saying how she wanted to change politics into a less inimical battle, and then immediately launch a personal attack on Stephen Harper.
    To her, he's the Enemy incarnate.
    At the end of the interview, of course, she reverts to Mother-Earth mode: sweetness, dimpled smiles, and cheery parting words.

    "The Green party will offer Canadians a broad platform in the next federal election without resorting to smear campaigns or fear tactics, Green Leader Elizabeth May said Saturday." That's what she said in May of last year after her "appeasement" comment about Harper (in the Globe and Mail)

    This is what she said in The Ottawa Citizen to Kate Jaimet, The Ottawa Citizen in October 2007:
    ""The election of Stephen Harper changed my life because I saw I was going to lose 20 years of my life's work. ... You've got a right-wing agenda that's anti-environmental to an extent we've never seen," she said. "You're going to spend all of your time tearing your hair out and *wanting to slit your wrists.8 So you might as well get into politics."
    Talk about extreme language.

    I wonder if she'll get the publication date of her upcoming book changed: Global Warming for *Dummies*
    http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/books/Global-Warm...

    I have the links for the newspaper references if needed.
  • Andrew
    There is clearly a double standard for let-wing commentators. I watched Don Boudria smear conservative bloggers on CPAC tonight and then sit back and say nothing when a caller phoned in and referred to the conservatives as Nazis. Like the Greens, the other left wing parties, seem to believe it is ok to diss conservative politicians and bloggers but when conservative say something negative about them, they jump up and yell it's unfair. Liz May better get used to it. She's asked to play in the big leagues and will have to be able to take body checks.
  • batb
    Still no apology to Stephen Taylor from John Bennett.

    What's very annoying is that Stephen Taylor's involvement in this issue seems to have been misconstrued by a number of commenters at TVO's The Agenda. There are negative posts assuming that this was the Conservative Party trying to put Elizabeth May in a bad light via Stephen Taylor's blog.

    Of course, it was nothing of the kind. I don't comment at The Agenda, otherwise I'd set the record straight.

    John Bennett needs to apologize to Stephen Taylor, as what the Green Party has alleged he did is far more serious than their threatening e-mail to Buckdog.
  • Scott
    The thing that irked me, and didn't seem to get any play in the MSM (or blogospere for that matter) was her playing of the 'gender card' when she was initially left out of the debate.

    For her to say that she was left out because 'she's the only woman in the race' is unbelievably ridiculous and sexist to boot.

    The other leaders had reasonable arguments for keeping her out. It had nothing to do with her sex, but there she went using that as a stick to further her agenda.

    And not a peep from the media.

    So now what? If the other leaders are 'too hard' on her in the debate, is she going to say they're beating up on a woman?

    I think it shows the weakness of her arguments when she has to resort to this kind of BS.
  • Gabby in QC
    For Scott, who said: "And not a peep from the media."

    Not quite.
    • As I pointed out above, the CBC's Susan Ormiston had it on her blog (Ormiston Online), and she put May's 'saying something stupid' (hey, that might make a good song title, right Mr. Sinatra?) in a "you decide" format.
    • My local talk show hosts also spoke about it.
    • And CPAC's Peter Van Dusen also alluded to it in the Friday Headline Politics, saying that now that Ms. May has been OK'd for the debates because she's the leader of a party, she has to expect a lot of scrutiny.
  • Gabby in QC
    Wow! I just listened to May's interview with Steve Paikin (Thanks, Joanne!)

    You know what? The audio should be slowed down to 95% speed, so that people could hear what she really said.
    She claims she said "I fundamentally DISagree with that assessment" yet I'm pretty sure I heard her say “I fundamentally agree with that assessment." Are my ears tricking me?

    Anyway, Ms. May again appears to be deflecting the blame from herself onto someone else, as she did during the Harper = Chamberlain comment. At that time she said she was merely quoting Prince Charles and George Monbiot.

    In this instance, she deflects it onto other politicians; they're the ones who think Canadians are stupid. She of course would never have said that. Did she? Didn't she?

    "And I don't think they should have suspended Ryan Sparrow. I know Ryan. I felt terrible for him. The thing is Mr. Harper has these spokespeople and he wants them to be out there and trained as pitbulls ..."
    How motherly of her.

    "Do you want to put Hummer drivers in jail?” Paikin says she was asked during the Munk conference.
    "No, Hummer drivers should be taken out back and shot ..." was her reply at the time.
    Now she explains it as her "inner Sarah Palin" coming out.

    Another thing she denied saying or intimating, and thus deflecting blame: accusing the other leaders and the consortium of sexism.
    "No, I never said that"
    "What I said was that what they had failed to examine was the threat of the old boys' club trying to keep out the only woman ... and that was interpreted as though I'd said it was sexist ..."
    In other words, people didn't understand what she really meant.

    I think we need another Stephen here ... Stephen Colbert, to call out 'truthiness!'
    We cannot risk Stephen Taylor being sued, so better it should be Colbert.
  • Observant
    Liberal-Green coalition coming soon

    After the televised leaders debate on October 2nd, Dion and May will announce a strategic alliance to stop the Harper Conservatives. May will be telling her Green party members they must work to convince Canadians to vote strategically for the Liberal candidate, even though it means sacrificing the Green party for a good cause.

    The Green party 8-9% of the popular vote will probably split but some of the votes will go Liberal. Such an alliance will give hesitant Liberal voters hope and energize them to also turn up to vote in spite of Dion's failed leadership.

    After the alliance is announced, Dion and May will invite the NDP voters to follow suit and strategically vote Liberal to stop Harper. Together they could be successful at holding Harper to a minority if not forming their own minority govt.

    Dion will make a strong appeal to NDP voters, and ask them for their vote if they want to save Canada from a possible Harper majority govt. Layton will be effectively neutered by Dion and Layton will not have enough time to respond to such a Liberal attack on his voting base.

    If Layton wants to save his ass from such a political attack, he will have to convince Canadians that the Liberals are not deserving of support and also launch a strong counter-attack with ads trashing the Liberals over a 7 day period leading up to the election. By that time it may be too little too late.

    A Liberal-Green coalition will mobilize the undecided vote and revitalize the Liberal vote. Harper and Layton will have to launch a coordinated attack against Dion and May, otherwise the NDP could well be wiped out and Harper left with another minority govt or even back to the opposition benches.
  • A highly unlikely scenario.

    Imaginative, but improbable all the same.
  • EBD
    Perhaps Elizabeth May said "they think Canadians are stupid," not "I think Canadians are stupid." I simply can't hear it, but a fair number of people claim that's what they hear, so it's at least open to interpretation.

    But her claim (see Joanne TB above) that she said "I fundamentally DISagree with that statement" is no less than a staggering act of gall. Does she think she has some sort of Gaian dispensation to not only retroactively edit what she uttered but to expect that people will follow suit and change their minds about what she said?

    I can't begin to fathom such profound a level of self-entitlement, or what it would mean to the country to have a PM with a passive-aggressive belief in her right to be unaccountable. The whole mindset of "if you see/hear something I said/did you are wrong, because I have a personal right to deny anything I've said or done" is borderline disturbing, and it is that attitude, not her policies or her propensity to misspeak, that should make any reasonable person seriously question May's suitability for public office.
  • Indeed.

    "I can't begin to fathom such profound a level of self-entitlement, or what it would mean to the country to have a PM with a passive-aggressive belief in her right to be unaccountable."

    She is practically a re-branded "Liberal" what else can anyone expect?
  • One thing for sure May has lost it for the Greens. The TVO clip of May uttering her thoughts on the intelligence of Canadian voters really turned people off. I played this clip for a number of neighbors and they all agreed what she said was bone headed and they all agreed she said "I" not "they". Either way she will be lucky if she even wins a seat. Bennett should be fired for his actions or suspended like Ryan Sparrow was for dissing a soldiers Father.
    War is hell no matter where the fight is. And 75% of Canadians agree we should get out of Afghanistan and let their own government take care of their problems instead of expecting the rest of the free world to do it for them.
  • Reg
    I was checking out the Rabble/Babble comments in the link provided in the post below. Wow, it is amazing how many of them agree with May. The left really does believe that Canadians are too stupid to manage their own affairs and Government must do it for them by regulating the smallest minutia of their lives. And from the left's perspective, Canadians prove how stupid they are by not understanding this and stupidly voting Conservative. I guess they are worried that if Canadians have some money left in their jeans after the Green Shaft they might actually buy beer and popcorn.
  • Truth serum
    Stephen, I watched the Agenda last night. On there, E. May says in reference to the tape, that she says "...and I fundamentally DISagree with that assessment..." in reference to the "Canadians are stupid.." comment; and that she just talks fast and you can't really make out the "dis".

