10.01.2010 08:39 AM

Tim Hudak’s staff search for “typical” Ontario family

…whilst typical Ontario families aren’t searching, particularly, for Tim.

———- Forwarded message ———-
Date: Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:43 PM
Subject: Fwd: Party Needs a Hand

———- Forwarded message ———-
Date: Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:30 PM
Subject: Party Needs a Hand

Hi all – on October 6, from 11:30 AM till noon, the leader wants to visit a
typical Toronto family in their home with media in tow.  The idea is either to
find a young couple with preschool children or a senior couple.  Whether they
talk about all day kindergarten or a seniors issue or whatever will depend on
who they are.

Do you have anyone that you can recommend.  We obviously want them to be
supporters, but not title holders.  (i.e.  we don’t want a past candidate,
riding president).

We don’t have a lot of time, so I would appreciate any ideas that you may have
as soon as possible.

I also appreciate your confidence in this matter.



  1. bigcitylib says:

    Well there’s always Shaidle and hubby. I think he’s a Sr.

  2. David Ross says:

    Hey Warren,

    You can spin this anyway you want but your man Dalton has done absolutely “nothing” to help Ontario families. I suspect this post won’t see the light of day and that’s because the truth hurts.

    Have a great day,

    • Warren says:

      We will see in a year from this month, won’t we?

    • Robin says:

      Not true at all: Dalton has helped my family quite a bit and has gone some way to restore most of the things that Mike Harris and Ernie Eaves has stripped of my typical family.

      However, I should point out that I won’t be voting Liberal next year (despite my lifelong commitment) thanks to the G8/G20 debacle. Dalton is almost as much to blame for his silence and passing a law that arbitrarily strips individuals of their civil rights (and once in custody, the police were sure to strip individuals of certain human rights) as Stephen Harper.

      • Paul says:

        Robin says:

        “Dalton has helped my family quite a bit and has gone some way to restore most of the things that Mike Harris and Ernie Eaves has stripped of my typical family. ”

        I see. Is that code for reinstating more government “goodies” to your family, paid for by other families and single taxpayers like yours truly that happen to earn more money than you do?

        Or how about the “heath premium”? How does it feel to not only pay more and get the same service? (Or less in my case… the only health services I’ve used in the past two years have been eye exams that are no longer covered.) Does your family go to the eye doctor regularly?

        …and while we’re at it how is the HST on energy, gasoline and many other things that your family needs working out for you? How about the recent (with more coming) energy rate hikes and crooked “smart meters” that have been foisted upon us?

        If things like the above are “help,” I’d hate to see what “harm” looks like.

        • Robin says:

          Where to begin on that on, Paul?

          First, you don’t know me, I don’t know you but you seem to think that you earn more money than I: this is just your Reformatory rage speaking, grasping at the arguments that Doug Finley sends you daily to your email. Try some intellectual independence for once, and resist the regurgitation of your political master’s word.

          Second, I would think a Reformatory like you would rather the user pay idea that is inherent in your Neo-Con, Thatcherite-loving, Friedman-fucking, Hayek-sucking, extreme me-only ideology? Isn’t that what Dalton gave you with the health premium? It’s much more closer to the free market that gives Reformatories like you a raging hard-on. If you want more service for a lower price, that’s what people on the left have been urging. But keep fighting for the wealthy to gouge you on your health and I’ll keep fighting so that you get socialized health care, to pay for your full participation in society and not have to worry over something so morally arbitrary like your vision (something we can’t blame you for, can we?).

          And the HST, all its done for me is stop me from consuming shit I don’t need. Why would I want to drive around in a gas guzzling SUV? All that does is transfer my money into the hands of your gods, the ultra wealthy Oil Barons.

          You’re a good Reformatory, the kind Stevie and Dougie like: the kind that cannot think for themselves and blames those he’s told to.

          Try to have a good weekend, Paul.

          • David says:


            Do you drive a rubber padded Prius?

            Oprah’s topic today is ” How to cope with your bitter anger over having to take responsibility for your life.”

            It should be a good one….

          • Paul says:

            My what a potty-mouth you have.. You’ve just made a whole raft of assumptions about me, and resorted to shrill profanity and sarcasm in the process. I can almost see you foaming at the mouth while composing the above rant. I don’t even know who this “Doug Finley” you speak of is…

            I never said that I was against socialized medicine… In fact I’m all for it, but just a little puzzled (and outraged) as to why we have to pay the premium on top of the tax already collected yet I still can’t seem to find family doctor that is taking on new patients.

            I’m also curious as to how it came to be that a billion dollars was pissed away on the eHealth boondoggle with nothing to show for it. Surely all that premium money was earmarked for front-line care and reducing wait times? I don’t mind paying for something so long as I actually RECEIVE what I’m paying for.

            As for attempted snark about “user pay”: User pay does not mean: pay income tax, sales tax, health premium and then STILL have to pay out of our own pockets!

            As for your comments re: the HST… I don’t feel that government should be using taxation to help people decide what they do and do not need, but maybe freedom is an alien concept to you as it is to most nanny-statists.

  3. James Bow says:

    Would he want to talk to me, I wonder? I’ve got a preschool child and a kid in kindergarten. And, I’ve got to say, I’m really loving this all-day kindergarten program. My kid loves it too. Thank you Dalton McGuinty!

    He probably wouldn’t want to talk to me.

      • David says:

        Presumably your child is either in a public school or is of the Catholic faith. Otherwise, they get squat.

        Thank you Dalton…

        Actually I’d suggest that public opinion polls do show that Ontarians and therefore “typical” families are looking for an alternative to McGuinty. The other choice by default is Hudak.

        Hudak needs to get his name out. Most peole probably wouldn’t recognize him if he passed them on the street. I’d say it is wise for the Ont. PC’s to get his mug out there. Pretty straight forward. No?

        • James Bow says:

          Yes, I support the public education system through my taxes — have done all my working life — and now I’m making use of that investment. And I have to say that the quality of education my child is receiving is excellent. Definitely worth protecting.

          • David says:

            I do too.

            We all pay taxes and we all fund the public education system.

            Worth protecting? Yes. But from what? What is it you fear?

            The premier decided that only Catholics should continue to enjoy full funding. Don’t forget his reasoning was cost.

            The full day kindergarten that you enjoy was way over budget. The shortfall must come from somewhere. The premier has suddenly lost all concern over cost. Lucky for you!

            Lucky for you again that the school your kid goes to is not overcrowded. The rest of the parents will have to wait many years (if ever) for their kids to get the program.

          • James Bow says:

            I should note in 2007, I voted Green. I appreciated John Tory’s take on the education issue as it was consistent: if you’re going to fund any religious schools with tax dollars, as we do with the Catholics, then all religions must be treated equally. I disagreed with him on the policy, however. We needed ONE public education system, not two and not twenty, and only the Green Party advocated for the logical opposite. The Liberals and the NDP? Not so much.

            When I say that the system “needs to be protected”, I’m speaking in the context of the debate we’re having here about full-day kindergarten and whether or not it’s a good thing, given the considerable money that’s being invested in it. I say it is a good thing, and money well spent. If we want to broaden the debate to discuss the other challenges that public education faces, that’s admirable. But right now the pros and cons of full day kindergarten are getting the lion’s share of the attention, here.

  4. Richard says:

    You left off his email address. How can we contact him with suggestions?

  5. Patrick Deberg says:

    Maybe Tim is too busy dragging dead cows up to the slaughterhouse at night past the meat inspectors to be recognized. It was much easier when you just fired them. Has Tim been selling his Harris retread in Walkerton?? Haven’t seen him there either. No sign of him in Renfrew where the New policy swept two people to their deaths under the Mountain Chute dam. That was when John Baird couldn’t read his hydro bill when he was minister of Hydro. Tim might be busy chaining someone on welfare to their bed to succumb to the heat for going to school. That’s why we can’t see Tim! He’s keeping the spirit alive!!!

  6. Michael Teper says:

    Here’s how this all-day kindergarten program really works: instead of a kindergarten teacher having 15 pupils in the morning and 15 in the afternoon, the teacher has 30 children all day. The children, who are four and five years old, need naps in the afternoon, but can’t get them so they get cranky. That makes classroom management a problem. Meanwhile, the daycare that used to take cared of the pupils while they were not in kindergarten stands empty during school hours, which means that some of the workers get laid off. The government saves money because it doesn’t pay the kindergarten teacher one more red nickel for the extra work she has to do with 30 pupils all day instead of 15 at a time, while saving money on the daycare subsidies. The government also collects more in income and payroll taxes, since the abolition of daycare fees means that being a double-income family becomes that much more lucrative. So everybody wins, unless of course you are (a) a four or five-year old in the all day kindergarten program who doesn’t get any rest in the afternoon, (b) a harried kindergarten teacher whose workload just doubled without any more money, or (c) a laid-off daycare worker. The people in Category A don’t vote, and Categories B and C don’t count for as many votes compared with the thousands of suburban parents who now have even more reason to become double-income families while externalizing the cost of their childcare.

    • James Bow says:

      You got a number of your facts wrong. Speaking as somebody with a child actually in an all-day kindergarten program, here’s the real deal: class sizes are limited to 25 (this is the case in the school my child is going to). The teacher is helped by two early childhood educators — new to the system — one of whom starts work at 7 a.m. and goes to about 1 p.m., and the other who works from 11 a.m. and goes to about 6 p.m. These early childhood educators also run special day-care programs starting at 7 a.m. and going to the opening of the actual school day, and from 3:15 p.m. to 6 p.m., so parents can leave their kids on their way to work and receive full supervision for the length of the day. On average, this costs parents $27 per day.

      And I should point out that not all children need afternoon naps. My 4 year old daughter abandoned hers at around the age of 3. My two-year-old is now in the process of abandoning her afternoon naps. So, my daughter in kindergarten is receiving twice the hours of education she would have received under the old system.

      Further, I should note that in Waterloo Region, this system replaces a system where the board of education opted for all-day, every OTHER day kindergarten — where teachers were not assisted by two early childhood educators. And THAT was a budget saving measure that probably did more harm to our kids and cost us more in the long run.

      As someone who actually uses this system, I can tell you that it has been a substantial benefit and improvement over the old.

    • Under the old Kindergarten Program, there is a maximum of 20 children in the class. There are minor exceptions such as children being added in mid-year. In the new Early Learning Kindergarten Program, there should be a about 26 maximum. Yes, there are extra children. However, with one ECE in the classroom during the actual school day, there should be more individual attention to the children. Remember also that in the old half-day program, a teacher may have two half-day or alternate-day classes with 40 children in total (20 x 2).

      As for the private day cares, I don’t care if they lose clientele because of the new EL/K program. They’re private businesses; they can look for profits elsewhere. Do I feel sorry for private day care workers? Yes and no. Yes, some of them may lose their jobs in the private day care centres; no, some of them may get jobs as ECE’s and educational assistants (EA’s) in the schools. I support educating children–not ensuring little customers for private day care operators.

      Do four and five year olds need nap time? They don’t need a formal nap time. If a teacher and ECE can provide an excellent EL/K program, there will be times when the children are active, and other times when they are relax. They should be engaged at all times. Classrooms may have a couple of mats for resting. However, if the children are having fun, these mats may not be used for resting.

  7. bc says:

    “Second, I would think a Reformatory like you would rather the user pay idea that is inherent in your Neo-Con, Thatcherite-loving, Friedman-fucking, Hayek-sucking, extreme me-only ideology? Isn?t that what Dalton gave you with the health premium? It?s much more closer to the free market that gives Reformatories like you a raging hard-on.”

    Good try, Robin.

    But it doesn’t count if the fee-for-service is added ON TOP of the existing taxes.

  8. Pedro says:

    of course Warren and his family would (n’t) be a typical Ontario family would they…??

  9. Andrew says:

    What’s the big deal? The NDP and Liberals have done the same thing recently. We were approached by the NDP for a similar type situation.

    • AmandaM says:

      I think, Andrew, that the point is that they must send out e-mails like this to find a “typical Toronto family”, and that they don’t actually know any who support Tim.

      • MetaKaizen says:

        I agree with Andrew- this is standard stage managing.

        Amanda, if you sent out an email to your coworkers asking if anyone knew any good restaurants, it wouldn’t mean that “they” don’t know any.

        In fact, it wouldn’t even necessarily mean that YOU don’t know any- you’re looking for someone else’s recommendation for whatever reason (already went to your favourite last week, It’s closed for a week, you’re looking for new ideas etc).

  10. David Ross says:

    Warren – thanks for setting the record straight.

    BTW – I’ve respected you and admired your courage since I picked up a copy of Web of Hate back in the 90’s. The War Room was an exceptional read too.


  11. Gerry Calderwood says:

    I remember the debate that ensued during the last provincial election on religious school funding. It not only pitted John Tory against McGuinty but also a “liberal” faith group the Canadian Jewish Congress against McGuinty as well.

    It actually made the election interesting because it demonstrated how strange political policy can be accepted by the majority.

    I mean can anyone really argue that funding RCs and no other faith’s schools is not discriminatory?

    In the end the staus quo prevailed and as is politics the Jewish Congress maintained its progressive stripes and all was forgiven even if it didn’t make any sense.

    That’s why i love politics.

  12. AmandaM says:

    Um, no. Having had experience with this sort of thing, your comms people should be able to answer the question of, “we want to do a spot with a supporter. who do we get?” right off the bat, without thinking or sending an e-mail. There was surely a meeting to discuss the spot, and this e-mail should, if you’re well organized and know who your supporters are, be unnecessary.

    This isn’t as provincial an issue as looking for a restaurant recommendation. This is high level politics. This e-mail shows that they are poorly organized and don’t know who supports th

    • Andrew says:

      Political parties have no idea of the make up of their supporters. If you contribute to any party, they do not know your level of income, demographics of your family, etc.

      My workplace sent out an email looking for anyone who has a child that just started university or college to get a new student’s perspective on their initial experiences at school.

  13. metakaizen says:

    Amanda, sort of like Garth Turner and CPAC. Tell me more about high level politics.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.