The Apogee of Manning

Rex Murphy’s glowing tribute to Preston Manning as the driving intellectual force behind the fundamental realignment of Canadian politics realized most clearly in the results of the last election…

Listening to Rex extol the “wizardry” of Stephen Harper “pursuing the party of Pearson and Trudeau into near oblivion,” one can only laugh at the extremist fringe of the right-wing forever angrily complaining about the flagrant “liberal bias” of the CBC.

Advertisements

15 Comments

Filed under 2011 Canadian Election, Conservative Party of Canada

15 responses to “The Apogee of Manning

  1. I’ve never fully understood the obsession with the CBC that the right-wing holds. I personally think their programming sucks and they are WAY too PC, but I think there is some value to maintaining it. The bias is there but it’s so obvious that I couldn’t care less.
    On a side note – I’d love for them to portray natives honestly……you know , the tribes that fought, raped, pillaged and ate their enemies as opposed to the regular portrayal of Indians living off the land and making dream-catchers prior to whitey’s arrival.

  2. It astounds me that the dreamy, idealized, Rousseauesque nonsense about peoples of the “First Nations” still persists in the face of abundant evidence to the contrary about their historical antics, which appear to be every bit as brutal and rapacious as those of Western civilization; just not as well documented by virtue of their inability to develop written language. Are we really to believe that before the arrival of white invaders, native peoples were living a more transcendent, spiritual existence? I rather doubt it, although that’s the sort of fantasy tale we’ve been peddled for as long as I can remember.

    As for the CBC, I think it’s fairly balanced in its coverage. (But then I would say that, wouldn’t I?). Look at the people it regularly invites on their programs to discuss politics and it’s a pretty even mix of left, right and center. When Sun TV has the equivalent of Kevin O’Leary co-hosting a show, or a left-wing counter to Don Cherry as a feature “star” on their network, then they can criticize the CBC for being unfairly biased.

  3. Heh. Rex clearly likes the sound of “Senator Murphy”. Just keep on fellatin’, there, boyo. I’m sure the Duffster’s puttin’ in a good word for ya.

    Paranoid CBC-hatred is not limited to the CPC’s lunatic fringe, by the way. Relatively moderate Cons believe the CBC to be biased. It’s an old and widely held canard. Many of the quite intelligent and otherwise fair-minded people I worked with on the old Ottawa-Vanier P.C. Party riding association, “Clark Tories” if you will, were convinced the CBC was a Liberal Party organ. Just consider Tomm’s attitude towards the network; though an inflexible partisan, he’s hardly an “extremist”. He’s actually broadly representative.

  4. True enough. It’s almost a given amongst many people that the CBC is “liberal” in its bias. But then, the same allegation is made against all of what Sarah Palin and her ilk call the “lamestream media”. To their minds, it would seem, anything that isn’t a dedicated, non-stop source of hysterical, fear-mongering, right-wing agit-prop is “liberal”…

  5. Just how is the CBC biased ?

    Or is its very neutrality and openness to question dogma considered bias against a fixed agenda (ideology)?

    I am quite concerned that their is a pure ideology out there, as it seems to me that Communism and Fascism were concerned with such purity.

    So … you can’t be a capitalist and question the excesses of capitalism?

    What has this world come to ?

  6. their sould read “there”

  7. sould should read “should” (confound this new laptop!)

  8. ATY: If you query the CBC-hating malcontents about the issue of “bias” they’ll happily cite a number of specific instances where they felt political coverage was unfriendly towards the Conservatives, or will throw up Dr. Suzuki’s “Nature of Things” program as an example of lefty enviro-propaganda. It’s the same bullshit that gets chucked at NPR in the U.S. or the BBC in Britain…

  9. Red:

    I get it, but what I fail to comprehend is how the mere questioning of some status-quo tenet qualifies as “bias.” Perhaps it is more of a demonstration of critical thinking.

    How critical thinking came to be seen as a bad thing in the culture still shocks me.

  10. Tomm

    I have just finished basking in the glow of Rex’s silver tongue. It is poetry.

    The CBC occassionally does something right. That includes the At Issue Panel which is truly the best political discussion on TV, even better than the old McLaughlin Group from the 90’s. And of course Rex has evolved into an admirer of Harper’s leadership. It is all very satisfying.

    I may listen to it again…

  11. Tomm

    The CBC has run into the same problem that the Liberal’s ran into.

    Two months ago, a Nanos poll had Ignatieff’s “trust” numbers at about 15%. Two weeks later he quarterbacked the contempt charge and brought down the government. It was clear at the time that only 15% of the people hearing his message believed what he was saying. Further, only 50% of the Liberal’s saw him as a credible spokesperson. He wasn’t able to get people to follow him. His credibility was in the dumpster.

    During the election campaign, Ignatieff, and the much of the media (led by the CBC) decided that the lead story would be whatever Conservative sleaze was highest on the list for that day. The problem was that the credibility of both the CBC journalists and Ignatieff were sitting around their ankles. As it turned out, nobody was listening.

    The At Issue Panel and Rex Murphy have credibility because they are not seen as CBC per se. Can you imagine Terry Milewski, Anna Maria Tremonti, and Evan Solomon instead of Coyne, Gregg, and Hebert? It certainly wouldn’t be something I would find as interesting.

  12. Tomm

    I guess, I’ve got one more thing to say. Harper’s unlikely hold on electors is rumored because like Daniel and the Sacred Harp, he made a pact with Randall Flagg.

  13. I listened to Rex on Cross-Country Checkup this weekend.

    Is it just me, or has he thrown away his thesaurus? He was actually speaking in semi-coherent sentences, instead of baroque monstrosities.

    By the end of the 2 hours, however, I still felt I was being spit on by a manic autodidact in the public library. (I know, I know, he’s a Rhodes scholar, which makes it all the creepier).

  14. Tomm: Glad you enjoyed Rex’s silver tongue. Seriously. I always get a kick out of listening to him hold forth, or even banter with callers on “Cross Country Check-Up” (a program that’s something of a national treasure, in the way that Peter Gzowski’s “Morningside” was in years past).

    Not sure however that I can agree with your interpretation of the media landscape and the way stories leading up to the election were played out by the media. One only has to call up the National Newswatch website to see how all of the correspondents and editorial pundits descend at once on what they deem to be “newsworthy” like a bunch of ravenous seagulls on a cast-off hot dog at the beach. It’s a bit of a stretch to imagine that the CBC is leading the pack…

    You make a interesting point about the correlation between the leadership index and how much stock Canadians put into claims from the opposition parties at the time about the parliamentary malfeasance of the Harper Government. Personally, I don’t think the two things were related in any way at all. The disconnect can be explained more simply by the fact that stories of that nature are of interest only to the press and political junkies. To the remainder of ordinary humans, they’re perceived as being stultifyingly boring, obtuse, and irrelevant.

    Notwithstanding the above, you’re quite correct in observing that “nobody was listening” and to use that issue as the trigger for an election – that let’s not forget, at the time almost nobody wanted – was a horrific miscalculation by the Liberals. I’m tempted to call their action “opportunistic” were it not for the fact that it was so terribly doomed and foreshadowed as such from the outset.

  15. Can you imagine Terry Milewski, Anna Maria Tremonti, and Evan Solomon instead of Coyne, Gregg, and Hebert?

    My ideal CBC talking-head troika would be Baird, Kenney, and Anders answering questions generated by the Media Outreach Commissariat of the CPC Office of Official Information during a segment moderated by an objective host, like Pamela Wallin.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s