Designated Driver of North America

CBC panders to Fox News, the National Post, and a right-wing astroturf campaign

Read about the CBC’s cowardice here, and here.

And this is Heather Mallick’s actual column: A Mighty Wind blows through Republican convention. Spread it around!

One portion of CBC publisher John Cruickshank’s self-justification that I find most appalling, in the entire abominable grovelling screed, is this:

The column, by award-winning freelance writer Heather Mallick, was also pilloried by The National Post in Canada and by Fox News in the U.S.

So…the CBC partly made its decision based on whining by FOX NEWS?? The right-wing American mouthpiece of Bush/Cheney’s neo-Con fascists?? Who hate the French, staunchly and stupidly vaunted their “freedom fries” abomination, and feature Ann Coulter (that lovely woman who wants all left-wingers rounded up and executed) as one of their so-called “pundits”? THAT Fox News?

Um…just what country do the CBC’s bosses reside in? I thought, if the CBC pandered to anybody, it was supposed to be CANADIANS. We are NOT the United States! To hell with what the Americans think of us! This is not either Fox News or the American Broadcasting Corporation!

Fucking cowards. Fucking cowards, hoping to god that if Harper’s own neo-Cons get a majority government and the CBC grovels enough, the Cons won’t kill their poor witto network.

This is my response sent to Mr. Cruickshank:

You, Mr. Cruickshank, have become a willing victim of a right-wing “astroturf” campaign, where a few pearl-clutching wingnuts who were forced to read a reality-based account of their world view drummed up a screaming horde to pile on you and complain, and pretend they represented a sizeable segment of society. I guarantee that most of the people who complained HAD NOT EVEN READ THE PIECE until told to do so by the few thin-skinned people who decided to roast you.

To make a move based on even a bit of whining from FOX NEWS?? What damn country do you live in, sir??

The network that hates the French and talks about “freedom fries” — helping you to derail a CBC columnist you should be supporting?? The same network that features brainless ANN COULTER — who wants left-wingers rounded up and executed??

AND YOU LISTEN TO THEM??

I sense that you are attempting to pander to the right-wingers who, it seems, may soon have a majority in Parliament. Maybe you hope that they won’t kill your network, so you are selling your heritage for a mess of potage.

Fie on you for that cowardice, sir! I do NOT want the “alternate” view, from people who think the world is 6000 years old and think science and fact should be decided by ideology!

What you SHOULD be doing, if you have any integrity, is FIGHT FOR TRUTH. So what if the neo-Cons destroy your network as a result? GO DOWN FIGHTING, for gods’ sake!

Instead you compromise and compromise and compromise until the CBC has no integrity left.

I’m pretty close, at this point, to abandoning the CBC altogether. And you have no idea what a death that would be, for me.

You have betrayed the trust of the Canadian people by pandering to right-wing, America-based, neo-Con interests.

In the end, HAVE YOU NO SHAME?

Here are some excellent analyses of the CBC’s cowardly act:

A mighty wind blows up the arse of the CBC – the original at The Galloping Beaver blog

A mighty wind blows up the arse of the CBC – reproduced at the Creekside blog

Who’s your daddy, CBC?Shorter CBC: “We, for one, welcome our new American media overlords.”

CBC Gutless, Cowers Before Freepers

CBC: Canadian Butt-kissing Corporation

CBC Ombudsman and Due Diligence

Dear MotherCorp – “Do you seriously believe that your last-minute recantation and offering up of your daughter will save you from the fire?”

September 30, 2008 Posted by | * Kowtowing to American Neo-Cons | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Do Conservatives ever change? – Part Two

Aide to Con Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon makes racist remarks aimed at  constituent

Con Agriculture Minister wishes the Liberal agriculture critic had died of Listeriosis

Do the Cons ever change? No. No, they don’t.

Granted, the Liberals have had two problems with racist remarks as well:

Simon Bedard, Liberal candidate, thinks it would have been worth 150 deaths (Indian, presumably) for the army to have put an end to the Oka crisis in 1990

Ricardo Lopez once believed all Indians should be rounded up and made to live in Labrador and leave the rest of Canada in peace

And the Green Party:

John Shavluk makes racist jokes in a blog post ranting about Iraq and 9/11

And the NDP has its own candidate oddities:

Dana Larsen once worked for a company that sold coca seeds

The big, big difference between all these other parties with candidate misbehaviour, and the Cons? ALL THOSE CANDIDATES ARE NO LONGER CANDIDATES. They’ve either been fired, or resigned.

Though it’s a bit amusing about Dana Larsen. I mean, he’s the candidate from Whistler. Duh! And we could get into all sorts of arguments about the fake “drug war” and how it’s used to terrorize citizens who are harmless, and invent criminals for the right-wingers to froth at the mouth about, blah blah blah. BUT. Just knowing it could be a problem for his party – DANA LARSEN VOLUNTARILY RESIGNED.

And one of those Liberal candidates who was fired? Ricardo Lopez? WAS FIRST ELECTED AS A MULRONEY CONSERVATIVE, AND RAN FOR THE ALLIANCE PARTY.

Do the Cons ever change? No. No, they don’t.

September 19, 2008 Posted by | * Canadian Cons' Skulduggery | , , , | 1 Comment

Do Conservatives ever change?

Evil Reptilian kitten-eater from another planet

Puffin

Smear of dead soldier’s father because he disagrees with a Con policy

No. No, they don’t.

September 11, 2008 Posted by | * Canadian Cons' Skulduggery | , , , | Leave a comment

Good god, is Harper THAT stupid?? Or just that nasty?

Does he really expect any Canadian with a brain to fall for the idea that if the Green Shift was implemented, it could actually tear the country apart??  It could have some effects, undoubtedly, good or bad, but something that extreme??

And the Cons say everyone else is a fearmonger if they say stuff like that.

They really have learned directly from the neo-Cons down south, haven’t they, when it comes to tactics?

The reason Harper’s remarks are so stupid – no, so outright nasty – is summarized perfectly by Stéphane Dion in that article: “While he was busy talking about building firewalls in the West, I was fighting to keep my country together… I do not need any lessons from Stephen Harper on fighting for the national unity of my country.”

Shame on you, Stephen Harper. Shame.

I guess Danny Williams was right: “There is nothing Harper will not do in order to win a majority government. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a party who purportedly offered a terminally ill MP a life insurance policy to get his vote… How low can you go?”

We’re beginning to get a good idea.

September 11, 2008 Posted by | * Canadian Cons' Skulduggery | , , , | 1 Comment

WE WON!!!

Elizabeth May, Green Party leader, will be participating in a televised leaders’ debate!

Power to the people, by god!

September 10, 2008 Posted by | * Anti-democracy | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Well, now at least I know who I’m NOT voting for

Stephen Harper – true to form, I might add – has effectively bullied all the main party leaders into refusing to allow the Green Party leader, Elizabeth May, to participate in the televised leaders’ debates during this election. This is Harper’s modus operandi, and the other leaders shrieked “How high??” when he told them to “Jump!”

From the CBC article linked above, Gilles Duceppe: “Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe said that while he never threatened to withdraw over the issue, his preference was to have just the leaders of the four major parties in Parliament, and that the Greens should not be included in the debate because they have not elected an MP to Parliament yet.”

Considering that the Bloc is included and they only represent Quebec and are not a national party at all — this is hypocrisy of the highest, most brazen, bald-faced, look-you-right-in-the-eye-and-lie order.

Coward, Duceppe!

Stéphane Dion: “Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion said Monday that his party had supported May’s participation, but that he himself would not participate if Conservative Leader Stephen Harper were to boycott the debates.”

Right. Kowtow to the bully, rather than say, “We won’t succumb to your threats; we will be democratic even if you’re not, you tyrant.”

Coward, Dion!

Stephen Harper: “Harper said letting May participate in the debates would be in essence allowing a “second Liberal candidate” to participate, which he called “fundamentally unfair.”

What a snake. Considering that it has long, long, long been a practice in Canada for parties to have the courtesy not to run opposing candidates in the riding of a party leader (though once the Cons’ influence began to be felt more and more, this courtesy has fallen by the wayside as so many other courtesies have under their influence) – Harper is knowingly attempting to deceive the public here, and using the deception to prevent democratic debate as much as he can. (Since, guess what, Elizabeth May is the one leader not yelling “How high??” when he commands, “Jump!”)

Coward, Harper!

And very worst of all, Jack Layton: “NDP campaign spokesman Brad Lavigne confirmed late Monday that party leader Jack Layton had said he wouldn’t attend the debate if May were allowed to participate.

“‘We believe that as someone who’s endorsed Stéphane Dion to be the prime minister of Canada, she has endorsed Liberal candidates throughout the country,’ Lavigne said.”

Absolute, disgusting lies. Opportunistic, Tory-fed, American Republican-style, self-serving lies from the New Democrats, of all people!

Coward, coward, coward, Jack Layton!

Guess I’m votin’ Green, eh? ‘Cause I’m sure not voting for those anti-democratic, self-serving, hypocritical, greedy pigs.

Later added  note: a tally of bloggers who consider this a cowardly decision is being kept on the Abandoned Stuff by Saskboy blog. And leftdog, over at Buckdog, has a discussion going on in his Comments, about what can be done about this. Mostly it involves whether or not people should spoil ballots.

September 9, 2008 Posted by | * Anti-democracy | , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Scandalpedia

You want a good summary of the track record of the Conservative Reform Alliance Party, or whatever they’ve chosen to call themselves this year?

Visit Scandalpedia for an eyefull.

Now, of course, we can add Stephen Harper’s outright bullying of the Green Party, and specifically its leader, Elizabeth May, and the bullying of the Consortium planning the televised leaders’ [sic] debates.

Shameful.

September 9, 2008 Posted by | * Canadian Cons' Skulduggery | , | Leave a comment

Harper’s lies about “fixed elections”

Way back in May of 2006, Stephen Harper said this: “Fixed election dates stop leaders from trying to manipulate the calendar…They level the playing field for all parties…The only way we can have justice is to have a fixed election date, because an election without a fixed election date is a tremendous advantage for the party in power.”

So what is he about to do, tomorrow, a full year before Canada’s fixed election date?

He’s going to call an election.

In other words – manipulate the calendar. Take full advantage of the way this act favours the party in power – his party.

Oh, and the Cons have been running election advertising on television for two weeks already, since they knew they were going to contradict their own PASSED bill and call an election whenever they chose. So they’ve manipulated the calendar that way as well, and taken advantage of the fact that (minority or not) they’re the party in power.

So much for the level playing field.

Stephen Harper is a liar.

September 6, 2008 Posted by | * Canadian Cons' Skulduggery | , , , , | 2 Comments