The Guergis affair, politics, and the presumption of innocence

[Handsome Rob]

Newspapers should report facts and actual news, there's a difference between good reporting and a smear campaign based on rabbid innuendo.

In such a case, how in the world would they make money?

Real life is rather boring, and 'insiders' & 'experts' make things much more entertaining.

The simple act of comparing 1 story on 4 different newspapers provides evidence enough as to the quality of the information. I find Canadian media to be harshly editorialized, almost to a Fox news level.

I also believe the amount of influence the media carry's with the public (IE: Toyota) to be much more distasteful than the media's editorializing, sensationalizing and otherwise.

But in the typical North American fashion, it has to be somebody else's fault. They make a very convenient scapegoat, but if we didn't want it this way, they wouldn't be selling it this way.

[Topaz]

That`s the way things are in Ottawa. Remember when Lib. Goodale, was said to have connection the the interest income fund leak. The Tories ran with this and yet the RCMP cleared him and found the guilty party as one of the workers from the Department of Finance.

[capricorn]

Ignatieff links Guergis, organized crime

---

“I don’t want to make false accusations but you don’t get cocaine at a corner drug store, right? You have to get it from somewhere, from someone and usually that means organized crime.”

http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/754232Is

Does Michael Ignatieff believe that every addict using hard illegal drugs is linked to organized crime? It sure sounds like it.

That raises another question. Would that then mean that Insite, the Vancouver safe injection program, is aiding and abetting members of organized crime, i.e, the addicts themselves? But, Ignatieff is on record as supportive of Insite.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/01/22/chris-selley-michael-ignatieff-s-gateway-to-the-status-quo.aspx

What the....

[Born Free]

http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/754232Is

Does Michael Ignatieff believe that every addict using hard illegal drugs is linked to organized crime? It sure sounds like it.

That raises another question. Would that then mean that Insite, the Vancouver safe injection program, is aiding and abetting members of organized crime, i.e, the addicts themselves? But, Ignatieff is on record as supportive of Insite.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/01/22/chris-selley-michael-ignatieff-s-gateway-to-the-status-quo.aspx

What the....

Ignatieff is an asshole....what else is new?

[waldo]

Does Michael Ignatieff believe that every addict using hard illegal drugs is linked to organized crime? It sure sounds like it.

interesting... your "sure sounds like it' runs smack up against your own selective, contextually uncertain quote that states an emphasis on 'not wanting to make false accusations' while also including the non-precise phrase, 'usually means'. "Sure sounds like it"... to you!

That raises another question. Would that then mean that Insite, the Vancouver safe injection program, is aiding and abetting members of organized crime, i.e, the addicts themselves? But, Ignatieff is on record as supportive of Insite.

yes, it's a real stretch for Conservatives and their partisans to buy into the progressive proven 'harm reduction' policies that Insite follows.

next thing you'll start posturing that the Official Opposition is behind this little ditty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0i9059PgKj4&feature=player_embedded

[Shady]

yes, it's a real stretch for Conservatives and their partisans to buy into the progressive proven 'harm reduction' policies that Insite follows.

Proven?

Let me guess, the IPCC right?

Edited April 18, 2010 by Shady

[Muddy]

No I won`t say the opposition is behind this little ditty. But some people who are all class put it together. All third of course.

The vultures smell blood ,be damned the evidence.Be damned a trial before ones peers. The Gal is finished career wise but still the left puts the boots to the lady without knowledge of truth or facts .

Tough guys! I bet you guys could squash a grape with one hand your so tough behind that screen.

[waldo]

Proven?

Let me guess, the IPCC right?

why lil' inconsequential buddy, given the constant ass-kicking you take in climate related threads, clearly, the only reason you would draw reference in that regard, is one that belies your masochistic tendencies.

don't hesitate to make your case against drug harm reduction policies... waiting.

[waldo]

No I won`t say the opposition is behind this little ditty. But some people who are all class put it together. All third of course.

The vultures smell blood, be damned the evidence. Be damned a trial before one's peers. The Gal is finished career wise but still the left puts the boots to the lady without knowledge of truth or facts.

Tough guys! I bet you guys could squash a grape with one hand your so tough behind that screen.

the "evidence" you describe would have us believe that Ms. Guergis, at minimum, was a passive enabler to Mr. Jaffer's (alleged) cocaine use. As the previous linked Spectator article states:

The Liberal leader said Sunday that Prime Minister Stephen Harper should have questioned Guergis’s fitness for cabinet months ago when her husband, former MP Rahim Jaffer, was first charged with cocaine possession.

“What I want to know is did he call in Helena Guergis, did he say, ’What’s going on here, what is the nature of Mr. Jaffer’s business relationships, how could he possibly have been accused of cocaine possession, is there any connection to you in any way?”’ Ignatieff told CTV’s Question Period.

