Election 2015

[sweep the leg]

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3

 

Article about Harper from The New York Times. Not very flattering...

 

Lol that's like quoting the Sun on a Trudeau article.  NYT openly leans to the left.

 

I don't know about the Sun comparison, but I realize they're left leaning. Regardless, I thought it was an interesting perspective from somebody outside of Canada. A look into the image we're presenting to the world.

 

 

It's written by someone in Toronto.

 

Well, never mind then...

[Mark F]

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3

 

Article about Harper from The New York Times. Not very flattering...

 

Lol that's like quoting the Sun on a Trudeau article.  NYT openly leans to the left.

 

you might want to look into that a little bit. New York Times was  the number one cheerleader of the invasion of iraq. They actually had an editorial apology for their role in that invasion. pretty sure that is not one of the invasions lefties like.

 

their main opinion writer is friedman, who is  not even slightly "left " The New York times is not left at all.

 

In fact it's despised by most left thinkers.

 

aside from that, did you read the article, and if you did, are there errors of fact in it? 

 

I haven't read the article, and have no opinion on it.

[Atomic]

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3

 

Article about Harper from The New York Times. Not very flattering...

 

Lol that's like quoting the Sun on a Trudeau article.  NYT openly leans to the left.

 

you might want to look into that a little bit. New York Times was  the number one cheerleader of the invasion of iraq. They actually had an editorial apology for their role in that invasion.

 

their main opinion writer is friedman, who is  not even slightly "left "

 

My friend, NYT is widely regarded as a left-wing outlet.  Doesn't mean every opinion they ever print will align with a liberal point of view.

 

I'm also not trying to say they are wrong in what they wrote.  I'm just saying, if I told you the Sun printed something about Trudeau and it makes him look bad... well of course they did.

[Atomic]

 

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3

 

Article about Harper from The New York Times. Not very flattering...

 

Lol that's like quoting the Sun on a Trudeau article.  NYT openly leans to the left.

 

I don't know about the Sun comparison, but I realize they're left leaning. Regardless, I thought it was an interesting perspective from somebody outside of Canada. A look into the image we're presenting to the world.

 

 

It's written by someone in Toronto.

 

Well, never mind then...

 

 

It's not a bad article really, it makes a lot of good points.  I feel the same way about Harper to be honest.  The clampdown on information can only be regarded as a bad thing.  But that's only one piece of the picture.

[Mark F]

My friend, NYT is widely regarded as a left-wing outlet

 

 

 

pretty vague statement in response to some specific examples. don't you think?

 

anyway, unimportant.

[Mr Dee]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3

 

Article about Harper from The New York Times. Not very flattering...

 

Lol that's like quoting the Sun on a Trudeau article.  NYT openly leans to the left.

you might want to look into that a little bit. New York Times was  the number one cheerleader of the invasion of iraq. They actually had an editorial apology for their role in that invasion. pretty sure that is not one of the invasions lefties like.

 

their main opinion writer is friedman, who is  not even slightly "left " The New York times is not left at all.

 

In fact it's despised by most left thinkers.

 

aside from that, did you read the article, and if you did, are there errors of fact in it? 

 

I haven't read the article, and have no opinion on it.

Well that's the thing isn't it? The article is just pointing out what has already happened and is happening now. Ther is nothing in there that is flattering because ther is nothing in there to be flattered about. It really doesn't matter who wrote it, it's making people aware that, right now we don't have a very good PM, in fact, he could go down as one of the worst.

As to it being in a left leaning news source? How else would that info come out.

It's not like the right leaning papers would want to revisit this stuff.

[Atomic]

 

My friend, NYT is widely regarded as a left-wing outlet

 

 

 

pretty vague statement in response to some specific examples. don't you think?

 

anyway, unimportant.

 

 

CNN: So let’s dive right in. The loudest criticism that we often hear about “The New York Times” — I don’t know if it’s the most frequent but it’s certainly the loudest, is that it has a liberal bias. Does it?

MARGARET SULLIVAN, PUBLIC EDITOR, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Well, some of my predecessors have taken that head-on. In fact, Daniel Okrent, the first public editor, once wrote a column — and I think the headline said something like “Is ‘The Times’ a Liberal Newspaper?”

And his answer in the lead was, of course it is. And he went on from there. And it got quite a bit of response.

I mean, that is obviously something people feel about The Times, and I think maybe the best way to think about it is that The Times reflects its readership, its community. It’s an urban paper; it’s a New York City paper. I mean that’s a reasonable criticism, I think.

CNN: So it is a yes?

SULLIVAN: It’s a modified “yes,” with a lot of nuance in it.

[Atomic]

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3

 

Article about Harper from The New York Times. Not very flattering...

 

Lol that's like quoting the Sun on a Trudeau article.  NYT openly leans to the left.

you might want to look into that a little bit. New York Times was  the number one cheerleader of the invasion of iraq. They actually had an editorial apology for their role in that invasion. pretty sure that is not one of the invasions lefties like.

 

their main opinion writer is friedman, who is  not even slightly "left " The New York times is not left at all.

 

In fact it's despised by most left thinkers.

 

aside from that, did you read the article, and if you did, are there errors of fact in it? 

 

I haven't read the article, and have no opinion on it.

Well that's the thing isn't it? The article is just pointing out what has already happened and is happening now. Ther is nothing in there that is flattering because ther is nothing in there to be flattered about. It really doesn't matter who wrote it, it's making people aware that, right now we don't have a very good PM, in fact, he could go down as one of the worst.

As to it being in a left leaning news source? How else would that info come out.

It's not like the right leaning papers would want to revisit this stuff.

 

 

Interesting that you totally miss the point of what it means to be biased.  Maybe I can come up with a pun so that you can relate a little better.  Give me some time.

[17to85]

Well I started reading the article, I couldn't get through it because it's slanting so far to the left I am surprised the letters didn't fall off the page. The reasons why Harper is such a control freak who hates the media should be pretty self evident. The media did a real hatchet job on the party before they were in power every time anyone said anything even remotely silly. No other party got that treatment but the whole "hidden agenda" story still hasn't died even after nearly a decade of conservative governments. People still think he's going to drag the country back to the stone age socially. All those constant attacks forced things to be the way they are for the party. The liberal media created a monster they couldn't control.

[17to85]

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html?smid=tw-share&_r=3

 

Article about Harper from The New York Times. Not very flattering...

 

Lol that's like quoting the Sun on a Trudeau article.  NYT openly leans to the left.

you might want to look into that a little bit. New York Times was  the number one cheerleader of the invasion of iraq. They actually had an editorial apology for their role in that invasion. pretty sure that is not one of the invasions lefties like.

 

their main opinion writer is friedman, who is  not even slightly "left " The New York times is not left at all.

 

In fact it's despised by most left thinkers.

 

aside from that, did you read the article, and if you did, are there errors of fact in it? 

 

I haven't read the article, and have no opinion on it.

Well that's the thing isn't it? The article is just pointing out what has already happened and is happening now. Ther is nothing in there that is flattering because ther is nothing in there to be flattered about. It really doesn't matter who wrote it, it's making people aware that, right now we don't have a very good PM, in fact, he could go down as one of the worst.

As to it being in a left leaning news source? How else would that info come out.

It's not like the right leaning papers would want to revisit this stuff.

 

you keep repeating this yet you offer up no reasons of your own to support this. Harpers place in history is going to be well regarded because of how successful he was as a politician. Say what you want about his policies but he's had a very long run as PM, including surviving several minority governments and growing through each one until he got a majority. That's an impressive feat and surely one of the worst PMs ever couldn't do that. People don't like him but don't let that cloud your judgement of what he's done. 

[sweep the leg]

Well I started reading the article, I couldn't get through it because it's slanting so far to the left I am surprised the letters didn't fall off the page. The reasons why Harper is such a control freak who hates the media should be pretty self evident. The media did a real hatchet job on the party before they were in power every time anyone said anything even remotely silly. No other party got that treatment but the whole "hidden agenda" story still hasn't died even after nearly a decade of conservative governments. People still think he's going to drag the country back to the stone age socially. All those constant attacks forced things to be the way they are for the party. The liberal media created a monster they couldn't control.

Who cares how bad the media hurts his feelings. As the leader of the country, he shouldn't be allowed to hide from questions he doesn't want to answer.

[Atomic]

 

Well I started reading the article, I couldn't get through it because it's slanting so far to the left I am surprised the letters didn't fall off the page. The reasons why Harper is such a control freak who hates the media should be pretty self evident. The media did a real hatchet job on the party before they were in power every time anyone said anything even remotely silly. No other party got that treatment but the whole "hidden agenda" story still hasn't died even after nearly a decade of conservative governments. People still think he's going to drag the country back to the stone age socially. All those constant attacks forced things to be the way they are for the party. The liberal media created a monster they couldn't control.

Who cares how bad the media hurts his feelings. As the leader of the country, he shouldn't be allowed to hide from questions he doesn't want to answer.

 

 

I don't care so much about not answering media questions, it's the muzzling of scientists that bothers me.  That seems to be going too far.

 

But again, one small part of the overall picture of Harper the PM.

[17to85]

 

Well I started reading the article, I couldn't get through it because it's slanting so far to the left I am surprised the letters didn't fall off the page. The reasons why Harper is such a control freak who hates the media should be pretty self evident. The media did a real hatchet job on the party before they were in power every time anyone said anything even remotely silly. No other party got that treatment but the whole "hidden agenda" story still hasn't died even after nearly a decade of conservative governments. People still think he's going to drag the country back to the stone age socially. All those constant attacks forced things to be the way they are for the party. The liberal media created a monster they couldn't control.

Who cares how bad the media hurts his feelings. As the leader of the country, he shouldn't be allowed to hide from questions he doesn't want to answer.

 

It's not about hurting feelings, it's about the media twisting the message, so he said "fine, you want to put words in our mouths I'll make it impossible for that to happen and control the message with an iron fist"

[kelownabomberfan]

 

NDP supporters are telling you they know they'll suck?

 

 

 

If I may take a guess, I think you made up a conversation, attributed it to NDP supporters, and then used it to laugh at "their" logic.

 

 

No I embellished the conversation for sure, like DUH.  Of course they didn't say "we're going to suck", that's just implied because the NDP always sucks.  But even most NDP supporters aren't dumb enough to actually admit it.  What I meant was that the NDP Kool-Aid drinkers constantly point fingers at Harper, but never say what they would do better.  It's always just a constant drone of negativity and stupidity.  Given the NDP other than under Doer have historically sucked the bag worse than any other provincial governments, it just appears like they are already apologizing for sucking in advance if they get elected, but it's ok for them to suck as lookie lookie at Harper.

[Mr Dee]

Well I started reading the article, I couldn't get through it because it's slanting so far to the left I am surprised the letters didn't fall off the page. The reasons why Harper is such a control freak who hates the media should be pretty self evident. The media did a real hatchet job on the party before they were in power every time anyone said anything even remotely silly. No other party got that treatment but the whole "hidden agenda" story still hasn't died even after nearly a decade of conservative governments. People still think he's going to drag the country back to the stone age socially. All those constant attacks forced things to be the way they are for the party. The liberal media created a monster they couldn't control.

 

Harper goes beyond trying to control the message, he is a control freak. This should be evident now as he is screening invitees to get his message across. He pays a visit to Winnipeg and the Conservative party had sent out invitations to a "special event" in the Manitoba capital BUT did not disclose a location for the event. If you register at the party's website..you will be screened. That's our PM

[The Unknown Poster]

I don't blame him for being a control freak. He knew the importance of the party having one message. I don't really blame any politician for not giving in to the whims of a lot of stupid media.

There's plenty of ways to see what the party's stand for. I don't feel any party seems secretive.

Sometimes the media really are morons.

[Mr Dee]

Interesting that you totally miss the point of what it means to be biased.  Maybe I can come up with a pun so that you can relate a little better.  Give me some time.

 

 

It's more interesting to not recognize that even in bias reporting, the facts still must be presented.

and if you want to take the pun out of everything (see, I did it again ) and you don't agree with the NY Times, I'll give you the words of a prominent Dr. who has added to the debate:

 

I do not like your government 

 I do not like your squelched dissent

I do not like your sneery ads

 I do not like your slimy lads

I do not like your thought control

 I do not like your budget hole

I do not like your science cuts

 I don not like your right-wing nuts

I do not like your robocall

 I do not like your gang at all

I do not like your open contempt

 I do not like your prorogue pre-empt

I do not like your ruination

 Of air and lakes and reputation

I do not like your senate scams

 I do not like your Tax-paid spams

I do not like your corporate masters

 Nor your foreign policy disasters

Your scorn for treaties, scorn for facts

 Your anti-democratic acts

And on and on and on and on

 I do not like you Steve the Con

[Mr Dee]

You just have to listen to Rick Mercer as he puts the PM's feet to the fire in regards to the investigation by the RCMP into the Prime Minister's Office for criminal wrongdoing. And if the PM controls the message as much as people seem to agree on, well….

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=750WMkyWeuA       1:46

[Noeller]

Mercer (...and the 22 Mins crew, for that matter...) are HARD left, but I still love their Harper take-downs. Mercer's a really smart dude...

[17to85]

Mercer (...and the 22 Mins crew, for that matter...) are HARD left, but I still love their Harper take-downs. Mercer's a really smart dude...

but it's interesting, when I go back and read the book of his rants from 22 minutes, when the Liberals were entrenched in power, you'd swear that he was right leaning cause he ******* hated the Liberals back then. 

 

With him it's all about taking any party to task over things he doesn't like. 

 

the current 22 minutes gang are all NDP nuts. I suspect a majority of their writing staff are on Reddit cause they get a lot of material straight from there and Reddit is the most left leaning place out there. It's sickening to read the crap these kiddies actually believe. 

[Noeller]

 

Mercer (...and the 22 Mins crew, for that matter...) are HARD left, but I still love their Harper take-downs. Mercer's a really smart dude...

but it's interesting, when I go back and read the book of his rants from 22 minutes, when the Liberals were entrenched in power, you'd swear that he was right leaning cause he ******* hated the Liberals back then. 

 

With him it's all about taking any party to task over things he doesn't like. 

 

the current 22 minutes gang are all NDP nuts. I suspect a majority of their writing staff are on Reddit cause they get a lot of material straight from there and Reddit is the most left leaning place out there. It's sickening to read the crap these kiddies actually believe. 

 

If it pours tomorrow, them early season DVDs are coming out....

[Mark F]

 

 

My friend, NYT is widely regarded as a left-wing outlet

 

 

 

pretty vague statement in response to some specific examples. don't you think?

 

anyway, unimportant.

 

 

CNN: So let’s dive right in. The loudest criticism that we often hear about “The New York Times” — I don’t know if it’s the most frequent but it’s certainly the loudest, is that it has a liberal bias. Does it?

MARGARET SULLIVAN, PUBLIC EDITOR, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Well, some of my predecessors have taken that head-on. In fact, Daniel Okrent, the first public editor, once wrote a column — and I think the headline said something like “Is ‘The Times’ a Liberal Newspaper?”

And his answer in the lead was, of course it is. And he went on from there. And it got quite a bit of response.

I mean, that is obviously something people feel about The Times, and I think maybe the best way to think about it is that The Times reflects its readership, its community. It’s an urban paper; it’s a New York City paper. I mean that’s a reasonable criticism, I think.

CNN: So it is a yes?

SULLIVAN: It’s a modified “yes,” with a lot of nuance in it.

 

 

I've given you two big examples of them being right wing. acting as a mouthpiece for George Bush and **** cheney lies, is hardly what I would call left wing. Tom Friedman is a neo con. 

 

still waiting for some examples of left wing positions taken by the New York Times.

 

 

asking them what they are is like me asking you what you're like. might somewhat different than what people who know you think.

 

anyway, thanks heel atomic.

[The Unknown Poster]

Just saw a post making the rounds on FB about how that no good Harper is making people wait 15 minutes on the trans canada highway while his motorcade passes. I guess the PM should just hop in a Buick or maybe a greyhound.

That's a good example of people's biases causing them outrage.

[Mr Dee]

Just saw a post making the rounds on FB about how that no good Harper is making people wait 15 minutes on the trans canada highway while his motorcade passes. I guess the PM should just hop in a Buick or maybe a greyhound.

That's a good example of people's biases causing them outrage.

Really? That sounds more like people getting pissed off because they are getting held up...probably without knowing why at first.

Frankly, that is a snitty example of people's biases.

[The Unknown Poster]

Nope. I read the posts. Anti-Harper nonsense. Like the PM shouldn't be in a protected motorcade. It's people like that that reinforces why the PM should be in a motorcade and the RCMP should be holding traffic.

If Mulcair was PM Id feel the same way. The position deserves respect even if you don't like the person holding the position.

I was reading about the PM's residence and what a shithole it is but no one wants to be the PM when they spend $10m on it which it desperately needs. Doesn't matter who is PM, these things should be given the respect they deserve.

Personally Id think it was pretty cool if I saw the motorcade pass by.