Sun family values

Photo courtesy of Tom Magliery

I was determined to let this slide but the facts that have emerged are too loathsome to ignore.

The CBC has been taking a lot of criticism for its Vote Compass, an online quiz that asks you questions about where you stand on various questions of public policy, and then tells you which party you should vote for. Lots of people, from the right and the left, have been complaining that the result it gives is biased, or somehow misrepresent their political views. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. Maybe these sorts of quizzes are just very poor devices for sorting the population by party.  I don’t know, and at this point I don’t care. What I do care about is the way Peter Loewen has been treated by Sun Media.

Peter’s a poli sci professor at the University of Toronto. He’s involved in the Vote Compass, mostly in preparing analysis of the data for the CBC. On March 31, in a story that ran on front pages across the chain, Brian Lilley broke the “news” that Loewen had also written some policy papers on equalization for Michael Ignatieff when he was running for the Liberal leadership in 2006. The rest of Lilley’s article goes on to list various half-assed accusations that the Vote Compass has a Liberal bias. Lilley never writes it straight, of course, but the implication of the article is that Loewen is deliberately torquing the Vote Compass results in favour of the Liberals.

The next day, Ezra Levant wrote a column making the same allegation, namely, that the Vote Compass has a default Liberal setting. He also insinuates that Loewen is some sort of covert agent feeding information back to the Liberals (he calls Ignatieff Loewen’s “former boss”, which is ridiculous).

It’s amazing what sort of character assassination you can get away through chickenshit use of question marks (in Levant’s case). Or in Lilley’s case, through the deliberate withholding of facts. As Peter Loewen himself told Lilley when Lilley interviewed him for his March 31 story, Loewen did the same sort of work for Harper in 2004 that he later did for Ignatieff. Loewen was also a staffer for a Nova Scotia Progressive Conservative leadership candidate in 2005. And he once donated money to Pierre Poilievre’s nomination campaign.

This information was available to Brian Lilley, his editor, and to Ezra Levant. It is thoroughly despicable that it was not included in the stories that were published. What is going on here? In yesterday’s Globe and Mail, Simon Houpt suggests that Loewen just got caught up in a broader anti-CBC campaign by Sun Media, as it prepares to launch its new television station.

If so, that’s disgraceful enough. But I actually think something more basic is at work here: Intellectual prostitutes like Brian Lilley and Ezra Levant are so used to selling their brains on the cheap in journalism’s back alleys, they find it literally incredible that everyone else’s intellect is not similarly for sale.

For the record: Peter is a friend of mine. I’ve known him for about six years, we met when I was a postdoc and he was doing his PhD at the University of Montreal. I’ve had drinks with him in bars and been to parties at his house. I have also gone to him, on a number of occasions, for his thoughts on a number of issues relating to Canadian politics, especially voter behaviour – turnout, national and regional patterns, shifting party support, that sort of thing.  He has always been extremely helpful – Peter’s a really, really smart guy.

And unlike the vast majority of academics of my acquaintance, I haven’t a clue how Peter votes. But more importantly, his academic work is irreproachably non-partisan. If you don’t trust me, give Peter’s work a read. Here’s his CV.  Or ask Tom Flanagan – who tried to get Sun Media to kill the story for the very reasons I’ve given here, and was pointedly ignored.




Browse

Sun family values

  1. Thanks for writing about this. These kind of character assassinations are sickening to watch. Sometimes one can look for a legal solution, as Riddell tried in going up against Harper, for example, but usually all one can do is try to expose the assault for what it is.

  2. Thanks for writing about this. These kind of character assassinations are sickening to watch. Sometimes one can look for a legal solution, as Riddell tried in going up against Harper, for example, but usually all one can do is try to expose the assault for what it is.

  3. Odd thing, I like Potter when he is angry.

  4. I live in a Conservative riding where Sun is King media. I have friends I can't talk to about politics because they repeat such Bs all the time. Some know I listen to CBC and read "big city papers" for a variety of sources and love to 'joke' about 'lamestream' media to me. I have come to firmly believe that Harper supporters belong to a cult.

  5. Odd thing, I like Potter when he is angry.

  6. There are some things more important than the economy.

    Mr. Harper in passing a law that allows the media to blatantly lie in support of his cause, has hit on one of them here.

    Now you're just seeing the results.

    Still support the Harper majority, Potter?

  7. There are some things more important than the economy.

    Mr. Harper in passing a law that allows the media to blatantly lie in support of his cause, has hit on one of them here.

    Now you're just seeing the results.

    Still support the Harper majority, Potter?

    • Severus?

    • That did NOT pass

      The CRTC said that, considering the overwhelming response from the public, they would not be reviewing the clause about thruthfulness in the news.

      • The CBC will be eternally grateful. Now if they can just keep prying eyes out of their books.

        Recall that the CBC is fighting attempts by other media outlets as well as the auditor general from seeing ANYTHING!. Too many Liberal Candidates at risk I suspect!

  8. You can fool 38% of people all of the time.

  9. You can fool 38% of people all of the time.

  10. Why no mention of the return of Kory Tenycke to the Sun chain, now moving from twitter to influencing the content of the print pages? Is the link not so obvious?

  11. Why no mention of the return of Kory Tenycke to the Sun chain, now moving from twitter to influencing the content of the print pages? Is the link not so obvious?

    • That explains the source of the horrible smell coming from Sun Media of late.

      • Of late? Only?

    • Does that mean Dot that I should take everything that appears on CTV Newsnet with a mountain of salt?

  12. I have come to firmly believe that Harper supporters belong to a cult.

    yes…. scientology…or at least it seems that way……….and this all getting very creepy

  13. On top of everything else, if you answer the CBC vote compass questions and then click "analyze my result," it tells you exactly how it determines your answer. That's quite a "cover up."

    But hey, that would require research. Or just an IQ of some kind. Or a desire to tell the truth. Anything really beyond the kind of blind partisanship the Sun is accusing the CBC of.

    As an aside, if Ezra and Brian might want to ask Charles Adler for the correct answers to the Compass questions. In the column right underneath Ezra's, Adler acknowledges that the vote compass afirmed he was a Conservative….so apparently, it doesn't just default to Liberal no matter what you enter.

    But really, it's a little rich that the Cons wail at the injustice when the Vote Compass gives them such a narrow pool of supporters when the Conservatives themselves eject all but the most righteous devotees from their rallies.

  14. Andrew it IS the CBC that starts lowering the bar. Here are the headlines running right now on the same subject. Sorry your friend is being misquoted, but the CBC as well as other media does it all the time.

    CBC: RCMP boss OK'd ex-PM aide Carson's security clearance

    CBC News has learned William Elliott, who was serving as national security adviser in the Privy Council Office in January 2006, was the official responsible for giving the green light to Bruce Carson working in the Prime Minister's Office. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/s

    CTV: Top Mountie not involved in Carson clearance: source

    Reports emerged Tuesday suggesting Elliott had been the person who approved Carson's security clearance, but a senior intelligence official told The Canadian Press that the current RCMP commissioner was not involved in the file.

    In an email to The Canadian Press, former PCO Clerk Alex Himelfarb said "the PCO is responsible for security clearance and the clerk is responsible for what happens in PCO." http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110406/sou

  15. On top of everything else, if you answer the CBC vote compass questions and then click "analyze my result," it tells you exactly how it determines your answer. That's quite a "cover up."

    But hey, that would require research. Or just an IQ of some kind. Or a desire to tell the truth. Anything really beyond the kind of blind partisanship the Sun is accusing the CBC of.

    As an aside, if Ezra and Brian might want to ask Charles Adler for the correct answers to the Compass questions. In the column right underneath Ezra's, Adler acknowledges that the vote compass afirmed he was a Conservative….so apparently, it doesn't just default to Liberal no matter what you enter.

    But really, it's a little rich that the Cons wail at the injustice when the Vote Compass gives them such a narrow pool of supporters when the Conservatives themselves eject all but the most righteous devotees from their rallies.

    • It wasn't that it said Liberal no matter what, I believe it was if you put "I don't know", or the neutral answer it would say Liberal

      • Hint: The neutral answer is closest to Liberal, because that answer is "About the same as it is now" for all questions.. well.. about the same as it is now is closest to the Liberal position, as Mr. Harper has been acting more as a Liberal than a Conservative for several years now.

        • If Harper is acting as a Liberal as you say (and which I agree with in large part), then why are the Liberals in the center of the spectrum, and why are the conservatives to the extreme right? Wouldn't the Tories be naturally closer to the center if they are so indistinguishable from the Liberals?

          • Acting as != stated policy positions.

            If you do the test, you can then go through and see how all the parties have been scored. I'd be quite interested in seeing how anybody who argues the test is biased think the party responses should have been changed.

            Perhaps the CPC only somewhat agrees that the Long Gun Registry should be scrapped, but I think the test has it right putting them at "Strongly Agrees" Similarly for the "Marriage should only be between a man or a woman" and so forth.

          • It put me into the Green Party; but all the non-Cult Conservative parties seemed pretty close together.

          • My choices initially put me closer to the Liberal party, but when I adjust the calculations based on what issues are actually important to me, the Green Party is closer.

            Given the candidates in my area though, the Liberal candidate, one Josipa Petrunic, is looking like the best available so far, but I haven't yet managed to get hold of the NDP candidate for my riding, so jury's still out.

          • Glad you brought up SSM. Perfect example of the bias.

            The CBC says the CPC "strongly agrees" with the statement that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Despite the fact that they have stated publicly since winning power in 2006 that the issue is dead. They held one vote to "reopen the debate" in 2006, lost, and have abandoned it and promised never to go there again. How does that equate to "strongly agree"?

            You want to point out their previous opposition to it? Fine. On the question "Should Canada adopt a carbon tax", what do you think the Liberal position would be, based on their campaigning on it in 2008?

            The CBC reports them as "strongly disagree" with adopting a carbon tax.

            There are other examples, but there's the smoking gun right there.

            There's the bias in the methodology. The CPC are tarred forever with the anti SSM brush in order to push them away from the other parties, while the Liberals are pushed towards the middle by being allowed to do a complete 180 on their carbon tax.

          • Glad you brought up SSM. Perfect example of the bias.

            The CBC says the CPC "strongly agrees" with the statement that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Despite the fact that they have stated publicly since winning power in 2006 that the issue is dead. They held one vote to "reopen the debate" in 2006, lost, and have abandoned it and promised never to go there again. How does that equate to "strongly agree"?

            You want to point out their previous opposition to it? Fine. On the question "Should Canada adopt a carbon tax", what do you think the Liberal position would be, based on their campaigning on it in 2008?

            The CBC reports them as "strongly disagree" with adopting a carbon tax.

            There are other examples, but there's the smoking gun right there. There's the bias in the methodology. The CPC are tarred forever with the anti SSM brush in order to push them away from the other parties, while the Liberals are pushed towards the middle by being allowed to do a complete 180 on their carbon tax.

          • Glad you brought up SSM. Perfect example of the bias.

            The CBC says the CPC "strongly agrees" with the statement that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Despite the fact that they have stated publicly since winning power in 2006 that the issue is dead. They held one vote to "reopen the debate" in 2006, lost, and have abandoned it and promised never to go there again. How does that equate to "strongly agree"?

            You want to point out their previous opposition to it? Fine. On the question "Should Canada adopt a carbon tax", what do you think the Liberal position would be, based on their campaigning on it in 2008?

            The CBC reports them as "strongly disagree" with adopting a carbon tax.

            There are other examples, but there's the smoking gun right there. There's the bias in the methodology. The CPC are tarred forever with the anti SSM brush, even though they will never go there again, in order to push them away from the other parties, while the Liberals are pushed towards the middle by being allowed to do a complete 180 on their past support for a carbon tax.

          • They've stated publically that they will not bring it forward in a minority parliament. They haven't said a thing about what will happen in a majority parliament, nor have they ever recanted their previous position on it. (Out of curiousity, what would you say their position on the issue currently is? "Neither agree nor disagree?")

            And that's the difference with your example of carbon tax. The Liberals have recanted their previous position. You obviously haven't kept up, as now they "strongly disagree" with a carbon tax and have since Ignatieff took over. Their position (unfortunately, in my mind) changed on this matter to be more in line with the CPC support of cap & trade.

            Is this the problem? Are CPC supporters claiming bias because they simply haven't bothered to look at how the Liberal platform has changed since the public so roundly turfed them out of power?

            I suppose that makes sense, because I keep seeing people talk about how they need to go out and re-evaluate what they stand for, even though they already have. The evidence of which you can see in their policy papers.

          • I can't help but notice that despite your facts being completely correct and your approach clearly aimed at finding the truth about the issue, the readers still vote you down. They don't seem as interested as you are in seeking the truth and appear to have more time than the conservatively minded to engage in the kind of pursuits that allows them to register their approval or disapproval of the readers' comments.

          • "… conservatives to the extreme right"?

            Only someone looking at it from the left of Joseph Stalin could possibly believe that bull! More like slightly to the right of centre which, in Canada, is located to the left of the US Democrats.

        • Linds
          That just confirms the obvious! IF YOU ARE LIEBERAL "YOU DON'T KNOW" the answer to anything. Were you aware that 3 of 10 Liberals still think they are led by Stephan Dion. Asked who Mike Ignatoff is they replied ' I DON'T KNOW"

      • There is no neutral answer.

        • Fair comment. But there is a middle answer, which is what most people understand to be the "neutral" one.

      • So you mean that liberal stands for clueless?

  16. Andrew it IS the CBC that starts lowering the bar. Here are the headlines running right now on the same subject. Sorry your friend is being misquoted, but the CBC as well as other media does it all the time.

    CBC: RCMP boss OK'd ex-PM aide Carson's security clearance

    CBC News has learned William Elliott, who was serving as national security adviser in the Privy Council Office in January 2006, was the official responsible for giving the green light to Bruce Carson working in the Prime Minister's Office. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/s

    CTV: Top Mountie not involved in Carson clearance: source

    Reports emerged Tuesday suggesting Elliott had been the person who approved Carson's security clearance, but a senior intelligence official told The Canadian Press that the current RCMP commissioner was not involved in the file.

    In an email to The Canadian Press, former PCO Clerk Alex Himelfarb said "the PCO is responsible for security clearance and the clerk is responsible for what happens in PCO." http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110406/sou

    • This is off topic, but clearly a very important subject. Someone had to approve Carson to work in the PMO and so far no one is willing to take responsibility for that decision, not the PMO, not the PCO, not the RCMP. The fact that there is a direct link between the PCO then and the RCMP now raises more questions which the media should try to get the answers to (since, obviously, Harper and Elliott are not going to provide any answers). At the moment, there are two different anonymous sources giving different views on the role of the PCO and Elliott. Both may be lying, but at least one appears to be, and we should try to find out the truth.

    • They've been there five years and they still don't know how it works. Brilliant.

      But the major point remains that Mr. Harper knew that Carson had a criminal dossier. Knowing that a candidate had previous criminal convictions, an intelligent and responsible person, a CEO of any organization, would have asked to see the full background check personally before letting someone in the inner circle of the PMO. It's poor judgment, again, on the part of Harper.

      I had to hire a cleaning lady recently and had a full background check done, including for criminal record. And I read it too !

  17. Levant & Lilley are rubes who rely on VC to tell them how they should vote.

    Vote CPC, no brain required.

  18. Levant & Lilley are rubes who rely on VC to tell them how they should vote.

    Vote CPC, no brain required.

  19. I`m not sure what Potter`s rant is all about here other than to get in some nasty accusations against Lilley and Levant ( can a media guy really call other media guys " intellectual prostitutes " and remain credible ).

    If Loewen is such " a really really smart guy " then he should have known that no matter what is on his CV or how good his work is in the past, when he agrees to set up a program like the CBC Vote Compass then he becomes part of something that will inherently make the Liberals look good at the expense of the Conservatives.

    This should not come as a surprise. The party that is most likely to do cutbacks to the CBC is the Conservatives. Therefore results of a program like Vote Compass will naturally be skewed to the Liberal favour if for no other reason then Liberals are more likely to participate then Conservatives because they tend to be CBC watchers.

    To protect himself in the future Loewen should insist that CBC remind viewers that this is a completely unscientific poll and the results will favour the traditional Liberal CBC watcher.

  20. This is off topic, but clearly a very important subject. Someone had to approve Carson to work in the PMO and so far no one is willing to take responsibility for that decision, not the PMO, not the PCO, not the RCMP. The fact that there is a direct link between the PCO then and the RCMP now raises more questions which the media should try to get the answers to (since, obviously, Harper and Elliott are not going to provide any answers). At the moment, there are two different anonymous sources giving different views on the role of the PCO and Elliott. Both may be lying, but at least one appears to be, and we should try to find out the truth.

  21. You're not alone. Former Conservative candidate David Marler also describes the party as a 'cult'. He's the lawyer who refused to participate in the in-and-out, judging it illegal.

    • State your source or RETRACT.

  22. You're not alone. Former Conservative candidate David Marler also describes the party as a 'cult'. He's the lawyer who refused to participate in the in-and-out, judging it illegal.

  23. Any tool (and that's all it is) that engages youthful Canadians, encourages them to vote, and prompts them to think about their values is a positive thing. Perhaps the Conservatives are afraid of the youth vote showing up?

  24. Any tool (and that's all it is) that engages youthful Canadians, encourages them to vote, and prompts them to think about their values is a positive thing. Perhaps the Conservatives are afraid of the youth vote showing up?

    • Bingo!

        • Thanks Holly. I needed that.

      • I don't know. The thought that someone would actually use this to decide how to vote?

        • Should you be allowed to vote if you use this "poll" to tell you how to vote?>

          • How about if it gets people to reconsider whether the party they have always voted for really stands for what they think it does? Seems to me anything that starts people thinking is positive.

  25. Will someone write an article on the 'coincidence' that Sun Media requires you to link any comments on articles to your facebook profile (except Free Speech Ezra, who doesn't allow comments), and now the mother party is using facebook to screen out unwelcome individuals?

  26. Will someone write an article on the 'coincidence' that Sun Media requires you to link any comments on articles to your facebook profile (except Free Speech Ezra, who doesn't allow comments), and now the mother party is using facebook to screen out unwelcome individuals?

  27. They've been there five years and they still don't know how it works. Brilliant.

    But the major point remains that Mr. Harper knew that Carson had a criminal dossier. Knowing that a candidate had previous criminal convictions, an intelligent and responsible person, a CEO of any organization, would have asked to see the full background check personally before letting someone in the inner circle of the PMO. It's poor judgment, again, on the part of Harper.

    I had to hire a cleaning lady recently and had a full background check done, including for criminal record. And I read it too !

  28. I think he's called them contemptible lying shills. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

  29. I think he's called them contemptible lying shills. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

  30. I've got to say, this is welcome. I don't know so much about Lilley but Levant is a piece of work. I became his new poster boy for anti-Semitism in November 2009, my picture on his blog and a link to my personal website, because I work in web media for KAIROS (I sent my child to a Jewish kindergarten – no anti-Semite here). Subsequently received whacko email threatening me, and informing me that my family could be found. He gets away with this because he has a huge following that loves this kind of bullying, and because, as a libel lawyer, he's made a career out of skating along the very edge of libel and getting paid handsomely for the resulting furor.

  31. I've got to say, this is welcome. I don't know so much about Lilley but Levant is a piece of work. I became his new poster boy for anti-Semitism in November 2009, my picture on his blog and a link to my personal website, because I work in web media for KAIROS (I sent my child to a Jewish kindergarten – no anti-Semite here). Subsequently received whacko email threatening me, and informing me that my family could be found. He gets away with this because he has a huge following that loves this kind of bullying, and because, as a libel lawyer, he's made a career out of skating along the very edge of libel and getting paid handsomely for the resulting furor.

    • I don't think Levant actually practices law.

      • No, but he's putting a lot of their kids through college…

    • Professor Richard Moon writes a useful description of the techniques used to undermine the credibility of the Canadian Human Rights Commision by the likes of Levant

      "The techniques used by critics of the human rights commission are sadly familiar. They include:
      • identifying one or two commission or tribunal decisions which seem unreasonable in their outcome, and presenting them as if they are representative of the larger body of decisions;
      • when describing a particular case, highlighting certain facts or findings and omitting mention of others to give a misleading picture of the case;
      • relying on dubious sources and reporting their claims as if true and uncontested;
      • using terms in a way that is intended to mislead the audience, i.e. making a claim that with some strain on the language may be ‘true' but which on an ordinary reading (the reading encouraged by the speaker) is false;
      • making blatantly false factual claims; and finally
      • engaging in personal attacks against those with opposing views, in order to undermine their credibility. "

      Article here: http://j-source.ca/english_new/detail.php?id=5100

    • I think you are a liar. So gusty of you to be annoymous in making these accusations.

      • Cute.
        Sounds familiar.
        Before making accusation s of lying, try a search on Levant's blog for KAIROS…

  32. In which way does the toll favour the Liberals? Have the positions of any of the parties been misrepresented?

  33. Way to prove the point of the post. Ridiculous partisans ignoring fact, in favour of their skewed view of the world: "The CBC and the universities are out to get us well intentioned Conservatives!"

  34. In which way does the toll favour the Liberals? Have the positions of any of the parties been misrepresented?

  35. The Sun chain… I only buy it for the pictures, I swear! I learnt long ago that with rare exception the columns and other editorials are so bereft of balance that they are self-mocking.

    And they seem to be upping their game. The Conservative bump.

  36. The Sun chain… I only buy it for the pictures, I swear! I learnt long ago that with rare exception the columns and other editorials are so bereft of balance that they are self-mocking.

    And they seem to be upping their game. The Conservative bump.

    • The amazing thing about that blog is that even after corrections and clarifications by Loewen, commenters persisted in their belief that the tool must be biased because it was done by the CBC. This is based on little more than prejudice, since their source of information in this case is a chain that is openly and avowedly right wing and has substituted commentary for reporting on almost every page of its newspapers. Why is bias reliable on the one hand and suspect on the other?

  37. "The party that is most likely to do cutbacks to the CBC is the Conservatives. "

    Funny that, as it was Paul Martin who slashed funding to the CBC.

    But why let reality interfere with your rants?

    PS: Vote Compass isn't an "unscientific poll". It's a questionnaire about public policy and political beliefs. Your responses are then compared to the public positions of the various parties. If you get results that show your preferences don't match with the party you usually support, take it up with your party's candidate.

  38. It wasn't that it said Liberal no matter what, I believe it was if you put "I don't know", or the neutral answer it would say Liberal

  39. So let me get your thinking on this.

    Because the CBC reports facts and those facts don't make the PM look very good, it is therefore OK for the Sun Media to libel, lie, assisinate the character of private individuals, completely ignore facts which gut their opinion?

    Nice country you want us to live in.

    For the record, I think the CBC is and always has been anti-government. They gave Mulroney a hard time, they gave Chretien a hard time (Milewski is being a pussycat with Harper compared to how he went after Chretien on APEC for one example), they gave Martin a very hard time and now they are giving Harper a hard time. But, as far as I can see, they are and always have been pretty factual.

    The fact that facts today have a built in anti-Harper bias is only Harper's fault.

  40. I don't think Levant actually practices law.

  41. Loewen didn't set up the Vote Compass, idiot. He is analyzing the data that comes out of it, just like he wasn't part of Ignatieff's leadership team but only analyzed data that came out of Ignatieff's polling; just like he wasn't part of Harper's 2004 campaign team but only analyzed data at Harper's request.

    So, in addition to being stupid and wrong about Vote Compass, to the point of this post by Potter, you are being a completely disengenuous stupid and blind partisan who is content to make things up and attack private citizens in some sicko scorched earth "with us or against us" approach to life and politics.

    With supporters like you, it should really be no surprise to anyone that Harper and co. are employing so many McCarthyesque/Nixonian tactics in their campaign. It's in a Harper conservatives DNA.

  42. Loewen didn't set up the Vote Compass, idiot. He is analyzing the data that comes out of it, just like he wasn't part of Ignatieff's leadership team but only analyzed data that came out of Ignatieff's polling; just like he wasn't part of Harper's 2004 campaign team but only analyzed data at Harper's request.

    So, in addition to being stupid and wrong about Vote Compass, to the point of this post by Potter, you are being a completely disengenuous stupid and blind partisan who is content to make things up and attack private citizens in some sicko scorched earth "with us or against us" approach to life and politics.

    With supporters like you, it should really be no surprise to anyone that Harper and co. are employing so many McCarthyesque/Nixonian tactics in their campaign. It's in a Harper conservatives DNA.

    • And in keeping with the name-calling of the Left tedbetts shows up and continues with the tradition of name-calling insults to those who would dare question his Liberal view of the world.
      …..tedbetts should calm down, go into a small room, and make up a new list.

      • You are full of it Blue. Always are.

        I don't call names because your views differ from mine or a Liberal view of the world.

        I don't challenge you on your views or for daring to question a Liberal view of the world. In fact, you haven't even done that here. I call you on your dispicable acceptance of this McCarthyesque behaviour of lying and misrepresenting and besmirching if not libelling a clearly non-partisan, private citizen because it might advance your "cause".

        This scorched earth "you are with us and promoting us or you are the enemy and anything goes" approach to life and politics is sickening, no matter what your political cause is.

        • amen!

        • The CBC, by it`s very nature is going to be pro-Liberal and anti-Conservative—-that`s a fact—–we all know it—Loewen should know it —Potter should know it.
          When Conservatives point out what they see as obvious, Liberals revert to name-calling and justify it as you did above by saying that it`s not because we have differing opinions but because our questioning of the objectivity of a skewed result and those who have their names associated with this report, must mean as you say that we have a McCarthyesque view of the world.
          If the CBC feel that they show objectivity by placing Loewen`s name on their site, then Loewen better be sure that the results are non-biased.

          As for your lists tedbetts, don`t stop—they are mildly entertaining. They are 90% fiction but I would never say you were " full of it, or dispicable, or McCarthyesque, or lying, or misrepresenting, or besmirching, or libelling or sickening or……………..

          • Just.

            Stop.

            Lying.

          • Listen dude, before you accuse me of lying I would suggest you give us any details where you thought I did not tell the truth, otherwise I will assume you are just another die-hard Lib who scrapes up the courage to accuse people of lying from the other Lib thumbsuckers here.

          • Stop claiming opinions as facts, and stop claiming unproven or demonstrably disproven news memes as proven, and then maybe we can meet in the middle.

          • My opinions are just that—my opinions, so don`t ever think I will stop expressing my opinion because of any command from you.

            Oh, and I am in the middle–let me know when you come in from the left bank.

          • Whatever you say, blue. Have a blast.

            "The CBC, by it`s very nature is going to be pro-Liberal and anti-Conservative—-that`s a fact—–we all know it—Loewen should know it —Potter should know it."

          • Thank for restating my opinion about the CBC.
            Loewen should know it, Potter should know it, and you should know it.

          • Your opinions are not facts, they are merely prejudices and therefore are worthless.

          • Stop it Blue, you are disrupting the meme. And Libs don't like that.

          • Thanks for clarifying your confusion between knowing something and believing something. You're certainly a major market share.

          • "The CBC, by it`s very nature is going to be pro-Liberal and anti-Conservative—-that`s a fact—–we all know it."

            A fact, is it? By what measurement? And who is 'we'? By your own utterances, you lot seem to get creepier by the day.

  43. Great article.
    Harper's "Intellectual prostitutes" love to leave these steaming heaps.
    It fires up their die-hard supporters and leaves us (ie the fraction of the population that is paying attention), aghast….. and distracted.
    Let's get these "facebook creepers"on May 2.
    Start now. Work for or donate to an opposition-party or the Catch 22 Campaign!

  44. Great article.
    Harper's "Intellectual prostitutes" love to leave these steaming heaps.
    It fires up their die-hard supporters and leaves us (ie the fraction of the population that is paying attention), aghast….. and distracted.
    Let's get these "facebook creepers"on May 2.
    Start now. Work for or donate to an opposition-party or the Catch 22 Campaign!

    • Speaking of "Facebook creeping", the Liberal rapid response team has really been on fire on this campaign.

  45. Speaking of "Facebook creeping", the Liberal rapid response team has really been on fire on this campaign.

  46. No, but he's putting a lot of their kids through college…

  47. Weird that all the anglophone left-leaning Quebeckers I know all ended up with the Bloc on Vote Compass. We could all have easily been categorized as Liberal if such a bias existed.

  48. Weird that all the anglophone left-leaning Quebeckers I know all ended up with the Bloc on Vote Compass. We could all have easily been categorized as Liberal if such a bias existed.

    • Well, there's no real federal NDP here. I did the quiz as a Quebec resident and got BQ, but I did it again as a BC resident and got NDP.

  49. That explains the source of the horrible smell coming from Sun Media of late.

  50. The Sun is trying to soften people up for a CBC sell off if Harper wins a majority. At least get the Sun/Conservative base riled up in full support and crying for blood. If Harper does get a majority we will be entering a dark age of personal freedom, where a lot more courageous people like Potter will be called upon to defend a lot more victims like Loewen, The Ottawa watchdogs, Ottawa U professors, and Facebook friends of political opponents.

  51. The Sun is trying to soften people up for a CBC sell off if Harper wins a majority. At least get the Sun/Conservative base riled up in full support and crying for blood. If Harper does get a majority we will be entering a dark age of personal freedom, where a lot more courageous people like Potter will be called upon to defend a lot more victims like Loewen, The Ottawa watchdogs, Ottawa U professors, and Facebook friends of political opponents.

    • Like the Conservative American group, Americans for prosperity, who are using a freedom of information act to access all Wisconsin professors' e-mails that contain trigger words like: Walker, Maddow, etc.. U.S. Republicans, Cdn. conservatives……..that's how they roll.

  52. "Intellectual prostitutes". That is THE line of the year. I will reuse and credit to Mr Potter.

  53. "Intellectual prostitutes". That is THE line of the year. I will reuse and credit to Mr Potter.

    • I'm maknig a macro for it. ;-)

  54. Here is what started all the uproar on the "vote compass". This is from a poster at the Chronicle Herald, April 2:

    Compass awry

    "The CBC website has an "educational tool" called Vote Compass, noted as having been developed by political scientists, that allows a person to find out to which political party his/her views are closest. It asks for his/her opinion on a number of political issues (34 questions) and then determines how their views compare with the platforms put forward by each of the political parties.

    I deliberately responded to the questions by indicating that I had no opinion at all about each issue, by answering each question as either a) "neither agree or disagree" or b) "no opinion" or c) "don't know." The Vote Compass, after digesting my responses, concluded that my views were closest to the Liberal party's. In other words, if one has no policy opinions at all, one must be a Liberal."

  55. In the description "Intellectual prostitutes"; if you're describing Brian Lilley and Ezra Levant — you don't need the word "intellectual". "Prostitutes" will do. "Media whores" would be even better.

  56. He really should sue Lilley and Levant. Levant hasn't been sued in weeks, I'm sure. He probably misses the attention.

  57. Here is what started all the uproar on the "vote compass". This is from a poster at the Chronicle Herald, April 2:

    Compass awry

    "The CBC website has an "educational tool" called Vote Compass, noted as having been developed by political scientists, that allows a person to find out to which political party his/her views are closest. It asks for his/her opinion on a number of political issues (34 questions) and then determines how their views compare with the platforms put forward by each of the political parties.

    I deliberately responded to the questions by indicating that I had no opinion at all about each issue, by answering each question as either a) "neither agree or disagree" or b) "no opinion" or c) "don't know." The Vote Compass, after digesting my responses, concluded that my views were closest to the Liberal party's. In other words, if one has no policy opinions at all, one must be a Liberal."

    • Well whoever said that was lying, as I just tried the exact same thing and it came out and said that I was closes to no party.

      But don't believe me either.. try it for yourself: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/v

      The "Don't Know" option is the rightmost one on all questions.

      Hint: If you start answering "Neither agree nor disagree" on some of the questions, you are essentially casting a vote for the status quo, which IS Liberal due to the direction of Harper's governance in a minority parliament.

      Looks like the problem in this instance isn't in the poll, but rather between the keyboard and chair.

      • I had intended to try it, but as soon as my postal code was asked for I stopped. Started to smell too much like data mining.

        Q: So what will CBC do with the results? A: CBC may report on data emerging from Vote Compass. But keep in mind, this is not a poll in the traditional sense. It is not meant to be predictive in any way, and we acknowledge that it is not meant to be a representative sample of the Canadian population. And CBC will not treat it as such.

        • Postal code is optional. Don't enter it and proceed.

        • Enter a fake postal code. I always do that.

    • The issue with Vote Compass is how the parties have been placed on the Spectrum. There is no earthly reason for the Liberals and Conservatives to be so far apart, and for the Liberals to be placed dead center of the spectrum. That is the engineering that's been done. If everyone complains that the Liberals and Conservatives are almost indistinguishable on policy, their positions on the spectrum is not defensible.

      The CBC should never have gotten into the business of recommending to people how to vote. As a national broadcaster committed to fairness and balance (no matter how poorly I think they achieve that objective), it is not possible to come up with a tool like this that would not be subject to accusations of bias. The fact that they go around telling people that they should take this test and the result "may surprise them" is much too suggestive for my taste. The amount of money they are spending to advertise Vote Compass while telling people this is also very suspicious. The CBC has no business being here.

      But I agree that Loewen's role in this should not have been trumped up the way it was.

      • Could not have said it better myself!!! Until they move the Conservatives closer to centre, or the Liberals further left (might as well for this election as Iggy has stolen most of Jack's platform), the results will be skewed.

        • Leo: They used PUBLISHED MATERIAL from and STATEMENTS from the party. This doesn't speak to bias; it does, though, give more credit to what parties say then what they actually do.

          That you think the Liberals should be further left and the Conservatives cenre shows YOUR bias, not the tool's.

          • "what parties say then what they actually do" Guess I'll be wandering in the wilderness for a while until they start "doing as they say", lol!!!

        • You've admitted you haven't done the quiz, so it might be a good time to stop talking about what's in it.

      • John: They used PUBLISHED MATERIAL from and STATEMENTS from the party. This doesn't speak to bias; it does, though, give more credit to what parties say then what they actually do.

        The CBC (or any broadcaster) has every right to educate people on party policy – this was a clever way to do it.

        (As an aside: the tool puts me slightly Conservative).

        • They have a right to educate. Not to blatantly misrepresent positions to engineer a desired result.

          The CPC does not strongly agree that marriage is between man and woman; there is not a chance in hell they gave that answer to the CBC. They have agreed that SSM is here to stay and will do nothing further to oppose it. If you want to say that the CPC is against SSM, then you have to say that the LPC supports a carbon tax instead of opposing it as the CBC suggests.

          The CPC does not agree with abolishing the senate. They support reforming the senate. Stephen Harper is on the record as not supporting abolishment of the Senate.

          The CPC does not "neither agree nor disagree" with the premise that government spending during economic downturn makes things worse. Hello Economic Action Plan?

          The CBC is misrepresenting party positions to push the CPC far to the right away from the other parties to engineer the result they want.

          • Okay, your paragraph on SSM and the carbon tax I dealt with above. I take it you're arguing that the CPC "Neither agrees nor disagrees" that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Is that correct? Were I to call up any CPC candidate and ask them if the party thinks that marriage should only be between a man and a woman, they'd tell me that they have no preference?

            The article you link to explicitly says that the CPC supports abolishing the senate if it can't be reformed. I agree that there could be seen to be a bit of bias in that the question doesn't ask about reforming the senate. So that's one possible additional question that could move a person slightly.

            Economic Action Plan was put in by the CPC under protest and threat of a coalition take-over, and again, even that only matters if we're looking at what they've done as opposed to what they stay they stand for.. which we aren't. However, what would you say the CPC would say about the premise that government spending during economic downturns makes things worse?

          • funny, i seem to remember the ONLY party putting forward a failed motion to recognize marriage as that of between one man and one woman is the Conservatives. The ONLY leader to personally agree with this is Stephen Harper. Stop it.

          • Only one party leader spoke at this rally against gay marriage in 2005 and promised that when elected Prime Minister to bring in legislation defining marriage as between one man and one woman:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFbPz6hMa1c

            If rude language offends you don't look at the comments

      • Try the test John. Then do the analyze the results thing. The CPC and Liberals are placed according to what their answers would be if the party statements were accurate representations of their opinion.

        Now if you want to get back to me about how those are placed incorrectly, we can have a discussion about this. However, from when I looked at it, it seemed pretty accurate to what I tended to remember hearing from them. You say you don't trust the media to not be spinning things? Fine..then for God's sake do the work yourself and see how their positions were actually placed.

        I'm actually quite interested where you think the parties are being misrepresented.

        • I did the test and saw the party positions. It dropped me almost exactly on the CPC icon. FWIW I would place myself well to the right of the CPC economically

          As to where I think they are misrepresenting the party positions, see above.

          • I'd suggest you're further to the right than their actions.. not than their stated preferences.

    • Either that or the Liberals are the most centrist, generally speaking.

    • That actually conforms exactly to my view of the Liberal Party, which is why I don't vote for them (although I would if they were the only alternative to Dear Leader).

  58. In the description "Intellectual prostitutes"; if you're describing Brian Lilley and Ezra Levant — you don't need the word "intellectual". "Prostitutes" will do. "Media whores" would be even better.

    • When I think of media whore, I think of someone like Donald Trump or Paris Hilton. Levant is unique in that people seek out his opinions even though he has a lamentable track record for rational discussion. Emotional, yes. Calm, rational no. Thus I think 'intellectual prostitute' is a term that serves nicely.

  59. You may want to reread Potter—I don`t think he referred to them as contemptible lying shills, but rather as was previously mentioned he called them intellectual prostitutes.

  60. I am sorry the perception is that the CBC is a publicity vehicle for the Liberals. I wish they were not so biased. By pointing out the obvious, I think I am being objective. You have every right to believe that the CBC is non-biased but you would be wrong.

  61. I am sorry the perception is that the CBC is a publicity vehicle for the Liberals. I wish they were not so biased. By pointing out the obvious, I think I am being objective. You have every right to believe that the CBC is non-biased but you would be wrong.

    • This perception is among Conservatives only. You seem to see the world through the Conservative "black and white" coloured glasses. "Either you are with us or against us."

      You have every right to believe that the CBC is biased, but you would be wrong

      • Well Bill — this is your perception, but you have no evidence to back it up. Conservatives could give you a solid chapter and verse set of examples to back up their claims of bias. My own view is that the Compass survey is not something the taxpayer funded broadcaster should do in the middle of an election. It is most definitely skewed (deliberately or not). But even if you don't believe that, many Conservatives (and NDP) are not happy about how the survey characterizes them. That the CBC continues to run the Vote Compass even after problems with bias (and security of the data) have been identified is a slap in the face to anyone but Liberal supporters. It is scandalous that the public broadcaster has so little respect for the broader Canadian public and appears willing to simply ignore issues of fairness.

  62. I will stand by my point that typical CBC users tend to be Liberals and NDPers rather than Conservatives and that the results of Vote Compass will be treated by the CBC, when it favours the Liberals, as a poll result, hence the caution to Loewen to expect criticism from others if he associates with a biased group like the CBC.

  63. Recently, the Supreme Court of Canada introduced an American concept into libel law by allowing media more leverage to write a "fair comment" story based on available facts. This is good for media, democracy, freedom and all of us.

    But it relies upon available facts and the notion of an absence of malice.

    If Lilley and Levant defamed Loewen and they had facts available to them that contradict or undermine their comments, then they would not be protected as "fair comment".

  64. I will stand by my point that typical CBC users tend to be Liberals and NDPers rather than Conservatives and that the results of Vote Compass will be treated by the CBC, when it favours the Liberals, as a poll result, hence the caution to Loewen to expect criticism from others if he associates with a biased group like the CBC.

    • So the CBC is doing its job when it incessantly attacks Chretien and Martin and gives glowing interviews with Harper and reproduces all his expensive taxpayer funded photo ops, but the moment it is the least bit negative, it's a biased group.

      Right.

  65. Hint: The neutral answer is closest to Liberal, because that answer is "About the same as it is now" for all questions.. well.. about the same as it is now is closest to the Liberal position, as Mr. Harper has been acting more as a Liberal than a Conservative for several years now.

  66. For years Conservatives have complained that Liberals are wishy-washy, and now they're mad about this?

  67. Severus?

  68. And in keeping with the name-calling of the Left tedbetts shows up and continues with the tradition of name-calling insults to those who would dare question his Liberal view of the world.
    …..tedbetts should calm down, go into a small room, and make up a new list.

  69. Well whoever said that was lying, as I just tried the exact same thing and it came out and said that I was closes to no party.

    But don't believe me either.. try it for yourself: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/v

    The "Don't Know" option is the rightmost one on all questions.

    Hint: If you start answering "Neither agree nor disagree" on some of the questions, you are essentially casting a vote for the status quo, which IS Liberal due to the direction of Harper's governance in a minority parliament.

    Looks like the problem in this instance isn't in the poll, but rather between the keyboard and chair.

  70. You are full of it Blue. Always are.

    I don't call names because your views differ from mine or a Liberal view of the world.

    I don't challenge you on your views or for daring to question a Liberal view of the world. In fact, you haven't even done that here. I call you on your dispicable acceptance of this McCarthyesque behaviour of lying and misrepresenting and besmirching if not libelling a clearly non-partisan, private citizen because it might advance your "cause".

    This scorched earth "you are with us and promoting us or you are the enemy and anything goes" approach to life and politics is sickening, no matter what your political cause is.

  71. This perception is among Conservatives only. You seem to see the world through the Conservative "black and white" coloured glasses. "Either you are with us or against us."

    You have every right to believe that the CBC is biased, but you would be wrong

  72. So the CBC is doing its job when it incessantly attacks Chretien and Martin and gives glowing interviews with Harper and reproduces all his expensive taxpayer funded photo ops, but the moment it is the least bit negative, it's a biased group.

    Right.

  73. There is no neutral answer.

  74. The amazing thing about that blog is that even after corrections and clarifications by Loewen, commenters persisted in their belief that the tool must be biased because it was done by the CBC. This is based on little more than prejudice, since their source of information in this case is a chain that is openly and avowedly right wing and has substituted commentary for reporting on almost every page of its newspapers. Why is bias reliable on the one hand and suspect on the other?

  75. I'm maknig a macro for it. ;-)

  76. " … the results of Vote Compass will be treated by the CBC, when it favours the Liberals, as a poll result … "

    From the CBC:

    "Q: So what will CBC do with the results? A: CBC may report on data emerging from Vote Compass. But keep in mind, this is not a poll in the traditional sense. It is not meant to be predictive in any way, and we acknowledge that it is not meant to be a representative sample of the Canadian population. And CBC will not treat it as such."

    So, Blue, you're just making stuff up — kind of like Brian Lilley.

    "… hence the caution to Loewen to expect criticism from others if he associates with a biased group like the CBC."

    Odd, as he wasn't criticized for working with the Nova Scotia Progressive Conservatives or for doing research for Harper in 2004. Indeed, these facts weren't even acknowledged by the SUN.

    FAIL x 2.

  77. At worst, Lilley and Lvant have torqued a story/headline and how many journos can claim to never have done that?

    And for making story a bit sensational, they are 'intellectual prostitutes', and this coming from a guy who works for Maclean's, a publication known to torque headlines/stories itself.

    • No, they deliberately withheld information about Loewen and his work on Conservative campaigns because the facts (he's a policy wonk and data guy who studies elections) would get in the way of their pre-conceived thesis: CBC hosts an online widget so it must be anti-Harper and anyone associated with it must be biased.

      Lilley and Levant are dishonest writers who work for the conservative press. Their purpose is to distort and defame — and validate the bigotries of their readers. Facts just get in their way.

      • Game, set and match.

        • Debunked? That is like proving cats don't exist because you have a picture of a dog.

          Ezra doesn't address why half the story is left out, because the whole story is a no news item.

      • sorry, but it is Potter who is a lying sack of sh1t. Loewen did not work for the Conservatives in a partisan role as he did for the Liberals.

    • Gee, silly me … I read the "intellectual" part as hyperbole.

    • Interesting word, "torqued". When I hear it, I take it to mean changing the emphasis of a story, or buying the lede.

      In this case, both writers deliberately left out facts that would have eliminated the conclusions they were drawing for the reader. That's beyond torque – at best it's journalistic malpractice, at worst it's rank propaganda.

      And if you have an example of Maclean's committing such a blatant sin, I'd like to see it.

      • " …. writers deliberately left out facts that would have eliminated the conclusions they were drawing … "

        Every week, Maclean's writers choose to include/exclude info that alters our view of topic.

        As just one example, Wells wrote an article last week about Iggy finding his fight and the Libs surprisingly good start to campaign. Nowhere in Wells article does he mention the Libs and their strong start are not reflected in any of the polls and Harper/Cons are still dominating the campaign.

        Malpractice or rank propaganda?

        • Pretty much the sort of response I expected and you should know better.

          If the Wells feels that the LPC got off to a good start, that's not necessarily disproven by polling data. The polling data may not even be relevant, considering people take time to absorb the news, adjust their voting preferences and report that to pollsters.

          Now if Wells made a claim about the polls, knowing full well that he'd cherry-picked only the ones that supported his thesis, that would be different.

          In the case of the Sun pieces, they made a claim of bias based on evidence that they specifically knew didn't support their claim. It's a lie of omission and it's an ominous sign that Sun Media may be planning to act as a propaganda arm for the right. Just like Fox News in the US.

          • Hopefully they overreach as much as Fox does [ as in this case] and rouse the sleeping moralist that slumbers most of the time in much of the better Canadian media…sometimes we're just too nice…thank goodness for journos like AP/AC/Wells.

  78. At worst, Lilley and Lvant have torqued a story/headline and how many journos can claim to never have done that?

    And for making story a bit sensational, they are 'intellectual prostitutes', and this coming from a guy who works for Maclean's, a publication known to torque headlines/stories itself.

  79. I had intended to try it, but as soon as my postal code was asked for I stopped. Started to smell too much like data mining.

    Q: So what will CBC do with the results? A: CBC may report on data emerging from Vote Compass. But keep in mind, this is not a poll in the traditional sense. It is not meant to be predictive in any way, and we acknowledge that it is not meant to be a representative sample of the Canadian population. And CBC will not treat it as such.

  80. Send a copy to Heather Mallick and Scott Reid, lol!!!

  81. Send a copy to Heather Mallick and Scott Reid, lol!!!

  82. It's amazing what sort of character assassination you can get away…through the deliberate withholding of facts.

    A mantra your entire industry should do a much better job of remembering.

    And for the record, I agree with you about Loewen's treatment by Sun Media. Unacceptable.

    • Global Winnipeg editing an interview with MP Glover and running the headline that she puts down seniors was a classic in "deliberate withgolding of facts"

      • A perfect example, but probably not one that would ever get Andrew P riled up enough to bash anybody. Unless the perpetrator is a conservative, or the victim is not (ideally you have both in order to really get the outrage going), that's just considered business as usual.

  83. It's amazing what sort of character assassination you can get away…through the deliberate withholding of facts.

    A mantra your entire industry should do a much better job of remembering.

    And for the record, I agree with you about Loewen's treatment by Sun Media. Unacceptable.

  84. Postal code is optional. Don't enter it and proceed.

  85. It is unfortunate that being called a name by an anonymous commenter over the internet, while anonymous yourself, wounds you so deeply that you are unable to address the substantive point — specifically, that you're either wrong or lying about Loewen setting up the vote compass. Would you care to clarify which?

  86. The issue with Vote Compass is how the parties have been placed on the Spectrum. There is no earthly reason for the Liberals and Conservatives to be so far apart, and for the Liberals to be placed dead center of the spectrum. That is the engineering that's been done. If everyone complains that the Liberals and Conservatives are almost indistinguishable on policy, their positions on the spectrum is not defensible.

    The CBC should never have gotten into the business of recommending to people how to vote. As a national broadcaster committed to fairness and balance (no matter how poorly I think they achieve that objective), it is not possible to come up with a tool like this that would not be subject to accusations of bias. The fact that they go around telling people that they should take this test and the result "may surprise them" is much too suggestive for my taste. The amount of money they are spending to advertise Vote Compass while telling people this is also very suspicious. The CBC has no business being here.

    But I agree that Loewen's role in this should not have been trumped up the way it was.

  87. No, they deliberately withheld information about Loewen and his work on Conservative campaigns because the facts (he's a policy wonk and data guy who studies elections) would get in the way of their pre-conceived thesis: CBC hosts an online widget so it must be anti-Harper and anyone associated with it must be biased.

    Lilley and Levant are dishonest writers who work for the conservative press. Their purpose is to distort and defame — and validate the bigotries of their readers. Facts just get in their way.

  88. Global Winnipeg editing an interview with MP Glover and running the headline that she puts down seniors was a classic in "deliberate withgolding of facts"

  89. Thank you this spirited defence of Mr. Loewen. It disgusts me that Lilley and Lavant would slander an individual’s good name in an attempt to make partisan points – and stupid and trivial ones at that … It unfortunately does not surprise me that Sun Media would ignore the truth and trample over an innoecnt bystander just so that they could make nasty with the CBC …

    We need people like you to rip off their flimsy cover of “journalism” to reveal the ugly underneath. The best the rest of us can do is not buy their papers and not watch SUN TV. Me? I unfollowed Lavant on Twitter after almost the first tweet I received from him … We don’t need another Rush Limbaugh here … please peddle your poop somewhere else.

  90. Thank you this spirited defence of Mr. Loewen. It disgusts me that Lilley and Lavant would slander an individual’s good name in an attempt to make partisan points – and stupid and trivial ones at that … It unfortunately does not surprise me that Sun Media would ignore the truth and trample over an innoecnt bystander just so that they could make nasty with the CBC …

    We need people like you to rip off their flimsy cover of “journalism” to reveal the ugly underneath. The best the rest of us can do is not buy their papers and not watch SUN TV. Me? I unfollowed Lavant on Twitter after almost the first tweet I received from him … We don’t need another Rush Limbaugh here … please peddle your poop somewhere else.

  91. I've taken a class with Loewen and I agree that his work is non-partisan and first rate – and that he's a really smart guy with a passion for Canadian politics and a desire to understand how and why people vote. I'm sure the Vote Compass is a rich source of information for his work (more likely people's policy choices than the recommendation output itself), and it's not at all surprising he chose to participate – it would have been more surprising if he'd declined.

  92. I've taken a class with Loewen and I agree that his work is non-partisan and first rate – and that he's a really smart guy with a passion for Canadian politics and a desire to understand how and why people vote. I'm sure the Vote Compass is a rich source of information for his work (more likely people's policy choices than the recommendation output itself), and it's not at all surprising he chose to participate – it would have been more surprising if he'd declined.

  93. "And he once donated money to Pierre Poilievre's nomination campaign."

    Now that I would characterize as a serious lack of judgement.

    Its actually very ironic, as Poilievre is about the closest any MP comes to resembling Levant.

  94. "And he once donated money to Pierre Poilievre's nomination campaign."

    Now that I would characterize as a serious lack of judgement.

    Its actually very ironic, as Poilievre is about the closest any MP comes to resembling Levant.

  95. A perfect example, but probably not one that would ever get Andrew P riled up enough to bash anybody. Unless the perpetrator is a conservative, or the victim is not (ideally you have both in order to really get the outrage going), that's just considered business as usual.

  96. Gee, silly me … I read the "intellectual" part as hyperbole.

  97. amen!

  98. Bingo!

  99. The CBC, by it`s very nature is going to be pro-Liberal and anti-Conservative—-that`s a fact—–we all know it—Loewen should know it —Potter should know it.
    When Conservatives point out what they see as obvious, Liberals revert to name-calling and justify it as you did above by saying that it`s not because we have differing opinions but because our questioning of the objectivity of a skewed result and those who have their names associated with this report, must mean as you say that we have a McCarthyesque view of the world.
    If the CBC feel that they show objectivity by placing Loewen`s name on their site, then Loewen better be sure that the results are non-biased.

    As for your lists tedbetts, don`t stop—they are mildly entertaining. They are 90% fiction but I would never say you were " full of it, or dispicable, or McCarthyesque, or lying, or misrepresenting, or besmirching, or libelling or sickening or……………..

  100. Could not have said it better myself!!! Until they move the Conservatives closer to centre, or the Liberals further left (might as well for this election as Iggy has stolen most of Jack's platform), the results will be skewed.

  101. Interesting word, "torqued". When I hear it, I take it to mean changing the emphasis of a story, or buying the lede.

    In this case, both writers deliberately left out facts that would have eliminated the conclusions they were drawing for the reader. That's beyond torque – at best it's journalistic malpractice, at worst it's rank propaganda.

    And if you have an example of Maclean's committing such a blatant sin, I'd like to see it.

  102. Potter: It is thoroughly despicable

    Well, now, isn't that a familiar potterism for a federal election campaign…

    • Yeah, we get at least one of these every campaign, don't we. Potter ranting about how despicable conservatives are.

      • Wait, I thought Mike Duffy was an independent journalist in the last election (when he violated the codes and ethics of the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council). You're not suggesting that – GASP – he was a Conservative at the time are you? Surely he wasn't violating journalistic codes in order to get a Senate seat.

  103. Potter: It is thoroughly despicable

    Well, now, isn't that a familiar potterism for a federal election campaign…

  104. Oh boo hoo Potter.


    "Loewen did the same sort of work for Harper in 2004 that he later did for Ignatieff. Loewen was also a staffer for a Nova Scotia Progressive Conservative leadership candidate in 2005. And he once donated money to Pierre Poilievre's nomination campaign.

    This information was available to Brian Lilley, his editor, and to Ezra Levant. It is thoroughly despicable that it was not included in the stories that were published."

    The exact same is true of Bruce Carson. He also worked for the Liberals. This hasn't stopped a million stories from appearing denigrating him, Harper and any number of the Cons for working with him.

    This sort of thing happens all the time. But it only matters when it happens to a friend of yours? In all other situations you'd be saying it's all fine and dandy if Loewen decided to prepare a tool for general use doing an election campaign! Then you'd be saying of course he should expect some criticism.

    Try to show a little consistency.

    Anyone who's taken a look can tell the Vote Compass is biased. If you choose any random number of answers, it will always tell you you'rea liberal. If person gives 20 answers, then person B gives the exact opposite 20 answers, the tool will actually tell them they should both be in the Liberal party! When persons A and B don't agree on anything! What a tool!

    • I'll ask the question again- When will conservatives stop playing the victim card?

      • The victim card was played by Potter, on behalf of a friend of his. I thought you might have noticed that.

        I mean, it's the whole point of the entire post!

        • It appears that the victims here have been truth, professionalism and good journalism.

          Lilley and Levant are the prime suspects.

          • Reference SDA: automatic fail.

          • Comments from TJCook: automatic fail.

          • Oh *snap*

            Hey, you can tell a lot about someone by the company they keep. In your case, well, ew.

          • Well, you've been responding to me (ew), and I guess you're saying that reflects negatively upon me. Interesting.

    • This would be a great point if it weren't a lie. The Compass gives different results for different answers. Nice try.

        • Hint: When you choose your answers at random, you're going to have more in common overall with the most centrist party, as while you'll be right in line with some answers of an extremist party, you'll be way out of whack on others. Choosing all the leftmost answers, or all the rightmost answers is essentially choosing at random.

          So she's not a liar, she just doesn't seem to understand how statistical averages work.

          • Thwim, from seeing many of your comments, and from knowing the quality of the faculty at Queen's, I can assure you that she knows a lot more about statistics than you do. And by the way, statistics has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. With a graduate degree in statistics, I can assure you of that. At this point you are proving yourself to be the lying sack of crap around here, but that's not unusual.

          • …..once again, maybe a little bit heavy, but dammit he had it coming as well.

          • Yeah, I agree on both counts – cheers.

    • s_c_f……That Vote Compass told me I was Green, so that makes you a Lying Sack of Crap.

      • Wow, that vote compass is powerful, I didn't know lying sack of crap was one of the possible results.

        • It isn't. It told JSC he was green. You being a lying sack of crap is apparently independent of the compass.

    • It told me I was a Green. Which I consider incorrect, but not malicious.

    • It's because the questions are equally right and left on the political scale. Therefore, if one person says all yes's and the other all no's, the first person will be answering "conservatively" on the first half of the test, and "liberally", on the second. The second person will be simply reversed, so it all comes out in the wash. They're both in the middle.

  105. Oh boo hoo Potter.


    "Loewen did the same sort of work for Harper in 2004 that he later did for Ignatieff. Loewen was also a staffer for a Nova Scotia Progressive Conservative leadership candidate in 2005. And he once donated money to Pierre Poilievre's nomination campaign.

    This information was available to Brian Lilley, his editor, and to Ezra Levant. It is thoroughly despicable that it was not included in the stories that were published."

    The exact same is true of Bruce Carson. He also worked for the Liberals. This hasn't stopped a million stories from appearing denigrating him, Harper and any number of the Cons for working with him.

    This sort of thing happens all the time. But it only matters when it happens to a friend of yours? In all other situations you'd be saying it's all fine and dandy if Loewen decided to prepare a tool for general use doing an election campaign! Then you'd be saying of course he should expect some criticism.

    Try to show a little consistency.

    Anyone who's taken a look can tell the Vote Compass is biased. If you choose any random number of answers, it will always tell you you'rea liberal. If person gives 20 answers, then person B gives the exact opposite 20 answers, the tool will actually tell them they should both be in the Liberal party! When persons A and B don't agree on anything! What a tool!

  106. "idiot." , "in addition to being stupid" , "completely disengenuous stupid and blind partisan" , "sicko"
    I can't understand not addressing such a "substantive" post.

  107. When I think of media whore, I think of someone like Donald Trump or Paris Hilton. Levant is unique in that people seek out his opinions even though he has a lamentable track record for rational discussion. Emotional, yes. Calm, rational no. Thus I think 'intellectual prostitute' is a term that serves nicely.

  108. Yeah, we get at least one of these every campaign, don't we. Potter ranting about how despicable conservatives are.

  109. Game, set and match.

  110. I'll ask the question again- When will conservatives stop playing the victim card?

  111. The victim card was played by Potter, on behalf of a friend of his. I thought you might have noticed that.

    I mean, it's the whole point of the entire post!

  112. Does that mean Dot that I should take everything that appears on CTV Newsnet with a mountain of salt?

  113. Fox News North is practicing their vile style of journalism [sic]. Get prepared for the demise of the CBC and the rise of FOX.

    • :>D

    • I hope so

  114. Fox News North is practicing their vile style of journalism [sic]. Get prepared for the demise of the CBC and the rise of FOX.

  115. " …. writers deliberately left out facts that would have eliminated the conclusions they were drawing … "

    Every week, Maclean's writers choose to include/exclude info that alters our view of topic.

    As just one example, Wells wrote an article last week about Iggy finding his fight and the Libs surprisingly good start to campaign. Nowhere in Wells article does he mention the Libs and their strong start are not reflected in any of the polls and Harper/Cons are still dominating the campaign.

    Malpractice or rank propaganda?

  116. It appears that the victims here have been truth, professionalism and good journalism.

    Lilley and Levant are the prime suspects.

  117. If Harper is acting as a Liberal as you say (and which I agree with in large part), then why are the Liberals in the center of the spectrum, and why are the conservatives to the extreme right? Wouldn't the Tories be naturally closer to the center if they are so indistinguishable from the Liberals?

  118. The "intellectual prostitutes" must be very angry that the prohibition about broadcasting fake or misleading news remains in effect in the lead up to the launch of SunTV News.

    • Actually, this "prohibition" did not stop the above "intellectually pure" writer at all, didn't it?

  119. I`m still here Thwim so obviously the name-calling means nothing to me however, it is probably a signal that Liberals are losing an argument.

    As for Loewen, my original point was that he should not be surprised when his non-partisanship is questioned when his name is used beside a program like Vote Compass. CBC has consistently shown itself to be a biased news organization. The same would probably be true if his name was used beside a similar program for the Sun group.

    • Perhaps you should re-read your message.

      Here, I"ll quote the relevant section: "If Loewen is such " a really really smart guy " then he should have known that no matter what is on his CV or how good his work is in the past, when he agrees to set up a program like the CBC Vote Compass then he becomes part of something that will inherently make the Liberals look good at the expense of the Conservatives."

      I've taken the liberty of adding the emphasis so that it doesn't slip you by.

      Now. Care to comment? Retract? Justify?

      Incidentally, I didn't say you'd left, just that you avoided the substantive portion of the message to concentrate on the insults.

      • "you avoided the substantive portion of the message to concentrate on the insults. "
        Are you so partisan that you really expect someone address the "substantive portion of the message' in a rant like that. (now a +10 rating)

        • If a person's going to respond at all, then yes.

          • I thought his (Blue) response was about right.
            It seems to me his "substantive point " was lost in the message. The fact that his post is now at +15 is disappointing.

  120. I`m still here Thwim so obviously the name-calling means nothing to me however, it is probably a signal that Liberals are losing an argument.

    As for Loewen, my original point was that he should not be surprised when his non-partisanship is questioned when his name is used beside a program like Vote Compass. CBC has consistently shown itself to be a biased news organization. The same would probably be true if his name was used beside a similar program for the Sun group.

  121. The "intellectual prostitutes" must be very angry that the prohibition about broadcasting fake or misleading news remains in effect in the lead up to the launch of SunTV News.

  122. Come on Ted.

    Lilley's piece was a news article. Read it. It contains only facts. As far as I can tell there are no lies in Lilley's piece, other than lies of omission. Potter's point (which I agree wholeheartedly with) is that Lilley's piece deliberately omitted certain other relevant context which if known would change the story. The Canadian media has built it's entire reputation around following this practice in the other direction.

    As to Levant's piece it was opinion.. I could point to anything Heather Mallick has ever written as being more provocative than what Levant wrote, but left wing shills like her always get a free pass around here.

    And it's pretty ridiculous for Potter to complain about Sun TV "attacking the CBC" when the entire Canadian MSM has pejoratively referred to Sun News from day 1 as "Fox News North". Glass houses and stones Potter. Glass houses and stones.

  123. Come on Ted.

    Lilley's piece was a news article. Read it. It contains only facts. As far as I can tell there are no lies in Lilley's piece, other than lies of omission. Potter's point (which I agree wholeheartedly with) is that Lilley's piece deliberately omitted certain other relevant context which if known would change the story. The Canadian media has built it's entire reputation around following this practice in the other direction.

    As to Levant's piece it was opinion.. I could point to anything Heather Mallick has ever written as being more provocative than what Levant wrote, but left wing shills like her always get a free pass around here.

    And it's pretty ridiculous for Potter to complain about Sun TV "attacking the CBC" when the entire Canadian MSM has pejoratively referred to Sun News from day 1 as "Fox News North". Glass houses and stones Potter. Glass houses and stones.

    • Potter's phrase "intellectual prostitutes" is right on. Much worse than being a "leftwing shill"; though Mallick seems to be too busy writing about herself to shill much.

      Levant's opinions are full of lies. He has lost at least two libel suits against him; see wiki.

  124. Pretty much the sort of response I expected and you should know better.

    If the Wells feels that the LPC got off to a good start, that's not necessarily disproven by polling data. The polling data may not even be relevant, considering people take time to absorb the news, adjust their voting preferences and report that to pollsters.

    Now if Wells made a claim about the polls, knowing full well that he'd cherry-picked only the ones that supported his thesis, that would be different.

    In the case of the Sun pieces, they made a claim of bias based on evidence that they specifically knew didn't support their claim. It's a lie of omission and it's an ominous sign that Sun Media may be planning to act as a propaganda arm for the right. Just like Fox News in the US.

  125. Either that or the Liberals are the most centrist, generally speaking.

  126. Enter a fake postal code. I always do that.

  127. Acting as != stated policy positions.

    If you do the test, you can then go through and see how all the parties have been scored. I'd be quite interested in seeing how anybody who argues the test is biased think the party responses should have been changed.

    Perhaps the CPC only somewhat agrees that the Long Gun Registry should be scrapped, but I think the test has it right putting them at "Strongly Agrees" Similarly for the "Marriage should only be between a man or a woman" and so forth.

  128. Fair comment. But there is a middle answer, which is what most people understand to be the "neutral" one.

  129. Perhaps you should re-read your message.

    Here, I"ll quote the relevant section: "If Loewen is such " a really really smart guy " then he should have known that no matter what is on his CV or how good his work is in the past, when he agrees to set up a program like the CBC Vote Compass then he becomes part of something that will inherently make the Liberals look good at the expense of the Conservatives."

    I've taken the liberty of adding the emphasis so that it doesn't slip you by.

    Now. Care to comment? Retract? Justify?

    Incidentally, I didn't say you'd left, just that you avoided the substantive portion of the message to concentrate on the insults.

  130. Wait, I thought Mike Duffy was an independent journalist in the last election (when he violated the codes and ethics of the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council). You're not suggesting that – GASP – he was a Conservative at the time are you? Surely he wasn't violating journalistic codes in order to get a Senate seat.

  131. This would be a great point if it weren't a lie. The Compass gives different results for different answers. Nice try.

  132. It put me into the Green Party; but all the non-Cult Conservative parties seemed pretty close together.

  133. Potter's phrase "intellectual prostitutes" is right on. Much worse than being a "leftwing shill"; though Mallick seems to be too busy writing about herself to shill much.

    Levant's opinions are full of lies. He has lost at least two libel suits against him; see wiki.

  134. "… I actually think something more basic is at work here: Intellectual prostitutes like Brian Lilley and Ezra Levant are so used to selling their brains on the cheap in journalism's back alleys, they find it literally incredible that everyone else's intellect is not similarly for sale."

    intellectual prostitutes…LOL…nailed Ezra in one.

    AP i frequently disagree with you, but i sure respect you. [ and not just for this] Thankyou for this piece…it was long overdue.

    Standing up for a friend…I ask you, what could be more honourable then that?

  135. "… I actually think something more basic is at work here: Intellectual prostitutes like Brian Lilley and Ezra Levant are so used to selling their brains on the cheap in journalism's back alleys, they find it literally incredible that everyone else's intellect is not similarly for sale."

    intellectual prostitutes…LOL…nailed Ezra in one.

    AP i frequently disagree with you, but i sure respect you. [ and not just for this] Thankyou for this piece…it was long overdue.

    Standing up for a friend…I ask you, what could be more honourable then that?

  136. s_c_f……That Vote Compass told me I was Green, so that makes you a Lying Sack of Crap.

  137. Carson was security-cleared as a policy advisor in the Prime Minister's Office for several years. He represented Canada abroad on more than one occasion in that capacity. He got there because he was a conservative.

    On the other hand, he was doing freelance research for liberal caucus members decades ago, with no clearance, and no official government responsibilities.

    If you don't understand the difference, why are you allowed to vote, exactly?

  138. "you avoided the substantive portion of the message to concentrate on the insults. "
    Are you so partisan that you really expect someone address the "substantive portion of the message' in a rant like that. (now a +10 rating)

  139. Glad you brought up SSM. Perfect example of the bias.

    The CBC says the CPC "strongly agrees" with the statement that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Despite the fact that they have stated publicly since winning power in 2006 that the issue is dead. They held one vote to "reopen the debate" in 2006, lost, and have abandoned it and promised never to go there again. How does that equate to "strongly agree"?

    You want to point out their previous opposition to it? Fine. On the question "Should Canada adopt a carbon tax", what do you think the Liberal position would be, based on their campaigning on it in 2008?

    The CBC reports them as "strongly disagree" with adopting a carbon tax.

    There are other examples, but there's the smoking gun right there. There's the bias in the methodology. The CPC are tarred forever with the anti SSM brush, even though they will never go there again, in order to push them away from the other parties, while the Liberals are pushed towards the middle by being allowed to do a complete 180 on their past support for a carbon tax.

  140. hahaha, you guys are way to funny. Look in the mirror! All of you bashing Harper for having a cult, have your very own Liberal cult right here on this web site! hahahah

    Here's the bottom line: "People who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones!"

    And you guys actually think, without doing any homework, that your God Iggy is giving you a blessing, IF elected PM, by imposing CAP & TRADE TAX on all of us……yep, that includes you too. Liberal cultist are not excluded from this added scam tax burden.

    • You may want to take a look at the Chicken Party of Canada's platform, which also includes CAP & TRADE TAX on all of us.

      Or is this a case of "It's Okay If You're A Conservative"?

  141. hahaha, you guys are way to funny. Look in the mirror! All of you bashing Harper for having a cult, have your very own Liberal cult right here on this web site! hahahah

    Here's the bottom line: "People who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones!"

    And you guys actually think, without doing any homework, that your God Iggy is giving you a blessing, IF elected PM, by imposing CAP & TRADE TAX on all of us……yep, that includes you too. Liberal cultist are not excluded from this added scam tax burden.

  142. My choices initially put me closer to the Liberal party, but when I adjust the calculations based on what issues are actually important to me, the Green Party is closer.

    Given the candidates in my area though, the Liberal candidate, one Josipa Petrunic, is looking like the best available so far, but I haven't yet managed to get hold of the NDP candidate for my riding, so jury's still out.

  143. Hopefully they overreach as much as Fox does [ as in this case] and rouse the sleeping moralist that slumbers most of the time in much of the better Canadian media…sometimes we're just too nice…thank goodness for journos like AP/AC/Wells.

  144. There was an interesting article the other day which pointed out that the Liberals supported the bills on tough on crime, which were passed, i.e. no more 2 for 1 credit, etc. Thus there will be an increase in prisoners, but the Liberal election platform states no to more jails. So where are we to put the additional prisoners?

    In other words, where would the political scientist place the Liberals on crime? You can't have both.

  145. Reference SDA: automatic fail.

  146. Small Dead Animals eh?

  147. Comments from TJCook: automatic fail.

  148. You appear to be following the conversation a little better now.

    I'm wondering, will you be asking Potter when he will stop playing the victim card?

  149. You appear to be following the conversation a little better now.

    I'm wondering, will you be asking Potter when he will stop playing the victim card?

    • No, but feel free to keep pretending not to understand the difference.

      • Oh, so now you're qualifying the victim cards: when a liberal pretends to be a victim (or in this case pretends that his friend is a victim of those horrible monster conservatives), that's a good thing, because after all, who knows, it might actually convince some poor dupe out there. Ezra Levant was hauled into court (and acquitted) for reprinting images in his publication, but he's not a victim of anything of course, because only liberals can decide who the victims are. But poor Peter Loewen is a victim, because his tool is supposed to be immune from any criticism whatsoever. I see.

        Your contributions to the conversation are always so meaningful.

        • Oh, I gave up on meaningful ages ago.

          Today when I reply, I simply try to match the quality levels of content and tone of the forum's most egregious (and usually egregiously sloppy) manipulators of the English language, which used to mean something in the world of political debate but which now is apparently only a delivery system for half-wittery and willful dishonesty. That course of action I've chosen takes very little intellectual exertion, though it comes at some emotional cost.

          But normally, when I can't come up with something at least half-witty of my own, I settle for obliquely saying something I believe to be true, rather than lowering myself to the status of the vast majority of Conservative supporters on these forums by tying myself into a byzantine clusterfvck of logical knots, non-sequiturs, and shameless disinformation in order to support my "Team" in their quest for "Victory" against my "Enemies".

          Present company excluded, of course. Anyone who has spent the last few years on these boards knows s_c_f would never stoop so low.

          Principles are for losers,
          Halo

          • "support my "Team" in their quest for "Victory" against my "Enemies"

            Yeah, you're right. I've never said anything like that. But of course, you're so full of sh*t that you'd claim that I did. And you're the one claiming the high road against "shameless disinformation". Meanwhile you make up false statements out of thin air. Such integrity, Mr. Halo. Go ahead, parse through my intense debate page, through hundreds of comments and try to find a single comment that is anything like that. But that's not for you, no, lies are your modus operandi.

            "come up with something at least half-witty"

            I'll break this to you directly: nothing you say is witty. I don't know what you say elsewhere, but I can assure you that no comment you've posted anywhere on these boards that I've seen has been witty in any way, shape or form. Nothing. Ever. Try harder.

          • Ordinarily I would think your last paragraph was a little bit over the top s_c_f, however in this case, I think that pretentious snob had it coming.

          • Halo Overide has wits and is witty. scf and Blue are vicious and boring.

          • Hey Halo, a couple of posts up, do you have any Grey-Poupon? I seem to have run out, old chap.

          • Left it in the other limo, regrettably. Wait a tic and I'll have them drive it over.

          • Making blind partisans angry around here is like shooting fish in a barrel. I mean, it's fun for the first go-around but quickly becomes boring, don't you think?

          • Yeah, and I always feel a little dirty afterward. The old "wrestling with a pig" thing, I guess.

            Still, I managed to have some fun today.

  150. Oh *snap*

    Hey, you can tell a lot about someone by the company they keep. In your case, well, ew.

  151. If a person's going to respond at all, then yes.

  152. John: They used PUBLISHED MATERIAL from and STATEMENTS from the party. This doesn't speak to bias; it does, though, give more credit to what parties say then what they actually do.

    The CBC (or any broadcaster) has every right to educate people on party policy – this was a clever way to do it.

    (As an aside: the tool puts me slightly Conservative).

  153. Leo: They used PUBLISHED MATERIAL from and STATEMENTS from the party. This doesn't speak to bias; it does, though, give more credit to what parties say then what they actually do.

