Liberal media conspiracy infiltrates Harper cabinet -

Liberal media conspiracy infiltrates Harper cabinet


Congratulations are due to Peter MacKay.

In a startling reversal of roles, it was Defence Minister Peter MacKay asking the news media a big question when he proposed to a CTV news executive Saturday.

MacKay asked Jana Juginovic, director of programming at CTV News Channel, for her hand while they were in Boston, where she is on a one-year fellowship. She said yes immediately, according to sources.

No word yet on how Larry Miller is taking the news.


Liberal media conspiracy infiltrates Harper cabinet

  1. Bets on when it's going to be called off?

    • Someone has to say it:

      When she crosses the floor to the CBC.

      • And now Craig O (below) is making me feel guilty. :-P So more seriously, congrats to both of them.

        And as a non-Conservative, I'm not actually worried about potential bias arising from this. If anything, Ms Juginovic will have to be extra careful to avoid the perception of bias.

    • When he starts using the word "smitten".

    • Right wing conspiracy?

    • Oh Wilson – that's not news….it's a diversionary tactic by Harper to try to change the channel, and again, you folks fall for it.

      Been there done it, time to move on. The AG should be checking out Harper and other current things right now. But, hey, he doesn't want her to. Why?

    • "Look! Over there! Nothing to see here folks, but over there! Adscam!"
      -Stephen "the journalist" Taylor

  2. I hope the two have a long and happy marriage, but this announcement just opens up so many crass jokes… my foul-mouthed inner child is having trouble containing himself.

    Also, I notice that, at 4:15 pm, this piece is listed as being posted at 4:30 pm. Someone forgot to set their clocks back!

  3. You don't think Canadians have a right to know what ridings and which Liberal Candidates were given stolen taxpayers money?
    Gomery was not allowed to dig deep.

    • I think the 'scandal' is well behind us. Let's move on with out lives, that was 4-5 years ago.
      This new scandal of spending our own money and acting as if they've given us God's greatest gifts is something more pressing.

      • How fitting that an apparant liberal supporter, puts quotes around "scandal" in reference to the greatest and most brazen act of political theft in our country's history.

        That many liberals truly belief it was not that big of a deal, only underscores the need to track down the use of the funds.

        Legitimate programs designed to be spent on the populace are treated by some as if its a virtual criminal activity, yet the spending of taxpayer funds, stolen, laundered and given to the liberals…that's to be shrugged off.

        Interesting priorities.

      • I agree, why spend more money investigating it at this point. We know what happened.

        • No, the whole point is that we still don't know what happened, namely we don't know where all the money went.

      • The actual events leading to the inquiry are even further in the past than that, well over a decade now! It was terrible that it happened but it was investigated and dealt with.

      • Liberals seemed to think a 30 year old Mulroney investigation should be done over and over,
        and that involved $300K of PRIVATE money.
        This is 4 years old and involving $43 Million of stolen taxpayers money.

        It's unfinished business.
        And there are billions in 'foundations' that the AG was not allowed to audit. Time's up.

      • Scandal? Scandal is when you're caught with your pants down around your ankles. This was corruption and law breaking.

  4. Proof that CTV and The Conservatives are in bed together!

  5. Of course its not a conspiracy, attempts to radicalize a logical viewpoint for the purpose of delegitimizing it, notwithstanding.

    It's a simple logical fact, that journalists are overwhelmingly more liberal, view the world from a "progressive viewpoint" and are more hostile to the conservative mindset.

    In kind and in degree.

    Born from the university/journo school culture, and fostered and reified in the social and economic circles journalists inhabit throughout their careers. And of course it affects their reporting, from what gets covered and what doesn't, the "angle" of stories, and fundamental premises stories are founded on.

    In matters of love? Well that's another story: just ask Carville and Mataline.

  6. "The scandal is well behind us."

    Tthe liberal obsession with decades old private deal with Mulroney, that involved a teeny fraction of the amounts involved in adscam, and which inloved private funds…

    makes their suggestion that we are to forget about a few tens of millions in unnaccounted for stolen taxpayer dollars taken only a few short years ago,

    quite laughable indeed.

    • Oh, so Chuck Guite was the PM of Canada, was he?

  7. If you know Juginovic you know how funny this is. She is a monster and widely hated at CTV, especially by her employees. My husband worked for her for two years until he switched departments. Worst time of his life. He said the rumour was that execs were trying to get rid of her so she decided to leave. Maybe she will become a housewife. I wonder if he'll continue to date.

    • This post is gossip and in poor taste.

      • Does it stop it from being true?
        But a housewife how pathetic would it be if after all she's done she'd end up just being a housewife. I'd be ashamed if I was her. And Mackay.

      • Absolutely.

        Although while we're on the topic, I recall he jilted his own little tomato when Ms. STronach and her fathers $ started making some eyes. Do watch your back, Ms. Juginovic.

    • "Worst time of his life."

      If he is anything like you, I bet Juginovic was glad to see the back of him.

      To blacken someone's name, anonymously, is not a good way to try and persuade people.

      • There is no such thing as anonymity, when it comes to libel.

      • Ahh yes, feminism is only feminism when it supports the right cause. Horrible post by LMN and Eva's is marginally better, if she decides that she wishes to raise children and not work the 70 hour week she was doing before why is that such a waste, if its her choice? If she and Mackay decide not to have children and be a power couple, then thats a fine choice as well. Heck maybe Peter will decide to raise his kids in the potato patch and live off his great MP pension whil Ms J goes out and brings in the bucks. Its their choice.

        I dont know ms J so i can't comment on whether or not she is a bad person, but it is clear she had numerous accomplishments, or at least her bosses thought well enough of her to put her in that position. I have hears similar rumours about just about every female success story there is, or male. easy to find someone they ticked off and is bitter somewhere along the line…..

      • obviously you are a friend of Jana and/or Peter…. Interesting though I read an article in Frank magazine a few months ago that portrayed Jana exactly as this woman is stating…… Best of luck to them.

  8. CTV News is so corrupt it's staggering.

    • I'm going to remind you of this thuggishness next time you try to take any moral high ground at all on any subject, ever, 'kay?

      • Nope, not okay, avr. A senior person in News Programming of one of our TWO — count 'em, TWO — national broadcasters has been pursuing a romatic relationship with a senior person in one of our national political parties? It's a grotesque betrayal of journalistic integrity however you define it.

        On the other hand, a total lack of professional ethics probably makes her the ideal spouse for Peter Mackay.

        • Oh my goodness Jack. They fell in love and are getting married for crying out loud.

          Your comment looks like it belongs in Orwell's world of 1984. No place for human feelings like love.

          This time change has knocked you off your game man. Keep that up and you won't be breaking the 100 point barrier anytime soon.

          • And how exactly did they fall in love, jarrid? By correspondence? Is this an arranged marriage?

            Police are not supposed to fall in love with suspects. Doctors are not supposed to fall in love with patients. Priests are not supposed to fall in love with the people who confess their sins to them. Professors are not supposed to fall in love with students. It's called professional ethics.

          • You're digging deeper in the hole Jack, stop digging.

            All of those examples you've given are people in positions of trust. Here they're equals and arguably in adverserial roles. Not the same thing at all.

            Anyway I'd urge you to think it over a little, you have a reputation to maintain and your comment at the top of this thread garnered a -3. Meanwhile, it looks like Crit's on his best behaviour of late. With the general lack of excitement on the political front, who'll be the first to break the 100 mark here is about as exciting as it gets of late. For what it's worth, I think you have the inside track but you can't let your game down at this juncture and hope to win.

          • "All of those examples you've given are people in positions of trust."

            Quite. And the trust in the case of journalists is the public's trust. Forgive me my naïveté if I don't regard that as trivial. We are, after all, talking about an essential component of modern democracy, namely TV news.

            Indeed, I will try and out-civil CR ("Out-civil, CR, thou madman?!") as we head for 100. But I'm honestly not trying to make partisan or facetious hay out of this, I'm attacking the convergence of politics and media in a way that should be warming your heart.

          • Iffy married his publicist.

          • Oh no! His own publicist might be biased toward him!

          • Your flaw in logic is that you consider journalis a profession….it isnt, it is a job. There is no license to lose or any other serious sanction.

            That being said, I cerainly hope she wont have responsibility for politics, I would be shocked if she did.

          • "There is no license to lose or any other serious sanction."

            There is public contempt. In which I am currently exercised.

            "I cerainly hope she wont have responsibility for politics, I would be shocked if she did."

            She isn't starting to date the Hon. Pete MacKay, she just accepted his proposal of marriage. They have known each other for some time, one hopes very closely; their hopes and dreams have begun to converge; each looks to the other's happiness for their own happiness; etc. It doesn't take an actual wedding ceremony to create the conditions for a serious conflict of interest.

          • All I am saying is that calls for "professionalism" amongst journalists are misplaced, it serves their needs but the publics. They arent professionals, although there are some who act that way. But I agree with your point about about public contempt, a long forgetten and under utilized tool.

            But this is a problematic area,see my other posts.

    • Wow Jack. You mean this is all it takes to identify corruption in our media?

      Boy, that was easy

      Read the whole thing.

      • So what's the point — fill us in. Taylor verifies a factual report then goes on to claim bias by the reporter. Doh!

        "The CEO of the Ontario Pharmacists Association said that? Well, yes."

    • I am pretty sure this was a rather clever little jest.

      • Turns out it's not. Jack's a little ill-humoured today.

        • Indeed not; but I didn't mean for there to be a double-entendre (I didn't intend at all to imply that the journalist is "selling" anything here).

  9. Let's just hope ol' Pete signs the pre-nup in writing . . . oh, wait . . .

    • If Pete hadn't signed, his successor would have. Having spent most of the nineties in political purgatory, a majority of PCs supported unity.

      • Regardless, he broke his sworn word. He'll never live that down, and shouldn't.

        • The napkin was needed for the champagne.

        • And where is David Orchard now anyway?

          • Dunno. Strangling Desdemona?

          • Maybe he is angling to be "best man".

          • LOL. That would certainly make for a good speech.

            "And who can forget the time — settle down, folks, only one more, I promise you — the time when ol' Pete here — sorry, the Honourable Peter MacKay — a hell of a man — a hell of a man — was running; and if there's one thing he does well, it's running — gimme another drink — when ol' Pete here and I, well, we locked horns, so to speak; we had an agreement — an agreement, I'm telling you — goddamn it I got it in writing . . ." (ushered out by many a MacKay cousin)

      • Then his successor should have done so. And lest we forget the actual circumstances, most of the "party" that supported unification purchased their memberships in short order indeed.

  10. "In a startling reversal of roles, it was Defence Minister Peter MacKay asking the news media a big question …"

    Doesn't the cutesiness of this make you want to puke?

    • It's hard to say. I've slowly become inured to cutesiness. Sometimes I read cutesy stuff that might have made me gag ten years ago, but now it barely elicits a shrug.

      • I'm the opposite. I've become less tolerant of it. I guess ever since Mark Steyn described the torture victims at Abu Ghraib as having been subjected to nothing worse than a Victoria Secret photo shoot, "cutesy" has taking on a different perspective.

        • Steyn said: "No doubt the average American network anchor or New York Times columnist wouldn't want to be led around naked with Victoria's Secret knickers on their heads by some freaky West Virginia slut."

          That's not "cutesy", that's depraved.

          • You're right, that is. I was thinking of this quote, from when Steyn appeared on Glenn Beck;

            "Yeah, it was a guy — what, whatever it was, the banana and the Victoria's Secret panties. Big deal! That's nothing compared to what goes on in the –"

            Everything is always worse when you examine it more closely.

  11. That's nice for them! I hope they'll be happy.

    I also hope Juginovic will now resign from her position at CTV, as it's impossible to imagine being married to a top Conservative minister wouldn't introduce bias into their coverage.

    • When Juginovic returns from her fellowship CTV will need to make arrangements so she does not cover her spouse, but no I do not think she needs to resign.

      Nor do I think Susan Delacourt should resign because her spouse apparently works for the Liberal Party.

      • Ah, right. The head of CTV news programming will have to make sure she never covers Canadian politics. Gotcha.

        • It's CTV NewsNet (the headline news channel), not all of CTV news.

          • Politics is often headline news. And it isn't just covering MacKay, it's anything about national politics. Even if bias isn't intentional, if you're married to someone you get more exposure to their side of any story, so coverage of their party's views and actions is likely to be more favourable.

