Your Search “email Greg Weston” Did Not Match Any Documents

Media 123 Comments

Update: A reader sends this item by a decidedly paranoid Greg Weston, in which he claims there exists an;

“… orchestrated Internet campaigns by Conservative partisans, designed to harass, intimidate and even threaten journalists into backing off a party of such fun-loving people.”

Well, Mr. Weston – an “orchestrated internet campaign” should be pretty easy to find, what with it being orchestrated on the internet and all. Instead of whining about negative feedback from unhappy customers, why not sharpen up your investigative skills by collecting the hard evidence of this vast right wing conspiracy and presenting it the old fashioned way?
As we like to say here in Interweb Land – Google is your friend.
Because, you know – presenting a collection of random quotes as evidence that a conspiracy exists is the type of nonsensical crap you’d expect to see from some amateur blogger on the internet.

123 Replies to “Your Search “email Greg Weston” Did Not Match Any Documents”

  3. Ward: The Star, the CBC.
    Maybe we need some more reminders. Aside from the Globe’s endorsement of Harper in the last election, the Globe was totally behind Mulroney in his two electoral bids.
    Sure, there are a couple left-leaning columnists writing for the Globe (Salutin, and until recently Malik). But most of the Globe’s columnists are (to varying degrees) on the right side of the ledger (Wente, Blatchford, Murphy, Ibbitson, Spector).
    The Globe isn’t as far right as say, the National Post of five years ago, but it’s certainly not a left wing paper.

  4. We all know this is merely a sulking journalist who is upset the PMSH won’t let the MSM hijack any more annoucements by asking non-topical questions at press scrums.
    Did anybody see the annoucement today in Vancouver about the move to have street racers charged under the criminal code instead of the traffic code? I did. When a call for questions was made, not one of these so called “reporters” had any questions about the move.
    They were all to preoccupied with the “childish” antics of the press gallery and PMSH. I am sick to death of this crap from the MSM and personally side with Harper on this point. The MSM is not there to create the news, they are there to report it. They should get on with thier job.
    But we know that the majority of the MSM has been on a witchhunt since the CPC won the election. This move to freeze them out just takes away thier matches.

  5. Dirk,
    I agree with you that some people around here need to recalibrate their spectrum analyzers. Comparing Macleans and Global to the Socialist Worker is just silly.
    But if you want journalists that will ask the tough questions, you won’t find many left in the PPG. “Do you love Canada?” isn’t a tough question, it’s a land mine. Read Paul Wells’ blog today (not the jazz stuff, below that) and you’ll see what I’m talking about. If this little spat convinces even some of the PPG to start actually doing their jobs again, it’s all good.

  6. Greg must be getting hard up for column ideas. Perhaps we can help. A good start might be:
    “New Details About Liberal Corruption Come Out at Guite Trial”…more charges sure to follow
    or
    “Prime Minister Stephen Harper Announces Crackdown on Street Racing”…additions to Criminal Code to follow
    or
    “Just over 100 days into Mandate and Conservatives Under Prime Minister Stephen Harper are Well on Their Way to Fulfilling Election Promises”…details on promises kept to follow
    or
    “Leaderless Liberals Dither as Dithering Leader is Nowhere to be Found During Important Vote”…ongoing hunt and investigation to follow
    or
    “Iggy Awes Liberal Press and Pundits With Intellect, Hopes None Notice His Conservative Military Policies” ad nauseum debates to follow
    or
    “Parliamentary Press Gallery Members Unite in Childish Tantrum, Prime Minister Sends Them to Their Room Until Hell Freezes Over”…Global Warming to follow
    That will fill the column for the first week…more to follow.
    Daniel

  8. Just curious, did the MSM and PPG call themselves a sort of official opposition while the Fiberals were in power? Didn’t think so.

  10. If I access the column via the Calgary Sun… no email link to Greg Weston.
    Makes me think that all the Conservatives in Toronto met in a minivan one day and decided to give poor Greg a rough time! lol

  11. I try to avoid the Globe – it’s boring, often childish, and left-wing.
    Rick Salutin, Naomi Klein, Patrick Martin, Jan Wong (former communist – I guess that puts her to the right of the NDP), Michael Valpy, the thankfully departed Heather Malik … Blech!
    Read the letters to the editor if you want to know how a limp-wristed latte-sippin’- Toronto Life reading- CBC Radio listening- Toronto Island living- metrosexual thinks. Like those of the Toronto Star, the letters are shrill beyond belief.

  12. “Maybe he’s right, except that it shows a brittleness and imperiousness that eventually will haunt him.”
    Simpson pegs the Prime Minister. What a writer! Simpson flings the “ness” and the “ness” with the sweetness of a jilted journo.
    http://www.voy.com/178771/15548.html

  13. Oh and did I mention Weston is another inept doofus who held a lofty Ottawa journaist position by sheer rapacity….over the years his journalistic output has been about as stellar as one would expect of the gal in the local yokel paper who runs the gossip column. It’s fun watching these inept media gas bags get a well deserved deflation.
    Where is Canada’s William Buckley?

