Oh, that lying liberal media

[Montgomery Burns]

The last paragraph of a Toronto Star article from yesterday:

Harper has been fairly quiet about his plans to repeal the same-sex marriage legislation since he was asked about it at the beginning of the campaign for the Jan. 23 election, and said a Conservative government would put an end to the practice.

Harper said no such thing; he said he would hold a free vote (yeah, I know that isn't very liberal of Harper).

The Toronto Star got this from the Canadian Press. To give the Toronto Star the benefit of the doubt, it could have an honest mistake--which would result in a correction, right?

Today's TS correction page mentioned nothing about this lie.

It's so frustrating that they get away with these lies. It's going to be the same BS as the June 2004 election and the same BS as the 2004 US election.

Charles Bird is a lobbyist for Bell Globemedia--which owns the G&M and CTV--and is the Ontario campaign chairman for the federal Liberal Party. We all know that the CBC hates conservatives with a purple passion. Remember all the loony stuff they had on their CBCunlocked website? If you worked for the CBC, wouldn't you be leery about reporting something that put the Liberals in a bad light--knowing that you might screw up your chance to become Governor General? Same with the liberal MSM in the USA; Paul Begala and James Carville were hosting CNN's Crossfire while they were campaign advisors to John Kerry--a blatant blatant conflict of interest.

It make me want to drown my sorrows in beer and popcorn.

[shoop]

Here's another example from today's star.

In an article talking about Harper's changing direction.

Experts in Canada-U.S. relations say Harper has clearly flip-flopped from his position at the outset of the war. However, there were signs in the last 18 months he had softened his position. He has publicly stated that supporting the U.S. war is not a popular position and that it would stretch Canada's military too thin.

Yet no 'expert' is quoted or referred to. Is it generally accepted journalistic practice to refer to 'expert' opinion without actually quoting any...

[wellandboy]

We'll see lot's of these stories up to the election. The key is not to take the bait.

[Montgomery Burns]

Here's another example.

Yesterday:

Q: Since the inception of the Iraqi war, I'd like to know the approximate total of Iraqis who have been killed. And by Iraqis I include civilians, military, police, insurgents, translators.

THE PRESIDENT: How many Iraqi citizens have died in this war? I would say 30,000, more or less, have died as a result of the initial incursion and the ongoing violence against Iraqis. We've lost about 2,140 of our own troops in Iraq.

So what does Reuters report today?

Voting started on a day that U.S. President George W. Bush gave a rare estimate of the number of civilians killed since U.S. troops invaded in 2003, acknowledging that 30,000 civilians had died in the violence.

The headline from The Australian?

30,000 civilians dead: Bush

Australia's Herald Sun leads their article with:

ABOUT 30,000 civilians have been killed during the Iraq conflict, according to US President George Bush.

The San Francisco Chronicle has already changed their headline and text of the story because rightwing bloggers emailed them complaining. Because of this common tactic of the MSM (and they never issue a correction), rightwing blogs have learned to screen capture online articles of bias.

The San Fran Chronicle article was originally headlined:

Bush says 30,000 Iraqi civilians dead in war

Now it says:

Bush says 30,000 Iraqis dead in war

However the original headline is SF Chron headline is still available at Google.

Sigh. It's just something that rightwingers have to fight against all the time.

[shoop]

Agreed, but two wrongs don't make a right.

So the Washington Times, Fox News, anything related to Ezra Levant or Mark Steyn, CanadaFreePress.com are all equally is vile....

Sigh.  It's just something that rightwingers have to fight against all the time. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[normanchateau]

Besides lying, the lazy media often are guilty of omission. For example, I've not come across a single story in the mainstream media during the campaign about Harper's opposition to including sexual orientation in hate crimes legislation.

Nor have I read any recent stories about the religious conservatives now running for the CPC. British Columbia has at least three such candidates. For example, Darrel Reid, the CPC candidate in Richmond, British Columbia, is a former President of Focus on the Family, a religious conservative group. Reid is not only anti-abortion and anti-SSM, he is also anti-stem cell research, an extreme position he shares with George Bush. The Reagan family actually condemned George Bush for his anti-stem cell research stance as it might have reversed the symptoms of Alzheimer's that Ronald Reagan suffered from in his final years.

