Hidden Agenda redux!
Good times are here again! The Liberals have released an attack YouTube (not an ad, just earned media bait — full irony understood here). The video implies Canada is acting like a third world country:
“Cover-up: a description far more familiar to other countries, until now.”
Cover-ups. Where have we heard this before?
[It] shocked the Canadian public and brought to light internal problems in the Canadian [Forces]. Military leadership came into sharp rebuke after a CBC reporter received altered documents, leading to allegations of a cover up. Eventually a public inquiry was called. [It was] controversially cut short by the government…
Is this today’s story of alleged (yes alleged) torture in of Afghans in Afghanistan by Afghans? No. This was about Somalia. This was about Canadians. This was about a cover-up by a Liberal government.
Today, Afghan detainees, one allegedly beaten with a shoe by an Afghan prison guard, is (allegedly!) throwing the country into madness. This is not Canada’s Abu Ghraib as some Liberal strategists have regrettably suggested.
Get the scandal playbook! Look up Chapter 3: What did you know and when did you know it?
The Liberal ad continues:
“When questions arose about what he and his government knew about torture in Afghanistan, Stephen Harper shut down Parliament.”
Flashback to Michael Ignatieff in a New York Times magazine op-ed piece, May 2, 2004:
“To defeat evil, we may have to traffic in evils: indefinite detention of suspects, coercive interrogations, targeted assassinations, even pre-emptive war.”
And for full context, we know that Michael Ignatieff has since climbed down on the Iraq war, and called it a mistake. And torture? Well, that was intellectual pretzel making, his defenders will say. He has, afterall, grappled with the issue and has come around to the fact that torture is wrong. We think.
Kady O’Malley, then at Macleans got the federal party leaders’ current positions on torture before this latest resurgence of this old story,
Michael Ignatieff:
“His current view is the same view he held as a renowned human rights expert who helped author the Responsibility to Protect: he is opposed.”
Case closed? Seems good enough for some reporters.
And Stephen Harper?
“The Prime Minister unequivocally condemns torture in all its forms. Canada is a signatory to both the Geneva Conventions and the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.”
Good enough for others?
And the prorogation of Parliament? Was this to “cover-up torture” in Afghanistan? The Liberal line is a classic political attack from days gone by: “we don’t know, he just won’t say”.
Much has been said of prorogations and their history. Shutting down Parliament at the apparent whim of a Prime Minister should perhaps open up a broader debate about the use of this power, and those that prorogue may incur the political cost that goes along with it whether large or small. But while we’re on the topic of Parliament and the apparent upset that prorogation has caused some Canadians, surely the dissolution of Parliament at a Prime Minister’s whim should be much worse shouldn’t it?
Flashback to 2000, Jean Chretien in a comfortable majority not only padlocked parliament, shut it down, cast aside committees and put up a chain link fence, but he also fired all MPs from their job and made them reapply, just because Stockwell Day was weak and ready to be slaughtered (he was).
And to 2008 when Stephen Harper, despite his own fixed election date law, called an election citing the log jammed committees in Parliament. Granted, the law allowed for an early election to be called if Parliament could not proceed smoothly, but despite this subjective test for maneuvering within the law and straight into an election, opponents called it crass opportunism because Stephen Harper perceived Stephane Dion to be weak and ready to be slaughetered (he was).
So, does prorogation cause anger and if so, does it amount to a high political price to be paid by whomever invokes it? And yet, dissolution is in effect, Prorogation Plus. Prime Ministers have been accused of political opportunism in the past and will be accused of political opportunism in the future. And if opportunism is the currency of politics, who knew that in Canadian politics we’d see… politics?
The question remains. Is this an unusual time in Canadian politics? Does prorogation cause more upset than dissolution? Are we in a place where down is up and black is white in Canadian politics? If so, does Michael Ignatieff perceive the Prime Minister to be weak and ready to be slaughtered in an election?
I have my doubts.
And Michael Ignatieff? He has his own.
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.
January 10th, 2010 at 3:57 pm
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't PMSH attacked by MSM not only for the content of the “Just Visiting” ads but that they were rolled out at a time of no election? With no election in the offing, why aren't Iggy and the Liberals attacked for percisely the same thing?
January 10th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
It actually remins me of the LIEberal$ famous commercial, soldiers with guns, in our streets, in Canad-uh (in that nice, non-partisan CBC voice and accent). Complete with the war-like drum beat in the background and the picture of harper looking right out of the movie Platoon.
I think the idea of that one too was to pick up on the theme of “a description far more familiar to other countries, until now”.
January 10th, 2010 at 4:37 pm
I'd like Kady to explain why she thought it was embarassing for the Conservatives to have a motion to extend sitting hours for two weeks prior to summer recess in the last two years defeated by the opposition parties, and now criticises the same Consevative government for not wanting to work for Canadians.
The motion has routinely been used since the early 80's to allow more legislation to be passed prior to summer shutdown.
January 10th, 2010 at 4:45 pm
Probably because Kady thinks she has forced Iggy to defeat the govt. and there will be an election within a few weeks. She is so full of herself it is sickening. Doesn't she know there will be no senate openings in Ont for years. I still think the loss of the senate is what is driving all this. If they can defeat the PM somehow before he names names, they will be happy.
I bet he has already got his senators in place, and committees etc are in place, just waiting.
If anyone is ripe for slaughter it is the liberal party, not just the leader.
January 10th, 2010 at 4:55 pm
Canadian Conservative has a list of all the liberal mps in Chretein's caucus during the Somalia shutdown. A lot of them are still in the HofC. They didn't complain then why are they now.
And in the Somalia case a young boy was shot in the back. Isn't that worse than being hit by a shoe by your own people, not Canadian troops.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:18 pm
I have read numerous posts from reasonable Canadians on this subject. This is simply another manufactured scandal by our MSM who need the ratings. The wafer fiasco, ignoring and downplaying Climategate has exposed them.
It is, by now, abundantly clear that many, if not all, major news organizations in the country simply don't like Harper and his confederates, who they depict as cold, uncommunicative, dismissive, and occasionally nasty. http://www.thebrucereport.com/
http://thinkinginplainsight.wordpress.com/2010/...
January 10th, 2010 at 5:23 pm
The MSM is contributing (Platinum Sponsor) for the latest scandal by airing and printing the campaign talking points. They gave the Liberals a great deal of air time to respond to the Just Visiting Ads. They will spend another week or two anaylsing the tweets and Facebook activities of angry PJ wearing Canadians who have a Facebook account.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
She is simply following orders from above. Someone in the CBC is interested in using our taxpayers dollars to help the opposition parties with pushing the latest manufactured scandal.
Without a senate to hold up legislation now, when it passes in the HOC they can't block anymore. For the first time in a very long time the MP's will have to be accountable how they vote.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
On Friday Ignatieff said he would investigate troop conduct in the field, who side is this guy on anyway? Is he on the acid trowing at little school girls Taliban?
January 10th, 2010 at 5:49 pm
They are counting on the media to help them, and counting on the people of this country to be really out of touch with what they've been up to since the Harper government came to power. Problem is the Liberals haven't got the best of help these days, the brains of the outfit have all bailed and the bunker cupboard is bare.
Having to rely on Facebook and Youtube to spread lies on the cheap is really hitting the bottom in politics.
Would someone please explain to the people who are continuing to spout off about it that proroguing parliament for a short period is not shutting down democracy?
They're once again taking us all for dummies with the help of the media. trying to make out they were doing constructive work when parliament was sitting when they were busy playing gotcha games and smearing our forces and our country.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:56 pm
Have you considered that the reason people are angry is because Harper has shut down Parliament three times in four years?
You people keep with the comparisons to Chretien, but they are weak comparisons.
Why this is about Ignatieff's comments on torture (constantly taken out of context by conservative supporters) is beyond me. This is about the abuse of the power to prorogue Parliament in order to run away from accountability. Harper did it twice, after he dissolved Parliament in order to call an election at a time convenient for him – something he promised he would not do.
Can I suggest you advise Harper to man up and take responsibility for his own actions rather than keep trying to deflect attention onto the LPC?
The other posters here might want to consider their attempts to somehow blame the media for Harper's missteps make them look a little paranoid.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:14 pm
There is no need for a change, whatsoever. It would not have mattered what occurred, the extremely left wing media in this country would find a reason to vilifiy any Conservative leader. IF you don't accept that, look at what they have done to Peter McKay.
The Prime Minister is the only one capable of standing up to these bended minds.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:34 pm
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has always been accountable — not always in the ways that his opponents, both elected and unelected would like.
Too bad. That's politics. It's pathetic to see politicians crying over politics.
The real lack of accountability comes from the Opposition parties who refuse to use their democratic rights and parliamentary freedoms to bring Stephen Harper's government down. They've had ample opportunity to vote non-confidence — which they obviously feel about PMSH and his government — but they don't have the guts or balls to do it. They simply hector, badger, whine, whimper, whinge, complain ad nauseum in the hope that if the public hears their complaints enough, they'll begin to internalize these nasty thoughts about the CPC. It's sick, really.
The Opposition seems to think that whining and whingeing can take the place of policies. They appear to think that they don't have to be accountable to the voting public, that they can continue to be unco-operative by holding up legislation. They appear to think that their only job is to put a spoke in the wheels of Canadians' duly elected government and to block their progress which, in the end, blocks progress for ordinary Canadians. It's truly amazing that our Prime Minister and his government have been able to enact as much legislation in the HOC as they have — with no help from the Opposition parties.
There is a way to deal with this situation which has nothing to do with cheap tricks like Facebook and youtube: The Opposition parties should vote no confidence in the CPC government, bring the government down, and precipitate an election. Although it's clear that Canadians don't want another election at this point, and that the CPC in the opinion polls is ahead of all of the other parties, the Opposition needs to put up or shut up.
The never-ending stream of criticism and gotcha tactics of the Opposition and their toadies in the media are a drain on our democracy, and many Canadians are heartily sick and tired of it.
As for Kady: She's a blip, a pimple, important only in her mirror — and her blog, poor dear. It IS grating, however, that we have to pay her salary.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:43 pm
Only the Liberal's could get bent out of shape over a foreign army wacking a terrorist with a shoe. I say good on proroguing Parliament until Mr. Harper reclaims the senate. I will also add that I do not support Mr. Harper on the idea that we have to follow cap and trade, on that he will lose me. Just like Eddy has.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
May I refer everyone to this: The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness
http://www.libertymind.com/index.php?page_id=1
That website tells you how the liberal mind works.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:24 pm
One always shuts down parliament for an election. Chretein and Martin both did it numerous times, before their mandate was up and they had majorities. This is only the second time and each session averages about 130 days.
And the truth is getting out there that Chretein shut down inquiries, shut down the House, to avoid having to answer questions.
To think that liberals have more concern for taliban terrorists that throw acid in girls faces, burn down schools so girls can't get an education, than they care for our troops is sickening.
Sort of puts a cork in all that pink book stuff about how they care for women. Oh, forgot, Bennett does worry that women's sex toys could be dangerous.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
And where will all that rage go if Iggy doesn't vote no confidence. Will he expect Layton to save him again. The coalition is alive and waiting to strike. We just have to make sure that they will need the Bloc to try it again.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
Hey – check out Inkless Wells – seems Paul thinks the ad miss the mark.
January 10th, 2010 at 8:19 pm
Reminds me of men with guns … in the streets … in Canada… Hyperparanoid.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:12 pm
“One always shuts down parliament for an election. Chretein and Martin both did it numerous times, before their mandate was up and they had majorities. This is only the second time and each session averages about 130 days.”
I remember those election calls. I remember how much Harper complained about them. I remember when he said he would not do that.
I remember the prorogations. I remember how much Harper complained about them. I remember when he said he would not do that.
In any event, this is the third time he has shut parliament down.
“To think that liberals have more concern for taliban terrorists that throw acid in girls faces, burn down schools so girls can't get an education, than they care for our troops is sickening.”
It is also a total lie. You know, when lies are all you have, you might want to step back and consider how weak your position really is.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:39 pm
One of those times was for an election. Are you saying that acid has never been thrown if girls faces, or schools have not been burned down, by the taliban. And if the liberals support the terrorists, by marching with them and carrying flags, worrying about some terrorist that got hit by a shoe, then yes, they have to support everything they stand for.
So it you that have nothing but lies.
Of course one complained when Chretain and Martin called unnecessary elections, what a waste of money. The only good thing about them is the libs lost 70 seats and we got Stephen Harper as PM of Canada, and Martin went from majority to minority to opposition.
My position is very strong, and you have proven, on several threads that all you have is hate for a government that is not liberal.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:47 pm
“One of those times was for an election.”
Um, you are the guy who brought up Chretien and Martin shutting down parliament to call an election.
“…if the liberals support the terrorists…”
But they don't. Liar.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:06 pm
Notice that the fence doesn't just appear as a whole, instead the barbed part takes the main focus right out of the chute — it's where the Liberals want you to look and the most suggestive part of the ad and what they want Canadians to take away from it. In fact, the barbed part is suggestively focused in on a second time just for good measure.
A padlock on a door, it seems, couldn't suffice for what the shameless Liberals are so obviously trying to suggest with this reprehensible smear piece. As you point out, it's no different at its core than the “soldiers in our streets” ad… in fact, one can argue it's even more egregious since it shows that a) the liberals' apology for that one wasn't in fact genuine; and b) they learned nothing, testing very dangerous waters yet again when they should just sink or swim already instead of leaving it to their Liberal pumpers in the media to push the messages meaning out and then cover for them when they're under fire for that very message. But give the Liberals and their media cohorts some credit: they've shown that indeed garbage can be recycled.
And with the narrator’s generic reference to “other” countries, can we expect MSM to angrily press Iggy and the Liberals first thing in the morning (and for days to come just for those of us who miss their climb-down) to clarify the names of those “other” countries and, more importantly, just so Canadians can see just how low the LPC can sink, give the names of those leaders which they're “suggesting” that PMSH most exemplifies and the tools of control they both share? Don't hold your breath on any of these questions to be asked. Too many “New Liberal Ads Slam PM Harper” type headlines — along with anchors and reporters regurgitating the Liberal talking points contained within those ads — that the media is off enjoying to display even a semblance of balance and journalistic integrity.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:46 pm
Iffy is simply performing, as per Donolo/Chretien direction,
for the Dippers, acedemics, professors and Harper-haters,
he doesn't believe a word he says.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
Marching in the streets with hezbolla,
attending fund raisers for tamil tigers……give it a rest Gayle, you are living in the Enchanted Forest.
The Liberals are demoralizing our troops,
and they don't care.
Maybe that's why Libs are running back to a nonexistant parliamentary session Jan 25,
they can't stand to face their constituants.
They should be ashamed, very ashamed.
January 11th, 2010 at 4:07 am
taliban. torture and kill them all.
January 11th, 2010 at 4:48 am
Take the time to read Monte Solberg in the Ottawa Sun today: “You can hate him, but the PM's no dictator”.
It's disgusting to have the media of this country jumping on the bandwagon with the opposition, putting out the spin to the point it becomes lies. If the first half of any story happens to suit their agenda you can be sure the rest of the story that gets to the truth, the facts, will not be told.
Frankly I'm sick of it, so are many more Canadians concerned for the country with the juvenile games being played by the opposition in tandem with the MSM. What part of this democracy do they not understand? We elected enough Conservatives to allow their leader to become PM and run the affairs of the country. It would take a coalition of the entire opposition to vote them down in the HOC.
It's time to call an election to put an end to this never ending joust for power by the Liberals who cannot respect the wishes of the people who elected this government. Iggy and the gang should concentrate on acting as adults if they have any aspirations to become a viable alternative.
January 11th, 2010 at 5:07 am
Liz – I have been trying to explain that to them, however the vile and disgusting responses are not worth the stress level. This is an NDP/union/student/Green led revolt – it is gang mentality and they are posting all sorts of links to support their position, however refuse to accept the truth.
January 11th, 2010 at 5:11 am
Gayle – why are they weak comparisons….because he had a majority…that is the favorite talking point over at the anti FB group???? – So shutting down parliament when he has a majority based on a dare is somehow better….or shutting down parliament to quell the Somalia affair – where a Canadian actually DID torture – or shutting down parliament to get out of a report into theft by your party.
Yeah – I can sure see how WEAK those are.
And just how is “conduct of troops in the field” taking things out of context – that is a clear as you can get.
Ah yes…the old “paranoid” comment… Nice try Gayle I guess when you don't have anything else, resort to calling your opponent “paranoid”
January 11th, 2010 at 5:15 am
But Gayle – you are always saying – actions speak louder than words…you are the one admonishing Harper for saying something and doing something else.
So…when the liberals jump on the bandwagon to investigate “the conduct of troops in the field”, I would say that yes, they love the Taliban – what other conclusion can we jump to.
January 11th, 2010 at 6:07 am
Engaging with “Gayle” guarantees you will eventually be called, “paranoid”, a “hypocrite”, a “liar” , that's her shtick. Some blog sites don't allow her that privilege.
As to whether Liberals support terrorists, we hope not, but perhaps inadvertently when marching with others who do support terrorists and wave their flag and who happen to be Canadian citizens from a certain community and VOTE. Liberals and the rest of the formal Coalition certainly are overly concerned for the Taliban in the guise of human rights for the purpose of smearing the Conservative government. This latest gotcha game is out of hand , it can't be misconstrued, they can't say they are not accusing the troops of war crimes when they are accusing them of handing over at least one captive to the Afghan officials who they in turn accuse of “torture” or whacking with a shoe. It should be noted, they have a thing about shoes in that part of the world, tossing a shoe is the ultimate insult so that could constitute “torture”.
The whole Liberal party is becoming a caricature in their desperate attempt to get back on the gravy train with the media hungering to get back to sopping. How else can their behaviour be explained? They are not in a fit state to govern but have more interest in playing gotcha games than revamping their own sorry mess and getting fit to even be a credible Opposition. Sad too is the six or eight also-rans for the leadership of that decrepit lot who can't get their leadership debt paid. Aside from Dion who hasn't a lot to say, they are among the most verbose, people like Kennedy the Kingmaker and Martha Hall Findlay who are hard at work stringing a desperate line. One would think they'd have more on their agenda than slagging ,getting their act together should be foremost at this point.
Apparently not.
January 11th, 2010 at 6:19 am
I've tried leaving a couple of comments on their video, but they refuse to approve them. Not a surprise really.
January 11th, 2010 at 7:45 am
Ha ha ha
First, you might want to consider how to properly use the “enter” key on your computer.
Second, if this was only about the Senate, why didn't Harper prorogue January 24, and recall Parliament January 25? By proroguing in December, Harper was able to put a stop to the committee looking into the Afghan detainee issue. He also managed to kill several of his bills, which means Parliament just wasted a whole bunch of their time and a whole bunch of our money working on bills that died on the table.
Third, the fact is Harper will have a majority in the Senate before January 25. The fact is he would have had no problem passing his legislation in the Senate after that time. The fact is that even Stephen Harper is not saying this is about the Senate committees.
But you cling to that notion rather than face the fact that Harper is, once again, doing the exact opposite of what he promised he would do when you started supporting him.
January 11th, 2010 at 7:48 am
Oh wilson, it is cute the way you keep trying this old stuff. Please show me where in the LPC platform or constitution it says they are in support of terrorism.
I guess the CPC stand for women staying at home, are anti-abortion, are anti-gay, and are racist.
I know this because there are individual MP's who stand for all these things. There are definately members of the CPC who believe these things. That must mean it is true of all of them.
See what happens when your silly logical arguments are turned around on you?
Now go back to the drawing board wilson. I do not think Harper is impressed with you yet.
“The Liberals are demoralizing our troops,
and they don't care.”
Liar
January 11th, 2010 at 7:51 am
AG – find me the quote where Ignatieff says he loves the Taliban.
As for “jumping to conclusions” – something you are pretty good at, if I were you I would not assume the rest of the country was capable of such wild leaps of logic as you are. Most of us do not subscibe to paranoid conspiracy theories.
January 11th, 2010 at 7:56 am
AG – Harper called on unneccessary election and prorogued twice because he did not want to be accountable to parliament – all within four years of government.
The best comparison you have is that Chretien once prorogued so he would force Martin to answer to Fraser's report – which of course was still tabled and still dealt with by the government.
Harper is running away from Parliament. Do you not see the difference between being accountable to the people we elected and delaying the tabling of a report?
January 11th, 2010 at 8:02 am
Gayle, Gayle, Gayle calm down, sweetie.
You do know that this is a minority parliament, right…your parties can vote to defeat him any time they want…in a dictatorship that is not possible.
Prorogation doesn't start until Jan 25 Gayle.
Re those bills – most of them can be reinstated by a vote in parliament – I am sure you will encourage Linda to vote for that.
January 11th, 2010 at 8:05 am
“conduct of troops in the field”
Gayle – obviously he believes the troops tortured the Taliban…obviously he wants to protect the Taliban – ergo – he loves the Taliban.
