BubberMiley Posted November 22, 2013 Report Posted November 22, 2013 (edited) Very weird poll. Apparently Ford has a 42% approval rating but only 35% think he is "good for Toronto." So 7% approve of him but think he's bad for Toronto. And 60% agree with the decision to strip Ford of his powers and want him to resign, so 2% approve of him but they also approve of stripping his powers and want him to go away. I'm not sure what to make of those two-percenters at all. Maybe they "approve" of him like I do, in that he may not be a capable mayor but he's hilarious entertainment. Edited November 22, 2013 by BubberMiley Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
jacee Posted November 22, 2013 Report Posted November 22, 2013 (edited) /canada-under-prime-minister-rob-ford/ SATIRE ALERT Besides, it doesnt matter what any of you think. The taxpayers like me. They see themselves in me especially the part where I admit my shortcomings but fail to muster even a half-hearted effort to correct them. By being me, I make you feel better about you. I think there's a lot of truth in that. Edited November 22, 2013 by jacee Quote
bleeding heart Posted November 22, 2013 Report Posted November 22, 2013 (edited) While I believe human beings are inherently contradictory creatures, there's something fascinating about the blatant contradictions of many (but presumably not all) of Ford's defenders and admirers. That is, I think a lot of them are feeling some compassion for a man's substance abuse issues. Now, in and of itself, I appreciate that. More compassion will make a better world. I genuinely believe that. So what's the problem? Well, it's not true compassion. It's partisanship (and worse, as I'll get to) under a self-serving pretence of compassion. Where were these ford supporters when he was lambasting criminals and drug abusers? Were they saying, "Hey, Rob, show a little compassion for the addicts and those troubled enough to take solace in dangerous substances"? Nope. "Rob, you are being too harsh and sanctimonious, and these people need and deserve our sympathy"? Silence. If anything, they were probably applauding his harshness, his smug No-Drug righteousness, and nodding quietly at his "common sense" and his "ability to tell it like it is" and his lack of "political correctness." Because, despite how they view themselves (and how they are often viewed by others) these Ford supporters are, in fact, elitists. If you can only summon empathy for the successful politician from the rich family...while viewing with contempt the people without means, networks, or anything else when they share the same problems....well, I'm sorry, but you are an elitist (by inclination, I mean, not by virtue of position), a sycophant, a power-worshipper. In this vein, Ford's continued popularity among a certain sector is beginning to make more sense to me. Edited November 22, 2013 by bleeding heart Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
ReeferMadness Posted November 22, 2013 Report Posted November 22, 2013 While I believe human beings are inherently contradictory creatures, there's something fascinating about the blatant contradictions of many (but presumably not all) of Ford's defenders and admirers. That is, I think a lot of them are feeling some compassion for a man's substance abuse issues. Now, in and of itself, I appreciate that. More compassion will make a better world. I genuinely believe that. So what's the problem? Well, it's not true compassion. It's partisanship (and worse, as I'll get to) under a self-serving pretence of compassion. Where were these ford supporters when he was lambasting criminals and drug abusers? Were they saying, "Hey, Rob, show a little compassion for the addicts and those troubled enough to take solace in dangerous substances"? Nope. "Rob, you are being too harsh and sanctimonious, and these people need and deserve our sympathy"? Silence. If anything, they were probably applauding his harshness, his smug No-Drug righteousness, and nodding quietly at his "common sense" and his "ability to tell it like it is" and his lack of "political correctness." Because, despite how they view themselves (and how they are often viewed by others) these Ford supporters are, in fact, elitists. If you can only summon empathy for the successful politician from the rich family...while viewing with contempt the people without means, networks, or anything else when they share the same problems....well, I'm sorry, but you are an elitist (by inclination, I mean, not by virtue of position), a sycophant, a power-worshipper. In this vein, Ford's continued popularity among a certain sector is beginning to make more sense to me. I'm not sure whether I disagree or just don't follow. As I understand the situation, many (most?) Rob Ford supporters are poorly educated, disaffected and lower-income. These people are not elitist by any measure. Instead, they are so distrustful and cynical about the normal centres of power (and the over-achievers who normally inhabit them) that Ford's bizarre behaviour just reinforces their already deeply held cynical beliefs. Ford is the outsider who is sticking it to the man, poking his finger in the eyes of the elite. The more the Toronto Star digs up dirt, the more he will become their guy. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Wilber Posted November 22, 2013 Report Posted November 22, 2013 (edited) Very weird poll. Apparently Ford has a 42% approval rating but only 35% think he is "good for Toronto." So 7% approve of him but think he's bad for Toronto. And 60% agree with the decision to strip Ford of his powers and want him to resign, so 2% approve of him but they also approve of stripping his powers and want him to go away. I'm not sure what to make of those two-percenters at all. Maybe they "approve" of him like I do, in that he may not be a capable mayor but he's hilarious entertainment. What the hey. If a crack smoking drunk can run Toronto, any idiot should be able to do it. Edited November 22, 2013 by Wilber Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
jacee Posted November 22, 2013 Report Posted November 22, 2013 I think this is the media parodying the media ... -rob-ford-accused-of-littering He's admitted to smoking crack and drinking too much but Toronto Mayor Rob Ford is now being accused of something else. Littering. Activist Sheila White says, according to police notes, Mayor Rob Ford and his associates showed a blatant disregard for the environment, hiding beverage containers in a secluded area of a public park over the past year. ... She calls littering a gateway crime, which could lead to other things like vandalism, not picking up after your dog, urinating in public and smoking crack. Oh ya ... and drunk driving. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 Now, everyone is a comedian. The problem is the comedians can't match the shock value of the original. Ford is comedian-proof. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
g_bambino Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 As I understand the situation, many (most?) Rob Ford supporters are poorly educated, disaffected and lower-income. I thought they were mostly from the suburbs. They're hardly the bastion of low earners and the disaffected. Quote
jacee Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 I'd guess that when Ford talks about "the little guys" he means small business owners and their employees. /why-do-so-many-people-still-support-rob-ford/ If Fords support is partly about the idea that its good to make liberals angry, then nothing can turn off a sizable chunk of his supporters. Well, not nothing. If he did something that made liberals happy, then that would probably lose him more supporters than all the crack and all the alcohol in the world. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 I thought they were mostly from the suburbs. They're hardly the bastion of low earners and the disaffected. What makes you say that? Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
bleeding heart Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 I'm not sure whether I disagree or just don't follow. As I understand the situation, many (most?) Rob Ford supporters are poorly educated, disaffected and lower-income. These people are not elitist by any measure. Instead, they are so distrustful and cynical about the normal centres of power (and the over-achievers who normally inhabit them) that Ford's bizarre behaviour just reinforces their already deeply held cynical beliefs. Ford is the outsider who is sticking it to the man, poking his finger in the eyes of the elite. The more the Toronto Star digs up dirt, the more he will become their guy. I said that they were elitist by inclination, not by virtue of their actual position. Like I said, if you deride and despise the criminals and addicts who are (at least relatively) without means and power--but feel sympathy and compassion for the rich and powerful elite who shares the very same problem--then that is, in my view, a type of elitism, of top-down class warfare. More to the point, I think, is that it's a type of power-worship (and all True Blue power-worshippers hate some powerful folk....in Ford Nation's case, it's those to the left of Pinochet). It's also bipartisan, as we've seen recently with the grief-soaked Passion Play involving the adoration of a vicious international gangster named John F. Kennedy. It's just that it seems unusually stark in the Ford case, probably due to the peculiarities of his more ardent admirers. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Boges Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 (edited) If anyone gets HBO, take a look at last night's Bill Maher show. He sort of puts up a bit of a defense for Ford. He's sort of a legalize all drugs type of guy so it's not much of a surprise. Here's an article http://globalnews.ca/news/986204/real-time-host-bill-maher-defends-toronto-mayor-rob-ford/ Edited November 23, 2013 by Boges Quote
eyeball Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 I would have thought if there was any reason to hope anything good could come out of this it was that the often holier-than-thou facade so many moral entrepreneurs usually insist people in power wear would perhaps rub off a little. I suppose its safe to say that hope will soon wither in the face of other political opportunities to make governing under the influence an issue. I suppose it's also safe to assume that the dissonance of hypocrisy will be numbed out with something or another...probably involving substances of some type as often as not. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
jacee Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 (edited) I said that they were elitist by inclination, not by virtue of their actual position. Like I said, if you deride and despise the criminals and addicts who are (at least relatively) without means and power--but feel sympathy and compassion for the rich and powerful elite who shares the very same problem--then that is, in my view, a type of elitism, of top-down class warfare. More to the point, I think, is that it's a type of power-worship (and all True Blue power-worshippers hate some powerful folk....in Ford Nation's case, it's those to the left of Pinochet). I think Ford Nation consists largely of lower wage (hard partying) private sector workers who are used to their bosses complaining that they can't pay them any more because 'the lefties' steal (tax) money from them to give to lazy-ass people on welfare ... or on bicycles.I also think many small business owners subscribe to the view that they shouldn't have to pay taxes to support people who don't work, use libraries, have too many kids, ride bicycles, etc. I think that mentality - that someone else is taking advantage of them - pervades much of the private sector. Until there is another viable right wing candidate who has similar street appeal (ie, NOT John Tory), many Ford fans may stay solid. I would think Tory 'elites' at all 3 levels of government would be working hard to replace Ford as he is causing a lot of damage to the Conservative brand. Edited November 23, 2013 by jacee Quote
Shady Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 I said that they were elitist by inclination, not by virtue of their actual position. Like I said, if you deride and despise the criminals and addicts who are (at least relatively) without means and power--but feel sympathy and compassion for the rich and powerful elite who shares the very same problem--then that is, in my view, a type of elitism, of top-down class warfare. More to the point, I think, is that it's a type of power-worship (and all True Blue power-worshippers hate some powerful folk....in Ford Nation's case, it's those to the left of Pinochet). It's also bipartisan, as we've seen recently with the grief-soaked Passion Play involving the adoration of a vicious international gangster named John F. Kennedy. It's just that it seems unusually stark in the Ford case, probably due to the peculiarities of his more ardent admirers. Complete and utter nonsense. All of it. Quote
bleeding heart Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 Complete and utter nonsense. All of it. Non-responsive. When you grow an argument, let me know. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Shady Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 Non-responsive. When you grow an argument, let me know. I don't argue with absurdity. Especially absurdity invoking Pinochet.. Quote
bleeding heart Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 (edited) I don't argue with absurdity. Especially absurdity invoking Pinochet.. How is my throwaway remark, an obviously intentional exaggeration, included as a de facto subordinate clause--subordinate within a parenthetical remark, in fact--"all of it"? The thrust of my argument couldn't be more clear; so there's no way that you, an intelligent man, could have misconstrued it. But in case I'm wrong about that, here it is: Rob Ford sold himself as a Tough on Crime sort of guy...and evinced sniggering contempt for illegal drug users. His followers had not stood up and remarked, out of their innate compassion and empathy for such folks, that Ford was being too harsh, too unsympathetic. no; they saved that riposte for Ford's critics. All of a sudden, it seems, people with horrible drug-using behavior deserve some sympathy. That is, now that the subject is a powerful millionaire. The sympathetic response did not (and presumably does not) apply for the lesser breed of humans; it's the old "worthy" vs "unworthy" victim phenomenon, which tends to exclusively orbit issues of Power. Edited November 23, 2013 by bleeding heart Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
g_bambino Posted November 23, 2013 Report Posted November 23, 2013 What makes you say that? A memory of material read and heard and experience. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted November 24, 2013 Report Posted November 24, 2013 I said that they were elitist by inclination, not by virtue of their actual position. Like I said, if you deride and despise the criminals and addicts who are (at least relatively) without means and power--but feel sympathy and compassion for the rich and powerful elite who shares the very same problem--then that is, in my view, a type of elitism, of top-down class warfare. More to the point, I think, is that it's a type of power-worship (and all True Blue power-worshippers hate some powerful folk....in Ford Nation's case, it's those to the left of Pinochet). It's also bipartisan, as we've seen recently with the grief-soaked Passion Play involving the adoration of a vicious international gangster named John F. Kennedy. It's just that it seems unusually stark in the Ford case, probably due to the peculiarities of his more ardent admirers. Maybe. I think that, bizarre as it may seem, Ford Nation doesn't see Rob as a member of the rich and powerful. He's such a doorknob, it's easy to forget how rich his daddy made him. These people see Rob as one of them. They resent what they see as the fat cats at City Hall and Rob is their hero who is going to go and take the fat cats down a notch. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
bleeding heart Posted November 24, 2013 Report Posted November 24, 2013 Maybe. I think that, bizarre as it may seem, Ford Nation doesn't see Rob as a member of the rich and powerful. He's such a doorknob, it's easy to forget how rich his daddy made him. These people see Rob as one of them. They resent what they see as the fat cats at City Hall and Rob is their hero who is going to go and take the fat cats down a notch. I have no doubt you're right. There's populism, and then there's delusional populism. But while it's obviously true that "liberal elites" exist, I think that, as far as the term is used as a political football, it has been a successful theme created by....conservative elites! You can't make this stuff up. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
jacee Posted November 24, 2013 Report Posted November 24, 2013 (edited) SNL takes another crack at Rob Ford NEW YORK CITY, N.Y. Saturday Night Live couldn`t resist a few more Rob Ford punchlines. During last night`s Weekend Update segment fake news anchor Cecily Strong had fun with the Toronto mayor`s recent admission to City Hall reporters that he had smoked crack. She noted Ford said that he wouldve admitted to smoking crack sooner if theyd asked him Have you smoked crack? rather than Do you smoke crack? And much sooner if anyone had simply asked, Would you like some crack? Ford's been known to offer to score oxycontins and "blow" for constituents, so maybe the media should have asked him to get them some crack! Kinda puts a different perspective on Ford's "customer service" approach ... Edited November 24, 2013 by jacee Quote
Shady Posted November 24, 2013 Report Posted November 24, 2013 I have no doubt you're right. There's populism, and then there's delusional populism. But while it's obviously true that "liberal elites" exist, I think that, as far as the term is used as a political football, it has been a successful theme created by....conservative elites! You can't make this stuff up. Oh no doubt. But you can make this stuff up, and you do. Your pseudo-psychiatry is more than amusing. You may not be one, but you can play one on the interweb! Lol. Quote
bleeding heart Posted November 24, 2013 Report Posted November 24, 2013 (edited) Oh no doubt. But you can make this stuff up, and you do. Your pseudo-psychiatry is more than amusing. You may not be one, but you can play one on the interweb! Lol. Yeah....my floated speculation that conservative elites have tried to produce talking points for political and campaign purposes is...just so....out there! It's even "pseudo-psychiatry"! Edited November 24, 2013 by bleeding heart Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
jacee Posted November 24, 2013 Report Posted November 24, 2013 (edited) Oh no doubt. But you can make this stuff up, and you do. Your pseudo-psychiatry is more than amusing. You may not be one, but you can play one on the interweb! Lol.A weak post.I fail to see where you have refuted bh's post. You've simply attacked the poster. Against forum rules, and also a sign of having no real argument to make. Zero points. Edited November 24, 2013 by jacee Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.