“Seven months ago, he should have been asking those questions.”

[capricorn]

Ignatieff is an asshole....what else is new?

I don't think Ignatieff is an asshole. What I think is that Mr. Ignatieff has a tendency to send mixed messages. He has been known to reverse his position on some issues.

[capricorn]

interesting... your "sure sounds like it' runs smack up against your own selective, contextually uncertain quote that states an emphasis on 'not wanting to make false accusations' while also including the non-precise phrase, 'usually means'. "Sure sounds like it"... to you!

Don't be coy by trying to make it about me. You know exactly what Mr. Ignatieff was getting at and the message he was trying to get across.

[Muddy]

the "evidence" you describe would have us believe that Ms. Guergis, at minimum, was a passive enabler to Mr. Jaffer's (alleged) cocaine use. As the previous linked Spectator article states:

The PM would have been out of line to ask her these questions. What Iggy is is doing is giving the impression that Jaffer is guilty of cocaine use or possession. Careful there Iggy, he was not found guilty in an Ontario Court of law for cocaine. Guergis has not been charged with anything yet but she has been found guilty by the talking heads and the vultures. Guilty by association and marriage! These people just might be guilty of some underworld shenanigans but stop kicking the Gal to death until the RCMP reports and or charges are laid. I think Iggy and company along with the PM just might have jumped the gun here.Harper better have some real evidence to pass over to the RCMP.

[waldo]

The PM would have been out of line to ask her these questions. What Iggy is is doing is giving the impression that Jaffer is guilty of cocaine use or possession. Careful there Iggy, he was not found guilty in an Ontario Court of law for cocaine. Guergis has not been charged with anything yet but she has been found guilty by the talking heads and the vultures. Guilty by association and marriage! These people just might be guilty of some underworld shenanigans but stop kicking the Gal to death until the RCMP reports and or charges are laid. I think Iggy and company along with the PM just might have jumped the gun here.Harper better have some real evidence to pass over to the RCMP.

your point is sound... faced with a situation where Harper refuses to provide any background details as to why he soundly kicked Guergis to the curb and why he called in the RCMP & Ethics Commissioner, others are simply left to accept Harper's actions and lack of commentary. Are Harper's actions a management technique that diminishes or fuels that 'guilt by association' you speak of?

[capricorn]

the "evidence" you describe would have us believe that Ms. Guergis, at minimum, was a passive enabler to Mr. Jaffer's (alleged) cocaine use. As the previous linked Spectator article states:

You're amusing in a twisted sort of way. You jumped on my opinion that "it sure sounds like it". Then you say "the evidence...would have us believe" she was an enabler. Unlike you, I don't think so highly of myself to reserve the privilege of speaking on behalf of the masses.

[Born Free]

I don't think Ignatieff is an asshole. What I think is that Mr. Ignatieff has a tendency to send mixed messages. He has been known to reverse his position on some issues.

.... sounds like a pretty good definition of my terminology...

[waldo]

Don't be coy by trying to make it about me. You know exactly what Mr. Ignatieff was getting at and the message he was trying to get across.

no - in the face of the Ignatieff caveat and use of non-definitive phrasing you chose to state, "Sure sounds like it".

and hardly coy... given the caveat and non-definitive phrasing, I chose to highlight that the certainty in your "sounding like" was... your certainty... surely, soundly!

[waldo]

You're amusing in a twisted sort of way. You jumped on my opinion that "it sure sounds like it". Then you say "the evidence...would have us believe" she was an enabler. Unlike you, I don't think so highly of myself to reserve the privilege of speaking on behalf of the masses.

actually... I suggested 'passive enabler' - there's a distinction.

so... your statement that "it sure sounds like it" as distinct from a statement like "it sure sounds like it... to me", is your qualifier to question how high you think of yourself... versus others? Which masses were you speaking for when you stated, "it sure sounds like it"?

[capricorn]

no - in the face of the Ignatieff caveat and use of non-definitive phrasing you chose to state, "Sure sounds like it".

If this sentence makes any sense to anyone reading it, I would gladly welcome a translation of this installment of waldospeak.

and hardly coy... given the caveat and non-definitive phrasing, I chose to highlight that the certainty in your "sounding like" was... your certainty... surely, soundly!

It's difficult to respond to such nonsensical banter.

[capricorn]

Speaking of Guergis and politics, here's an entry written by a person named Julian Beltrame. I believe Julian is a male but I'm not positive. He says Harper hasn't had much luck with the women in his party and asks whether Harper is headed for "woman trouble". What's most interesting are the two responses by individuals identifying themselves with female names.

CavetRose

Guest

18-Apr-10 08:13 Women Problems ?

What a sad display of journalism & political commentary ! The real problem is pants on fire mr zsohar and his mysognist opposition & daily circle jerks.!The liberal party of thieves has 'Women Problems' as it is noted that their daily attacks on women ministers ensure that real woman will piss in their coffee at any opportunity including the next election.

Verna

Guest

18-Apr-10 04:34 Verna

The only one who will have women troubles is Ignatieff calling Helena Guergis MRS. Jaffer. The Liberals have been after the Cons. women in Cabinet for MONTHS...smears and inuendos...asking for all of them at one time or another to step down. What a farce. I am a women and PMSH is the BEST thing this country has seen in support of women.Look at the women in the opposition...most have VERY SHADY pasts and have been in trouble.Canadians arn't listening to the LIBERAL media hacks any more. Disgusting and pathetic.I hope Helena Guergis sues the lot of you when the RCMP are finished investigation this latest LIBERAL scam.

Of course, there is no way of knowing who for sure wrote those replies. Yet, I have been having similar thoughts that the Liberals piling on the women in Cabinet may backfire. Few women are married to perfect men and I think most of them would be insulted if they were blamed for the faults or misdeeds of their spouses. Divorce is not always an option for these women and for a variety of reasons, they choose to stay in less than perfect unions. Another thing, once Guergis' miscarriages became public, many women probably sympathized with Guergis' airport meltdown because many of them have been there. So I wonder whether the Liberals are alienating a lot of women, a group they are trying to bring onside.

I know the Conservatives' lead in the polls has narrowed and some are saying it's because of the Guergis thing. I don't read much into this because the polls have been all over the place in recent months but in all of them the Liberals never came out on top. What would be very bad for the Liberals is if Guergis is cleared of any wrongdoing by the authorities. The Conservatives would be sure to remind the public of the unrelenting attack on a woman innocent of the allegations leveled against her.

In view of the need to secure the votes of women, this is a minefield for all parties.

[waldo]

“I don’t want to make false accusations but you don’t get cocaine at a corner drug store, right? You have to get it from somewhere, from someone and usually that means organized crime.”

Does Michael Ignatieff believe that every addict using hard illegal drugs is linked to organized crime? It sure sounds like it.

interesting... your "sure sounds like it' runs smack up against your own selective, contextually uncertain quote that states an emphasis on 'not wanting to make false accusations' while also including the non-precise phrase, 'usually means'. "Sure sounds like it"... to you!

Don't be coy by trying to make it about me. You know exactly what Mr. Ignatieff was getting at and the message he was trying to get across.

no - in the face of the Ignatieff caveat and use of non-definitive phrasing you chose to state, "Sure sounds like it".

If this sentence makes any sense to anyone reading it, I would gladly welcome a translation of this installment of waldospeak.

It's difficult to respond to such nonsensical banter.

is this your lame attempt at attempting to negate your foot-in-mouth capricornspeak?... you wrapped the certainty of your "sure sounds like it" assessment around that Ignatieff quote that included a caveat (I don’t want to make false accusations) and that included non-definitive phrasing (usually that means). Yes, notwithstanding the caveat and non-definitive phrasing, you were surely and soundly positive in your capricorn certainty, that "It sure sounds like it", to you!

[waldo]

Of course, there is no way of knowing who for sure wrote those replies.

apparently... some wags are suggesting those replies were written by Guergis staffers (something about they have experience in that sort of thing )

[capricorn]

capricornspeak

I'm pleased to see you're inspired by my posts.

[Muddy]

Well I admit I am a man ,and I think Iggy made some real mistakes on this . He has come off sounding like a male bully picking on a women who has already been knocked down . She may be guilty of some wrong doing ,or she may just be guilty by association. Or she may have done nothing at all except been in the wrong place at the wrong time.

If the latter is true ,Harper will not be looked at to kindly by some. But right now Iggy is being brutal. The NDP are just the NDP and they just huff and puff. They are so over the top nobody except themselves listen.

[Born Free]

apparently... some wags are suggesting those replies were written by Guergis staffers (something about they have experience in that sort of thing )

It was intended as scarcasm....however, given her past...who knows fer sure eh? Only her hairdresser perhaps...

[waldo]

Well I admit I am a man ,and I think Iggy made some real mistakes on this . He has come off sounding like a male bully picking on a women who has already been knocked down . She may be guilty of some wrong doing ,or she may just be guilty by association. Or she may have done nothing at all except been in the wrong place at the wrong time.

If the latter is true ,Harper will not be looked at to kindly by some. But right now Iggy is being brutal. The NDP are just the NDP and they just huff and puff. They are so over the top nobody except themselves listen.

white knight syndrome: n. A personality characteristic found in most males that lead them to:

1. rush to the aid of any female they see who appears in any form of distress.

who said chivalry was dead?