    Yet, when you watch the original TVO tape of the show in question, it is clear as anything that May says "...and I fundamentally agree with that assessment..." The camera shot at the time is right up close to her face, and there is no hint, no sound whatsoever, of a "dis". To me, this is an outright, blatant lie, by Elizabeth May. Now, all a person has to do is go to the TVO website, and view tape of last night's show, and the original one from Feb07. I'd really like to know what other people make of this. To me, if it is an outright lie, then Canadians need to know.
  • It doesn't stop there.

    Listen to the excuse she makes in this audio interview in regards to her comments.

    http://www.nationalpost.com/podcasts/fullcommen...

    Check the September 12, 2008 podcast.

    She tries to say it was all due to a problem with her microphone and that what she really had said was "inaudible". Someone should make a new video with all the evidence here and expose her.
  • You are a partisan hack; shame on you.
  • riiiight. way to make your non-existent point.

    Look up the definition of a word before you attempt to misuse it.
  • I guess that I stirred up the hornet's nest on Roy Green's national show today. Read the comments here on Kate McMillan's blog to see what transpired: http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/009546...

    There is nothing worse for a politician than to lie about doing something. To say that an audio recording or photo has been doctored is even worse.
  • batb
    Hmm. I wonder which Joe Clark wrote that message?

    If Joe Who: Well, he's partisan.

    If Joe Citizen: Well s/he's partisan, too.

    I guess if you're honest or have any political discernment at all, you're going to be partisan. That's not the problem. The only problem in being partisan is in not being able to back up or support your bias. I think Stephen Taylor does a more than admirable job of making his case.
  • Gabby in QC
    Stephen, you absolutely have to get a tape of the QP interview just completed with Elizabeth May. She said to Jane Taber that Steve Paikin *agreed* with her that she had NOT made the statement she made during the Munk Centre Conference.

    I wonder if Steve Paikin really does agree with Ms. May with her version of that Agenda interview?
  • Dave
    Fact: stephentaylor.ca nor Buckdog Politics are fronts for the Conservative Party


    Great, thanks for clearing that up. Since you know which blogs aren't fronts, can you tell us which ones ARE? :)
  • Sunday Update: Elizabeth May REFUSED to appear on Roy Green's show!!! What a coward, at least politically speaking!

    I hope that everyone floods the lines of CBC's Cross Country Checkup beginning at 1pm PDT / 4pm EDT: http://www.cbc.ca/checkup
  • Truth serum
    Elizabeth May = liar, liar, pants on fire. Can you imagine if this was about Harper - the MSM would be all over it.
  • wallyj
    NationalNewswatch has a story up about Lizzie's ace in the hole;Blair Wilson,possibly being investigated AGAIN by Elections Canda. EC will not comment one way or the other. Hmmm,I wonder why? Is that normal? Ds. May seems to be in way over her head. Did she not think that a MP that the liberals would not even touch may have a few skeletons in the closet?C'mon now,the libs have been musing about bringing back adscam players,but took a pass on this guy. Poor little Lizzie,she is on the horns of a dilemna. Keep Wilson and possibly have the Greens first and only mp charged with fraud,or stay in the debate to massage her own ego and take a chance on Wilson's innocence?
  • The issue from where I sit was what Bennett did.

    I have May’s reponse to the Taylor video up as well as her decision to allow Bennett to make his mistakes.
    (she does talk fast:^)

    Bennett apologized, I think Buckdog made his point in responding back and the rest of us can move on to the next gaffe.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Just found out abt the Ford denial. I called his cell today and he confirmed it to me in no uncertain terms that he was announcng in March.
Stephen Taylor - email@stephentaylor.ca
Stephen Taylor is a scientist, political analyst and a blogger. Taylor writes here regularly and is the founder of bloggingtories.ca. Taylor has contributed to Macleans, CTV, talk radio and has been a featured speaker on new media at numerous events including the Western Standard Cruise and the Forum for Public Policy. In December 2008, Taylor organized Rally for Canada, a series of rallies held coast-to-coast to protest the proposed coalition government.