August 02, 2015

Follow The Rebel for fearless Canadian federal election coverage!

Rebel Staff
 

The 2015 federal election has begun. And we’ve launched our new attack ad! Not against the Liberals or the NDP. But against a far more powerful, better-funded party: the Media Party.

You know what I mean — the majority of journalists in Canada who pretend to be independent and objective, but in real life are just left wing activists embedded within the media.

They’re not going to be reporting on this election. They’re going to be campaigning in it — through their newspapers and TV shows.

Not us. We’re the only independent news outlet that Canadians can trust to give the whole story — not just left-wing cheerleading.

Help us bring you coverage of the 2015 federal election campaign and show you what the Media Party never will by clicking here

Unlike the CBC or Maclean’s, we don’t take a dime in government money.

Unlike CTV and the Globe and Mail, we’re not run by Liberal donors.

We’re on your side — and we’re fearless.

SIGN UP NOW and never miss a single election story!

PS: Tell me what you think of our new ad, and share it with your friends!

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-08-22 02:40:23 -0400
The background is good. It prevents distraction and reminds us we’re a brick in the wall
commented 2015-08-21 16:51:11 -0400
Ezra, Get a different background, you look like someone has you backed into a corner.
commented 2015-08-21 13:31:48 -0400
Richard Brinkman cry me a river! Poor baby was ignored gee that is sad.
commented 2015-08-21 13:01:33 -0400
I posted my comment today on the Huffington Post news story titled: Wanted: Campaign Supporters As Backdrops To Humanize Party Leaders – CBC:

COMMENT: NEWS MEDIA AND GOVERNMENT – It’s all a Gong Show folks! Recently I witnessed the NEWS media, Ezra Levant of The Rebel Media doing EXACTLY THE SAME AS POLITITIANS DO – By controlling the outcome of his news event – He placed certain Q&A people at the back of the room of a recent Edmonton Emergency Town-Hall Meeting to ask the right questions about the NDP that Ezra had scripted answers for – people who had thier hands up including myself were ignored all night by Ezra’s people who looked after placing the mikes in the hands for the mouths of selected right-wing people – The evennt was filmed by The Rebel Media – Later I finally cornered Ezra at the end of the meeting and asked him about how he intends on inproving the low trust Canadians have with today’s corporate news media… This was his answer close to the end of my YouTube Citizen news Report- https://youtu.be/ZmRTS3XFMdU
commented 2015-08-19 20:09:11 -0400
What dose the NYT know?
commented 2015-08-19 18:48:14 -0400
JIMMY DA SILVA , if you have to write that much hype, then you are desperate…….
commented 2015-08-19 16:07:47 -0400
I basically rule out any poll with under 1500 polled and stick to the larger polls. Also keep in mind that most Canadians don’t really give a flying rat fart until the last month, so polls should still be taken with a grain of salt at this point. Using the August polls, and factoring in the fact that NDP votes are far less committed than CPC ones, I call it a tie at this point, around the 31% level between the NDP and CPC. There still are around 12% of voters who haven’t decided so they will be the deal breakers. The most concerning trend is that the NDP seems to lead in all age groups except over 65. So that means, despite all Harper’s work to woo the middle class family vote, the NDP is still beating him there.
commented 2015-08-19 11:53:29 -0400
Gee Da Silva idiots like you show up on every web site spouting your nonsense. Troll
commented 2015-08-19 11:51:57 -0400
Da Silva you’re an idiot. You want everyone here to agree with you. Regardless of how more intelligent we are.
commented 2015-08-16 22:38:49 -0400
From The New York Times:

The Closing of the Canadian Mind

THE prime minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, has called an election for Oct. 19, but he doesn’t want anyone to talk about it.

He has chosen not to participate in the traditional series of debates on national television, confronting his opponents in quieter, less public venues, like the scholarly Munk Debates and CPAC, Canada’s equivalent of CSPAN. His own campaign events were subject to gag orders until a public outcry forced him to rescind the forced silence of his supporters.

Mr. Harper’s campaign for re-election has so far been utterly consistent with the personality trait that has defined his tenure as prime minister: his peculiar hatred for sharing information.

Americans have traditionally looked to Canada as a liberal haven, with gun control, universal health care and good public education.

But the nine and half years of Mr. Harper’s tenure have seen the slow-motion erosion of that reputation for open, responsible government. His stance has been a know-nothing conservatism, applied broadly and effectively. He has consistently limited the capacity of the public to understand what its government is doing, cloaking himself and his Conservative Party in an entitled secrecy, and the country in ignorance.

His relationship to the press is one of outright hostility. At his notoriously brief news conferences, his handlers vet every journalist, picking and choosing who can ask questions. In the usual give-and-take between press and politicians, the hurly-burly of any healthy democracy, he has simply removed the give.

Mr. Harper’s war against science has been even more damaging to the capacity of Canadians to know what their government is doing. The prime minister’s base of support is Alberta, a western province financially dependent on the oil industry, and he has been dedicated to protecting petrochemical companies from having their feelings hurt by any inconvenient research.

In 2012, he tried to defund government research centers in the High Arctic, and placed Canadian environmental scientists under gag orders. That year, National Research Council members were barred from discussing their work on snowfall with the media. Scientists for the governmental agency Environment Canada, under threat of losing their jobs, have been banned from discussing their research without political approval. Mentions of federal climate change research in the Canadian press have dropped 80 percent. The union that represents federal scientists and other professionals has, for the first time in its history, abandoned neutrality to campaign against Mr. Harper.

His active promotion of ignorance extends into the functions of government itself. Most shockingly, he ended the mandatory long-form census, a decision protested by nearly 500 organizations in Canada, including the Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Catholic Council of Bishops. In the age of information, he has stripped Canada of its capacity to gather information about itself. The Harper years have seen a subtle darkening of Canadian life.

The darkness has resulted, organically, in one of the most scandal-plagued administrations in Canadian history. Mr. Harper’s tenure coincided with the scandal of Rob Ford, the mayor of Toronto who admitted to smoking crack while in office and whose secret life came to light only when Gawker, an American website, broke the story. In a famous video at a Ford family barbecue, Mr. Harper praised the Fords as a “Conservative political dynasty.”

Mr. Harper’s appointments to the Senate — which in Canada is a mercifully impotent body employed strictly for political payoffs — have proved greedier than the norm. Mr. Harper’s chief of staff was forced out for paying off a senator who fudged his expenses. The Mounties have pressed criminal charges.

After the 2011 election, a Conservative staffer, Michael Sona, was convicted of using robocalls to send voters to the wrong polling places in Guelph, Ontario. In the words of the judge, he was guilty of “callous and blatant disregard for the right of people to vote.” In advance of this election, instead of such petty ploys, the Canadian Conservatives have passed the Fair Elections Act, a law with a classically Orwellian title, which not only needlessly tightens the requirements for voting but also has restricted the chief executive of Elections Canada from promoting the act of voting. Mr. Harper seems to think that his job is to prevent democracy.

But the worst of the Harper years is that all this secrecy and informational control have been at the service of no larger vision for the country. The policies that he has undertaken have been negligible — more irritating distractions than substantial changes. He is “tough on crime,” and so he has built more prisons at great expense at the exact moment when even American conservatives have realized that over-incarceration causes more problems than it solves. Then there is a new law that allows the government to revoke citizenship for dual citizens convicted of terrorism or high treason — effectively creating levels of Canadianness and problems where none existed.

For a man who insists on such intense control, the prime minister has not managed to control much that matters. The argument for all this secrecy was a technocratic impulse — he imagined Canada as a kind of Singapore, only more polite and rule abiding.

The major foreign policy goal of his tenure was the Keystone Pipeline, which Mr. Harper ultimately failed to deliver. The Canadian dollar has returned to the low levels that once earned it the title of the northern peso. Despite being left in a luxurious position of strength after the global recession, he coasted on what he knew: oil. In the run-up to the election, the Bank of Canada has announced that Canada just had two straight quarters of contraction — the technical definition of a recession. He has been a poor manager by any metric.

The early polls show Mr. Harper trailing, but he’s beaten bad polls before. He has been prime minister for nearly a decade for a reason: He promised a steady and quiet life, undisturbed by painful facts. The Harper years have not been terrible; they’ve just been bland and purposeless. Mr. Harper represents the politics of willful ignorance. It has its attractions.

Whether or not he loses, he will leave Canada more ignorant than he found it. The real question for the coming election is a simple but grand one: Do Canadians like their country like that?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html?_r=0
commented 2015-08-16 10:01:20 -0400
NDP would lead a minority government if elections held today, Tories slip to third according to the polls posted by today’s National Post -Yet 2 days ago Huffington Post polls indicated the Tories were in the lead with NDP in second place and Liberals trailing in third… No wonder the corporate news media has lost so much trust… Active Citizen Free News Sharing I interviewed Ezra Levant on the lack of TRUST in today’s News Media. YouTube: TheRebel Media Ezra Levant on Alberta NDP and MLA Rod Loyola – https://youtu.be/ZmRTS3XFMdU
commented 2015-08-15 14:06:19 -0400
Jack,

Well the mentality of people here provides an abundance of things to bitch about. I understand that you want to live in a world where everyone agrees with you, but it’s important to be challenged and for an opposing view.
commented 2015-08-14 20:14:55 -0400
Jimmy, you shouldn’t bitch about bitching, because that’s all you do here.
commented 2015-08-12 02:49:27 -0400
It is so hypocritical that conservatives have no problem with taxpayers paying $300 to $500 MILLION dollars due to a completely unnecessary extended election, because they will hopefully get what they want – Stephen Harper being re-election, but they bitch about the CBC and other things they deem to wasteful and unnecessary for the taxpayers, because they are things they don’t want.

Lesson learned? Conservatives have no problem wasting close to a BILLION DOLLARS if they get what they want, but if it’s something that liberals want – they are evil and destroying the Canadian economy.
commented 2015-08-11 22:13:59 -0400
I don’t think you can assume the additional costs since the costs are mainly at the back-end of the comparing. Their offices are always the open so there is really very little costs due to the length of the campaign.
If the Conservative party Was to apply true -consrvative policy they would never get elected. A fact of life is that they have to adopt some liberal policy.
commented 2015-08-11 14:26:01 -0400
Charleton, I was referring to taxpayers funding of Elections Canada through a 77-day campaign, regardless of individual party’s or candidates’ spending. For Elections Canada to be up and running it costs an estimated $375 million for a 37-day campaign, but the Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation says this election is likely to cost $500 million, just for administration. Elections Canada needs to rent office space and hire staff to operate its offices.
So yes, whether you support one party or another you are still going to pay through the nose so that Harper can gain a small partisan advantage. That is why I say Harper has long ago stopped defending conservative or Reform values of less government intrusion and less pork-barreling.
commented 2015-08-11 11:02:38 -0400
Jay, I’m pretty sure Liberals and NDP won’t spend anymore because they don’t have anymore. Pretty telling don’t you think? Vote for them and you won’t either!
commented 2015-08-11 10:57:18 -0400
Jay how do you get the extended campaign costs taxpayers twice as much? That is ignorance since you have no idea what each party will spend or be reimbursed.
commented 2015-08-11 10:53:59 -0400
I agree Michael. Conservative party is the only choice. They are also the only party with any money proof of their economic superiority.
commented 2015-08-09 01:36:33 -0400
Surely “fearless” election coverage would begin with a critique of a government’s choice to foist a campaign twice as long as necessary, and costing taxpayers twice as much as necessary, just for a perceived partisan gain. They are “Conservative” in name only. Harper has long-since ceased to speak for conservative or Reform values.
commented 2015-08-06 15:58:01 -0400
I love when conservatives use words like EVIL. So every liberal on the planet is EVIL? I know a Michael McKay – I hope it isn’t you, because I would have to stop associating with you if you think I am evil and all.
commented 2015-08-06 15:36:14 -0400
Thanks, Michael, and thanks for reminding the readership that approximately 70% of your fellow Canadians, those who lack your clear insight and idiosyncratic use of the upper case, are supporters of intrinsic and moral EVIL.
I’m sorry, Joan – you were saying something about “attacks”…?
commented 2015-08-06 15:10:03 -0400
Conservative Party of Canada is the only real choice. When you read the political Platforms of the other three Political Parties that are running in the Federal Election, there is only one clear choice, and that is the CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA. The Liberals, Greens, and the NDP, if you read take time and study and read the Political Platforms of these COMMUNIST, SOCIALIST PARTIES. you will find that their Party Platforms are full of policies that areIntrinsically, and morally EVIL, and as a Born again Christian, who hapens to be a FAITHFUL ROMAN CATHOLIC, I cannot in all good conscience Vote for any party except Conservative Party of Canada.
commented 2015-08-06 10:41:52 -0400
Wanda, do you remember the article Stephen Harper published in the National Post two days after the funeral of Pierre Trudeau, way back in 2000? Have you read Tom Flanagan’s account of the campaign he ran on Harper’s behalf, and how Harper characterized his "enemies? Or Paul Wells’ description of Harper’s attitude toward the Liberal party?
commented 2015-08-06 09:53:38 -0400
Also, folks, don’t forget that lots of readers never post comments.

For my part, as a long-time registered Conservative Party member, I am sickened by the – sorry, Wanda – hateful and mean-spirited attacks by avowed hard-right conservative thinkers against anyone who disagrees.

When I see calls by avowed hard-right conservative thinkers to kill homosexuals, I wonder if it may not be time for another party to take the helm – as a minority, of course – for a term.

Just as I would not support a child or a colleague in abhorent attitudes and values, I will not support a Conservative Party that promotes or even condones killing any minority. Nor will I vote for any party that promotes or condones devaluing women, treating FN Canadians as less than equal, and suppressing free speech about these issues with vile personal attacks and social exclusion.

I am not shy about saying so but lots of people read sites like this who do not ever comment but who are influenced nevertheless. And the prejudice and hatred don’t attract votes.
commented 2015-08-06 08:10:28 -0400
@liza: : “Jimmy, you and Rudden are just here for the entertainment, but your influence on us is about as weighty as the Rebels influence on you.”
Well, I hope that’s correct. Certainly the “Rebel” has had an influence on me, and it’s good to know that we’re influencing others as well. On some of the Aboriginal discussions, it was good to be able to clarify a few points of law that people didn’t seem to get, and it may, hopefully, broaden their thinking about those issues in the future.
As I said before, for a lot of readers, this is a site some people come to simply for the comfort of a like-minded, uncritical community who can reassure each other that “we’re right, they’re wrong”. Those folks tend to respond to any threat to their world view with rage. I get that. It’s a defense mechanism, completely natural and completely understandable. Generally I don’t engage with those folks after the first few explosions. But there ARE points that need to made, and truths that impact on discussion here, that people should hear. The fact that some writers have been registered, paid lobbyists for oil, gas, and tobacco SHOULD color the way a reader approaches their posts.
commented 2015-08-06 08:06:36 -0400
“Hate”, “loathing”, “visceral” – these are all words that, it seems to me, have become so misused and overused in political, social discourse as to be virtually meaningless. They bring the discussion, whatever the topic may be, into the realm of those TV programs where vacuous celebrities indulge their emotions “I hate that”, “he hates me”, “why are you so hateful”, it’s all about the hate, hate, hate. We seem oblivious of the fact that hate is not synonymous with “disagreement” or even “dislike” and it was never understood to mean “stuff that doesn’t make me feel good”.

I doubt very much that PM Harper “hates” the Liberal Party. Maybe if he were running around saying things like “death to all liberals” or advocating that we put them in cages and drown them in swimming pools, then a case could be made that he does indeed feel some intensely strong, intensely negative emotion toward Liberals or the Liberal Party or whatever it is that he’s alleged to be hating at the time. But aside from these kinds of actions, it’s doubtful that he feels hatred towards them. Implying that he does really takes into banal entertainment culture. That should worry you because as long as you sit around singing “I hate you, you hate me”, your influence on the world around you is zero.
commented 2015-08-06 06:59:51 -0400
Jay, what are “traditional conservative values”? I understand those encompass a belief that the role of the state is to intrude as minimally as possible on the freedoms of its citizens, to provide for the physical security of its citizens (that is, safety from internal and external violence and aggression), to establish basic legal frameworks to govern contractual relations and provide for the orderly resolution of disputes, to maintain a judicial system to uphold the law, to promote economic growth through free enterprise, and generally to promote self-reliance, responsibility to family and community as the foundation for personal and collective success. That’s kind of it in a nutshell although there are much more fullsome explanations available if you’re interested.

I don’t see this as especially well aligned with the old Progressive Conservative party which had become largely indistinguishable from the Liberal party of the same era. The main difference was that the PC’s were more oriented towards the old Anglo elite while the Libs pitched themselves as being Quebec-centric and immigrant friendly (mainly in Ontario). Both were, however, slavishly devoted to Quebec and the eastern provinces as that’s where most of their leaders and party brass came from and, since both engaged in rampant cronyism, where their hangers-on were based. There wasn’t a whole lot of difference between them. Both presented themselves as variants of a “mushy middle” and that’s what prompted the eventual splintering off of the more traditional conservative group that would become the CPC.

The reason the “mushiness” has fallen out of favour with a lot of voters is that, whatever your views, we are more conscious today than ever of the dangerous world we inhabit. Whether you believe that the greatest source of danger is ISIS or climate change, mushy doesn’t cut it anymore. Hence, the declining fortunes of mushy middle parties and the growth of parties that are somewhat more pointed in their views about those subjects.
commented 2015-08-06 06:59:00 -0400
@rick: " Lots of history there to loathe."
Depending on your ideological stance, the same can be said of any party, of course. But my point is that Harper’s biographers, including the more sympathetic ones, seem to agree that there’s something more visceral than philosophical in Harper’s hatred of the Liberals.