Fear mongering...too funny....of course shutting down the tar sands is a noble venture that the Liberals seem to have little issue stating, but scuttling Hebron????

No that wont happen, move along nothing to discuss....etc etc. Danny Millions may have to start turning his fire on someone else now, loud mouthed git.

Of course Danny made his money from exploiting a government monopoly granted to him but that is a whole other story.

Watching Danny and Dion try to figure out how not to fight about this is going to be entertaining....The cons need to raise this one again and again and again. If Dion backs down then it should shred hatever environmental credibility he has left....and Danny boy....well he cant back out of this, it is his deal.

I wonder how they picked Scott Simms for the balanced opinion... oh wait, Simms was a journalism major before he learned to read the weather. I wouldn't even consider him a weatherman since his meteorologist training consists of looking out to see if he can spot Aunt Martha's sheep. No sheep = must be foggy.

Ask an economist about the market future? Ask an industry expert? Ask Chevron? The CBC(pravada) would do this? Thank God I have learned to put my coffee down before reading SDA! Anybody want to buy some prime oil land?
Seriously. How can anybody with two brain cells to rub together believe any of the crap the CBC puts out? Heck.I don't even watch them for HNIC anymore! TSN/ESPN has much better coverage.

dion will piss in danny's cornflakes the first chance he gets, liberal or not.

CBCpravda at its best.

We will see if Danny Williams ( premier of WhineLand- the vikings knew!!!) goes on an outrage over this.

the last time he got the choice of two paychecks he wanted not the largest but both.

The CBC's got Stephane Dion's back? They ain't exactly Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. More like Gilligan and the professor. This could be entertaining; more to come, I hope.

and don't forget . . Hebron is just an MOU at this point . . there is no "deal" yet.

Still lotsa lawyer work before a contract is signed.

Ask an economist? Why would they do that? An economist might determine that the conservative mp is correct.

That would be bad for the CBC and their lib friends. This is why I stopped listening to the CBC years ago.

CBC = Perfidious, state sanctioned, taxpayer coerced, left slanted news, 24/7.
Geez Harper, cut that egregious lot loose into free market territory!
Or at the least encourage FOX news into Canada for some balance into news reporting.

Speaking of media, today's Red Star has the most assinine article imaginable (although given that Delacourt (isn't she married to a liberal?) muses about the dampening that Harper's government has had on Ottawa and how funny the place used to be. Seems Delacourt even gives Harper credit for making the liberals not funny (although given the recent reference of the liberal party adopting the Puffin as their mascot, I'd have to challenge her on that point).

Media and the liberals? Is the media, liberals? I think given the long list of ex-media types who ended up in the senate or other key positions in the federal government at the hands of past liberal governments, I'd say the proof is in the 'excrement' (even if it is buried).

Ed the Hun

The cbc sure wants Harpoon & his gang, out- don't they? (That's understandable- there are many large 'special interest' groups in this country who would feel a lot more comfortable in dealing with the best politicians that money can buy.............
The cbc is still funded by the taxpayer, (and it is still a make-work project for Glib appointees- perhaps a closer look at their budget, where it is spent, and who gets to choose what that money is spent on, is in order? (Somebody out there in SDA land must have that information.)

Kate, I worked for a decade in journalism at organizations far bigger and more prestigious than the CBC, and I can safely say that in 100 words you exercised more journalistic judgment than the 2 to 4 CBC reporters and editors who spent at least half a day writing that piece.

I don't watch the CBC not so much because of its ridiculous opinions, but because it's just so Godawful.

This is why we need to have more Conservatives out in public speaking out. Silence lets stories like this hang around and do their damage.

Why don't we have a Minister from the region ready to speak every single time this sort of nonsense starts? A simple "we are very happy for Newfoundland and Labrador that they will be able to prosper from their offshore resources - that's why the Government's approach to the environment is to remember that we need to balance the greening of Canada with economic prosperity for all Canadians".

A little birdshot over the puffins' head would be a good thing. What's more important, the CBC would be forced to carry the clip (fairness rules in the newsroom) - they might make it second, and let it stand on its own, but it would be heard. But moreover, the clip would be heard where it counts - in the region affected.

You don't think VOCM wouldn't carry that? A little of that kind of talk and 17% in the local poll is just a distant memory.

C'mon, Stephen, you are secure. Grow a pair and take the battle to the country!

So now we know why Williams would not meet with Dion publicly, he didn't like his plan but going against it publicly would help Harper.

Williams is in for a bumpy ride in more ways then one. He's supposedly a clever fella but gotta wonder about the mentality of someone who rambles on to the point where he comes off looking like a Buffoon.

-

Some fears are worth mongering.

-

I notice that not only CBC but CTV do massive editing on Citoyen Dijon's sound bites to keep the gaffes to a minimum....I have see a lot of pre edit footage of the boy and believe me he's a bigger howl than Robin Williams on crack.

"And that is why we mock you", Kate. EXACTLY !!

And that is why I watch (rarely) the CBC with caution.

The thing I find strange about Danny Chavez is that the oil and gas finds on the east coast were made in the early 1970s, and it took over 20 years to bring the product to market.

That was thanks to the Liberal federal govts, who clearly benefitted vote-wise in keeping the east coast poor.

Then Danny has the audacity to attack a Conservative PM Harper as if he is the Grinch who is destroying Newfieville?

Bizarre.

Privatize the CBC. Do it now.

Sell it to Fox news.

Unfortunately for the CBC, the only people, beside seven Liberals, who know about this piece, are bloggers at SDA. No self-respecting person takes "analysis" from CBC seriously.

Let's not forget their "reality check" segments during last fed election. Of course, only Tory promises/platform were "analyzed" with sure rebuttal from a Liberal or CBC sycophant.

Remember when everybody else, including Puffy at CTV, finally starting questioning the fluffy mantra of Paul Martin, CBC stood steadfastly by their dying icon, and went down with the ship.

Over at CBC moonbat land, when Liberals make a claim, you must prove them wrong, when Conservatives make a claim, they must prove, not only that they are right, but the Liberals/moonbats are wrong.

Could their hostility towards Tories have anything to do with their fear of a "hidden agenda" to make CBC sing for its own supper?

Just for a laugh, the Tories should that they plan to privatise CBC is re-elected. Imagine the "analysis" we would get from CBC; something like the "analysis" we got when the Liberals cut their funding in the 90s.

It is what it is. For now we have to put up with these unprofessional moonbats. What can you do but counter all their self-serving claims, then try to get someone to actually quote you.

Well done Kate. Mr. Manning's statement is accurate. I believe that the people of NFLD will choose prosperity instead of infantile dependence. NFLD has been double-crossed and robbed many times by the rest of Canada (eg. Quebec profits from NFLD hydro energy by selling power to the U.S. - that was a 'gift' that most NFLDers were not happy to give).
Mr. Williams is an excellent Premier, he has kept his province on the front burner and everyone in NFLD knows that Danny Williams will defend the Province he governs - he will not be run over by the Feds in Ottawa like other NFLD Premiers. I would say that this is a first for NFLD.
Lyin Brian was put into office by Western Canadians - did he treat us fairly?? It is all about trust; Danny Williams does not trust Dion and he is wise not to trust any Liberal, just as the West is wise not to trust any Liberano - but what Premier is staking ground for the Western provinces? There are some pretty weak Premiers out west, most of us have forgotten that Canada has a minority government federally because Prime Minister Stephen Harper has done such an excellent job of governing this country. Where will Eddie S., Campbell and Doer be if the Liberanos were to win the next election? I hope Lorno is on the way out so Brad Wall will be the person to ask about the same scenario in Sask. Sask does not need the dole - let us hope that Mr. Wall will stake out his ground and take control of his province by staking his ground and abandoning the dole in favor of taking over Sask. and DEFENDING the province he will govern by defending it against the unthinkable - Liberanos back in power - BEFORE the 'unthinkable' could happen.
Danny Williams has covered all his bases - where are the Premiers of Nova Scotia, Alberta, B.C. and Sask. and the Yukon? The Federal government is responsible for the country of Canada; provincial governments are responsible to the people of individual provinces - Premiers are NOT responsible for governing other provinces!
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is the best Prime Minister this country has ever had, Mr. Williams knows this, NOW is the time to stake ground. Sask has a choice: poverty and dole via Culvert or ...what is Mr. Wall's plan? Does Mr. Wall feel that he should opt for the dole default or is he willing to defend his province with real ammo by grabbing provincial control of resources? This should be asked and Sask. people should be asking IMO. Mr. Wall might give Eddie and Campbell a backbone if he opted out of the dole default.

A newfie was strolling along the waterfront when he happened upon a sign that read,"today's special,lobstertail and beer",to which the newfie muses,"ah,me tree favorite tings".

it's time yo cut country in 3

in not yo

to not yo ....sorry about that bc and ab .....ontaristan and frogs

Is the CBC still shilling for the Puffin Poo Party? I guess some things just never change. Glad I stopped watching them years ago.

We tend to laugh at the Left and how they attack the Conservatives, but it's no laughing matter when we look at who they support.

Taliban, Hamas and Muslim extremism. Now that's not funny at all.

At least the Globe and Mail editorrial staff are strongly against Citoyen Dion and four-square in favour of the Conservative plan.
I don't know if the word has filtered down to the cadres as yet.

Danny Williams made a big mistake in the tone of his attack on Stephen Harper; one of the few mistakes he has made. He came across as shrill and whiney, and therefore as WEAK. Even if he intends to take Newfoundland out of Confederation, which I think likely, he should never let himself be seen as weak. "It was worse than a crime, it was a blunder" as Talleyrand said on another occasion.

...just a thought.

Write to those who still advertise on CBC, like Fountain Tire, MacDonald's or such and mention the lack of journalistic skills are being associated with their products.

...why doesn't Newfoundland join Alberta? We got their biggest city - Ft. McMurray.

I also saw the Delacourt article (on Bourque) referenced by Ed the Hun earlier and I must say the hatchet job by Delacourt is worthy of some high Liebrano award for excelence in spin and obfuscation.

I don't know how to link to it, but hopefully someone can, as it is worthy of a post by itself.

Lets expose Delacourt for what she is, the Minister of Propaganda for the Liebranos!

Why should CBC have all the fun. Check out CTV article Where Peter McKay announces there will be debate about Afghan War, that people need to be told the good that is being done. How does article end, with a big BUT from the Senlis, where CTV again misrepresents their arguments (they don't say we should leave Afghans, they want us to help them even more) as rebuttal to the efficacy of our mission. Like I said they have misrepresented Senlis argument (they have a right to be miffed), to present a lie that we aren't doing good there.

The MSM days are numbered; there are plenty of better sources of info, and they are about to be relegated to reality TV and game shows. Looks good on them.

"And that is why we mock you."

Actually, I think it's the CBC mocking us taxpayers. Again.

We received the opinion of a weatherman.

Hahaha. I suppose that'd be as laughable as a carpenter* offering his opinion on the economic impacts of federal environmental policies.

MP Manning is not an economist, nor did he call upon any economic or industry expert to back up his claim. His is merely a political opinion; the obvious rebuttal to this is a political opinion from the opposition. Had he cited an actual economic argument, then you'd have something to gripe about. But alas, he did not, and so you do not.

If the CBC is so utterly biased, then why would they have even bothered to devote an entire article to Manning's comments? Why not just ignore him altogether? Why go with the headline of "Grit environmental agenda will sink Hebron: Manning"? Plus, you think a comment from the Chevron PR Dept would have added balance to this piece?

That's why everyone else mocks you.

*
"A said... why would they have even bothered to devote
an entire article to Manning's comments?"

you mean pissing on his argument, right?

thank you, for your oh so shrewd
analysis... mr hole.

*

A little comic relief on this holiday week-end,

When I was young and stupid I joined the peace corp and they sent me to Africa to do good.

On the way there I has a stop-over in St. John's.
While out having a smoke with a couple of baggage handlers I casually asked if they new how far Africa was from the St. John's Airport. One of them replied, "It can't be too far cause there's a black fella on our shift and he goes home for lunch".

Ya gotta love the Newfies, other than their politicians, they're the best.

'Good one, Kate--not that I need a reminder of how one-sidedly biased and juvenile the CBC reporting is: I KNOW!, but because it's instructive and necessary to put their bare-faced pro-Liberal, anti-CPC drivel on display for all to see.

I just don't watch the CBC anymore. They're way past their sell-by date, so please, please, please, Prime Minister Harper, throw the lot out. NOW!

neo: you mean pissing on his argument, right?

Ah, but that's just it, neo -- Manning never offered a factual argument, just his own politicized opinion...on a hypothetical scenario, no less. To summarize: a Tory MP takes a shot at a Liberal policy, the CBC asks the Liberals for a reply, the Liberals predictably claim the Tory MP is out to lunch, and you shoot the messenger.

Funny, don't you think, that Kate pointed out that MP Simms got 4 paragraphs of coverage, but ignored the fact that MP Manning got at least 5? Funny also that she pointed out the "mid-report eye catcher" of "Political motivation claimed," but ignored the equally eye-catching headline of "Grit environmental agenda will sink Hebron: Manning"?

The least we could do for the poor old CBC is pull all tax payer funding from it. If we still want to keep it alive make it like PBS in the US and let whoever[ not tax payer ]fund the thing.

A,

As far I know, Kate is not getting a billion $ of taxpayers money for her blog ... maybe she will confirm or deny.

What's really funny is that you think her blog should be held to a higher standard than the CBC ... what's ironic is that it is ... granted that bar isn't very high.

Gee Kate must have spent billions to have already garnered more journalistic credibility than our national broadcaster.

If we still want to keep it alive make it like PBS in the US and let whoever [not tax payer] fund the thing.

Sorry to disappoint, but much of PBS's operational funding comes from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which is largely funded by the government.

A,

I assume "largely" means over 50% for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (not like 100% for the CBC). Can you point to an annual report, what ever, that supports your statement? KOS doesn't count.

A - PBS's gov't funding has dramatically fallen. Any comparison to the CBC or BBC is nonsense. It's gov't funding source is only a small fraction, for now, with hopefully more cuts to come. Americans wised up a long time ago and decided that the media functions best as privatized. Better to let Wall Street, capitalism, cut lose the losers and award the winners. Heve you check the charts on News Corp vs the NYT's lately?, it pretty much tells the story.

Google and wikipedia are your friend. Use them.

Can you point to an annual report, what ever, that supports your statement? KOS doesn't count.

Annual financial reports are readily found on both the CPB and PBS websites. Do your own homework. Just bear in mind the distinction between program production and program distribution and broadcasting.

PBS, paid for by the public by choice.
CBC, paid for by the public through Government taxation, no choice.

Like many, many others, CBC is no longer worth watching, can't even trust the news to be unbiased, thus inaccurate or skewed, still paying though.
See anything wrong with this picture?

See anything wrong with this picture?

For starters, even the Conservative Party appears to disagree with you. One is tempted to ask: with Tories like these, who needs Grits?

Thanks for the link 'A'
Thankfully Oda no longer carries the CBC portfolio, and she certainly doesn't speak for "Tories". We have another misleading title...but what could we expect from a group called Friends of Canadian Broadcasting. How cozy!
This statement alone is hillarious:
"The Senate committee (after three years) concluded that newsgathering ...generally served Canadians well"
Of course...and it took three years to determine that?
Generally useful bunch those senate committees.
Who did they ask?
Some generally satisfied people at the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting..??Friends of Mansbridge, or Friends of Delacourt?

What was your point again,A?

GREENPEACE and OPEC the biggist rip off of all time FEED GREENS TO THE POLAR BEARS PENGUINS and SKUAS

What was your point again,A?

The point is that if the Conservatives really were interested at all in privatizing the CBC, they'd have done it already. Or, at the least, they'd have starting laying the groundwork for doing so. Instead, they got their then-Heritage Minister -- who indeed speaks for the Government of Canada on matters relevant to her portfolio -- to formally testify to a Parliamentary committee, on the public record, about the importance of "long-term, stable funding," AND guaranteed supplementary funding over the next couple years. Interesting strategy. (BTW, did you notice that the link was of a Canadian Press article that quoted MP Oda directly, and thus the fact that it was merely reproduced on the FCB website is irrelevant?)

Face facts, dear friend: you are so out of touch with the Canadian mainstream that you can't even count on the ruling right-wing party of Canada to share your views anymore. Maybe it's time to re-form the Reform?

"Face facts, dear friend: you are so out of touch with the Canadian mainstream...": Wrong again, A.

The CBC News gets about 5% of the market share of those watching television news. It's those who support the totally taxpayer-subsidized CBC that are out of touch...not only with "the Canadian mainstream" but with reality, pure and simple.

The CBC exists for a few very privileged elitists and their friends (you know, The Friends of the CBC?) to forward their lib-left, feminist, new world government, Kyoto-friendly agenda, and to He** with the rest of us plebs.

Do you think the Conservatives could privatize the CBC without a majority? They'd have all of these powerful elites, who pretty much have a stranglehold on our mainstream media and other areas of influence, all over them, spreading lies and propaganda and poisoning the Canadian water, more than usual, that is. They'd be in a feeding frenzy, something Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his CPC obviously want to avoid at all costs...at least for now.

Take your head out of whatever cloud or other place it's in, A. Stephen Harper and his party are keeping their powder dry. They're not stupid. Nor are they suicidal.

The CBC News gets about 5% of the market share of those watching television news. It's those who support the totally taxpayer-subsidized CBC that are out of touch...not only with "the Canadian mainstream" but with reality, pure and simple.

Where'd you get 5 percent from, BATB? In any case, need I remind you that you repeatedly accuse all of the mainstream media -- CTV News, CBC National, Global News Hour, etc etc -- of failing to reflect your views. In other words, the mainstream's take on the issues doesn't match your take on the issues; ergo, demonstrably, you are out of touch with the mainstream. It's just a fact, BATB, nothing to be ashamed of.

Besides, if you re-read my early comment more carefully, you'd realize that my point about your being out of touch is evidenced not by the CBC's relative market share, but by the Conservative Party's recent policy shifts away from the right-wing end (where you reside) towards the middle. And how to explain this, BATB? Seems to me that, for the sake of power, the Tories are as willing as any other politicians to sell out their conservative principles and promises. Or perhaps, as you suggest, it's all just a political ploy to secure a majority before returning to the more conservative roots so close to your own heart. So, either they have questionable integrity, or they have a hidden agenda. Welcome to Canada's New Government.

No hidden agenda, A, just political reality. See, we return to reality. The same old, same old.

It's not just that most of the mainstream media doesn't reflect MY reality; it's that it doesn't reflect reality, period.

That would be the reality of most Canadians when it comes to a lot of issues, including the family, Kyoto and Canada's energy policy, the political process and how we go about it, etc. Most Canadians don't happen to like being robbed blind by their government, in order for its members to reward their friends and bribe voters to vote for them WITH TAXPAYERS' HARD-EARNED DOLLARS. 'Too bad the MSM for far too long covered up for their friends and political cronies in the Liberal Government, which is what really sticks in the craw of a lot of us who are neither small- nor capital-letter liberals.

What we're asking is simply that the MSM report facts to the Canadian public without the infernal lib-left spin. (Look, I've been around the block on this issue of lib-left tilt in the news for over 30 years, so I'm not just talking about the odd lapse in bias here.) The sad reality is, however, that most of the members of the MSM, the PPG in particular, wouldn't know a straight fact if it hit them in the face. They're so immersed in the lib-left world/mindset that they're convinced that it's the only reality there is. And, to add insult to injury, they mock and disparage anyone who thinks differently than they do.

Each to his/her own I always say. So, you don't agree with my point of view? Fine. But, please, don't expect me to pay your salary and all of your perqs and benefits out of my hard-earned salary. And, please, don't ridicule me and my family's way of doing things or the political party that I happen to vote for.

last time I saw the CBCpravda viewership it was 7%. which translated is 2.3 million, or about 865 $ of subsidy per viewer. drop that on to the patrons cable bill directly and viewership would plummet again.

the only ones that appear to enjoy the CBCpravda agenda are dippers, hairy legged lesbians, and people from PEI who watch to see if they appear as an extra.

Posted by: cal2

"last time I saw the CBCpravda viewership it was 7%. which translated is 2.3 million, or about 865 $ of subsidy per viewer. drop that on to the patrons cable bill directly and viewership would plummet again."

Your numbers are a tad off. Total viewership is not the population of Canada at 32 million, and neither is it 7%.

According to CRTC study, CBC viewership is only 5.8% and based on the Billion $$$ anal CBC subsidy, that works out to about $1,000 direct subsidy per CBC user.

It has been estimated that the CBC benefits by an additional Billion $$$ per year through indirect subsidies.

CAN THE CBC .... !!!

A, are you listening?

The net result of eliminating the CBC would be no HNIC and no good classical music radio. You think you'd get a cheque for your share of the billion? Give your head a shake. The money would just go to some other useless government "service", or be funnelled into some politician's pet project, so what the hell's the difference?

The Conservatives have plans for the CBC, I'm sure, but they won't involve its demise. It's hard to rebuild a state mouthpiece from the gound up. Better to renovate the one they have now.

Alan ,Classical radio Toronto is 100 times better than the CBC socialist's offering.
Here's the best part.
It doesn't cost a billion dollars a year, it's free.