Peter Kent’s anti-Israel documentary (updated, with other critics of Kent)
I’m an ardent supporter of Israel, as you all know. I thought Peter Kent was, too.
As the former head of B’nai B’rith, Karen would have never authored anti-Israel crap like this.
UPDATE: I’ll post a free link as soon as I get it. But I’m not alone on this. Here’s what scholars have said about what Kent did:
- Elihayu Tal: “[Kent and NBC’s] anti-Israel bias so was so blatant, Arab countries rushed to use it as propaganda film.“
- Stephen Karetzky: “[It was] more Israel-bashing at NBC.”
- University of Pittsburgh: “[Kent’s attack on Israel] seriously misrepresented [the facts]….”
KCCCC Day 26: Weird, man
- Gouge Away: That’s what I was humming, last night, at the Pixies concert at Massey Hall. They played all of ‘Doolittle,’ start to finish. People danced in their seats. It was weird. Anyway, it meant I missed the now-legendary Michael Ignatieff-Peter Mansbridge thing. Sorry. Rock’n’roll comes first. That said…this election is weird.
- Nanos thinks so: Shockingly, stunningly, your daily poll crack has the parties….where they pretty much were when this thing started. Conservatives without a majority, Liberals without a minority, and the NDP where it’s been for the past half-decade or so. My advice: start a fun new drinking game! On the morning of May 3, do a shooter every time you hear someone say “Why the Hell did we have an election, anyway?” You’ll be comatose, and possibly dead of alcohol poisoning, by noon.
- Scandalizers think so: The Carson scandal has it all: ex-cons in the corridors of power! Fraud! Patronage! Dirty deals! Hookers hanging out with cabinet ministers! And…is it having any measureable impact on the election campaign? Not that I can see. The media care, the Opposition care, the voters mainly don’t. Weird.
- Columnists think so: Opinionizers are befuddled and bewildered by this election campaign, veering from obituaries to paeans all on the same day. Dan Gardner, for instance, who is super-smart and usually cranky, writes this historical analysis of Iggy’s predicament. It’s a fun read, but it’s wrong. Libs win by campaigning from the Left and governing from the Right. That has been the Igster’s biggest error. Going Right, and staying there.
- Analysts think so: This fellow, who seems intelligent, thinks people aren’t inspired about our leaders. Um, I don’t think so. Conservatives think Harper has done smashingly well; Liberals feel the same way about Ignatieff; and pretty much everyone is impressed by Jack Layton (I’m one of them – running a campaign like he has, when fighting cancer? Wow.) The problem is that our politics have become entrenched, I think: the Cons have a lock on their 30 to 35 per cent, and everyone else fights about the remainder, for eternity. It’s like a bad Star Trek episode.
- Even authors think so! Here, Margaret Atwood gets in on the analysis act, trying to poke through the entrails and figure it all out. My advice: stick to fiction, Maggie. This thing is weirder than a novel.
- Weird pic: We have a winner! And I found it all on my own!
Lib ad kicks ass on health care
In today’s Sun: where we Lefties went wrong (updated)
Here it is, linked…
“What’s a charter member of the latte-sipping, Volvo-driving, secular humanist trilateralist cabal like you doing with a bunch of right wing kooks? Don’t you feel uncomfortable being a Liberal surrounded by Conservatives?”
My stock answer, which has the benefit of actually being true: “You get used to it. Besides, pretty much every Leftie in the country is going to feel like I do, in a couple weeks – you know, a stranger in an even stranger land.”
They don’t get it, or they don’t agree. They will, soon enough.
Stephen Harper’s Reformatories, you see, are heading to victory on May 2. And, barring some big upset in the next few days, it may be a big victory, too.
Now, it’s not like that the Conservative leader deserves a majority, let alone re-election. He’s run up a historically-big deficit, he’s run a lousy campaign, and he’s run his promise to clean up government straight into the ditch – with so many ethical lapses taking place, you need a program to keep track. (My personal favourite? He fires Helena Guergis for cavorting with hookers, when she didn’t – and he then gives a big patronage job to convicted fraud artist Bruce Carson. Who, er, brought a real hooker to a party at 24 Sussex.)
So if I’m right, and Harper’s done such a crummy job, why is he cruising to victory? Mainly, it’s because those of us on the Left have done a lousier job.
First off, the Liberals and the NDP had a shot at working together, about two years ago, but they blew it. The forces of the Left allowed themselves to be scared away off of cooperation/coalition/merger by Harper – despite the fact that Harper himself had brought together the forces of the Right, and then won government.
Secondly, Michael Ignatieff feels more comfortable among Rosedalian Liberals. You know, the ones who – over martinis at the Toronto Tennis Club – always felt more kinship with the likes of John Turner or Paul Martin than they did with, say, Pierre Trudeau or Jean Chretien. You know, Liberal lefties who win elections.
Thirdly, Iggy and his Rosedalian senior staff thought they could ignore Jack Layton’s NDP. By becoming a paler shade of blue, they assured themselves, they’d win back government. Thus, the Liberal chief was more hawkish than Harper on Afghanistan, more enthusiastic about the Oil Sands, and more willing to look at Medicare “alternatives” than any Liberal ever should. In so doing, Iggy scared away soft NDP voters, all of whom now consider Iggy to be a paler version of Harper.
What’s the solution for the Left? Same as it was two years ago: listen to smart guys like Chretien, Ed Broadbent, Roy Romanow, and bring together progressives to form a single, formidable political force. That’s how to beat Harper.
The good news, I suppose, is that those of us on the political left will now have four long years to get our act together.
Because, believe me: on May 3, this Leftie ain’t going to be the only stranger in an even stranger right-wing land.
Apologies
The site went dark, there, for a while. Media Temple, which hosts it, had a big system-wide crash.
Also, I still don’t see my Sun column online anywhere yet – it’s in the dead tree version, however, so go buy it, if you’re so inclined!
KCCC Day 25: Change of plan
- So, er, what happened? Lots of big changes of course/plan in the past 24 hours for a lot of folks, me included. Here’s a summary, which may leave you as bewildered as I tend to be most days.
- Kinsella Kolumn Killed: If you are one of the two or three people who read it, you will notice that my usual Tuesday Sun column ain’t there. Why isn’t, you ask? Beats me, says I. I filed it, my editor got it, and the rest is a mystery. My suspicion is that the launch of the new Sun TV network, the launch of the new Sun web site, and the paper redesign all had something to do that. That, or I’ve been canned, and no one’s told me yet. Here’s a snippet of it, in the unlikely event you are curious about the subject matter: “Stephen Harper’s Reformatories, you see, are heading to victory on May 2. And, barring some big upset in the next few days, it may be a big victory, too. Now, it’s not like that the Conservative leader deserves a majority, let alone re-election. He’s run up a historically-big deficit, he’s run a lousy campaign, and he’s run his promise to clean up government straight into the ditch – with so many ethical lapses taking place, you need a program to keep track. (My personal favourite? He fires Helena Guergis for cavorting with hookers, when she didn’t – and he then gives a big patronage job to convicted fraud artist Bruce Carson. Who, er, brought a real hooker to a party at 24 Sussex.) So if I’m right, and Harper’s done such a crummy job, why is he cruising to victory? Mainly, it’s because those of us on the Left have done a lousier job.”
- Sun TV rises: Speaking of the TV thing, I wasn’t on the launch show yesterday, either. I will be on there tomorrow, I think, perhaps as an out-of-work columnist. Some of the commentary on the new network is here and here. I watched a bit of the launch with my staff, and I can tell you the following: (i) I will not be wearing a short skirt, unless you want to pay me scads of money, in which case I will; (ii) I like free speech, too, but you won’t see me yelling “fire” in a crowded Sun TV studio anytime soon; (iii) I have noticed that “political correctness” is usually code for “I want to say whatever pops into my head without getting sued/fired;” and (iv) “Controversy,” is my middle name, so I should fit right in, however much I am a Bolshevik when compared to the rest of the gang.
- Libs change gears?: So says Ms. Hebert: “The lines may be different but the basic script is eerily familiar. For the third time in as many federal elections, the Liberals are switching horses at the mid-way point in the hope of resuscitating a flagging campaign.” Well, not quite. Reporters may not have noticed it, but the Libs and the NDP have been talking about the subject for quite some time – it’s just that some media outlets find talking about strategy and tactics a lot more interesting than writing about, you know, issues. And, on health care: the Libs deftly turned a potential negative (the Harper misquote in that hard-hitting health care ad) into a positive (a fun contest to find the quote with which to replace it). Brilliant.
- Reformatories target NDP: As Jane points out in her daily take on the daily Nanos: “Stephen Harper will lose seats in Quebec, is dropping support in British Columbia and will not form a majority government on May 2, according to a new Nanos Research poll.” That’s a lot of bad news for the Con leader – so he’s now changing course, and starting to aim at the surging NDP and Jack Layton. Will it work? Dunno. But expect a lot more critical scrutiny of Wacko Jacko by both the Grits and Tories in coming days.
- Poll changes: Sort of. You Daily Nanos Crack™ suggests that the Liberal-Conservative gap remains what it has been for weeks (about 8 or 9 points), and that the NDP’s national support is still about half the Liberals’ (30 to 17, respectively). So one thing hasn’t yet changed – vindication for those of us who were predicting this election will get us more or less what we had when Parliament dissolved: a minority Tory government.
- Pic of the day: Caption contest!
“Whee! Look at me! Look at me! I’m a contender!”
Take that, TransAlta
An example of TransAlta’s brilliant business model.
The heartless creeps who run this greedy multinational – and, as shown on my site last week, don’t give a damn when they make small town Ontario families sick – get mocked on Twitter, here.
Follow it, one and all! This could get really interesting.
Pot, kettle, etc.
The Auditor-General and Parliamentary Budget Officer could not be reached for comment.”
Seriously, folks: that ad has been on air for six days.
The reason why the CPC is complaining now?
It’s working.
KCCCC Day 24: Things get weird
- The start to the second-to-final campaign week! And for the Tories (sort of) and the Grits (in particular) things are not so great. In yesterday’s Sun, I tried to address why some voters are making Stephen Harper unhappy (because they’re afraid what he’ll do with a majority), and in tomorrow’s paper, I will try to address why some voters are making Michael Ignateiff unhappy (because they’re uneasy that he chose to render the LPC a paler shade of Harper on some key issues). Thus, this morning’s stunner Angus Reid poll.
- The stunner poll: On most days, I look at most things from this particular firm with a proverbial grain of salt – but, that said, it’s consistent with what I’m writing tomorrow: namely, under Ignatieff and his senior staff, the Libs moved too far to the right on important issues (eg. Afghanistan, oil sands, health care, etc.). And now they’re paying the price: “An Angus Reid poll shows one quarter of Canadians say they would vote for the New Democrats, an increase of four percentage points since early this month. That puts the party in a tie for second place with the Liberals, who are also at 25 per cent after seeing their support drop by two percentage points over the same period. The Conservatives remain in first place with 36 per cent of the support, down by two percentage points but still a double-digit lead.” For lefty-Libs like me, it’s not a surprise – but it’s a disappointment, because it could have been avoided. Whenever we let Rosedale Liberals take over – under Turner, Martin and now Ignatieff – we lose folks to the NDP. Liberals never win when they go too far right.
- Why are the Cons a bit edgy, then? because, as is pointed out here by Jane, there’s whole lot of “turbulence” going on beneath the horserace numbers. And, as I’ve been suggesting to political pals, the national horserace numbers give a distorted picture: Harper can only win seats once, for example, in places like Calgary. So the huge numbers he has there are wasted – and it means he’s not as strong nationally as you might think. The majority may not come to pass: it all depends on GOTV.
- Touched a nerve! Wow – my column in yesterday’s aforementioned column in the Sun got nearly 300 comments here, and nearly 200 over on the Sun web site. Conservatives were enraged that I would suggest that Harper and Co. would go after guns, abortion and gays – and many were positively delighted, saying that that’s the kind of Canada they wanted. One Toronto-area Liberal campaign emailed me to say that they were hearing about the column at the doors – people were concerned about what a Harper majority would do to Canada. Meanwhile, a couple assholes make snarky remarks about my religion, so I told them to piss off and blocked them. Not bad for a Sunday!
- Candidate Rule #356: Never, ever let a reporter accompany your candidate as he or she goes on a door-to-door canvass. They’re always going to report on some single nasty exchange – not the dozens of positive receptions you got. Thus, this Star story, where we learn that the Conservative candidate in Helena Guergis’ riding – a medical doctor – is dispensing medical advice to people at the door. I’m not a doc, just the son of one, but I’m kind of wondering if that is, well, legal. It sure as Hell is inviting trouble.
- Most ridiculous column of the week: Seen here. It’s so dumb, it’s hard to know where to begin.
- Fill ‘er up: My newspaper has an editorial, here, about the only issue that all the Real People I know are talking about: the price of gas. On this one, Harper can be whacked by Messrs. Ignatieff and Layton – because he’s seen as the shill for greedy oil multinationals. Will they go after Harper today? We shall see. They should.
- Video of the campaign! Check out this spot by my Lib pal Bob Richardson – it’s the toughest (and most effective) sot of the campaign so far: