Category Archives: Parkdale High Park
Ontario Liberals insinuate ONDP hates babies, or when will Ontarians tire of cynical, disingenuous, and negative politics???
As a constituent of what must be one of Ontario’s most progressive ridings, Parkdale-High Park, I was dismayed and disappointed by the first piece of Liberal campaign literature that showed up in my mailbox. In a riding where the Conservative candidate, by all accounts very worthy, is an extreme long shot to get elected, I get that the Liberals will be attacking the NDP. It will be interesting to see if the Liberals will once again engage in personal smears on NDP incumbent, Cheri DiNovo- one of the strongest and most outspoken MPP’s at Queens Park. It devastatingly backfired before, I don’t think they’ll do it again.
Still, for some inexplicable reason the Liberals have decided to attack the NDP on its environmental policy. Personally, I think it’s a big mistake. The NDP is now rolling out very solid environmental platform. The NDP has long been recognized as the strongest advocate of the environment of the three major parties. And the NDP has in its caucus one of the strongest minds and advocates for the environment, former Greenpeace Canada Director, Peter Tabuns.
Regardless, in my mailbox arrives a dead tree -I mean a glossy multi-ink cardboard card- with a picture of a beautiful baby playing on a lawn on one side and on the other side “Fact: Doctors agree, harmful pesticides pose serious health risks”. First, I like the redundancy in that sentence. It’s foolproof even. Really, do you need doctors to confirm that harmful pesticides poses a health risk. Doesn’t anything that is harmful pose a health risk. Anyway, I think if you’re going to kill trees to send out messages to the electorate, you should communicate truthfully, logically and responsibly. This campaign piece is none of that.
Underneath this “fact”, we are told that PCs and the NDP both voted against the provincial pesticide ban introduced by the Liberals. Apparently because the “PCs [Progressive Conservatives] side with pesticide lobby” and because the “NDP sides with PC’s [Personal Computers???]”. The inference, of course, we are asked to make is that the only reason that someone would vote against the proposed legislation would be that one hates babies, one hates lawns, and one especially hates babies playing on lawns. Moreover, we should be reminded that the ONDP is the second coming of Mike Harris and “the proof” is that both the PC’s and the ONDP voted against the pesticide ban. Ontario Liberals, you have got to be kidding!
First, this is so reminiscent of Harper’s attacks during the recent federal election; one attack that particularly irked me was the federal Conservatives insinuation that because Ignatieff had rejected the budget, Ignatieff must be against seniors and students. I guess the Ontario Liberals figure that if it worked for Harper, it might work for McGuinty. Applied in this case, the “logic” runs if the ONDP voted against the provincial pesticide ban, it must be because its against babies.
As is patently obvious, this attack is founded on puerile and faulty logic. Just because pesticides may be harmful and pose serious health risks doesn’t mean any proposed legislation around a pesticide ban must be supported. Moreover, just because the ONDP voted against the pesticide ban, doesn’t mean they did so for the same reasons as the PCs.
Anyway, should anyone want to confirm that Andrea Horwath is not Mike Harris, or that the ONDP does not in fact hate babies, nor hopes to foreclose our future by destroying our environment, go to Stop the Smears. Also, for anyone really interested in the actual debate around the provincial pesticide ban proposed by the Liberals, read the actual debates here.
It’s sad that Dalton McGuinty prefers to wage a negative campaign, forcing parties like the ONDP to expend great effort just to counteract these smears. It’s sad that this distracts from real debate and discussion on very serious and critical issues. It’s sad that McGuinty would rather have people vote against his opponents than vote for his vision and record.
You know that in principle I’m profoundly against strategic voting, which I see as the symptom not the cure for a deeply flawed electoral system. But I guess if there’s one thing worse than “strategic voting” it’s “non strategic strategic voting”. “Strategic voting” advocates say to vote for Peggy Nash in the riding of Parkdale High Park.
I know it’s not a shocker, but do link over there for some very compelling reasons to vote for Jack Layton and the NDP.
Throughout this campaign I’ve written mainly with the “progressive” voter in mind, and have attempted to discredit the Liberal Party of Canada’s claim to represent that label. I’ve discussed things like disingenuous or cynical politics played by Liberals (here, here, here, here). I’ve noted Dion’s highly dubious costing of the Liberal platform and his “regressive” voodoo economics around the Liberal position on slashing corporate tax rates. Progressive voters really just need to keep in mind, that if the Liberal Party of Canada actually stood for “progress”, they would run on electoral reform to address a failing, unfair electoral system which produces things like strategic voting and I believe is partly responsible for decreasing voter turnouts and citizen participation in our democracy.
WHAT THEY’RE SAYING ABOUT PEGGY:
“Peggy Nash brings years of real experience in negotiating with some of Canada’s largest businesses. Canada needs her judgement and skills in the House of Commons in this time of uncertainty and worry.”
Jim Stanford, Economist and Contributing Columnist, Globe and Mail
“This exemplary woman is not a promise. Peggy Nash is a given.”
Cheri DiNovo, MPP Parkdale- High Park
“ You can vote with more than your heart, even your head, for … Peggy Nash in Parkdale-High Park…. and be confident that you will have made your mark beside the name of one of the best MPs that Canada will elect next week.”
NOW, October, 9, 2008
“One of the best local MPs in any party….”
Don Martin, The National Post, October 6, 2008
“…power chick NDP (MP) Peggy Nash… and MPP Cheri DiNovo, they have the riding all sewn up”
Christina Blizzard, Toronto Sun, Sept 24, 2008
“Kudos …to MP Peggy Nash for spurring opposition to the sale of Canadarm and Radarsat-2 satellite technology to a U.S. defence contractor…”
David Olive, Toronto Star, April 14, 2008
“Laurels to …MP Peggy Nash: For standing up for Ontario; too often our representatives in Ottawa forget their roots.”
Editorial Page, Toronto Star, March 1, 2008
I was wondering when The Star would ramp up it shilling for the Liberal Party of Canada, and I guess today’s Saturday edition must have been decided as the best time to do so. I suspect that next Saturday is when we’ll see the editorial board come out and officially endorse the LPC. I still maintain The Star should have been claimed as a campaign expense by the McGuinty Liberals last year and that they failed the public miserably in their coverage of the provincial election.
I usually agree with Christina Blizzard, who always calls them as she sees them.
Political recycling bin
No reducing, lots of reusing as many past politicians use name recognition en route to ballot box
By CHRISTINA BLIZZARD
Checking out some federal lawn signs these days, you could be forgiven for thinking you were caught in a time warp.
The political space and time continuum seems to have become bizarrely bent out of shape. A former premier, a former NDP cabinet minister, one of McGuinty’s former cabinet ministers, a clutch of Mike Harris-era former provincial Tory cabinet ministers and the odd backbencher all have their names on the hustings.
They’re ’90s names in an ’08 world.
It’s like reduce, reuse and recycle for politicians….
A lot of Liberal insiders are wishing it were Rae taking on Prime Minister Stephen Harper, New Democratic honcho Jack Layton and Green Leader Elizabeth May in the TV debate.
Rae is a formidable debater, with experience in televised debating. And his French is better than Dion’s English.
Rae is set for an easy win — especially since the Tory candidate running against him, Chris Reid, was forced to quit over some oddball blog entries.
Which brings us to former McGuinty education minister Gerard Kennedy. He’s in tough in Parkdale-High Park against NDP power chick Peggy Nash. Provincially the riding is held by another popular New Democrat woman, Cheri DiNovo. Between DiNovo and Nash, they have the riding all sewn up.
If Kennedy loses, it will be poetic justice. He was the guy who foisted Dion on an unsuspecting party by throwing his support behind him in the leadership convention.
Most pundits predict it will be adieu, Gerard. And the end of his political career. Any openings at the food bank, I wonder?
There are numerous ways to break down this tightly contested race between Peggy Nash and Gerard Kennedy. While I believe that we desperately need to reform our electoral system if we want to revitalize our democracy, given what we have to work with, we should first focus on the strengths of the First Past the Post system to mitigate its inherent unfairness. An obvious strength of the FPTP system is that it allows voters to establish a direct and local connection with their elected representatives. In the FPTP system, each voter really is asked to evaluate the candidates running in the riding and choose from among those the one that will best represent and defend his/her interests. For PHP, in a head to head comparison, Peggy Nash is the clear and superior choice for most voters, particularly progressive voters.