          • So should Gloria Galloway resign her position at the Globe and Mail for having been married to Mark Dunn, who was Stephane Dion's director of communcations, and worked in Coderre's department when he was immigration minister?

            Just curious…

          • Yes. And so should Belinda Stronach redux here.

          • She didnt, and I dont see why its all of a sudden a big deal for some now that it is a conservative.

            The only ones who hold any credibility would be those who were pointing out earlier. I look forward to the references of your previous objections.

          • It was a big deal then too. Galloway should have been pulled off the Canadian politics beat for the duration of her spouse's tenure as a Liberal official (if she wasn't — I think she was in Afghanistan for a while, no?). I'd say that was in the same league as this conflict of interest, except that TV news is more influential than the newspaper and MacKay is himself a subject in the news (unlike Dunn, who was merely spinning the news).

          • No, it's a question of ongoing relationships and ongoing political activities, if any. But of course it applies or should apply to all journalists and all parties.

          • Just curious, to police this newfound journalistic puritanism I am curious should the ombudsman in each news org investigate journalist personal relations. As well, this has been going on for some time, but now they are "making it legal" and making it public. Why punish them now….I look forward to your expose of gay ministers and bueaucrats and politicians who have relationships or one night stands with members of the press..

            I am sympathetic to your position, all my bluster notwithstanding. I think it is dangerous that the Press gets too settled covering an area…understandable when relationships form, people have kids they want to settle down…but think about how long many of the political pundits and journalists have been covering Ottawa, especially if they cover nothing else.

            The foreign service used to circulate ambassadors and staff to prevent them from, "going native". Why news editors dont do this I dont understand.

          • The policing shall consist of righteous fulmination when such scandals come to light; the bigger the scandal (cameraman + junior staffer = not big; Deputy Leader of the CPC + Head of CTV NewsNet programming = friggin' huge) the bigger my fulmen.

            Good point about circulation. The CF does this too, as do banks.

          • There are degrees of compromise for sure. It can also go to my last joking point about relationships that never happened, spurned etc. But my ultimate point, and yours as well was that this has been going on for some time, and there are numerous horizontal's mambo's (as Frank used to call it) going on amongst the powerful and the 4th estate every day. It being secret is worse than it being open.

            It will happen, it just needs to be minimized and accounted for. In the Galloway case their editors either feel that this isnt an issue or they dont care about it. I dont know the answer but this falls into the realm of workplace romance and creates issues for all involved, including the co workers of those involved.

            I just dont see the practicality of vetting all those relationships, but the regular recirculation of reporters and editors would mitigate this to a large degree.

            Banks also force their employees to take vacations, I believe it is at least a week posisbly requirmenet of 2 weeks consequetive, depending on the level.

          • "It will happen, it just needs to be minimized and accounted for."

            I do hope so. It should be a firing offense. It certainly is in other professions. But the media closes ranks so quickly — criticising a colleague would, after all, potentially endanger one's career — gasp — that I fear there are no real consequences. Which is just the way it goes in the homeland of arteriosclerosis.

          • How incredibly illiberal of you, Jack, to presume that a woman who has made it to the top echelons of media can't assert her own thoughts and must be swayed by her husband.I think on the whole, the Liberals would be the more encumbered party if policing such relationships was enforced.

          • What does her being a woman have to do with anything? As to "asserting one's own thoughts," by that logic we needn't have any conflict of interest rules in any field. Because people are strong and upright by nature, don't you know, and never favour their own companies, and never report favourably on their own spouses, and it's all's perfectly great as long as one can moralise like the town goose.

          • We are in general agreement over the problem. It is clubby, and while our prescriptions to solve it might be different I think we both are bothered by the lack of concern exhibited within the club. This is why I refuse to call them a profession or couch expectations that way, they arent. Any romanticized notions the media have about being a bulwark f democracy are crap and only serve to fluff themselves.

            They have a paycheque to earn, some it do it with more integrity than others, some less. It makes reading many of them easier on the stomach and the blood pressure.

    • I hope it doesn't go sour and MacKay calls her a dog, like the last time.

      • That was never really fair to Belinda. Dogs are loyal, after all.

        • Do mean loyalty as in Peter "I'll never merge the Progressive Conservative Party with the Canadian Alliance" Mackay? Or do you mean loyalty like a man's chattel, his woman?

    • Why should she? Suhanna still works for the CBC. And don't get me started on Gloria Golloway.

  12. An internship in Boston? She must be out of touch with Canadians and only in it for herself.

    • Hahaha. Let's report on that please, I very much like it.

    • Dont worry, Mackay was Just Visiting Boston.

    • How fortunate, then, that she's not running for PM.

  13. she is on a one-year fellowship

    Word leaked out when McKay broke into a rousing chorus of For She's a Jolly Good Fellow while down on one knee.

  14. Speaking of bias in CTV news coverage I thought that Craig Oliver was at his worst in today's Question Period program. While he may not have been spouting Liberal talking points, he spent the entire show using "gotcha" journalism tactics and diplaying a level of hysteria that would make Carolyn Bennett blush. Liberal supporters need not worry. craig Oliver and Jane Taber are not going out of thier way to be friendly to the Conservatives.

    • Was that before or after the harsh cross-examination of Alf Apps, or do you only retain the parts of the program that support your conspiracy theories?

    • I dont mind him being tough but I thought his question was really off the chart

      "So do you think it was a mistake for the Federal Government to give vaccine to a private clinic was right?"

      Two options:
      1) He was either forgetting completley that the Provs handle this
      2) He was intetentionally trying to catch the Minister….

      In either case I would mark that as pretty close to a low point for Craig.

      • Craig Oliver knows full well that it is the provincial governments who are making the decisions on how the vaccine is being delivered. Moreoever, he knows the rules that every agency that gets the vaccine is supposed to distribute it on a priority basis to the groups who need it. This is not a sign that our vaunted "public system" is being compromised. Surely he understands that home doctors, who normally administer vaccine shots are private service providers. No, Craig was just trying to "catch" the MInister and Butler-Jones off guard by getting them to criticize "private clinics" for rich people. Over the next few years, due to chronic health care shortages I expect most family doctors to move into private clinics. This is the same health care service we have now. The only difference is that Canadians will go to a clinic, instead of a stand alone doctor. By the way, it's more efficient and will provide more efficient service to everyone.

        • Oliver and gang also know that Canada has delivered vaccine to 18% of the pop, in one week.
          Compared to the US which had delivered to 4% of the pop , in 3 weeks.

          Canada per capita, delivered 4 X the vaccine in 1/3rd the time, than the US

      • Oliver then accused the Minister of blaming the provinces.
        That's why he used a manipulative question.
        Ms Minister held her own tho.

    • Yes Craig need to learn his talking points better, like Robert Fife.

    • two yen, are you flipping kidding me? I try to be objective when reading/watching news, but boy do I disagree, anyone related to CTV is Conservative. Remember when CBC supposedly back only the Liberals.

  15. What a bunch of foul mouthed people. I wish them both many years of happiness. Sure shows a load of very unhappy married couples on this post. Hurray for love.

    • My feelings are hurt! I shall have to repair to a potato patch with a rented dog to malinger. Alert my press secretary.

    • Wayne, I NEVER thought I'd agree with you on something, but here we are! Congrats to the happy couple.

    • love you Wayne, just because someone is being negative doesn't necessarily mean their unhappy in theri marriage or life.

  16. Congratulations to Jana Juginovic and Peter MacKay!

    • But what would Orwell have said about your good wishes?

      • I'm sure he'd accuse me of "nationalism".

        • Prolly.

      • He'd only be concerned if they were doubleplusgood wishes

  17. I hope it works out for the two of them

    Because I have no desire to watch him blubbering in a pumpkin patch on the family estate while he cuddles his pet for the camera, again.

    • I thought at the time that CTV's coverage of that event was a bit overblown.

      • I agree. I happen to be fond of potatoes…and dogs.

  18. Elope in New Glasgow! Congrats to both.

  19. What a lovely couple!

    They could have gotten a more flattering picture of Juginovic. The National Post has a better picture of her.

    Does anyone have any evidence that they've be in bed together? They're not even married yet for pete's sake.

    • That should be " been in bed". I don't think anyone should jump to any conclusions.

  20. One more thing. If Aaron was inclined, and he's not, but it would be interesting to make an inventory of former CBC types who've run for public office under the Liberal banner. You'd have a fair-sized army I figure.

    Off the top of my head they're Lesley Hughes who ran for the Libs last go around in a Winnipeg seat but she was turfed by Dion because of her 9/11 Truther sympathies. There's also a Quebec MP who was elected in 2006 who was a well-known CBC reporter.

    The left/lib sympathies of the CBC are notorious. It's no wonder Kady O'Malley gravitated there.

    • Don't forget A Clarkson and M Jean. And Juneau, who ran and lost for Trudeau Liberals. He was the inspiration for theJuno awards.

      By the way, I wouldn't include Kady in the pot of lefties. I think she does a pretty good job at being non-partisan.

      • Clarkson and Jean were never Liberals, as you know perfectly well. Nobody would deny that the CBC is left of the Canadian centre, but party affiliation is something else entirely.

        • You're skating on thin ice with Clarkson Jack. When you think Clarkson, you think Grit.

          As for Jean, you're bang on. The last time I checked Quebec Liberals weren't allowed to support separation, so that pretty much rules her out as being a card-carrying Grit.

          • I'm sure it's your privilege to free-associate as you think fit. I maintain that there's an important difference between official affiliation and general political sympathy. E.g., with Clarkson, she wasn't so Liberal-minded as to not contemplate giving Stephen Harper the chance to form a government, a year after the last one, when it looked like Martin was going down in May 2005. She said so in her memoirs. A card-carrying Liberal would not have done that.

          • You're confusing the person with the office. A common mistake. I fully expect a GG, like a judge, to perform their duties in a responsible manner, be they Liberal, Tory or Dipper. Even Pequiste officials (say any number of ministers of finance) have been known to set aside party dogma when serious decisions need to be made.

            The issue of party affiliation is most relevant when it comes to the appointment; that is, those who are not Liberal (when the Grits are in office) need not apply. There was a time when some appointments (say the vice-regals, especially L-Gs) were rotated between the parties. Pearson did it, Trudeau did it, Mulroney did it. Chretien didn't. He appointed Grits whenever the opportunity presented itself. (In NB during the Chretien years, no-one was appointed to the bench without Liberal credentials.) His vice-regal appointments all had a reddish tinge to them (even those who now stand accused of crimes).

          • As for the Rt. Hon. Ms. Clarkson (Ms. Poy? Mrs.Ralston-Saul?) I wouldn't take heart in her post-regal reflections. It was well-known that she had a personal distaste for PMPM (although probably well-deserved) ever since his minions took her to task for her taxpayer-funded circumpolar junkets. I expect that, had the Martin government fallen in tyhe spring of 05, she would have fallen in line with constitutional convention (and granted an election writ) after consulting her advisors. Had she done anything different, she truly would have been playing politics.

          • Your confusion over Ms. Clarkson's name puzzles me.

  21. Marriage is the first towards divorce.

    • and birth is the first step towards death. get a grip

  22. Actually, it involved billions in government defense contracts.

    • There is no evidence of that. So you could say it involved the tooth fairy.

      • There was evidence all over the place, just not a criminal conviction. So you could say that it was successfully swept under the rug using lawyers, suppression of evidence and inlfuence.

        • just not a criminal conviction


          There was no prosecution, nor was there a trial. So obviously there was not evidence.

  23. Just for the record…this makes Jana the third woman (by my count, there could be more) to be engaged to young Peter. To date he has yet to take the last step.

  24. Juginovic is Director of CTV News Channel, which CTV describes as:

    CTV News Channel remains home to all of CTV's award-winning news programming, including CANADA AM, CTV NATIONAL NEWS WITH LLOYD ROBERTSON and CTV NATIONAL NEWS WITH SANDIE RINALDO. CTV News Channel also boasts Canada's political show of record, POWERPLAY WITH TOM CLARK. With 15 local newsrooms across the country, six international bureaus and partnerships with CNN, ABC and APTN, CTV News Channel delivers the most comprehensive coverage of major national and international news, as it happens.

    The National Post is reporting that CTV has said they made sure she didn't cover Peter MacKay, but it is really the shows that came under her direction (like Mike Duffy Live) and what they were told.

