Hey media - about that “spouse who stays in a dysfunctional relationship under the misguided notion” he can change...

I was such a spouse, so you can fuck right off when you whine and use that as an excuse for having backed harper.  Sure, now that his atrocities are so in everyone’s face that you can’t hide his bestiality or your own black eyes, you seek to gather your shredded slef-esteem by pointing out how utterly vile his actions are since being elected, but your garments are so threadbare from years and years of defending him it’s ludicrous.

And you dare blame us for adding to your beatings.  Us, the ones who have been trying to shake some sense of responsibility into you for years.

   T hose who are now beating up the media, including the media themselves, for their supposedly off-base and out-of-touch coverage of the federal election campaign are missing a key element.  It's how good Stephen Harper truly is at ruthless, calculating politics.

   If the media made any mistake, it wasn't to focus on Harper's cynical calculations leading up to and during the campaign.   But if media made a mistake, it's the same one made by the spouse who stays in a dysfunctional relationship under the misguided notion that "Everyone else thinks he's a great guy," and "Somehow I can change him."

We never missed that key element, fuckwads.  How dare you?  How often have we written about that very thing.  Warned, pleaded, sought whatever means we could to expose what was never really concealed?  Wrote lengthy pieces supported with a great deal of research and careful links to information going back years?  How often did we on the Net challenges harper’s claims and bring out his ruthlessness when you failed to do so?

You made the monster.  And you can’t claim the abuse spouse excuse.  With knowledge comes responsibility, for one thing.  You had greater access to information than we had, and we figured it out and acted accordingly.  You are an industry that is supposed to look at and report things objectively, not get all involved like a wife struggling to hold together the fantasy of a marriage.

And “everyone else thinks he’s a great guy?”  Excuse me?  Hello?  Hell-fucking-o?  How many years has steve been barely holding 33% in the polls?  How many articles did your soret write about people just not trusting him or warming to him?  How many of us - you know, the ones who make up the rest of “everybody” shouted how utterly dangerous the man was then and how much worse he’d be with a majority?

And finally, you claim you thought that “somehow you can change him?”  Are you really so unprofessional?  Of course you are, and you prove it again with this whiny piece where you claim it isn’t your fault you sucked up to the tyrant, endorsed him, played not into his hands but right along with him, willingly.

How can a spineless bunch like you change your master?  You bowed and crawled and bobbed in his dust for a few crumbs, grumbling now and then but still parroting the lines he fed you.

You were his creatures, and from this article and other recent ones, it appears many of you still are.

One could bemoan the promotion of the thuggish John Baird to Foreign Affairs or Tony Clement as Treasury Board chair, but it should be noted that these two are at least among Harper's most politically talented ministers.

Really?  Talented? 

Ministers of modest competence -say a Gerry Ritz in Agriculture -can remain in cabinet as long as they are willing to be partisan pit bulls who savagely defend Harper's policy that bump up against the interests even of stakeholders in their portfolio.        

Modest competence?  Ritz? 

Excuse me for not linking to the proof of the absurdities of your statements, but really, what’s the point?  You have no respect for truth anyway.

Back to that abused spouse who is far, far better than you guys can ever be.  Once she realizes the douchebag was playing her as he abused her, she pulls it together, if not for herself, then for those she’s responsible for.  She gets informed, gets help, gets the hell out of there.  And having done that, she assesses the past relationship and looks at her role in it, determined never to make the same mistakes.  She doesn’t whine and blame others for her part in the bad marriage or in propping up the douchebag.

She doesn’t claim all men women are as dysfunctional as she was around the douchebag.  Rather, she looks to them to understand how they could see through the prick while she failed to in order that she learn a better approach in sizing up people in her life.

As someone who lived through a dysfunctional, abusive relationship, I learned many things.  One of them is that the douchebag is not the only tyrant out there.  You learn to watch for signs.  You may think I’m talking about the master strategist whose butt you have your noses up, but I’m talking about you, the media.  You are useless, opportunistic sycophants, lazy on top of all the rest, pompous, self-righteous, and far to quick to blame others while doing little to reform your own behaviour.

So don’t expect me, or the many like me who are so very angry in the role you played and continue to play in propping up and excusing harper to have any belief in what you write, to think you play a role of any value to the building of our nation, that you have any respect for truth, and that you are likely to change.

We have dealt with the abuse and know that types like harper, and types like you don’t change.  You don’t have the emotional or psychological equipment for that.

About that media speculation over steve relaxing, spontaneously turning into something akin to human

I’d say giving every single Canadian an unabashed fuck you before the House even sits, and not having the courtesy of announcing it personally should pretty much slap all of you incredibly stupid people upside the head.

(photo)


In the party where liars and criminals are elevated, why not losers?  Even two-time losers?

Stephen Harper wasted no time in bringing back three defeated candidates, appointing former Quebec cabinet minister Josée Verner to the Senate and reappointing Larry Smith and Fabian Manning.

Smith and Fabian - you remember?  Those two harper appointed senators who used their time as senators to prep for their MP campaigns, quit the senate to run, then were rejected by voters?

Can you think of a more unapologetic screw you to all of us?

Can anyone seriously still doubt that steve has absolutely no sense of ethics?

This is what we face for the next four years.  Longer, much longer if the press in particular keeps treating him like a mildly disobedient golden child, gently chiding him while bragging to all who will listen just how terrific and oh so special he is. 

Oh...and you journalists who want to make amends by keeping tabs?  Kind of need access to the guy you all endorsed for that.

Minutes after he finished answering questions from reporters about his cabinet shuffle, the Prime Minister’s Office sent out a release announcing the three appointments. So Mr. Harper did not have to address the issue in public.

I am anxiously waiting to hear about steve’s plans for senate reform.  Really.  Just so excited.

Headline from the twilight zone

CRTC may ease ban on broadcasting false or misleading news

Really.  You see a title like that and you just have to read on, thinking it must surely be an extremely poorly worded title.  What "independent public organization that regulates and supervises the Canadian broadcasting and telecommunications systems" would not fight to enforce nothing but the most reliable news delivered with absolute journalistic integrity?

We would assume that being an independent, public organization, such an agency would want to make sure it shields itself from corporate and political influence.  The public needs to be protected from the constant barrage of paid for ads full of false and misleading statements meant to sell us ideas or goods that we would never consider embracing should we be told the truths behind them.

Unfortunately, the title to this article is not misleading.

Current regulations contain a blanket prohibition on broadcasting “any false or misleading news.”  The (CRTC) wants to considerably narrow the scope of that prohibition.  It is proposing a ban on the broadcast of “any news that the licensee knows is false or misleading and that endangers or is likely to endanger the lives, health or safety of the public.”
 
Michael Geist, a University of Ottawa law professor specializing in communications issues, says the proposed prohibition is far too limited.  “If we're setting a high standard that you've got to actually endanger someone's life, health or safety, frankly almost anything that's false or misleading that's obviously outside of that fairly narrow scope would be fair game,” Geist said in an interview.  For instance, he said false news that caused financial harm would not be covered by the more limited prohibition.

Nor would such a limited prohibition prevent intentionally false news that could ruin someone's career, family life, or reputation.  It would not protect companies under attack by ones intent on destroying their public image.

It would create a new battleground for vicious attacks against political opponents, special interest groups, minorities, or anyone that gets in the way of people with enough money and power to buy or bully their way on the airwaves.

That the new rules would disallow lies which endanger lives, health, and safety of the public is no protection at all since it is often difficult to prove in a court of law that certain words provoked a certain outcome.  The same violent rhetoric can be repeated over and over, working its influence on those so full of anger and frustration they only need a small nudge to act, but as we have seen in the recent Arizona killings, the rhetorical trigger was pulled at a safe enough distance in the eyes of the law that those who promote violence and hatred through their lies can continue to do so without personal repercussions.

Orwell's Bastard has a link where you can reach a site and tell CRTC what you think of this dangerous change.  As OB says, they may not listen, but we should voice our opposition anyway. 

Next step: interviewing himself.

This is great.  Fucking hilarious, in fact.  Like it was written for a sit-com where the main dude thinks he’s the only one who knows what’s going on when really, he’s the only one who doesn’t.  Makes you want to story-board it.

The Prime Minister of Canada blew into central Vancouver Island Wednesday afternoon to tout facilities being built with federal dollars and provide some photo ops for local media and MPs.

"Did they tell you this is all oyster shells?" Stephen Harper said to the media, assembled behind a make-shift partition 10 metres away at the Deep Bay Field Research Station.

He paused a moment, holding a crushed shell…The dozen reporters present, surprised he'd even acknowledge them, said nothing.

So far, Harper true to character, everyone exactly where the master strategist wanted them...But then -

His security men, looking the part in dark suits (with bulges) and sunglasses, kept looking our way and beyond, into the trees. His handlers, who had been busy imposing the rules of the game ("I want you over there, sir, with the rest of the media"; "Remember, no questions. Do you have a problem with that?") kept poker faces also. The people with him, MP James Lunney (Nanaimo-Alberni), VIU president Dr. Ralph Nilson and project manager Brian Kingzett, stopped chatting with the Prime Minister and waited.

Sorta like when everyone except the emperor, so wrapped in his ego he’s oblivious to all else, realizes he has no clothes.  But the serfs keep right on pretending, acting as though every journalist there hadn’t just ignored the Prime Minister of Canada’s question.

Since nobody else said anything, Mr. Harper finished the thought himself. "It is," he said. Then he returned to face his hosts and continue his banter with them, just out of earshot.

Well, many Canadians are beginning to suspect he talks to himself because he’s the only company he really enjoys.

And you have to think that Mr. Harper might ultimately be the loser in this game he's playing, setting himself apart from the media rabble. Because while it may be safer in some ways, it also has its risks: being seen as lacking courage is one of them, and failing to address local concerns is another.

Hmmm…lack of courage.  Proroguing Parliament rather than face the consequences of his actions; hiding behind the troops, behind public servants, behind his own MPs; never, ever, ever admitting he made a mistake.  I think old Steve is past that tipping point.

Hey! Fellow Canadians!

This concerns all of you.

Federal officials assured the Red Cross in 2006 that Canada would take an active role in monitoring the fate of Afghan prisoners - but for critical months behind the scenes did little more than manage the political spin, secret memos show.

The records, examined on a confidential basis by The Canadian Press, show the Harper government placed a greater emphasis on drafting "key messages" to the public and preparing "approaches" for embarrassing disclosures than on dealing with the human rights of prisoners.

(...)No. 1 on the eight-point plan for officials was to "Prepare standard key messages (ie. importance of adhering to obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law regarding the treatment of detainees.)"

Point No. 8 in the plan was to "consider supplementing the existing arrangement" in such a way to include the "guarantee of access for Canadian authorities to individuals transferred by the (Canadian Forces)."
h/t to Impolitical for that story.

This speaks of a broad problem with this government, so even if you somehow convince yourself that sure, torture is bad, hmm-kay...but the detainee issue is different because it’s just anout them thar terr’ists who throw acid in the faces of little girl, drafting key messages to avoid embarrassment or accountability is always the priority of Steve & Co.

What if there was, say, a dangerous, deadly bacteria in a common food source?  Do you want to take the chance that this government might place spin above the health and safety of Canadians?  Could Harper go that far?...Oh...right -

The news agency reported that Ritz fretted about the political dangers of the crisis, and then quipped: "This is like a death by a thousand cuts. Or should I say cold cuts." 

The handling of something as serious as torture and Canada violating the Geneva conventions shows what lengths this government will go to in order to protect the false image it constantly promotes.

A respected former diplomat was aghast that "developing the spin" would take priority over dealing with an issue as urgent as possible torture.  "This is one of those situations where - once again - presentation has taken the place of substance," said Louis Delvoie, Canada's former high commissioner to Pakistan.

And this applies to any situation, even those affecting those Canadians who don’t give a damn about what happens beyond our borders -

"It's a rather sad commentary on what is taking place. You (should) deal with the substance of an issue and then you develop the communications plan as a separate and subsequent item to explain how you're doing it and what you're doing."

A bonus bit on those precious troops Harper and Baird are so concerned about -

Errol Mendes, a human-rights law expert, said the paper trail demonstrates that the Harper government viewed the war as a political exercise, where image-branding trumped policy.  "Throughout all of this the military has been used as a political prop and that is dangerous," he said.  "Governments come and go but the military as an institution remains and the damage this kind of approach can leave is severe."

We are likely to see more of this message massaging and crafting, paid for by...us.

Taxpayers are being asked to pay an extra $1.7-million this fiscal year to help bolster Stephen Harper's communications support services – just as the Prime Minister's Office begins distributing government videos of Harper to the news media.  Supplementary estimates tabled last month by the Privy Council Office, the Prime Minister's bureaucratic back office, boosted internal operational spending by almost $7.3-million for 2009-10. That's on top of existing budgets.

Oh great!  More of this nonsense, but costlier.

In the last two weeks, the PCO started sending news organizations links to new videos in the same way the PMO has routinely distributed photos shot by Mr. Harper's official photographer.

Besides being a ridiculous expense to taxpayers (just so Steve can pretend to be a real PM), this push to produce his own media outlet over which he has complete control threatens impartial journalism:

The photos, and now the videos, have sparked a debate over media access and when the use of government-produced and approved images may be appropriate in an independent news media.

“It's not access,” said Chris Waddell, who holds the Carty chair in business and financial journalism at Ottawa's Carleton University.  “Access is an opportunity to ask questions and an opportunity to engage in independent work according to journalistic principles. What they're giving you is public relations.”

To which Mr. Message himself answers:

“The media can't have it both ways,” Mr. Soudas recently told CBC.  “They can't criticize us for not providing enough information, and then criticize us for providing too much information.”

Well, yes we can, Dimitri.  Yes we can.  The info you provide through PMO releases is stilted, incomplete, and allows no avenue for challenge or questioning. 

It gives the illusion that Canadians are being kept up-to-date on what the government is doing, what studies have uncovered, what goals and plans are, how our money is spent.  But it is only the illusion that Harper wants us to buy into.

It’s like relying solely on the testimony of a pathological liar when that same liar is the one on trial.

update:  The Imp tells us to just say no.