Those partisan supporters of Ford just don't get it.

[Guest Peeves]

When he was elected, many of us saw a breath of fresh air in politics. Here came a guy with an agenda to put tax payers first in priority. A white knight that would stop the socialistic platform of the Millerites. A person of the people with a record of demanding fiscal responsibility of council and a stop to union catering and demands. Here came a light in the leftist political darkness that we could support. A man that would lead a path to conservative values and that would 'stop the gravy train."

His unacceptable behavior is an embarrassment and more. His apparent failures in drugs, driving while drinking, and a foul mouth has taken something from us that we shared. Our hopes, faith, and expectations now gone. Another politician with feet of clay that disappointed and dumped his personal failings on our heads.

I haven't felt so down over the behavior of a person since Ben Johnson's cheating turned cheers for a goal into cheers.

[]D e e v e s

[ReeferMadness]

Peeves:

I can't debate your premise directly because I've never been to Toronto and my perceptions of Ford only arose as his increasingly bizarre statements and behaviour became known. However, a number of commentators who are much closer than me have made excellent cases to refute your central premise.

Both before and during the previous election, it was clear that Rob Ford was racist, homophobic, and had problems with substance abuse and honesty. Nevertheless he won the election. We, all of us who care about justice and democracy, need to ask ourselves why this happened.

We knew who Rob Ford was before he was elected.

I think it would be fairer to say that your cohort is so desperate for a return to a 19th century tax regime that you're willing to overlook almost any character flaws. The famous photograph where Ford is shown cuddling with 3 gang-bangers outside a crack house is so damning in itself that it alone would have caused most politicians to resign. People who have supported Ford previously have been wilfully blind and now you stand before us and proclaim that you now see the light. Good for you. Too late but good for you.

Andrew Coyne put it best:

It is the same condescending populism, the same aggressively dumb, harshly divisive message that has become the playbook for the right generally in this country, in all its contempt for learning, its disdain for facts, its disrespect of convention and debasing of standards. They can try to run away from him now, but they made this monster, and they will own him for years to come.

Rob Ford mess a monster born of divisive and condescending populism

[bleeding heart]

Awesome post, reefer.

[Boges]

I'd like some evidence that he's a racist.

Don't just throw pejoratives around because it suits your narrative. There are plenty of apt ones that could apply.

Ford's failings have certainly derailed a conservative movement in the city.

Beyond Ford's behaviour the narrative of him being elected is a simple Suburb vs. Urban divide.

Why else would Ford's insistence on a Scarborough subway cause so many, including the provincial government, to flip flop?

[Michael Hardner]

And of all his enablers, the most culpable are the strategists, the ones who fashioned his image as the defender of the little guy, the suburban strivers, against the downtown elites, with their degrees and their symphonies — the ones who turned a bundle of inchoate resentments into Ford Nation. Sound familiar? It is the same condescending populism, the same aggressively dumb, harshly divisive message that has become the playbook for the right generally in this country, in all its contempt for learning, its disdain for facts, its disrespect of convention and debasing of standards. They can try to run away from him now, but they made this monster, and they will own him for years to come.

How are the strategists the most culpable ? This statement seems to wish politics wouldn't exist. There's a cultural gap there, and so it awaits someone to step into it. Guess what the lesson is ? That people care about their levels of taxation.

How is this message still being missed ?

Mel Lastman was also a buffoon, if a less caustic one, and his two big priorities (from his own words as I remember) were keeping taxes low and solving the homeless problem. He was popular too.

[Michael Hardner]

Ford's failings have certainly derailed a conservative movement in the city.

Maybe this episode will forge a new alliance of high-road politicians.... we can only hope.

[ReeferMadness]

I appreciate the comment, bh, but all I've done is point to some of the cogent analysis that is out there.

It would be tragic if this analysis is lost in the inane swirl of late night comedy. Anyone else feel that Ford's behaviour is so outrageous that the punch lines delivered by the late night hosts are a tragic letdown in comparison?

Speaking of tragedy, it will be a terrible loss if Coyne's brilliant, genius, crystalline insight is lost amongst the detritus of sensationalism. I don't normally say things like this but I wish I could force people to confront it. It applies across a broad front of North American politics - from the tea party to our Federal Conservatives to elements within provinces across this country.

[TimG]

In 2008 the US public voted for a man that does not exist because they wanted change and imposed their desire for change on a human.

The same thing happened in Toronto although Ford's fall has been much more spectacular than Obama's.

[The_Squid]

In 2008 the US public voted for a man that does not exist because they wanted change and imposed their desire for change on a human.The same thing happened in Toronto although Ford's fall has been much more spectacular than Obama's.

