Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Coren gets the hook | Main | Too, ahem, "high profile." »

Saturday, November 26, 2005

CBC election bias

CBC describes what it calls a "promising" poll.

You wouldn't believe what result they find "promising".

Posted by Stephen Taylor on November 26, 2005 | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference CBC election bias:


My suggestion is that the CPC etc should not express any surprise over these polls and conclusions. Accept that the CBC, CTV, Globe and Mail etc, are biased. Accept is as FACT, not opinion - much as you accept that 12 eggs is a dozen eggs. It's a FACT, not an opinion.

Therefore, don't be surprised, don't expect anything but bias. And say so- openly. Refer, openly to "the biased polls of the CBC", the "biased polls of the G&M biased", the "biased statements of CTV".

Note that the Liberals use this technique all the time. The Grewal tapes were not tampered with, but, the Liberals stated that they were - as a 'fact'. The public swallowed this, despite the RCMP later saying that the tapes were not tampered with.

Don't expect anything but bias, corruption and lies from the Liberals. Acknowledge it, by saying it openly - "The Liberal lies about XXX; the Liberal statement, which is a lie, is..."
Don't ask for rebuttal, don't ask for anything. Instead, state openly that you are aware that the rhetoric of the Liberals is nothing but lies and you will treat all their statements as such.

Leave it up to them to do the rebuttals. Oh- and expect that they will use the same tactics on the CPC.

This election is not about Canada or Canadians. It's about power - the continuance of power of the Cartel, as run via the Liberal party.

Posted by: ET | 2005-11-26 12:05:42 PM

Off topic but...

Ken Dryden's (Child Care) Liberal way...!

1. Announce 5 Billion dollars for child care...
2. Build or buy or lease (from loyal liberal) office building in Ottawa...
3. Populate building with loyal liberals, friends and family...
4. Demand provinces do the same...
5. Demand no choice for women, it's the liberal way or the highway...
...NOTE:...(unless you want an abortion...THEN IT REALLY IS YOUR CHOICE)...
6. Denounce all who disagree...

After the provinces get around to
...NOTE:...(All federal programs have been ELEVEN-PLICATED nation wide)...
I suspect there will be around 5 million left to give to needy mothers looking for child care...

Why can't they just distribute the money through the baby bonus system...
which wouldn't cost anything...
All 5 billion would get to the mothers that need it, and (THEY) could..(CHOOSE).. the kind of child care that best suits them...!!!

Silly me...but then Ken's sister in-law's uncle won't get his job for life...!!!!!!!!!!!!!

William Wylie..Ajax, Ont.

Posted by: B Wylie Ajax, Ont. | 2005-11-26 1:33:28 PM

The media is biased as anyone who's read a book would be biased or anyone who knows the facts would be biased or anyone who knows the history of Canada would be biased.

When the CPC smartens up and dumps Harper and dumps the scary wackos from the party then they can take Ottawa. Canadians want a change - the problem is no one is offering a worthy alternative.

Your enemy isn't the Libs or the CBC - it's you.

Posted by: Justin | 2005-11-26 1:38:45 PM

And by "scary wacko" you mean anyone west of Thunder Bay.

The enemy *is* the libs *and* CBC. Most of the media, for that matter, is staffed by liberals and owned by liberals. It wouldn't be so bad if journalistic ethics maintained an unbiased coverage, but its plain to see that anytime the Conservatives make a false step, its on page A1, above the fold. When the Liberals screw up, you're lucky to find it buried on page C13. Makes sense, when your potential Senatorship or future as GG might be at play.

When Reform wanted to get tough with Quebec, they were seen as radical. When the Liberals wanted to, they called it the Clarity Act and made it a law.

It boils down to respect, and there are huge power centres in this country who do not respect ideas originating outside of Ontario. This must change. As the balance of power shifts to Alberta, this respect will come, else Alberta will go.

Posted by: Norman Lorrain | 2005-11-26 2:22:14 PM

Justin - you don't seem to understand the word 'bias'. It is invalid to claim that IF you read a book, THEN you are biased. Or, IF you know the facts, THEN you are biased.

The word 'bias' doesn't mean 'informed' or 'knowledgeable'. It means that the individual has a particular goal or desire which dominates all information that they read and hear. This goal is so dominant that it 'skews' or 'swerves' their reason, so that the individual rejects information that infringes on the success of that goal. The term refers to the force (bias) that causes you to 'swerve' from the objective acceptance of reality. It has nothing to do with 'being informed'. It means that you have a 'block' in your mind that prevents you from 'being informed'.

Who are the 'scary wackos' in the CPC?

I think, for instance, that Pettigrew is a 'scary wacko' in the Liberals; so is Volpe - they both spend taxpayer money without accountability. And importantly, without a shred of guilt.
Martin scares me, because he lies - for example, his telling Canadians that SSM was a 'charter right', when the Charter says nothing about marriage (which is a social and not a natural right). The Supreme Court refused to hear the case on SSM, because it was not a Charter issue; yet, Martin informed Canadians that it was. That's scary.
I think bribery is frightening - and that's what the Liberals do. I think corruption is frightening- and that's what the Liberals are.

Svend Robinson is scary in the NDP; his rhetorical glibness is disturbing. Jack Layton's insistence on a health care system that is similar only to that of Cuba and N. Korea - that's scary. Jack Layton's insistence on the Nanny Welfare State - that's scary.

Posted by: ET | 2005-11-26 2:52:40 PM

Justin, on the one had you’ve nailed it with your observations that we’re all biased! That’s true and that’s healthy in a functioning democracy.

But I have to pay for the CBC even though I disagree with its bias. Why is that democratic? That’s confiscation of my taxes for a bias that I disagree with. If Bell Canada shareholders want to pay for bias in the Globe and Mail and CTV, that’s their choice, I don’t own Bell shares and never will for that reason.
But I’m a reluctant shareholder in the CBC as a taxpayer and I want to divest of that company but can’t until we get rid of Librano$$. Also I want to stop huge government subsidies going to Global TV and CTV to subsidize their production. Let’s cut off the cartel of Corporate Welfare Bums – the only smart idea to ever flow from the NDP (hypocritically not matched by a NDP parallel policy toward unions). Are these the “crazy wacko” ideas that scare you because they involve a democratic choice?

Then you say my enemy isn’t the Liberals. Come again?
The Liberals are public enemy number 1. You must think a “crazy wacko” is anyone who dissents with your PET Liberals. Stop simply demonizing Harper and tell us what CPC policies “scare” you versus the Librano$$ alternatives? My guess is that it’s conservatism that “scares” you because it advocates citizens and corporations become self-sufficient versus Librano$$ dependent for life.

Posted by: nomdenet | 2005-11-26 3:00:00 PM

Social conservatism scares most Canadians period (I know you're going to specify and say 'Ontarians' but if you want to be tribalist about get the hell out of Canada) and Harper represents that history. The truth is that SSM is a done deal - it's over - and that's why I'm a little softer lately with the CPC since they can't touch this anymore so I'm more open to looking at their Economic Conservativism which is quite sound.

You people at the ShotDumb never get it and you always talk about 'Ontario this' and 'Ontario that' - you frankly sound like a bunch of children. It's this type of talk that's come from Harper in the past that scares Canada. So either accept it or don't - but you can't have it both ways. Same goes for the Quebec Separatists. You'd think you would have learned something from them but instead you just mimic their more juvenile characteristics. Grow up. Accept the opinions of the majority of Canadians. Then CPC can govern in Canada and teach the Liberals a lesson.

Posted by: Justin | 2005-11-26 3:57:04 PM

Justin- all you are doing is pontificating - assertive preaching-style orders.

What is your proof that social conservatism 'scares most Canadians'? And, what does that phrase (social conservatism) actually mean? Please be specific and please show how it is indeed a policy of the CPC.