    That you think the Liberals should be further left and the Conservatives cenre shows YOUR bias, not the tool's.

  154. He would go with what's in their platform / written material NOT based on their voting record. Therefore the tool's bias does not favour one party or the other, but biases towards written material and official party policy positions rather than voting patterns.

    Indeed, the tool would point someone towards being a Conservative for fiscal discipline, even though the Conservative government has absolutely no track record on fiscal conservatism.

    • So Jack and Gilles are quacking and walking like the ducks they are, and the Libs and Cons are just quacking!!!

  155. He would go with what's in their platform / written material NOT based on their voting record. Therefore the tool's bias does not favour one party or the other, but biases towards written material and official party policy positions rather than voting patterns.

    Indeed, the tool would point someone towards being a Conservative for fiscal discipline, even though the Conservative government has absolutely no track record on fiscal conservatism.

  156. It told me I was a Green. Which I consider incorrect, but not malicious.

  157. That actually conforms exactly to my view of the Liberal Party, which is why I don't vote for them (although I would if they were the only alternative to Dear Leader).

  158. About a week ago the Sun ran a very anti-Quebec editorial and the resultant comments on the blog were abslutely sickening. Levy heads a less than stellar casts of commnetators in persuit of discourse that offers profit to those who would divide. Think reichwing US politics….and Ezra Levant.

  159. About a week ago the Sun ran a very anti-Quebec editorial and the resultant comments on the blog were abslutely sickening. Levy heads a less than stellar casts of commnetators in persuit of discourse that offers profit to those who would divide. Think reichwing US politics….and Ezra Levant.

  160. Of late? Only?

  161. I thought his (Blue) response was about right.
    It seems to me his "substantive point " was lost in the message. The fact that his post is now at +15 is disappointing.

  162. "what parties say then what they actually do" Guess I'll be wandering in the wilderness for a while until they start "doing as they say", lol!!!

  163. I don't know. The thought that someone would actually use this to decide how to vote?

  164. Good point. Only Liberals should be allowed to vote.

  165. Good point. Only Liberals should be allowed to vote.

    • I'd settle for "only literates".

      • Then you and Brian should decide whether it will be literates or liberals, because if you choose both traits as qualifiers, then there are no available voters. Thankfully, we don't live in the kind of tyranny where Halo_Override has any say in the matter.

        • Citizens of the Maclean's forums, I hereby pledge that if elected Prime Minister of Canada I will make the trains run on time!

  166. So Jack and Gilles are quacking and walking like the ducks they are, and the Libs and Cons are just quacking!!!

  167. Well, you've been responding to me (ew), and I guess you're saying that reflects negatively upon me. Interesting.

  168. It's very disappointing to hear the use of "Intellectual Prostitutes" in labeling others whom one disagreed with. It reflects badly on the user. I never thought media people can lower themselves worse than politicians.

  169. Wow, that vote compass is powerful, I didn't know lying sack of crap was one of the possible results.

  170. Try the test John. Then do the analyze the results thing. The CPC and Liberals are placed according to what their answers would be if the party statements were accurate representations of their opinion.

    Now if you want to get back to me about how those are placed incorrectly, we can have a discussion about this. However, from when I looked at it, it seemed pretty accurate to what I tended to remember hearing from them. You say you don't trust the media to not be spinning things? Fine..then for God's sake do the work yourself and see how their positions were actually placed.

    I'm actually quite interested where you think the parties are being misrepresented.

  171. Looks Like Brian Lilley's CBC/Loewen stories have disappeared from his official SUN Columnist Web-Page http://www.calgarysun.com/comment/columnists/bria

    Is this the same type of disgraceful journalism that we can expect from his SunTV News show, and those of his soon to be TV "news" colleagues?

  172. Looks Like Brian Lilley's CBC/Loewen stories have disappeared from his official SUN Columnist Web-Page http://www.calgarysun.com/comment/columnists/bria

    Is this the same type of disgraceful journalism that we can expect from his SunTV News show, and those of his soon to be TV "news" colleagues?

    • Absolutely.

  173. It isn't. It told JSC he was green. You being a lying sack of crap is apparently independent of the compass.

  174. You may want to take a look at the Chicken Party of Canada's platform, which also includes CAP & TRADE TAX on all of us.

    Or is this a case of "It's Okay If You're A Conservative"?

  175. They have a right to educate. Not to blatantly misrepresent positions to engineer a desired result.

    The CPC does not strongly agree that marriage is between man and woman; there is not a chance in hell they gave that answer to the CBC. They have agreed that SSM is here to stay and will do nothing further to oppose it. If you want to say that the CPC is against SSM, then you have to say that the LPC supports a carbon tax instead of opposing it as the CBC suggests.

    The CPC does not agree with abolishing the senate. They support reforming the senate. Stephen Harper is on the record as not supporting abolishment of the Senate.

    The CPC does not "neither agree nor disagree" with the premise that government spending during economic downturn makes things worse. Hello Economic Action Plan?

    The CBC is misrepresenting party positions to push the CPC far to the right away from the other parties to engineer the result they want.

  176. All of the above notwithstanding, there is a problem with the Vote Compass. It does NOT accurately predict voting intention. I did it the first time and it said Green Party. I intend to vote NDP and am very certain I do not want to vote Green Party so I did it again…same result even though I had answered several questions differently. Not accurate at all…

  177. All of the above notwithstanding, there is a problem with the Vote Compass. It does NOT accurately predict voting intention. I did it the first time and it said Green Party. I intend to vote NDP and am very certain I do not want to vote Green Party so I did it again…same result even though I had answered several questions differently. Not accurate at all…

    • If it were aimed at predicting your vote, then it would be called a POLL.

      You are criticizing an apple for being a bad orange.

      • And they call it an "educational" tool? That is even worse.

  178. They've stated publically that they will not bring it forward in a minority parliament. They haven't said a thing about what will happen in a majority parliament, nor have they ever recanted their previous position on it. (Out of curiousity, what would you say their position on the issue currently is? "Neither agree nor disagree?")

    And that's the difference with your example of carbon tax. The Liberals have recanted their previous position. You obviously haven't kept up, as now they "strongly disagree" with a carbon tax and have since Ignatieff took over. Their position (unfortunately, in my mind) changed on this matter to be more in line with the CPC support of cap & trade.

    Is this the problem? Are CPC supporters claiming bias because they simply haven't bothered to look at how the Liberal platform has changed since the public so roundly turfed them out of power?

    I suppose that makes sense, because I keep seeing people talk about how they need to go out and re-evaluate what they stand for, even though they already have. The evidence of which you can see in their policy papers.

  179. That did NOT pass

    The CRTC said that, considering the overwhelming response from the public, they would not be reviewing the clause about thruthfulness in the news.

  180. Andrew, the Vote Compass does NOT "tell you which party you should vote for". It's unfortunate that, in an otherwise laudable column about misrepresentation, you have misrepresented the Vote Compass.

    Granted, some people might choose to let Vote Compass determine their vote, but such simple minded decisions are hardly the responsibility of anyone but the simple minded themselves.

    What Vote Compass does is encourage people to pay more attention to parties that people had otherwise assumed to be distant from their values. Surely that is a valuable contribution to democracy: to encourage thinking about the options.

  181. Andrew, the Vote Compass does NOT "tell you which party you should vote for". It's unfortunate that, in an otherwise laudable column about misrepresentation, you have misrepresented the Vote Compass.

    Granted, some people might choose to let Vote Compass determine their vote, but such simple minded decisions are hardly the responsibility of anyone but the simple minded themselves.

    What Vote Compass does is encourage people to pay more attention to parties that people had otherwise assumed to be distant from their values. Surely that is a valuable contribution to democracy: to encourage thinking about the options.

    • Surely that is a valuable contribution to democracy

      Only if it worked. If two people give the exact opposite answers to the exact same questions, and it tells them both that they disagree so much they should be voting for the same party, then it's not much of a contribution to anything.

  182. Take whatever you want.

    A former Director of Communication for Harper, hyper-partisan, and this CBC /Lib bashing is occurring during a general election. Some contributing factors.

  183. If it were aimed at predicting your vote, then it would be called a POLL.

    You are criticizing an apple for being a bad orange.

  184. Just.

    Stop.

    Lying.

  185. Well, there's no real federal NDP here. I did the quiz as a Quebec resident and got BQ, but I did it again as a BC resident and got NDP.

  186. I did the test and saw the party positions. It dropped me almost exactly on the CPC icon. FWIW I would place myself well to the right of the CPC economically

    As to where I think they are misrepresenting the party positions, see above.

  187. You've admitted you haven't done the quiz, so it might be a good time to stop talking about what's in it.

  188. No, but feel free to keep pretending not to understand the difference.

  189. I'd settle for "only literates".

  190. Surely that is a valuable contribution to democracy

    Only if it worked. If two people give the exact opposite answers to the exact same questions, and it tells them both that they disagree so much they should be voting for the same party, then it's not much of a contribution to anything.

  191. Hint: When you choose your answers at random, you're going to have more in common overall with the most centrist party, as while you'll be right in line with some answers of an extremist party, you'll be way out of whack on others. Choosing all the leftmost answers, or all the rightmost answers is essentially choosing at random.

    So she's not a liar, she just doesn't seem to understand how statistical averages work.

  192. Oh, so now you're qualifying the victim cards: when a liberal pretends to be a victim (or in this case pretends that his friend is a victim of those horrible monster conservatives), that's a good thing, because after all, who knows, it might actually convince some poor dupe out there. Ezra Levant was hauled into court (and acquitted) for reprinting images in his publication, but he's not a victim of anything of course, because only liberals can decide who the victims are. But poor Peter Loewen is a victim, because his tool is supposed to be immune from any criticism whatsoever. I see.

    Your contributions to the conversation are always so meaningful.

  193. They haven't said a thing about what will happen in a majority parliament

    Yes they have. They said if they lost the vote to reopen the debate, then the matter was closed and they would never go there again. They lost the vote. They are never going there again. At best they are "neither agree nor disagree".

    Yes, the Liberals abandoned a horrible vote-sapping policy, as did the CPC. So basically the CBC is allowing the Liberals to recant on the carbon tax, but is not allowing the Conservatives to recant any of their changed "millstone" policies like anti SSM. That's my problem. You can't let one party shed itself of inconvenient policies but force another party to wear their old millstones around their necks forever.

  194. I would like to start off by saying I am a Conservative. That being said, I don’t agree with Levant and Lilley’s actions. As journalist, if they have the facts, they should have presented both sides of the story. I don’t know Potter’s track record so I can’t comment on the “people in glass house”, but just because he might be a hypocrite doesn’t excuse what Levant and Lilley did. They tried to use the fact that Loewen worked for Iggy to infer that the Vote Compass must be biased. Obviously knowing that Loewen also worked for Conservatives makes it difficult to make that inference solely based on Loewen’s involvement (it might be biased for other reasons). There is no need to sully an academic’s reputation just because he did work for the CBC.

  195. I would like to start off by saying I am a Conservative. That being said, I don’t agree with Levant and Lilley’s actions. As journalist, if they have the facts, they should have presented both sides of the story. I don’t know Potter’s track record so I can’t comment on the “people in glass house”, but just because he might be a hypocrite doesn’t excuse what Levant and Lilley did. They tried to use the fact that Loewen worked for Iggy to infer that the Vote Compass must be biased. Obviously knowing that Loewen also worked for Conservatives makes it difficult to make that inference solely based on Loewen’s involvement (it might be biased for other reasons). There is no need to sully an academic’s reputation just because he did work for the CBC.

  196. Thwim, from seeing many of your comments, and from knowing the quality of the faculty at Queen's, I can assure you that she knows a lot more about statistics than you do. And by the way, statistics has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. With a graduate degree in statistics, I can assure you of that. At this point you are proving yourself to be the lying sack of crap around here, but that's not unusual.

  197. Okay, your paragraph on SSM and the carbon tax I dealt with above. I take it you're arguing that the CPC "Neither agrees nor disagrees" that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Is that correct? Were I to call up any CPC candidate and ask them if the party thinks that marriage should only be between a man and a woman, they'd tell me that they have no preference?

    The article you link to explicitly says that the CPC supports abolishing the senate if it can't be reformed. I agree that there could be seen to be a bit of bias in that the question doesn't ask about reforming the senate. So that's one possible additional question that could move a person slightly.

    Economic Action Plan was put in by the CPC under protest and threat of a coalition take-over, and again, even that only matters if we're looking at what they've done as opposed to what they stay they stand for.. which we aren't. However, what would you say the CPC would say about the premise that government spending during economic downturns makes things worse?

  198. I'd suggest you're further to the right than their actions.. not than their stated preferences.

  199. Then you and Brian should decide whether it will be literates or liberals, because if you choose both traits as qualifiers, then there are no available voters. Thankfully, we don't live in the kind of tyranny where Halo_Override has any say in the matter.

  200. the further this goes the less we talk about real issues and get bogged down in "cultre wars"

  201. the further this goes the less we talk about real issues and get bogged down in "cultre wars"

    • And whose idea was this?

      Mr. Graves could hardly have been more blunt. ‘I told them that they should invoke a culture war. Cosmopolitanism versus parochialism, secularism versus moralism, Obama versus Palin, tolerance versus racism and homophobia, democracy versus autocracy. If the cranky old men in Alberta don't like it, too bad. Go south and vote for Palin.'

      • Fail! This has been going on far longer then anything Graves has had to say. It's an American import we can do without.

  202. "You can't let one party shed itself of inconvenient policies but force another party to wear their old millstones around their necks forever. "

    You mean like the millstone coalition that Iggy has denounced but Harper won't acknowledge?

  203. Thank-you Guest.
    I am well aware that the Super-Charged Libs like Thwim and tedbetts either do not read the comments that have an opposing view than theirs or choose to misinterpret.
    The tragedy of the thumb scoring system here is that these Super-Libs reinforce their fantasy-world by encouraging their comrades` even most inane remarks to the point that they seem disconnected from the real world.

  204. "You can't let one party shed itself of inconvenient policies but force another party to wear their old millstones around their necks forever. "

    You mean like the millstone coalition that Iggy has denounced but Harper won't acknowledge?

    • Ooh, snap!

  205. Oh, I gave up on meaningful ages ago.

    Today when I reply, I simply try to match the quality levels of content and tone of the forum's most egregious (and usually egregiously sloppy) manipulators of the English language, which used to mean something in the world of political debate but which now is apparently only a delivery system for half-wittery and willful dishonesty. That course of action I've chosen takes very little intellectual exertion, though it comes at some emotional cost.

    But normally, when I can't come up with something at least half-witty of my own, I settle for obliquely saying something I believe to be true, rather than lowering myself to the status of the vast majority of Conservative supporters on these forums by tying myself into a byzantine clusterfvck of logical knots, non-sequiturs, and shameless disinformation in order to support my "Team" in their quest for "Victory" against my "Enemies".

    Present company excluded, of course. Anyone who has spent the last few years on these boards knows s_c_f would never stoop so low.

    Principles are for losers,
    Halo

  206. Ooh, snap!

    • No I'm not.

      Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he will respect today's vote against revisiting debate on same-sex marriage, and considers the matter closed.

      MPs voted 175-123 on Thursday against a Conservative motion calling for the government to introduce legislation restoring the traditional definition of marriage.

      "We made a promise to have a free vote on this issue, we kept that promise, and obviously the vote was decisive and obviously we'll accept the democratic result of the people's representatives," said Harper. "I don't see reopening this question in the future."

      • That's pathetic John. The dates are right there.

        In '06 Harper said he wouldn't reopen the question in the future.

        In '08, the CPC reaffirmed their position that they will support legislation that makes marriage only between a man and a woman.

        So even if that WAS their position then, their documents say flat out that it's not their position NOW. If you don't like it, take it up with them, but you're wrong.

  207. Why is CBC in the business of trying to inform us of how to select the party to vote for? Of course, the questions asked in the Compass thing are very broad, very simplistic questions and statements which one then has to answer.

    I did not like the questionaire, but I did like it even less that the CBC is doing such a thing.

    I think that the goal of CBC is to have as many participants as possible, to then be able to declare, just before voting day, that x millions of Canadians did the questionaire, and some "majority' of participants came out chosing Liberal. The high participation rate will supposedly give the Compass validity.

    For the CBC to run this Compass indicator, IS the problem.

  208. Why is CBC in the business of trying to inform us of how to select the party to vote for? Of course, the questions asked in the Compass thing are very broad, very simplistic questions and statements which one then has to answer.

    I did not like the questionaire, but I did like it even less that the CBC is doing such a thing.

    I think that the goal of CBC is to have as many participants as possible, to then be able to declare, just before voting day, that x millions of Canadians did the questionaire, and some "majority' of participants came out chosing Liberal. The high participation rate will supposedly give the Compass validity.

    For the CBC to run this Compass indicator, IS the problem.

    • The problem is you seem to be incapable of any kind of rational thought and you're blaming the CBC for it.

  209. John D –
    Ezra Levant's site allows comments. so who is spreading misinformation now?

  210. John D –
    Ezra Levant's site allows comments. so who is spreading misinformation now?

  211. The problem is you seem to be incapable of any kind of rational thought and you're blaming the CBC for it.

  212. "support my "Team" in their quest for "Victory" against my "Enemies"

    Yeah, you're right. I've never said anything like that. But of course, you're so full of sh*t that you'd claim that I did. And you're the one claiming the high road against "shameless disinformation". Meanwhile you make up false statements out of thin air. Such integrity, Mr. Halo. Go ahead, parse through my intense debate page, through hundreds of comments and try to find a single comment that is anything like that. But that's not for you, no, lies are your modus operandi.

    "come up with something at least half-witty"

    I'll break this to you directly: nothing you say is witty. I don't know what you say elsewhere, but I can assure you that no comment you've posted anywhere on these boards that I've seen has been witty in any way, shape or form. Nothing. Ever. Try harder.

  213. Listen dude, before you accuse me of lying I would suggest you give us any details where you thought I did not tell the truth, otherwise I will assume you are just another die-hard Lib who scrapes up the courage to accuse people of lying from the other Lib thumbsuckers here.

  214. Donato was one of the originals who came from the old Tely to became one of the best loved political cartoonists in Canada. The Feds came after him on a test case to determine how much a cartoonist can write off etc. etc. The first time around the Feds gave up after many years of dragging the matter out only to hit him again with another bias slanted persecution (rather than prosecution)., but he fought back and again a long time passed before the court date and when Feds didn't even bother to show up, so the case was tossed. I do not know how much money it costs to defend these actions but I assume it was substantial. Here's my point,the matter was covered by the Globe and Mail whereas the Sun gave nary a line to the precedent setting matter. Gotta tell ya somethin'.

  215. Donato was one of the originals who came from the old Tely to became one of the best loved political cartoonists in Canada. The Feds came after him on a test case to determine how much a cartoonist can write off etc. etc. The first time around the Feds gave up after many years of dragging the matter out only to hit him again with another bias slanted persecution (rather than prosecution)., but he fought back and again a long time passed before the court date and when Feds didn't even bother to show up, so the case was tossed. I do not know how much money it costs to defend these actions but I assume it was substantial. Here's my point,the matter was covered by the Globe and Mail whereas the Sun gave nary a line to the precedent setting matter. Gotta tell ya somethin'.

    • And Potter lied about that one too?

  216. The CBC's vote compass was based on a very faulty premise. It does not matter the achievements or none achievement of the creators – it was not well thought out. At the least one would think it was done by a high school student or someone in a deadline, to note that it was created by a professor of UT, is neither helping the professor, nor the reputation of this University, nor an already much tarnished image of CBC. Potter may have helped his and his friend's case had he stopped from using the phrase "Intellectual Prostitutes", he could have scored some points. Instead, he successfully dragged everybody's name in the mud, including this magazine.

  217. The CBC's vote compass was based on a very faulty premise. It does not matter the achievements or none achievement of the creators – it was not well thought out. At the least one would think it was done by a high school student or someone in a deadline, to note that it was created by a professor of UT, is neither helping the professor, nor the reputation of this University, nor an already much tarnished image of CBC. Potter may have helped his and his friend's case had he stopped from using the phrase "Intellectual Prostitutes", he could have scored some points. Instead, he successfully dragged everybody's name in the mud, including this magazine.

  218. funny, i seem to remember the ONLY party putting forward a failed motion to recognize marriage as that of between one man and one woman is the Conservatives. The ONLY leader to personally agree with this is Stephen Harper. Stop it.

  219. Ordinarily I would think your last paragraph was a little bit over the top s_c_f, however in this case, I think that pretentious snob had it coming.

  220. …..once again, maybe a little bit heavy, but dammit he had it coming as well.

  221. Halo Overide has wits and is witty. scf and Blue are vicious and boring.

  222. Or You could use my Librometer:

    You're A Liberal If…….

    MAN ON THE STREET VOTE COMPASS

    If you know you're better than everyone else…you could be a Liberal

    If you took one year at a University and call yourself a graduate….you could be a Liberal.

    If you look down on people who call their monthly income a paycheck….you could be a Liberal

    If you believe that everyone but you should share your paycheck…you could be a Liberal.

    If you believe the Oilsands isn't the reason you have money in your pocket….you could be a Liberal.

    If you believe Al Gore is your friend…..you could be a Liberal.

    If you believe David Suzuki is your friend….you could be a Liberal.

    If you believe Canada's Armed Forces are your enemy…..you could be a Liberal.

    if you believe the path to becoming PM of Canada is via the NDP….your name is Pierre or Bob.

    If you believe the LPC is Canada's Natural Governing Party…..you need help.

  223. Or You could use my Librometer:

    You're A Liberal If…….

    MAN ON THE STREET VOTE COMPASS

    If you know you're better than everyone else…you could be a Liberal

    If you took one year at a University and call yourself a graduate….you could be a Liberal.

    If you look down on people who call their monthly income a paycheck….you could be a Liberal

    If you believe that everyone but you should share your paycheck…you could be a Liberal.

    If you believe the Oilsands isn't the reason you have money in your pocket….you could be a Liberal.

    If you believe Al Gore is your friend…..you could be a Liberal.

    If you believe David Suzuki is your friend….you could be a Liberal.

    If you believe Canada's Armed Forces are your enemy…..you could be a Liberal.

    if you believe the path to becoming PM of Canada is via the NDP….your name is Pierre or Bob.

    If you believe the LPC is Canada's Natural Governing Party…..you need help.

  224. CBC and CTV Journalistic Values

    Regarding F35 Planes. This "Expert" expressed his half-assed idea for the CBC and CTV

    Winslow T Wheeler

    Washington DC is filled with dozens of "beltway bandits" who will write position papers for/against any political position they are paid for. World Security Institute is a beltway bandit who champions leftist/anti-defense causes. Winslow Wheeler is employed by Center for Defense Information, a division of WSI. Do you expect Wheeler to write epistles that are contrary to the political bent of his employer? If he did so, the lefties would stop giving money to WSI and WSI would go out of business.

  225. CBC and CTV Journalistic Values

    Regarding F35 Planes. This "Expert" expressed his half-assed idea for the CBC and CTV

    Winslow T Wheeler

    Washington DC is filled with dozens of "beltway bandits" who will write position papers for/against any political position they are paid for. World Security Institute is a beltway bandit who champions leftist/anti-defense causes. Winslow Wheeler is employed by Center for Defense Information, a division of WSI. Do you expect Wheeler to write epistles that are contrary to the political bent of his employer? If he did so, the lefties would stop giving money to WSI and WSI would go out of business.

    • Yes, big money buying influence… what a shocker. Obama is indebted to big money, American think tanks get big corporate money, the Tea Party is corporately financed by big money…

      Canada took steps to try (unsuccessfully) to reduce the influence of big money in politics. Fail fail fail… money still rules and it isn't a left-vs-right thing.

  226. More Journalistic Values

    Prorogation, Afghan detainees, abortion funding, the Suaad Hagi Mohamud affair, H1N1 and native body bags, Jaffer-Guergis: Every month or two, there is some new overhyped Tory quasi-scandal that, my Liberal friends assure me, will destroy Stephen Harper's support and catapult their party into government.

    Quote from Jonathan Kay National Post

  227. More Journalistic Values

    Prorogation, Afghan detainees, abortion funding, the Suaad Hagi Mohamud affair, H1N1 and native body bags, Jaffer-Guergis: Every month or two, there is some new overhyped Tory quasi-scandal that, my Liberal friends assure me, will destroy Stephen Harper's support and catapult their party into government.

    Quote from Jonathan Kay National Post

    • Don't forget to catch the QUASI-SCANDAL part of the quote that the Liberals freely admit to.

  228. Don't forget to catch the QUASI-SCANDAL part of the quote that the Liberals freely admit to.

  229. Yeah, I agree on both counts – cheers.

  230. And whose idea was this?

    Mr. Graves could hardly have been more blunt. ‘I told them that they should invoke a culture war. Cosmopolitanism versus parochialism, secularism versus moralism, Obama versus Palin, tolerance versus racism and homophobia, democracy versus autocracy. If the cranky old men in Alberta don't like it, too bad. Go south and vote for Palin.'

  231. Hahahahahahaha! It so very funny to read Liberals in the media and their followers crying over one of their own being called out. Proof once again that Liberals are colossal hypocrites! Liberal shills like Potter and his followers can dish out hyperbole and character assassinations on a sometimes daily basis, bit if that hyperbole is turned on them they cry and whine with all the feigned outrage and hysteria a Liberal hypocrite can manufacture. The CBC are essentially telling people to vote Liberal by using a seriously flawed and obviously biased slight of hand, and Mr. Loewen was involved in this deliberate deception. A Liberal media whore calling out opposing views as whores of the other side just illustrates the continuing debasement of the political, and intellectual sphere. Mr Loewen was involved in the creation of an offensive, overtly biased propaganda mechanism employed by the Liberal partys CBC in an obvious and nefarious scheme at attempting to manipulate the electorate by encouraging them to vote Liberal. How much did the taxpayer funded CBC pay Mr. Loewen? Mr. Loewen should have known better then to get involved with helping out such low life characters as CBC propagandists. On the funny side of this issue, if one answers, "I don't know anything" and "I don't have an opinion on anything", it tells you that you are a LIberal… sounds about right. Liberals can ruthlessly and deliberately dish it out, but they sure can't take it.

  232. Hahahahahahaha! It so very funny to read Liberals in the media and their followers crying over one of their own being called out. Proof once again that Liberals are colossal hypocrites! Liberal shills like Potter and his followers can dish out hyperbole and character assassinations on a sometimes daily basis, bit if that hyperbole is turned on them they cry and whine with all the feigned outrage and hysteria a Liberal hypocrite can manufacture. The CBC are essentially telling people to vote Liberal by using a seriously flawed and obviously biased slight of hand, and Mr. Loewen was involved in this deliberate deception. A Liberal media whore calling out opposing views as whores of the other side just illustrates the continuing debasement of the political, and intellectual sphere. Mr Loewen was involved in the creation of an offensive, overtly biased propaganda mechanism employed by the Liberal partys CBC in an obvious and nefarious scheme at attempting to manipulate the electorate by encouraging them to vote Liberal. How much did the taxpayer funded CBC pay Mr. Loewen? Mr. Loewen should have known better then to get involved with helping out such low life characters as CBC propagandists. On the funny side of this issue, if one answers, "I don't know anything" and "I don't have an opinion on anything", it tells you that you are a LIberal… sounds about right. Liberals can ruthlessly and deliberately dish it out, but they sure can't take it.

  233. Hay Paul, ask why they have failed to take adequate steps to curb CO2 emissions:

    "…Climatologist Andrew Weaver, at the University of Victoria, said the new report highlights the "hypocrisy" of the Harper government's approach to climate change.

    The Conservatives agreed internationally to take steps to help keep warming below the 2 C threshold, but the government continues to promote expanded use and export of Canadian oil and coal that are driving up emissions.

    "If we want to deal with this problem, we have to start transforming our energy systems now," said Weaver. "Not yesterday, not tomorrow, now. That means we should be weaning ourselves from our dependency on oil, not trying to expand it as fast a possible."…"

    Read more: http://www.canada.com/technology/Canada+hasn+done

  234. Hay Paul, ask why they have failed to take adequate steps to curb CO2 emissions:

    "…Climatologist Andrew Weaver, at the University of Victoria, said the new report highlights the "hypocrisy" of the Harper government's approach to climate change.

    The Conservatives agreed internationally to take steps to help keep warming below the 2 C threshold, but the government continues to promote expanded use and export of Canadian oil and coal that are driving up emissions.

    "If we want to deal with this problem, we have to start transforming our energy systems now," said Weaver. "Not yesterday, not tomorrow, now. That means we should be weaning ourselves from our dependency on oil, not trying to expand it as fast a possible."…"

    Read more: http://www.canada.com/technology/Canada+hasn+done

    • Oops, wrong blog. Still, Andrew, it's worth thinking about.

  235. Oops, wrong blog. Still, Andrew, it's worth thinking about.

  236. It's amazing what sort of character assassination you can get away…through the deliberate withholding of facts.

    Hey Potter…remember when the above used to piss you off?

    Read this. Then come back here and tell us about deliberate withholding of facts and character assassination. Are you outraged by this?

    Yeah…didn't think so.

    • Potter's gone off on rants like this quite a few times, and while he may have a point once in a while, there's something in common with all of these rants, he's always going off about people on one half of the political spectrum.

    • "CBC's anti-Harper attack dog Terry Milewski "

      That is an interesting site JG. But really, TM as an anti-Harper attack dog? I can remember him going after Chretien too. Didn't he come to some grief over that?

      Maybe some of those protesters needed to be screened. But the was an awful lot of assumptions made by BR for a few FB entries. Maybe he might want to examine his own bias? Besides, complete innocents have been excluded too.

  237. It's amazing what sort of character assassination you can get away…through the deliberate withholding of facts.

    Hey Potter…remember when the above used to piss you off?

    Read this. Then come back here and tell us about deliberate withholding of facts and character assassination. Are you outraged by this?

    Yeah…didn't think so.

  238. Had CBC heard, and listened well to criticism from the people who fund it (we the tax payers) not the Liberal party of Canada, this whole ugly and dirty mess, could have been avoided. By hiring political activists and ilk among their fold, they have succeeded in destroying a public broadcaster s image of impartiality. CBC can be partial but not as a public funded corporation. They should be brave enough to follow their hypocritical drive against Sun Corp., no public funding, oohps, or was it to not exist in Canada (…and they call themselves open minded and democratic)?

    If you are really real friends, you should be honest with your views (pros/cons), being lapdogs will not help yours and your friends mental and creative growth. Could anyone really say with open eyes and honest heart that the CBC's voting compass is intelligently done?

  239. Had CBC heard, and listened well to criticism from the people who fund it (we the tax payers) not the Liberal party of Canada, this whole ugly and dirty mess, could have been avoided. By hiring political activists and ilk among their fold, they have succeeded in destroying a public broadcaster s image of impartiality. CBC can be partial but not as a public funded corporation. They should be brave enough to follow their hypocritical drive against Sun Corp., no public funding, oohps, or was it to not exist in Canada (…and they call themselves open minded and democratic)?

    If you are really real friends, you should be honest with your views (pros/cons), being lapdogs will not help yours and your friends mental and creative growth. Could anyone really say with open eyes and honest heart that the CBC's voting compass is intelligently done?

  240. Hey Halo, a couple of posts up, do you have any Grey-Poupon? I seem to have run out, old chap.

  241. Actually, this "prohibition" did not stop the above "intellectually pure" writer at all, didn't it?

  242. And they call it an "educational" tool? That is even worse.

  243. Thanks Holly. I needed that.

    • Levant's a funny writer. I liked the part where he said "It is important to me to get my facts straight!"

      • Liberals think facts are funny.

        • I have no objection at all to facts being funny. I do, however, prefer that they also be factual. Call me old-fashioned.

          • and which part of Levant's post is not factual? are you just gratuitously smearing him or do you actually have something on him? it seems to me that Potter's post above is the one which reeks of bullsh1t.

          • If I wanted to go out of my way to smear Ezra Levant, I'd just sit back and let him talk.

            But he still has a job with the company who was forced to apologize on his behalf, so as near as I can tell he's pretty much unsmearable. Ironic, how having powerful allies has been such a benefit to him. What do you have to do to get fired from Sun Media?

  244. Making blind partisans angry around here is like shooting fish in a barrel. I mean, it's fun for the first go-around but quickly becomes boring, don't you think?

  245. Well, I'm happy to hear even the right think they are getting weird results from the Vote Compass. Apparently I and many of my friends are pretty green….

    I never believe a word out of Ezra Levant's mouth, pen, computer whatever. The Toronto Sun had to run an apology after Ezra's mouth got the best of him and he accused George Soros of being a Nazi collaborator when he was a child in Hungary. Brian Lilley? If Glenn Beck's your taste, then Brian's your man.

    Quite frankly, I despair at what passes for journalism these days.

    • Soros took a job with the Jewish Council which had been established during the Nazi occupation of Hungary to carry out Nazi and Hungarian government anti-Jewish measures.

      Check several sources on the internet. Just sayin' and not accusin'.

      • That is a lie. He was about 13, stupid.

        • just because he was 13 it is a lie? No, it is true.
          I myself might have done the same thing at 13, to save my life, but I would have accepted responsibility for it later in life.

  246. Well, I'm happy to hear even the right think they are getting weird results from the Vote Compass. Apparently I and many of my friends are pretty green….

    I never believe a word out of Ezra Levant's mouth, pen, computer whatever. The Toronto Sun had to run an apology after Ezra's mouth got the best of him and he accused George Soros of being a Nazi collaborator when he was a child in Hungary. Brian Lilley? If Glenn Beck's your taste, then Brian's your man.

    Quite frankly, I despair at what passes for journalism these days.

  247. It is worse than Leo says. Not only does answering every question the same rank you as a Liberal, The vast majority of possible responses are ranked as Liberal.

    I ran the test 80 times using random responses. The result: 65 Liberal rankings, 13 Conservative rankings, 2 NDP rankings and no Green rankings. Granted, it is possible for a solid Conservative or NDPer to to correctly ranked, anyone else is likely to be guided to the Liberal.

    If Loewen (or Potter) can't see a problem in a survey like that, I think they ought to be giving those PhD's back. If (as I suspect) they actually do deserve their credentials, they had best not be complaining too loudly about "selling their brains."

    • Show your work or you don't get a grade.

      (Hope that doesn't sound too academically elitist.)

      • He doesn't have to. Look at how the parties are aligned on the grid. The only way to not be chosen a liberal is to completely answer all questions to the extreme. Throw a few 'i don't knows' or 'middle of the road' answers, and presto chango, you are a liberal.

        • He doesn't have to.

          If I'm going to state in public that I've done an experiment that involved eighty runs through a process with "randomized" data, and that my results prove political corruption on the part of a crown corporation and incompetence in an area of expertise of the person independent of that corporation whose job it is to analyse the results, I certainly would adhere to the old internet meme, "pics or it didn't happen". Because I would expect to be called on it.

          Unless, of course, I was just talking out of my ass.

          • Why doesn't the CBC release the results of this tool? If the numbers somewhat match the average polling numbers over the last few months,then there is no problem. However,they will not release the figures. HMMM… Mighty suspicious of them.

  248. It is worse than Leo says. Not only does answering every question the same rank you as a Liberal, The vast majority of possible responses are ranked as Liberal.

    I ran the test 80 times using random responses. The result: 65 Liberal rankings, 13 Conservative rankings, 2 NDP rankings and no Green rankings. Granted, it is possible for a solid Conservative or NDPer to to correctly ranked, anyone else is likely to be guided to the Liberal.

    If Loewen (or Potter) can't see a problem in a survey like that, I think they ought to be giving those PhD's back. If (as I suspect) they actually do deserve their credentials, they had best not be complaining too loudly about "selling their brains."

  249. Most of the complaining seems to be coming from Conservatives. Ironic. By my numbers (see above), it is the NDP (and green) that ought to be most enraged by this. Not only are their random results the furthest below their polling numbers, I would think a would be more likely to sway a casual NDPer (who knows he doesn't want Conservatives) than a casual Conservative(who knows he doesn't want Liberals). What's more NDPers are more likely to trust a CBC voting tool than Conservatives are.

    If there is any bad intent going on, I think it is most likely to mislead voters on the left, not the right.

    • No PeteE. The right feels that the CBC should stand or fall on it's own and should not insertitself into an election but report on it.

    • Pete, I think you just hit the nail on the head as to why the CBC did it. Stop enough of the vote splitting, and the liberals get the seat. Smart play – too bad for the NDP and green, though.
      The CPC does have a right to be angry, though.

  250. Most of the complaining seems to be coming from Conservatives. Ironic. By my numbers (see above), it is the NDP (and green) that ought to be most enraged by this. Not only are their random results the furthest below their polling numbers, I would think a would be more likely to sway a casual NDPer (who knows he doesn't want Conservatives) than a casual Conservative(who knows he doesn't want Liberals). What's more NDPers are more likely to trust a CBC voting tool than Conservatives are.

    If there is any bad intent going on, I think it is most likely to mislead voters on the left, not the right.

  251. So, hold on here. Your lying, foul-mouth writer can swear in his column and I can't ask (in his Phd language) if he is what he accuses the Sun writers of?

    • And will Andy Panda issue an apology?

  252. So, hold on here. Your lying, foul-mouth writer can swear in his column and I can't ask (in his Phd language) if he is what he accuses the Sun writers of?

  253. No PeteE. The right feels that the CBC should stand or fall on it's own and should not insertitself into an election but report on it.

  254. :>D

  255. And Potter lied about that one too?

  256. If Mr. Potter denigrate others as "Intellectual Prostitutes" (to be on the politically correct side of things), does it mean he is "Intellectually Pure?" Isn't that a supremacist kind of attitude? Pardon my ignorance but what constitute intellectual prostitution? Receiving money,services, and ideas in exchange for ideas? Wow! Then we are all prostitutes, except of course Mr. Potter and his select friends. Shame on Macleans for abusing and not paying one of their opinion makers.

  257. If Mr. Potter denigrate others as "Intellectual Prostitutes" (to be on the politically correct side of things), does it mean he is "Intellectually Pure?" Isn't that a supremacist kind of attitude? Pardon my ignorance but what constitute intellectual prostitution? Receiving money,services, and ideas in exchange for ideas? Wow! Then we are all prostitutes, except of course Mr. Potter and his select friends. Shame on Macleans for abusing and not paying one of their opinion makers.

  258. So you mean that liberal stands for clueless?

  259. Left it in the other limo, regrettably. Wait a tic and I'll have them drive it over.

  260. Yeah, and I always feel a little dirty afterward. The old "wrestling with a pig" thing, I guess.

    Still, I managed to have some fun today.

  261. Sun Media is for imbeciles who didn't get a university degree. Sorry guys.

    • If Potter is an example of a university student who is probably a Liberal, I wouldn't be aligning myself with him if I were you. And I'm glad I'm not you…or him. A worse example is Loewen who got outed in less than 4 hours with his little Libralizer.

    • Generalizations and judgments based on a self diagnosed superiority are for nit-wits who fancy themselves "educated". Sorry dude.

    • Hitler had the same supremacist attitude, it did not do well for him at the end.

    • First of all, shame on you.
      Lots of imbeciles have degrees. Are you saying that all people without degrees are imbeciles? I truly hope an elitist like yourself never rises to a position of power or authority.

  262. Sun Media is for imbeciles who didn't get a university degree. Sorry guys.

  263. Citizens of the Maclean's forums, I hereby pledge that if elected Prime Minister of Canada I will make the trains run on time!

  264. Intellectual prostitutes like Brian Lilley and Ezra Levant are so used to selling their brains on the cheap in journalism's back alleys, they find it literally incredible that everyone else's intellect is not similarly for sale.>>>>

    That's what I call nailing it.

    • Why can people not see that we can have different point of view, without saying that others 'sell out' or are 'imbeciles'?

  265. Stop claiming opinions as facts, and stop claiming unproven or demonstrably disproven news memes as proven, and then maybe we can meet in the middle.

  266. Intellectual prostitutes like Brian Lilley and Ezra Levant are so used to selling their brains on the cheap in journalism's back alleys, they find it literally incredible that everyone else's intellect is not similarly for sale.>>>>

    That's what I call nailing it.

  267. No I'm not.

    Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he will respect today's vote against revisiting debate on same-sex marriage, and considers the matter closed.

    MPs voted 175-123 on Thursday against a Conservative motion calling for the government to introduce legislation restoring the traditional definition of marriage.

    "We made a promise to have a free vote on this issue, we kept that promise, and obviously the vote was decisive and obviously we'll accept the democratic result of the people's representatives," said Harper. "I don't see reopening this question in the future."

  268. If Potter is an example of a university student who is probably a Liberal, I wouldn't be aligning myself with him if I were you. And I'm glad I'm not you…or him. A worse example is Loewen who got outed in less than 4 hours with his little Libralizer.

  269. Levant's a funny writer. I liked the part where he said "It is important to me to get my facts straight!"

  270. Soros took a job with the Jewish Council which had been established during the Nazi occupation of Hungary to carry out Nazi and Hungarian government anti-Jewish measures.

    Check several sources on the internet. Just sayin' and not accusin'.

  271. Show your work or you don't get a grade.

    (Hope that doesn't sound too academically elitist.)

  272. And will Andy Panda issue an apology?

  273. Liberals think facts are funny.

  274. My opinions are just that—my opinions, so don`t ever think I will stop expressing my opinion because of any command from you.

    Oh, and I am in the middle–let me know when you come in from the left bank.

  275. Well……point made…

    But it is true that if you take the Compass test, and pick all the neutral options, you come out as a Liberal…..which means one of two things.:

    The poll is biased.

    The brain-dead, without thought, principle, or belief, are Liberals.

    Take your pick.

    • This has been addressed numerous times earlier in the thread. Just because someone repeats a lie often enough, doesn't make it true.

  276. Well……point made…

    But it is true that if you take the Compass test, and pick all the neutral options, you come out as a Liberal…..which means one of two things.:

    The poll is biased.

    The brain-dead, without thought, principle, or belief, are Liberals.

    Take your pick.

  277. Whatever you say, blue. Have a blast.

    "The CBC, by it`s very nature is going to be pro-Liberal and anti-Conservative—-that`s a fact—–we all know it—Loewen should know it —Potter should know it."

  278. I have no objection at all to facts being funny. I do, however, prefer that they also be factual. Call me old-fashioned.

  279. What a bunch of fricking whiners lol…Grow up Lieberals, you are a joke…..

  280. What a bunch of fricking whiners lol…Grow up Lieberals, you are a joke…..

  281. Generalizations and judgments based on a self diagnosed superiority are for nit-wits who fancy themselves "educated". Sorry dude.

  282. Hitler had the same supremacist attitude, it did not do well for him at the end.

  283. They should have used intellectual condom, oohpsie, idea filters, before promoting and posting those "educational" voter's compass. This so much “intellectual infectious disease”, oohps, intellectual prostitution brouhaha could have been avoided.

  284. They should have used intellectual condom, oohpsie, idea filters, before promoting and posting those "educational" voter's compass. This so much “intellectual infectious disease”, oohps, intellectual prostitution brouhaha could have been avoided.

  285. Like the Conservative American group, Americans for prosperity, who are using a freedom of information act to access all Wisconsin professors' e-mails that contain trigger words like: Walker, Maddow, etc.. U.S. Republicans, Cdn. conservatives……..that's how they roll.

  286. It's because the questions are equally right and left on the political scale. Therefore, if one person says all yes's and the other all no's, the first person will be answering "conservatively" on the first half of the test, and "liberally", on the second. The second person will be simply reversed, so it all comes out in the wash. They're both in the middle.

  287. Absolutely.

  288. Two words: Ethical Oil.

  289. Two words: Ethical Oil.

  290. I prefer imbeciles with no university degrees than complete turds with 5 PhDs. In fact, if you think your university degree means you're not a moron, im afraid you're deluding yourselves. Most university degrees these days are awarded to complete idiots.