So when is it OK to call Spin what it really is; Lying?

Message for you Sir!

This is a super quick post. I didn’t do any research, I just read a post over at The Rural Canadian, which basically contained a rebuttal of some over the top spin by our beloved Prime Minister. It was Akin who proved to be the source.

Basically, the ‘Spin’ was that the Senate had to be packed with appointee’s, and Parliament had to be prorogued, because the Liberal Senate was obstructing his law’n’order bills. ( I take my prorogue’s with sour cream and bacon. Harper spices his with spin and lashings of patronage).

So James Cowan, Liberal Senate Leader draughts a letter to the Minister of  Justice, which details precisely how many bills have been passed or delayed, and precisely who and how they didn’t get passed, or enacted into law. It’s long, and full of persnickety details, which makes it less than exciting, but the substance is that bill by bill, it was the Government who failed to enact bills already passed by both houses. They declined to bring bills forward for their second readings, etc. etc. Just read it, and your’ jaw will start to drop at just how empty this piece of bullshit, (Sorry, I mean Spin), by the Conservatives really is.

For those of us who have read Flannagan’s book, Harpers Team, we are already aware that the CPC’s operating principle is that it doesn’t have to be TRUE, it only has to sound PLAUSIBLE. The underlying assumption is that people just don’t care enough to fact check. I was happily tripping along, thinking that sure, of course the Liberal Senate is screwing with the Conservative Agenda. Sounds plausible right? Nothing new there, ‘it’s the way it works’, etc. Well I’m sure glad that somebody was fact checking eh? ‘Cause I was very wrong in that casual assumption.

I will vote here to say that this is a case where the polite word for a politicians’ Lie, (Spin), can be given the Lie, and we can call a lie; a Lie. ( God, just try to proofread that sentence. Where do the comma’s go? Shouldn’t there be a colon, or semi-colon or something in there?)

Anyay, have a read of the letter, and maybe you’ll be wanting to call the Prime Minister a liar, and in good conscience too.

Add to: Facebook | Digg | | Stumbleupon | Reddit | Blinklist | Twitter | Technorati | Furl | Newsvine


4 Responses

  1. I think you nailed it on the head with
    “The underlying assumption is that people just don’t care enough to fact check.” Even if us politicos do research it, most Canadians (especially big-C card carrying Conservative Canadians) don’t. I still hear the talking points around the coffee maker.

    The question for all political parties is how do you distribute the facts without it ending up in the recycle bin without being read???

  2. “The question for all political parties is how do you distribute the facts without it ending up in the recycle bin without being read???”
    Well here’s a start, you can put a funny little picture with it, stick your’ tongue in your cheek, summarise the facts, and try to make it stick with humour! Don’t forget the boring source, so people will believe they exist, even if they don’t have the time to read it through. How’s that for a fact delivery mechanism?
    Thanks Mark.

  3. There are MANY more conservative claims about Bill C-15 waiting to be debunked. It doesn’t stop at the “Liberal Senator obstructing crime bill” myth.

    *** Look at the bill itself! ***

    Mandatory minimum sentences have already been tried in the U.S. to disastrous outcomes. Harper wants to take Canada down that same road to certain and expensive failure, even though…

    A) Justice Minister Rob Nicholson used to be critical of the use of mandatory minimum sentences (MMS) using the same reasoning as those who are now opposing their introduction in Bill C-15!

    B) the Justice Department already did a study of mandatory sentencing (2002?) and concluded that MMS do NOT deter crime or increase public safety — which is what this bill is claimed to address. The reality is that MMS could possibly make those things worse.

    C) despite numerous requests during committees Rob Nicholson was unable to provide even a single study to support the effectiveness of MMS. (There is no lack of studies condemning the use of MMS, especially for drug crimes.)

    Don’t be confused by the Conservative spin!

    The only ones who will benefit from the passing of Bill C-15 are police, organized criminals and politicians who willing to fear-monger and use “tough on crime” rhetoric to appeal to people’s emotions rather than their intellect.

    This is a clear example of a lust for power trumping the safety of Canadians!

    Watch videos of expert testimony at the Senate Committee studying Bill C-15 and then JUDGE FOR YOURSELVES…

    *** ***

    Recommended witness testimony:

    1) David Bratzer – an active duty police officer in Victoria, BC, and a member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.

    2) Eugene Oscapella – Ottawa lawyer and founder of Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy,

    3) Craig Jones – Exec Dir., John Howard Society

    4) Kirk Tousaw – Lawyer and Executive Director of the Beyond Prohibition Foundation.



    *** The so-called “gutting” of Bill C-15 by Liberal Senators ***


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: