Royston James this week published a op ed piece in the Star in which he suggested that the city's finances could be brought in line by each day hanging each of the city counselors in Nathan Phillips Square and charging admission. Now Royston being a black man obviously does not see the irony of his statement as compared to what happened in the American south not that long ago. You have to wonder of Royston was not a black man whether he would have been allowed to make those comments.
If you remember a couple of years ago the Star called for the armed over throw of the democratically Ontario Government -- the Harris Tory's. The said this was an op ed piece it just was not in the editorial pages of the Star.
How low can they go -- I am sure once someone takes the Star's advice to heart we will find out. Moron's the lot of them.
Showing posts with label toronto star. Show all posts
Showing posts with label toronto star. Show all posts
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Friday, October 12, 2007
51% of eligible voters voted
Frankly I am disgusted -- what good is having a democracy if you refuse to participate? To put this into context the Ontario Liberals got 71 seats based on the votes 21% of eligible voters. This means that one in five Ontarion's felt that the Liberal vision of Ontario was the correct one -- I won't make assumptions about those who chose not to vote.
I am not going to dispute the legitimacy of the Ontario Liberals right to rule -- they won the election based on the rules we have. I disagree with McGuinty that campaigns that call politicians liars, promise breakers et al would convince people not to vote. I mean lets get serious any party that has the Liberal war machine, namely Warren Kinsella and his ilk, behind it -- is going to run negative campaigns. And lets face it negative campaign work.
The disenfranchisement of the voter has to much more than that -- politicians are politicians, some are reptilian in nature others are saints -- most are in between -- they have been like this for centuries, and the public has been aware of it. Why are people refusing to vote? Would love to see some polling on this -- I am assuming it is a lack of a decisive vision for the future -- lets face it most of the policy initiatives across all parties came out of the same photocopier. The futility of voting when people feel nothing substantive is going to change.
The political parties and media also does a piss poor job in educating the voter on the need to vote -- the need to be part of the discussion -- it rather is seen as a closed club, fraught with insiders, full of scandals and graft and frankly from the media pretty poor reporting.
I personally think papers like the Toronto Star further exacerbate the problem with less than ethical reporting -- one sided and inflammatory headlines, bullying people into questioning their convictions and further alienating and marginalizing people who do not fit their narrow view of an idealized Ontarion and thereby increasing apathy and a sense of futility.
But then of course I could be wrong.
I am not going to dispute the legitimacy of the Ontario Liberals right to rule -- they won the election based on the rules we have. I disagree with McGuinty that campaigns that call politicians liars, promise breakers et al would convince people not to vote. I mean lets get serious any party that has the Liberal war machine, namely Warren Kinsella and his ilk, behind it -- is going to run negative campaigns. And lets face it negative campaign work.
The disenfranchisement of the voter has to much more than that -- politicians are politicians, some are reptilian in nature others are saints -- most are in between -- they have been like this for centuries, and the public has been aware of it. Why are people refusing to vote? Would love to see some polling on this -- I am assuming it is a lack of a decisive vision for the future -- lets face it most of the policy initiatives across all parties came out of the same photocopier. The futility of voting when people feel nothing substantive is going to change.
The political parties and media also does a piss poor job in educating the voter on the need to vote -- the need to be part of the discussion -- it rather is seen as a closed club, fraught with insiders, full of scandals and graft and frankly from the media pretty poor reporting.
I personally think papers like the Toronto Star further exacerbate the problem with less than ethical reporting -- one sided and inflammatory headlines, bullying people into questioning their convictions and further alienating and marginalizing people who do not fit their narrow view of an idealized Ontarion and thereby increasing apathy and a sense of futility.
But then of course I could be wrong.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Scandal in Sarnia -- yes its true
Apparently a P3 (I know not politically correct to use P3) hospital in Sarnia is going to cost approximately 250% of the original estimated price. The original cost was suppose to be $140 million and now it is hovering around $319 million. Not sure who broke the story NDP or PC's -- came right after Furious George Smitherman had visited the riding and guaranteed this not to be the case.
What is not reported is whether the $319 million price tag is for essentially the same project as the $140 million price tag -- been there seen scope creep like crazy -- but then of course we would not have had the headline -- and some reporter would have had to do some investigating. Sounds like work eh. Now the fact the locals will have to raise an additional $30 million because of this is reprehensible -- who ever approved the new figure should pay the cost -- George sounds like it is yours.
What I do find interesting though on the Toronto Star's on line edition the story played prominently yesterday and attributed the story to the NDP -- the story no longer seems to exist on their servers -- looks like a case of pre-election censorship going on.
What is not reported is whether the $319 million price tag is for essentially the same project as the $140 million price tag -- been there seen scope creep like crazy -- but then of course we would not have had the headline -- and some reporter would have had to do some investigating. Sounds like work eh. Now the fact the locals will have to raise an additional $30 million because of this is reprehensible -- who ever approved the new figure should pay the cost -- George sounds like it is yours.
What I do find interesting though on the Toronto Star's on line edition the story played prominently yesterday and attributed the story to the NDP -- the story no longer seems to exist on their servers -- looks like a case of pre-election censorship going on.
Friday, October 5, 2007
Howard -- Its the message stupid!
To Ontario's media representatives present:
Ontario NDP Leader Howard Hampton: "We've become the child poverty capital of Canada -- don't any of you people (reporters) care? Don't you care that there are seniors living in soiled diapers? Don't you care about that? I'm asking you, 'What do you care about?' That's what I know people care about. These are real issues."
Howard, piece of advice, they would report on other issues if everyone had not kept pandering to the bigotry and racial bias in Ontario and if you had something substantive to say.
Liked the quote from a senior (paraphrased) -- he has trouble voting for the liar or the idiot but wants Hampton to tell him what his platform is instead of just attacking people.
Ontario NDP Leader Howard Hampton: "We've become the child poverty capital of Canada -- don't any of you people (reporters) care? Don't you care that there are seniors living in soiled diapers? Don't you care about that? I'm asking you, 'What do you care about?' That's what I know people care about. These are real issues."
Howard, piece of advice, they would report on other issues if everyone had not kept pandering to the bigotry and racial bias in Ontario and if you had something substantive to say.
Liked the quote from a senior (paraphrased) -- he has trouble voting for the liar or the idiot but wants Hampton to tell him what his platform is instead of just attacking people.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
MMP -- referendum time for a choice
The whole referendum on the current First Past the Post or Mixed Member Proportional issue has been very poorly dealt with by Elections Ontario -- it has been too little too late with very little public education or debate about it. The whole strategy appears to be to be to not get this initiative approved. That being said the proposed modified system seems to be a political compromise -- and really quite confusing.
The vote needs 60% of Ontarion's to vote (of those who actually vote) in favour of the change for the MMP to be effective for the next election -- four years hence. Just want to make sure everyone understands it is not for this election.
There have been a fair amount of editorials (the Toronto Star in particular)who have railed against this new system -- they feel it is a step backward for democracy and raise the specter of a "Star Chamber" type of government where the will of the public is undercut by non elected party insiders. By the way the Tor Star editorial was factually wrong on a number of counts -- but they are the Star so that would be par for the course.
I really think they need to grow up. The current system of forced compliance to party vote is far more damaging to democracy then MMP would be. Right now a MPP cannot vote against party position in the house without the threat of discipline, the MPP cannot effectively represent their riding -- and from what I have seen the Caucus and decision making is ultimately controlled by a small number of individuals, most of whom are not elected. In addition parties with 5% to 10% of the popular vote and their constituencies are being shut out of the legislature.
I personally think the first past the post system is flawed -- too many seats awarded on a small number of votes. As it is currently designed one seat may be worth 10,000 votes while others are worth 300,000 -- not really fair. In addition being able to have a majority government without the requirement of a majority of the votes is kind of counter intuitive. The current system also marginalizes the smaller parties influence on the government of the day -- NDP, Greens, and the Family Coalition Party come to mind -- a party with 10% of the popular vote may have no seat in the legislature -- that is shutting out a fair amount of the population from the democratic process.
Will I vote for MMP yes -- do I think it will pass no, so why -- well hopefully a large percentage of Ontarion's will vote yes to the referendum -- so in the next election, four years hence, we may actually have another referendum with a properly designed and communicated proposal for electoral reform.
The vote needs 60% of Ontarion's to vote (of those who actually vote) in favour of the change for the MMP to be effective for the next election -- four years hence. Just want to make sure everyone understands it is not for this election.
There have been a fair amount of editorials (the Toronto Star in particular)who have railed against this new system -- they feel it is a step backward for democracy and raise the specter of a "Star Chamber" type of government where the will of the public is undercut by non elected party insiders. By the way the Tor Star editorial was factually wrong on a number of counts -- but they are the Star so that would be par for the course.
I really think they need to grow up. The current system of forced compliance to party vote is far more damaging to democracy then MMP would be. Right now a MPP cannot vote against party position in the house without the threat of discipline, the MPP cannot effectively represent their riding -- and from what I have seen the Caucus and decision making is ultimately controlled by a small number of individuals, most of whom are not elected. In addition parties with 5% to 10% of the popular vote and their constituencies are being shut out of the legislature.
I personally think the first past the post system is flawed -- too many seats awarded on a small number of votes. As it is currently designed one seat may be worth 10,000 votes while others are worth 300,000 -- not really fair. In addition being able to have a majority government without the requirement of a majority of the votes is kind of counter intuitive. The current system also marginalizes the smaller parties influence on the government of the day -- NDP, Greens, and the Family Coalition Party come to mind -- a party with 10% of the popular vote may have no seat in the legislature -- that is shutting out a fair amount of the population from the democratic process.
Will I vote for MMP yes -- do I think it will pass no, so why -- well hopefully a large percentage of Ontarion's will vote yes to the referendum -- so in the next election, four years hence, we may actually have another referendum with a properly designed and communicated proposal for electoral reform.
Labels:
Conservative,
election 2007,
hampton,
mcguinty,
Ontario,
PC,
referendum,
toronto star,
tory
Sunday, September 30, 2007
High Gear -- for a tricycle
Looks like we are coming into the last critical weeks -- and well not much is happening.
The Liberal's seems to recognise their lead and have McGuinty talking about "Canada" issues. He ventured into the realm of foreign takeovers -- interesting territory -- and over the last couple of days has delivered a couple of good speeches -- good for a person who is about as exciting as dry toast. Though I did take exception to have all those new immigrants into the public school system -- oh yeah the one with funding going to the catholics -- yeah thats right.
Tory -- well why bother, religious school funding, privatise parts of health care, beer and wine in the corner store -- right with you bud.
Hampton -- is he campaigning -- oh yes tax the rich.
Miller -- I know he is not campaigning -- but he could actually speak to the candidates and get some attention for Toronto. Guess not too busy flying from conference to conference -- and talking about raising taxes. Idiot!
The Liberal's seems to recognise their lead and have McGuinty talking about "Canada" issues. He ventured into the realm of foreign takeovers -- interesting territory -- and over the last couple of days has delivered a couple of good speeches -- good for a person who is about as exciting as dry toast. Though I did take exception to have all those new immigrants into the public school system -- oh yeah the one with funding going to the catholics -- yeah thats right.
Tory -- well why bother, religious school funding, privatise parts of health care, beer and wine in the corner store -- right with you bud.
Hampton -- is he campaigning -- oh yes tax the rich.
Miller -- I know he is not campaigning -- but he could actually speak to the candidates and get some attention for Toronto. Guess not too busy flying from conference to conference -- and talking about raising taxes. Idiot!
Labels:
bias,
catholic,
liberals,
mayor miller,
mcguinty,
Ontario,
PC,
toronto star,
unethical
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Toronto Star -- fundamental and unethical bias
I could not be a reporter or work for the Star -- something about ethics and self respect. I always find it amazing the Star was quick to condemn Black and his newspapers for bias in reporting -- when they really have mastered the the wholer concept. What has me mad today -- the vote liberal bias is so strong it shows itself in every article, the editorials, the just general tone. McGuinty Is struggling -- he should be winning hands down based on the performance of both Tory and Hampton.
However the Star seems to now have decided that McGuinty needs to be elected at all costs -- including if it means they use propaganda and editorial bias in articles.
Earlier in the campaign after the debate the Star sold the front page of the Metro (one of their papers) to the liberals in a very misleading piece of advertising which looked like a real front page -- in which they proclaimed McGuinty the winner -- sleaze journalism. Can't blame the Liberals -- sleaze electioneering is the name of the game.
However the Star seems to now have decided that McGuinty needs to be elected at all costs -- including if it means they use propaganda and editorial bias in articles.
Earlier in the campaign after the debate the Star sold the front page of the Metro (one of their papers) to the liberals in a very misleading piece of advertising which looked like a real front page -- in which they proclaimed McGuinty the winner -- sleaze journalism. Can't blame the Liberals -- sleaze electioneering is the name of the game.
Labels:
bias,
election 2007,
liberal,
NDP,
Ontario,
PC,
toronto star,
unethical
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)