Press complains about access to Harper.

[Topaz]

I've never heard any of the Canadian media tell unthruths and IF they did it was corrected the next day. The only untruths I hear is in the House during Question Period and one has only to guess who tells the most. Harper problem is his personality, at least , the one he shows us Canadians. When comes to accomplishments, they are only the negative ones that hurt Canadians, that stand out. What has he done? When you think of Harper what comes to mind, first?

[cybercoma]

I wonder how the Harper Defence Squad would feel about an NDP Prime Minister dodging the media like Stephen does.

[Mr.Canada]

I wonder how the Harper Defence Squad would feel about an NDP Prime Minister dodging the media like Stephen does.

I wonder how the public would feel about the NDP having state run media instead of the media we have now.

[cybercoma]

I wonder what it would be like for your posts to actually be based on reality, rather than your batshit crazy fantasies.

[Charles Anthony]

Everybody,

Stop the personal attacks and the rude language. Anybody who posts a hint of an innuendo of an indirect personal attacks runs the risk of having posting privileges suspended.

Ch. A.

[PIK]

Bruce carlson, I think he is the guy in trouble right now, well everytime it seems and just last week, when he is in the news , the headlines say former harper advisor, and how long ago was that. lol

[bleeding heart]

Bruce carlson, I think he is the guy in trouble right now, well everytime it seems and just last week, when he is in the news , the headlines say former harper advisor, and how long ago was that. lol

That's not some plot to undemine PM Harper; it's to provide context about somebody by referring to their most prominent position.

If it were Buzz Hargrove, you don't think they'd mention a little thing like the Auto Union?

Of course they would.

I think some of y'all have got a victim complex about the Prime Minister, or maybe about conservatives generally.

Edited November 5, 2012 by bleeding heart

[bleeding heart]

double

Edited November 5, 2012 by bleeding heart

[PIK]

And in todays paper harper is feeding the trained media seals on his plane. And as I look up, I see it is snowing outside. I should be hunting deer.

[Argus]

I wonder how the Harper Defence Squad would feel about an NDP Prime Minister dodging the media like Stephen does.

You clearly don't remember how Trudeau and Chretien dodged the media. Hell, Trudeau ran his last campaign dodging the media!

[cybercoma]

You clearly don't remember how Trudeau and Chretien dodged the media. Hell, Trudeau ran his last campaign dodging the media!

So that means it's ok for Harper to do it because Trudeau did it 30+ years ago?

[Signals.Cpl]

So that means it's ok for Harper to do it because Trudeau did it 30+ years ago?

Why are you so interested in PM Harper making himself available to the media? He will never get a fair chance from them. If the media wants to get more access to the PM then they need to make an effort to be more balanced and fair in the way they portray him. What if President Obama decided that he will ignore Fox News for his second term? Would you say its fair seeing that no matter what he does fox and co. twist his words and actions to fit their agenda.

[cybercoma]

I'm interested in Harper being available to the media because I don't want a government that talks down to Canadians with propagandized statements. I don't give a fig who the PM is. And it's not a particular news service that's complaining about access to Harper, it's journalists from everywhere.

[Signals.Cpl]

Ok, but tell me this, do you think that the media as a whole has been fair to Mr. Harper? And I am asking to look at it is without considering wether you like or dislike him. Ask yourself if you were the leader of a party and PM of Canada would you make yourself available to any news media that is essentially out to get you or would you hang back ignore all those that are out to get you and allow the results to speak for themselves.

[Wilber]

It's conveniently forgotten that it was the media's coverage of Sponsorgate that effectively nailed the coffin shut on the Liberals. Didn't hear moaning from Harper or any other Conservatives then.

It's the media's job to ask hard questions and any government should be able to answer them.

Edited November 6, 2012 by Wilber

[Signals.Cpl]

I am not saying that they should avoid the hard questions, I am saying that for media sources to go out of their way to fabricate controversy without providing context means that the government has no obligation to them and if the media as a whole would want more access to the PM then they should be more fair to the PM. The Conservatives and the PM have enough controversies and problems so investigating those is one thing, but we are talking about creating problems or spreading misinformation in order to further their agenda.

We need to restructuring the CBC so that its a reliable unbiased source of information and it as an organization should be held at a much higher standard as it receives tax payer dollars.

[eyeball]

This idea that Harper is either afraid or cannot afford or risk to speak to Canadians because the media will misreport him is an utterly bogus one. Again I say, in light of the fact that there is nothing stopping him from bypassing the media and simply showing us first hand what he's doing and saying.

If there was ever an opportunity for someone that was inclined to virtually kill the vast left-wing dominated media in a single stroke it is right now. Why on Earth especially in this day and age is Harper not jumping on this opportunity? The technology and system to do this could be set up and running within days if not hours.

Edited November 6, 2012 by eyeball

[Shakeyhands]

I am not saying that they should avoid the hard questions, I am saying that for media sources to go out of their way to fabricate controversy without providing context means that the government has no obligation to them and if the media as a whole would want more access to the PM then they should be more fair to the PM. The Conservatives and the PM have enough controversies and problems so investigating those is one thing, but we are talking about creating problems or spreading misinformation in order to further their agenda.

We need to restructuring the CBC so that its a reliable unbiased source of information and it as an organization should be held at a much higher standard as it receives tax payer dollars.

So much bollocks in one post! Could you possibly provide a cite or two?

[Signals.Cpl]

So much bollocks in one post! Could you possibly provide a cite or two?

1.Challenger Jets- There was no context to why they were used it was thrown out that they were used and it cost x number of dollars without ever explaining that the majority of the cost is there wether they are used or not.

2.F-35's- Seems to me that majority of the media is jumping on the F-35's because the government "lied" about the total cost while ignoring the fact that the same method was not applied to other recent purchases.

3.The whole bullshit of complaining about the Federal Government paying out the severance pay that was started well before their time ignoring the fact that they also cancelled it and thereby saved billions of dollars in the future.

4."Harpers war in Afghanistan"... how many times have I opened a paper and had to read some bullshit about how Harper is responsible for getting us involved in Afghanistan.

No matter who is at fault it will always be turned around to being Harper's fault one way or another.

[jacee]

On topic ... We PAY Harper to work FOR us, and to report what he's doing to us.

Imo

[eyeball]

4."Harpers war in Afghanistan"... how many times have I opened a paper and had to read some bullshit about how Harper is responsible for getting us involved in Afghanistan.

I don't know, but you should be able to cite dozens just off the top of your head if it's as bad as you say.

And again I ask...why does he keep putting up with the bullshit when he could quite literally put an end to it tomorrow?

[Shakeyhands]

1.Challenger Jets- There was no context to why they were used it was thrown out that they were used and it cost x number of dollars without ever explaining that the majority of the cost is there wether they are used or not.

2.F-35's- Seems to me that majority of the media is jumping on the F-35's because the government "lied" about the total cost while ignoring the fact that the same method was not applied to other recent purchases.

3.The whole bullshit of complaining about the Federal Government paying out the severance pay that was started well before their time ignoring the fact that they also cancelled it and thereby saved billions of dollars in the future.

4."Harpers war in Afghanistan"... how many times have I opened a paper and had to read some bullshit about how Harper is responsible for getting us involved in Afghanistan.

No matter who is at fault it will always be turned around to being Harper's fault one way or another.

Cites normally include a link to an article that supports your point. Try again perhaps?

[Wilber]

The government is not a private citizen or company, the same standards of privacy do not apply. The government is answerable to the people and the media is a primary method of getting those questions answered. Not clarifying it's position by openly answering questions and defending its position is just inviting speculation and innuendo.

[eyeball]

The standards the government applies to itself and our knowledge of it's activities are related to secrecy not privacy.

[Wilber]

The standards the government applies to itself and our knowledge of it's activities are related to secrecy not privacy.

I quite agree.