  14. Ahhh the righteous indignation of the MSM and the PPG is palatable. Yesterday Dave Rutherford (who has a decidedly right bias by admission) had an executive from the PPG on his show.
    Her sniffy attitude and assertation that the very principles of freedom of the press were at risk spoke volumes.
    Rutherford asked some tough questions and the responses were increasingly shrill. Interestingly enough Dave went to a station break before taking calls and lo and behold the guest disappeared from the airways. All attempts by Rutherford’s producers to get the guest back on the line failed.
    Hmmmmm……. The pot calling the kettle black??? It seems the executive of the PPG don’t like to answer questions unless they’re softballs tossed by a friendly MSM comrade.
    Syncro

  15. This united offensive by the press in the Harper wars has got me riled. Since reading and hearing this bile, I have sent off a bunch of emails.
    Saw the National and the segment “the Chase” with Julie Vanduesen. The Conservative had promised to “immediately” follow up on some health thing and compensation. Julie cornered Tony Clement and was slagging him for not “immediately” following through. What an incredible bitch she appeared as. 13 years of intransigience by government and by fiat, Clement must have this done “immediately”.
    I want a majority badly. CRTC and CBC must be at the top of the list when that happens. Reagan changed the rules for the FCC which created the environment for the emergence of Fox news and Rush Limbaugh and conservative radio. Time for that in Canada.
    enough

  16. Actually,I thought it was some ground-breaking,well thought out journalism…I rank it right up there with the breaking of the black SUV story!…Dishonest twits!

  17. Enough,
    I saw the same Julie Van Duesen piece last night and was outraged. Talk about ambush reporting. I thought Tony Clement handled himself well. Of course Van Duesen included a gratuitous comment about Harper muzzling his MP’s when Steven Fletcher refused to answer her questions. After years of the Liberals ignoring the Hepatitis victims trust the CBC to slam the Tories for not dealing with it in their first 100 days. And the press wants us to believe they are not bias.
    If there is no bias why does the CBC keep comparing Harper to Bush because he is supporting the mission in Afghanistan. Why didn’t we see similar comparisons when Chretien sent the troops or when Martin supported the mission?

  18. I think the problem on the hill is much like the spoiled brat who gets it’s way with mom but dad doesn’t bye the BS and shuts it down.The spoiled brat naturally rebells agains dad. Typical childish immature behavior.I listened to Westson on Adler( what little of that clown that I can stand)and they sounded like a couple of recently disciplined children in their treehouse plotting the OVERTHROW of dad’s control.

  19. Large percentage of Canadians hold conservative views
    Strong majorities wanted government to adopt family-friendly tax policies; or to be tough on crime, illegal immigration and bogus refugees. Large percentages even held socially conservative views.
    via neale news

  20. “Strong majorities wanted government to adopt family-friendly tax policies; or to be tough on crime, illegal immigration and bogus refugees.”
    Do you really think those ideals are exclusive to conservatives? Forgetting about that nit-pick, I think your statement is better phrased this way:
    “Large percentage of Canadians hold *some* conservative views.”
    But let’s be clear, “large majorities” of Canadians also hold some centrist, or even left-leaning views. And let’s not get all condescending: lots of these people aren’t stupid, lazy, or hoodwinked by the MSM. They just have different political views than many of the posters here at SDA.

  21. Sure, and the reporters and editors at CBC, for example, have different political views than most Canadians. Never mind their years-long silence during the Liberal graft rampage, but how about the Guite trial going on right now? If you consider how old allegations against Brian Mulroney have been given the full-length investigative documentary treatment on CBC’s Newsworld, why are all these details coming out daily from the fraud trial of Chuck Guite, which show the institutional nature of misbehaviour in the LPC deemed not newsworthy by the senior producers at the National? Or is this question just betraying the narrow political consituency who reads SDA?
    And gee, do you think if it were Conservatives on trial, caught behaving like Gagliano et al, that it might possibly get coverage on The National?

  22. Paul from Vancouver :
    Very telling points, all!! Thank you for the examples, of this group of babies.

  23. Van Douchebag & Boag, two useless Librano apologists mourning the loss of junior dithers and his band of fratboys. Of course when you have the IQ of lint, the juggernaut (NOT) would seem impressive.

  24. Dirk said, “And if we’re being honest here, let’s imagine the outrage over here at SDA if Chretien or Martin were to pull a stunt like this [having a list of those who can ask questions of the PM].
    The point is, Dirk, neither Chretien nor Martin had to worry (until Martin began his meltdown) about who asked questions. The members of the PPG and MSM very seldom asked them any really hard ones. Otherwise, how come it took so long for details of Adscam, Shawinigate, the HRDC scandal, etc., to surface? The MSM/PPG just weren’t doing their job under Chretien’s and Martin’s “watch.”
    They were partying with the party in power and party apparatchiks, in hopes of leaks, insider information, and patronage appointments.
    Now that Stephen Harper’s PM, the MSM/PPG have been turning on the heat. They have a pack mentality and it’s been pretty ugly watching them circle CPC members and go after first David Emerson, then Harper, now Rona Ambrose, and this is just the beginning.
    Haper’s taking a risk going straight to the people, but it’s a calculated risk and one that I think he needs to take. The MSM/PPG are a pack of hyenas; you don’t make peace with hyenas, you outrun them or outsmart them.

