Let it be Stephen, Or Even Thomas, But Not Justin Pleads Canadian News

Cheerleaders or Reporters c

Is it the job of the news media to report the news as it happens, or is it the job of the news to pick  for the Canadian voter who is a worthy candidate to run for political office and who is not? I believe it is the first choice, report the facts impartially about each candidate and let the Canadian voters decide for themselves who they want to vote for.  All I see are smirks at the mere mention of Justin Trudeau’s name by the hosts of CBC’s political news hosts and their blatant push to get the Conservative Party of Canada’s opinion out to their Canadian viewing and voting public. Rosie Barton of power and Politics cannot help herself and not only jumps at every opportunity to push the Conservative Party of Canada’s view about Justin Trudeau’s lack of political experience and his not being ready yet, but manufactures the opportunities at times interrupting her guests to put them forward.  Perhaps hosts like Rosie Barton and others on  the CBC are not mature enough to be political reporters and analysts and should find a job more suitable for the advancing of one’s personal opinion on the air, or in print, like covering fashion, movie premieres, or perhaps home decor.

It is not merely coincidence that Conservative guest panelists on news shows like Power and Politics hosted by Rosie Barton always get the last word; it is a subtle way that news hosts such as Rosie choose to support their choice in any given debate. Like Rosie Barton, I believe that in the case of Justin Trudeau and his running for the office of Prime Minister of Canada news agencies in Canada and their program hosts and reporters can be counted on to unfairly target Justin Trudeau as immature, unreliable and way too young to hold such an important job, while at the same time be counted on to continue ignoring, side stepping and down playing Stephen Harper’s:

  • Dictatorship style of governance. (firing, or silencing anyone who disagrees with him be they the Auditor General or the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the Veteran’s Affairs Ombudsman or the once head of Indian Affairs, the Access To Information Commissioner, or scientists working for the government.
  • Scandal ridden governance up to now. (The senate scandals, the in and out scandal, or  the 2011 Canadian federal election voter suppression scandal, better known as  “Pierre Poutine”.
  • Botched military procurement record. (F-35 Fighter Jet, the procurement of  28 CH-148 Cyclone helicopters from Sikorsky, and finally the Close Combat Vehicles this government said had to be retired suddenly became only in need of refitting as costs soared and Stephen Harper tried to side step another scandal. Could be laughable if this did not put our men and women fighting to defend this country at unnecessary risk of permanent life altering injury and even death.
  • Refusal to hold one Premiere’s conference. how do you govern a country when the power to do so is split between the federal and provincial governments if you will not sit down and talk with the provincial leaders. I say it can’t be done and yet this is the approach Stephen Harper has taken in his 10 years of governance.
  • Failure to get the pipeline deal done. His failure to act responsibly on climate change has forced the USA to reject the pipelines. Stephen harper is the only G-7, 8, or 20 leader to still reject the science of climate change.
  • Failure to reach a real balanced budget.
  • Causing Canada to be the only G-7 nation to fall back into recession.
  • Failure to run a single federal election campaign that did not end up in some sort of cheating scandal. when he and his cohorts were  accused of cheating, or have been caught cheating he and they just changed the rules by passing the Unfair Elections Act.
  • Bad choices for advisors, senators, ministers and parliamentary secretaries, leaving a question as to the reliability of choosing the right people for very important jobs.

No matter what Stephen Harper does, or refuses to do, Stephen Harper is dealt with in the media with respect.  Stephen Harper has done everything in his power and tried to go beyond to turn Canada’s democratic system into a farce and yet the media ignores it, preferring to highlight anything that they can use to diminish Justin Trudeau as a viable candidate for Prime Minister of Canada.

I could go on an on about what the new media is failing to tell, or remind Canadians about all the candidates, while they continue the Justin Trudeau witch-hunt, but what would be the point? Canadian news agencies have made up their collective mind’s when it comes to Justin Trudeau that it is better to lie, misquote, show only parts of interviews or tell the story in an unfair way and lead the Canadian voter towards a more reliable, older gentleman for the job of Prime Minister of Canada even if that means breaking their rules and reporting half-truths and editing interviews to make it so Justin Trudeau looks not as qualified as the others.

As the news media puts a negative spin on everything that has every come out of Justin Trudeau’s mouth since becoming the leader of the  Liberal Party of Canada, his every job held since he was old enough to work, to the way he wears his hair, it becomes obvious that these same negative tactics are not being used on Thomas Mulcair.  Not one reporter, show host, or analyst has questioned, or tried to make a campaign issue out of the fact that Thomas Mulcair chooses to wear a beard, or suggested that he could be hiding behind it, or joked that he could be using it as a prop to add more masculinity to his quite obvious effeminacy, with the exception of me, of course in a earlier post I published called https://archemdis.wordpress.com/…/tom-mulcair-the-man-lurking-behind-the-beard. On a more serious note, since the election campaigns started I have yet to hear or see reports, or discussions about Thomas Mulcair’s:

  • Starting as a Provincial Liberal, offering to be a top advisor to Stephen Harper and refusing to remain a NDP member of parliament if he was not given the leadership of the party after jack Layton died; all this going to show that he believes in nothing except advancing his career.
  • Refusal to stop at the security gate on parliament and identify himself hill, further breaking the law a few moments later by refusing to stop when the RCMP clearly signalled him to pull over.
  • Inability to convey himself as a leader that 2 of his female MPs thought they could go to when they thought that they were being sexually harassed for advice on what to do about it and how that  caused his 2 female MPs to instead bring their problem directly to Justin Trudeau for answers to their problems.
  • Satellite office scandal that involve both Thomas Mulcair and his MPs

As I have said earlier in this post the political news media in Canada seems to think that it is more important for the Canadian voting population to see Justin Trudeau as too young, too inexperienced and too rich to be the next Prime Minister of Canada then to remind Canadians of some of the facts I have mentioned about the other two front running candidates.  Gender preference sexually has been overcome as far as becoming the leader of  a political party and premiere of a province, but it would seem that discrimination where age is concerned is the new prejudice, or discriminatory factory that would keep a legally aged person from being considered for the job of Prime Minister of Canada according to the Conservative Party of Canada, the New Democratic Party of Canada and the Canadian news media of Canada.  Personally if I were a young legally aged person in Canada I would take this real personal and show  that on election day, by voting for Justin Trudeau if I felt that he made sense and would make a good Prime Minister.

 As Thomas Mulcair tries to ride to victory in the upcoming federal election on the coattails of  the  NDP provincial party’s victory over the conservatives in Alberta, it would appear that some very interesting similarities between Steven Harper and Thomas Mulcair are beginning to become apparent. I bring this up because I am wondering with Thomas Mulcair out ahead in the polls right now despite the similarities in leadership styles if all Canadians require to feel like they are getting a change in government is a change in the political party’s name? I mean we sit and scream for new blood, a new way of thinking and a new approach to politics, but the reality is that to us a change of political colors is all that seems to be required. This is why I feel that it is so important that Canadians understand that the Canadian political news media in my opinion can no longer be trusted to give us just the facts, or all of the facts damaging, or helpful concerning all political candidates  during an election. Just look at how the Canadian news media looks at and  portrays Steven Harper, Thomas Mulcair and Justin Trudeau and how that coverage is affecting the way you feel about each of  them becoming the next Prime Minister of Canada.


  1. Is this type of sensationalized reporting brought on by the fact that scandals, cheating acting as though you are above the law is the new norm of behavior for our politicians and so no longer considered important news?
  2. Is it that news agencies like the CBC have been bullied so much and suffered so much in terms of their budget at the hands of the Conservative Party of Canada simply for reporting honestly, that they have told their hosts and reporters to cover the story, but drop it quickly.

Is it the job of the news media to report the news as it happens, or is it the job of the news to pick  for the Canadian voter who is a worthy candidate to run for political office and who is not? I believe it is the first choice, report the facts impartially about each candidate and let the Canadian voters decide for themselves who they want to vote for.

About archemdis

I try to say what is on my mind and not hurt others, but some things need to be said whether they hurt or not and I do just that. I try to listen as well as talk, but my opinion is just that mine. You need not take it as your own, just respect the fact that I am entitled to it, as you are yours. I do read all comments, but will only answer, or allow to be displayed those which adress me by name, refer to the post by name in the comment, or that have been sent through the proper channels. In this manner I can tell whether the comment was meant for me and that it is not just spam.
This entry was posted in abuse of power, Canadian Federal Elections, Government and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.