News   Jul 15, 2024
 376     1 
News   Jul 15, 2024
 544     0 
News   Jul 15, 2024
 560     0 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ford isn't the only one confused. CBS News captioned Winnipeg mayor Sam Katz as being from "Winnipeg, Ontario."

Though CBS' error is remarkably lame (fact-checker asleep on the job?) at least it's a foreign news agency making the mistake. Whereas our (Canadian) mayor's sterling grasp of geography? That's all on him. I'm guessing he figures that the less he knows, the purer he looks.
 
Boy, that NBC article is harsh! Ouch.
What the hell was that incomparable jobs creator Nick Kouvalis doing down there with Ford and the gang? I hope he paid his own way. On a postive note, I am glad to see that Ford's football teams didn't collapse without him here to coach them.

Here's something fun from Spacing:
SCTV's Melonville mayor, Tommy Shanks, accused of siphoning off money from a milk fund...

http://spacingtoronto.ca/2012/09/20/has-mayor-rob-ford-become-mayor-tommy-shanks/
 
Last edited:
LoL, they are both duds......Good Luck
Stintz publicly betrayed him and then successfully cut his transit plans off at the knees. I call that hard-core, not a dud.

Once we have the ability to look beyond ourselves with an eye to taking out Ford, then it doesn't necessarily look so "woe is us".
Fat chance that ability ever manifests itself on this forum.

AG - who would you propose?
I imagine he thinks Ford will come out of this court case unscathed.
 
Fat chance that ability ever manifests itself on this forum.

But, look at it this way--the Fords have a point with their bully-boy "if you don't like it, run for office" schtick. Because in and of ourselves, we likely *wouldn't* win vs Ford--we haven't the infrastructure, or the means. We're mice.

And the same goes for pro-Fords, too. 99% of us don't run for public office; because we know our own limitations.

And when viewed through that idealistic-yet-personally-incapable prism--yeah, Ford looks more unbeatable than he is. But just because we're "incapable", doesn't mean we're "cowards"; or that our own individual incapability translates itself onto whomever does run credibly against Ford.

Look: ultimately, all this buffoonery takes its toll. And if Ford still appears "viable" now, it's in absence of an actual mayoral race that's still two years off--for now, he's all there is, Our Incumbent Mayor. And that's where his absent-minded support lies...
 
But, look at it this way--the Fords have a point with their bully-boy "if you don't like it, run for office" schtick. Because in and of ourselves, we likely *wouldn't* win vs Ford--we haven't the infrastructure, or the means. We're mice.

And the same goes for pro-Fords, too. 99% of us don't run for public office; because we know our own limitations.

And when viewed through that idealistic-yet-personally-incapable prism--yeah, Ford looks more unbeatable than he is. But just because we're "incapable", doesn't mean we're "cowards"; or that our own individual incapability translates itself onto whomever does run credibly against Ford.

Look: ultimately, all this buffoonery takes its toll. And if Ford still appears "viable" now, it's in absence of an actual mayoral race that's still two years off--for now, he's all there is, Our Incumbent Mayor. And that's where his absent-minded support lies...

Yeah, but I think the problem is deeper, and in that respect that Ford's mistake here is deeper and even more foolish. He's not just arguing--if he's even arguing this at all--that our inability to beat him at the polls amounts to our being cowards. He's arguing that this inability translates to our opinions being mistaken, misguided, wrong, what have you.

But that's an obviously asinine argument precisely because, as you've pointed out, the viability of one's political opinions, even if one were to attempt to translate these opinions into the public realm by running for office and attempting to implement them through policy, has sadly little to do with whether one will be successful running for office.

And that's just to say that electoral success is less and less a matter of policy, and more and more a matter of political persuasion, or what you referred to broadly as political 'infrastructure.'

It's the ultimate fool's gambit to attempt to beat an opponent not on the grounds of the actual content of the debate, but on the grounds of whether he could succeed in some other way that's more or less unrelated to content in question.

Sure, Ford could argue that the viability of one's political opinions actually is a matter of whether one can succeed electorally on their basis. But then he'd have to admit that his own campaign was wrongheaded, as he didn't run on policy as much as rhetoric, and one's 'political opinions' refers only to the former, not the latter. In other words, he'd have to admit that he too hasn't 'won' yet, as his campaign wasn't in fact a test of his political opinions. And this just puts him in the same boat as 'us' with respect to this particular way of looking at the matter.

So he can win this debate, but only by losing elsewhere. This all assumes he can debate. And he can't. But whatever.
 
Last edited:
Sure, Ford could argue that the viability of one's political opinions actually is a matter of whether one can succeed electorally on their basis. But then he'd have to admit that his own campaign was wrongheaded, as he didn't run on policy as much as rhetoric, and one's 'political opinions' refers only to the former, not the latter. In other words, he'd have to admit that he too hasn't 'won' yet, as his campaign wasn't in fact a test of his political opinions. And this just puts him in the same boat as 'us' with respect to this particular way of looking at the matter.

So he can win this debate, but only by losing elsewhere. This all assumes he can debate. And he can't. But whatever.

Of course, Ford's the sort who's prone to spinning that being-in-the-same-boatness as a plus. Which in the end, is like an incompetent quack doctor claiming that he's more "at one" with the patients than a competent, qualified professional.

Funny thing is, and I may be treading the Godwin line here: much like he's oblivious to "conflict of interest", Ford's probably also fatally oblivious to the notion of "tinpot fascist dictatorship" as anything more than his idiosyncratic spin on something that imposes on "his rights". Because, increasingly, as he gets isolated and even mainstream big-three-US-network media is laughing at him, that's probably his only means of holding power. Yeah, he might be *that* stupid: to enact dictatorial powers without comprehending that they're dictatorial powers. And I don't even mean the Harris/Harper type of as-framed-by-the-left "dictatorial powers", either...
 
This missing meeting thing is becoming an epidemic! This from Ms Levy in Sun:

Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti wants the brass at City Hall to know he’s not any bureaucrat’s “piece of tail.”

In fact, the community recreation and development (a.k.a The Bleeding Hearts Committee) chairman was so determined to make the point he decided to play hookey from the entire meeting of his own committee Wednesday.

What’s got him upset was the adamant refusal of deputy city manager Brenda Patterson to change the order of the meeting agenda to reflect the priorities of the Rob Ford regime — instead of those dictated by the largely leftist contingent that dominates the committee.


More (unsuccessful) bullying.
 
Mayor Rob Ford attacks Newstalk 1010 during his Newstalk 1010 show

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/cit...s-newstalk-1010-during-his-newstalk-1010-show

Daniel Dale
Urban Affairs Reporter


Mayor Rob Ford and Councillor Doug Ford angrily criticized Toronto’s media on their Newstalk 1010 radio show on Sunday — including Newstalk 1010.

The brothers’ latest broadside against perceived media failings follows a two-week period in which the mayor was taken off message by stories on his use of city resources for his football teams and his personal request for city repair work outside his family company’s building.

Rob Ford regularly denounces the Toronto Star. Doug Ford has lambasted the Star, the Globe and Mail and the CBC. But neither of them had publicly scolded a talk radio station that is generally sympathetic to them.

Early in the Sunday show, Rob Ford claimed again that last week’s official trip to Chicago won’t cost taxpayers “a dime” — even though taxpayers are picking up the tab for at least some of the eight councillors who attended. Newstalk ran a mid-show update that pointed out his claim was false.

Soon after, Doug Ford said unnamed members of the media are “like a bunch of little sucky little kids” who “whine and cry and moan” when the Fords stand up to them and who “sensationalize and lie through their teeth.”

Rob Ford then added: “They’re pathological liars, that’s what drives me nuts. Let me tell you: we talk about an hour on Chicago, and now these guys come out and put advertising on about expenses,” he said, referring to the Newstalk news update as advertising.

“They don’t even know what the expenses are, because the councillors said this, this is all gonna balance out at the end, and I know, I’m gonna stick to what I said: it’s not costing taxpayers a dime.”

Talk radio is Rob Ford’s preferred media venue, and he regularly calls in to Newstalk. The brothers thanked and praised the station in an attempt to make amends before the show ended.

“If they’re comin’ after me, I’m comin’ after them. I don’t care who they are. So you better make sure your chin strap is done up pretty tight,” Rob Ford said with a hint of a chuckle.

The mayor followed the “pathological liars” accusation with incorrect statements of his own.

When he took office, he claimed, the city was “gonna be bankrupt within a year.” The city had the same excellent credit rating under David Miller as it does now, and there has never been even a remote risk of bankruptcy.

Ford also claimed that he dominates the football pool he participates in with left-leaning council colleagues. In fact, he regularly loses.

Ford has refused to offer a justification for his use of his office staff and a city car for his high school and summer football teams. He said Sunday, without explaining what he was referring to, that he “paid for that car” by reimbursing the city $1,000 last year.

At the time of his $1,078.92 reimbursement payment, however, the bill for the car was $1,972.95. And the city council code of conduct flatly prohibits the use of city resources for personal activities. There is no allowance for reimbursements.

Ford said he doesn’t think TTC fares should be increased for next year. In late 2011, the TTC board, which was then dominated by Ford allies, approved in principle a 10-cent hike in each of 2013, 2014 and 2015.

Ford touted the Chicago trip as a major success that will “create thousands of jobs.” Ignoring the swirling controversies, he said last week was “the best week, probably, in my 12 years in politics.”

Doug Ford spoke proudly of his frequent media criticism. “Think of this, folks, think of this: we’re the only two elected officials — think what I’m saying here — we’re the only two elected officials, Rob, in recent memory — federally, provincially, or municipally — number one, has put a halt on the gravy train, but number two, talks back to the media,” he said.

Rob Ford said, “We’ve done more in this administration than any other administration ever has, and the media just — I don’t know what, I don’t know what they want. I guess they want bankruptcy. I guess they want a ghost town. I don’t know.”

Doug Ford claimed that members of Chicago’s media had approached him during the trip to say, “What is wrong with your media? They’re embarrassing your city.”

Chicago outlets largely ignored the trip. NBC Chicago published a blog posting that called the mayor “obnoxious” and mocked his weight.
 
Doug Ford claimed that members of Chicago’s media had approached him during the trip to say, “What is wrong with your media? They’re embarrassing your city.”

Chicago outlets largely ignored the trip. NBC Chicago published a blog posting that called the mayor “obnoxious” and mocked his weight.

highly doubt the chicago media said that, but if they did, it certainly doesn't help when the Frod's continually add fodder with their gaffs, etc. the media reports what happens.
 
Well, you know, the Frod's would accuse them of censorship, etc. The usual stock-in-trade of the paranoid-political martyr-type folks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top