  25. I have been told that Greg Weston is a member of the illustrious (and very rich) Galen Weston family anyone care to confirm?

  26. NKOTB:
    “The point is, Dirk, neither Chretien nor Martin had to worry (until Martin began his meltdown) about who asked questions. The members of the PPG and MSM very seldom asked them any really hard ones… Now that Stephen Harper’s PM, the MSM/PPG have been turning on the heat. They have a pack mentality and it’s been pretty ugly watching them circle CPC members and go after first David Emerson, then Harper, now Rona Ambrose, and this is just the beginning.”
    This is a perfect example of groupthink here at SDA: posters here keep repeating the same baseless crap, and eventually it’s taken as gospel truth. Let’s look at what’s actually happened over the past couple years.
    The press and Chretien:
    JC did not have a good relationship with the press. To suggest otherwise is ignoring what went on in the months leading up to his early retirement. In his last election, he was getting skewered on a daily basis for being too aloof, too out of touch, and too corrupt. That the Liberals got elected was more in spite of JC than because of him. Oh yeah, Shawinigate was uncovered by Andrew MacIntosh at the Post, who was a huge pain in JC’s ass for years. And that was a good thing.
    The press and Martin:
    From the day he became PM, the anti-Martin sentiment in the press grew steadily, culminating with sponsorship. It was the press that assigned him, and propogated the Mr. Dithers label. It was the press that repeatedly pressed him for some real responses on Iraq, SSM, Kyoto, etc.. And in every case, he’d ramble nonsensically until he finally became convinced by polling numbers that he could give an answer that would please the most people. And during the election campaign, it must be noted that there was almost open warfare between the press and Martin’s people because they insisted on taking names and questions from the press in advance of scrums.
    To say that the relationship between the press and the Liberal government was a love-in is either dishonest or ignorant, depending on how closely you paid attention.
    So now Harper has been elected, and now the press is grilling him harder than he’s been grilled before. To me, that makes perfect sense. Being in a position of power demands that the press examines you more closely.
    And this “circling” of Emerson, Ambrose, and Harper is appropriate as well. They’ve all been involved in important issues, so I’d be angry if the press left them alone. The press went after Belinda after she defected, so did you really expect Emerson to get a free ride? What you see as “circling” has been going on far before the CPC formed the government. Just ask Jane Stewart, Andy Scott, Judy Sgro, and of course Chretien and Martin. If I thought a little harder, I could certainly come up with more Lib names.
    In saying all the above I’m definitely not saying the PPG is doing a good job. I think they’ve sucked now for years. What I am saying is that I follow current affairs, and I can’t see a difference in the press coverage, since Harper became PM.
    What Harper and his people are doing now — wanting to control who gets to ask questions is now what I want from a man who campaigned on giving us a more open and accountable government. Unless you’re an idiot who only cares that your favourite party attains and holds power, you want the press to have access to government leaders and be able to be ask tough questions.
    If you’re serious about wanting a strong conservative government, you’ll want them to be challenged on how they’re governing. Both by the opposition, and the media. It will make them better, and it will make the country better.

  27. Dirk, I am neither dishonest or ignorant. I have voted Liberal and I have voted Conservative. To say that the press is not hardeer on the Conservatives is just ignoring all of the evidence:
    1. The Dithers label was coined by the Economist not the main stream Canadian media.
    2. The press perpetuated the Scary Harper label until Harper laid out his platform directly to the people so that the public no longer was duped by the press. (not that that didn’t stop the press from still trying eg. dredging up the abortion issue whenever they got the chance)
    3. I read the press very carefully when Stronach crossed the floor. Rather than criticizing Stronach the press focussed on the story that Harper was difficult to get along with and had a scary right wing agenda that forced Stronach to leave. She was portrayed as acting on principle. Compare this to the coverage on Emerson.
    4. Jane Stewart: Hey when you spend $1 billion without any controls you should expect a little negative coverage.
    5. I have lost count of how may times the CBC has compared Harper to Bush. On what basis? Which of his policies are far right wing policies? His support for Afghanistan? If so, why wasn’t Chretien or Martin compared to Bush for their policies on Afghanistan.
    And the list goes on…

  28. Dirk,
    What is the problem exactly with the PPG being asked to put their names on a list? There is no proof that their accusations and inuendo about PM favoritism are true. They never gave the new protocol a chance. I’m sorry but the tail should not be allowed to wag the dog. I don’t see that what PMSH asked was so aggregious as to cause the PPG to throw a collective tantrum. To any observer, the press gallery had become a circus under the previous governments. I don’t see anything wrong with the PM at his perogative setting new guidelines that allow orderly questioning.
    It seems to me that the press to some extent had this coming. They have developed a pack mentality that is not healthy for our system. Look what they did to Stockwell Day. No one deserves that level of contempt. Yes he would be the first to admit that he made a couple of mistakes and that if he could do it over again, he would do it differently. Having said this, the unofficial opposition decided collectively to ruin the man and his reputation. They tried the same thing with Preston Manning, he fortunately was a little better at rolling with the punches. I think Stephen Harper has a good memory and does not want to see a repeat of what happenned so he is giving them less ammunition in their guns by controling the message and the caucus members more tightly. I applaud him for this.
    Daniel

  29. Rob,
    Thank you for those examples. They are right on!
    As far as the press turning on Chretien, it must be noted that at the same time Paul Martin had created a split in the Liberal party and orchestrated Chretiens demise partly through controlled leaks to the press. The MSM cosied up to Paul Martin as soon as it became obvious that Chretien had no chance of surviving the Martin juggernaught that had by hook or by crook taken over the riding associations.
    Paul Martin then signed his own demise with the press the day he called the Gomery inquiry and an RCMP investigation. As the details about the scandal could no longer be kept secret, Martin was tarred with his own brush. The press had no option at that point but to gang up on Mr. Dithers. He turned out to be ineffectual and indecisive as a PM and lost the confidence of the people, the press and his party. Had he not called the inquiry, which is what Jean Chretien would have done BTW, he may have rode out the scandal. He banked on it looking like he was taking the high road and was above it all. The public and the press saw through that and knew that if he didn’t know anything as finance minister and Quebec lieutenant all those years, then he was either incompetent or lieing, neither of which we want in a Prime Minister. That is why the press turned on him. He left them no choice. The income trust scandal was just the final stake through Mr Dithers heart.
    Daniel

  30. I remember watching Peter Mansbridge interviewing Carolyn Parrish on One On One. She was explaing that after she had pissed Martin off, she realised that her career had stalled and she would never be in cabinet and therefore could concentrate on looking after the needs of her constituents.
    It never occurred to Mansbridge to ask what the hell she thought she had been elected for in the first place if it wasn’t to look after her constituents. I guess it never occurred to him that anyone would actually put their responsibilities ahead of their personal gain. Or maybe he was just trying to get laid, because it sure looked a lot more like a date than an interview.
    When Mansbridge was interviewing the windmill man about the ‘Military, In Our Citys’ ads, Martin denied approving those ads and two minutes later said that he had approved them. A real newsman would have called him on it and called him a liar. All that was happening of course, was that Peter Mansbridge was interviewing his boss.

  31. “1. The Dithers label was coined by the Economist not the main stream Canadian media.”
    The dithers label was coined if I recall, in his first term as finance minister. The Economist had a big piece on him with the dithers headline, but the Canadian MSM certainly did keep the dithers name in print.
    “2. The press perpetuated the Scary Harper label until Harper laid out his platform directly to the people so that the public no longer was duped by the press. (not that that didn’t stop the press from still trying eg. dredging up the abortion issue whenever they got the chance)”
    We saw very little scary Harper press in the last election. In Harper’s first election as CPC leader, granted, there was a lot. But in this last election the editorial staffs of a number of papers, including the Globe, backed Harper. Also of note are the Liberal campaign ads. In the last election the Liberal campaign was lambasted by the press for perpetuating an unjustified fear, and not actually advancing a meaningful platform.
    “3. I read the press very carefully when Stronach crossed the floor. Rather than criticizing Stronach the press focussed on the story that Harper was difficult to get along with and had a scary right wing agenda that forced Stronach to leave. She was portrayed as acting on principle. Compare this to the coverage on Emerson.”
    That was certainly one of the stories that got coverage. However, there were a number of stories that were very critical of her, raising the point that once it was clear to her that she didn’t have a hope of leading the party, that she’d jump ship. And the situation here is somewhat different as well — Emerson defected just a couple weeks after being elected. That was more shocking to me than the Belinda defection, and it does, I think, warrant more media attention.
    “4. Jane Stewart: Hey when you spend $1 billion without any controls you should expect a little negative coverage.”
    Indeed.
    “5. I have lost count of how may times the CBC has compared Harper to Bush. On what basis?”
    Here’s a few points, for starters:
    – Harper has repeatedly made a point of emphasizing his good relationship with the Republican government in the US. This is a legitimate selling point for him, given the open acrimony between our governments in recent years.
    – Harper supported Bush’s Iraq agenda before the invasion began.
    – Harper also expressed open support for Bush’s reelection bid.
    “Which of his policies are far right wing policies?”
    Harper is a conservative at heart. He hasn’t hidden this. The five principles aren’t exactly 100% right-wing policies, but I’m willing to bet we’ll see a more right-wing election platform from Harper for the next election.
    “His support for Afghanistan? If so, why wasn’t Chretien or Martin compared to Bush for their policies on Afghanistan.”
    Afghanistan is a far different scenario than Iraq. I’m not opening that can of worms. Someone else will probably open it anyway, but regardless of one’s opinions on the Iraq invasion, you can’t deny that the politics surrounding military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan are completely different.

  32. “What is the problem exactly with the PPG being asked to put their names on a list?”
    As I’ve repeated already, our democracy depends on a free and independant press. For the PMO to determine who gets to ask questions, compromises this independance.
    “I’m sorry but the tail should not be allowed to wag the dog.”
    What’s this supposed to mean? You don’t want to see PMSH receive tough questions? I say suck it up: it’s an occupational hazard as PM. And a necessary one.
    “I don’t see that what PMSH asked was so aggregious as to cause the PPG to throw a collective tantrum.”
    Both the PPG and PMSH are throwing tantrums. I don’t see anyone walking the high road here.
    “To any observer, the press gallery had become a circus under the previous governments. I don’t see anything wrong with the PM at his perogative setting new guidelines that allow orderly questioning.”
    I agree the PPG has its problems. But it’s not the place of the government to fix them.
    “Look what they did to Stockwell Day.”
    I don’t think he’s an example you want to bring up here. He made more than just “a couple mistakes”. He repeatedly spoke without thinking, and made it clear that he wasn’t a statesman. Manning and Harper are light years better than Day.
    “They tried the same thing with Preston Manning, he fortunately was a little better at rolling with the punches.”
    I disagree. The press didn’t give Manning an easy ride, but they respected him. He commanded respect in a way Day didn’t. Manning is still asked to be a pundit on various shows, and he gets essays published in Canadian papers regularly.

  34. Dirk, on the Stronach defection I urge you to go back and read the stories. As to your point that Emerson’s defection was worse coming right after an election, remember that Stronach defected right before a key confidence vote in the House. It came at a far more critical time and was clearly a cynical move by Martin to hang on to power and Stronach to grab power. Emerson was at least justifiable as a means of securing a softwood deal.
    You state:
    “The five principles aren’t exactly 100% right-wing policies,.” Not exactly 100% right wing policies! There’s nothing right wing about most of them: reducing GST, reducing wait times, a childcare allowance, …pretty scary secret agenda kind of stuff.
    “but I’m willing to bet we’ll see a more right-wing election platform from Harper for the next election”. There’s that scary secret agenda again that you’ve bought into.
    And why is Harper compared to Bush when he supports Afghanistan? How does this not show bias to any reasonable person? Chretien approved the mission in the first place and Martin also supported it.

  35. “For the PMO to determine who gets to ask questions, compromises this independance.”
    I disagree. In what way? They still get to ask questions, perhaps not in the order they wish but if they are on the list, they will be called. Several provinces work this way as do many corporations and other national governments. Stephen Harper did not invent this and I see it as a welcome change to the zoo that was there before. They did not even try it! All of their imagined problems had not taken place yet so where is the beef?
    “What’s this supposed to mean? You don’t want to see PMSH receive tough questions? I say suck it up: it’s an occupational hazard as PM. And a necessary one.”
    I mean it is up to the government (PMO) to set the rules of protocol, not the other way around. The press is in a tizzy because “they” are not making the rules. In doing so “they” have become the news trying to wag the PM.
    “Tantrums”
    We can agree to disagree on this one. I see the press throwing a tantrum. I see PMSH moving to “Plan B”. I think this is a well thought out strategy. If the PPG had agreed to the protocol change, I think PMSH was willing to work with them. When they refused and walked out, I think he had decided ahead of time what plan B would be and implemented the road show.
    “But it’s not the place of the government to fix them.”
    Well who praytell should fix the problems then? As I said earlier, it seems to me that the PMO gets to set the rules of protocol. I think the PM in his own way was trying to bring in a protocol that would restore decency and order to the press conferences. You would probably be correct in thinking that PMSH is obsessed with controling the message right now. He is under no illusions. He knows he has a press that is gunning for him and he knows that he has a few loose cannons in the caucus. Seeing him impose caucus discipline in this way is really something to behold when you think of the cast of characters that he has to work with. Many (dare I say “rednecks”)from out west are plain spoken men and women who freely speak their mind. I’m sure that there are many who are chafing at the restrictions but I think that the PM is right on this one. They all need to learn to speak the same thing and give the same message. If a little time being muzzled will teach some caucus discipline, that is a good thing. I see that the cabinet ministers are being given a little more rope these days!
    I only broght up Stockwell because his undoing typified the pack mentality of the MSM and the way that they can ruin a person.
    Agreed on Preston. They didn’t give him an easy ride.
    I don’t mind the PPG or any other part of the MSM asking the PM tough questions, I expect it and so does Stephen Harper. I think he is determined to do things differently and bring some changes to parliament Hill. It is about time and the PPG had better adjust or become irrelevant. The government in our age has many different methods and ways to get its message out. Times have changed. 20 years ago, the PPG were an essential organ of information dissemination…not any more. They are no longer essential. I hope that they and the PM make up and be friends. I think there is a symbioisis there, they need each other to some extent but I think PMSH is going to dig in his heels and starve them out until they say uncle. Then the orderly press conferences can begin…or not! I think the ball is squarely in the PPG’s court right now. I am hearing the PM loud and clear from London, Ontario and today from the west coast…
    Daniel

  36. PMSH doesn’t mind the press asking him tough questions. He got them all the time during the election campaign, and he answered them better than any of the other leadership candidates.
    He still doesn’t mind being asked tough questions, he just wants to make sure that there is some order to the media circus and that the same old media hacks who, BTW, have been contemptuous and sleazy in their treatment of both him and his party for many years, don’t hog the time allotted. ‘Can’t say I blame him. Julie Van Dusn’t doesn’t always have to be at the head of the line, does she, shrieking out her latest impudent hogwash?
    Jane Taber, on “Mike Puffy Live” yesterday, admitted that under both Chretien and Martin there was a protocal for the PPG to ask questions. She conceded that PMSH’s “list” wasn’t exactly revolutionary. In the next breath, however, she asserted AGAIN that the MSM and the PPG weren’t biased.
    Well, Janey, connect the dots. The MSM/PPG accuse PMSH of being a control freak, undemocratic, Bush-lite, and against the freedom of the press when he requests a protocol for members of these groups to ask questions even though you concede that both Chretien and Martin essentially did the same thing, and the MSM/PPG didn’t make a peep. And that’s NOT bias?
    Your reaching this conclusion, despite the facts staring you in the face, makes it clear that, yes, there is definitely a media bias when it comes to PMSH and his party.
    Take off the blinders, JT, wipe the sleep from your eyes, and follow the logic of your own observations. Otherwise, hang it up. You’re past your sell-by date as a professional journalist and have just joined the ranks of the media hacks.

  37. “As to your point that Emerson’s defection was worse coming right after an election, remember that Stronach defected right before a key confidence vote in the House.”
    And how many months did the government last after that confidence vote?
    “It came at a far more critical time and was clearly a cynical move by Martin to hang on to power and Stronach to grab power. Emerson was at least justifiable as a means of securing a softwood deal.”
    I’m not justifying the Stronach defection. Martin had little to do with the whole defection, until it was basically a done deal (this was driven by Jim Peterson and Stronach). As for Stronach, I was no fan of hers before the defection, and even less so after.
    Regarding Emerson, I have a hard time believing the softwood deal would not have happened without his continued involvement in the 50-60 days after the election. You talk about cynical — defecting two weeks after you ran against the party you joined pretty much takes the cake.
    “Not exactly 100% right wing policies! There’s nothing right wing about most of them: reducing GST, reducing wait times, a childcare allowance, …pretty scary secret agenda kind of stuff.”
    That was exactly my point — he did not run on a right-wing platform this election. And so far, he’s delivering on his promises, which is good. But that doesn’t change who he is, and what he’s done in the past. He was the president of the National Citizen’s Coalition before he became CPC leader, for pete’s sake. He’s a fiscal conservative at heart, and that’s fine. I don’t think he’s hiding that from anyone.
    “”but I’m willing to bet we’ll see a more right-wing election platform from Harper for the next election”. There’s that scary secret agenda again that you’ve bought into.”
    Huh? Did you even read what I wrote? I said that he would probably run on a more conservative platform next time around. That’s not saying he has a secret agenda. I think a good deal of Harper’s success is due to his debunking of the secret agenda stuff. So far it looks like he’s going to deliver on his promises, demonstrate that a CPC government can govern well, and that people have nothing to be frightened of. And when the next election is called, I think he will run on a somewhat more conservative platform, once people get that he’ll do what he says he will. Nothing secret about that.
    “And why is Harper compared to Bush when he supports Afghanistan?”
    I agree that an isolated comparison to Bush just based on Afghanistan is unjustified. You said that was the CBC?

  38. “They still get to ask questions, perhaps not in the order they wish but if they are on the list, they will be called… They did not even try it!”
    There’s no way every question will get asked. They’d be there forever. The PPG offered to change the zoo-like atmosphere with a system where reporters would line up and get to ask questions on a first-come-first-served basis. But the PMO turned them down flat out.
    For the PMO, this is not about maintaining order, it’s about controlling how their messages go out to the public. And from a government that ran on openness and accountability, that bothers me.
    “Well who praytell should fix the problems then?”
    Only the media can fix themselves. And if we stop buying crappy papers, maybe they’ll get the message.
    “I think the PM in his own way was trying to bring in a protocol that would restore decency and order to the press conferences. You would probably be correct in thinking that PMSH is obsessed with controling the message right now.”
    Again, this isn’t about decency, it’s about message control.
    “He knows he has a press that is gunning for him and he knows that he has a few loose cannons in the caucus. Seeing him impose caucus discipline in this way is really something to behold when you think of the cast of characters that he has to work with.”
    I can understand this, and I don’t have big problems with this. It’s a smart move to keep the Myron Thompsons of the world clammed up. Although this is a little rich to hear, from the man who criticized Martin for imposing restrictions on his MPs.

  39. Dirk,
    Deal with the sleaze and contempt of the MSM/PPG. Your arguments don’t deal with their unprofessionalism, their attitude of entitlement, their outright lies, their not reporting things of importance (The National, Politics, and “Mike Puffy Live,” for instance, are not reporting on the Chuck Guite trial; what’s with that?), their deep lack of respect for duly elected officials of Canada.
    It is the perogative of the PMO to lay out the ground rules for engagement with the press and, frankly, except for the members of the media, themselves, and the so-called “loyal” opposition, in their hyped up colunms, hysterical commentary on TV, and political rhetoric, who are dissing PMSH, I think most Canadians are cheering on the PM’s side.
    We’re sick to death of being fed lies and propaganda the media propogate on behalf their Librano and Dipper friends. Don’t kid yourself, Dirk, these guys are all in bed together and a whole lot of “ordinary” Canadians find the resulting orgy sickening.
    We’d like it to stop.

  40. “Under the liberals there were certain rules where we did… sign up with Jean Chretien (on the road) and with Paul Martin we did that. Jean Chretien had favourites. He had selective hearing and who he took questions from. We all know that he did that. There just seems to be this other rule with the Tories, so I can see why the Tories are concerned about that…” Jane Taber May 26, 2006 in conversation with Mike Duffy and Lawrence Martin
    Have you ever noticed how PMSH always answers the opposition leaders questions in Question Period. PMPM would often defer to Scott ‘let Gomery do it’s work’ Brison. PMSH actually believes in and respects parliament. Ultimately he’s accountable to it.

  41. Dirk
    Like I said there are some points which I think we will agree to disagree. To the extent that things had become indecent under the Liberals this is about restoring decency and decorum. I don’t agree that the media will change themselves. It is extremely naive to think that they will. There is no incentive for them to do so. PMSH has no control over the media nor should he have. He does however have control of the government buildings and the process through which his annoucements and press conferences will be held.He should stand his ground on these.
    I think thirteen years of Liberal governance created some bedfellow relationships that continue to this day. These relationships develop over a period of time. The journalist or reporter develops a rapport with several individuals in government or cabinet that will feed them info. In turn they promise to write favorably about the government of the day. It is just the way it has been done for years now. The PPG offered a little window dressing to give an appearance of change, but in no time it would be back to the same as it was before the election… a feeding frenzy at the zoo.
    “But the PMO turned them down flat out.” Only after the PPG had turned the PMO down flat out!!! The Prime Minister did not ask anything of them that is not already being done in other places and other jurisdictions. No ones freedoms are being taken away. They can still ask the hard questions if they wish as their name is called. Personally I don’t see anything wrong with the PM trying to control the message at this point in a new government with a new direction and new policies. Would you rather go back to Mr. Dithers where the message changed everday depending on which special interest group was the loudest or which way the pollsters were spinning that day? Until the media realizes and accept that there is a new protocol and new rules of engagement they can go pound sand!
    Daniel

  42. Harper shouldn’t back down one iota on this, in fact now is the time to go on the offensive. The media chose to go to war with him, they shouldn’t get to choose when and how it should end. Raise the stakes and lower the boom. Don’t let them try to cut their losses.
    It’s time to clean out the stables, there’s no point in stopping until it’s done.
    I always thought the biggest challenge Stephen Harper would have would be dealing with the media bias in this country and often wondered how he would handle it. So far he has done very well. He shouldn’t give those corrupt liberal puppets one single solitary inch. Nothing less than democracy in Canada is at stake.
    How else should he treat a media that brags that they made him and they can unmake him?
    It’s a huge challenge, the good news is that Stephen Harper is way smarter than any of those hopeless fools in the PPG.

  43. Virgil, you are quite right. I agree conservatives should be on the offensive (not JUST Harper). The phone numbers and some e-mail addresses of the PPG reproters are on the PPG website as well as a few e-mail addresses. We need to attacking these dick heads ourselves.
    By the way, this thread started with a comment about PPG reprter Greg Weston, (AKA sniveling weasal). His e-mail is greg.weston@tor.sunpub.com I’m sure he’d love to hear from as many conservatives as possible.

  45. I have written Greg “grumpy”Weston several times. The last time the answer was a succinct “whatever”. Obviously he didn’t like what I had to say to him. However, I am retired, 65 years old and this is the first time that because I belong to a certain party, holding certain beliefs, I am part of a conspiracy. Go figure. Anybody interested should read Andrew Coyne’s column in the National Post today. He says it like it is and on the National the other night he said the Press Gallery had become pompous. Truer words were never spoken.
    When did the media begin to think they were the opposition in this country? I thought we elected opposition parties who were suppose to hold the government to account and the media was suppose to report both sides of the argument. Obviously the media has decided that this was not exciting enough or that the opposition was too weak and so they think the government must provide them with the information so the media can write their stories for the various newsclips on 24 hour television. Somebody needs to bring the media into line. They are not interested in trying to determine both sides of the story but need to create sensationalist headlines so they can sell newspapers and obtain viewers for their newscasts. So sad…so sad..All this under the guise of the public’s right to know. When a poll says that the majority think the media is biased they better give their heads a shake and start doing their jobs differently.

  46. NKOTB:
    “Dirk, where are you?”
    I assume you’re wondering why I haven’t responded? Well, two reasons: I’ve got lots of stuff on the go, and I’ve said about all I’ve got to say here.
    “Your arguments don’t deal with their unprofessionalism, their attitude of entitlement, their outright lies, their not reporting things of importance (The National, Politics, and “Mike Puffy Live,” for instance, are not reporting on the Chuck Guite trial; what’s with that?), their deep lack of respect for duly elected officials of Canada.”
    The crappy state of the media in our country is beside the point. I’ve got two problems:
    – Harper wants to use the media as a vehicle to get his message to Canadians. He’s said as much himself. And to accomplish this, he’s got to impose restrictions on the press: ie. control his, and the CPC’s interaction with the press. If you can’t see the obvious problem with this, nothing I can say will make a difference.
    – This constant complaining by Harper, and many posters like yourself, that the MSM is biased against the Conservative govenment. Up to this point, I thought things were actually going rather well for Harper and his CPC government. He’s been getting pretty good reviews. I’ll remind you once more: the Globe editorial board, in addition to those from a number of other papers supported the notion of a Harper this past election. Sure, there were some hiccups and things that didn’t go over well, like the Emerson defection and some of the Kyoto handling, but you can’t expect the press to kind of laugh that stuff off and not apply any pressure.
    “We’re sick to death of being fed lies and propaganda the media propogate on behalf their Librano and Dipper friends.”
    To be honest, I don’t know why I’m bothering with a response. Anyone that uses “Librano” and “Dipper” like this isn’t going to take any ideas seriously unless they’re convinced they’re from a fellow conservative ideologue. But anyway…I think you’re going way too far with the “lies and propoganda” bit. I’ll agree that media sources tend to have a bias one way or another, but that’s part of the industry. It’s impossible to write objectively, without bias. On the whole, most of the Canadian press is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Kind of like the majority of Canadians. Sure, some media institutions are more right or left than others, but that’s ok. It’s fairly common knowledge where the biases lay.
    About the Guite thing, I don’t know why it’s not getting coverage on TV news. It is getting covered in print, but I don’t think any paper is really going nuts with it, like what happened with Gomery. The Gomery Inq. was the real story. We all already know that Guite is a crook and that some Liberals are complicit in his dealings, so this trial isn’t really ground-breaking. It’s an appropriate, expected outcome of the Gomery Inq..

  47. Dirk – when you said “This is a perfect example of groupthink here at SDA: posters here keep repeating the same baseless crap, and eventually it’s taken as gospel truth.”
    If the shoe fits…………
    Think about what you said – you have been parroting the leftist/MSM line – giving all the “reasons” behind your arguements – the same “reasons” about how Emerson is “different” than Stronach (by the way – I spewed my morning coffee with your statement about Paulie not knowing about Stronach until it was a done deal – you can’t really believe that – and if you do, well then you are an idiot) – about how the media said some bad things about the liberals proves they aren’t biased.
    You are a perfect example of your statement in that you have been hearing the same baseless crap from the MSM for years now about the Conservatives and now you believe it. Try to open your eyes and ears and really listen, really pay attention to the phrasing, to the innuendo, to how the reporters and columists say one good thing then add 10 buts…..
    Try – just for a week to put yourself in our place (I know it will be tough but I have faith that you can do it) and really hear from a conservative point of view.
    Then come back and try out your reasoning again on some of your quotes.
    Methinks you will be surprised.

  48. Dirk I would like to congradulate you on maintaining your composure in a very hostile enviroment. This, doesn’t mean however, that I agree with you. Like you I don’t have the time to deal with this. Although I will give it some thought and present my points later.
    One thing that infuriates me about the news media (bit off topic) is the tendencey to cover each others asses and dismiss ANY transgression. The public insulting of Stockwell Day’s daughter-in-law, and Peter Newman’s attacks on Mulroney are two glaring examples. The news media attacks everyone else but is absurdly lenient (to the point of moral corruption) on it’s own people.

  49. Alberta Girl:
    (Congrats on the Oilers, btw… unless you’re a true-red Flames fan. I’m thrilled to bits, having been a die-hard fan since I was a kid in the 80s.)
    “Try to open your eyes and ears and really listen, really pay attention to the phrasing, to the innuendo, to how the reporters and columists say one good thing then add 10 buts…..”
    I totally agree that the press is consistently overly negative, that they pursue the sensational over the meaningful, etc., etc.. But I truly don’t see this same overwhelming bias you, and others here do. Sure, the CBC or the Star, tend to be more critical of the CPC. But the Sun papers and the Post are more critical of the Liberals. And the NDP is lucky to even get serious coverage in any of the national media. My point is, we’ve got major right-leaning media sources as well as major left-leaning media sources. And if you want to get really technical, what you consider “left” in the some of the MSM here in Canada barely scratches the surface of what socialism is really all about. In other words, on a global scale the Reform party was far more on the right side of the spectrum than the NDP is on the left.
    Further, if this so-called anti-Conservative bias is so prevalent, why, then, did Harper have the open support of so many editorial boards in the last election? And why has he gotten more positive reviews than negative reviews from columnists in the first 100 or so days of his being PM?
    What I think this comes down to in most cases here is an approach to politics that’s akin to one’s support of a favourite hockey team. There are many CPC fans here, which in itself is fine, but as soon as anyone says anything that’s close to being critical, people are up in arms.
    Since you asked me to “Try to open your eyes and ears” and take in the news from a conservative perspective, I’d like you to do the same, but from the perspective of someone who supports a centrist, or dare I say, a left-leaning agenda. I’m confident you’ll find similar problems. And don’t just pick and choose from one media outlet, try variety. I’ll take you up on your challenge, though.

  50. The reason Harper has gotten such . . . “Good” press is that after the overwhelming corruption and arrogance of the Liberals I’m certain Forrest Gump could have been PM and gotten good press. Stop patting yourself on the back Dirk. speaking of the pres figuratively patting themselves on the back I notice you didn’t have much to say about my post regarding the presses habit of glossing over and ignoring each others misdeeds.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation