Whooee! Well, friends an' foes, I spent a little time putting words into ol' King Steve's mouth. In this episode, "Kevin" Solomon hears how those who question the PM on the F-35 deal are enemies of freedom & enemies of Canada.
Showing posts with label CBC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CBC. Show all posts
Sunday, April 08, 2012
Friday, April 06, 2012
CBC's Power & Politics... after the budget cuts
Whooee! Well, friends an' foes, I cobbled up another video. This time, I'm takin' a shot at the budget cuts to the CBC. It's kinda long so I won't blather on too much about it. Here it is:
Monday, January 12, 2009
CBC Unfair in Next Great PM Contest
Whooee! Well friends an' foes, I got a email today from Camille Labchuk. Camille was a bigwig at Green Party headquarters and just recently changed jobs. Now she's workin' for the Canadian branch of the Humane Society International. She's also been runnin' in the Next Great Prime Minister contest on the CBC. She's been doin' great in that contest and was considered a frontrunner.
Today, I found out that the CBC kicked Camille outta the contest. They say it's because she's disqualified on accounta she ran fer Parliament once and that's against the rules. Apparently, if you're serious enough about Canadian politics to actually throw your hat in the ring, the CBC sez you're not qualified. Goofy logic, sez I.
The thing is... there's another NGPM contestant who also ran fer Parliament, Emily Berrigan's still in the running even though, like Camille, Emily ran for the Greens in a federal election.
The rules also set limits on the length of the YouTube videos the contestants are required to post. Some contestants did not comply with the time parameters but they ain't been kicked out.
Here's the story in Camille's own words:
Generally speakin', I'm a pretty big CBC booster. I don't begrudge 'em the money they get from outta the public purse and I think CBC Radio One, in particular, helps Canajuns understand one another. This time, the CBC's wrong. If they didn't want Camille in after she told 'em she'd run fer office, they shoulda sed so before she spent so much time and energy workin' on this here contest.
I've already written to the numbnutses and told 'em what I think. Maybe some o' my thousands an' thousands of readers'll do the same.
JimBobby
Today, I found out that the CBC kicked Camille outta the contest. They say it's because she's disqualified on accounta she ran fer Parliament once and that's against the rules. Apparently, if you're serious enough about Canadian politics to actually throw your hat in the ring, the CBC sez you're not qualified. Goofy logic, sez I.
The thing is... there's another NGPM contestant who also ran fer Parliament, Emily Berrigan's still in the running even though, like Camille, Emily ran for the Greens in a federal election.
The rules also set limits on the length of the YouTube videos the contestants are required to post. Some contestants did not comply with the time parameters but they ain't been kicked out.
Here's the story in Camille's own words:
From Camille LabchukYeow! More'n 200 hours and winnin' the contest an' she gets kicked out.
Saturday, January 10, 2008
Hi supporters,
I just received the shocking news that CBC has disqualified me from the Canada’s Next Great Prime Minister contest. They say it is because I ran for Parliament in 2006, but when they asked me to enter the competition in November (yes, they recruited me) I raised this point with the producer and asked if it made me ineligible. The producer told me (in writing) that I was “good to go”.
Until today, I was a front runner in the contest. Thanks to your support, my entry video got more votes than any other contestant.
I devoted all of my free time to this competition over the past two months. My campaign team and I spent over 200 hours researching policy, filming videos, organizing online and encouraging people to vote for me. My efforts paid off and I was slated to become the Web Winner next week when voting closes, meaning I would have automatically advanced to the semifinals.
Another contestant has run for Parliament yet has not been deleted from the CBC’s website, like I have. There are 31 additional contestants whose videos are either too short or too long to comply with the entry rules and, according to the rules, should be disqualified too. I don't think these candidates should be kicked out and I don't think I should be kicked out either. CBC let us enter this competition, allowed us to spend two months of our lives on it, and they should let us finish it. I have asked CBC if they will disqualify these other candidates and they refuse to answer me.
The intent of the Next Great PM contest was supposedly to encourage youth political engagement. This outrageous treatment of a contestant who has poured her heart and soul into the contest sends an opposite message: "get involved, get kicked out". I am appalled that our publicly funded broadcaster sees fit to backtrack on its word. I am also shocked that major sponsor Magna, run by former MP Belinda Stronach, would accept this. Ms. Stronach has had to fight every step of the way to climb to the top in politics and I can't imagine that she would support this treatment of a young Canadian who loves politics and simply wants to make a difference.
CBC and Magna chose to disqualify the wrong young Canadian. I am launching a major campaign to draw attention to this abuse. I feel utterly crushed that my efforts have been for nothing and I refuse to just quietly go away. I will be retaining counsel and intend, if necessary, to pursue legal action against the CBC for unfair disqualification. Lawyers cost money and this is going to be difficult for me to take on financially, so if you want to contribute to my legal fund, write to me. I feel it’s the only way to hold CBC accountable.
Please help me expose this injustice by contacting CBC and Magna to tell them their actions are reprehensible. Write to:
seema.patel@cbc.ca (Seema Patel, Senior Producer)
matthew.barrington@cbc.ca (Matt Barrington, Producer)
ht.lacroix@cbc.ca (Hubert Lacroix, CBC President)
mary_gittins@magna.on.ca (Mary Gittins, Magna)
Copy your emails to me (cflbchk@mta.ca) so I can track support!
Thanks for standing with me.
Camille
My Facebook group
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=96386440211&ref=ts
Generally speakin', I'm a pretty big CBC booster. I don't begrudge 'em the money they get from outta the public purse and I think CBC Radio One, in particular, helps Canajuns understand one another. This time, the CBC's wrong. If they didn't want Camille in after she told 'em she'd run fer office, they shoulda sed so before she spent so much time and energy workin' on this here contest.
I've already written to the numbnutses and told 'em what I think. Maybe some o' my thousands an' thousands of readers'll do the same.
JimBobby
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Kiss my ass, Rex Murphy. You ain't the language police.
Whooee! Well friends an' foes, ol' JimBob's pissed-off. Rex Murphy come on The National last night an' dressed down Lizzie May over her appeasement sermon. Rex is s'posed to be a smart feller. He's a Rhodes Scholar, after all. If he's as smart as he thinks he is, he'd know that politicians been invokin' the memory of Neville Chamberlain fer 60 years.
Go read Maclean's, you dumbass.
Murphy sez any reference to Chamberlain and even any use of the words "appeasement" and "deniers" are reprehensible and off-limits. Kiss my ass, Rex. You ain't the language police.
Murphy ain't the only ignoramus who can stand in line to kiss my green ass. Steve Harper, Peter MacKay, Stephane Dion, Jack Layton an' any other kettle in this here pot and kettle mudfest.
What's really got my goat is that Lizzie May sed what she sed in a church sermon an' she's gettin' raked over the coals by these numbnutses who sed the selfsame thing in Parliament for the official record.
Do these hypocrits want to monitor all church sermons lookin' fer inapporopriate historical references?
There's a few boogin' pundidiots I seen who ain't content just to blast Lizzie over the appeasement reference. They don't like it that Lizzie has religion. Here's a coupla quotes from the comments over at Accidental Deliberations -
I ain't a religious person. In fact, I'm an atheist. Organized religion, IMHO, has done a lot of damage over the centuries an' continues to do damage today. Do I think that all organized religion is bad and that churches have never done anything good? Of course not. Are all religious people peterfilin' priests or residential school apologists? No.
While I don't believe in a supreme being or attend church, I recognize the right of others to do so. Sometimes, like when I'm at a funeral, I envy the believers who truly believe that the dead guy's in a better place. One thing I try not to do is mock people for their religious beliefs.
When someone refers to "May's Lord, Jesus Christ moment of Godly all knowing creationist fundamental bull," I interpret that as mockery of religious beliefs. Like I sed over in that comment gabfest, that sorta mockery is small-minded, petty and cruel. If references to Neville Chamberlain are off limits, mockery of a person's deeply held religious beliefs are way off limits.
Regardin' the emotionalism aspect, I thought we'd got beyond the point where a public figure was not allowed to shed a tear. Back in 1972 in Merka, there was a presidential hopeful by the name of Edmund Muskie. He got all emotional on the stump an' shed a tear. His presidential chances were scuttled. I thought we'd moved on and grown since then but it seems that the "shrill hysteria" label is alive and well.
True confession time - I get choked up about things that concern me deeply.
Back when my dear departed Dad was in his fifties, I started to notice how emotional he'd become. He'd get all teary-eyed over somethin' he'd remember from back when he was in WW2 or when he was a kid in the depression or even over some dumbass TV show. I remember bein' a little embarrassed when Dad would choke up over what seemed like nuthin'.
Now that I'm an old codger goin' on 60, I find myself embarrassed at my own emotionalism fairly often - 'specially, when I'm tellin' somebuddy about somethin' I feel strongly about. Maybe the Jurist is right when he sez Lizzie's too emotional. Maybe them guys who mocked Ed Muskie were right, too. Maybe, but I don't think so.
Anybuddy else wants to get in the kiss JB's ass line-up, just join in the comments with some pot'n'kettle hypocrisy.
JimBobby
Go read Maclean's, you dumbass.
Murphy sez any reference to Chamberlain and even any use of the words "appeasement" and "deniers" are reprehensible and off-limits. Kiss my ass, Rex. You ain't the language police.
Murphy ain't the only ignoramus who can stand in line to kiss my green ass. Steve Harper, Peter MacKay, Stephane Dion, Jack Layton an' any other kettle in this here pot and kettle mudfest.
What's really got my goat is that Lizzie May sed what she sed in a church sermon an' she's gettin' raked over the coals by these numbnutses who sed the selfsame thing in Parliament for the official record.
Do these hypocrits want to monitor all church sermons lookin' fer inapporopriate historical references?
There's a few boogin' pundidiots I seen who ain't content just to blast Lizzie over the appeasement reference. They don't like it that Lizzie has religion. Here's a coupla quotes from the comments over at Accidental Deliberations -
Go an' read the whole thing. The Jurist has some dang good ideas about how deals between parties oughta be made. An' he's right about the comments bein' blown out of proportion. Good tactic fer the Jurist to change course now that it's been pointed out how many other MP's have used the same analogy.JimBobb, you go on ad's site, take a swipe at Layton, and then the rest of your post was defending May's Lord, Jesus Christ moment of Godly all knowing creationist fundamental bull.
She even pulled off a Tammy Faye Baker 'shed a tear' moment as the profit.
janfromthebruce 05.01.07 - 6:16 pm #and...
As for the implosion, the Chamberlain comments probably have been blown out of proportion. But it's the other factors that seem more damaging to me - both May's religious fervour and her inability to control her emotions over her own prepared speech seem to bode poorly for her in the political arena, even if they wouldn't be problems elsewhere.
The Jurist Homepage 05.02.07 - 11:30 pm #
I ain't a religious person. In fact, I'm an atheist. Organized religion, IMHO, has done a lot of damage over the centuries an' continues to do damage today. Do I think that all organized religion is bad and that churches have never done anything good? Of course not. Are all religious people peterfilin' priests or residential school apologists? No.
While I don't believe in a supreme being or attend church, I recognize the right of others to do so. Sometimes, like when I'm at a funeral, I envy the believers who truly believe that the dead guy's in a better place. One thing I try not to do is mock people for their religious beliefs.
When someone refers to "May's Lord, Jesus Christ moment of Godly all knowing creationist fundamental bull," I interpret that as mockery of religious beliefs. Like I sed over in that comment gabfest, that sorta mockery is small-minded, petty and cruel. If references to Neville Chamberlain are off limits, mockery of a person's deeply held religious beliefs are way off limits.
Regardin' the emotionalism aspect, I thought we'd got beyond the point where a public figure was not allowed to shed a tear. Back in 1972 in Merka, there was a presidential hopeful by the name of Edmund Muskie. He got all emotional on the stump an' shed a tear. His presidential chances were scuttled. I thought we'd moved on and grown since then but it seems that the "shrill hysteria" label is alive and well.
True confession time - I get choked up about things that concern me deeply.
Back when my dear departed Dad was in his fifties, I started to notice how emotional he'd become. He'd get all teary-eyed over somethin' he'd remember from back when he was in WW2 or when he was a kid in the depression or even over some dumbass TV show. I remember bein' a little embarrassed when Dad would choke up over what seemed like nuthin'.
Now that I'm an old codger goin' on 60, I find myself embarrassed at my own emotionalism fairly often - 'specially, when I'm tellin' somebuddy about somethin' I feel strongly about. Maybe the Jurist is right when he sez Lizzie's too emotional. Maybe them guys who mocked Ed Muskie were right, too. Maybe, but I don't think so.
Anybuddy else wants to get in the kiss JB's ass line-up, just join in the comments with some pot'n'kettle hypocrisy.
JimBobby
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
