The vast left-wing conspiracy

by Aaron Wherry

Conservative MP Larry Miller tells us what’s really going on here with all these stories about giant novelty cheques.

“This is about the national media trying to help the Liberals deflect the attention off their problems right now,” said Miller. “Anybody that has seen Mr. Ignatieff and his crew in the House of Commons in the previous two or three weeks, it has looked as bad as when (Stephane) Dion was there and the media knows it, the Liberals know it and they are just trying to make an issue out of something.”




Browse

The vast left-wing conspiracy

    • Yea.. all those left wing commies at the National Post and the Sun Media Chain that are ranting and raving about this are all trying to help the Liberals. Same with Gerry Nicholls – he's obviously trying to help the Liberals too.

      You guys sound utterly ridiculous when you claim "liberal bias" in the media.

    • Would that be the same media who insisted on replaying Dion's flubbing of a question he claimed he didn't fully understand due to a hearing difficulty [ during an election ]? Because if so i fail to see what your gripe is?

    • Folks, this was a simple point. There are known instances of national news media trying to help the Liberals as per the example I gave above. Therefore the suggestion that they are doing so in this case is not necessarily crazed paranoia.

      That's not to say it's true, just that it's not wildly implausible. Everyone going on about "claims of liberal bias", cases of possible conservative bias, disclaiming both, whatever, is missing the point. Wherry is posting this as though it's Clinton-style nuttiness, whereas it's not.

      Jimminy Christmas.

  1. What a douche.

  2. Thanks for passing on this fascinating and insightful commentary by a leading figure in the Conservative cabinet and one of our sharpest political analysts. Thank goodness journalists are finally giving every MP a chance to be heard. You shoudl make this a regular feature – phoning each MP in turn to get a quote for your blog. One a day!

  3. Sorry Larry, if there's anything the national media loves more than bashing the Conservatives, it's anonymous Liberals. The reason this is being covered is that it's legitimate news.

  4. Larry certainly has a point though. It's kind of hard to disagree with the obvious and judging by all of the polls the late canadian public would agree as well so what does that leave – frustrated left wing nuts whose threads are getting stripped from the turns of the mental screws of late. To sum it all up folks – it must suck to be a liberal right now and no doubt about it!

    • Except the Liberals have been discussing Harper's politicization of the stimulus funds since the middle of summer.

    • I do believe that Larry, along with Pierre Poilevre, is now eligible for his taxpayer funded pension.

      So, he does not NEED to make any apologies.

      • You mean that gold-plated parliamentary pension that the reformers vowed never to accept? Ain't that right, Monte, Deb, Myron……?

  5. The biggest complaint about the Economic Action Plan that I've seen from journalists is the lack of transparency and complete facts.

    That lack of complete facts hasn't stopped Stephen Maher and the Ottawa Citizen from using that admittedly incomplete information to smear the Conservatives, stating decisively that the Tories are favouring their own ridings by cherry picking data (specifically, projects over $1M, excluding the projects under $1M) that supports their claim. It would be equally possible to cherry pick data that could support an alternate hypothesis (for example, Newfoundland and Labradour has received more stimulus money per person than any other province despite not electing any Conservative MPs at all), but they did not do so.

    • Smearing? Such as all Lieberals were involved in Sponsorship?

      How many Conservatives are involved in this scandal?

    • How can you possibly know that these journalists are cherry picking the facts? Have you checked their facts? Obviously you don't like their conclusions, but blame the right people for this mess. The govt has no-one to blame but itself – it could have gone out of its way to make this stuff transparent – for some unfathomable reason it chose not to. if journalsts are making faulty assumptions the govt has no-one to blame but itself. You're well aware of the fact that there's far more to the accusations than logos on cheques. Just the fact that the term Harper govt or even Consevative govt has been plastered [ by the Canadian govt ] from one end of this country to the other is disgusting enough.

  6. I think with Harper's gang was found out stirring the pot, and the media discovered they were quoting "conservatives pretending to be anonymous liberals" there was going to be some backlash… Pity the poor CONs; they can't get the media to focus 100% of its energies on (Sun media excluded) if Ignatieff's good-week, bad-week dilemmas are all that's keeping this country from heading down the bowl in a swirl. Nothing about accountability.
    Maybe Miller should start talking about stripper-gate again to change the channel — oops, that was about government accountability, just not his government.

  7. In the article Miller is quoted "The Liberals had no issue with this when I presented the same cheque on their government's behalf when I was in opposition," Miller said. "I used it for a year and a half in opposition and they had no issue with it then."

    Who can imagine the current government allowing an opposition member to make a funding announcement in their riding? Big cheque or not?

    • Who can imagine the current government letting an opposition member know about a funding announcement?