"A man that does not exist"?

Say what you mean...

On 2nd thought... Don't bother. The Obama/Ford comparison is not at all relevant.

Edited November 16, 2013 by The_Squid

[ReeferMadness]

In 2008 the US public voted for a man that does not exist because they wanted change and imposed their desire for change on a human.

The same thing happened in Toronto although Ford's fall has been much more spectacular than Obama's.

Really, Tim? Are you really comparing Rob Ford to Barrack Obama??

Please proceed and develop your thesis for us. Explain and elaborate how these guys are really the same.

This should be good.

[cybercoma]

Peeves, why do you start threads when you want your account deleted?

[bleeding heart]

I think tim's suggestion, or at least part of it, is that the a lot of people voted for Obama based on a highly effective campaign (which won a major advertiser's award for marketing, significantly). The campaign slogans meant very little objectively, but were designed, doubtless with great care, to act as an empty slate upon which folks could insert their own political desires, whether explicit or inchoate.

I agree with this assessment, incidentally.

It's much like campaigns which suggest the correct toothpaste will help you find your life partner (that's an actual ad campaign); or of driving your shiny new truck up the rugged mountainside, presumably towards heaven (and unaccountably avoid getting the paint nicked on your $35 000 vehicle).

It's worth noting that, so obviously and immediately successful was the campaign, that the McCain/Palin team wasted no time in emulating it, with talk of the "mavericks" who were running on a campaign of "change."

In a way it's all old hat, but it took on extra energy in this particular campaign.

Edited November 16, 2013 by bleeding heart

[Boges]

Maybe this episode will forge a new alliance of high-road politicians.... we can only hope.

One would think John Tory would be that answer. But then again his aspirations to become the province's leader were derailed by single issue wedge politics as well.

BTW Tory also talks about rampant government waste, he just does so sans the bluster of the likes of Ford.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Boges

[ReeferMadness]

I'd like some evidence that he's a racist.

Don't just throw pejoratives around because it suits your narrative. There are plenty of apt ones that could apply.

Ford's failings have certainly derailed a conservative movement in the city.

Beyond Ford's behaviour the narrative of him being elected is a simple Suburb vs. Urban divide.

Why else would Ford's insistence on a Scarborough subway cause so many, including the provincial government, to flip flop?

In fairness, it isn't me calling him a racist. I'm quoting Councillor Gord Perks who is describing him as racist (in adjective form - it's slightly different that calling him a racist - noun form). Now, here's a question for you.

The mayor can be described in many ways but "shy" isn't one of them. Perks has publicly and undeniably described Ford as racist. Why hasn't Ford threatened to sue? Ford has liberally threatened to sue staffers over allegations made to police (it's easy to threaten people without the means to hire lawyers to defend themselves, isn't it?). Why has Ford not sued Perks??? My guess is that he knows he'd likely lose and be embarrassed.

Really, though, how much more embarrassed could this guy get?

Finally, there are examples on the record of Ford engaging in racial stereotypes and racial slurs. He has, for example said

Those Oriental people work like dogs. … They're slowly taking over

Doesn't that sound racist to you?

[Boges]

It sounds socially tone def to me. He was actually trying to be complementary to the community in that quote. Of course failing miserably.

Gord Perks is one of the most Liberal councillors there is. I wouldn't put it past him to say anything about the mayor. Politics is a blood sport so I can see why suing someone for any pejorative would be pointless.

Why didn't Paul Martin sue when the CPC insinuated he was soft on child porn?

I think the most compelling evidence Ford isn't a racist is the fact his number one hobby, to a fault, was coaching football to mostly under privileged black teenagers. Also before becoming mayor his Ward is largely made of blacks.

I doubt he could continue to be elected if he was clearly racist.

[Guest Peeves]

As you stated, you can't debate my (?) premise directly. You rely on hearsay from detractors, leftists that set out to destroy him from the outset.

Many of us that initially supported him and continued to do so when attacked by left wing lawyers and unions had his record in council and his political platform to weigh against alternative candidates. The baggage came insidiously and only in the recent past has become beyond the pale.

Your conjecture that any partisan supporters of Ford were willfully blind or over looking character flaws is specious, given that such were not then apparent, and, those charges brought against him were ruled in Ford's favor.

So I think it would be fairer to say that you can contribute naught but other's opinions to critic my sentiments. Opinions much after those 3 -4 years after the campaign or election that I alluded to in my O.P.

I would remind you the hoi polloi and in the majority the vox populi favored Ford for most of his term in office, including most of the media,

No, I was not blind, I was one of those looking for a light in the wilderness. A Diogenes perhaps, but certainly not a Quixote. I did what any political junky does, read anything and follow everything pro and con and make up my mind on the de facto revelations as available, not on the spurious

innuendo of his (leftist) opponents like Ruby-Magder* et al.

That I too was (again), taken in by a politician is not unique.

*

http://torontoist.com/2013/01/paul-magder-and-clayton-ruby-trying-to-appeal-ford-decision-to-supreme-court/

Peeves:

I can't debate your premise directly because I've never been to Toronto and my perceptions of Ford only arose as his increasingly bizarre statements and behaviour became known. However, a number of commentators who are much closer than me have made excellent cases to refute your central premise.

We knew who Rob Ford was before he was elected.

I think it would be fairer to say that your cohort is so desperate for a return to a 19th century tax regime that you're willing to overlook almost any character flaws. The famous photograph where Ford is shown cuddling with 3 gang-bangers outside a crack house is so damning in itself that it alone would have caused most politicians to resign. People who have supported Ford previously have been wilfully blind and now you stand before us and proclaim that you now see the light. Good for you. Too late but good for you.

Andrew Coyne put it best:

Rob Ford mess a monster born of divisive and condescending populism

[ReeferMadness]

It sounds socially tone def to me. He was actually trying to be complementary to the community in that quote. Of course failing miserably.

You know, you're probably right. Here's a way we can test it.

Why don't you stand up in front of a racially mixed crowd and say "You Orientals work like dogs". "I think you're trying to take over".

I'm sure they will recognize that you are only trying to be "complementary" and give you a standing ovation. When you report back on how it went, it would be helpful if you could include some video. We can all be educated.

Gord Perks is one of the most Liberal councillors there is. I wouldn't put it past him to say anything about the mayor. Politics is a blood sport so I can see why suing someone for any pejorative would be pointless.

And yet Rob Ford is threatening to sue almost everyone around him. But not Gord Perks. Interesting, isn't it?

Why didn't Paul Martin sue when the CPC insinuated he was soft on child porn?

I don't recall Paul Martin ever threatening to sue anyone. Maybe it wasn't his style.

Good point, though - comparing the CPC's tactics to Rob Ford. That was Coyne's essential theme, that the right is dragging politics into the gutter. Thanks for illustrating the point.

I think the most compelling evidence Ford isn't a racist is the fact his number one hobby, to a fault, was coaching football to mostly under privileged black teenagers. Also before becoming mayor his Ward is largely made of blacks.

So, your contention is people who enjoy football aren't racist?

I doubt he could continue to be elected if he was clearly racist.

So, this leaves us with a bunch of possibilities:

1. Rob Ford is a nice guy but not too bright. He thinks that racial stereotypes are actually compliments. Ford Nation is comprised of enlightened individuals like you who are willing to overlook the fact that Rob is an idiot because he has other fine qualities.

2. Rob Ford is a racist homophobe. His handlers mostly manage to keep his sentiments inside his head but occasionally, they leak out in the heat of the moment. Ford Nation is (like most voters) comprised of people who are not racist homophobes but aren't really interested in Rob's darker side, so long as he delivers tax cuts and a subway.

3. Rob Ford is a racist homophobe. His handlers mostly manage to keep his sentiments inside his head but occasionally, they leak out in the heat of the moment. Ford Nation contains a large contingent of people (mainly suburbanites) who are similarly racist homophobes who mostly internalize those feelings. They silently cheer when Ford spouts things like "Orientals work like dogs" and wish he would say it more often.

I would say that #1 is possible but not very plausible. Option 2 is plausible. I'm afraid that there there is more truth in #3 than Gord Perks and I would like to think.

[Guest Peeves]

Peeves, why do you start threads when you want your account deleted?

I can't pass a fire hydrant without leaving a mark.

Veni, vidi, vici. Quo vadis ? (if anywhere.)

Edited November 16, 2013 by Peeves

[The_Squid]

Except Obama isn't an inept, crack smoking, drunkard.... The comparison is extremely tenuous and silly at best.

[Boges]

You know, you're probably right. Here's a way we can test it.

Why don't you stand up in front of a racially mixed crowd and say "You Orientals work like dogs". "I think you're trying to take over".

I'm sure they will recognize that you are only trying to be "complementary" and give you a standing ovation. When you report back on how it went, it would be helpful if you could include some video. We can all be educated.

And yet Rob Ford is threatening to sue almost everyone around him. But not Gord Perks. Interesting, isn't it?

I don't recall Paul Martin ever threatening to sue anyone. Maybe it wasn't his style.

Good point, though - comparing the CPC's tactics to Rob Ford. That was Coyne's essential theme, that the right is dragging politics into the gutter. Thanks for illustrating the point.

So, your contention is people who enjoy football aren't racist?

So, this leaves us with a bunch of possibilities:

1. Rob Ford is a nice guy but not too bright. He thinks that racial stereotypes are actually compliments. Ford Nation is comprised of enlightened individuals like you who are willing to overlook the fact that Rob is an idiot because he has other fine qualities.

2. Rob Ford is a racist homophobe. His handlers mostly manage to keep his sentiments inside his head but occasionally, they leak out in the heat of the moment. Ford Nation is (like most voters) comprised of people who are not racist homophobes but aren't really interested in Rob's darker side, so long as he delivers tax cuts and a subway.

3. Rob Ford is a racist homophobe. His handlers mostly manage to keep his sentiments inside his head but occasionally, they leak out in the heat of the moment. Ford Nation contains a large contingent of people (mainly suburbanites) who are similarly racist homophobes who mostly internalize those feelings. They silently cheer when Ford spouts things like "Orientals work like dogs" and wish he would say it more often.

I would say that #1 is possible but not very plausible. Option 2 is plausible. I'm afraid that there there is more truth in #3 than Gord Perks and I would like to think.

So you think a large number of the 47% that voted for him are racist homophones?

He's done much for the black community. I challenge you to find an example of outright racism and not just a verbal lapse, that happened pre-election. Are you purposely ignoring that Ford hails from a multicultural part of the city?

Regarding Ford being litigious. This is a recent development. He didn't even sue the Star when they reported he assaulted a football player even though the player in question denied the story was accurate.

It's interesting I brought up an example of the CPC using gutter politics as evidence that's in their nature when I was asserting that it was Perks that seems to be using gutter politics.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Boges

[Guest Peeves]

One would think John Tory would be that answer. But then again his aspirations to become the province's leader were derailed by single issue wedge politics as well.

BTW Tory also talks about rampant government waste, he just does so sans the bluster of the likes of Ford.

Unfortunately the announced candidates (+ Tory),would split the conservative voters and Chow would be elected.

IF Chow is elected look for more socialism and union concessions.

The NDParty has seemingly pulled back a bit from former positions on fiscal matters, but I doubt Chow has.

[ReeferMadness]

As you stated, you can't debate my (?) premise directly. You rely on hearsay from detractors, leftists that set out to destroy him from the outset.

Many of us that initially supported him and continued to do so when attacked by left wing lawyers and unions had his record in council and his political platform to weigh against alternative candidates. The baggage came insidiously and only in the recent past has become beyond the pale.

Your conjecture that any partisan supporters of Ford were willfully blind or over looking character flaws is specious, given that such were not then apparent, and, those charges brought against him were ruled in Ford's favor.

So I think it would be fairer to say that you can contribute naught but other's opinions to critic my sentiments. Opinions much after those 3 -4 years after the campaign or election that I alluded to in my O.P.

I would remind you the hoi polloi and in the majority the vox populi favored Ford for most of his term in office, including most of the media,

No, I was not blind, I was one of those looking for a light in the wilderness. A Diogenes perhaps, but certainly not a Quixote. I did what any political junky does, read anything and follow everything pro and con and make up my mind on the de facto revelations as available, not on the spurious

innuendo of his (leftist) opponents like Ruby-Magder* et al.

That I too was (again), taken in by a politician is not unique.

*

http://torontoist.com/2013/01/paul-magder-and-clayton-ruby-trying-to-appeal-ford-decision-to-supreme-court/

"You read everything and followed everything" So, were these pro's or cons:

- His arrest in 1999 for driving while impaired and possessing marijuana

- Lying about this incident (the marijuana part "slipped his mind"

- In 2002, 4 councillors heard Ford use the term "Gino" boy to describe one of the 4. Ford denied it

- In 2002, he said about the homeless, instead of a public meeting, how about a public lynching

- Getting kicked out of a hockey game in 2006 for being drunk and abusive

- Lying about even being at the game

- In 2006, he voted against city funding to prevent AIDS because "if you're not doing needles and you're not gay, you won't get AIDS"

- In 2007, he spoke out again bike lanes and said about cyclists "My heart bleeds for them when I hear someone gets killed, but it’s their own fault at the end of the day."

- In 2008, he was charged with assaulting his wife

- In 2008, he made the comment about Orientals working like dogs and taking over

these are all things I easily found on the web. I know there is lots more to be found if I dig. Are you, a self-described politically junkie, telling me that there are no indications here that the guy you voted in as mayor, the guy whose name beside you marked a check, was a substance abusing, people abusing flake?

[Guest Peeves]

Except Obama isn't an inept, crack smoking, drunkard.... The comparison is extremely tenuous and silly at best.

Welllll 'inept'...might stick a little.

[Boges]

Unfortunately the announced candidates (+ Tory),would split the conservative voters and Chow would be elected.

IF Chow is elected look for more socialism and union concessions.

The NDParty has seemingly pulled back a bit from former positions on fiscal matters, but I doubt Chow has.

That assumes all candidates stick around until the end of the campaign and no other liberal candidate emerges.

I've heard Chow has health problems.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Boges

[Guest Peeves]

"You read everything and followed everything" So, were these pro's or cons:

- His arrest in 1999 for driving while impaired and possessing marijuana

- Lying about this incident (the marijuana part "slipped his mind"

- In 2002, 4 councillors heard Ford use the term "Gino" boy to describe one of the 4. Ford denied it

- In 2002, he said about the homeless, instead of a public meeting, how about a public lynching

- Getting kicked out of a hockey game in 2006 for being drunk and abusive

- Lying about even being at the game

- In 2006, he voted against city funding to prevent AIDS because "if you're not doing needles and you're not gay, you won't get AIDS"

- In 2007, he spoke out again bike lanes and said about cyclists "My heart bleeds for them when I hear someone gets killed, but it’s their own fault at the end of the day."

- In 2008, he was charged with assaulting his wife

- In 2008, he made the comment about Orientals working like dogs and taking over

these are all things I easily found on the web. I know there is lots more to be found if I dig. Are you, a self-described politically junkie, telling me that there are no indications here that the guy you voted in as mayor, the guy whose name beside you marked a check, was a substance abusing, people abusing flake?

"You read everything and followed everything" So, were these pro's or cons:

- His arrest in 1999 for driving while impaired and possessing marijuana

- Lying about this incident (the marijuana part "slipped his mind"

- In 2002, 4 councillors heard Ford use the term "Gino" boy to describe one of the 4. Ford denied it

- In 2002, he said about the homeless, instead of a public meeting, how about a public lynching

- Getting kicked out of a hockey game in 2006 for being drunk and abusive

- Lying about even being at the game

- In 2006, he voted against city funding to prevent AIDS because "if you're not doing needles and you're not gay, you won't get AIDS"

- In 2007, he spoke out again bike lanes and said about cyclists "My heart bleeds for them when I hear someone gets killed, but it’s their own fault at the end of the day."

- In 2008, he was charged with assaulting his wife

- In 2008, he made the comment about Orientals working like dogs and taking over

these are all things I easily found on the web. I know there is lots more to be found if I dig. Are you, a self-described politically junkie, telling me that there are no indications here that the guy you voted in as mayor, the guy whose name beside you marked a check, was a substance abusing, people abusing flake?

I as many others liked his platform compared to the alternatives. Looking up those items now is hardly chronologically relevant. Were they headlined in the campaign? In the years running for and elected to council from 2000 ? Many slurs are cast on candidates in elections. There was an obvious opposition out to get him and sour grapes prevail in losing to an opponent of a differing bent. Were these items you reference now of note then? Nope.

Such matters were not in the the publics eye as you would attempt to make out. Any negative baggage that could be, would be used by the other candidates at campaign time and I point out there were many fronts attacking Ford from the Left. That muckraking goes with an election. Ford won handily over the likes of E Heath manager Smitherman.

The eHealth scandal that has dogged George Smitherman throughout his Toronto mayoralty campaign intensified on Wednesday with the release of a report by Auditor-General Jim McCarter revealing more spending and procurement improprieties during the former Ontario health minister’s tenure.

Mr. McCarter’s 32-page report chronicles a rash of questionable practices — including the sole-sourced hiring of expensive consultants, exorbitant billing and poor oversight — after an audit of the health ministry, local health integration networks (LHINs), and more than a dozen hospitals.

Now on balance, Ford was the overwhelming choice. " Ford garnered 47.1 per cent of the vote, compared with 35.6 per cent for former provincial Liberal cabinet minister George Smitherman. Deputy mayor Joe Pantalone trailed with 11.7 per cent."

Ford was on council and a such open to scrutiny from the year 2000. Ford was investigated by the Left Wing City government for not using his expenses.

You might wish to familiarize yourself with his time as a politician. You seem to be focused on what you can find as exposed denigration of Ford of late which is damning, but not what was attributed to Ford in the years from 2000. The Toronto Star his current antagonist was then his supporter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Ford

Edited November 16, 2013 by Peeves