CN Tower
Banned
Reinventing history, Olivia Chow-style
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/03/17/reinventing-history-olivia-chow-style
|
|
|
- Thread starter SJD_Toronto
- Start date
Reinventing history, Olivia Chow-style
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/03/17/reinventing-history-olivia-chow-style
SecretSquirrel
Active Member
A Sue-Ann Levy column? This changes everything*!
I know, I know: debate the message, not the messenger... but when it comes to SAL, the messenger is the message.
A few questions:
- How does promoting bikelanes encourage gridlock, exactly? No, really: how? When answering, try to use facts & studies rather than huffing/puffing/"it's obvious".
- What's wrong with these, exactly? "More than $40 million in child and family projects over three years" / "$100,000 in 2002 for harm reduction projects including safe crack kits"?
- "As chairman of Toronto school board's race relations committee, Chow endorsed a petition to end racially-motivated police violence". What a monster! OK, that's not a question, so here's one: what exactly is wrong with that? (let me guess - it stoked tensions or somesuch nonsense? Are you suggesting Chow is anti-law & order?)
etc. etc. etc.
Really - do you even read the stuff you link to? (I did, but I feel dumber for having done so)
A better title would be "Creatively misinterpreting stuff - Sue-Ann Levy-style", because that's what this is.
* I know sarcasm doesn't always come through on the internet, so for the avoidance of doubt, this was intended to be sarcastic.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
Can you put warning on Sue Ann Levy articles, so people don't click accidently?
The women is completely ignorant about politics. She was convinced both that Rob Ford would make a good mayor and he wasn't a bigot. Clearly she is very naive and grossly incompetent. Why would anyone take her seriously at this point, given how completely she messed up last time?
If you want to go for predictable anti-Chow attack articles, might was well just start with the Toronto Star, who are doing their usual anti-NDP attack thing.
Though combined with their usual attack-the-Conservatives thing, it does make me wonder who'll support.
Are we expecting any seroius centrist candidates, or is all we have the extremists?
JasonParis
Moderator
Holy hyperbole! Toronto's business taxes were lowered under Miller. Was Toronto hollowing-out under Miller or going through a massive expansion? The answer is all around us, yet you post this?
Last edited:
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
Wow, SAL is bringing back the Lastman-era moral panic over rave music? The Right really is desperate for bad things to say about Chow. I was a teenager back then, and became a Chow supporter when I saw her standing up for the rave scene. History has proven her right. We now see cutting edge music and art scenes as being an important source of economic prosperity in the city - rather than some social evil that needs to be shutdown because it scares the old folks.
SecretSquirrel
Active Member
Yeah, I see your "facts" but I "feel" as though taxes went up under Miller, because socialism garbage strike union sweethearts.
If this City elects another socialist I feel we will soon be huddled round burning tires for warmth, all because co-op taxes NDP.
Hey! No point putting all that effort into understanding something when you can just be afraid of it instead.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
Thankfully, no one's afraid of it anymore. I doubt even SAL cares about the raves. She's just grasping for something - anything - to use against Chow. As evidence of how far our city has come, look at how Rob Ford's anti-graffiti campaign fizzled. People embrace edgy creative expression.
the lemur
Senior Member
I was kind of hoping you'd be able to say something in your own words, instead of borrowing someone else's and hoping for the appeal to authority to rub off. I mean, some of SAL's attempts at compare-and-contrast aren't even about the same thing:
1. It's possible to be opposed to island airport expansion while still supporting small businesses, jobs and prosperity (doesn't everyone?)
2. Bike lanes don't promote gridlock/congestion - they're a way of offering an option to relieve it. Note that SAL opts to call it gridlock, which is something (total immobility) that happens rarely here, as opposed to congestion, which is less catastrophic, largely unavoidable and something that Ford has really done nothing tangible to address. SAL herself rides a bike! I guess that means she avoids bike lanes and exercises a prerogative to call other bike users 'helmet heads', because SAL is like a puerile bully version of a shark: if she doesn't stop applying childish nicknames to people she disagrees with, she'll die.
3. Role models: she may not have done entirely right by the co-op principles but, uh, isn't someone who abuses alcohol and drugs, habitually lies about it (and other things), subjects others to drunken (racist) abuse, lies about that, makes death threats on camera and refuses to explain them, endorses known criminals in legal proceedings and hiring procedures, lies about being assaulted, etc., etc. ... isn't someone like that a worse role model, by several orders of magnitude, than someone who didn't quite do enough to avoid the appearance of ethical impropriety?
And if we're going to talk about role models and spouses, SAL herself has some explaining to do. She met her partner while writing about a dispute regarding media coverage of a situation that seemed on the surface to be unfair to her partner but which turned out to be a case of fraudulently benefiting from a system designed to help someone less fortunate! That part of the story she didn't disclose at all.
blearghhh
New Member
no she didn't! For the love of god can you please go and read the multiple times in this !(!#$& thread where this specific #$(@@#(@#$$*ing point is refuted multiple times with excruciating goddamn fucking detail?!??!?!?!?!!
jml
Active Member
I also like "That's not a proper place for a high income couple to be living in opinion." when this is the actual point of a co-op.
TFC
Active Member
Back to actual policy discussion 
, Soknacki came out in favour of city-wide rules for food trucks and against the veto option for BIAs.
Soknacki Campaign @Soknacki2014 2h
RT @DavidSoknacki: New food truck rules give resto's veto through BIAs - recipe for less diversity, competition. Need citywide rules #TOpoli
, Soknacki came out in favour of city-wide rules for food trucks and against the veto option for BIAs.Soknacki Campaign @Soknacki2014 2h
RT @DavidSoknacki: New food truck rules give resto's veto through BIAs - recipe for less diversity, competition. Need citywide rules #TOpoli
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
David Soknacki.
Let's hope.
Regarding Soknacki, he answered a Reddit AMA yesterday; answered about 40 questions.
Here is the link
TFC
Active Member
I agree. So far, Soknacki has been the only real moderate/centrist candidate capable of attracting people from both the left and right wings.
Olivia Chow, Rob Ford and John Tory are polarizing figures in their own way, and tend to be characterized by their political affiliation. Electing Chow as mayor will isolate a large segment of the population who don't share her ideology, similar to how electing Ford has isolated a large segment of the population.
the lemur
Senior Member
This is the thing the critics will never address. You can ask them where they think Chow and Layton should have been living and they'll tell you they don't know or care. They're interested only in being able to say they think it's inappropriate and that it supposedly took an apartment away from someone who needed it more, as if they were so very concerned all along about housing the less fortunate.
Same with SAL and her criticism of initiatives Chow supported. Do something with money to address a problem? Bad. Address a problem by 'regulating it out of existence' (squeegee kids) rather than recognizing that it arose due to certain circumstances that don't go away through regulation? Good. Otherwise regulation bad, freedom, low tax, let the market decide, blah honk subways.
SecretSquirrel
Active Member
The only answer of his I didn't like was to the question: "Why are you in favour of the airport expansion?"
His answer was:
Soknacki said:
So, err... it must be legal, and we must have a Council plan for avoiding the inevitable traffic disaster. You'll forgive me if I'm somewhat cynical that a "Council-approved plan" will actually make much of a dent in the existing problem, let alone the massive additional load that would created by the expansion. Not exactly compelling stuff; not a word about the impact of the increased plane traffic on people living, working and enjoying recreational activities on the waterfront & Islands. Maybe he'll come around.
Otherwise, I thought he came off well. He's one of only two major candidates I would consider voting for, although his support for the airport expansion makes him the best of a bad bunch after Chow.
Last edited: