News   Nov 15, 2024
 695     3 
News   Nov 15, 2024
 859     0 
News   Nov 15, 2024
 1.1K     0 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
But surely Fordites think that our cops are tops!

If things get to where Ford Nation thinks the police are part of a leftist conspiracy, they've really flow off to Cloud Cuckooland.
 
I disagree. As FCG notes, above, there's a wonderful bit of poetry in a Fordite attacking the Star's (or anyone's) ethics. Also, some of the best satireon this site has been the sock-puppet Fordite-spoofers whose words and views are so close to the real thing that it is challenging to distinguish the two.

For all the talk about how Ford Nation is delusional, its really strange how completely paranoid some of you guys are when it comes to all matters Ford.

Ford has a 40% approval rating. Some of the people here seem to be in such denial about that that they seem to think anybody who supports Ford has to be a "sock-puppet Fordite-spoofer." Really, is it so hard to believe that maybe the two or three Ford supporters on here are part of the hundreds of thousands of Torontonians who support Ford?

Same thing with my personal anecdote. At least two people called it out as BS and refused to believe it. The anecdote? I support Ford and most of the people I know don't support Ford but didn't believe the crack allegations either. Yeah, I was really pushing the boundaries of credulity with that one.
 
I support Ford and most of the people I know don't support Ford but didn't believe the crack allegations either. Yeah, I was really pushing the boundaries of credulity with that one.

Various polls do not support your interpretation - and presumably those polls also gave you the 40% figure. One still has to logically explain to me why someone who wasn't remotely guiltless would go about avoid the media for a week AND then provide a heavily parsed, legally meaningless statement of "supposed" innocence (for such a supposed straight talker, I might add).

And beyond that - truth, much less good governance isn't a popularity contest.

AoD
 
Last edited:
I don't see any ethics being breached at all. I think you see it that way cause it's your guy...not because you are concerned for "ethics" (in which case you would definitely not be a self-proclaimed Rob Ford supporter).

If you don't see any ethics being breached, if you don't see intentionally trying to mislead the public and sway the events of an election combined with printing false stories with no subsequent retractions as unethical, then I don't know what I can say.

There seems to a filter as to what people here respond to. There have been 4 or 5 responses about the KFC video and not one that acknowledges the first two ethical violations I pointed out here.

That poll to which you're referring wasn't a question asked directly about the credibility of the Star, was it? It asked if people believe there exists a crack tape. The Star isn't the only news outlet that has hinted that it believes the tape exists.

But the Star is the only media outlet (along with Gawker) that purported to have seen the video and asserted that it exists. If you don't believe in the crack video, then it follows that you don't believe the Star, as they have stated that a video of Ford smoking crack cocaine does exist.

I'm not sure why this has become such a contested topic on here. Michael Cooke has said as much.


Anyway, I wish those who come here to support Ford would just speak from their own beliefs and conclusions rather than acting as emissaries from the real-world, wanting to tell us how the people (those at Tim Horton's and Walmart, in Fordspeak) think.

I have, countless times.

Not to mention that the phrase is always "they resort constantly to low-blow, TMZ-style videos like the KFC one"... but there is not a single additional example of that. I don't know, I thought "constantly" meant something else.

The KFC video was certainly the low-point, but there have been other instances. Following the Mayor to his cottage in Muskoka, for one.
 
Various polls do not support your interpretation - and presumably those polls also gave you the 40% figure.

What polls are you talking about here? Polling has shown about half the city does not believe the crack allegations.

One still has to logically explain to me why someone who wasn't remotely guiltless would go about avoid the media for a week AND then provide a heavily parsed, legally meaningless statement of "supposed" innocence (for such a supposed straight talker, I might add).

We're not debating the merits of the crack allegation. For the record, I've stated that I believe the video exists. What I'm saying is that the Star has lost credibility in the eyes of many Torontonians, as polls have shown.
 
For all the talk about how Ford Nation is delusional, its really strange how completely paranoid some of you guys are when it comes to all matters Ford.

Ford has a 40% approval rating. Some of the people here seem to be in such denial about that that they seem to think anybody who supports Ford has to be a "sock-puppet Fordite-spoofer." Really, is it so hard to believe that maybe the two or three Ford supporters on here are part of the hundreds of thousands of Torontonians who support Ford?

I don't think anyone is in denial about the polling numbers, but I will admit to being dismayed/curious that such a high proportion of the electorate is either stupid and/or evil enough to continue to support Ford after all that has happened. But in response to your comment re: the existence of Fordite spoofers, there have been a number of spoof-posts that nail the Ford Nation talking points better than the real thing, complete with "correct" Teabonic punctuation's (sic). It's not that difficult to fathom. Colbert, for example, does Fox News better than Fox News.

Same thing with my personal anecdote. At least two people called it out as BS and refused to believe it. The anecdote? I support Ford and most of the people I know don't support Ford but didn't believe the crack allegations either. Yeah, I was really pushing the boundaries of credulity with that one.

Are you aware that "credulity" is a synonym for "gullibility", and does not mean the same thing as "credibility". Was that intentional or Freudian? You're clearly literate, so I am trying to read the post from the POV that the substitution of "credulity" for "credibility" in the "pushing the boundaries" idiom was a sly turn of phrase, but I'm having trouble.
 
I agree with what you said, but it should be pointed out that Urban Toronto isn't under the jurisdiction of the Charter.
thank you. It always irritates me when people believe "freedom of speech" mean freedom from criticism and/or free access to the platform of their choice. Yes, they may speak freely, but no one is obligated to provide or sponsor a platform from which they may speak.
 
If you don't see any ethics being breached, if you don't see intentionally trying to mislead the public and sway the events of an election combined with printing false stories with no subsequent retractions as unethical, then I don't know what I can say.

There seems to a filter as to what people here respond to. There have been 4 or 5 responses about the KFC video and not one that acknowledges the first two ethical violations I pointed out here.

Well, since we're on the topic of ethics - what of the fake twitter accounts of his campaign? What of David Price sock-puppeting on his radio show and his supposed punishment and continued employment after the fact? What about his habitual lies until confronted with the facts? You can't seem to tolerate a paper doing supposedly unethical acts and yet one has nothing to say about the chief magistrate of the city running a campaign and governing with these tactics and standards?

And unlike the Star - which has to respond to Press Council complaints - how many time has Rob Ford been rapped by the Integrity Commission AND decided (not inadvertently) to simply ignore it?

AoD
 
Last edited:
For all the talk about how Ford Nation is delusional, its really strange how completely paranoid some of you guys are when it comes to all matters Ford.

Ford has a 40% approval rating. Some of the people here seem to be in such denial about that that they seem to think anybody who supports Ford has to be a "sock-puppet Fordite-spoofer." Really, is it so hard to believe that maybe the two or three Ford supporters on here are part of the hundreds of thousands of Torontonians who support Ford?

We'll see how those numbers look once a viable, real conservative candidate emerges with a platform. At the moment, all these polls really indicate are a yes/no answer in "Do you support Ford?"
Once the race starts, it'll be "Do you support Ford, or do you support x, y, z, etc. candidate?" Mind you that platforms are not mutually exclusive, so some people who like certain aspects will be convinced to go elsewhere.

We need real fiscal Holyday-esque conservatism in this city, not Ford-esque populism.



Hudak says 'subways are the right thing to do'
By: Richard J. Brennan Provincial Politics, Published on Mon Jul 15 2013

PC Leader Tim Hudak suggested Ontario’s budget is big enough to set aside money to pay for subway construction.

Tory Leader Tim Hudak has seen the future and says subways are the way to get there.
Hudak, who was member of the Mike Harris government that cancelled the Eglinton subway, said Monday that building subways, not above ground light rail transit, is the best bang for taxpayers’ dollars.
“I certainly believe in my heart and in my gut that in world class cities they build subways underground. You don’t rip up existing streets and make traffic even worse,” he told reporters outside the Kipling subway station.
And he says they can be built without raising taxes. A Tory government would take over the Toronto Transit Commission.
Holyday conceded that governments of all stripes and all levels have dropped the ball on subway construction.
“If government would have built a little bit of subway every year . . . If they had done it 30 years ago we would probably be well on our way right now,” he said.
Holyday said the $5 tax on each household in Toronto to help pay for the Scarborough line is a start, but says the provincial and federal governments have to pony up as well.
Holyday says he would like to see the subway eventually completed to Sherway Gardens.
“If there was one further west a lot more people might use the subway,” he said.
Hudak said Ontario has a $130 billion budget “so are you telling me you can’t find 1.5 cents on every dollar that you spend?”
“Subways . . . are the right thing to do and it’s better for jobs,” he said.
http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2013/07/15/hudak_says_subways_are_the_right_thing_to_do.html
Wasn't he a week ago decrying the taxes needed for the subway? And wasn't he all about solving the deficit before subway construction (not until after 2017)? A shameless opportunist, be warned of his shallow 'white papers' or anything he says.


Can you link me to that video? I must have missed that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wldrgpyuQY

It wasn't actually the Star who filmed him, they simply reported on the video.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Are you aware that "credulity" is a synonym for "gullibility", and does not mean the same thing as "credibility". Was that intentional or Freudian? You're clearly literate, so I am trying to read the post from the POV that the substitution of "credulity" for "credibility" in the "pushing the boundaries" idiom was a sly turn of phrase, but I'm having trouble.

Yeah, I just used that word incorrectly there. Completely unintentional.
 
Well, since we're on the topic of ethics - what of the fake twitter accounts of his campaign? What of David Price sock-puppeting on his radio show and his supposed punishment and continued employment after the fact? What about his habitual lies until confronted with the facts? You can't seem to tolerate a paper doing supposedly unethical acts and yet one has nothing to say about the chief magistrate of the city running a campaign and governing with these tactics and standards?

And unlike the Star - which has to respond to Press Council complaints - how many time has Rob Ford been rapped by the Integrity Commission AND decided (not inadvertently) to simply ignore it?

AoD

What about them?

Rather then actually address any of the issues I raised, you're trying to instead turn the focus onto Ford. Well, regardless of whether Ford has been ethical or not, the Star hasn't been ethical in their reporting.

Now, if you want to debate the separate issue of whether Ford is ethical, that's one thing. But right now, we're discussing whether the Star has lost credibility and has been unethical in their conduct. Changing the focus onto Ford doesn't address these issues.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top