"Be angry" -- Media Bias -- "Blind Justice" & the "Appointment" Process

In response to an article critical of Stephen Harper entitled "Stop giving us anger ..."

Letter: Be angry by Jack Shore, Toronto, in the National Post, Monday, November 07, 2005

Herein lies evidence of one of the most serious problems in Canada today: the media's hidden agenda.

First of all, Tory leader Stephen Harper should be commended for his anger, not criticized. More Canadians should feel the same way. But Canadians are apathetic and just turn the other cheek instead of getting angry and doing something about the mess the Liberals have put this country in.

Americans would not be encouraged by their journalists to suppress their anger. And you could be sure that the message of the right would have a proper public airing. But not in Canada, where the media tilts left. Why else do we not read and hear more about Mr. Harper's proposals for reform and accountability, which he has been championing since becoming Tory leader?

While there is certainly a crisis in our federal government today, the more critical one is in the media. Without a fair and unbiased media, what we have is not a true democracy. Canadians should feel free to express their anger, and tune out the biased and unsolicited advice of narrow-thinking journalists.

Jack Shore, Toronto

He speaks for Canadians who find out that the newspaper they pay for has printed a lengthy article from a Paul Martin advisor when we expect solid news or balanced journalistic analysis.

The reader of the original article had to plow to the end for the bona fides of the faux-journalist who inspired Jack Shore's response, above.

"John Duffy is a volunteer advisor to Paul Martin and a registered federal lobbyist."
Check for yourself: Stop giving us anger ... John Duffy, NP, Nov. 4, 05

How green was my valley

Re: Chretien vs. Gomery, Round 2, Don Martin, Nov. 3.

'Judges are above politics' Nov. 4, 05

[. . . . ] Canadians know judges are above politics, and that is why judges are trusted. Canadian judges do err from time to time, but they do not "do favours" for anyone. Canadian judges are totally honest and independent and they make their decisions without bias or favouritism. The integrity of judges, and Canadians' general recognition of that integrity, are a crucial part of the way Canada works. To suggest otherwise undercuts the very heart of Canadian democracy.

James C. Morton, Toronto

Would that not constitute a denial of freedom of speech -- the freedom to come to the conclusions to which the evidence points?

That, Mr. Morton, is why Canadians who care about Canada are furious. We see how the Prime Minister's--and his predecessors'--"appointment" process goes, who gets appointed, the biases they come with / are appointed for, the decisions they saddle Canadians with, and we KNOW. I won't call you naive, just perhaps decent enough that you couldn't imagine the shenanigans that have been going on under your nose . . . when you believed justice was blind. I regret to have to tell you that it is a delusion; the process of appointing justices is tainted by political input -- instead of the candidate going to Parliament for a thorough questioning / vetting / investigating and then voting by these representatives of the people.

Join us in changing this.

Is it possible Canadians have listened to so much horse feathers for years that they no longer trust their own instincts and the evidence before their eyes? That they no longer think for themselves, simply mouthing what media and Big Brother tell them?

---