January 11th, 2010 at 8:07 am
Gayle – as usual, you have twisted yourself right around.
You do know that the afgan detainee issue can be brought up again in March, right?
January 11th, 2010 at 8:32 am
Gayle says:
“Most of us do not subscibe to paranoid conspiracy theories.”
That's rich coming from someone who uses their mother to blame the Harper government for their father's cancer.
January 11th, 2010 at 8:34 am
Ha ha ha
Prorogation starts as soon as Parliament was prorogued – which was on December 30. That is why the committees that were meeting, no longer can meet. If that were not the case, you can be assured the committee would be meeting right now. Which is, of course, the whole point of proroguing Parliament when he did – because Harper does not want to be accountable to its elected representatives.
The fact Harper is in a minority actually makes prorogation worse. See, AG, if Harper went to the elected members of Parliament and asked them to allow him to prorogue, chances are the majority would have said “no”. If Canadians had seen fit to give him a majority, things would be different. But they didn't, so they aren't.
As for those bills – sure they can be reinstated. I hope the opposition will not agree to that reinstatement unless Harper comes through with something – like the unredacted documents for instance. But thanks for the advice about speaking to Ms. Duncan. I am going to fire off an email today asking her to make demands of Harper before she agrees to reinstate his bills.
As for defeating Harper, yet again I have to point out to you that the opposition can actually criticize the government without defeating it.
Maybe you should bone up on your knowledge of how our system of democracy works in this country. Start with prorogation and move on from there. I look forward to you getting informed. It would make our discussions so much more interesting if you knew what you were talking about.
January 11th, 2010 at 8:36 am
It is not even close to being “obvious” AG. The only thing that is obvious is your desperation.
Anyway…
January 11th, 2010 at 8:39 am
Sure it can. Harper was banking on people forgetting about it during the prorogation. And, given the number of rumours that were floating around about Harper calling an election, and the fact his numbers usually go up when the House is not sitting, I personally believe his plan was to prorogue, get his numbers up and then call an election in March, hoping he would win a majority and therefore end all discussion about the Afghan detainees.
Now clearly this prorogation has backfired on him, but if this dies down (and eventually it will), and his numbers go up before March 3, I am guessing there is still a pretty good chance of an election call.
Otherwise, you are quite right. He will have to face the will of Parliament and answer to this issue.
January 11th, 2010 at 8:44 am
Gayle says:
“Most of us do not subscibe to paranoid conspiracy theories.”
That's rich coming from someone who uses her mother to blame the Harper's Conservatives for her father's cancer.
January 11th, 2010 at 8:57 am
Gayle…if the opposition are so up in arms, they can vote no confidence in the budget.
Will they?
January 11th, 2010 at 8:59 am
So, Gayle – since they can reinstate the bills, and can either have an election or vote the government down – I guess nothing is lost then, right?
January 11th, 2010 at 9:06 am
Let me guess – you did not educate yourself on our system of government.
It is not “put up or shut up”. They do not have to vote against them on the budget in order to criticize them. In fact, they can spend the next year criticizing them over and over and over again. If Harper's numbers go down as a result – so much the better. That is just the way things work.
January 11th, 2010 at 9:08 am
It is possible nothing is lost. That depends on whether they agree to reinstate the bills. They certainly do not have to do so.
Harper knew that risk going in.
January 11th, 2010 at 9:13 am
So Gayle – you admit that if the opposition is so up in arms over the “lost bills”, voting to reinstate them, as is allowed in our parliamentary system, would be the best thing to do. Not voting to reinstate them, makes the opposition just as bad as the PM, agreed???
Of course, this being a minority parliament, there always has been another option…funny that they scream and complain and yet when push comes to shove, one or more always end up voting with the government.
Why is that Gayle? If Harper is a dictator and his last two prorogations were such an affront to democracy, voting him down would have been the best thing for the country, don't you think?
January 11th, 2010 at 10:07 am
“In fact, they can spend the next year criticizing them over and over and over again”
But why Gayle, if this is such an affront to Democracy as I have been reading, if he is a tyrant and a dictator, why would the opposition not vote to defeat him. Seems like the logical thing to do given their outrage.
Under our system of government, it is pretty simple – a miniorty parliament can be voted out in a vote of non confidence.
I would say that calling him a dictator, saying that proroging is an affront to democracy would form the ultimate in non confidence.
Given that IS our system of government, why would they keep criticizing him. Seems pretty simple to me?
January 11th, 2010 at 10:54 am
If the Parliament buildings are padlocked is the Gotcha Game Coalition going to have to break in to get on with the good work they plan to do for the people of Canada? Love their undying dedication to their own narrow little agenda of slagging the government without a clue or idea to put forward as an alternative, nothing but a pack of hypocrites.
It's a big loss to the Liberals to have their last little fiefdom with a bit of power taken away when the PM makes Senate appointments to fill the vacancies. That is really their big concern, it's not about prorogation.
January 11th, 2010 at 11:40 am
“But why Gayle, if this is such an affront to Democracy as I have been reading, if he is a tyrant and a dictator, why would the opposition not vote to defeat him.”
Do Canadians want an election right now? If not, then why should the opposition ignore the will of the people and force one.
So I understand it would totally grant Harper's wish if the opposition forced an election, but it just ain't gonna happen.
January 11th, 2010 at 11:43 am
There is a difference between attacking someone for their political actions (like proroguing parliament), and attacking someone personally because you don’t like them.
January 11th, 2010 at 11:46 am
There is a difference between attacking someone for their political actions (like proroguing parliament), and attacking someone personally because you don’t like them.
January 11th, 2010 at 11:49 am
“Not voting to reinstate them, makes the opposition just as bad as the PM, agreed???”
Of course not. Why should the opposition cover Harper's mistakes for him? He screwed up. He should take responsibility.
As I said, however, I hope the opposition says they will reinstate the bills, just as long as Harper comes clean with those documents, and stops playing games with the committee.
As for your “put up or shut up” argument, that one is getting stale. Al you are doing is exposing your real fear – that this is just the tip of the iceburg, and so long as the opposition gets the opportunity to hammer away at Harper's facade, it is all downhill for the CPC.
Surely you can see the prudent course is for the opposition to keep chipping away at that armour of his. They have Canadians' attention at the moment – they need to capitalize on that and expose all of Harper's broken promises on accountability. THAT is what is the best thing for the country. And THAT is what you are afraid of.
January 11th, 2010 at 11:51 am
Keep telling yourself that Liz.
January 11th, 2010 at 11:59 am
LOL!Where did they get that ad ,from Alex Jones Infowars?FEAR is a powerful ally!Doom and Gloom!The world is ending!I got a question.If it so bad why worry?LMAO!
January 11th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
The ad itself is very silly, had to come from the kids in the bunker. There is also something else that seems to be overlooked, even though it's a concoction, they have put Stephen Harper's name to it which is as inaccurate as as the ad itself and ever so juvenile. It's something one would expect from the grade school gang who put kick me signs on other kids backs for laughs.
January 11th, 2010 at 1:05 pm
I think there will soon be a diagnosed disease, cured only by a PMSH majority. Harperphopia is preventable. Why do so many liberals and media suffer from RMS, remember that one of years ago.
They have forgotten all the cancelled inquiries by Chretain, all the prorogations by libeals, all the un-necessary elections called, with 2 yrs left in their mandate and a majority. There are many other things they have forgotten, strangling a man on live tv, pepperspraying students who were against a dictator getting the royal treatment. Oh, and the adscam thingy.
You can be cured, vote conservative. You have never told us why you have harperphopia, what has he done to you. Oh, I forgot, he caused your fathers cancer.
January 11th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Oh, I see, this is like – “he is going to wear the recession”?
Yep that “chipping” away at the various pseudo scandals has been working well for them, hasn't it, Gayle.
I guess you are right – they will keep asking questions because they are too afraid to pull the plug.
You really are dumb Gayle.
January 11th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
Will, please stop parroting the “democracy” shtick. PM Harper shut down Parliament, not democracy. That is nothing but a sock-puppet speaking point. Now, personally, I would have preferred that PM Harper NOT prorogue and, instead, stand up to the hypocritical LPC and set the record straight once and for all. I personally was appalled by the prorogation but…PM Harper did NOT shut down democracy. PM Harper's main problem – and it annoys me to no end – is his insistence on taking the high road. It is obvious that the likes of the LPC, the NPD and Lizzie May, that he is dealing with down and dirty types who can't even see the high road. Time and again, the PM is attacked and time and again, he doesn't fight back. That is my one and only issue with PM Harper – and I am a total Conservative, Harper-backer.
January 11th, 2010 at 1:51 pm
No personal attacks please.
I believe that you think she is mistaken or uninformed.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
Can you folks help clear this up? Whenever I read here that the MSM is Liberal-dominated, or at least Liberal-sympathetic, I look at organizations like the Globe and Mail (… Liberal?), the National Post (…Liberal?), the Toronto Sun (..Liberal?) and CanWest Global, started by the Asper family, and I try to imagine any of them as Liberal… and I fail utterly.
Could it actually be that since you all hold right-wing views, that anyone or any media outlet that is moderate or centrist is always going to be at least a little to the left of you?
Also, if Canada is tilting right, then why would the MSM choose to tilt “left” to get ratings? Wouldn't they need to tilt right? Oor don't Conservatives own TVs?
January 11th, 2010 at 3:20 pm
“To think that liberals have more concern for taliban terrorists that throw acid in girls faces, burn down schools so girls can't get an education, than they care for our troops is sickening.”
That's still a lie and you know it.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:27 pm
Stephen – first Liz J and now batb have advised us that populist new media tricks like Facebook and youtube are beneath contempt.
I disagree, I think you were doing something useful when you created those sites last year for the Coalition Crisis. Nonetheless, these have now been outed as cheap tricks, so please use caution in future.
I sure hope they don't force you to shut down the blog.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Gayle…that does not compute – the opposition are continually telling Canadians that he is a tyrant, a bully, an affront to democracy among many other things….
So you are telling me that the opposition would rather leave a tyrant and a bully in office than vote to kick him out for the good of the country.
Wow…sounds like they really aren't doing their jobs!
January 11th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
Valid point Stephen…my apologies Gayle
January 11th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
You can retract that I ever said Facebook and You Tube are “beneath contempt”? That's not true at all.
I was referring to the fact Liberals are broke, they can make full use of those entities because they are free, the cost of prime time mainstream media to spread their message however pathetic or whatever passes for fact in their minds is not something they can afford. They broke the bank on their last pair of silly ads.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:54 pm
Kenn2,
I don't know anyone who thinks they are getting a good value for what they pay for “TV”.
Negative stories get ratings. According to Gallup Conservatives are in the majority in the US and if Fox is the only centre right News. Does it mean the centre left stations are money losers? Yes. (Need a link?)
Our centre left tv stations are losing money, they have cable monopolies, until Satellite Packages and can't make enough money after paying for Wheel of Fortune and other US content. (Save local tv….yikes!)
If you would like a better balanced topic current affairs show insightful try CTS -Michael Coren.
January 11th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
AG, when constructing a logical proof, your premises need to be true in order for the following conclusions to be true.
“obviously he believes the troops tortured the Taliban.”
– nobody, NOBODY is asserting that Cdn troops have tortured detainees. No-one. The question that needs to be answered is whether the Canadian government, when aware that Afghan authorities were likely to torture prisoners, still directed our troops to hand over detainees.
“obviously he wants to protect the Taliban”
- I'm ashamed that anyone in Canada would even joke about something like that, when referring to an elected official. Unfortunately some of you seem serious about this.
I would have thought that someone purporting to support the troops would therefore care that the troops are receiving the best possible support from their government, and especially that their government has put them in a situation that is honourable and just.
So, forgive me, but I happen to think that when a government (or its supporters) tries to deflect questions about the direction it has provided to its troops by claiming it's an attack on the troops themselves… those are the people who are truly doing our troops a disservice.
January 11th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
You said “Having to rely on Facebook and Youtube to spread lies on the cheap is really hitting the bottom in politics.”
…and I took that to mean you felt that using these modes to get the message out was beneath contempt. My apologies if I got this wrong.
January 11th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
If it does not compute, maybe your brain is not working properly.
Maybe go educate yourself on our system of government and get back to me.
January 11th, 2010 at 5:08 pm
Yes, we are both getting carried away here. Perhaps you should delete one of my responses to her above.
January 11th, 2010 at 5:10 pm
I don't think even Harper would call this one a “pseudo-scandal”. After all, he prorogued Parliament because he was afraid of what might come out, and he has been doing damage control ever since..
January 11th, 2010 at 5:13 pm
“I don't know anyone who thinks they are getting a good value for what they pay for “TV”.”
- what are you referring to? No-one “pays” for TV in North America, the advertisers “pay” for TV. You might pay for enhanced reception (cable or dish) or for cable-only channels, but that's your choice. I'm currently getting about 15 crystal-clear digital HD channels from Canada and the US using an antenna made of coathangers and tinfoil. $0/month.
Or are you referring to the CBC, who are but one part of the Canadian MSM ? You didn't mention any one of the examples I gave.
“Our centre left tv stations are losing money”
– News-flash – ALL local Canadian tv stations are losing money. It's the economy, plus the upheavals of media convergence we're currently experiencing.
“If you would like a better balanced topic current affairs show insightful try CTS -Michael Coren.”
- I quite respect Michael Coren, but neither he nor CTS would ever call themselves neutral, it IS the Crossroads Television System, home of Huntley St, their agenda is front and center, and they like it that way. And guess where CTS buys their US content? (oops I gave that away)
January 11th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
Media bias in the eye of the beholder, I doubt anyone can help you with your limitations in that regard.
http://www.fairpress.org/identify.htm (May help)
Michael Coren will invite all sides and have an heated debate. He has NOT stacked the show panel to push an left vs right agenda (bias).
I don't watch the other shows. Your bunny ears is not typical (bad example) tin foil hat included.
http://tv.about.com/od/canadiancableproviders/C...
http://tv.about.com/od/canadiansatelliteprovide...
What is the average Cable/Tel/Int Bill (All in one?) $70-120 p/mth?
Top TV Program Ratings
http://www.bbm.ca/en/top_programs.html
Hope that helps.
January 11th, 2010 at 6:01 pm
I'm not the one claiming media bias, CS. Go fix your own limitations. Word to the wise, a website that has to call itself “fair” somethingorother is usually anything but.
“Michael Coren will invite all sides and have an heated debate. He has NOT stacked the show panel to push an left vs right agenda.”
I never said he did. But you usually know where he stands on something (which is also OK). So everyone but Michael stacks their panels? Is that what you're saying?
“What is the average Cable/Tel/Int Bill (All in one?) $70-120 p/mth?”
You're paying for tv delivery, not tv content (exception: cable-only channels: you're also paying for content). You do know the difference between content and delivery, right? BTW it's a simple UHF array in the attic, not bunny ears.
I don't know what you were trying to help me with, but thanks anyway.
January 11th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
No, no, no, kenn2. You misunderstand.
When I wrote “There is a way to deal with this situation which has nothing to do with cheap tricks like Facebook and youtube,” I wasn't putting down either Facebook or youtube. I don't “do” Facebook, but I really love youtube.
The cheap trick is all to do with the Liberal$, not Facebook or youtube. They're supposed to be a serious political party, aren't they? Why not use Parliamentary means to go after Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his CPC government? Well, we all know that the LPC is stone broke, so I guess that's why.
But it leaves a tinny taste in one's mouth.
January 11th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
God I hate the attack-ad phase of these things. I hated the character-assassination ads run by CPC on Ignatieff, and I also hate this Liberal one.
You ask -
“The question remains. Is this an unusual time in Canadian politics? Does prorogation cause more upset than dissolution?”
The question right now is not about prorogation per se; everyone including the gang here have ably shown that prorogation has been used frequently by both ruling clans. So let's toss that aside.
It's more about how and when prorogation is used. Harper said publicly that he didn't think the public would much object to it. Sorry, wrong, they object. He gambled, and he's lost. The timing and optics of this snap prorogue simply stink, and he should have anticipated this.
Anyway, he's just lost a hand, not the whole game, and after break he'll be playing with a stacked deck (Senate), so this will soon be forgotten in March, unless the detainee or other issue festers in the meantime.
So… Harper can play the politics game as well as any Liberal now. Too bad, I thought he was going to clean things up.
January 11th, 2010 at 8:03 pm
It is the job of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition to oppose. Call it hector, badger, whine, whimper, whinge, complain… it's still their job. Sauce for the goose, etc. So no sympathy from me on that score.
Re accountability, I still can't quite fathom how sidestepping issues is an accepted form of that, but March will be here before we know it, recess will be over, and we'll hope for a different flavour of accountability at that time, I guess.
“Why not use Parliamentary means to go after Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his CPC government?”
…but…but… Parliament's closed! Oh you mean the “call-an-election” thing… no! you first!
it's like 2 ten-year-olds on the 3m dive board… who will jump first? Hey, quit shovin'!
January 12th, 2010 at 4:02 am
“It is the job of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition to oppose. “
Duh.
It's their job to oppose, of course, but constructively, because as part of the government of Canada one of their first priorities is to forward the business of Parliament for the good of all Canadians. This is what the CPC did when they were in Opposition. They suggested alternate policies when they disagreed with the way the Liberal$ were governing — many of those policies then taken up by the LPC as their own.
Not so with the Liberal$ in Opposition. It's clear that their sole agenda is to usurp power in the HOC. Their lust for power is obscene, largely because they seem to care nothing for Canadians and their families who are being greatly challenged by the current global vulnerability. We don't hear the LPC members suggesting policies to help Canadians. All we hear is frontal attacks on our duly elected Prime Minister and his MPs. That's not being Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, which is why I call them HM's Disloyal Opposition. There's a vast difference.
For years, the Liberal$ have had AMPLE OPPORTUNITY to unseat PMSH and his government — they don't need the next three weeks. Parliament is prorogued for three weeks, not three months which the rabid members of the LPC and their toadies in the media keep shouting. Three weeks. The HOC would be going back on January 25, Parliament was going to be closed for the two weeks of the Olympics anyway, the House is going back on March 3rd — so, do the math.
The way the heckling hyenas in the Opposition have been behaving — shouting matches in the HOC, no constructive ideas about how Parliamentary business can move forward FOR THE GOOD OF CANADIANS — it's a good thing that PMSH is resetting the government. It's a much-needed time-out. As a teacher, I'd sure as heck time out clowns who behaved like the Liberal MPs.
The LPC are like bullies who are used to getting their way and then are gobsmacked — gobsmacked, I tells ya'! — when someone challenges them. Scratch a bully and you'll always find a coward. The LPC MPs are some of the most cowardly, dishonourable, rabble I've ever seen. And, I've been around the block.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:40 am
Ok. Got it. Now tell me about the part where Harper takes the One True Ring and tosses into Mount Doom.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:47 am
and with a “go educate yourself” Gayle shuts down debate…
Nice Gayle…unfortuantely, you are making no sense saying it is better for the country, a country that seemingly thinks the PM is a dictator, to keep him in power, even though they have all the power to kick him out, just to keep asking him questions.
Hmmm – and I am the one that needs to educate myself?
January 12th, 2010 at 4:51 am
Sorry Ken, but when he says that we need to investigate “the conduct of our troops in the field”, it is a bit of a stretch that he is talking about the Conservative government.
And Ken…just what about what the Liberal government knew, after all, they were the ones that had no policies…how come you guys are just hammering away at the Tories.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:53 am
Yeah, you did get it wrong, misunderstood, whatever. Take your time, it's a tough job defending the Liberals. It's a tough job defending their pathetic performance as Official Opposition. Their role includes criticism of the the governing party when they feel they have a better alternative and put it forward. You know very well that's not been the case with this latest concoction of the LPC under the pseudo leadership of Ignatieff, a man without leadership experience and a short term of on the job training in politics.
One would assume a clever person, as Ignatieff is touted as being, would at least be able tussle with ego and opportunism and have common sense and fairness come out on top. It is increasingly obvious he is not fit to take on the top job judging by his leadership of the LPC and his pathetic performance as Opposition leader.
January 12th, 2010 at 5:02 am
“the conduct of our troops in the field”
I know that you wouldn't just pull a quote and use it out of context, so I'll wait for you to provide a link to this.
Thanks.
January 12th, 2010 at 5:06 am
Ken – you do know that a dissolution results in an election, right.
Prorogation is used to end a session.
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/procedure-book-livre/Doc...
Effects of Prorogation
Prorogation of a session brings to an end all proceedings before Parliament. With certain exceptions, unfinished business “dies” on the Order Paper and must be started anew in a subsequent session.
Bills which have not received Royal Assent before prorogation are “entirely terminated” and, in order to be proceeded with in the new session, must be reintroduced as if they had never existed.[113]
Dissolution terminates a Parliament, ending all business in the Senate and in the House of Commons, and is followed by a general election
So are you saying he should have disolved the sitting?
January 12th, 2010 at 5:12 am
No problem Kenn
http://news.guelphmercury.com/printArticle/582729
“Ignatieff said the documents would shed light on such crucial matters as whether Canada has respected international law and human rights, “the conduct of our troops in the field” and the conduct of the government which appears to have ignored warnings about torture”
second last paragraph in the article – to make it easy
January 12th, 2010 at 5:18 am
There are several tools in the ole parliamentary governing toolbox:
- dissolution
- prorogation
- suspension of Parliament (a pause like prorogation, but doesn't require tossing out incomplete bills and ongoing work)
- and, of course, an oldie but a goodie – continuing to govern.
Harper made his choice. He gets to wear it. Til March, anyways.
January 12th, 2010 at 5:26 am
Did you go to the parliamentary site and read the effects of each of the various “tools”
The only tool that allows a new budget is prorogation
Dissolution results in an election
January 12th, 2010 at 5:42 am
Thanks. It also isn't a complete verbatim quote, just a reporter's paraphrasing, with the same quote stuck in the middle, but I'm willing to accept it as accurate.
You do know that this refers to the documents requested by Commons committee that Harper is refusing to release, right? From the same article: “And he lambasted Harper for proroguing rather than complying with a Commons resolution demanding that the government turn over documents related to torture accusations levelled by diplomat Richard Colvin.”
Ignatieff is completely talking about the Conservative government. The documents in question would no doubt exonerate the Canadian troops, like we've heard all along from other sources, but by failing to release them, Harper himself has left the question of troop conduct spinning in the air. And then the CPC tries to stick this on the Liberals. Despicable. Have we mentioned how MacKay has lied to the HoC on this?
No matter how you slice and dice it, there are no allegations of wrongdoing against Canadian troops and no-one is calling for an investigation of the troops.
January 12th, 2010 at 5:48 am
And did you address my point about the lack of policy in place when the CPC came to power and what the Liberal government knew about detainee transfer?
WE will agree to disagree on this one…I am sorry, but I do not care one iota if the Afgan police beat a murderer with a shoe.
This is a witch hunt, plain and simple.
January 12th, 2010 at 6:10 am
You are right, albertagirl, it's a witch hunt, the prorogation has created a witch hunt interruptus, that's what has them all in a tizzy, all frustrated their gotcha game moves got put on hold.
January 12th, 2010 at 6:13 am
I agree that the detainee transfer agreement initially created by the outgoing Liberal government is part of the issue. Further, I've said all along that I don't think there's that serious an issue at the heart of this, and that the Harper government could easily clear themselves on this. But they haven't, it's just been smear, deny, prorogue.
This is about the Conservative government, and actually has f*ck all to do with what one Afghan did to another with his footwear. So on that, I don't care either.
I'd be content to drop this too, but every time someone here yells “they's attackin' our troops! – they loves the Taliban!”, my blood boils.
Just let the damn witch out of the cupboard, already.
January 12th, 2010 at 6:19 am
You realize that this can be brought forward after March 3, don't you?
So really, nothing is lost
January 12th, 2010 at 6:30 am
help! I'm running out of column space!
January 12th, 2010 at 6:49 am
Ha ha ha
You seem unable to grasp the fact the opposition may criticize without forcing an election.
This whole “I dare you to call an election” crap is all about having an election when it is most advantageous to Harper. Stop pretending it is anything else.
The opposition will criticize – and when the country is ready they will force an election – but not before the country is ready. It is all about that whole “listening to the people” stuff you and yours used to think was the way things should be run.
January 12th, 2010 at 6:54 am
Not if Harper gets that election you seem to want him to have.
Hey AG – remember the last time Harper prorogued, when he was hoping against hope that things would “calm down”, and they did?
Do you think that maybe, just maybe, Harper thought the same thing would happen? That maybe he thought by preventing the opposition from continuing their investigation into this issue until after the Olympics, that he thought there would be such a groundswell of love and devotion from the Canadian people for their Government that the opposition would come to realize it would not be politcally expedient to force this issue?
I ask, because I remember a lot of your colleagues were crowing about how Harper was going to bask in the glow of Olympic glory, force an election before Parliament reconvened and get his majority.
Do you think maybe that particular plan had something to do with proroguing Parliament?
January 12th, 2010 at 7:10 am
Well at least you are honest about the agenda of the opposition- even though it is veiled in concern for the country.
January 12th, 2010 at 7:12 am
Do you have a link to those “crowing” comments, Gayle..because I do not remember any such thing.
I away your links. Otherwise, you are blowing smoke.
January 12th, 2010 at 8:44 am
Sorry, is this the same CBC who held the Liberal government's feet to the fire over the Somalia affair, or a different CBC?
http://archives.cbc.ca/war_conflict/peacekeepin...
I wouldn't want to hate on the wrong CBC by mistake.
Thanks.
January 12th, 2010 at 9:05 am
Did I use the word hate in discussing bias? Did I suggest neutrality? I suggest biases exists and they exist in the eye of the beholder.
I did not jump the shark and state the CBC is only biased and always will support the Liberals (did I)?
This might be easier to understand-wiki
Accuracy and standards for factual reporting
* Reporters are expected to be as accurate as possible given the time allotted to story preparation and the space available, and to seek reliable sources.
* Events with a single eyewitness are reported with attribution. Events with two or more independent eyewitnesses may be reported as fact. Controversial facts are reported with of the publisher is desirable
* Corrections are published when errors are discovered
* Defendants at trial are treated only as having “allegedly” committed crimes, until conviction, when their crimes are generally reported as fact (unless, that is, there is serious controversy about wrongful conviction).
* Opinion surveys and statistical information deserve special treatment to communicate in precise terms any conclusions, to contextualize the results, and to specify accuracy, including estimated error and methodological criticism or flaws.
Bias
Tell me how the “wafer” PM being late 2x story was covered for two weeks by our MSM. Thanks
January 12th, 2010 at 9:24 am
Re the Ontario E-Health scandal, there's a pretty complete and critical report from the Auditor-General on it already, which the government has completely accepted, and the key players have been sacked or quit, including a Health Minister. What would possibly be gained by a new inquiry now? What new would you learn?
Contrast this with the Afghan detainee issue. There's a HoC committee already looking into this, but the government is actively blocking it by suppressing documents, smearing the key accusor, and by proroguing.
Apples and oranges.
January 12th, 2010 at 10:17 am
Hey CS,
Sorry, I didn't mean to impugn you specifically, I was more addressing the CBC-bashing I see in general on Canadian right-wing sites. Sort of like it's a secret handshake, or something (“I want to be right-wing” “Do you want to abolish the CBC?” Heck yeah” “Welcome, friend…”)
So, could you clarify what you meant by this?
“She is simply following orders from above. Someone in the CBC is interested in using our taxpayers dollars to help the opposition parties with pushing the latest manufactured scandal.”
I agree to some extent that bias is subjective, but as you also point out there are objective standards by which genuine bias can be detected. I believe in market forces so I believe that on the whole, averaged out, the media landscape reflects the tastes and opinions of its audience. So the idea that most of the media are left-biased is far-fetched. Likewise, the idea that it's some sort of deliberate conspiracy.
No sharks were jumped in the making of this comment.
January 12th, 2010 at 11:04 am
Kind of a shame, then, that Harper's government will have to miss the Olympics while they prepare the throne speech and the new budget.
What was he thinking?? Wasn't April soon enough for a budget? Someone needs a calendar…
January 12th, 2010 at 11:08 am
Kenn2,
Without giving too much away, I had a friend in an news organization who was in the room when the new director announced “okay write whatever you want on this guy”, it did not take long for those to understand what they were looking for, get published and rewarded.
Conrad Blacks' have their narrative, agenda, people who write the cheques have their own biases and it is reflected in their organization.
Corporate culture, groupthink, call it whatever you like.
January 12th, 2010 at 11:23 am
I have a hard time believing that Conrad Black, or most media moguls for that matter, are predominantly Liberal partisans. But I can't deny that they each have agendas, or that they might influence their news coverage to fit that agenda.
So I will thank you for providing a very compelling argument for why a healthy modern democracy needs to have an arms-length, non-profit, publicly-funded national broadcaster.
January 12th, 2010 at 11:30 am
I did NOT say Conrad Black was a Liberal Partisan. I said they have biases why do you refer to it as only a “Liberal” bias?
I have said it —>exists<—- to suggest otherwise that somehow it does NOT is just wishful thinking.
January 12th, 2010 at 11:35 am
Here is an example NON political bias
NOT REAL
I own a Real Estate Company and my bias is for my Agents to sell property that sell for $ 1.5 Million+, do I hire agents who have that experience or hire an agent on Million + or give those who have a grea deal of experience on small single family units under 300k?
My own bias would eliminate or give the others an unfair advantage in the recruitment process.
January 12th, 2010 at 11:41 am
It was my understanding from your other posts that you feel that the MSM has a predominantly Liberal bias, so when you brought him up as an example of bias, I naturally thought you meant Liberal bias.
An honest mistake, I assure you.
So, please straighten me out – do you or do you not believe the MSM has a Liberal or left-leaning bias?
January 12th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
Can you be more specific? I have given examples of bias including on my blog. Cite a story with a link and if you like I can give my personal opinion on bias.
Bias-thin gruel in December MSM
An example the reporting of the detainee issue has grown out an individual's testimony for 4 weeks, a field note from a shoe beating from 3 years ago (how many hours have been spent on the words alleging torture, cover up war crimes based on those two?)
Pick a story or link
If a CTV, CBC personality has a bias they can still do their job or hold a liberal to account.
http://canadiansense.blogspot.com/2009/11/when-...
January 12th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
http://www.newzsource.com/
Interesting article about people who write cheques and don't like bias in their dad's business.
January 12th, 2010 at 2:23 pm
Maybe you'd like to comment on the cowardly behaviour of the “Loyal” Opposition, always lobbing spit balls at the government, objecting to this, decrying that, but when the CPC do what they say needs to be done — as in the stimulus package — they shout bloody murder about the deficit, which they knew any stimulus package would result in.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government are in a Catch-22 position with the Disloyal Opposition because it doesn't matter what they do: It's wrong, it's not what needs to be done, it's wasteful, it's not enough, yada, yada, yada ad nauseum.
He's keeping his own counsel, of course he's taking a political risk, but all real leaders do. He's the best thing that's happened to Parliament in well over 40 years so, of course, the Opposition, cowards and bullies that they are ('been listening to Ralphie Badbeer lately?), has to pull him down. These liberals are so open and tolerant — but only towards those with whom they agree, otherwise they feel perfectly justified in demonizing and ostracizing you.
You're actually not too far off the mark, kenn2, with your Harper/Frodo analogy. 'Way to go!
January 12th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
They are as concerned about the country as Harper.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:56 pm
So your dispute is with my characterization of the comments as “crowing”? I cannot imagine you are disputing the fact that you missed all those comments from conservatives who believe(d) Harper was gunning for an election because they thought March would be the time he could get his majority.
So I will retract the characterization of “crowing” since it seems to offend you.
January 13th, 2010 at 4:38 am
Gayle…the opposition are only concerned about themselves…and how the polls are rising or falling.
January 13th, 2010 at 4:39 am
Gayle..I never once saw those types of comments – so unless you can provide me a link to one, I will use your favorite retort.
LIAR!
January 13th, 2010 at 4:43 am
Huh? I guess it means that the Conservatives are more concerned about actually running the country than gladhanding at the Olympic games…
They most likely know that the games are about the athletes – not about the government. Not that that will stop the likes of the opposition from saying they don't care about the athletes.
After all, if they can use our soldiers to attempt to drive polls…our athletes hold no hope of not being pulled into the oppositions games.
January 13th, 2010 at 6:12 am
You know that no MP will miss the Olympics, and Harper will probably live in Whistler for 3 weeks. So this March “budget” BS is yet another reason why the whole prorogue farce smells.
Nice troll with the troops thing, BTW. I already know you know what's what with that , still, don't you have any shame about repeating that filth? Y'all tag the “Liberal$” for lying, yet when caught red-handed in a lie, you guys continue to trot it out. In the same thread, even.
January 13th, 2010 at 7:09 am
You are seriously trying to say that you have not seen any comments from conservative supporters suggesting Harper will win a majority after the Olympics?
That is funny. Some of them are on threads where you have commented. Pardon me if I decide I do not believe you on this one.
January 13th, 2010 at 7:10 am
Snort.
January 13th, 2010 at 10:26 am
Well Gayle – I have not…so if you have a link, or come across one, please let me know.
January 13th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Gayle…the opposition are only concerned about themselves…and how the polls are rising or falling.
January 13th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
Gayle..I never once saw those types of comments – so unless you can provide me a link to one, I will use your favorite retort.
LIAR!
January 13th, 2010 at 12:43 pm
Huh? I guess it means that the Conservatives are more concerned about actually running the country than gladhanding at the Olympic games…
They most likely know that the games are about the athletes – not about the government. Not that that will stop the likes of the opposition from saying they don't care about the athletes.
After all, if they can use our soldiers to attempt to drive polls…our athletes hold no hope of not being pulled into the oppositions games.
January 13th, 2010 at 2:12 pm
You know that no MP will miss the Olympics, and Harper will probably live in Whistler for 3 weeks. So this March “budget” BS is yet another reason why the whole prorogue farce smells.
Nice troll with the troops thing, BTW. I already know you know what's what with that , still, don't you have any shame about repeating that filth? Y'all tag the “Liberal$” for lying, yet when caught red-handed in a lie, you guys continue to trot it out. In the same thread, even.
January 13th, 2010 at 3:09 pm
You are seriously trying to say that you have not seen any comments from conservative supporters suggesting Harper will win a majority after the Olympics?
That is funny. Some of them are on threads where you have commented. Pardon me if I decide I do not believe you on this one.
January 13th, 2010 at 3:10 pm
Snort.
January 13th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
Well Gayle – I have not…so if you have a link, or come across one, please let me know.