Liberal Table Bill Restricting Abortions

[Riverwind]

I think the CBC is singled out because it is a State organization and many people (including myself) view it as biased.

Isn't that a strawman? Presume the CBC will act in a certain way and then castigate the CBC for acting that way? This simply demonstrates that it will be impossible for the CBC to satisfy everyone since some people are so baised against the CBC that they will make up facts to 'prove' their case.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

Agreed. Absolutely. The speculation concerns what the CBC would have done if a Tory had done this

Happy that you agree you are engaged in speculation. The CBC is 'biased', to a certain degree, but nothing is free from it, and 'piblic' media is likely to be less biased than privately owned outlets.

[sharkman]

Dear August1991,

Agreed. Absolutely. The speculation concerns what the CBC would have done if a Tory had done this

Happy that you agree you are engaged in speculation. The CBC is 'biased', to a certain degree, but nothing is free from it, and 'piblic' media is likely to be less biased than privately owned outlets.

That's the way it should be, but there are too many activists on salary at the CBC and it keeps showing up in stories like these.

[Michael Hardner]

Still nothing on this story.

I'd have to agree that a CPC backbencher would have got more coverage from the CBC, and probably the other outlets would have picked it up.

But... isn't it amazing that there is nothing reported on this ? Even for a private members bill ? It could eventually go to a vote.

MapleLeafWeb informs us so much better than the MSM.

[geoffrey]

http://www.parl.gc.ca/legisinfo/index.asp?...4806&List=toc-1

There's a link to the bill on the parl website if anyone didn't believe us. It'd be hard to believe it with the lack of media coverage...

[Guest Warwick Green]

Thyere are are 149 private members bill swirling around right now - most of them addressing some MP's particular hobby horse.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/Bills_House_P...E&Parl=39&Ses=1

The chances are that none of them will be passed. Which ones should the CBC - or any other news agency - have reported on?

[August1991]

Thyere are are 149 private members bill swirling around right now - most of them addressing some MP's particular hobby horse.

That's quite a shopping list! Over half are bills to get money for some special interest group or another. In the US, this pork gets tacked on to some other bill (if the Congressman has clout in committee). I think rural areas do better at this game than urban areas.

That list explains in part how government has gotten larger over the past century. It's enough to make one feel ill about democracy.

The Liberal Party exists to include this MP wishlist in actual legislation.

Which ones should the CBC - or any other news agency - have reported on?

A major issue in the last federal election was the Conservatives so-called "scary hidden agenda" on social issues. Many Liberals and NDP-types claimed that the Conservative Party is filled with social dinosaurs who would become visible once in power. (Some claim that they are just waiting for a majority now... )

If a Conservative backbencher had tabled anti-abortion legislation, the speculation is that the CBC would have immediately ran the story as evidence of the Conservatives true dinosaur colours. Since it's a Liberal backbencher who has tabled this, it's a "non-story".

Isn't that a strawman? Presume the CBC will act in a certain way and then castigate the CBC for acting that way? This simply demonstrates that it will be impossible for the CBC to satisfy everyone since some people are so baised against the CBC that they will make up facts to 'prove' their case.

No, I would call the CBC's action hypocrisy. I suppose my viewpoint could be described as prejudice. I'm prejudging the CBC's coverage.

But, you know, Lucy always pulls the ball away so I've learned to expect it.

[Guest Warwick Green]

Isn't that a strawman? Presume the CBC will act in a certain way and then castigate the CBC for acting that way? This simply demonstrates that it will be impossible for the CBC to satisfy everyone since some people are so baised against the CBC that they will make up facts to 'prove' their case.

No, I would call the CBC's action hypocrisy. I suppose my viewpoint could be described as prejudice. I'm prejudging the CBC's coverage.

But, you know, Lucy always pulls the ball away so I've learned to expect it.

Hard to fault the CBC. Nobody else has reported it either.

Only political groupies and those in groups like this know about it. The timing is poor but I wonder if it will surface in the Lib leadership debates?

[gc1765]

A major issue in the last federal election was the Conservatives so-called "scary hidden agenda" on social issues. Many Liberals and NDP-types claimed that the Conservative Party is filled with social dinosaurs who would become visible once in power. (Some claim that they are just waiting for a majority now... )

Well you have to admit that if the conservatives do have a hidden agenda, it won't come out until they have a majority. It would be stupid of them to do it in a minority, harper knows that and he will keep everyone else in line. I won't argue one way or another that harper has a hidden agenda, only that if he does we won't know about it until he has a majority.