BCL has more on the M THIRTY enviro flogs issue.
Also, I've heard that PB is removing identified flogs.
Showing posts with label Political Strategy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Political Strategy. Show all posts
Funding Anti-Green Sock Puppets
Not all unions are in McGuinty's pocket. The Ontario Power Workers' Union (UPW) has bankrolled a campaign against McGuinty fighting the Green Energy Act.
More and more, marketing companies are using social media to promote their clients. UPW is pushing for power produced using coal and nuclear by, in part, seeding conversations in social media.
The marketing company in question is M THIRTY. Read the link above if the details and ethics interests you. I'm not getting into it.
Except to point out that one of the bloggers M THIRTY uses seems to be on the Progressive Bloggers blogroll.
Rather, I just wanted to point out that anti-green groups like Wind Concerns Ontario likely don't exist without similar backing. They say differently, or appear to.
Note: As I write this quick note, I see that BCL has written more, and has included the same suspicions as mine, fleshed out in detail.
UPDATE:
BCL reports some flogs are going into maintenance mode...
More and more, marketing companies are using social media to promote their clients. UPW is pushing for power produced using coal and nuclear by, in part, seeding conversations in social media.
The marketing company in question is M THIRTY. Read the link above if the details and ethics interests you. I'm not getting into it.
Except to point out that one of the bloggers M THIRTY uses seems to be on the Progressive Bloggers blogroll.
Rather, I just wanted to point out that anti-green groups like Wind Concerns Ontario likely don't exist without similar backing. They say differently, or appear to.
Note: As I write this quick note, I see that BCL has written more, and has included the same suspicions as mine, fleshed out in detail.
UPDATE:
BCL reports some flogs are going into maintenance mode...
A Thought on Campaign Slogans
We're in turbulent times. Economically uncrertain. People are worried about their jobs. People want certainty. Comfort.
Canada just elected a stay-the-course Prime Minister preaching exactly that.
So, here you are, trying to come up with a theme for your opposition political leader in an upcoming provincial election.
And the theme you choose is 'Change?'
You call the policy book 'Changebook?'
Your advertised Twitter hashtag is '#changevote?'
Your campaign bus says '[change]' all over it?
Your candidates have roads signs on their pamphlets saying 'Change Ahead?'
Is this wise?
Compare and contrast:
PCs: Change
NDP: Change that puts people first
Greens: It's Time
Liberals: Forward. Together.
The NDP slogan reads like PC-lite. Even my beloved Greens are working on a 'change' theme.
Look at the Liberal slogan. Isn't that safe? Secure? Together, going forward, which is always good, right? It's safe, it's optimistic. It visions, even. We are given a positive direction, and none of us are alone.
Do people really want change now?
They don't want change. Change isn't safe. They may want BETTER, but they'll stick with being safe. Stay the course (FORWARD). TOGETHER.
You know what? That's a good slogan for the times.
Change isn't. Change is scary.
Canada just elected a stay-the-course Prime Minister preaching exactly that.
So, here you are, trying to come up with a theme for your opposition political leader in an upcoming provincial election.
And the theme you choose is 'Change?'
You call the policy book 'Changebook?'
Your advertised Twitter hashtag is '#changevote?'
Your campaign bus says '[change]' all over it?
Your candidates have roads signs on their pamphlets saying 'Change Ahead?'
Is this wise?
Compare and contrast:
PCs: Change
NDP: Change that puts people first
Greens: It's Time
Liberals: Forward. Together.
The NDP slogan reads like PC-lite. Even my beloved Greens are working on a 'change' theme.
Look at the Liberal slogan. Isn't that safe? Secure? Together, going forward, which is always good, right? It's safe, it's optimistic. It visions, even. We are given a positive direction, and none of us are alone.
Do people really want change now?
They don't want change. Change isn't safe. They may want BETTER, but they'll stick with being safe. Stay the course (FORWARD). TOGETHER.
You know what? That's a good slogan for the times.
Change isn't. Change is scary.
Conservative Party Promoting on Our Dime, Again
Well the omnibus crime bill is out. It's an expensive pile of solutions looking for problems, but I'll leave that to others.
Instead, let's talk about under-reported 'crime':
I'm reminded of Ernie Eves presenting a provincial budget at a car parts plant. The point is to frame and control the message by taking the process of presenting a bill out of Ottawa, where it belongs, and to a controlled audience.
We, of course, pay for this, while still paying for Parliament, where the introduction of bills belong. We pay for airfare, staff, equipment and the "parading of cabinet ministers." No mention of gazebos.
Austerity, indeed.
Instead, let's talk about under-reported 'crime':
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson unveiled the bill at a Brampton news conference, not in the House of Commons. A series of cabinet ministers marched before cameras to promote the moves.
I'm reminded of Ernie Eves presenting a provincial budget at a car parts plant. The point is to frame and control the message by taking the process of presenting a bill out of Ottawa, where it belongs, and to a controlled audience.
We, of course, pay for this, while still paying for Parliament, where the introduction of bills belong. We pay for airfare, staff, equipment and the "parading of cabinet ministers." No mention of gazebos.
Austerity, indeed.
Campaign Strength/Weakness Observation
For a PM who didn't want to do any stimulus spending, and took Parliament to the brink over it in 2008, Harper certainly has reaped considerable political leverage with the so-called Economic Action Plan.
The opposition, despite having forced it to happen over Harper ideological objections, has failed to remind the electorate that they were the authors of this policy. They have allowed Harper to own their idea.
If Harper gets the majority, how ironic. He's will have ridden the economic message using policies he detests. His masters thesis was at least in part on how to not use stimulus spending during recessions.
The opposition, despite having forced it to happen over Harper ideological objections, has failed to remind the electorate that they were the authors of this policy. They have allowed Harper to own their idea.
If Harper gets the majority, how ironic. He's will have ridden the economic message using policies he detests. His masters thesis was at least in part on how to not use stimulus spending during recessions.
Harper: The Environment is a Sideshow
“In light of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and the reluctance of the companies involved to accept responsibility, what new control measures for oil drillers will the Canadian government put in place to reduce the risk of oil spills in Canadian waters, and ensure the continuance of our marine ecosystems and the sustainability of our fisheries?”
What a great question. Notice how it ties the environment to the economy?
As reported by Jane Taber, this question was submitted by Raimey Gallant, a student from Winnipeg’s Red River College.
Harper's stage managers nixed the question. As we all now know, PM Office denials aside, this entire matter was heavily stage managed.
What does Harper have to say about concerns which do not fit his very narrow definition of economics?
"Anything beyond the economy, including issues frequently covered by the national media, is a “sideshow,” the Prime Minster said."
To have our environment described as a sideshow by this circus act of a government speaks volumes about it's pettiness and lack of concern for my children's future.
Harper's Buy American deal is a betrayal!
In exchange for less than two weeks access to America's stimulus money, Harper has surrendered the ability of Canadian provinces and municipalities to prefer Canadian suppliers... FOREVER.
There is such reciprocity here. American states do not have to drop their current level of preferential buying.
Why did Harper do this? There is only one explanation: to get positive headlines, and ongoing bragging rights. Harper hopes he will brag louder than those who rightly criticize him.
You only have to think about what the headlines would say had he not reached a deal. "HARPER FAILS TO BREAK BUY AMERICA BLOCKADE" and the like. With the "Harper Government" way down in the polls, battered by Harper's partisan prorogation and his utter contempt of Parliament and the rule of law, more negative news is something this government is not prepared to have.
Harper sees that it is far better to sellout his country than to see his grip on power further erode.
Harper's partisan prorogation has made this deal even more possible. With Parliament closed, Harper doesn't have to ratify the agreement before it. There's no debate, no questions, and no criticisms on the Hansard record. We only get a few canon shots via the media.
I can imagine the mess Harper would have if Parliament were open. Instead, we get a PR roll out claiming this is a great deal, followed with some contrary reporting, quotes and comments print showing us that this is a lousy deal. I wonder which headlines win?
Well, Harper's tactical moves certainly have failed before; however, with this being framed as simply a "bad deal" and not as a sellout engineered to get good press, the resulting dialogue is not beyond what the public expects, and I doubt will get much negative traction. The typical headline OPPOSITION CRITICIZES GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT is not going to capture people's attention.
Advantage: Harper.
-----
Links:
Jane Taber Ottawa hails Buy American deal
Thomas Walkom Sold a bill of goods on `Buy American'
The Galloping Beaver Bye bye "Buy Local' - Hello "Buy North American"
There is such reciprocity here. American states do not have to drop their current level of preferential buying.
Why did Harper do this? There is only one explanation: to get positive headlines, and ongoing bragging rights. Harper hopes he will brag louder than those who rightly criticize him.
You only have to think about what the headlines would say had he not reached a deal. "HARPER FAILS TO BREAK BUY AMERICA BLOCKADE" and the like. With the "Harper Government" way down in the polls, battered by Harper's partisan prorogation and his utter contempt of Parliament and the rule of law, more negative news is something this government is not prepared to have.
Harper sees that it is far better to sellout his country than to see his grip on power further erode.
Harper's partisan prorogation has made this deal even more possible. With Parliament closed, Harper doesn't have to ratify the agreement before it. There's no debate, no questions, and no criticisms on the Hansard record. We only get a few canon shots via the media.
I can imagine the mess Harper would have if Parliament were open. Instead, we get a PR roll out claiming this is a great deal, followed with some contrary reporting, quotes and comments print showing us that this is a lousy deal. I wonder which headlines win?
Well, Harper's tactical moves certainly have failed before; however, with this being framed as simply a "bad deal" and not as a sellout engineered to get good press, the resulting dialogue is not beyond what the public expects, and I doubt will get much negative traction. The typical headline OPPOSITION CRITICIZES GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT is not going to capture people's attention.
Advantage: Harper.
-----
Links:
Jane Taber Ottawa hails Buy American deal
Thomas Walkom Sold a bill of goods on `Buy American'
The Galloping Beaver Bye bye "Buy Local' - Hello "Buy North American"
The banning of Patrick Ross
A few years ago, I started moderating my comments. I did this because people would at times publish defamation here, and, as the blog owner, Canadian libel law holds me responsible for that content.
I also was allowing people to defame me in my own space.
I still do. The difference is, I only publish their comments when I'm ready. No more would some insult or calumny rest on my blog unanswered for hours at a time.
It's a strategy that worked well. Until recently.
A few days ago, Patrick Ross started leaving comments here. I published them. I had to offer rebuttal. My rebuttal was increasingly ignored. Eventually, for my own reasons, I stopped publishing Ross in one of my threads, and dropped a message there explaining why.
Between work, my kids, whom I financially support and, most days of the week, raise alone; and my political activities, which have had me quite busy for the past several weeks (CAPP), it takes effort for me to respond to people here. Frankly, if they are wasting my time, I am going to resent it.
It has become very clear Ross was commenting here to merely demonstrate that he could.
Ross and Canadian Cynic have a dispute, the history of which I am personally well aware of, but not involved in. I will not repeat it here. Still, due to my above mentioned commitments, I was not aware that CC had issued a request for progressives to stop publishing Ross. Those who continue to are subject to an embargo by CC.
Ross has been dropping comments around the progressive blogosphere more than usual lately. He made clear yesterday why: all of us who published him he is claiming to not honour CC's request. Ross has specifically named me as "rejecting" CC's request. This is out of line.
Ross never raised this issue with me, and I was not aware of it. My publishing of Ross' comments should not be construed by him as a lack of support for CC.
It is clear to me that Ross was occupying my valuable time only for the petty reason of defaming CC.
I will not allow myself to be used in this way.
Patrick Ross, you are banned from this blog for disrespect and misrepresentation. I know you are baiting me. I don't care.
I also support CC's call for a general embargo on Ross's expression.
If this sound wrong, it's not. CC, after all, is not preventing Ross from exercising his freedom of expression. Ross can publish all he wants on his blog. CC is not preventing any of us from doing the same. No, CC is just setting editorial restrictions within his own space. We are free to respond in any way we like. The blogosphere does not rise or fall based upon CC's choices and writings.
People need to be aware that in publishing a comment, either directly though moderation, or indirectly, through a open comment policy, that you are responsible for disseminating that person's ideas. This is both a legal and a moral responsibility. Though my comment policy arose out of legal issues, I am all too aware that allowing others to publish propaganda here means that I am disseminating that propaganda as well.
By coincidence, just a few hours ago, I read this passage in "Not a Conspiracy Theory" by Donald Gutstein (great book) pp 309:
Well, we used to have Good Government.We don't anymore.
Our Prime Minister is involved in a propaganda war against those he represents. He has locked the doors of Parliament for purely partisan reasons, and gives us lies to justify it.
There's a long list of Harper's active erosion of our democracy here.
Harper has many syncophants willing to perpetuate these lies. CC understands this better than most. He does not suffer fools, and calls them as he sees them. Mostly, he makes the right calls.
We progressives all too often make the mistake of thinking that we are engaged in some sort of reasoned dialog with people. Truth will prevail! Facts speak for themselves! Conservatives just need more facts, then they'll understand.
Sure, it happens that some come around. But far too many on the right are just ditto-head loyalists repeating lies and laying fog.
I have no cause to aid them in any way.
So I support Canadian Cynic.
The enemy is ruthless, and it's time that we were too. Especially now with our Parliament locked.
We should not be spending time arguing with the Patrick Ross' of this world when we need to be hammering on Parliament's doors.
It is going to get worse, people. It is.
Please watch this piece below, and understand that it is not a polemic. It is simply the truth.
As you watch it, remember that Harper, prior to re-entering politics, fought hard in our courts to remove restrictions on third party advertising during elections.
And stop giving a platform to those who would keep us on our knees.
And please, be afraid. Give yourself leave to be. You need to be.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to have a much-needed beer.
I also was allowing people to defame me in my own space.
I still do. The difference is, I only publish their comments when I'm ready. No more would some insult or calumny rest on my blog unanswered for hours at a time.
It's a strategy that worked well. Until recently.
A few days ago, Patrick Ross started leaving comments here. I published them. I had to offer rebuttal. My rebuttal was increasingly ignored. Eventually, for my own reasons, I stopped publishing Ross in one of my threads, and dropped a message there explaining why.
It has become very clear Ross was commenting here to merely demonstrate that he could.
Ross and Canadian Cynic have a dispute, the history of which I am personally well aware of, but not involved in. I will not repeat it here. Still, due to my above mentioned commitments, I was not aware that CC had issued a request for progressives to stop publishing Ross. Those who continue to are subject to an embargo by CC.
Ross has been dropping comments around the progressive blogosphere more than usual lately. He made clear yesterday why: all of us who published him he is claiming to not honour CC's request. Ross has specifically named me as "rejecting" CC's request. This is out of line.
Ross never raised this issue with me, and I was not aware of it. My publishing of Ross' comments should not be construed by him as a lack of support for CC.
It is clear to me that Ross was occupying my valuable time only for the petty reason of defaming CC.
I will not allow myself to be used in this way.
Patrick Ross, you are banned from this blog for disrespect and misrepresentation. I know you are baiting me. I don't care.
I also support CC's call for a general embargo on Ross's expression.
If this sound wrong, it's not. CC, after all, is not preventing Ross from exercising his freedom of expression. Ross can publish all he wants on his blog. CC is not preventing any of us from doing the same. No, CC is just setting editorial restrictions within his own space. We are free to respond in any way we like. The blogosphere does not rise or fall based upon CC's choices and writings.
People need to be aware that in publishing a comment, either directly though moderation, or indirectly, through a open comment policy, that you are responsible for disseminating that person's ideas. This is both a legal and a moral responsibility. Though my comment policy arose out of legal issues, I am all too aware that allowing others to publish propaganda here means that I am disseminating that propaganda as well.
By coincidence, just a few hours ago, I read this passage in "Not a Conspiracy Theory" by Donald Gutstein (great book) pp 309:
"...progressives need a common enemy if they are to rally their diverse groupings to a common cause. Historically, the enemies of the left have been poverty, homelessness, inequality, poor health care, racism and sexism. The enemy of the right, in contrast, is the left. Progressives need to make the right -- the radical conservatives -- the enemy... they must engage the enemy, who they consider the source of most injustice."If that sounds harsh, I'm sorry to say that it's not. We are under siege. For generations we have relied on Peace, Order and Good Government. We get the third in exchange for granting the other two.
Well, we used to have Good Government.We don't anymore.
Our Prime Minister is involved in a propaganda war against those he represents. He has locked the doors of Parliament for purely partisan reasons, and gives us lies to justify it.
There's a long list of Harper's active erosion of our democracy here.
Harper has many syncophants willing to perpetuate these lies. CC understands this better than most. He does not suffer fools, and calls them as he sees them. Mostly, he makes the right calls.
We progressives all too often make the mistake of thinking that we are engaged in some sort of reasoned dialog with people. Truth will prevail! Facts speak for themselves! Conservatives just need more facts, then they'll understand.
Sure, it happens that some come around. But far too many on the right are just ditto-head loyalists repeating lies and laying fog.
I have no cause to aid them in any way.
So I support Canadian Cynic.
The enemy is ruthless, and it's time that we were too. Especially now with our Parliament locked.
We should not be spending time arguing with the Patrick Ross' of this world when we need to be hammering on Parliament's doors.
It is going to get worse, people. It is.
Please watch this piece below, and understand that it is not a polemic. It is simply the truth.
As you watch it, remember that Harper, prior to re-entering politics, fought hard in our courts to remove restrictions on third party advertising during elections.
And stop giving a platform to those who would keep us on our knees.
And please, be afraid. Give yourself leave to be. You need to be.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to have a much-needed beer.
Bunch of white guys looking (sort-of) busy
What's with that ultra-thin, very unwrinkled file folder in front of Rob Nicholson? Damn! he looked right into the camera while nervously shuffling around. No royal jelly there.
We have evidence here of the coming Conservative fiscal austerity: They can't afford a chair for Peter Van Loan! Is he responsible for getting the coffee? He's reminding me of Sergeant Schultz here. "I know nuthing...." He stands there for only 15 seconds, and looks incredibly useless the entire time.
Truth is, they can't have Van Loan sit beside Harper because he'd appear higher in the hierarchy than he is. Harper gets one entire side of the table. Alpha male stuff.
In another great example of Harper bringing us government transparency, we can see Peter Mackay's undershirt through his translucent shirt. I guess I should call that 'government translucency.'
Well, I guess we should be thankful for this. Clearly, we have no need of Parliament as long as The Harper Government can continue to supply us with 15 second soundless clips of white guys doing something.
Harper now has a longer lever
When Parliament resumes in March, if the opposition wants the committee to continue investigating the Afghanistan detainee issue, then they are going to have to approve Harper's budget. Otherwise, they will have to risk an election, which Harper is going to be spending months setting up to be on his own terms.
Starting in January, expect Harper to launch more Conservative ads, and spend even more of our money on "government" partisan advertising, angled towards boosting Conservative fortunes.
Expect the ten percenters to fly though mailboxes in key ridings.
Those bills lost through Harper's arrogant prorogation? Every one of importance will be promoted again, as if new, I expect. Sadly, it works. The public has a short memory, and will mostly hear the Harper rhythm not realizing it's a tune they've heard many times before.
The PM has far too much power in this country. The opposition would be wise to concentrate on that point.
Starting in January, expect Harper to launch more Conservative ads, and spend even more of our money on "government" partisan advertising, angled towards boosting Conservative fortunes.
Expect the ten percenters to fly though mailboxes in key ridings.
Those bills lost through Harper's arrogant prorogation? Every one of importance will be promoted again, as if new, I expect. Sadly, it works. The public has a short memory, and will mostly hear the Harper rhythm not realizing it's a tune they've heard many times before.
The PM has far too much power in this country. The opposition would be wise to concentrate on that point.
Harper suspends Parliament... BY TELEPHONE!?!?!?!?!?
That's all it takes these days? A mere telephone call to the Governor General, and Parliament is prorogued.
How will he do it next year? By text message? ("GG plz prorog til Mar3 Thx SH")
I can see Harper in a coming year, during a difficult question period, furiously text messaging the GG, and then rising. "Mr. Speaker, I would answer that question, but the Governor General has prorogued Parliament."
Our country's democracy is a mokery of the very idea.When one man can arbitrarily shut Parliament, we have no true representation and no good government.
I call on our parliamentarians to protest, not just with their voices, but with a continued presence on the Hill. We once had a senator hunger strike over Katimavik, a single small government program, to large and ongoing media coverage. What is our Parliament worth compared? Less? Or More?
I look forward to another tepid response by the Opposition, compared at least to what is at stake in this country. Oh, whine! Oh accusation! Oh, 60 days off.
James Bowie has a list of the bills that have died and will have to be reintroduced from scratch, assuming Harper doesn't call his planned post-Olympic election first.
Canada is dying a slow death.
====
Update:
Andrew Coyne has it right: Parliament should meet anyway.
How will he do it next year? By text message? ("GG plz prorog til Mar3 Thx SH")
I can see Harper in a coming year, during a difficult question period, furiously text messaging the GG, and then rising. "Mr. Speaker, I would answer that question, but the Governor General has prorogued Parliament."
Our country's democracy is a mokery of the very idea.When one man can arbitrarily shut Parliament, we have no true representation and no good government.
I call on our parliamentarians to protest, not just with their voices, but with a continued presence on the Hill. We once had a senator hunger strike over Katimavik, a single small government program, to large and ongoing media coverage. What is our Parliament worth compared? Less? Or More?
I look forward to another tepid response by the Opposition, compared at least to what is at stake in this country. Oh, whine! Oh accusation! Oh, 60 days off.
James Bowie has a list of the bills that have died and will have to be reintroduced from scratch, assuming Harper doesn't call his planned post-Olympic election first.
Canada is dying a slow death.
====
Update:
Andrew Coyne has it right: Parliament should meet anyway.
My only question if Harper closes Parliament again...
...is, what will the Opposition do this time?
Last time Stephen Harper closed Parliament in order to avoid it, I was disappointed at the response. There was some bluster and much puffing, but given the extent of the offence, I was shocked at how tepid the Opposition was in response.
When a pseudo-Straussian fascist arbitrarily closes Parliament in order to avoid democratic processes and decisions he doesn't like, the response should not be a flurry of press releases and talking heads furiously hand waving.
Instead, our Parliamentarians should be storming the Hill.
We will need action, not reaction. Real risky, sweaty effort, not armchair criticism.
I'm not calling for armed rebellion or anything, but some extended and creative activism would be most welcome.
Sadly, this bunch is not up to the task. They still do not know their enemy.
If Harper locks Parliament until after the Olympics, we will have two months of Conservative attacks ads and government funded partisan adverts to look forward to as the Conservatives strive to shape public opinion sufficiently in their favour to prepare for a Spring post-Olympic election.
I predict a small Harper majority win, based upon several months of propaganda targeting wedge groups of voters and key ridings.
Unless our hapless Opposition wakes up.
As if.
Last time Stephen Harper closed Parliament in order to avoid it, I was disappointed at the response. There was some bluster and much puffing, but given the extent of the offence, I was shocked at how tepid the Opposition was in response.
When a pseudo-Straussian fascist arbitrarily closes Parliament in order to avoid democratic processes and decisions he doesn't like, the response should not be a flurry of press releases and talking heads furiously hand waving.
Instead, our Parliamentarians should be storming the Hill.
We will need action, not reaction. Real risky, sweaty effort, not armchair criticism.
I'm not calling for armed rebellion or anything, but some extended and creative activism would be most welcome.
Sadly, this bunch is not up to the task. They still do not know their enemy.
If Harper locks Parliament until after the Olympics, we will have two months of Conservative attacks ads and government funded partisan adverts to look forward to as the Conservatives strive to shape public opinion sufficiently in their favour to prepare for a Spring post-Olympic election.
I predict a small Harper majority win, based upon several months of propaganda targeting wedge groups of voters and key ridings.
Unless our hapless Opposition wakes up.
As if.
Tom Flanagan says he looks up to Iggy
A must read. Lots of nuggets in this interview: Ignatieff 'quality guy,' Flanagan says
Look at Harper's new homosexual-hating speech writer
Nigel Hannaford is the new hire, formerly of The Calgary Herald. His words, on homosexual rights:
Not that this makes him a poor speech writer. Still, look at who Harper surrounds himself with.
xtra has more.
"Fine, said lots of people. Leave gays alone? Fair enough. But, let 'em be Boy Scout leaders? Have each other's benefits? Adopt kids? Marry each other? Ridiculous. Anybody seeking political office who suggested it would have been laughed off the hustings. Yet, the Liberals are ready to legalize gay marriage. How did we get to this point?"
Not that this makes him a poor speech writer. Still, look at who Harper surrounds himself with.
xtra has more.
Let me be clear
Repetitive rhetorical phrases work.
And it's better that you own your phrases rather than letting someone else define them for you.
"Do you think it's easy setting priorities?" -- LOL.
And it's better that you own your phrases rather than letting someone else define them for you.
"Do you think it's easy setting priorities?" -- LOL.
Would-be Conservative MP steps down
No surprise here: The Markham-Unionville Conservative candidate, Gordon Landon, has resigned.
Of course, even Conservative MPs have to get such permission. They owe more fealty to their party than to their constituents.
He wants to speak his own mind? Wow. Did he ever pick the wrong party to run for.
Landon was dumped Monday as the Conservative candidate for Markham-Unionville after publicly musing the GTA riding was being shut out of federal infrastructure funding because it is held by a Liberal.The York regional councillor says he complied with a request from the Conservative party to step aside, adding he is not used to people telling him what to say and think.
..."I didn't follow Conservative policy in terms of getting permission to go on that TV show and I made a comment on that show that was an embarrassment to some members of the Conservative party."
Of course, even Conservative MPs have to get such permission. They owe more fealty to their party than to their constituents.
He wants to speak his own mind? Wow. Did he ever pick the wrong party to run for.
The 'Prince' must stay out of the fray
More on this later, but Ignatieff has to avoid this sort of thing:
Mr. Ignatieff at first told reporters Friday that he did not want to play “games” by criticizing the NDP's position, but did later poke fun at his rivals on the opposition benches.That's a good quote, but one of his lieutenants should have pitched it.
“Jack and Gilles have gone up the hill, and we know how that little fairy tale ends,” he said.
Also: Worth Repeating
Now that the media have had their fun asking Ignatieff to rule out a coalition after the next election, for consistency's sake, how about if those same reporters start asking Stephen Harper to similarly promise that he will not go running off to the Governor General begging to prorogue the House after a throne speech?
-- Nottawa
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)