Pro-Harper Rally In Toronto?

This reminds me of media coverage of pro-life events I've attended. One such event drew 1500 people in Regina, with virtually no coverage. Other, more 'popular' causes with downwards of 2 dozen attendees get rave reviews in the MSM.

I saw something similar in Calgary, on Saturday, with about ~30 Chinese around City Hall. Still didn't see/hear about coverage.

Shane O. :

To the MSM the 'pro life' cause is similar to the ancient disease leprosy.

One is held out to public derision, and the MSM/left lib screechers hurl delightful epitaphs such as "woman hater" etc.

The favorite of the left-lib in respect of PM Stephen Harper is "Harpercrits" etc.

In short, if one does not hold to or countenence an orthodox secular viewpoint one is considered according to left lib metrics, anathema; one is to be solemnly condemned.

When PM Stephen Harper proposed something as innocuous as a democratically elected Senate in a democracy, which has been suggested in government reports since 1926; the powers that be have a collective coronary.

Heavens, an elected Senate in a democracy!!

Why that is revolutionary!!

Well if having an election is revolutionary in a democracy; then I am all for it.

As G K Chesterton once noted:

"He is a very shallow critic who cannot see an eternal rebel in the heart of a conservative." - Varied Types

Good on the Chinese/Canadians!

Of course the MSM won't report it though.
This is the Utopian Centre of the Universe.
Jack & Olivia's multicultural shit covered homeless shelter.
It's a whole 4 blocks from the CBC mothership, 5 blocks from the Globe and Mail, and 3 blocks from City TV, and exMSM reporter (gerk aghk) newly turned socialist freak city councillor Adam Vaughn's new digs.
Remember Steve's press wrangler pleading with "Adam, Adam come on Adam" when Adam got in a huff during the last election after his standard MSM moronic hit and run ambush fizzled on the soon to be Priminister.

You can still walk around this crack/meth smash and grab paradise and see four year old Jack Layton and Olivia Chow posters that hang in perpetuity.

Side note
Two burned out cars still sit 100 yards from that corner that were torched Saturday night.

OT - but most suitable of recent threads.

Congrats to The Dominion Institute, and all blogerrs who directed us to the petition, as the State Funeral for the last WWI survivor has received unanimous consent (on an NDP motion no less).

Like in the thread above this one I will not be uncharitable to Jack on this one. Late to the party but they get it right (no pun intended) for a change.

The power of the blogosphere never cease to impress. Congrats again.

Ken

Does the media wonder why The Prime Minister deals with the media the way he does.

It seems that the pro-Harper rally, if it took place, was on Sunday, Nov 19th. That's the day of the Santa Claus Parade - a six km parade, an event that almost closes the downtown area, draws hundreds of thousands - and nothing else is noticed that day - other than Ho Ho Ho.

pro-harper rally cover-up?

More "media conspiracies 'r us" I see.

As a former Torontonian and frequenter of the Dundas and Spadina area, I can tell you that you cannot get several hundred (let alone thousand) people on all 4 corners at the same time, let alone the southwest corner. In fact, the SW corner is fairly tall and modern office building, surrounded by side walks about 7 feet wide. NO way that "hundreds" could go there with banners, without blocking traffic in one of the city's major intersections. And THAT would have made CITY...it didn't. In fact, yu can't find any pictures - personal or otherwise - even in a google search.

I won't call wascally wabbit a liar even though there is plenty of circumstantial evidence to suggest that is the case. No, I'll say that this person perhaps saw a few - maybe 10 or 20 - protesting and everyone else SHOPPING (since that is what you do on Spadina on a Saturday).

Yup, the Fiberals are infinitely more newsworthy. Witness the policy resolutions they'll be discussing at the leadership convention next weekend.

Resolution No. 45: WHEREAS the current law discriminates against unmarried same-sex couples by not permitting unmarried persons under 18 to legally engage in consensual anal intercourse;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Federal Government of Canada to bring the age of consent for anal intercourse in equal pairing with other forms of sexual activity.

That's a few blocks from my apartment. There's zero chance that many people were there. It is, however, a site frequented by a knot of Falun Gong protestors - perhaps some connection?

I heard a very fast snippit of this on the weekend. A group of Chinese Canadians gathered to show support for the strong stance Harper took with the Chinese government over human rights issues.

I believe it was on CTV, since that is my usual Canadian news television channel, but I definitely saw something brief about this mentioned on tv.

