05.04.2010 03:27 PM

The Daily Idiocy Award

…and we have a winner! Charlie Angus, come on down!

Now, it pains me to say this about Charlie, because he is a fellow aging punk rocker who dabbles in politics. He’s a good guy and usually pretty sensible.

But this bizarre attack on the CBC, just to get at Kory, is dopey. It’s foolish. It’s boneheaded, fatheaded, thick, cloddish, doltish, dense, dim, dull, dumb, obtuse, gormless, unthinking, nitwitted, senseless, soft-witted and witless. (I’m on a roll, baby! Someone pay me to go on a TV panel, fast!)

Charlie, baby, people on panels get paid all the time. Hell, I was in Ottawa yesterday, and the smart and savvy NDP guy to the left of me (natch) was paid, just like I was to punditize the peoples. I don’t recall him tearing up the cheque.

Going back more than a decade, in fact, I have been paid to be on political panels on TV. One that paid me, all the time, was on CBC and it was called Counterspin. It’s host was an incredible, brilliant guy named Avi Lewis. He’s the son of a guy named Stephen Lewis. You may have heard of him. Perhaps Avi’s grandfather, too – David. He led your party for a while, there.

If NDP politicians think there’s something to be gained by attacking the public broadcaster for having the temerity to provide balance in its programming, knock yourselves out. Blow your brains out, Team Stupid. It’ll do wonders for the coverage/exposure you get. Just you watch.

In the meantime, make sure you send back all the fees your representatives have been paid to appear on various shows over the years. And don’t forget the interest – it’ll be substantial!

25 Comments

  1. Derek Pearce says:

    Agreed, pretty idiotic. I think in a misguided way Angus is trying to protect the CBC, by using this silliness as a counter-balance to the silliness the Tories were pushing when it came to the Graves brouhaha last month.

  2. Manchild says:

    Missing the point. The hiring of Teneycke was a violation of the CBC’s own hiring policy. Why have a policy then? Sort of like signing the Geneva convention and then endorsing torture.

  3. Sean says:

    so what the heck is Ian Capstick supposed to be? Of course there are no NDP complaints about Flanaghan… gift that keeps on giving…

  4. Scott Tribe says:

    Hi Warren:

    I don’t think the point that he and/or some other bloggers are making is that the CBC can’t use Kory on the network.. its the fact their own hiring guide says 2 year cooling off period, and Kory was hired to be on there in a lot less time then that. You haven’t addressed exactly why you think pointing that out is in error… does it somehow not apply to Kory?

  5. Michael Watkins says:

    Agreed.

    Just let Kory be Kory. That’ll be enough to turn off more viewers than it will turn on.

  6. Sandra says:

    I think the problem is the moderator. I don’t think Solomon is up to the job. Newman wouldn’t let Teneycke away with the stupid bullying.

    I don’t know why Susan Bonner wasn’t given that position – she won’t take crap either.

    • MJH says:

      Solomon is very rude, constantly interrupting the comments of those he disagrees with and asking the same questions over and over trying to get the answer he agrees with. Shame on the CBC.

  7. Jymn says:

    I’m an idiot, too, so forgive me for wondering: is Angus’ main point wrong that Kory’s hiring within the two-year limit breaks the CBC’s own rules for employing pundits?

  8. leftdog says:

    Oh please! I am quite sure that the motivation for this particular post stems from some sort of misguided sense of collegiality that Mr. Kinsella seems to feel towards his communication’s colleague. Does Mr. Kinsella think for one second that he would ever be on the receiving end of a similar gesture from his political opponent, Mr. Teneycke? Not on your life. CBC is not following their own staffing guidelines in this matter and Kinsella’s convenient dismissal of this is ridiculous. Teneycke is a hard nosed, humorless right winger who would never hesitate to hold his political counterpart to the letter of the law.

    Chalk this up as another instance of a Liberal using whatever ammunition that is available to attack a New Democrat. (File under: Liberal/Tory … same old story).

  9. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Warren,

    I’ve never been paid one blue or red cent for my assorted pearls of wisdom. But then again, I don’t mind being a sucker for a good cause. It’s really like going into a trance. Suddenly, it all comes spewing forth, gratis! No need to thank me. Really. My pleasure. Humble all the way to the grave, that’s who I am.

  10. Scotian says:

    Warren, you miss the point in this post. It is that it appears his hiring as a regular panelist before the cooling off period according to CBC’s own hiring guidelines that is the problem, not the fact he is a conservative commentator. Which I must admit I find a point you should have understood given your own background and lengthy history as a political commentator and operative so it does leave one wondering whether you did so deliberately, or simply rushed to judgment without actually taking in the whole argument first. Either way though in this I agree with those calling you wrong for this post, because from what I’ve read it looks fairly clear that his hiring for that panel as a regular member was in contravention of that policy. It is not like he is being asked on from time to time where he would not need to dealt with under those restrictions, he clearly was hired to be the regular CPC supporting member of that panel and that from what I’ve read in the guidelines IS a position that falls under the two year cooling off period.

    Please look at the guidelines again and I think you will see that this time out you got it wrong.

  11. Elizabeth says:

    I thought CBC must have hired KT in order to shut up or pacify those who insist that CBC is a left-wing, communist pinko rag. I can’t imagine any other reason.

    During the interview with Graves, I thought he was rude, uncivil, and bullying – as well as being wrong, and dishonest, and I just don’t get how anyone can sit there, with their face hanging out on TV like he did – and spout things that are not true – AND be dishonest enough to not allow the opponent (Graves) make his perfectly legitimate points.

    I thought Solomon did a deliberately poor job of controlling KT. I’m sure Solomon can do better than that – but my impression is that he’s right-wing and so was allowing KT to do what he wanted to. It was a pathetic interview, and the two of them, Solomon and KT, exhibited very poor standards in journalism and interviewing.

    That’s a good string of adjectives.
    My mother used to use ‘gormless’ as in ‘gormless idiot’ usually – I don’t hear it very often!! It’s a Border expression I think, as in Scots/English border.
    Also – ignorant boil, I always liked that one.

  12. Derek Lipman says:

    Leftdog: Angus’ commentary is hardly surprising and neither is yours. Anything that does not originate from the NDP/champagne socialist intelligentsia’s braintrust is summarily discarded. Nobody outside the NDP circles could possibly have ideas worth listening to can they? I’m no fan of Teneycke’s politics, but like it or not, there tens of thousands of Canadians who share his views. They deserve to be heard. Maybe, just maybe, the more people who hear Teneycke won’t like what they hear. If he is as “humorless” as you say he is, then Michael Watkins of this thread might be right…

    Same old story? Who are the MP’s voting to dismantle the gun registry? Who supported Bill Davis and his malevolent separate school funding? Who promised to implement public auto insurance and never delivered? Who opened up collective agreements in Ontario during the early 1990s? What party has been a complete disaster every time it has governed save Sask?

    The answer is a three letter word…

  13. James says:

    The NDP believes in free speech for itself and its radical subgroups but not for anyone else. Just remember the 5-year dictatorship of the extremist Ontario NDP, which was euthenized by the electorate in June of 1995.
    According to NDP dogma, only certain people should be allowed to speak. Eveyone else must be silenced.

  14. Catherine says:

    I am with Mr. Angus, on this one.

    Debates on political shows is intended to be thought-provoking and challenging.

    And for that reason, Mr. Teneycke is a poor choice as a pundit.

    He does not intend to partake in a robust conversation. His aim is to take out his opposition.

    And, CBC, is his little sandbox.

  15. You and I don’t agree on much, as to Mr. Angus and the NDP, you nailed it Warren. Angus needs some new handlers, that’s for sure.

    • MJH says:

      Agree the NDP is away out of line on this one! How will NDP pundits feel now when appearing on numerous paid political panels?

  16. James says:

    Catherine, kindly explain why some NDP hack should determine who speaks for the Conservatives. Does that mean that, say, the Liberals should pick the spokeswoman for the NDP? I don’t particularly like Mr. Teneycke either, but he his far less partisan than Avi Lewis ever was, with that self-satisfied, smug, ain’t I just so clever smirk on his face.

  17. Paul R. Martin says:

    Hello Warren. I do not expect to see this comment in print; however, you are remarkably quiet regarding Ignatief’s GG blunder.

  18. At least this helps highlight the stupidity of the Coservative campaign against the CBC. I think the Liberal Party should take this head on and defend the CBC aginst both the Tory and NDP attacks.

    • MJH says:

      The Liberals on many blogs have come to the defense of the CBC in no uncertain terms. Such rabid support adds to the perception that the CBC has been a big Liberal booster for many years.

  19. Nastyboy says:

    I KT a salaried employee or does he invoice the CBC for his services. As a paid consultant/trainer with my own company who charges my clients per appearance (not in politics or media), I get around hiring practice rules all the time by. Some people may not think it’s Kosher, but that doesn’t make it against the rules.

  20. Dave says:

    When I worked there not so long ago, the CBC’s Journalistic Policy Guide called for a two-year cooling-off period for anyone who wanted to work as a journalist (on-air reporter or producer). It did not forbid hiring former elected reps, candidates or party workers as commentators. I don’t know if the policy has changed, but it seems to me that it makes good sense to have recent party insiders (from all parties) on the air to provide informed analysis.

Leave a Reply

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


*