  25. "The National Post is reporting that CTV has said they made sure she didn't cover Peter MacKay,", writes Catherine.

    CTV should make sure that Mr. Mackay's fiancée doesn't cover the government of Canada's activities and the activities of its political opponents. This station has already allowed its top journalist, Mike Duffy, to contravene to the code of ethics of his profession. CTV should not put Mr. Mackay`s fiancée in a compromising position when she returns to the chain from Harvard.

  26. After MacKay's comments concerning Fox news, he is definately a Red Tory.

    Since Red Tories are really just Liberals in a suit, I'm afraid the right wing voters will force his hand.
    I wouldn't be surprised to see him cross the floor.

  27. How can MacKay get engaged to a Harvard girl? That's a no-no with Tories – will she be just visiting?

    She better keep both eyes open with this dude.

  28. Here is CTV Globemedia's corporate policy handbook, which includes definition of conflict of interest as it relates to family and personal lives.

    Under this policy, should Juginovic resign? Should Gloria Galloway have resigned from the G&M, which is covered by the same policy?

    I don't know the answer, the policy seems pretty lax. But it makes no sense to call for Juginovic's resignation if you are prepare to tolerate Gloria Galloway.

    • You seem to be missing the point about ethics and responsibility for people who are in leadership positions. From CTV's description, it sounds like Juginovic is Director for essentially all their political news reporting. It is not so much the individual, particularly when the conflict is out in the open (which it is now), it is making sure that no other people working at CTV feel they need worry about offending or flattering Juginovic in the way they report on MacKay or others in Cabinet or their opponents.

      • That's a fair point.

        Personally I don't think either should be in the position they are in. Juginovic should not be calling the shots on Canadian political news reporting, and Galloway should not be covering national politics; or at the very least, all of her stories should identify her potential conflict of interest under her byline.

        CTV Globemedia ought to beef up their corporate policies in this area as well. It's a shame that there is such a grey area for what seems to be a rather obvious conflict of interest.

      • You've just made a compelling case for shutting down the CBC news department. How could anyone working at the CBC not worry that their bosses would act in the same manner regarding state-ownership and state-expansion, when they work for a state-owned corporation.

    • But these are the ones you know about, there are many many more…..a highly problematic area…..sometimes for these reasons and sometimes for reasons of marriage or being in the closet. The Ottawa gossip mill is filled to the brim with rumours, some true some not of all kinds of dalliances involving bureacrats, ministers, pages, MP's, reporters lobbyists and prostitutes (not all at the same time as far as I know)

      To be serious, it is for editors and publishers to keep an eye on these things, since some of them are the worst gossipers (part of the trade) and take action were appropriate. Imagine if news reporters had to follow the same Sarbannes Oxley disclosure rules…..The disclosure statements of who slept with who at some time in the past would go on for some time.

      "And thats it from Ottawa, in full disclosure I slept with the Chief of Staff after a new years party. My cameraman slept with the Minster and the Opposition Critic at the same time and the my editor is currently locked in a bitter dispute over who gets the Cat with a key member of the Bloc Quebecois. good Night"

  29. The conservatives trying to keep the gun registry: 14 comments

    McKay reenacting The Proposal: 122 comments

    You soap box jackasses are just a bunch of limp-wristed loons.

  30. Oh MacLean's, too funny! Your not-so-well disguised sarcasm in the title pretty much brings it home… I don't agree with much, anything actually, Mackay believes, but I'm not about to wish him ill in his personal life. I hope this works for him and his spouse-to-be but if it doesn't, please Peter, buy your own dog this time around!

  31. c t v corrupt? We here in Alberta call the CBC the liberal channel. Peter Mansbridge gets a tingle up his leg every time he critizes our hero, Steven Harper.

  32. Wait a minute. These two have been dating for YEARS!? The former Minister of Foreign Affairs and now National Defence was dating the news director of a TV network for YEARS? This is far worse than Bernier. The Minister might not have left a file at her home but he must have had some discussions with her about his portfolios, no? And what about the ATV ambush of Dion? What did she know about that?

    For a Minister of Defence, marrying the media should be seen as just as bad as dating the mob, IMO.