If there was a hell for fat, lying sacks of shit who have no integrity...

...this whore would surely end up there.

 “When I went to the school of hard knocks, we were told to be fair and balanced,” Duffy said. “That school doesn’t exist any more...”  - Duffy      

And of course, the Afghan detainees issue is the Liberals’ fault.

Maybe a public servant living in that other Canada wrote this.

You know, the Canada Harper says is better now than four years ago?

“The Prime Minister’s action has not only brought additional talent and expertise to the Senate; it has greatly strengthened our efforts to move forward on our tackling-crime agenda.”

“The opposition has obstructed that agenda in the Senate, most notably by gutting Bill C-15 – a bill proposing mandatory jail time for serious drug offences, and a key part of the government’s efforts to fight organized crime.”
“These five new Senators support all our measures,” said Minister Paradis. “And today, we ask the opposition parties to listen to the victims of crime and to support our measures, too.”

That is part of what appears on Justice Canada’s site.

Like all federal departments and agencies staffed by public servants, the website is supposed to be non-partisan.  At all times.

This is important, because if an elected government is allowed to use it to push its ideology, promote its agenda, or attack the opposition, there is a clear conflict of interest and the very real possibility of presenting biassed information.

Nor should tax payer funded sites such as these be used to promote the interests or attack ads of any one party.

This time, all of us tax payers have paid for this partisan attack ad posted by the Conservatives.  Tolerate this, and next year, we could all be paying for similar ads for the Liberal party.  No elected government can be allowed to manipulate public service websites, or those sites become nothing more than political propaganda.  Useless as a source of information to the public.

Public servants, especially those working in communications, understand this.  That is why it is near to impossible that a public servant wrote that conservative message with the intentions of posting it on Justice Canada’s site.

Furthermore, since the statement made on that site is not accurate considering the Conservatives themselves have delayed and even killed their own crime bills, it is even less believable that a public servant wrote it.  That communications person would have done their research, aimed for accuracy, knowing full well that their words will be closely reviewed and edited by several managers.

With several levels of public service managers reviewing the message, errors would have been caught and it is impossible that the partisan nature of the message would not have been caught and addressed.  Unless the message came from the top.  The political top.

"This is a concerted effort on the part of this government to politicize the public service," said Liberal MP Marlene Jennings. "This is not the first time, it is reprehensible and it has to stop." Jennings lodged her complaint with Privy Council Clerk Wayne Wouters over a press release posted on the Justice Department's website

...She wants it removed and Wouters to investigate whether public servants wrote, approved and posted it, or if it was prepared by political staff and posted under their orders. She also wants to know if any bureaucrats objected.

An investigation sounds appropriate.  But with attack after attack on public servants who have been brutalized for trying to do their jobs, will any come forth?  I hope so, but then it’s easy for me to say since I’m not the one risking my job.

More public servants are coming forth, but with the threat of cutbacks in the public service, and a scarcety of jobs in the private sector, they take a great risk in offending their political Minister.

This is why I keep saying we need to support our public servants when they stand up against those who would rather they remain silent.

They work for us.  We should help them do so without threats or harassment.

So, Bliss, if that’s the case, why don’t you just write for a reality TV show?

Note: as provided by commentator Morning - Bliss isn't a journalist but a well respected historian who has been critical of Harper in the past. That said, he should know better...

I have here referred to him as a journalist, but this post is actually based on an opinion piece Bliss wrote.

Michael Bliss, published in the Globe and Mail (too bad Stevo didn’t look to partisan media hacks for this latest round of Senate appointments, eh, Mikey?) Tells us that we Canadians have very short attention spans, should just stay the hell out of politics, do buy work studying Olympic figure skating so we aren’t ridiculously giving a damn about our democracy, and well, none of it matters anyway because we’ll all forget about this whole prorogation thing anyway and sit around talking about real important shit like who place where in the Olympics.

Bliss could stand to do a bit of studying of his own on prorogation, it’s purpose, and what it takes to maintain a healthy democracy: 

It's hard to see why there is so much fuss about the Harper government's prorogation of Parliament. The House of Commons, which is not very well respected by either ordinary or informed Canadians when it is sitting, will now sit for three weeks less than it would have otherwise.

Standard fodder from the CON script of “what’s the big deal?”

Bliss deliberately avoids even going through the motions of fairly presenting his argument.  The big deal has been explained dozens of times in the media these past few weeks.  It has been written on protest signs, spoken of by politicians, analyzed and explained by political experts.

Proroguing Parliament to avoid being accountable to the electorate is a big deal, Michael.  Avoiding debate and accountability as you try to ram through changes to our systems without allowing debate by elected representatives (representing us, the electorate, the ones the government is supposed to work for) is a big deal.

That Harper’s lapdogs go around the country bragging about how much easier it is to get things done without opposition or the threat of a non-confidence vote is a very big deal, Michael.  Tow thirds of Canadians, as of the last election want to have their say through those they elected, want the government to have to get approval of the majority before making certain changes.  And according to recent polls, that number of Canadians is consistently and solidly on the rise.

Some useful government bills are going to have to be reintroduced.

Thank you for saying that, Michael.  Yes certain Bills will have to be re-introduced, at great expense.  Please remind us of that when Harper goes on and on about how those very Bills have been held back by an unelected, Liberal Senate, will you?  Just remind us of who really slowed their progess - not only slowed it, but stopped it dead.

The Afghan hearings, into events of several years ago, will be delayed for a few more weeks.

Yeah, what’s the big deal if a few more brown people are tortured, meanwhile, if a few more critical records are white washed, if a few more witnesses are threatened and harassed in a bid to silence them?

 And that's about it.

Not quite.  Jobs are still being lost, programs are not receiving funding - costing more jobs and killing some damn good programs - issues such as the problems at Chalk River and the listerisosis crisis are not being addressed...

One would think from the heated rhetoric of opposition politicians, the strange gaggle of academics who signed the long, sanctimonious letter against prorogation, and the fulminations of some editorialists and pundits, that our democracy is somehow imperilled by the government's resort, twice, to one of the most common of all parliamentary practices.

“Strange gaggle...”  Is that like the chattering classes, Michael?  Oh, wait.  Academics.  I get it.  If the chattering classes in question are also academics, does that make them a strange gaggle?

I love concise, clear writing by journalist.  Love it.

“Sanctimonious...”  Give me a sec as I wipe up the coffee I just spewed all over my keyboard.

OK.

The most common of all parliamentary practices.  A little over the top on that one, aren’t you Mikey, beside being acutely dishonest.  Listen up, ok?  I will only repeat what has been said DOZENS of times by experts, lately: Prorogation is not uncommon.  It is why and how Harper did it that is, and it is also why and how he did it that imperils democracy.  You contemptible hack.

(...) the opposition parties are trying to keep the pot boiling, largely by playing on public ignorance of the workings of government.

Well, actually, if you, a journalist, would actually, you know, read what other reporters - real ones - are reporting, it isn’t nearly so much the opposition who are drawing attention to this abuse of power by the Harper government, but the strange gaggle of academics, the chattering classes, the average Canadians who got their asses out on the National day of protest organized not by the opposition, but by other average Canadians.  The attention is being drawn by experts in political affairs who recognize the dangers of such a practice applied as it has been by Harper.

People obsessed with the ins and outs of how to prorogue Parliament would do better making book on Olympic figure skating.

Really?  Why is that, Michael?  Because if people who are interested in their own fate, in the future of their country, in shaping the democracy of their country (you know, people acting responsibly by being informed and actually doing their part as good citizens) look at the shiny object rather than at the fact they are being discounted, trivialized, ignored, insulted, trod upon, they will offer no resistence to a government that seeks to impose its narrow ideology upon them despite their will?

Is that why, Michael?

That one statement of yours is the most insulting to Canadians, the most appalling coming from a journalist whose role should be to make people think, to inform them, to have them become engaged in their own government.

The appointed Senate of Canada is obviously a standing, outrageous disgrace to democracy and ought not to be tolerated by a free people. It's surely to Stephen Harper's credit, both short and long term, that he keeps trying to change the Senate. One of his reasons for resorting to prorogation and falling back on making his own partisan appointments appears to be to try to stop the egregious abuse of their power by certain Liberal senators.

Of course, no CON partisan hack column is complete without mentioning the evils of a Liberal, appointed Senate.  Then of course to go on and justify the angelic, saintly, god-driven purpose of an appointed, Conservative Senate.

Sort of like the battle of the angels in heaven, right, Michael?  The bad ones are cast out by the good ones?  Well, hell, god had to appoint good angels to drive out the bad ones.  And if they stick around for all eternity afterward, doing angelly things, what the hell?  Might need them for other wet work later on, right?

And besides, the Liberals did it first, so it’s cool.

A few days after prorogation ends on March 3, Canadians will mostly have forgotten all the words written and spoken about it. They'll be rehashing the Olympics instead.

Uh-huh.  Right.  Isn’t it that very arrogant, ignorant, insulting argument that drove so many Canadians to protest prorogation?  That keeps them chattering away?  That’s causing them to stage flash rallies?  That’s causing Harper’s crash in the polls?

Seriously, if you think we Canadians, the very ones who read the news and allow you to have a venue for your nonsense are so shallow, so easily distracted, why don’t you write for a reality show?

Instead, the dancers just kept on, encouraged by their media and academic acolytes, not noticing that the music had stopped and the audience had gone home.

Correction, Michael.  As much as you would like it to, the music hasn’t stopped, and the audience is still paying attention.  I know, because we are making the music, and we are very, very much engaged in it.

I don’t know what Canada you have been living in these past few years.  Maybe that alternate universe Harper spoke of last week when he said Canada is better off now than it was four years ago.

But in this Canada, Canadians do see Harper’s latest abuse of prorogation as a big deal.  In this Canada, they know that the Olympics, which should be an inspiring event of many countries coming together peacefully to celebrate the excellence of their athletes is being used exactly for what you try to use it for - a distraction from the corrupt and undemocratic practices of a government which doesn’t give a damn about the will of the people and which views democracy as an inconvenience.

You write to us, Michael, try to convince us of your great  insight and wisdom.  But as you tell us we are stupid not to hear your words, you add that we are just generally stupid overall, and that we should just mind our own business - which of course does not involve being good, responsible citizens contributing to their own government - and go play with an expensive toy so that the ones accountable to us don’t have to be impeded by that very accountability.

You can keep your Canada, Michael.  I, and many, many other like me will continue fighting for ours.

The dumbest opinion piece by a journalist I’ve read in a long time

Alec Bruce, Moncton-based journalist and columnist of The Bruce Report   tells us all - journalists and other Canadians, that we should get on the same page.

That page, it's pretty obvious, comes right out of CON speaking notes.

This opinion piece is so ridiculous and self-contradictory that it’s difficult to know where to start.

To read sundry editorials in recent days is to be treated to a cacophony of chicken-little squawking, as marvellously exemplified by a front-page screed in the Globe and Mail last Thursday.

He is referring to the media coverage of Harper’s latest adventures in dodging accountability and snubbing his nose at democracy by proroguing Parliament.

...But ask "average" Canucks -- those who are more concerned about their jobs or, for that matter, the winter Olympics, than the prime minister's machinations -- and the response is wholly different. You're more likely to hear "don't care," "business as usual" and "what does prorogation mean?"

Is Bruce suggesting journalists should ignore their knowledge of Parliamentary procedures, their insights into democratic systems, their trained ability to connect events and project possible consequences?  Is he saying they should just forget all that and write whatever “average” Canadians - whatever the hell he means by that - are saying?  And are average Canadians really more concerned about the Olympics - which few can even afford to attend - than, say, making sure they will actually have jobs in March?

Why bother with journalists at all, if that is the case?  Just let “average” Canadians write to each other.

It is, by now, abundantly clear that many, if not all, major news organizations in the country simply don't like Harper and his confederates, who they depict as cold, uncommunicative, dismissive, and occasionally nasty.

Gee, Bruce, could it be at all possible - now dig down deep for any dregs of journalistic impartiality for a moment - is it at all possible that Harper may actually be cold, uncommunicative, dismissive, occasionally nasty?  Is it possible that stating there are opportunities to be had by some as the economy crashes for the majority could be perceived as a rather cold comment?  Can you consider that maybe, just maybe Harper’s avoidance of the press could be construed as non-communicative on his part?  How about ignoring Supreme Court rulings?  Is that, perhaps, dismissive?  And nasty - might it not be a little nasty of him to bash artists, label them as elitists?  Or how about the endless personal attacks on Dion?

No, I guess many news organizations just decided one morning to dislike Harper.  He’s probably a real peach of a guy.  Just all warmth, openness, and willing to talk to Canadians without having to control minute aspects of every media appearance.

It is equally obvious that the rest of Canadians, by and large, are either dismissive of or indifferent to the federal political system. After all, if the Afghan detainee debacle has failed to light a fire under their rumps, what's the likelihood that a point of parliamentary protocol will now provoke popular outrage?

So what are you saying, Bruce?  If the public doesn’t seem to be interested, journalists should not bother informing it?  Is that what journalism is all about?  I thought that was prime time TV - like reality tv shows, crappy marketing, you know, entertainment as opposed to informed journalism.

Part of the problem, in this recent circumstance, is that the loudest media voices fallaciously equate "prorogation" with "undemocratic."

No they don’t.  They largely acknowledge that Harper is allowed to prorogue, but that doing so for poor reasons, over and over to dodge accountability is in spirit undemocratic and threatens our democracy.

The procedure may not be open, transparent and accountable -- especially as how Harper has deployed it over the past year -- but neither is it, strictly speaking, an autocratic device.

Really?  He decides, all on his own, despite the majority of elected members of Parliament being opposed, and not even being asked for their input, even though they are there to represent those who elected them.

It is just another widget in the constitutional toolbox. And to suggest that even its imprudent or cynical use undermines the very foundation of our commonwealth is to confess that, at some level, we can never fully trust our system of government.

Well yes.  Exactly.  That’s what many of us are saying.  This present system allows cynical abuse of prorogation, showing we can’t trust our system of government - in the hands of a self-serving, cynical, dismissive autocrat.  We need to make changes, but that isn't likely under Harper since prorogation is one of his favourite democracy dismantling widgets.

Now, Bruce’s first contradiction:

Lamentably, many Canadians already believe this (reference to previous paragraph), which explains their reaction to Harper's latest fandango. And, herein, lays the real peril.

I thought you said Canadians don’t really care, Bruce.  Thought you were whining on about how media is not on the same page as Canadians.  But let’s look at this peril you speak of:

There comes a point in every tired democracy when its defenders lose the ear of the people, when no amount of virtuous rabble-rousing, no degree of righteous eloquence, compel the majority to stand up and take back their plurality from those who have squandered their responsibilities. Canada is steadily heading towards this point, to a place where it will find itself impaled on the horns of its own ambivalence.

To reverse this course, the mainstream media (as long as one exists) must do a far better job than it has of educating citizens about the real, quotidian offenses to democracy in Canada -- the ones that go unreported and, therefore, unrecognized simply because they don't inspire front-page treatment.
       
Hmmm.  I thought that is what they have been doing in this case- interviewing specialist on democracy, stating the process in layman’s terms, getting informed opinions on if and how Harper’s moves violate or endanger democracy.  What say you, Bruce?

The daily function of an unelected, and easily manipulated, Senate is an abomination. Parliamentary committees stacked with partisans and power-mongers insult common sense and injure egalitarian principles.

An abomination.  Oh, yes.  Certainly that.  Which is why Harper (who is not cold, dismissive, un-communicative, nasty) (nor a blatant liar who violates his own promises) is stacking the Senate with unelected Conservative partisan hacks. 

And committees.  Right.  Huge problem with committees.  Those damn opposition members and their dirty tricks handbook, their refusal to show up at committees, their reluctance to produce documentation or allow witnesses to speak.  Oh, wait, it’s the CPC committee members who do that.   

But I get your point.  That’s some real serious shit, not trivia like blocking climate change talks at international summits, the economy tanking as the CONs deny there is even a problem, gagging public servants, firing them for doing their jobs too well, burying reports, and proroguing Parliament to avoid accountability.

Let's read more about these systemic threats to liberty and political participation from the country's ink-stained wretches, and less about perfectly democratic, if indisputably disingenuous, tactics executed by not just this government, but every government that waddles into Ottawa armed with an agenda.

Yes, lets’s, Bruce, you ink-stained wretch with your political participation.  You, and dishonest journalists like you who show the same contempt for your readers as does the Harper government are a systemic threat to our freedoms.  You go for the lowest denominator - not even the lowest common one - and pompously, self-righteously demand that responsible journalists dive into that mire, embrace it, and spew out the crap they ingest.  And then call it journalism.

Your pathetic little whines of it’s not fair!  Why are you always picking on him!  Canadians don’t know a damn thing, but hey, look, let’s report just as they would! fortunately don’t resound with readers who actually read past the headline.  As for the rest, well, you had them at I’m a CPC partisan hack.

Canadians and their mainstream media should, in the end, be on the same page.

Isn’t that called indoctrination, if the media is asked to tow Harper’s line, as you are demanding they do?