Alexander Panetta

Apparently CTV is wanting to appear openly as CTV Tass news agency.

CTV tass is far more concerned about some sly remarks in parliament- Liberals saying dog and Mckay gesturing than whether Paris Stronach crosses the floor or pump and dumps someone elses marriage.

Looks like "The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" meme has been exported across the 49th parallel to Canada. I don't know which "legally blonde" politico would have brought it up here, but anyone who has been sighted with Bill Clinton in the last 10 years is certainly a candidate.

What annoys the pressitutes and politicians who are interested only in infotainment of the massed sheeple is that the blogs exist and thrive outside of their closely controled and tightly spun machinations.

Keep blogging Kate.

Some critics are saying that the media in Canada (and that other "nation" within it) is a complete waste of time.

>>Case in point, last Friday. Before shutting down for the evening, someone in our office opened up www.bloggingtories.ca and was
amazed that four or five consecutive posts on Belinda Stronach carried the same message: She's worse than a dog.

Case in point - last Friday, before shutting down for the weekend, we turned on our radios and televisions and were amazed that four or five consecutive reports on Belinda Stronach carried the same message: Peter MacKay is a liar.

Kate, you are the best.

In my desire to replicate his comment, I made a factual error.

Bloggers don't generally "shut down" for the weekend.

Good on ya' Kate. The condesending arrogance that drips from the CTV drivel is especially irritating.
Those that think they know everything, really piss off those of us that actually do.

Pat

Interesting exchange. Yes the MSM work off of prepackaged stories and talking points...this is why they end up spouting a common line.

Bloggers generally work off their own thoughts. As for the Stronach thing there really were only 4 positions

1) Belinda is "dog", Mackay is innocent
2) Belinda was wronged, Mackay a liar
3) Belinda is a dog, Mackay is a liar (pox on both houses)
4) Belinda was wronged and Mackay is innocent

#4 really isnt realistic and the #3 doesnt make sense at the beginning of the story, its what it turns into.

So really there are only two logical positions to take on the story. Given the ideological edge of Blogging Tory websites then it is hardly surprising that they would 90% of the time go to position #1.

It would not surprise me if you reviewed the Liberal and Dipper sites if they. 90% of the time, chose position #2....without co-ordination.

The question is why did the MSM choose position #2 and not position #3? or no position at all.

I don't know what the big hub-bub is?

Peter MacKay is a liar, period, but not only that he's the biggest and worst liar on Parliment Hill.

The Tory blogosphere is laughable in that it reminds me of Russian espionage agents in America during the cold war. These commies spent all their time and energy on covert operations when all they had to do was walk in a library, open a book and get the information they were looking for...that simple.

Everybody knows that the MSM is in bed with the Liberals. What really cracks me up is that the CPC want to be in that bed too but are miffed because their crybaby antics don't get them there. A classic case of misplaced jealousy.

Wah wah wah.

"I don't know what the big hub-bub is?"

Judging by your comment, it's because you didn't bother to read the link provided.

email records are a deadly weapon.

the old timers 'boys club' faction havent clued in yet.

I am about to confront a major organization in my city with email based evidence that someone in a high position is falsifying their version of events. if it works I will fill you all in with the details. it will become a municipal election issue if I can find the next public debate with the dude involved in the discrepancy.

Spector just called Belinda a bitch on radio in Vancouver--more than once. Good for him.

as far as ms stronach, frankly I dont find her attractive. she is in my estimation middle of the road in the looks dept. I find oriental women vastly more alluring than n american blonde bimbos. also a lot of russian and eastern european ladies I have met in my days are quite stunning and their smarts are just icing on the cake.

stronach aint all that clever or good looking. so whats the fuss?

Colin,

Wow, unusally strong language from NS....what was the context?

Blogging Tories makes a convenient "conservatives in captivity" petting zoo for the lefties in MSM.

Kate,

I did read the link before posting but chose not to join in on the bruhaha.

Flushing out MSM/Liberal nepotism is a noble undertaking but at the end of the day what's really accomplished...more bitterness in the anti-Liberal mind.

It's all too obvious that a conspiracy is involved. I write CP to complain about the story. Alex Panetta writes me back. I forward the email to one of my co-conspirators. She posts the email and blogs about it. Kate picks up the story and the blogosphere is once again on fire. More stories likely to come. Coincidence? I think not.

Furthermore...

What you anti-Liberal bloggers don't realize is that people like Belinda feed off of adversity and criticism...rather than go away, their resolve only gets stronger.

So what if she's a bitch-dog. Getting your rocks off by thinking she's squirming is very telling of your own insecurity and jealousy.

If you really want to deliver the death blow then drop any mention of her.

"3) Belinda is a dog, Mackay is a liar"

I'm ashamed at how many conservatives are glossing over the fact McKay has been lying about the comments he made. I've yet to read a blog that's taken him to task for lying about the hillarious comment he made.

Adune,

That's because dim-witted conservatives have yet to catch on to the childishness...like you have.

Adune, DBrown:

Did McKay actually say the word - dog?

That would be Mackay.

Zip:

"pressitutes"

Heh.

Stephen: sorry, just turned it on. Phones went crazy with for and against. Bill Good asked Spector if he expected to be on the front page of the G&M tomorrow--he didn't think so. He said that "bitch" was in his vocabu
lary. Phone-ins were for both sides. It happened towards the end of the show. Cheers, Colin

I think Alexander mistook the BloggingTories having the same relationship with the Conservative Party that the MSM has with the Liberal Party.

1. Liberal Party press release with talking points
2. Exact parroting of press release by CTV, CP, CBC, etc.
3. Continuation of parroting for x days.
4. On to next Liberal press release.

Chalk it up to a simple misuderstanding of the truth.

David Brown,

why bother even bother coming to SDA. It's clear you're going to have the polar opposite view of what 's posted here.

Suggestion, stick to sites where you can unpucker yourself amongst friends. try http://lalaland.com

I actually have always found alexander panetta to be fair and balanced in his reporting, even when other cp stories or other reporters have not. I hold him in high respect compared to other journalists.

I always thought that a huge opportunity was lost for a complete political unification of the United States and Canada.

Bill was definitely having, let's call it, an "intimate relationship" with Belinda.

Canada was discussing the possibility of marriage for gays, and some said this would lead to legitimizing polygamy.

Well, I figured if Bill then wanted to marry Belinda in Canada, and of course he would still be married to Hillary in the United States, it would sort of make us politically all under one authority, so to speak.

Incidentally, Belinda is not the only Canadian who has assisted America in a time of crisis like she did in a number of 4-star hotels with Bill.

Babs Streisand was climbing up Bill's leg, and Hillary drug her off of him and hooked her up with Peter Jennings, who was free at the time.

So there has been quite a bit of raprochement at the highest levels between our two countries.

ADune & DBrown, perhaps you should check out a few more BT'ers if you're so convinced that we're all mindless zombies. In the meantime, some of the readers may appreciate you pointing out a left-leaning blog that takes the opposition parties to task for wasting so many tax dollars on something so trivial.

This is even more childish now. Look the speaker said he didnt hear it. Honestly, if there was any respect for tradition then the members opposite would have left it at that.

Members are considered Honorable, meaning they are taken at their word AND the Speaker is GOD of the House.

The speaker should have reinforced his authority by calling the house leaders in, mostly because it is not an issue that should be taking up house time.

The minister denies it, no member of the staff heard it, the speaker didnt hear it and it isnt in Hansard. MacKay, like it or not is correct....but because nobody knows or respects the rules of the house, or the traditions then we end up with this silly discussion.

But of course the MSM could have investigated that as well rather than quoting the Liberal line....

As for the CPC wanting to be in bed with the MSM, I dont think there is any evidence to support that statement.

Adune: Had you checked, you would have found blanket condemnation of McKay's comments. An example (from the blog I contribute to):

"Don't get me wrong here; I'm not defending what MacKay said in the house. Regardless of what mean-spirited comments were directed towards him about a very personal (and very public) moment in his life, MacKay could have, and should have taken the high road and kept his mouth shut. As a government minister, he is obliged to remain above petty banter. His comments were both immature and inappropriate. I offer this criticism as someone who has had the opportunity to talk with Mr. MacKay on several occasions and (usually) thinks very highly of him, so I do not make it lightly. MacKay should offer a simple, straightforward and brief apology in the house and let the furor die off on its own, as it should."

Sorry to use bandwidth, kate, but i need to credit that post;
http://www.uncommontruths.blogspot.com

Kitchener Conservative,

You hit the nail bang on the head.

The exact reason why I post at SDA rather than at some pro-Liberal blog.

Witnessing the stupidity and absurdity of conservative thinking is as entertaining as it gets.

May I suggest that you pull your head out of your arse, come up for some air and smell the roses.

Did fuddle-duddle ever get this much press and for this long? Let's move on folks, nothing new to see here. Nobody was killed, maimed or greously injured (besides egos) so let it go. That goes for Brownie who critcises people for commenting on it but is guilty like the rest.

Now if someone up there in the house was writing books containing pron then... oh, that would be the Lieberal Red Book, right?

(typo inserted to fool Kate's spam blaster)

David,

"Witnessing the stupidity and absurdity..." you must talking about hitting the reload button and your comments appear.

Look the topic is about CP slandering the BloggingTories and then trying to indignitely explain it away that we're just mouth pieces for the Conservative Government. It's obviously not important to you, but to alot of us, it is.

So surprise, surprise imagine us talking it.

As for your "May I suggest that you pull your head out of your arse, come up for some air and smell the roses.". That kind of comment reminds me of a song my kids Dora the Explorer show. Here goes "I'm the grumpy old Troll who lives under the bridge....", all Trolls kindly go elsewhere.

You got a nasty, patronizing response, Kate; from a self proclaimed 'elitist, entitled' fool. Good manners and proper respect for others are Canadian values from the past - the Liberano$ (after the disgusting performance of the PET (on many occasions)followed by the same from the Cretian, and Martin have lost all vestiges of good manners. They scorn good manners. The msm are puppets of their masters.
Just as all sane people must stop defending the 'right' to freedom of religion, in this country, when evil immigrants preach death to their hosts; all sane people who know the agenda of the Dipper/Liberano/Bloc outfits must stop being cordial to the msm spewers of lies, hate, and envy.
When my second youngest brother went fighting forest fires at the age of 16, he came home dirty, tired and richer - and with amazement he announced to our Mom and myself that 'You fight fires with fire'.
Bloggers must never assume that the msm will ever play fair. Honorable people still want to believe that the old unwritten rule: fair play is the only way to win/lose, is still in effect. The msm is the creature of the Dipper/Liberano organization; nothing more, nothing less.

No, runny brown stuff, you post here because you've finished your housework and have a few moments before the wife gets home.

Good one dean!

I am actually somewhat amused that the MSM who just a short while back considered blogs and bloggers as a passing fancy and not made from the same stuff as real journalists are now crying that bloggers, as in the BT are a new and insidious tool of the government. Priceless, eh.

I detested trudeau from the get go. I saw right through trudeaumania for what it was.

I hold maximium contempt for this fascist supporter and more than ever. he being a rotting carcass at this time is immaterial, the damage he inflicted on this once great nation still exists.

"I'm not into taking malicious potshots." -- A. Panetta

You mean, as in when you start a "news" article with: "Conservatives are not only supporting Peter MacKay -- a handful of them on the internet are going even further in comparing Belinda Stronach to a dog." (ital. mine)

It's either a malicious potshot at "them" (Conservatives) or the blithe, un-self-concious expression of someone so comfortably ensconced in a milieu ("us") within which Conservatives are "them" that such tribe-centric wording has become second nature.

For those who don't see the potshot, or who think I'm trying overstating the value of the innocuous pronoun "them", let me put a fine point on it: Would Panetta, basing a story on comments from Lib-friendly blogs, begin with "Liberals are not only supporting Ignatieff's 'war crime' comment -- a handful of them are going even further in comparing Israel to Nazi Germany"?

I know the level of thought-crime is worse in my example, but that's not the point; the point is that the nasty or un-pc comments of a few Liberals would never be described as at the start of a story as "Liberals"; that would obviously be a gratuitous potshot at millions of people that wouldn't show up on CTV's website.

If the MSM ever wants to understand why it's rapidly losing credibility, Panetta's piece is an object lesson. You have a blatantly partisan piece, passive-aggressively unaccountable in it's language, hiding behind a veil of objectivity, and pretending to be fact-based journalism.

What drives the piece out of bounds into the realm of the spectacular, though, is the sheer hypocrisy. Panetta actually has the gall to portray the very thing that gives the blogosphere far more credibility than, oh, say, CP/CTV -- its complete openness and accountability regarding partisan affiliations -- as being something suspicious, or threatening, or curious, and worthy of investigation.

Oh, and a threat to the disabled. Seriously. Read the end of the "news" piece.

For certain members of the MSM -- Boagsie, anyone? -- the concealment of political affiliations provides a glorious opportunity to do sterling, unfettered PR work coast-to-coast on behalf of the embedded ruling tribe. The real kicker is that such concealment is a professional requirement. Is the bonus light on, or what?

"Do you mind if I store your address, and contact you if I ever plant to write again about the Blogging Tories...?"

Um, do you mind if we don't pretend along with you?

Amen

Stephen at October 30, 2006 03:35 PM

Right you are Stephen. I would only add that polite company generally ignores the passing of things brown.

Onward to the real business of state.

Working towards a Conservative majority = TG

It's obvious who didn't read the full post Kate has made--or who it is that has serious processing problems.

This thread has nothing to do with Belinda or Peter or dogs. It's about how dim Alexander Panetta is when it comes to how the blogosphere works and, much more serious, how he has misrepresented the connection between the Blogging Tories and the CPC government of Canada.

His answers to both Kathy and Kate are flip and condescending and, like Kate, I think he should retract his erroneous comments about the BTs and the CPC.

I'm not thinking it's going to happen. But it should.

EBD,

That was a great comment.

Like, almost seperate post worth (hint Kate), particularily these lines:

"If the MSM ever wants to understand why it's rapidly losing credibility, Panetta's piece is an object lesson. You have a blatantly partisan piece, passive-aggressively unaccountable in it's language, hiding behind a veil of objectivity, and pretending to be fact-based journalism.

What drives the piece out of bounds into the realm of the spectacular, though, is the sheer hypocrisy. Panetta actually has the gall to portray the very thing that gives the blogosphere far more credibility than, oh, say, CP/CTV -- its complete openness and accountability regarding partisan affiliations -- as being something suspicious, or threatening, or curious, and worthy of investigation."

Not to demean anybody's wit but it's not like equating a dog and loyalty or a dog and bitch is a really novel concept.

Why it would be suspicious that any two or three, ten or a thousand people might jump to the same comparison at around the same time (it was, thanks to the MSN the major news story of the minute/hour/day/week) is beyond me. I mean it wasn't like an, "OMG how clever" moment.

Clearly some in the media felt it was too clever by half and therefore could only have come from the PMO's office talking points.

I suppose that might be considered a sign of respect for the PMO but what does it say about the opinion they hold of the rest of us.

Bah, BT conspiracy theories are yesterday's bagels.

Everybody knows Kathy Shaidle gets her talking points straight from Conrad Black. I'll bet she makes him look "positively wet", heheheh.

Alexander Panetta....he seems just a bit smug to me.
Note that while he suggests that if he had Known more about Kathy's role he would have acted differently.
Well I'd say that if he had bothered to ask he might have known.
He also goes on to comment on how he often reads and respects her work.

UHUH! If this is so then why did he write what he wrote??

Even a grumpy old troll from under a bridge can, once in awhile, speak a truth:

"people like Belinda feed off of adversity and criticism....If you really want to deliver the death blow then drop any mention of her."
Posted by: David Brown at October 30, 2006 02:37 PM

Off topic, but true.

Well, this whole thing is indeed getting far too much play in the MSM, but does anyone actually believe MacKay? The man's a blatant liar.

Nice work Kate and Kathy!

"Call me next time please,... before I make something up about you,...."

That works for liberals ?!!
Unbelievable!
I'm holding my breath waiting for Alex's retraction. :I