      • Who can imagine the current government barring the duly elected Member of Parliament and Member of Provincial Parliament from a funding announcement.

  8. Don't you get it? Harper began his tenure telling people there is Liberal media bias…part of his mind manipulation strategy – the fools fell for it.

    CanWest/Nat Post/Sun/CTV/Globe and Mail are all (including the little small town papers they have taken over are Conservative.

    What's left – The Toronto Star.

    Just like Flaherty – the Con trolls can't count.

    • Don't you understand? The fact that every newspaper in the country save one endorsed the Conservatives in the last election is an example of the liberal media bias. They're cunning those newspaper editors. They were using REVERSE PSYCHOLOGY. They all endorsed the Tories in an effort to get people to vote Liberal.

      If you can't see that, you're just hopelessly naive.

      • Who else would the various newspaper editorial boards support, when the Liberals were just too timid to put out any detailed tangible economic policies.

  9. He's forgetting about the reverse vampires

  10. Oh Oh, sounds like he's gonna make an accident happen to somebody.

    Who is this guy, Tony Soprano?

  11. Gagliano?

  12. Larry also makes a habit of leaving hunting knives in his unlocked truck. While driving around the local media as he campaigns.

    Not the sharpest tool.

  13. Thanks to Wherry for helping an honest man like Larry Miller get the truth out. If you want the truth talk to a man like Miller nearing the end of his career. The likes of McGuinty and Kennedy are too busy worrying about their future career to give truth it`s priority. As a matter of fact, Iggy spoke some truths during the leadership campaign a couple years back and if you could get him away from Kinsella long enough he would speak it again.

    Also, when we look back at 2009 and the Lib attempts at inventing a scandal, some of you may be embarrassed. Whether it`s tapes or wafers or bathroom breaks or novelty cheques, it`s all much ado about nothing. Miller is right—-Kinsella and his cohorts are manipulating the media—its comforting to know our man Wherry is above that.

    • You make it sound as if journalists are vulnerable little fourth graders, oh-so-prone to manipulation. Get real. Nothing but the facts — in record time.

      • I am sorry if I made seem that journos are lacking in intelligence. To survive journalists must have the attention of the public—-simply reporting on a state funeral or an economic action plan will not get that attention—-but if you can somehow mix in a fictional scandal then that got your attention—right.

        So, you can see how a manipulator like Kinsella is able to siphon out these fictions to even the most intelligent of journos like our Mr. Wherry.

  14. Actually, I blogged about it in February.

    • A broken clock is right twice a day.

  15. I am confidendt that the facts they chose to present are correct. How do I know they are cherry picking? Because they arbitrarily picked projects over $1M, with no explanation as to why. Why not write an article about how fair and non-partisan the stimulus distribution has been based on the N&L example? Why are those facts any less important?

    I agree completely with you that the government could and should be more forthcoming with the data, but that doesn't give license to journalists to categorically accuse the Conservatives of systematically favouring their own ridings unless they have facts a lot more solid than what they are going on.

  16. "Kinsella and his cohorts are manipulating the media…"

    I do not want Miller or any other Conservative taking credit for money that is the taxpayers' own.

  17. The media is biased towards the better story. So if your spin cycle is deemed more interesting than their spin cycle then the media will help you give it a whirl. There are individuals within the media that are obviously biased, but the media as a whole is agnostic, it seems to me.

  18. WHAT!?

  19. Miller's insight is truly remarkable – Canadians are really far more interested in rumours about the official opposition than they are about what Harper & Co. are doing with their tax dollars.

  20. But will Wherry be able to continue his courageous crusade against his media colleagues? If only we could convince him to phone up all other MPs who are nearing retirement…he could really blow the lid off this whole media manipulation thing…

  21. With all this bad press over unequal distribution of funds, why aren't the Conservatives coming out with numbers that show the funds are being distributed fairly? This has to make you think that the opposition might be on to something.

    • They have replied, but it doesn't matter.

      Trying to fight the media hatchet jobs is a waste of time, the media will attack the Cons no matter what they say. That's what happened with wafer-gate, Mohamed-gate, and all other fake and dishonest attacks.

      Regardless, you are trying to say the absence of a defense in the face of flimsy evidence is an admission of guilt? I'd hate to be a defendant in your courtroom.

      All we really need is a complete cross-Canada accounting, rather than this cherry-picking. And it will take time to produce the full accounting. But don't worry, you'll hear about it when it happens.

  22. "Much—perhaps even the vast majority—of journalism out of Ottawa right now takes its basis from the latest public opinion polls. In the absence of quantitative data to analyze what we see and hear here everyday, we take refuge in the latest surveys."

    Wherry I read about your speech on Delacourt's blog yesterday and agreed that it was good talk. I think the focus on polls and other non-weighty matters has happened due to most journos being social liberals and buying into politically correct thought.

    Why does Steyn always get by far the most comments for his articles? Because he is challenging people and their beliefs while most journos serve us multi-culti approved pablum. There seems to be consensus within msm that liberal beliefs are the only legitimate ones out there and everything else is racist, sexist, homophobic …. etc and it is boring beyond belief.

    • It's true, Steyn is like a breath of fresh air, expanding on legitimate thoughts that many people have but are found nowhere else in the socially-liberal media.

    • Yeah, I liked Wherry's speech too, particularly the comments about the press gallery and the comments about value in the industry.

  23. Jeez, who's deflecting now, Larry? The media's motivation for covering the CPC taking credit where credit ain't due doesn't make the CPC's actions any less wrong.

  24. Aren't surveys quantitative data?

  25. "Would that be the same media who insisted on replaying Dion's flubbing of a question he claimed he didn't fully understand due to a hearing difficulty [ during an election ]?"

    Showing unadulterated footage of Dion in action illustrates Con bias? Canadian msm is not Con just because it does not carry Lib water 100% of time. I clearly remember TorStar reporter L Diebel talking about Dion/Lib campaign during election last autumn on Duffy Live. TorStar had just run a story pointing out problems with Lib campaign about two weeks into election and Diebel was talking about how msm reporters were not reporting everything they knew because they wanted to give Libs/Dion a chance to get their act together.

    II think it tells you all you need to know about Canadian msm if a journo feels comfortable telling story about how reporters are not reporting things they learned in order to give Libs chance.

  26. "Aren't surveys quantitative data?"

    Ask Wherry what he is talking about.

  27. Actually, it does. At least according to the Canadian Broadcast Standard's Council. Read the full decision here: http://www.cbsc.ca/english/decisions/2009/090527a

    In essence, they nix every complaint but one — the footage was shown even though CTV initially agreed not to do so. That was discourteous, showed bias, and unprofessional journalism, as it thus did not allow Dion any opportunity to respond to what they said they would not broadcast.

  28. Is this not Def-con 6? or is Def-con 1?

  29. I seem to recall Harper's Conservatives getting the nod for two elections in a row from all but, what, two newspapers?

    CanWest, CTVGlobeMedia, Global, Sun, Rogers, Transcon … all well-known bastions of liberalism. (Right.)

    Larry, have any evidence? If so, pass it on to Robert Fife or Craig Oliver or Jane Taber or anyone named Kay …

  30. Once again, Harper is a no-show for QP today.
    What kind of leader doesn't even show up and leaves his team to try to defend against opponents scoring points against his game plan?

  31. Actually jwl i didn't claim it shows con bias, you did. In my view the media is reasonably fair in how it goes about handing out the sticks or carrots. clearly in this particular instance they weren't fair at all.

  32. A canny one, to be honest. No way for the media to get the lovely visual byte of the question being asked, and then the camera jumping to him as he sits there and a junior minister takes it, or worse, actually stands and acknowledges the question (thus validating it, no matter which way he responds)

    I have my points against Harper as leader, but I'll grant him that he is certainly well versed in media control and the psychology of the mass audience.

  33. "Why does Steyn always get by far the most comments for his articles? "

    Because it's dead easy to write "Thank God for Mark Steyn! He is truly a national treasure! *squeal*" over and over and over again.

  34. What exactly is a social liberal?
    Steyn may challenge peoples beliefs some of the time. But he also spends a lot of time pandering to peoples baser instincts. Witness the legions of faithful followers and acolytes. Critics are often drowned out or shouted down on his blogs. Still, as you say. He's not boring – mostly.

  35. And that makes him a good Prime Minister? Or a foul and manipulative git?

  36. It makes him neither. He's a foul and manipulative git for completely different reasons.

    • Well, this is a surprise—-even I would not have thought that PM Harper had sufficent skills to manipulate the left-leaning media here. However, you may be right and I am sure the PM will be thrilled in the new found confidence you have in him.

  37. Actually, there are lots of partisan attacks coming out of the media today, like wafer-gate, the hatchet job regarding Suaad Mohamed, the reporter planting questions with the Mulroney appearance at Parliament, the photo showing Harper shaking hands with his kids. It's not just plausible, it's true that there are lots of cases of the media trying to make an issue out of nothing in an attack on the Conservatives.

    The cheque logo business was wrong, but it was blown out of proportion – to even call it a scam or a scandal is ridiculous. There is a difference between funneling money to your own party like in Adscam and sticking your party logo on a cheque.

  38. What kind of leader

    A busy one. As Wells has said before, there is no legitimate reason to expect the PM to show up to QP every single day.

  39. "There is a difference between funneling money to your own party like in Adscam"

    Evidence?

  40. Gaunilon – ." Wherry is posting this as though it's Clinton-style nuttiness, whereas it's not."
    Perhaps. But it is in this context –

    "This is about the national media trying to help the Liberals deflect the attention off their problems right now,” said Miller"

  41. LOL!!

  42. JWL – Thanks. I guess i'm one. I take it you disaprove of a mixed economy?

  43. I am not a fan, that's for sure. I don't like 'positive' freedoms and believe the government is doing more harm than good when it meddles in health, education and welfare. I am not against health, education and welfare but do believe they would be immeasurably improved if they were in private sector.

  44. The other day I took you for an honest, but ill-informed, person.

    I still can't judge your level of ignorance, but your level of honesty is no longer in question.

  45. So wrong! It's about time – the CPC's true colours are showing and the media is finally waking up!

  46. Oh yeah, I agree. Our cousins to the south have a great private insurance industry. Top-of-the-line and everything. Let's do exactly that.

    • I agree with everything you wrote but am fairly certain you are being facetious.

      Profits pay for all the social programs that you support, unless you are not being smarmy of course.

    • This stupid demonization of profit is ridiculous. Profit is a measure of the difference in value between what you consume versus what you produce. A profit shows whether a business is a net contributor to society or not. A business that fails to turn a profit is a business that fails to produce something of increased value.

      As Jolyon says, profits are the only things that can pay for social programs, the only thing that can pay for future investments, the only thing that can increase our standard of living. Without profits, we'd still be living a basic existence, because profit is a measure of productivity, and without productivity there is no progress.

      Without profits we'd have nothing left over after paying for food and shelter – our own personal profit (the difference between our personal earnings and expenses) is not different than the profit of a professional or a business.

      Profits mean that people consider the fruits of your labour and ingenuity more valuable than what existed before.

      I'm tired of this ridiculous babble about the negativity of profits, it's like calling smiles negative. The state of economics education in this country is abysmal.

  47. Except,

    every single serious study on party affiliation, and political leanings, show that journos and other members of the media are overwhelmingly left leaning/progressive.

    Its not something like a 60/40 split either. It's on the order of 25:1 liberal to conservative. Which means, entire newsroom cultures, premises, starting points, general views, are premised on the left leaning view of things.

    Get a large group of journalists together and try to find one among them who'd tend towards the conservative.

    It's not even close, and every single conservative out there paying attention sees it. Every conservative blog will have regular, blatant concrete example laden references to it. Over, and over and over again.

    • "every single serious study on party affiliation, and political leanings, show that journos and other members of the media are overwhelmingly left leaning/progressive."

      What studies? what are the categories? Who wrote them? Mark Steyne, daffy duck, Who?

    • You are absolutely correct b——the one example of a right-leaning media that little k and other lefties come up with was the decision to show Dion stumbling in the last election. Their refusal to accept what you state as an overwhelming obvious fact is further evidence that they are losing a grasp on reality.

  48. Should the military be private too? If not. Why not?let's privatize warfare…lots of profit going wanting there.
    How's it going with the privatization of jails? I hear they can't keep up with demand.

  49. "let's privatize warfare…lots of profit going"

    I have to disagree with you on this, kcm. I think The State has legitimate role to play in Armed Services, infrastructure and law/order. You are too right wing.

  50. Again, proof of a statement failure. Prove that they've replied with numbers, stats etc. Or is that part of Harper's "don't trust stats" meme, too? Because if in this case, as Harper has suggested in the case of falling crime rates, that I should trust my gut over actual figures and numbers, I'd say it shows him to be a liar, hypocrite and someone not very good at hiding his own corruption…

  51. Please forgive my sardonicism towards the health insurance industry.

    Of course profit isn't evil. It's one of the best motivators and without it, none of us would enjoy the comfort of life we do at present. However, I'm sure many would frown upon profiting from weapons sales to unsavoury types or war profiteering. The same can be said about profiting from illness. If a corporation is blind to everything except increasing the bottom line, how long is it before the quality of service suffers?

    As an example, the quality of care a sick person receives requires a certain level of expenditure. While innovation and other advances generally allow for a reduction in costs, with the ever-shifting demographic and lack of repeat business created by optimal preventative care, how soon is it before the continuous quest for cost reductions compromises the service delivered?

    Regulation certainly is required to prevent degradation of service, but if the societal productivity gains achieved through universal care warrant it, would a publicly-administered service with parallel regulation to the private not allow for more profit generation in the long-term?

  52. There's been numerous statements by the Cons today. One of them is the fact that the provincial Libs chose the projects in Ontario, so all the stupid noise about Ontario ridings and Toronto ridings has been a complete fabrication.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *