whatthe
Active Member
Agreed. It's almost unheard of.
|
|
|
- Thread starter MetroMan
- Start date
- Status
Agreed. It's almost unheard of.
Ramako
Moderator
These studies are interesting but I think it's disingenuous and counterproductive for the left to blame Chow's failed campaign on such prejudices. While I'm sure they exist, there were far more fundamental problems with her campaign which had nothing to do with her communication style, as recently summed up by John Lorinic here.
That being said, the problem I find with her communication style has nothing to do with the quality of her English and everything to do with her speaking style. You'll notice that right before she makes the most substantive or poignant point, midway through her sentence, she pauses then slows down and softens her speech, as though she were speaking to a child, so as to emphasize the point. First off it awkwardly disrupts the pace and flow of her sentence, but more importantly it comes off as condescending, particularly when she's addressing someone directly. I could absolutely see how it rubs people the wrong way.
Last edited:
Racquette
Active Member
Interesting! So the police have no way to interview 'persons of interest' in connection with a crime, in Canada, unless said persons wish to be interviewed? One doesn't want to see police power abused...but I confess I'm amazed they ever solve crimes while hobbled to that extent.
Am guessing that should apply to 'carding' also and therefore it should be a non-issue? People could just refuse to produce the ID and ask if they are free to leave? Is the problem just that people don't know that?
Jimmi T
Senior Member
I heard a rumour cops would've preferred to have just placed trackers on their cars but initially couldn't get a warrant to do so. Cessna was the next best option as safely tailing them without a tracker would've required about a half dozen cars.
Les Nessman
Active Member
Excuse my ignorance,
They have him drunk driving, yelling abusively at 911 operators (weak one), public intoxication, assaulting a staff member, threatening to kill someone- on tape..............and they can't "pull him in"?
Sorry, if anyone of us did that.....we'd be charged and have some 'splainin to do!
What am I missing?
casita
Senior Member
I have heard some fiery oratory from Olivia Chow when she was in the House of Commons. I much prefer that Olivia to the one we have seen in this election. (She also says ok a lot, as if she is clarifying comprehension which can also lead to a perception of condescension)
the lemur
Senior Member
Ha, I hadn't thought of that. The Rob Ford Fund for F*cking Minorities Who Need Better Football Stuff.
Ramako
Moderator
OSS 117
Senior Member
I'm sure the boys in Chicago have standing orders to keep the hookers warm for his imminent return.
Greg Banks
Active Member
That's a fact and if you really want to screw things up even before the police can open their mouths ask for Duty Counsel.
whatthe
Active Member
Generally speaking (there are of course exceptions to every rule), that's correct! And uncooperative witnesses do hobble police investigations quite frequently. I have had many, many cases fall apart because of the code on the streets - witnesses won't cooperate, so the charges are withdrawn.
Racquette
Active Member
This. I readily confess my own inherent bias TOWARD wanting to support Chow due to her gender. Nor do I think my ultimate lack of enthusiasm was merely due to style although it is possible that a communication style that I continue to categorize as 'lacking' may have obscured some substance...
Not to dismiss the prejudices - I am indeed sure they exist, as you said; however, I wouldn't dismiss the gains she could make by critically examining the critiques and working on the delivery/clarity/relevance of her message, either, as her apologists appear to wish to do.
whatthe
Active Member
If they have grounds to arrest him, of course they can (and should) arrest him. And I have no doubt that if any of my clients at Jane & Finch had done some of the things RoFo has done, they'd have been in cuffs.
But unless they're going to lay charges, they can't just "pull him in for questioning". Even if they do arrest him they can't force him to answer any questions.
Cooper
Senior Member
My guess is they were hoping to find evidence showing that Rob was involved in Sandro's drug business. It would have been cheaper to look in the envelopes, IMO. Can they do that, whatthe, or would it be an illegal search?
- Status