The local Richmond newspapers pointed out how even some members of the CPC constitutency association resigned after Reid was elected as the CPC candidate, thanks to a huge and sudden influx of new religious, conservative members. But the incompetent and lazy mainstream media never reported this story nor did they describe, except very superficially, the other religious conservatives running for CPC in BC.

[shoop]

Great point wellandboy.

Generally speaking this has been a very good election for the CPC in terms of media coverage. If Harper and Layton pressure Martin well in the debates tonight we will likely see a CPC lead early next week.

We'll see lot's of these stories up to the election. The key is not to take the bait.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Montgomery Burns]

Agreed, but two wrongs don't make a right.

So the Washington Times, Fox News, anything related to Ezra Levant or Mark Steyn, CanadaFreePress.com are all equally is vile....

Sigh.  It's just something that rightwingers have to fight against all the time.  

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You continually say this. Where is your proof?

This should be a breeze for you since it is so easy to find the lies and/or misleading claims by the leftwing MSM. Ezra Levant and CanadaFreePress are not part of the MSM (Steyn is a columnist fer chrissake), but even them. Hell, even the Wash Times gets has about 1/10 the circulation of the WashPo.

I gave 2 examples of outright lies in reporting - not op-ed columns - from the last 2 days. Start laying down the proof you surely must have.

Good grief. Mark Steyn? Notwithstanding that he is a columnist - not a reporter, but even the lefties can't find dirt on him.

Even a search on the George Soros-funded partisan MediaMatters only has one result for Mark Steyn.

Put up all the proof you surely must have.

Btw, is there any acceptable rightwing source that is not "vile" or "childish" or "embarrassing" to you?

[normanchateau]

This should be a breeze for you since it is so easy to find the lies and/or misleading claims by the leftwing MSM. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not just lies and misleading claims. The lazy leftwing media have totally missed the story of infiltration of CPC by religious conservatives as happened recently in Richmond.

[geoffrey]

This should be a breeze for you since it is so easy to find the lies and/or misleading claims by the leftwing MSM. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not just lies and misleading claims. The lazy leftwing media have totally missed the story of infiltration of CPC by religious conservatives as happened recently in Richmond.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually I'm sure they were elected democractically by their constituancy assocations. So either let the voters choose, or have some guy at the top parachute a candidate in that fits more correctly with the party line.

What a ridiculous attack. I'm with Monty, find some proof of misreporting of facts by any Canadian right wing media outlet, and not just someone's opinion, actual reporting.

If your saying the CBC is right wing for not reporting democracy in BC, I don't think that really qualifies.

[wellandboy]

Great point wellandboy.

Generally speaking this has been a very good election for the CPC in terms of media coverage. If Harper and Layton pressure Martin well in the debates tonight we will likely see a CPC lead early next week.

We'll see lot's of these stories up to the election. The key is not to take the bait.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm getting this stuff in my riding all the time. "Hidden agenda" still slides off Liberals tongues like butter. I simply say Conservatives enjoy popcorn; which we buy with our hard earned dollars. The preferred brand is "Smart Food".

PS-Sorry, I don't know the availability of this cheddar flavour popcorn is available outside Ontario.

[normanchateau]

This should be a breeze for you since it is so easy to find the lies and/or misleading claims by the leftwing MSM. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not just lies and misleading claims. The lazy leftwing media have totally missed the story of infiltration of CPC by religious conservatives as happened recently in Richmond.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually I'm sure they were elected democractically by their constituancy assocations. So either let the voters choose, or have some guy at the top parachute a candidate in that fits more correctly with the party line.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, they were elected democratically in the same way that a surge of instant new members resulted in Chuck Cadman losing the CPC nomination in his own riding.

If Harper has no problem with candidates like Reid in Richmond, I suspect it's because Reid and Harper see eye-to-eye.

Or are you saying that there's no candidate Harper would block even if the candidate were racist, anti-Semitic, sexist, or all three?

[shoop]

Hey Monty Burns,

John Ibbitson (Globe and Mail) and Lorne Gunther (National Post/Edmonton Journal) are two very solid, well-considered conservative columnists in this country.

Does that count as *acceptable* right wing sources for you? They do in my books.

Here is a good link with what is wrong with Mark Steyn. The quote is one of the many gems on the link.

Steyn Link

In a recent article named "Stop making excuses for Muslim extremists", published in the National Post last week, Steyn deals with the Washington Sniper:

You get the picture: sure, Muslim fundamentalists can be pretty extreme, but what about all our Christian fundamentalists? Unfortunately, for the old moral equivalence to hold up, the Christians really need to get off their fundamentalist butts and start killing more people. At the moment, the brilliantly versatile Muslim fundamentalists are gunning down Maryland schoolkids and bus drivers...

It matters little to Steyn that John Muhammad was further from being an "Islamic fundamentalist" than your average Christian. After all, didn't Muhammad allegedly leave notes with, "I am God" written on them. Surely, Steyn is aware that no Muslim, lest of all a Muslim fundamentalist, would declare himself to be God -- Allah.

Good grief.  Mark Steyn?  Notwithstanding that he is a columnist - not a reporter, but even the lefties can't find dirt on him.

Btw, is there any acceptable rightwing source that is not "vile" or "childish" or "embarrassing" to you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[normanchateau]

"Hidden agenda" still slides off  Liberals tongues like butter.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is unfair for Liberals to keep referring to Harper's hidden agenda. Harper is quite open about his agenda. He revealed part of it on the first day of the campaign. About a week later in British Columbia he revealed what Liberal-tabled legislation he won't reintroduce. His social conservative agenda is sufficiently transparent in my opinion.

[shoop]

Really Normie? I never would have guessed you don't like Harper from your history of posts.

His social conservative agenda is sufficiently transparent in my opinion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[normanchateau]

Really Normie? I never would have guessed you don't like Harper from your history of posts. 

But Shoopie I was defending him from those unfair Liberal accusations of "hidden agenda".

[shoop]

The Liberals are too caught up in their own strangeness (beer & popcorn/pissing match with the U.S.) to target Harper this time around. Now they will be hard pressed to return to the same old playbook...

But Shoopie I was defending him from those unfair Liberal accusations of "hidden agenda". 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[sharkman]

Yep, the lefty media is like having an extra player on the ice during the contest of an election, and your typical Canadian is too naive to realize they are being spoon fed leftist ideology and slant on a daily basis.

[shoop]

Shark that was then 2004, this is now 2005-6. They may not be onside, but they definitely aren't as anti-Harper as they have been in the past. Best to just ignore it and hopefully not antagonize them.

Yep, the lefty media is like having an extra player on the ice during the contest of an election, and your typical Canadian is too naive to realize they are being spoon fed leftist ideology and slant on a daily basis.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Montgomery Burns]

Shoop:

Hey Monty Burns,

John Ibbitson (Globe and Mail) and Lorne Gunther (National Post/Edmonton Journal) are two very solid, well-considered conservative columnists in this country.

Does that count as *acceptable* right wing sources for you? They do in my books.

I will reserve judgement since I have barely heard of Ibbitson and Gunther and don't recall reading any of their op-eds - which is odd since I visit many rightwing blogs,

Here is a good link with what is wrong with Mark Steyn. The quote is one of the many gems on the link.

This is what really shocked me; you linked to Atrueword.

Butler is a huge supporter of Al Muhajiroun, a radical group that has called for a British Islamic state. He has written articles comparing Bush to Trotsky, and he has been vilifying Stephen Schwartz since Schwartz wrote The Two Faces of Islam.

Butler writes for radical sites like antiwar.com, Al Jazeerah, and Islamonline.net.

But you take his opinion over Mark Steyn's opinion. That doesn't sound conservative; that sounds.....

Atrueword posted photos of the nineteen 9-11 terrorists as heroes on that mosque in London.

And let's take a look at who else is on Atrueword's editorial board--Ismail Royer, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison last year for being the leader of a terrorist group in Virginia that conspired to train on American soil for violent jihad.

And then your "other gems" are op-ed pieces by John Quiggin!

Do you even know who John Quiggin is?

If you are going to deride one of the best conservative columnists in the world as vile, childish, and embarrassing--you're going to have to do a helluva lot better than linking to pro-Islamic sites that champion radical organizations and hav terrorists on their editorial board.

Same goes for the loony John Quiggin.

[Riverwind]

I will reserve judgement since I have barely heard of Ibbitson and Gunther and don't recall reading any of their op-eds - which is odd since I visit many rightwing blogs,

That is your entire problem: you rely on right-wing extremists to spoon feed your opinions to you. You don't look for or even consider the opinions of people who take a balanced view of things and are capable of understanding issues from different pespectives. Ibbitson is certainly not a conservative columnist in your definition of the term (i.e. he thinks about issues and forms a opinion based on the facts rather than regurgitating right win gmantras). However, Ibbitson frequently ends up siding with the conservative view of things.

[Montgomery Burns]

I will reserve judgement since I have barely heard of Ibbitson and Gunther and don't recall reading any of their op-eds - which is odd since I visit many rightwing blogs,

That is your entire problem: you rely on right-wing extremists to spoon feed your opinions to you. You don't look for or even consider the opinions of people who take a balanced view of things and are capable of understanding issues from different pespectives. Ibbitson is certainly not a conservative columnist in your definition of the term (i.e. he thinks about issues and forms a opinion based on the facts rather than regurgitating right win gmantras). However, Ibbitson frequently ends up siding with the conservative view of things.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's rich coming from you, who claimed - on the NDP refuses to denounce secular extremist thread - that the ring Svend Robinson stole was only $5000, when it was, in fact, worth over $50,000--which I had stated in my OP. Then you attempted to smear rightwingers by claiming that Fred Phelps of the Godhatesfags website was a rightwinger, when in fact he is a registered Democrat.

Perhaps if you visited some rightwing sites for some balance, instead of devouring the pablum that leftwing extremist sites spoon feed you, we might see more from you instead of the constant regurgitating of leftwing mantras. Please think for yourself.

I did a search and read some of Ibbitson's op-ed columns and he is not a rightwinger; he is a centrist. If he was a rightwinger, he would be linked by rightwing sites - like I pointed out - but obviously you were unable to connect the dots.

And I have no choice but to be exposed to both right and leftwing views--considering that Canada's media is overwhelmingly leftwing. You, OTOH, don't have that option, so you will have to show some ambition and check out rightwing sites if you want to see "the other side's" views.

Try it.

[JerrySeinfeld]

I will reserve judgement since I have barely heard of Ibbitson and Gunther and don't recall reading any of their op-eds - which is odd since I visit many rightwing blogs,

That is your entire problem: you rely on right-wing extremists to spoon feed your opinions to you. You don't look for or even consider the opinions of people who take a balanced view of things and are capable of understanding issues from different pespectives. Ibbitson is certainly not a conservative columnist in your definition of the term (i.e. he thinks about issues and forms a opinion based on the facts rather than regurgitating right win gmantras). However, Ibbitson frequently ends up siding with the conservative view of things.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's rich coming from you, who claimed - on the NDP refuses to denounce secular extremist thread - that the ring Svend Robinson stole was only $5000, when it was, in fact, worth over $50,000--which I had stated in my OP. Then you attempted to smear rightwingers by claiming that Fred Phelps of the Godhatesfags website was a rightwinger, when in fact he is a registered Democrat.

Perhaps if you visited some rightwing sites for some balance, instead of devouring the pablum that leftwing extremist sites spoon feed you, we might see more from you instead of the constant regurgitating of leftwing mantras. Please think for yourself.

I did a search and read some of Ibbitson's op-ed columns and he is not a rightwinger; he is a centrist. If he was a rightwinger, he would be linked to by rightwing sites - like I pointed out - but obviously you were unable to connect the dots.

And I have no choice but to be exposed to both right and leftwing views--considering that Canada's media is overwhelmingly leftwing. You, OTOH, don't have that option, so you will have to show some ambition and check out rightwing sites if you want to see "the other side's" views.

Try it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Harper has no personality. Remember when Mulroney stood up in the debate and said (paraphrase): "you sir (turner), have no monopoly on patriotism! i grew up in this country, I come from a CANADIAN family...etc"

That's what Harper needs: some backbone!

Enough of the Libs taking Canadian nationalism as their own rallying cry.

[Montgomery Burns]

Apparently Harper is an amiable fellow, at least that is what I hear from people who have met him. Sometimes I wish he would show more spunk, but then the media labels him as "angry".

I, too, am tired of Martin telling us what "Canadian values" are.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Apparently Harper is an amiable fellow, at least that is what I hear from people who have met him.  Sometimes I wish he would show more spunk, but then the media labels him as "angry".

I, too, am tired of Martin telling us what "Canadian values" are.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

have you seen the lib ads about "30 million reasons to vote liberal"?

what a joke

Human rights are about the right not to die on a waiting list