Political Partisanship Masquerading As Political Analysis

With the Ontario provincial election pending, more and more opinion pieces will find their way into both national and local papers. I certainly welcome a broad range of views to read and react to. However, it strikes me as the epitome of dishonesty for a columnist to pretend he or she is writing a political analysis when in fact the purpose is to advocate for a specific party or candidate.

Such is the case with Andrew Dreschel's column in today's Hamilton Spectator. Entitled Ontario could face coalition government, the article, by invoking the prospect of a coalition, transparently attempts to invoke the same kind of reactionary fear that Stephen Harper so effectively exploited on his road to a majority government. While I encourage everyone to read the piece, here are a couple of snippets that illustrate Dreschel's larger purpose:

Hudak might end up leading a minority government.

If so, the idea of an alternative governing coalition or at least an alliance between the Liberals and New Democrats may very well be in the cards.

He then goes on to remind the reader of the alliance that took place between Liberal David Petersen and then NDP leader Bob Rae that ultimately led to the disastrous Ontario NDP government, suggesting that Dalton McGuinty and Andrea Horvath could find sufficient common ground to partner:

As with Peterson, McGuinty’s generally seen as progressive — if you take the word to mean left of centre.

The sowing of fear has begun.

Please sign this petition urging Prime Minister Harper to stop threatening Michaela Keyserlingk and to stop exporting asbestos.