More on the Flogs Issue

BCL has more on the M THIRTY enviro flogs issue.

Also, I've heard that PB is removing identified flogs.

Funding Anti-Green Sock Puppets

Not all unions are in McGuinty's pocket. The Ontario Power Workers' Union (UPW) has bankrolled a campaign against McGuinty fighting the Green Energy Act.

More and more, marketing companies are using social media to promote their clients. UPW is pushing for power produced using coal and nuclear by, in part, seeding conversations in social media.

The marketing company in question is M THIRTY. Read the link above if the details and ethics interests you. I'm not getting into it.

Except to point out that one of the bloggers M THIRTY uses seems to be on the Progressive Bloggers blogroll.

Rather, I just wanted to point out that anti-green groups like Wind Concerns Ontario likely don't exist without similar backing. They say differently, or appear to.

Note: As I write this quick note, I see that BCL has written more, and has included the same suspicions as mine, fleshed out in detail.


UPDATE:

BCL reports some flogs are going into maintenance mode...

A Thought on Campaign Slogans

We're in turbulent times. Economically uncrertain. People are worried about their jobs. People want certainty. Comfort.

Canada just elected a stay-the-course Prime Minister preaching exactly that.

So, here you are, trying to come up with a theme for your opposition political leader in an upcoming provincial election.

And the theme you choose is 'Change?'

You call the policy book 'Changebook?'

Your advertised Twitter hashtag is '#changevote?'

Your campaign bus says '[change]' all over it?

Your candidates have roads signs on their pamphlets saying 'Change Ahead?'

Is this wise?


Compare and contrast:

PCs: Change
NDP: Change that puts people first
Greens: It's Time
Liberals: Forward. Together.

The NDP slogan reads like PC-lite. Even my beloved Greens are working on a 'change' theme.

Look at the Liberal slogan. Isn't that safe? Secure? Together, going forward, which is always good, right? It's safe, it's optimistic. It visions, even. We are given a positive direction, and none of us are alone.

Do people really want change now?

They don't want change. Change isn't safe. They may want BETTER, but they'll stick with being safe. Stay the course (FORWARD). TOGETHER.

You know what? That's a good slogan for the times.

Change isn't. Change is scary.

My Optimistic Debate Analysis

I didn't watch the debate. I couldn't. I happily lack cable. I don't have an antenna attached. And if I did. it couldn't pick up the new digital broadcasts if I tried as I lack the gadget. Anyway, I had better things to do.

I was enjoying a fine steak dinner bought by a friend for my birthday.

I didn't think of the debate once.


What a wonderous birthday gift that was!

(I have happily discovered the joys of borrowing DVDs from the library, BTW. The downside is I'm waiting ages for Buffy Season Two to show up. Everyone has it on hold!)

I hate debates. So much do they drive me crazy, that if I were to watch, my television would implode (it's a tube set) under the onslaught of cutlery, plates, books and whatnot thrown at it. And for what? My analysis of 'who won' is useless. As a political watcher and former PR hack, I know far too much, and am far too cynical, to be caught by turns of phrases, or statistical tricks. My view doesn't reflect the public will at all.


So, then, what of John and Jane Public? What did they think?

Watch for the next set of reliable post-debate day polls, and then you'll know (not this one -- it's an online poll). Maybe. You won't know if it'll last, though, assuming there's any significant movement in the polls at all.

If you insist on figuring it out, don't read newspapers, watch television. If the talking heads say no one won, then the public will likely agree.

Heack. Don't bother. Wait for the polls.

And, why care? If your leader 'lost' -- assuming your leader was even in it -- what are you going to do about it anyway?

Okay, fine. I'll give you my optismistic take.

McGuinty won.

I can tell because he isn't being stoned to death this morning.

I'm sure this is a frustrating election for conservatives and dippers. There's all this ammo, and McGuinty should be long dead from the gunfire. eHealth! Taxation! Debt! But, he keeps on going. It's like he's a zombie. Or Harper. LOL.

Where Mike Harris tries to take credit for America's 1990s economic boom

I woke up in an alternate reality where Mike Harris got an op-ed in The Toronto Star. Typical of Harris, he tries to claim his actions while in office saved Ontario, while ignoring wider trends at the time.

Facing an economic wall, we moved quickly in 1995 to reduce the size and cost of government. It needed to be done. At the same time, we reduced taxes to stimulate private sector job creation and investment. It worked.

We balanced the budget on schedule and created more than 750,000 new private sector jobs in four years. That growth and prosperity lifted thousands of Ontarians from the despair of welfare into meaningful work and created the tax revenue for investments in both health and education.

Actually, Ontario rode the economic boom in America that coincided with Harris assuming power. It was as simple as that.

Despite that, most of our wages have gone nowhere, while the upper echelons have enjoyed increased income.

There's no mention in his piece of selling a highway to balance the budget, or of the eventual structural deficit that developed under his government, or of the lack of preparedness and resources for crisis like Walkerton and SARS. Sure, the debt came under Eves even as they lied about it, but it was Harris' model of government that did it.

"To benefit from history, we first have to understand it" says Harris. Indeed.

And Harris is no historian.