Stephen Maher, a "Robocall" hysteric, is one of those. Presumably to coincide with the release of Trudeau's new autobiography, yesterday Maher enthused about a new book by Michael Harris smearing Stephen Harper "Party of One: Stephen Harper and Canada’s Radical Makeover":
... Michael Harris writes about the Harper- Finkelstein link...In other words Harris' book is chock-a-block with paranoid anti-Harper venom. Of course neither Harris nor Maher would mention that Trudeau's campaign is inspired (if not actively advised) by Barack Obama's crew and that Obama has actually vowed to "fundamentally transform America".
... Harper is inspired by Republicans, a leader hostile to Canada’s system of parliamentary democracy, and in Party of One Harris meticulously traces what he sees as Harper’s attack on that system.
... Harris connects the dots between Harper and Finkelstein, who is nicknamed the “merchant of venom” because of his skill with attack ads....
Maher does, however, bring up the Media Party's recent phony outrage over alleged Conservative copyright abuse:
... Harper has been fighting to make Canada safe for attack ads. ... Last week, leaked cabinet documents showed that he wants to change copyright law to allow political parties to use news footage in attack ads.You'd expect that Maher, as a journalist, would know full well that under copyright fair dealing provisions political parties have long been allowed to use news footage in political ads. What Maher could also be reasonably expected to know, but fail to mention (naturally), is that the real scandal in this is that the heads of CBC, CTV, Global and CityTV "news" organizations had been secretly colluding (conspiring) to thwart those provisions by mutually agreeing (forming a cartel) not to run Conservative ads using their news clips.
This was all in a corrupt effort to protect Justin Trudeau from his own idiotic musings and, while they were at it, attempt to smear Harper. This is, apparently, their idea of objectivity and ethics in the news business. The up-side is that now those CBC, CTV, Global and CityTV "news" executives face criminal charges, big fines and even jail time for violating the Competition Act.
Conservatives use paid "attack" ads, as do all the other parties. Liberals use the Media Party's attack newspapers and attack TV networks full time, at no expense to themselves.
11 comments:
oh Jesus...FINALLY someone who see's the media for what they are. Who in the opposition party need to pay for attack ads when they have the CBC,CTV GLOBAL, Toronto Star, Globe & Mail at their beck and call for FREE. Pimping for the Liberal Trudeau 24/7 .Someone should ask LIBERAL Elections Canada if this is LEGAL.
There is an entire network that is dedicated to hating Trudeau. I don't hear you crying about the Sun Channel's obvious and hateful bias against Trudeau. Are you really for media fairness of are you just complaining every time someone in the media says that Harper is less than perfect.
Hardly a fair comparison..Sun News vs ALL the other Harperphobic 'news sources'!
@Anonymous who is either ignorant of established facts or lying. There is written proof of collusion among all the news networks led by the CBC to target the Conservative government and to promote Trudeau. The collaborators also decided to exclude SNN, clearly knowing that SNN would out them. Through access to information SNN obtained proof in writing of this.
Secondly SNN reports the actual news with proof to back it up, so when SNN reports Trudeau's inability to respond as an adult to serious questions, it is simply showing him as he is. Furthermore on many occasions SNN has done the same with the CPC government on various issues. The media party however prefers to invent, fabricate, take out of context or whatever it takes in order to cast anything the Conservative government does in a negative light; not occasionally but constantly while hiding every screw-up by Trudeau. There is absolutely no comparison.
Harris is so openly anti Harper that it would've been a shocker if he'd said ANYTHING positive at all. It will no doubt belong next to openly Liberal Paul Wells book. That would be the discount shelf at the local Goodwill or Sally Ann. It's just part of the "consortium" in the battle to elect the boy-god and return to the good old days of Librano largesse.
@Anon (3:01 PM) is another typical, whiny Lib who thinks any voice at all for Conservatives is unfair to Justin.
Hell, CBC's $1.1B taxpayer subsidy alone dwarfs SNN's measly budget. Compared with the combined resources of all the Trudeau supporting, anti-Harper TV networks and newspaper chains SNN's budget is completely insignificant.
Plus you have to PAY to watch SNN. All the other networks are included with basic cable. And some cable networks (eg. Telus) don't even carry Sun.
The media playing field is so skewed against Conservatives in this country, it's a surreal bad joke (aka a disgrace).
And, Anon (3:01 PM), nobody at SNN "hates" Justin. They (and we) just think that parentage, celebrity and really, really nice hair are insufficient qualifications to be PM. SNN is merely attempting to educate its viewers using Justin's own behaviour and words. Who I, for one, do "hate" are the corrupt, ruthless dimwits of the Media Party who go out of their way to suppress boy-Justin's idiocies and cover up his utter lack of fitness for office.
You know, you don't really have to think or have deep thoughts in order to be a Progressive. Just mouth words like "diversity" and "inclusiveness" and "carbon pollution" and you are instantly a member of the club. That's why Trudeau is so attractive to the LIV and the Media Party. Thought is not required and he epitomizes thoughtlessness.
Anon,
"sluts, etc" - well I admit that some of that may have been crude and a little "mean" but it has the benefit of being true. Ezra says those things with a smile, not "hate". He's mocking Trudeau, and will never apologize for being technically accurate and meanly humorous.
Ezra Levant, to Liberals, may seem over the top at times but, in general, he and the other opinion shows at SNN are doing what the other media outlets absolutely refuse to do - properly vet the new, wet-behind-the-ears Liberal leader. And for balance SNN frequently solicits even Liberal attack-dog Warren Kinsella's opinion.
No, the Media Party is not "equally critical". It is relentlessly lib/left, attacks Harper daily and has no compunction at all about trumping up bogus "scandals" (eg. "robocalls" and now "copyright"). It refuses to critically examine Trudeau and actively suppresses coverage of his many dopey statements.
The media would, by now, have mercilessly crucified any Conservative candidate as ill-qualified and gaff prone as Trudeau. Perhaps you'll recall, for example, its treatment of Stockwell Day, a much better qualified and much more experienced politician.
Harris was a radio host on CFRA in Ottawa during Adscam. He basically called Liberals thieves and crooks on a dialy basis and wondered about the morality of anyone who could support this, I believe he helped many CPC candidates win their ridings in and around the Ottawa area. He's anti Harper now, but was anti Chretien too.
Call him what you want, but, he's consistant. Some of his books on the Justice system should be manditory reading, he is no fan of Liberal policy.
I know its been a long time since the Conservatives were in opposition, but, to people like Michael Harris it doesnt matter if your Liberal or Conservative, he's an equal opportunist when it comes to raining down on sitting governments.
Ezra Levant alleged on Sun News yesterday that the media is now refusing to run CPC ads. If this is verified to be true, then I smell a lawsuit. But, who will report on this other than Sun News.
I am not so sure the media is totally skewed against the Conservatives. At least with papers if you look at the endorsements in 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_endorsements_in_the_Canadian_federal_election,_2011 there were far more papers who endorsed the Conservatives than any of the other parties. Granted the endorsements may be different next time around but hardly seems like a Conservative bias to me. Michael Harris certainly hates them, but I've found many others who are fair. In addition a large chunk of the country hates Harper for various reasons so I don't really have a problem with him giving them a voice. If he is factually wrong on many things, it should be easy to debunk.
Post a Comment