I found this post the other day, if the government controls the armed forces and the police to a point were they will not question what the government wants, that is a dangerous situation. This may only be a minor problem now, however what about ten years from now or twenty years from now. What if they want to repress any democratic demonstrations involving environmental concerns, we all know this conservative government doesn't care about the environment. Where does this get us in the future?
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Outrageous
While we focus on robocalls, there is another story on the political radar, one that is simply an outrageous ABUSE of power, that puts the impartiality of the military into question:
Defence Minister Peter MacKay almost ran from a military conference Friday morning as he dodged questions about emails that suggest military personnel were enlisted to help turn the tables on the opposition after revelations MacKay used a search-and-rescue helicopter during a fishing trip in 2010.
The emails show that on Sept. 22, one day after a TV report that MacKay had used a Cormorant helicopter to be taken from a private fishing lodge near Gander, N.L., military officials began searching for instances of opposition members using military aircraft.
This revelation demands an investigation, MacKay has effectively pimped out the military to do opp research on a political rival. In so doing, MacKay has made the Canadian military an arm of the Conservative Party, a simply astounding development. It is no wonder MacKay ran from reporters, because there is no credible way to reconcile this political interference, this behaviour crosses important lines.
No comment from Gen. Walter Natynczyk is simply not good enough, the military should be conducting its own investigation, because ultimately this tarnishes public perception. Is this my Canadian military, or are my tax dollars being abused to further a political party's interests? The military didn't initiate the MacKay story, journalists did, and yet the "counter" seems to be entirely political in scope, people otherwise invested in military matters scanning records looking for DIRT on a Liberal MP. The opposition isn't supposed to be the "enemy" that the military needs to expose, but effectively, here, they've taken a political side, they've become an active player and this represents an incredibly dangerous precedent.
MacKay can't run forever, this story deserves further attention.
Posted by Steve V at 8:38 AM 15 comments Links to this post
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook
Kelowna B.C.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Found another good blog post
WesternGrit
Western Grit - VERY ETHNIC
Monday, January 23, 2012
"Firewall" Harper's Firesale Continues...
After obliterating Canada's fiscal safety nets (multi year surpluses), Harper has set his aim at destroying Canada's environment, our First Nations, and now Healthcare. Read more in Ralph Goodale's weekly newsletter:
HARPER CANCELS FEDERAL ROLE IN HEALTHCARE
When he first came to power in 2006, Stephen Harper inherited a decade of surplus budgets, declining debt, declining taxes, and federal financial flexibility of $100 billion over five years.
It was an enviable position. The best in the western world.
Embedded in the fiscal framework was sufficient funding to implement the ground-breaking Kelowna Accord for Aboriginal people, achieve 80% of Canada’s international obligations on Climate Change, and launch a decade of rejuvenation in healthcare.
The Conservatives immediately cancelled work on Aboriginal issues and Climate Change. Consequently, Canada has become a global embarrassment on the environment, and we’ve spiraled downward from high Aboriginal hopes in Kelowna to the tragedy in Attawapiskat.
Most recently, healthcare too has been thrown under the bus.
Just before Christmas, Mr. Harper announced a new funding formula. Arbitrary. Unilateral. Non-negotiable. He’ll keep commitments Liberals put in place for three further years, but then cut back.
It’s dictatorial federalism, by brute force.
A couple of Premiers, like Saskatchewan’s Brad Wall, were hoping certain things could still be discussed with the feds – like healthcare innovation. But just before the Premiers met last week in Victoria, Mr. Harper bluntly told them all to get stuffed.
The biggest problem is not his typical crudeness, or even the short-term money he put on the table. The biggest problem – and danger – is Mr. Harper’s ruthless abandonment of any creative federal role to help make medicare better.
He says that’s exclusively a provincial problem. All the feds should do, according to him, is write a cheque – one, incidentally, that represents a steadily declining share of healthcare costs – and that’s it. Don’t even discuss anything substantive.
This attitude is absolutely guaranteed to fragment and balkanize Canadian medicare, creating a patchwork among provinces, and leaving many Canadians vulnerable.
In Stephen Harper’s Canada, it’s more important to spend billions on bigger jails.
Western Grit - VERY ETHNIC
Monday, January 23, 2012
"Firewall" Harper's Firesale Continues...
After obliterating Canada's fiscal safety nets (multi year surpluses), Harper has set his aim at destroying Canada's environment, our First Nations, and now Healthcare. Read more in Ralph Goodale's weekly newsletter:
HARPER CANCELS FEDERAL ROLE IN HEALTHCARE
When he first came to power in 2006, Stephen Harper inherited a decade of surplus budgets, declining debt, declining taxes, and federal financial flexibility of $100 billion over five years.
It was an enviable position. The best in the western world.
Embedded in the fiscal framework was sufficient funding to implement the ground-breaking Kelowna Accord for Aboriginal people, achieve 80% of Canada’s international obligations on Climate Change, and launch a decade of rejuvenation in healthcare.
The Conservatives immediately cancelled work on Aboriginal issues and Climate Change. Consequently, Canada has become a global embarrassment on the environment, and we’ve spiraled downward from high Aboriginal hopes in Kelowna to the tragedy in Attawapiskat.
Most recently, healthcare too has been thrown under the bus.
Just before Christmas, Mr. Harper announced a new funding formula. Arbitrary. Unilateral. Non-negotiable. He’ll keep commitments Liberals put in place for three further years, but then cut back.
It’s dictatorial federalism, by brute force.
A couple of Premiers, like Saskatchewan’s Brad Wall, were hoping certain things could still be discussed with the feds – like healthcare innovation. But just before the Premiers met last week in Victoria, Mr. Harper bluntly told them all to get stuffed.
The biggest problem is not his typical crudeness, or even the short-term money he put on the table. The biggest problem – and danger – is Mr. Harper’s ruthless abandonment of any creative federal role to help make medicare better.
He says that’s exclusively a provincial problem. All the feds should do, according to him, is write a cheque – one, incidentally, that represents a steadily declining share of healthcare costs – and that’s it. Don’t even discuss anything substantive.
This attitude is absolutely guaranteed to fragment and balkanize Canadian medicare, creating a patchwork among provinces, and leaving many Canadians vulnerable.
In Stephen Harper’s Canada, it’s more important to spend billions on bigger jails.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Whats up with our main steam media?
I found this great blog explaining a little bit of whats wrong with the media of today, have a read.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
The Problem With the Media May Not be Lack of Balance
In her book The Right is Wrong, Arianna Huffington devotes a chapter to the media's search for truth, or abandonment of it, depending on how you look at it.
Huffington is a former Republican who left the party when she realized that they had gone completely crazy. If you recognize her name, it's because she is the founder of the Huffington Post.
She claims not to be angry with the right-wing media. After all, they are only doing what we expect them to do, so we don't read their papers, listen to their radio programs, or watch their television stations.
They have become part of our culture, so we're aware of them, but they don't have an impact on our own views.
Where the problem lies, she believes, is with what is supposed to be the mainstream media. Those charged with providing unbiased news and seeking the truth in every story.
However, in today's toxic political climate, an attempt to seek the truth, may be an archaic principle, because the mainstream media has allowed the Right's radical ideas to become "ordinary".
A key to understanding the fanatical Right's takeover of the Republican Party and how their ideas spread to the rest of the country is looking at the role of the media—not the Fox News pseudo-newsmen or the talk radio blowhards, but the respectable, mainstream media. Without the enabling of the traditional media—through their obsession with "balance" and their pathological devotion to the idea that truth is always found in the middle—the radical. Right would never have been able to have its ideas taken seriously. If not for the media's appeals to balance, nea-conservatives would have been laughed out of the court of public opinion long ago. And when the media do attempt to dig into the ideological underpinnings of debates about policy and current affairs, they get buried in another form of disorder. (1)
Fox News and Sun TV have contrarians on all the time, but only to set them up for ridicule. They are not seeking the truth, but simply reaffirming their truth, to the people who watch their programs.
When Shelley Glover remarked in a CBC segment, that "it is a well known fact that all cops vote Conservative and all criminals vote Liberal", she should have been rebuked. Yet her insane comment was allowed to stand as legitimate. A contrary point of view, that we have a Conservative law enforcement, instead of one paid with the tax dollars from those of all political stripes?
The Left/Right Paradigm
Richard Nixon was the first to suggest that there was a left wing media bias. From his inauguration in 1969, until the day he left office in disgrace, he exacted his revenge on the press, once stating: "One day we'll get them - we'll get them on the ground where we want them. And we'll stick our heels in, step on them hard, and twist." (2)
His anger wasn't unjustified, though it had nothing to do with a left bias, but a stalker columnist named Jack Anderson, who matched dirty journalism with dirty politics. As for the rest of the media, Nixon simply didn't like getting caught.
However, since that time, the media has enabled the Right to set the tone of debate, by establishing a left/right paradigm. Thus all arguments are now based on left/right "opinions", instead of established facts.
Climate change is a perfect example of this. Jim Hansen, a climate scientist and director of NASA's Goddard Institute, wrote in the New York Review of what happens when highly qualified experts try to make their case in the mainstream media.
I used to spread the blame uniformly until, when I was about to appear on public television, the producer informed me that the program "must" also include a "contrarian" who would take issue with claims of global warming. Presenting such a view, he told me, was a common practice in commercial television as well as radio and newspapers. Supporters of public TV or advertisers, with their own special interests, require "balance" as a price for their continued financial support. Gore's book reveals that while more than half of the recent newspaper articles on climate change have given equal weight to such contrarian views, virtually none of the scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals have questioned the consensus that emissions from human activities cause global warming. As a result, even when the scientific evidence is clear, technical nitpicking by contrarians leaves the public with the false impression that there is still great scientific uncertainty about the reality and causes of climate change. (3)
Can you imagine if today's media was around at the time of other scientific breakthroughs? When Jonas Salk developed a vaccine for polio, would we have Stanley Knowles (CCF/NDP) and Louis St. Laurent (Liberal) arguing its merits and pushing to immunize all Canadian children, with contrarian Solon Low (Social Credit) calling it a Jewish plot to suck money out of the treasury.
Of course not. We trusted science and science prevailed in combating the disease.
So why are we leaving information about the devastating results of climate change, and human activity that is accelerating it, to politicians and political pundits? Harper claims that it is only a "theory" and that Kyoto was "essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations." (The Star, January 30, 2007) and we allow that to stand, just as we allow Glover's remark that all cops vote Conservative to stand.
Instead of truth vs lies, science vs non-scientific opinion, and fact vs myth, it has all come down to left vs right.
Not So Much Anger as Disappointment
I have found myself many times getting angry with the media, and not the obvious right-wing media, whose job it is to spout nonsense, but with the mainstream media.
As Huffington suggests, it is because of disappointment. We expect more and get less. In an effort to seek balance, they have allowed the conservative movement to frame all debate. We know that Canada's crime rate is the lowest in history, but apparently only those on the left pay attention to the facts. And by giving the contrarian viewpoint, that crime is on the rise, so we need more prisons; there is an implication that the facts may be open to debate. A confused public shrugs and moves on. They'll let future generations deal with the mess that this change in direction will create.
During Harper's first and second term, every time that conservative corruption was revealed, the MSM countered it by bringing up the Sponsorship Scandal. In other words, yes the Harper government was corrupt, but what about those darn Liberals? They gave him an excuse. And yet not one mentioned that most involved in the scandal, were hired by Brian Mulroney (4), in the first Adscam.
With such an entrenched right-wing media, the old rules of "balance" no longer applies. What we need is argument against right-wing nonsense, instead of providing it with a platform.
And What About the Auditions?
There is a joke often thrown around, that many journalists and columnists are jockeying for senate seats, so that their work becomes their portfolio. It is well known that Mike Duffy had been trying to get a senate seat for years, but it was his complicity in the annihilation of Stéphane Dion, that finally gave him his coveted spot.
But what of others, like Angelo Persichilli? I used to enjoy his columns, with the exception of the Quebec bashing, until he started acting weird. Becoming the Liberals' Jack Anderson (2) he turned into a tabloid writer, listening in on private conversations, in an effort to discredit them at every turn. He went from a respected columnist to a peeping tom.
So should we have been surprised that he was given the top job on Harper's communications team? They needed someone without integrity, who would do anything to dig up dirt on Harper's political opponents, and he proved with his latest columns, that he was up for the job. Or I should say down.
We have some very good journalists in this country, but the Chantel Heberts, Evan Solomons and Lloyd Mansbridges, must step up to the plate and debunk conservative spin, instead of turning the crank. Talk to experts not idiots, or risk joining the latter.
Sources:
1. Right is Wrong: How the Lunatic Fringe Hijacked America, Shredded the Constitution and Made us All Feel Less Safe (And What You Need to Know to End the Madness), By Arianna Huffington, Aldred A. Knopf, 2008, ISBN: 978-0-307-26966-9, p. 5
2. Poisoning the Press: Richard Nixon, Jack Anderson and the Rise of Washington's Scandal Culture, By Mark Feldstein, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-374-23530-7
3. Huffington, 2008, pp. 23-24
4. On the Take: Crime, Corruption and Greed in the Mulroney Years, By Stevie Cameron, Macfarlane Walter & Ross, 1994, ISBN: 0-921912-73-0
Posted by Emily Dee at 7:16 AM
Labels: Angelo Persichilli, Chantel Hebert Right-wing journalist, Lloyd Mansbridge, Mainstream Media
Saturday, December 10, 2011
The Problem With the Media May Not be Lack of Balance
In her book The Right is Wrong, Arianna Huffington devotes a chapter to the media's search for truth, or abandonment of it, depending on how you look at it.
Huffington is a former Republican who left the party when she realized that they had gone completely crazy. If you recognize her name, it's because she is the founder of the Huffington Post.
She claims not to be angry with the right-wing media. After all, they are only doing what we expect them to do, so we don't read their papers, listen to their radio programs, or watch their television stations.
They have become part of our culture, so we're aware of them, but they don't have an impact on our own views.
Where the problem lies, she believes, is with what is supposed to be the mainstream media. Those charged with providing unbiased news and seeking the truth in every story.
However, in today's toxic political climate, an attempt to seek the truth, may be an archaic principle, because the mainstream media has allowed the Right's radical ideas to become "ordinary".
A key to understanding the fanatical Right's takeover of the Republican Party and how their ideas spread to the rest of the country is looking at the role of the media—not the Fox News pseudo-newsmen or the talk radio blowhards, but the respectable, mainstream media. Without the enabling of the traditional media—through their obsession with "balance" and their pathological devotion to the idea that truth is always found in the middle—the radical. Right would never have been able to have its ideas taken seriously. If not for the media's appeals to balance, nea-conservatives would have been laughed out of the court of public opinion long ago. And when the media do attempt to dig into the ideological underpinnings of debates about policy and current affairs, they get buried in another form of disorder. (1)
Fox News and Sun TV have contrarians on all the time, but only to set them up for ridicule. They are not seeking the truth, but simply reaffirming their truth, to the people who watch their programs.
When Shelley Glover remarked in a CBC segment, that "it is a well known fact that all cops vote Conservative and all criminals vote Liberal", she should have been rebuked. Yet her insane comment was allowed to stand as legitimate. A contrary point of view, that we have a Conservative law enforcement, instead of one paid with the tax dollars from those of all political stripes?
The Left/Right Paradigm
Richard Nixon was the first to suggest that there was a left wing media bias. From his inauguration in 1969, until the day he left office in disgrace, he exacted his revenge on the press, once stating: "One day we'll get them - we'll get them on the ground where we want them. And we'll stick our heels in, step on them hard, and twist." (2)
His anger wasn't unjustified, though it had nothing to do with a left bias, but a stalker columnist named Jack Anderson, who matched dirty journalism with dirty politics. As for the rest of the media, Nixon simply didn't like getting caught.
However, since that time, the media has enabled the Right to set the tone of debate, by establishing a left/right paradigm. Thus all arguments are now based on left/right "opinions", instead of established facts.
Climate change is a perfect example of this. Jim Hansen, a climate scientist and director of NASA's Goddard Institute, wrote in the New York Review of what happens when highly qualified experts try to make their case in the mainstream media.
I used to spread the blame uniformly until, when I was about to appear on public television, the producer informed me that the program "must" also include a "contrarian" who would take issue with claims of global warming. Presenting such a view, he told me, was a common practice in commercial television as well as radio and newspapers. Supporters of public TV or advertisers, with their own special interests, require "balance" as a price for their continued financial support. Gore's book reveals that while more than half of the recent newspaper articles on climate change have given equal weight to such contrarian views, virtually none of the scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals have questioned the consensus that emissions from human activities cause global warming. As a result, even when the scientific evidence is clear, technical nitpicking by contrarians leaves the public with the false impression that there is still great scientific uncertainty about the reality and causes of climate change. (3)
Can you imagine if today's media was around at the time of other scientific breakthroughs? When Jonas Salk developed a vaccine for polio, would we have Stanley Knowles (CCF/NDP) and Louis St. Laurent (Liberal) arguing its merits and pushing to immunize all Canadian children, with contrarian Solon Low (Social Credit) calling it a Jewish plot to suck money out of the treasury.
Of course not. We trusted science and science prevailed in combating the disease.
So why are we leaving information about the devastating results of climate change, and human activity that is accelerating it, to politicians and political pundits? Harper claims that it is only a "theory" and that Kyoto was "essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations." (The Star, January 30, 2007) and we allow that to stand, just as we allow Glover's remark that all cops vote Conservative to stand.
Instead of truth vs lies, science vs non-scientific opinion, and fact vs myth, it has all come down to left vs right.
Not So Much Anger as Disappointment
I have found myself many times getting angry with the media, and not the obvious right-wing media, whose job it is to spout nonsense, but with the mainstream media.
As Huffington suggests, it is because of disappointment. We expect more and get less. In an effort to seek balance, they have allowed the conservative movement to frame all debate. We know that Canada's crime rate is the lowest in history, but apparently only those on the left pay attention to the facts. And by giving the contrarian viewpoint, that crime is on the rise, so we need more prisons; there is an implication that the facts may be open to debate. A confused public shrugs and moves on. They'll let future generations deal with the mess that this change in direction will create.
During Harper's first and second term, every time that conservative corruption was revealed, the MSM countered it by bringing up the Sponsorship Scandal. In other words, yes the Harper government was corrupt, but what about those darn Liberals? They gave him an excuse. And yet not one mentioned that most involved in the scandal, were hired by Brian Mulroney (4), in the first Adscam.
With such an entrenched right-wing media, the old rules of "balance" no longer applies. What we need is argument against right-wing nonsense, instead of providing it with a platform.
And What About the Auditions?
There is a joke often thrown around, that many journalists and columnists are jockeying for senate seats, so that their work becomes their portfolio. It is well known that Mike Duffy had been trying to get a senate seat for years, but it was his complicity in the annihilation of Stéphane Dion, that finally gave him his coveted spot.
But what of others, like Angelo Persichilli? I used to enjoy his columns, with the exception of the Quebec bashing, until he started acting weird. Becoming the Liberals' Jack Anderson (2) he turned into a tabloid writer, listening in on private conversations, in an effort to discredit them at every turn. He went from a respected columnist to a peeping tom.
So should we have been surprised that he was given the top job on Harper's communications team? They needed someone without integrity, who would do anything to dig up dirt on Harper's political opponents, and he proved with his latest columns, that he was up for the job. Or I should say down.
We have some very good journalists in this country, but the Chantel Heberts, Evan Solomons and Lloyd Mansbridges, must step up to the plate and debunk conservative spin, instead of turning the crank. Talk to experts not idiots, or risk joining the latter.
Sources:
1. Right is Wrong: How the Lunatic Fringe Hijacked America, Shredded the Constitution and Made us All Feel Less Safe (And What You Need to Know to End the Madness), By Arianna Huffington, Aldred A. Knopf, 2008, ISBN: 978-0-307-26966-9, p. 5
2. Poisoning the Press: Richard Nixon, Jack Anderson and the Rise of Washington's Scandal Culture, By Mark Feldstein, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-374-23530-7
3. Huffington, 2008, pp. 23-24
4. On the Take: Crime, Corruption and Greed in the Mulroney Years, By Stevie Cameron, Macfarlane Walter & Ross, 1994, ISBN: 0-921912-73-0
Posted by Emily Dee at 7:16 AM
Labels: Angelo Persichilli, Chantel Hebert Right-wing journalist, Lloyd Mansbridge, Mainstream Media
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Are NDP and Conservatives Closer Than We Think?
I found an interesting story this morning by Katie O'Mally that seems to show an distinct link between top Conservatives and top NDPers and a falling out with a Liberal party. Now this type of back room negotiations are always taking place, I find when it takes place at the level we see here, that seems odd to me. Thomas Mulclair is I believe the deputy leader and the fact that the Conservatives were trying to recruit him, that just backs up my assumptions that the two parties are far too closely linked to be effective as any type of opposition.
Strategic Leak Watch: About that whole 'Mulcair considered joining the Tories' meme ...
July 29, 2011 11:27 AM | Read 31 comments31
By Kady O'Malley
For a few minutes yesterday morning, it seemed that incoming interim opposition leader Nycole Turmel might find herself facing a political firestorm before the ink on her temporary installation papers had even had the chance to dry, courtesy of an incendiary tweet from CTV bureau chief Robert Fife that appeared just as the NDP federal council was gathering in a downtown Ottawa hotel to make her appointment official.
Here's how it all went down:
By kady o'malley, 21 hours ago
Email
Embed story
ReplyRetweet
Tories claim Deputy NDP Thomas Muclair negotiated to join Harper PMO before joining NDP. #cdnpoli
RobertFifeJuly 28, 2011 at 7:42
ReplyRetweet
@YaroslavB Sources say Muclair negotiated to work for Harper minister and than run for Tories. #cdnpoli
RobertFifeJuly 28, 2011 at 8:16
Unfortunately for reporters desperate for a new angle on what had been, thus far, a remarkably orderly, if unexpected, interim leadership selection process, NDP communications staffers were quick to point out that the claim that Mulcair had entertained offers from other parties before signing on with Team Orange was not, strictly -- or even loosely -- speaking, 'news' in any meaningful sense of the word.
Not only had those discussions had taken place nearly five years earlier -- in April 2007, when Mulcair was a political free agent following his falling out with the provincial Liberals -- but the fact that the NDP managed to win him over despite what must have seemed a tempting counteroffer from the governing Conservatives -- who, it bears noting, had a far stronger presence in Quebec at the time -- was widely understood -- and, in fact, reported -- back when it all went down.
From the Montreal Gazette (04/20/2007):
While Mulcair had been actively courted behind the scenes by both the NDP and the Conservatives, sources close to him said he chose the NDP because he felt it is best positioned to make a difference when it comes to the environment.
Those sources said the Tories were interested in the ex-minister because they believed he could help improve their image on the environment, but he turned them down once he realized they were more interested in having him toe their line than in adopting his positions.
NDP staffers weren't the only ones left scratching their heads.
ReplyRetweet
Are the Tories really leaking that they failed to nab Mulcair, before the party he went to won most of the seats in Quebec?
InklessPWJuly 28, 2011 at 9:58
ReplyRetweet
Pretty sure that Mulcair 'news' isnt. Profile or star candidates almost always shop around to or are recruited by all of the parties.
aligoldingJuly 28, 2011 at 11:06
ReplyRetweet
You know, I remember when Mulcair made the jump to federal politics. There was a betting pool over which party would land him.
kadyJuly 28, 2011 at 10:10
In any case, when the now formally, if temporarily, anointed interim leader appeared before the cameras following the federal council meeting, she was dutifully quizzed on the claim, to which she responded by pointing out that Mulcair had, in fact, decided to join the NDP.
Federal director Brian Topp, meanwhile, told reporters that he took it as a compliment, suggesting that the Conservatives wouldn't go on the attack unless they were worried.
So why did the Conservatives -- or, to be scrupulously exact, an unknown number of unnamed party operatives -- decide to dredge up the ghosts of failed star candidate recruitment efforts past? Was it simply an attempt to stir up internal dissent and suspicion with a strategy that, to be fair, has rarely failed them in the past when deployed against the Liberals? Or did someone not bother with a cursory Google to make sure that the 'news' they were attempting to plant was, in fact, new?
Given the campaign that the party waged against the two previous leaders of the opposition, it's likely worth keeping an eye on the Little Shop of Tories over the summer, if only to see whether they plan on taking the same approach to the NDP.
Strategic Leak Watch: About that whole 'Mulcair considered joining the Tories' meme ...
July 29, 2011 11:27 AM | Read 31 comments31
By Kady O'Malley
For a few minutes yesterday morning, it seemed that incoming interim opposition leader Nycole Turmel might find herself facing a political firestorm before the ink on her temporary installation papers had even had the chance to dry, courtesy of an incendiary tweet from CTV bureau chief Robert Fife that appeared just as the NDP federal council was gathering in a downtown Ottawa hotel to make her appointment official.
Here's how it all went down:
By kady o'malley, 21 hours ago
Embed story
ReplyRetweet
Tories claim Deputy NDP Thomas Muclair negotiated to join Harper PMO before joining NDP. #cdnpoli
RobertFifeJuly 28, 2011 at 7:42
ReplyRetweet
@YaroslavB Sources say Muclair negotiated to work for Harper minister and than run for Tories. #cdnpoli
RobertFifeJuly 28, 2011 at 8:16
Unfortunately for reporters desperate for a new angle on what had been, thus far, a remarkably orderly, if unexpected, interim leadership selection process, NDP communications staffers were quick to point out that the claim that Mulcair had entertained offers from other parties before signing on with Team Orange was not, strictly -- or even loosely -- speaking, 'news' in any meaningful sense of the word.
Not only had those discussions had taken place nearly five years earlier -- in April 2007, when Mulcair was a political free agent following his falling out with the provincial Liberals -- but the fact that the NDP managed to win him over despite what must have seemed a tempting counteroffer from the governing Conservatives -- who, it bears noting, had a far stronger presence in Quebec at the time -- was widely understood -- and, in fact, reported -- back when it all went down.
From the Montreal Gazette (04/20/2007):
While Mulcair had been actively courted behind the scenes by both the NDP and the Conservatives, sources close to him said he chose the NDP because he felt it is best positioned to make a difference when it comes to the environment.
Those sources said the Tories were interested in the ex-minister because they believed he could help improve their image on the environment, but he turned them down once he realized they were more interested in having him toe their line than in adopting his positions.
NDP staffers weren't the only ones left scratching their heads.
ReplyRetweet
Are the Tories really leaking that they failed to nab Mulcair, before the party he went to won most of the seats in Quebec?
InklessPWJuly 28, 2011 at 9:58
ReplyRetweet
Pretty sure that Mulcair 'news' isnt. Profile or star candidates almost always shop around to or are recruited by all of the parties.
aligoldingJuly 28, 2011 at 11:06
ReplyRetweet
You know, I remember when Mulcair made the jump to federal politics. There was a betting pool over which party would land him.
kadyJuly 28, 2011 at 10:10
In any case, when the now formally, if temporarily, anointed interim leader appeared before the cameras following the federal council meeting, she was dutifully quizzed on the claim, to which she responded by pointing out that Mulcair had, in fact, decided to join the NDP.
Federal director Brian Topp, meanwhile, told reporters that he took it as a compliment, suggesting that the Conservatives wouldn't go on the attack unless they were worried.
So why did the Conservatives -- or, to be scrupulously exact, an unknown number of unnamed party operatives -- decide to dredge up the ghosts of failed star candidate recruitment efforts past? Was it simply an attempt to stir up internal dissent and suspicion with a strategy that, to be fair, has rarely failed them in the past when deployed against the Liberals? Or did someone not bother with a cursory Google to make sure that the 'news' they were attempting to plant was, in fact, new?
Given the campaign that the party waged against the two previous leaders of the opposition, it's likely worth keeping an eye on the Little Shop of Tories over the summer, if only to see whether they plan on taking the same approach to the NDP.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
I made this comment on Steve V's blog post this morning regarding the living conditions on native reserves and how the Liberals need to champion this a major issue to wrap themselves around.
Your exactly right Steve, the Liberals need to champion themselves around a just and honourable causes, and the plight of our first nations and the alarming living conditions in which they endure is an important objective indeed. However, I strongly feel that the Liberals NEED to have a complete arsenal of just and honourable causes including major issues such as; healthcare, environment, education, equality, poverty, human rights, foreign policies, global diplomacy, democratic transparency, accountability. I’m sure I’ve missed a few important issues as well but to reiterate my point the Liberals should be working as a team to champion these issues and work towards taking steps needed to correct or improve on these plights. I believe the Liberals are on the right track with this approach but more needs to be done, for example; Ralph Goodale and his work with agriculture and rural concerns, Bob Rae and his exemplary work on foreign policy and human rights, John McCallum financial and economic expertise, Stephen Dion and tireless work with environment issues and possible solutions (I think the Green Shift was a policy ahead of its time and many of the items in that plan should be pursued), Martha Hall Finlay and her stellar work on womens rights (I’m sure she will continue even though she is no longer a sitting member of parliament and I hope we see her run again in the next election as she has so much to offer), anyways the list goes on with a good many representatives. The Liberals should be more vocal and more proactive on these plights, it’s one thing to have these as policies but to champion these issues and gather other people towards your particular plight is essential, social media is the perfect tool for this endeavour. We should see more rallies, protest and campaigns for the many people effected by this inactive government and I would love to see more Liberal representatives in the thick of things. The Liberals should be getting behind the people and their causes and forget the fact some other Canadians might be annoyed or angered by their actions, as long as the campaigns are just and honourable there will be a good many Canadians who will applaud their actions.
As for the specifics of your post Steve, Sheila Frasers scathing report on the conditions our first nations face is definitely a perfect example of how the Liberals can wrap themselves in a just and moral cause, and yes many red neck types will definitely be annoyed by their efforts. I think I’ve heard that statement by Doyen many of times “ what can be done for the first nation anyways” or “they don’t want our help they just want our money” and yes thwap that is the sentiment of many Canadians. What many Canadians do not know is that our efforts and assistance has had numerous positive successes. I am sure there are many more reserves that have a normal standard of living and that may only have a minimal percentage of the population living in deplorable conditions, and we have that in our own communities as well. The Osoyoos Indian band is one of the first bands to see year after year profits through their approach of treating the band as a business and constantly expanding the business. Chief Clarence Louis has been traveling the country teaching other bands to use this extremely productive approach to better their communities. I have worked with various native band offices for many years and I currently work for a company who operates on a native reserve, more than forty percent of my fellow workers are native and I have many good friends who are native. I would like to say that they are no different than you or I, period! Yes they have poverty and substance abuse issues but so does the rest of this country, have you ever seen the Vancouver east end, and those conditions exist in every major city in Canada. What is needed is simple EDUCATION and EMPOYMENT period!
Sorry for the long winded comment Steve, I guess you hit one of those hot button issues I’m so passionate about, and the Kelowna Accord was one of them.
Your exactly right Steve, the Liberals need to champion themselves around a just and honourable causes, and the plight of our first nations and the alarming living conditions in which they endure is an important objective indeed. However, I strongly feel that the Liberals NEED to have a complete arsenal of just and honourable causes including major issues such as; healthcare, environment, education, equality, poverty, human rights, foreign policies, global diplomacy, democratic transparency, accountability. I’m sure I’ve missed a few important issues as well but to reiterate my point the Liberals should be working as a team to champion these issues and work towards taking steps needed to correct or improve on these plights. I believe the Liberals are on the right track with this approach but more needs to be done, for example; Ralph Goodale and his work with agriculture and rural concerns, Bob Rae and his exemplary work on foreign policy and human rights, John McCallum financial and economic expertise, Stephen Dion and tireless work with environment issues and possible solutions (I think the Green Shift was a policy ahead of its time and many of the items in that plan should be pursued), Martha Hall Finlay and her stellar work on womens rights (I’m sure she will continue even though she is no longer a sitting member of parliament and I hope we see her run again in the next election as she has so much to offer), anyways the list goes on with a good many representatives. The Liberals should be more vocal and more proactive on these plights, it’s one thing to have these as policies but to champion these issues and gather other people towards your particular plight is essential, social media is the perfect tool for this endeavour. We should see more rallies, protest and campaigns for the many people effected by this inactive government and I would love to see more Liberal representatives in the thick of things. The Liberals should be getting behind the people and their causes and forget the fact some other Canadians might be annoyed or angered by their actions, as long as the campaigns are just and honourable there will be a good many Canadians who will applaud their actions.
As for the specifics of your post Steve, Sheila Frasers scathing report on the conditions our first nations face is definitely a perfect example of how the Liberals can wrap themselves in a just and moral cause, and yes many red neck types will definitely be annoyed by their efforts. I think I’ve heard that statement by Doyen many of times “ what can be done for the first nation anyways” or “they don’t want our help they just want our money” and yes thwap that is the sentiment of many Canadians. What many Canadians do not know is that our efforts and assistance has had numerous positive successes. I am sure there are many more reserves that have a normal standard of living and that may only have a minimal percentage of the population living in deplorable conditions, and we have that in our own communities as well. The Osoyoos Indian band is one of the first bands to see year after year profits through their approach of treating the band as a business and constantly expanding the business. Chief Clarence Louis has been traveling the country teaching other bands to use this extremely productive approach to better their communities. I have worked with various native band offices for many years and I currently work for a company who operates on a native reserve, more than forty percent of my fellow workers are native and I have many good friends who are native. I would like to say that they are no different than you or I, period! Yes they have poverty and substance abuse issues but so does the rest of this country, have you ever seen the Vancouver east end, and those conditions exist in every major city in Canada. What is needed is simple EDUCATION and EMPOYMENT period!
Sorry for the long winded comment Steve, I guess you hit one of those hot button issues I’m so passionate about, and the Kelowna Accord was one of them.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Civil disobedience?
This post was written by Emily Dee on "Pushed Left and Loving it", I thought it was a good read;
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Ned Franks is Dead Wrong About Brigette DePape
I was busy yesterday and didn't get to say as much as I would have liked about Brigette DePape. Then I read Ned Franks column in the Star this morning, and couldn't possibly find enough words to tell him why he is dead wrong about this young woman.
Professor Franks is a constitutional expert but apparently not much of an expert on democracy.
Because if he believes that what took place on May 2, was democracy in action, then he clearly needs to read a few books on the subject.
This was the most undemocratic election in our history. Fifty-seven Conservative MPs were no shows, and almost as many NDP, the same.
Our prime minister limited questions to five, and even then only answered the ones he wanted to answer. Fences were put up and one person arrested simply for throwing a teddy bear over the barricades. Another because she had a picture of herself with Michael Ignatieff on Facebook.
If you weren't on a list you didn't get in. Period. In Kingston, the police drew an imaginary line for us not to cross, and when one one man fell over it, tripping on the curb, he was thrown against a police car and hauled away.
It was defined by dirty tricks, bogus phone calls, and Gestapo like control.
And with less than 40% of the popular vote (25% of eligible voters), Stephen Harper has almost 100% control of our country. This is democracy?
This young woman, and others like her, are smart enough to see that our system is badly broken.
And if we expect her to treat our institutions with respect, our current government is not leading by example. A 200 page manual instructing their MPs on how to disrupt Parliamentary committees.
Dean Del Mastro conducts himself like an animal, Pierre Polievre has had to have his mike shut off he was so obnoxious, and Peter Braid has attacked witnesses so voraciously, they have trembled with fear.
This government was found in contempt of Parliament, and yet they were able to run for re-election.
Bev Oda doctored a contract after it was signed and yet she was able to run for re-election.
Young people are not going to sit by for the next four to five years, as Canada continues its race to the bottom.
Miss DePape may not have taken her rightful place on the bus, but hopefully, she has earned her place in history.
We need to encourage our youth to get involved, not vilify them when they do, in the only way they can. Through civil disobedience.
I applaud her and look forward to more of the same, from Canadians of all ages.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Ned Franks is Dead Wrong About Brigette DePape
I was busy yesterday and didn't get to say as much as I would have liked about Brigette DePape. Then I read Ned Franks column in the Star this morning, and couldn't possibly find enough words to tell him why he is dead wrong about this young woman.
Professor Franks is a constitutional expert but apparently not much of an expert on democracy.
Because if he believes that what took place on May 2, was democracy in action, then he clearly needs to read a few books on the subject.
This was the most undemocratic election in our history. Fifty-seven Conservative MPs were no shows, and almost as many NDP, the same.
Our prime minister limited questions to five, and even then only answered the ones he wanted to answer. Fences were put up and one person arrested simply for throwing a teddy bear over the barricades. Another because she had a picture of herself with Michael Ignatieff on Facebook.
If you weren't on a list you didn't get in. Period. In Kingston, the police drew an imaginary line for us not to cross, and when one one man fell over it, tripping on the curb, he was thrown against a police car and hauled away.
It was defined by dirty tricks, bogus phone calls, and Gestapo like control.
And with less than 40% of the popular vote (25% of eligible voters), Stephen Harper has almost 100% control of our country. This is democracy?
This young woman, and others like her, are smart enough to see that our system is badly broken.
And if we expect her to treat our institutions with respect, our current government is not leading by example. A 200 page manual instructing their MPs on how to disrupt Parliamentary committees.
Dean Del Mastro conducts himself like an animal, Pierre Polievre has had to have his mike shut off he was so obnoxious, and Peter Braid has attacked witnesses so voraciously, they have trembled with fear.
This government was found in contempt of Parliament, and yet they were able to run for re-election.
Bev Oda doctored a contract after it was signed and yet she was able to run for re-election.
Young people are not going to sit by for the next four to five years, as Canada continues its race to the bottom.
Miss DePape may not have taken her rightful place on the bus, but hopefully, she has earned her place in history.
We need to encourage our youth to get involved, not vilify them when they do, in the only way they can. Through civil disobedience.
I applaud her and look forward to more of the same, from Canadians of all ages.
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Why Canadians Should Worry!
This is what makes me mad about the direction the Canadian Government is going and how our reputation in the world is being spoiled.
I came accross this post this morning and it hits the nail on the head, Canadian oil companies and minning companies are distroying the environmnet, the communities, and people who try to stand up against them, throughout the world and it's making Canada look like the principle problem in our attempt to conbat global warming. Anyways here's the post;
Canadian Mining Companies Continue to Make Headlines
In 2009, Liberal MP John McKay introduced a private members bill, Bill C-300, in an attempt to hold Canadian mining companies, operating abroad, to account for human rights abuses.
Almost immediately he began receiving threats, and several other MPs spoke of similar threats to their careers by the mining lobby. The bill was defeated 135 to 140, with 13 Liberal, 5 Bloc and 4 NDP absent from the vote.
Brent Popplewell wrote a piece for the Toronto Star on the abuses, saying that:
The word "Canada" is so reviled in some places that travelling Canadians mask their citizenship by wearing American flags on their caps and backpacks.
Recently a Mining Justice Conference was held in Vancouver.
Indigenous representatives from Latin America were in Vancouver the week of May 16 speaking out on Canadian mining companies and the negative impacts operations are having on local communities.
Human rights violations, environmental degradation, bribery, intimidation and disregard for local villages and indigenous populations are alleged to have occurred at the hands of publicly shared operations with home bases in Vancouver.
From protests in Guatemala over the abuse in Canada of temporary foreign workers to Tibetans fighting against the exploitation of their mineral rights, we can't really say that Canada has lost its international notoriety.
Around the world we are becoming reviled. I think I'd rather they didn't know who we were.
Posted by Emily Dee (Pushed to the Left and loving it)
I came accross this post this morning and it hits the nail on the head, Canadian oil companies and minning companies are distroying the environmnet, the communities, and people who try to stand up against them, throughout the world and it's making Canada look like the principle problem in our attempt to conbat global warming. Anyways here's the post;
Canadian Mining Companies Continue to Make Headlines
In 2009, Liberal MP John McKay introduced a private members bill, Bill C-300, in an attempt to hold Canadian mining companies, operating abroad, to account for human rights abuses.
Almost immediately he began receiving threats, and several other MPs spoke of similar threats to their careers by the mining lobby. The bill was defeated 135 to 140, with 13 Liberal, 5 Bloc and 4 NDP absent from the vote.
Brent Popplewell wrote a piece for the Toronto Star on the abuses, saying that:
The word "Canada" is so reviled in some places that travelling Canadians mask their citizenship by wearing American flags on their caps and backpacks.
Recently a Mining Justice Conference was held in Vancouver.
Indigenous representatives from Latin America were in Vancouver the week of May 16 speaking out on Canadian mining companies and the negative impacts operations are having on local communities.
Human rights violations, environmental degradation, bribery, intimidation and disregard for local villages and indigenous populations are alleged to have occurred at the hands of publicly shared operations with home bases in Vancouver.
From protests in Guatemala over the abuse in Canada of temporary foreign workers to Tibetans fighting against the exploitation of their mineral rights, we can't really say that Canada has lost its international notoriety.
Around the world we are becoming reviled. I think I'd rather they didn't know who we were.
Posted by Emily Dee (Pushed to the Left and loving it)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)