Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

Oh, for heaven's sake, this is not Wafergate-gate II.

by kadyomalley on Wednesday, August 5, 2009 7:19am - 106 Comments

If you read Duffy’s speech — which, by a remarkable coincidence, showed up virtually simultaneously on two of the most widely-read Conservative blogs, each ostensibly independently of the other — it is clear that, at the very least, it was a mildly partisan address. Who, after all, is the “we” to whom the good senator repeatedly refers as being responsible for the avalanche of spending in the province? What party is currently in power, and “moving heaven and earth” to protect Canadians?

There’s nothing remotely wrong with a senator delivering a partisan speech, notwithstanding the response it incites in certain PEI Liberals. That said, there is also nothing wrong with the Guardian having described it as such, no matter how vociferously the senator in question might dispute that interpretation. What is, frankly, ridiculous is to suggest that this is in any way similar to what may or may not have gone on behind the scenes at the Telegraph Journal, which, as far as ITQ can see, is a rather shameless attempt to feed the “biased media” meme that launched a thousand Finley-penned fundraising letters — not that there’s anything particularly wrong with that, either. Heck, ride the wave of outrage — who knows how long it will last this time? Just don’t expect ITQ to sign on to find the real culprits, since, as far as she’s concerned, this is, as the Speaker might put it, a matter for debate.

Tags: island politics, remarkable coincidences, senator mike duffy

More by kadyomalley

http://intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

Kady, we don't want reporters.

We want stenographers.

I do worry about the value of a stenographer limited to the use of two thumbs.
But I suppose you could always charge admission to view the spectacle.
Jon

Ms O'Malley lamenting something being mildly partisan?? Hello Kettle, this is Mr. Pot… You're black!

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

I wasn't lamenting anything. I don't actually think there's anything wrong with being partisan when you are, in fact, a partisan. But feel free to savage that straw man!

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

I think you're stretching just a little there. Can you point to any example of a current — or former — MP or senator sitting with the government caucus using the word \”government\” to imply the opposition? If that was his intent, he would have given the credit to Parliament, since \”government\” is exclusively reserved, in our political lexicon, for the party in power. From: IntenseDebate Notifications
http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

I'm sorry, but with respect, I just don't see this as \”invention\” at all. It's an interpretation with which you happen to disagree – which is your right, of course – but to conflate it with what you and others have repeatedly described as \”fabrication\” by the Telegraph Journal is unfair to the writer. Perhaps you don't understand what a serious allegation that is for a journalist, but it really shouldn't be tossed around willy-nilly, lest it lose all meaning. From: IntenseDebate Notifications
http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Its interesting some people on this board criticizing the fact that Duffy a journalist was appointed to the Senate and somehow that's wrong. Duffy was host of a poltical program only and allowed politicians to come on his show and spout their propaganda. He did not write newspaper columns or opinion pieces. He was simply a host of a political broadcast.

However, I believe it is worse when print reporters who have responsibility for writing news reports about political parties, sitting on panels on TV giving their opinions jump to political parties to work for them. Funny its alway the Liberal party that they jump to. Two names from the past are Susan Murray who left CBC worked for Scott Brison and Maria McClintock of the Sun jumped to be the head flak for Belinda Stronach. They were responsible for reporting unbiased information to the public. Well we know where there sympathies lay when reporting the "news".

So those criticizing Duffy for accepting an appointement to the Senate should resist showing their hypocrisy. I would rather Duffy in the Senate than a former band leader and washed up hockey player any day.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Its interesting some people on this board criticizing the fact that Duffy a journalist was appointed to the Senate and somehow that's wrong. Duffy was host of a poltical program only and allowed politicians to come on his show and spout their propaganda. He did not write newspaper columns or opinion pieces. He was simply a host of a political broadcast.

However, I believe it is worse when print reporters who have responsibility for writing news reports about political parties, sitting on panels on TV giving their opinions jump to political parties to work for them. Funny its alway the Liberal party that they jump to. Two names from the past are Susan Murray who left CBC worked for Scott Brison and Maria McClintock of the Sun jumped to be the head flak for Belinda Stronach. They were responsible for reporting unbiased information to the public. Well we know where their sympathies lay when reporting the "news".

So those criticizing Duffy for accepting an appointement to the Senate should resist showing their hypocrisy. I would rather Duffy in the Senate than a former band leader and washed up hockey player any day.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Its interesting some people on this board criticizing the fact that Duffy a journalist was appointed to the Senate and somehow that's wrong. Duffy was host of a poltical program only and allowed politicians to come on his show and spout their propaganda. He did not write newspaper columns or opinion pieces. He was simply a host of a political broadcast.

However, I believe it is worse when print reporters who have responsibility for writing news reports about political parties, sitting on panels on TV giving their opinions jump to political parties to work for them. Funny its alway the Liberal party that they jump to. Two names from the past are Susan Murray who left CBC worked for Scott Brison and Maria McClintock of the Sun jumped to be the head flak for Belinda Stronach. They were responsible for reporting unbiased information to the public. Well we know where their sympathies laid when reporting the "news" don't we.

So those criticizing Duffy for accepting an appointement to the Senate should resist showing their hypocrisy. I would rather Duffy in the Senate than a former band leader and washed up hockey player any day.

Mulletaur

"Duffy was host of a poltical program only and allowed politicians to come on his show and spout their propaganda."

Um, no. Puffy was the source of the propaganda. You should seriously consider disinserting your cranium from your nether regions.

http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Perhaps you should take a flying leap at a galloping goose you troll.
http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Obviously you didn't watch the same shows I did. He simply hosted and allowed the various MPs to spout the silliness. In fact there were times I thought he lost control of the show particularly when the blowhard Gooddale was spouting his partisan tripe. Get real.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Obviously you didn't watch the same shows I did. He simply hosted and allowed the various MPs to spout their silliness. In fact there were times I thought he lost control of the show particularly when the blowhard Gooddale was spouting his partisan tripe. Get real.

Mulletaur

No, I just didn't see them through the same hallucinogenic lens you did. You ought to be careful with that stuff, it can lead to permanent psychosis.

William

And you are still whining about Duffy reporting the news about Dion being unable to answer a simple question.

Mulletaur

Not at all. Dion's faults were plain for all to see, Puffy or no Puffy. And now he's gone.

Matt F.

funny it's always the Liberals they jump to?

Ask Peter MacKay and Greg Thompson what their flacks did before? Both were reporters. Don't let the facts get in the way of some whinging though…

JamesHalifax

Kady commented:
"I wasn't lamenting anything. I don't actually think there's anything wrong with being partisan when you are, in fact, a partisan. But feel free to savage that straw man! "

You're right Kady, there is nothing wrong with being partisan. However, if you are paid to be a "reporter" (Of which we have none in Canada as yet) who is expected to report facts….then being a partisan has its drawbacks. Partisanship quickly becomes obvious if a "reporter's" writing consistently represents only half of the real story.
There are no straw-men here. It's just straightforward observation.

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

If you honestly believe that to be true — that there are, literally, no reporters in Canada, and every single one of us is a partisan — then I'm pretty sure there's no reasonable outcome that could result from our continued conversation. We're just not inhabiting the same reality. Which isn't to say you shouldn't feel free to continue to comment, and even point out, repeatedly, that as far as you're concerned, every journalist in the country is hopelessly biased and incapable of doing our jobs, but I'm not going to bother trying to engage you in discussion. It will save us both a lot of frustration.

JamesHalifax

Kady, there are many people who write for a living that call themselves "reporters" but are in effect opinion columnists. "Reporters" as I understand the word are people who actively search, dig, and harass folks to find the truth. A good example would be Brian Laghi (I think) who broke the Sponsorship scandal, so I guess there are a few still around.
However, when you have folks like Lisa Laflamme doing a cut-and-paste smear job on the Prime Minister and she still has her job, you can see how folks like me begin to doubt the veracity of what we hear or read. There are many examples of this type of behavior, and Wafer-gate was just one more in a long line. In fact, a REAL reporter would be digging to find out who inserted the fabricated items in that piece. Have you tried to interview the reporters who submitted the original report? Did you speak with the Publisher or Editor? WHO is responsible for the fabrication? Someone has to be curious, and I'm sure they would be if it were a Conservative leaning paper doing a hit piece on Iggy. Count on it.

http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Kady…what in essence you are doing with this comment is dismissing the concerns of JamesHalifax. There are increasing signs that news reports do not simply "report" the news which then allows the reader to interpret what the news means to them. Instead we seem to be seeing news reports with speculation, unnamed sources, innuendo, misrepresentation which is an attempt to lead the reader to a certain conclusion. In fact for ordinary Canadians it is sometimes difficult to determine whether they are reading a news report or an opinion piece.__I do not believe that all reporters are biased but it is very difficult to find an opinion piece or a news report that says anything good about the government but there sure are lots of negative news reports. Surely there are some reporters who can find something good to say about a Conservative government who is managing the worst recession since the last depression. I am not looking for cheerleaders. However, I am looking for balance.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Kady…what in essence you are doing with this comment is dismissing the concerns of JamesHalifax. There are increasing signs that news reports do not simply "report" the news which then allows the reader to interpret what the news means to them. Instead we seem to be seeing news reports with speculation, unnamed sources, innuendo, misrepresentation which is an attempt to lead the reader to a certain conclusion. In fact for ordinary Canadians it is sometimes difficult to determine whether they are reading a news report or an opinion piece.__I do not believe that all reporters are biased but it is very difficult to find an opinion piece or a news report that says anything good about the government but there sure are lots of negative news reports. Surely there are some reporters who can find something good to say about a Conservative government who is managing the worst recession since the last depression. I am not looking for cheerleaders. However, I am looking for balance. When was the last time you reported something positive about the government's policies, actions?
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Kady…what in essence you are doing with this comment is dismissing the concerns of JamesHalifax. There are increasing signs that news reports do not simply "report" the news which then allows the reader to interpret what the news means to them. Instead we seem to be seeing news reports with speculation, unnamed sources, innuendo, misrepresentation of the facts which is an attempt to lead the reader to a certain conclusion. In fact for ordinary Canadians it is sometimes difficult to determine whether they are reading a news report or an opinion piece.__I do not believe that all reporters are biased but it is very difficult to find an opinion piece or a news report that says anything good about the government but there sure are lots of negative news reports. Surely there are some reporters who can find something good to say about a Conservative government who is managing the worst recession since the last depression. I am not looking for cheerleaders. However, I am looking for balance. When was the last time you reported something positive about the government's policies, actions?
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Kady…what in essence you are doing with this comment is dismissing the concerns of JamesHalifax. There are increasing signs that news reports do not simply "report" the news which then allows the reader to interpret what the news means to them. Instead we seem to be seeing news reports with speculation, unnamed sources, innuendo, misrepresentation of the facts which is an attempt to lead the reader to a certain conclusion. In fact for ordinary Canadians it is sometimes difficult to determine whether they are reading a news report or an opinion piece. I do not believe that all reporters are biased but it is very difficult to find an opinion piece or a news report that says anything good about the government but there sure are lots of negative news reports. Surely there are some reporters who can find something good to say about a Conservative government who is managing the worst recession since the last depression. I am not looking for cheerleaders. However, I am looking for balance. When was the last time you reported something positive about the government's policies, actions?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Wascally_Wabbit Wascally_Wabbit

I like this from Lorne Gunter of the Calgary Herald – edited for space…

~~~~Harper probably shouldn't have been in the lineup for a wafer in the first place.

As a non-Roman Catholic, he is not invited to the altar. Rightly or wrongly, most Catholic churches announce during the mass that the host is to be consumed only by baptized Catholics.

Non-Catholics wishing to participate in the rite are to cross their arms in front of themselves so the priests know to give them a blessing instead.

Even if Harper was not wrong to be in the line, he was wrong not to identify himself as a non-Catholic. But taking and eating a cracker he was not entitled to was a minor faux pas compared to possibly stuffing the host in his pocket.

~~~
Robert Fife, CTV's Ottawa bureau chief, was even reporting late last week that the entire story was a hoax, concocted by the Liberals to embarrass the prime minister and drive traditional Catholics back to the Liberal party.

~~~~
The fallout doesn't just affect the Telegraph-Journal, though. It affects all papers.
JamesHalifax

The story stopped being about the wafer when it was discovered that the Liberal Party used its influence with a Liberal – friendly newspaper to create a story where none existed. In fact, the story was a complete fabrication. The reporters to submitted the orignal type should be demanding the names of those who planted the changes….as should any reporter who is the least bit interested in a political party pressuring (albeit all to willing to comply) a so-called media organization.

The real story is not about Harper….it's about collusion between Canadian Media and the Liberal party.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

I wish somebody would give Duffy a mint-thin wafer.
smelter rat

Of course it was an electioneering speech. Does anyone in the country seriously dispute that there will be an election soon…probably this fall? Seriously? It will occur without regard to Harper's fixed election date promise…again.
JamesHalifax

I see kady deletes comments that make her logic look foolish.
JamesHalifax

As for your own partisanship kady, it is clear. You don't like Harper or his Government. Fine……that's your right, but don't write articles that are clearly biased and then proclaim your neutrality. Just mark your ballot for Iggy when the time comes and consider your job as a citizen to be complete. All readers ask for is that you stop writing "news" stories that try to convince us to follow your lead.