Interesting editorial in TOronto Sun yesterday about why eastern Liberals are pushing Bob Rae. Lots to do with China and eastern elite of which he and his brother are members. Lousy at linking these things, but the Toronto Sun is applauding John Ibbitson's column (yes, Ibbitson) in the Sop & Wail about how oil will shift power from eastern Canada to the west and pretty much neuter this powerful group of Liberals. Worth a read. Wish I'd read Ibbitson's column. Don't subscribe to that dreadful newspaper, but if anybody read it and can add anything, please do. Power in the west is a good thing for Tory fortunes.

It was a very good column by Ibbitson. I don't subscribe to the paper edition of Globe and Mail and refuse to sign up for their free online edition. BUT - you can get the locked columns by going to Google, then News, then, type in the columnist's name.

Ibbitson was essentially saying that Canada has developed, over the Liberal years, an enormous Liberal bureaucracy, based in Ottawa-Montreal-Toronto who live in a self-made bubble, isolate from what is really going on in Canada. They don't realize or refuse to acknowledge that the nature of Canada has shifted - to the West. He has some marvellous statements in his column.

He writes that, "Money and power and people are flowing steadily westward and the decline of deference continues to drain power out of the common rooms and into the commons.

One day, not that far off, the West will choose the song, and the masses will elect whom they please, and the elite of the liberal consensus will find themselves talking only to each other, and being listened to by no one at all."

Now - isn't that true - and the Liberals with their martinis in the House of Commons and the Montreal-Toronto boardrooms don't realize that reality is moving out of the Common Room and into the commons; namely, into the hands of the people. Of the West.

As much as I'm a fan of Alberta, don't 3 of 4 of the western provinces regularly elect the provincial NDP?

How does this improve matters?

Forgive me for intruding, but Global Calgary news last night made a passing mention of pro-Harper demonstrators appearing "with impeccable timing".

Funny, every news outlet in the country knew that the anti-war protests last month were entirely organized and run by the NDP, and none of them mentioned it. They all portrayed it as bona fide grassroots protest. Whereas this one is being written off as staged, even without any knowledge of who the protestors actually are.

I live right by Chinatown in Toronto. There was no "pro-Harper rally" that weekend. As QSW (Nov 21, 02:22 PM) notes, there is a small group of Falun Gong supporters (4, maybe 5) who more or less staked out the SE corner of Spadina/Dundas on a daily basis. Their semi-permanent protest includes several large banners documenting China's persecution of Falun Gong followers. It's extremely likely that it was they, rather than a "crowd of thousands", who made the show of gratitude to PM Harper.

You may wish to rethink this whole MSM conspiracy thesis of yours, which does nothing but sap your credibility. To be sure, all media outlets have their editorial biases (compare the G&M to the National Post), but there is no vast, organized left-wing conspiracy.

A - there may not be any top-down and vast organized left wing agenda, that's irrelevant.

What there most certainly is - is the real situation that the greatest majority, about 90%, of the MSM hold left-wing views and express them constantly - ignoring that their first duty is to provide 'the facts and only the facts'. Instead, we are provided, endlessly, with their leftist opinions, with their selective choice of data, with their leftist interpretations of the world, with their constant criticism and attacks against Harper. Endless, endless, endless.

Now, the MSM are in full steam, declaring in daily interviews and special hour long 'documantaries' (hah!) that Harper is destroying the ecological nature of the world because he rejects Kyoto.

And they insist that he is destroying the very basis of the Canadian economy, because he brought up the question of human rights with China. Now, China is rejecting Canada, these sophists say, and 'Canadian industrialists' are 'extremely worried'. Sure. They are not. Canada's exports are to the USA, 85% of them. We export very little to China, but, we do import from them - about 5%. They obviously won't stop sending the cheap clothes to us. But - the MSM insist that his bringing up human rights was wrong; they are now declaring that he just did it 'for the ethnic vote'. That's a Liberal tactic; maybe, just maybe, we have a PM with principles. The MSM, of course, don't know what that word means.

Strange - these same MSM never seemed to mind when the Liberal gov't relentlessly attacked the US - despite the fact that it purchases 85% of Canada's exports. Now, that really would put a blip on our economy if the US said - F*k you; we're tired of your endless attacks against us; go live in the real world on your own; compete with other countries in the economy; why should we buy your goods.
But- never, ever, did the MSM bleep a word about the Liberal attacks against the US.
But- bringing up human rights in China, and their retention of a Canadian citizen - by the Conservatives - ahh, that's different. That's not allowed.

The MSM is deeply, thoroughly a Liberal tool; it may not be run by the Liberals/NDP - but, almost all members of the MSM are brainwashed Liberal/NDP followers.

I never heard a word about the falon gong parade in vancouver last weekend either. Must of been 200 or so in the parade, when they went by me I stood and saluted there bravery and belief in FREEDOM. To bad we dont let more like them into the country instead of the undercover terrorists that seem to be everywhere.

It's not an organized conspiracy, but it makes sense. News organization which show sympathy for anything even resembling a "right wing perspective" automatically get labeled as "government propaganda", or "blible-thumping trash rags". Take a walk through downtown Toronto and you'll see pretty much every single Toronto Sun box covered in graffiti - "lies", "propaganda", "trash", etc. Meanwhile Toronto Star boxes are spotless. Never mind the fact that the Sun has constantly been proven to be the less biased of the two - it's a matter of historical record that left wing organizations tend to be much more vocal (and disrespectful) in their protests of their opposition. Newspapers and news networks which want to avoid getting trashed by the ultra-liberals are therefore required to refrain from showing the least bit of sympathy to anything that may be perceived as a "right-wing cause". It's not an organized conspiracy, it's a simple case of the media taking the easy road. Much like when they refused to publish the Mohamed cartoons.

Regarding the bias of the MSM...

View the possibility of MSM bias as you would religion...those who believe in God, see God at work in everything and see the proof of God's existence in every blade of grass. Those who do not believe in God, don't see anything of the sort and see the believers as fools.

Those who believe in an unbiased MSM, see an unbiased reporting of facts in every story and mourn the terrible things that Jews and Christians and Conservatives are doing in the world. Those who don't believe in an unbiased MSM, see the bias that MSM spews in every article and sees the "believers" as fools (or worse yet, accomplices).

So, lefties such as A see the MSM as unbiased because that is what they want to believe...aided and abetted by the fact that they hold the same beliefs as the MSM...it fits their paradigm. They are colour blind...tone deaf. They cannot perceive the bias. They cannot see the forest for the trees.

A and other lefties need to experience a paradigm-shift...they need to think outside the box...look at the issue critically, objectively and dispassionately. But, alas, that is not what lefties do...they just "feel".

Another thing to ponder, A...count the number of times in any given newscast that the MSM refer to "right-wing" this or "extreme right-wing" that and compare that number to the number of times you hear them mention "left-wing" or "extreme left wing". I can't remember EVER hearing the term "left-wing" used.

Doesn't that give you any pause?

Stephane Dion goes to an international Kyoto meeting and Canada is labelled as "dinosaur"...nothing in the news. Rona Ambrose goes to an international Kyoto meeting and Canada is labelled as "dinosaur"...and the media spews invective wildly (see Heather Mallick's latest CBC News posting for an example). Doesn't that seem odd?

The bias is there if you look at it objectively.

I'm just a guy who likes to keep up with world events in as many mediums as possible. I'm not a "kool aid drinker" and am not politically "involved". I am more amenable to conservative/libertarian policy, but that should not preclude my ability to be impartial, especially in such a *diverse* and *inclusive* nation such as Canada.

Who cares? People like A and Tony that I see post from time to time should care. If they think there is no discernable bias becoming apparent to the masses, well, it's their funeral. I see very little balance in today's dead tree media, and this means they see a fraction of my disposable $$. Shrug it off at your own peril.

Hey this is Jason from True North. It appears that the site of this rally is frequented by human rights protestors, so it is likely that some sort of rally did happen. Whether there were only a few dozen people, or hundreds, remains to be seen.

I am an average Canadian who is fed up with the Liberals and their BS. It is destroying our great country! I see no hope for this country should the CPC not be elected to a Majority next election. We've seen the fear mongering tactics of the left and it is a smoke screen to hide their ineptness. The people of this country need to wake up!

Hassle writes: View the possibility of MSM bias as you would religion...those who believe in God, see God at work in everything and see the proof of God's existence in every blade of grass. Those who do not believe in God, don't see anything of the sort and see the believers as fools.

You know, by your exact same logic, it could be argued that (paraphrasing), "Those who believe in a biased MSM see a biased reporting of facts in every story and mourn the terrible things that Palestinians and Muslims and Liberals are doing in the world. Those who don't believe in a biased MSM, see the stark objectivity with which the MSM reports every article and sees the "believers" as fools"?

Now, I'm not saying the MSM is objective. Far from it--I'm quite aware (and acknowledged as much in my earlier comment) that all news outlets have their particular ideological biases/slants/lenses/etc. This is extremely old news. I just wanted to point out here that your "argument", while framed in the form of a clever analogy ("view the possibility of MSM bias as you would religion"), is in fact inherently meaningless, since it serves no purpose except to reinforce one's own preconceptions.

Alex: News organization which show sympathy for anything even resembling a "right wing perspective" automatically get labeled as "government propaganda", or "blible-thumping trash rags". Take a walk through downtown Toronto and you'll see pretty much every single Toronto Sun box covered in graffiti - "lies", "propaganda", "trash", etc. Meanwhile Toronto Star boxes are spotless.

Assuming that such vandalization is in fact as selective as you claim, it is more a reflection of the general public's opinion of those two newspapers than it is the content of those publications themselves. Insofar as the Sun favours the 'right-wing' and the Star favours the 'left-wing', the fact that people vandalize the Sun but not the Star indicates that the vandalizers are also 'left-wing.' It hardly proves that one paper is more or less biased than the other.

Incidentally, in my view, the Sun completely discredits itself as a legitimate source of news for at least three reasons: (1) its insistence on juvenile puns for its frontpage headlines; (2) the fact that it still has those cheesy "sunshine girl" and "sunshine boy" features; and (3) its articles are short to the point of having no informative value.

Never mind the fact that the Sun has constantly been proven to be the less biased of the two - it's a matter of historical record that left wing organizations tend to be much more vocal (and disrespectful) in their protests of their opposition.

"Matter of historical record"?! Really?! Have you any objective proof for this otherwise ridiculously sweeping claim? In addition to rethinking the MSM conspiracy thesis, I would recommend SDA fans to rethink their frequent use of categorical (over)generalizations about the 'left.' Again, it only undermines your credibility that you can't come up with anything more specific than "the left sucks."

Incidentally, what do people think of the National Post?

Left-wing media? That's a load of crap. Even though the term "left-wing" encompasses a broad spectrum of ideological thinking, in Canada the term left-wing normally implies socialism, communism, or at the very least, pro-labour. None of the MSM, including the CBC, support this kind of thinking. If the MSM were truly left-wing, we would be constantly bombarded with messages denouncing capitalism and free markets and promoting organized labour, etc. In reality, the opposite is occuring. For example,when is the last time anything positive has been written or broadcast in the MSM about organized labour? Even the CBC (constantly being accused of left-wing bias on SDA) showed their true colours two summers ago when they locked out their employees. That's showing support for the working people, eh? Hardly the action of a left-wing organization. That's why the term "MSM" is in fact interchangeable with the term "corporate media."

On the other hand, I won't argue that the MSM is mostly Liberal party biased, probably for a variety of reasons. BUT, the Liberal party is a party that supports big business, much like the Conservatives. The only difference is that Liberals like to stay in power so they steal ideas from the other parties if they think it will help them get elected, regardless of whether these ideas come from the left or right.

Moreover, calling a party of millionaires like Paul Martin and Belinda Stronach "left-wing" is laughable. And like Belinda Stronach, millionaire David Emerson demonstrated quite aptly how interchangeable Liberal and Conservative ideology is when he switched sides.

"it is more a reflection of the general public's opinion"

No, it's a reflection of the left's disrespect for private property and intolerance of opinions they don't agree with. You don't tend to see conservatives burning cars and smashing windows in the name of 'capitalism", or throwing pies in the faces of politicians and commentators whose views those they disagree with.

Can anyone confirm this?

Well, I was there, I walked through the crowd, I picked up the pamphlets, even got a DVD which I haven't watched yet. I would put the numbers at around four or five dozen (with the caveat that I'm terrible at guesstimating crowd sizes). As someone else pointed out, it's pretty much logistically impossible to corral hundreds or thousands of people at the corner in question, regardless of the time of day. All that being said, the lack of media attention, compared to, say, protests being attended by even smaller numbers of people but espousing double-plus-goodthink, is... well, I was going to say "a sad comment on the state of our media", but that would imply that I had any expectations of them whatsoever to begin with.

Sorry, just to clarify one point and supplement on a couple of others: the banner expressing support of Stephen Harper was definitely there; the DVD I was given was being handed out by the protestors; and it was a well-organized event - there was a mini-marching band (they were marching in place), other musical performers and a whole whack of pro-Falun Gong banners and posters, most showing photographs of the results of absolutely horrendous tortures being inflicted on people. The intersection is the site of a relatively permanent pro-Falun Gong set of activists, but this was clearly an amplified occurrence.

Living in downtown Toronto, especially downtown south of Dupont between University and Bathurst, you kind of become quite accustomed to seeing a Falun Gong protest going on somewhere of varying numbers.

There is constant protest in front of the consulate on St. George Street just south of Dupont. There is often several protestors gathered in the Grange.

That this particular time some conservative, especially some conservative like Kathy Shaidle, happen to hear or notice it and that it didn't get picked up in the media, is not your best example of this Vast Left Wing Media Conspiracy (TM) conservatives like to go on and on (and on and on and on and on) about.

Without stepping into a very old and tired and boring and thoroughly discredited conspiracy theory (not as bad as the 9/11 was Bush's fault or there was no moon landing, but still) of The Vast Left Wing Media Conspiracy (TM), this has got to be one of the worst examples of it. Right up there with the Steyn whine about not having enough of his books on sale quickly enough by Chapters (despite the fact that you can't escape Coulter or O'Reilly or Hannity whenever they come out with their latest).

You don't tend to see right-wingers protesting much because, generally speaking, these are the people who control the reins of power and are usually better off financially. For example, when social programs are cut, right-wingers are not the ones hurt by this. They are the ones doing the cutting. However, people who feel powerless will eventually fight back.

I'm not sure, Iberia. It appears to me that throughout history those at the top of the Communist and Socialist heaps resemble today's Liberals, preaching help for the little guy, but lining their pockets in the process. As a theory, Communism probably is a good idea - it's just that everywhere it's been tried it hasn't worked.

The other reason you don't see 'right-wingers' protesting much is because our protests aren't reported! (see my first comment) You'd never know that thousands of Canadians protest abortion every year, I think something like 6000 alone on Parliament Hill in one protest this past year. But you'd hear about it in a second if half a dozen people protested lack of abortion access.

The other reason you might not hear much of our protests is because we tend to consistently follow the law, and act all peaceable-like in the process of them. No violence on our part leads to low newsworthiness.

Shane (re 12:06):
I'm not advocating Communism. And they ALL preach help for the little guy...
BTW, I think that the meaning of "right" and "left" under Communism are opposite to our definitions.

(re 12:09):
No violence, except when abortionists get killed by anti-abortionists.

The media is what it is -- incompetent.

I hope this shows the blogosphere that Toronto isn't the purely leftist haven it's sometimes made out to be.

lberia, I agree with your left/right definition problem.

IMO, I, and I think alot of others on sda, should be more clear about "Left". I would certainly NOT include the working man, for they truly are the ones who put a roof over our heads. Even union activists sometimes have a beef.

By the Left, I would include most of the Basket Weavers, Most University Profs, Enviro-activists, most so called Journalists, Terrorists, some public School Teachers, All UNers, Follywood..

I also think there is a misconception of who is on the "Right". IMO, the problem-rightists are the rub-your-nose-in-it and the beggar-your-neighbour types. I would take a "Raga-muffin" help-you-out type of guy over a "Rich Bitch" any day.

Yes, I think lberia is correct. We shouldn't generalize.

"By the Left, I would include most of the Basket Weavers, Most University Profs, Enviro-activists, most so called Journalists, Terrorists, some public School Teachers, All UNers, Follywood."

I think the most accurate label for this group would be "social progressives."

"social progressives" ?? I know it was meant in jest.

Terrorist are progressively terrorising and killing us. -- Profs teach to strive for Utopianism. -- Some Public School curic rewards failure. -- UNers promote Socialism as a Pyramid Scheme. -- Basket Weavers are against value add. -- The activists in Enviro-activists are against Humankind. -- Journalists believe they are the story.

Progressives ??

I didn't make up the term: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_progressivism

"Especially Kathy Shaidle".

Bugging Ted is fun. He's silly.

A: I realize that my analogy cuts both ways. That was main point I was making. You see what you want to see when it comes to the issue of media bias.

If you think like a Liberal or New Democrat, then the news you see, read or hear makes sense to you and reinforces your perspective. You don't dig any deeper or question they're objectivity...it makes sense to you, so why question it?

If you think like a Conservative, then everything you see, read or hear DOESN'T make sense to you and reinforces your perspective that the media is biased.

Ask most "lefties" whether they think the media is biased and they'll say no...just look at the responses here at SDA. No...no left bias...but the Sun chain is right-biased! To your credit, you at least acknowledge the bias but suggest that it is balanced (I don't think so...one, maybe two newspapers or newspaper chains are right-leaning while every other media outlet...radio, TV and print...is seemingly left-leaning...not what I call balance).

The biggest issue is this...THERE SHOULD BE NO BIAS AT ALL! They should REPORT THE FACTS, and NOTHING BUT THE FACTS. If they want to editorialize, then trumpet the editorializing as an "editorial". The trouble is...they don't! This is unacceptable.

Poll journalists as to their political leanings and I am absolutely convinced that the vast majority would be Liberal or NDP (the US journalists were shown to be overwhelmingly Democrats when something similar was done), whereas the population in general is split. With that slanted perspective, they will write whatever makes sense to them...and that will almost automatically be Liberal or NDP focussed.

The MSM is guilty of bias and must be forced to change their ways. Surely we can agree on that.

Kate: No, it's a reflection of the left's disrespect for private property and intolerance of opinions they don't agree with. You don't tend to see conservatives burning cars and smashing windows in the name of 'capitalism", or throwing pies in the faces of politicians and commentators whose views those they disagree with.

Since we're overgeneralizing, I suppose I could reply by saying that conservatives tend not to "burn cars, smash windows..." because they're too busy disrespecting private property through corporate white-collar crimes a la Conrad Black, Enron, Tyco, WorldCom, Parmalat, etc etc etc. Or at the global level, pilfering developing world economies through SAPs, which even the IMF/World Bank is now (slowly) coming to realize were an inconceived idea. All in the name of "capitalism," of course.

Or maybe we ought not to debate using blanket statements about as diverse groups as the "left" or the "right." Maybe doing so only makes our arguments look unsophisticated and without merit.

Hassle: The MSM is guilty of bias and must be forced to change their ways. Surely we can agree on that.

I can absolutely agree with that, as long as we can agree that this bias swings both ways. And if we can agree on that, then I think trying to argue who's more biased which way becomes a bit of a fool's errand. Who cares? If all the news outlets are guilty, then the problem is systemic, and the blame is shared by all. Claiming one side is more biased than the other is yet more petty one-upmanship, a pissing match for the sole sake of pride and ego.

Now, a little closer to home (or SDA, anyway), can we also agree that making blanket generalizations about either the "left" or the "right" is also problematic? Ditto for ad hominem attacks and knee-jerk reactions? Which thread was it where you were so quickly (and incorrectly) labelled a 'socialist' simply because you posted something that didn't tow the company line? These sorts of cheapshots--even when it's friendly fire--are never called for. More decorum, less hyperbole. More substance, less spite. Surely we can agree on that.

A: I can agree with your sentiments to a point. Elements of the media are biased to both the left and to the right, agreed...but my contention is that the split is in the order of 80% to 20% (just wild speculation). That's not so easy to just call even.

And yes, the right versus left thing is unfair generalizations...but if we were to try to be completely fair in our comments, the comments would be neutered, meaningless babble. Better to make MOUNTAINS out of the molehills of dispute so we can clearly get our point across. We should all know that we're dealing with comments that are full of wild exagerations and generalizations just to make a point.

So, I appreciate your sentiment and would practice this in face-to-face discussions...but in the world of blog commentary, go big or go home!

Kate can speak for herself, but I would thing sda is more of a Media Audit site. Not an extreemist views site.

"One day, not that far off, the West will choose the song, and the masses will elect whom they please, and the elite of the liberal consensus will find themselves talking only to each other, and being listened to by no one at all.

reality is moving out of the Common Room and into the commons; namely, into the hands of the people. Of the West."

Power is certainly shifting West. But it isn't shifting from the elites to the masses. It is shifting from the Toronto-Montreal elites to the Vancouver-Calgary ones. Stephen Harper rose to the top by courting the favours of the Alberta oil industry. David Emerson was considered an asset because of his connections in the boardrooms of Vancouver. The "masses" are just there to be manipulated into supporting the egos and ambitions of powerful women and men.