Harper 'represents that history'. What does that mean? Certainly, Harper is the leader of the CPC, but what history are you referring to ?

What does SSM have to do with your polemic? After all, many Liberals were opposed to it also.

What do you gain by insulting people?

What is your evidence that all Harper talks about is 'Ontario this' and 'Ontario that'?

What are you talking about - re the Quebec separatistes? What are we supposed to have learned from them?

]What are the opinions of the 'majority of Canadians'? Since you seem privy to these opinions, would you please tell us that they are? And - how you come to know them with such certainty?

Justin - you preach but you don't dialogue. How about answering some questions? Without insults, without pontificating. Just discuss the issue.

Posted by: ET | 2005-11-26 4:07:01 PM

I am ET - but it's frustrating.

I'm no fan of the Libs but the CPC makes it SOOO easy for them - that's frustrating. All you need to do is read many of the posts here by commited CPCers and you'll see why Canada will never elect them.

Posted by: Justin | 2005-11-26 4:13:56 PM

"Accept the opinions of the majority of Canadians."

Spoken like a true believer in a one-party state. Dissent is not allowed, differing opinions are not allowed. Only the majority Ontario opinion is permitted in the halls of federal power in Canada, and anyone who doesn't like it, who wants to change it, is "juvenile".

Well, the day will come, Justin, when the people who you say should "get the hell out of Canada" will take you up on that. Don't be surprised. Attitudes like yours practically guarantee it within 25 years, I'd say.

Posted by: Ian in NS | 2005-11-26 4:39:35 PM

No Justin, committed CPC people aren’t “sacred”. But at least we got one “scary” thought out of you – SSM.
It’s a start. I’m a social liberal, I buy into the idea of keeping the state out of the bedroom of consulting adults, I support SSM and I support the CPC. Similarly on the flip side, many Liberals are social conservatives but support their party nonetheless.
These are opinions and values. But why are they “scary”?
My recall is that polls outside Quebec show that the country is split on SSM, even in Ontario. This is an issue that should involve a democratic process. Instead Martin cynically lied about SSM, he said repeatedly that SSM is a right, SSM is not a right, if it was a right it would not have been passed from the SC to Parliament. SSM got railroaded through Parliament by Martin lies.

Moving on, why would the possibility of SSM, which I actually don’t think will be recalled anyway, returning to a democratically elected Parliament “scare” you more then corruption? Why doesn’t the welfare handed out to the corporate cartel “scare” you more, because it debilitates capitalism and successful entrepreneurs that don’t get the handouts because they aren’t part of the cartel?

Enough questions, Justin, just give us your thoughts, why are you “scared”? Is it because the Globe and Mail/CTV/CBC told you to be “scared”?

Posted by: nomdenet | 2005-11-26 4:52:03 PM

Thank you ET and Ian in NS for proving why Canadians don't vote CPC even though the Libs have given them every reason to.

You have nothing to offer except your tantrums.

Posted by: Justin | 2005-11-26 4:52:09 PM

Justin- what tantrums? Could you explain this?

I asked you a number of reasonable questions. They were all based on statements that you had made. Why don't you answer them? I'm asking you for some answers.

So far - all you do on this blog, is rant, sneer, insult people, you make sweeping generalizations none of which have any foundation in fact. When asked to clarify some of your statements - what do you do? Nothing - but - continue to insult people.

Again- how about answering some questions. Without insults.

Posted by: ET | 2005-11-26 5:10:16 PM

Thank you ever so much, Justin. You are making it oh so easy for separatists like me to convince my fellow citizens that it is time to leave this so-called democracy and found a new nation that will indeed be free and answerable to its citizens.


Posted by: oswald czolgosz | 2005-11-26 5:46:07 PM

Thank you ever so much, Justin. You are making it oh so easy for separatists like me to convince my fellow citizens that it is time to leave this so-called democracy and found a new nation that will indeed be free and answerable to its citizens.


Posted by: oswald czolgosz | 2005-11-26 5:46:56 PM

Justin, it would be great if just for once, you answered a question.
I'm asking only one. Please answer it directly. Don't change the subject to social conservatism or your dislike of Harper (or your tendency to only include those who dislike him in the category of "Canadians").

Do you think it is alright for a publicly-funded media provider, which is mandated by our government to provided fair and objective news coverage, to have bias in its news coverage?
Whether the term "promising" refers to the CPC, the Libs, the NDP or the Greens....do you think it's acceptable? That's the purpose of this discussion, please answer directly.

Posted by: Charlotte | 2005-11-26 6:00:24 PM

Re: the questions

Why waste your time? It should be obvious that some people are not interested in having a discussion; they prefer to insult, sneer and, on occasion, bang on their high chairs.

Two quotations come to mind:

You can't reason a man out of a position he has not reasoned himself into.

Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Posted by: Kathryn | 2005-11-26 6:35:13 PM

good points Kathryn, I'll stop wasting my time. Justin seems to simply want to rile us up.
It would probably annoy him way more if everyone simply ignored his comments, unless he's willing to discuss issues with reason.

Posted by: Charlotte | 2005-11-26 7:31:31 PM

Justin is a bit of a Liberal die hard. Here is a tip for him.

Justin. When you hear all of the polls that make their way through the media keep this in mind.

1st. They are all being spun by the Liberal PMO and the media controlled through the Liberal CRTC.

2nd. You will not see a CPC lead in the polls projected until the Liberals tell the media to do it and it will be done with a "people are scared of a Conservative Majority" message.

3rd. Most Heartening. Take any poll and pull 5 to 7 percentage points away from the Liberals and give them to the CPC, this is because of the lack of CPC support in Quebec and the Liberals attempts to buy votes there, particularly in Montreal.

4th. The best one yet. The Liberals are in a big pile of shit and are gonna sink with it.

Have a nice election. Watch for our soon to be purchased CORRUPTION BUS that will be in Regina Waskana during the whole election, drawing attention to the Liar and Sellout Ralph Goodale. I bet you won't see a sniff of it on the national news, but it will be out there every day.

Good Luck on the hustings.

Posted by: BDT | 2005-11-26 11:37:35 PM


As I recall, the polls just before the last election underestimated, not overestimated Liberal support. By quite a bit in fact.

Posted by: surly | 2005-11-26 11:56:16 PM

The polls Liberals made the polls right before the election underestimate their power to encourage Liberal voter turnout.

Posted by: Andrew | 2005-11-27 2:37:42 AM

Justin. We are all biased. Some are biased toward truth, some are biased toward lies.

Posted by: Mallard | 2005-11-27 9:38:00 PM

I am not a Liberal - but like I said in another post you people are very very simple and reduce everything to a Coke vs. Pepsi proposition.

The world is more complicated and it needs thinking that doesn't stop at A or B.

You're all very reactionary and frankly not very bright. Sorry not meaning to be insulting just being honest. The two things just happen to meet coincidentally.

I love how you all question the media and the 'spin' when it comes to the Liberals but when it comes to Bush in America you bend over for him willingly.

Coming to the ShutDumb is like having an ant farm.

Posted by: Justin | 2005-11-28 12:47:37 AM

Yes, Oswald, I too am happy to have the likes of Justin represents the typical enlightened "Canadian" who is disgusted by the westerner, specifically the Albertan. *Talking to Canadians* like Justin is an exercise in futility if one hopes for any kind of intellectual honesty to come from his closed circles of thought. Otherwise, he is an apt illustration of "Canadian" *logic*.

I have yet to hear ONE good reason (without sentimental touchy feely smarminess) why Alberta should remain in CONfederation from the centre or east, let alone 10 good reasons. I've been waiting since 1980!

I hope for a Librano MAJORITY to accelerate the movement of Albertans to bid farewell to our sadly Left Asleep *comrades* who are find us too "scary". We find them dishonest, entitled and not at all as smart as they find themselves.

Posted by: wharold | 2005-11-28 1:24:33 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.