A Journal's Sad Decline

Readers of this blog will probably know that I am a big supporter of newspapers. In my view, they are the best bulwark against the ignorance that seems so prominent in Western society today. As a subscriber to The Toronto Star and a financial contributor to The Guardian, it is fair to say that newspapers have been a daily part of my life for a long time.

Having been born and raised in Hamilton, the newspaper of record when I was growing up was The Hamilton Spectator which, for the longest time, was an afternoon journal my family eagerly consumed after school and after work. It had a proud and long history in the Steel City, bringing to our doors both local and national news of note. Few homes went without it.

Now part of the Torstar chain, it is a paper I only buy on Saturdays. as I am addicted to the large weekly and the large New Your Times crossword puzzles contained therein. It is thanks to these once-a-week purchases that I have noticed the journal's sad decline. Not only does it rely increasingly on content from the Toronto Star, but also, it seems, on incendiary letters that, in my view, no responsible paper would publish, reliant as they tend to be on ad hominems and unsubstantiated assertions.

I offer the following as sad example of what may be a misguided attempt to increase circulation:

Obama, not Trump, was the great evil

As America's first black president, it was hoped Barack Obama would end the racial divide and bring unity to the country. Instead, the United States is more polarized than ever. He was a narcissist who wanted to change America. Everything about him was phoney. He was a demagogue whose speeches were high on rhetoric and empty promises. His actions divided the country and fanned the flames of racism and anti-Semitism. Don't look at what Obama said or how he said it. His actions belie his words. Democrats calling Trump Hitler and his supporters Nazis demonize half of Americans for the simple reason they don't support their insane leftist policies. Having a different political opinion shouldn't make you a target for verbal abuse or physical assault.

Is that what Obama meant when he said he wanted to "fundamentally transform the United States of America"? I guess he did and the result is not pretty.

Harold Pomerantz, Dundas

Blame the left, not Trump

Henry Giroux writes that, "Under the presidency of Donald Trump, the nightmare drumbeat of a fascist and racist tinged politics is getting louder and more consistent." Yes, except the drumbeat he cites is coming from the left, as their efforts to unseat the president become increasingly unhinged.

How can a man in the glare of publicity for decades suddenly be a white supremacist? How can there be a Nazi in the White House who's celebrated in Israel and has a half-Jewish family? How can Trump be uniquely evil if it's necessary to distort his actions and policies in order to show it? How can the Russia collusion stuff all be true, and then forgotten?

Get a grip, everyone. If Trump had run as a Democrat and still won the presidency, we'd be getting on with our lives.

Stuart Laughton, Burlington

Hero Trump protecting North America

The Spectator's recent columnist from the American Civil Liberties Union is spewing fake news. Chris Rickerd falsely stated that President Trump is anti immigration. Trump is not anti-immigration because America continues to accept over one million legal immigrants every year. Trump is against open borders. Trump isn't for illegal immigration, he is anti-illegals.

........

North America is the world's lifeboat and it must not be swamped. When we think about immigration we should ask ourselves, "Were the sailors who manned the Titanic's lifeboats racists because they didn't risk losing their survivors by going back for more survivors?" President Trump is only protecting Americans from illegal activities in order to preserve the Union.

George Rooney, Hamilton

It is beyond sad when a once-respected newspaper chooses to pander to shrill, inflammatory, populist but essentially empty rhetoric. Yellow journalism has no place in any responsible journal.

Was Nathan Cirillo A Hero? - Part 2

Yesterday's post revolved around a column by The Hamilton Spectator's Andrew Dreschel in which he questioned whether the circumstances of Nathan Cirollo's death qualified him as a hero. I predicted that he would likely be subject to a barrage of criticism, given that the young man's death was so recent, and a state funeral had essentially been accorded him.

Today's piece by editor-in-chief Paul Berton confirmed this. While some comments were supportive, others were not so complimentary:

An online petition urged The Spectator to have Dreschel fired. Others wanted us to remove the column, which was apparently "going viral" on social media, from thespec.com.

Another said,

"How can you print one day that he's a hero and the next day that he is not?"

I was glad, however, to see that Berton is standing his ground:

I acknowledge the timing of the column may have been premature and insensitive, and I take full responsibility for that. But a newspaper should not refuse to print opinions simply because they may offend.

As devastated — and as proud — as so many of us were in Hamilton this week, does wondering what it all means in the modern scheme of things take away from that?

He goes on to say:

But isn't that the nature of any good newspaper — to reflect all opinions, no matter how popular or unpopular?

Isn't that the nature of a democratic community? To make sure we can learn from all events?

The funeral brought this community together — and enlightened us. Might not a frank conversation do the same?

I wonder if the irony is lost on all those thousands who lauded Cirillo for his protection of our freedoms who now seem, through their intolerance, to value it so little?

Was Nathan Cirillo A Hero?

As I noted on this blog previously, it is always a tragedy when a young person loses his or her life, whether to accident, disease, or mayhem. The lost potential is incalculable. Like me, however, I suspect many found the mythologizing of Nathan Cirillo's murder, his passage on the Highway of Heroes, and what amounted to a state funeral, attended by an array of dignitaries, including the Prime Minister, a little much. And as a cynical observer of the political landscape, I cannot escape the notion that all of the ceremony will prove to be of great benefit to the Harper regime's propaganda machine and its ongoing efforts to reduce our civil liberties.

This morning, a friend of mine alerted me to a piece by the Hamilton Spectator's Andrew Dreschel. It is a frank and honest assessment of this past week's spectacle. It is also brave, as I suspect it will earn him a barrage of hate mail.

While in no way detracting from the loss of this young man, Dreschel offers an unsentimental assessment of what happened:

The 24-year-old Hamilton reservist was murdered in cold blood by a homeless crack addict with terrorist notions while he was ceremonially guarding the National War Memorial in Ottawa.

Cirillo's death was tragic and senseless, but in no way was it heroic.

Dreschel then goes on to talk about what constitutes heroism: those who display remarkable courage,

by performing brave deeds and daring feats — risking or sacrificing your life to save others, valiantly defending a position, boldly destroying the enemy.

But Cirillo never got the chance to show the stuff of which he was made:

He died unprepared and unarmed, the unlucky victim of a seemingly deranged killer who was himself gunned down after storming Parliament.

All of the subsequent coverage gave this tragedy a life of its own, culminating in what the writer describes as secular canonization.

Dreschel ends on this note:

Through no action of his own, the accidental victim had become an accidental hero. But sadly, like all accident victims, he just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Unsentimental and accurate, the column raises some disturbing issues that we should all be honest enough and brave enough to confront. Of course, it is right to feel grief and empathy in tragic situations; obviously it is part of what makes us human. But we should also be keenly aware that those very human responses can work to our detriment if they are not leavened by the knowledge that those in positions of trust with far darker motives may try to exploit them to their own advantage.

Stephen Harper's Advice: 'Don't Believe What You Sometimes Read'

That little gem was delivered by Dear Leader at a gathering of true believers outside of Hamilton the other day as he offered this confabulation:

"There are more people going to good-paying jobs today than in any other time in our history."

About the deplorable sellout he engineered in his sweetheart deal with U.S. Steel, he had this to say:

"We know there are still challenges in the labour market. We read about some today in this area. That's because we are part of a global economy."



While the party faithful applauded his words, a retired Hamilton steelworker voiced a sentiment that I think is felt by many, many Canadians :

Harper does nothing as U.S. Steel ‘shafts’ workers

I am truly shocked that Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservatives can sit back and let foreign ownership of our industries walk all over Canadian workers and not say a word.

I worked at Stelco-U.S. Steel for 31 years. When I retired, I was told this is your pension for the rest of your life. A lot of people don't realize that a lot of our pension is deferred wages paid by employees. Our pensions are not some handout by the company.

Stelco was making a profit when U.S. Steel purchased it. The union continued to take concessions from the company and faced consecutive lockouts when they were ready and willing to sit with this company and negotiate a fair deal for all concerned.

U.S. Steel continues to shaft every Canadian worker and this federal government sits back and does nothing. We must send a message in the next federal election that Canada is not for sale under any circumstances. Harper and his cronies should start touring the soup kitchens and the missions to get a taste of what they are doing to hardworking Canadians who paid taxes all their lives only to get shafted when it's time to retire and enjoy the fruits of their labours.


John Sanislo, Hamilton

With Apologies, Another Post On Tim Hudak

I have to admit that I grow increasingly tired of and bored with young Tim Hudak, the boy who would be Ontario's next premier. Yet because his duplicitous tactics and rhetoric provide such a window into the sordid world of Conservative politics, sometimes I just hold my nose and plod on. But I promise to be brief.

In this morning's Star, Martin Regg Cohn examines Hudak's oft-repeated plan to bring 'workplace democracy' to Ontario, i.e., make union membership optional. Says Tim:

“We will change Ontario’s labour laws to give union members more flexibility and a greater voice. We will give all individuals the right to a secret ballot in certification votes. We will introduce paycheque protection so union members are not forced to pay fees towards political causes they don’t support.”

Such a touching concern for the sensibility of workers, to which he adds:

“Modernizing our labour laws is a part of that [bringing manufacturing jobs back to Ontario]. Makes it more attractive for jobs. Thatcher was instructive in that … they had rigid labour laws, they were deep in debt. She ended the closed shop, she modernized the labour laws.”

Assuming a rudimentary reasoning capacity just slightly beyond that of a toddler, one can fill in the details that young Tim withholds as to why making union-membership optional might, in theory, attract more jobs. No, it's not because a worker given the choice of union membership is a happier and more productive worker - without a union, he is a much cheaper worker, a reality at odds with Hudak's promise of one million good-paying jobs for Ontario.

What about the political machinations going on behind the scenes? In a party that has grave concerns about its leadership, those Progressive Conservatives who will likely run in the next election are concerned about how to best massage the message. The following, from The Hamilton Spectator, offers some insight into the sordid, morally-compromised world these people inhabit:

Internal memo shows concern over Hudak's 'right-to-work' plan

Alarm over Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak's controversial "right-to-work" policy is spreading among party activists, MPPs and increasingly skittish new candidates.

In an unusually candid memo obtained by The Toronto Star, 11 would-be MPPs express concern that Hudak's U.S.-style anti-union measures could hurt them in a provincial election expected as early as spring.

Echoing fears raised in a Jan. 22 conference call of 300 party stalwarts and earlier by MPP John O'Toole at last September's Tory convention, the candidates worry that radical labour reforms will be a tough sell to voters.

"Part of being smarter means we should recognize that campaign policies need to be flexible in order to allow for the type (of) precision needed to maximize regional support," says the draft memo, written by Timiskaming-Cochrane Tory hopeful Peter Politis with input from the 10 other Northern Ontario nominees.

"I'm sure we agree that messaging of policies and being prepared for the counter-message is the most important aspect of our campaign going forward," he writes.

Politis warns that "critical wedge issues" must be "messaged effectively in order to maximize the impact in our region while not hurting the impact of other PC seats in other regions."

"The 'right-to-work' policy also needs to be messaged effectively to maximize its impact in the south without sacrificing 11 seats in the North that can very well be the difference between a majority or minority government."

The candidates' memo is the latest sign of an internal PC schism over a pledge to eliminate the Rand Formula, which requires all workers in a unionized workplace to pay dues, regardless of whether they join the union.

Harking back to the party's heyday, the PC standard bearers urge Hudak to follow the centrist footsteps of former premier Bill Davis, who governed from 1971 until 1985 and remains popular to this day.

It is perhaps a testament to the character of the candidates that their concern over Tim's union-busting policy is prompted, not by principled objections but rather political expediency, i.e., "How can a union-busting promise be presented without damaging our chances of getting elected?"

Such is the stable from which the Progressive Conservatives draw.

Victory for Lucene Charles!

Lucene Charles, the St. Vincent native who has been battling deportation from Canada for some time now because of her failure to fill out the proper immigration papers years ago, has finally achieved victory.

The decision in principle to allow her to stay has been made, a decision that will be finalized after the proper criminal and medical checks have been completed. A woman who is a valued and contributing member of the Hamilton community, Charles has worked for many years at St Joseph's Hospital.

The fact that Canadian immigration officials have come to the right decision is a victory for everyone, considering the publicity surrounding her case, and the flurry of social activism and petitions that ensued, were very likely major influences in this decision.

It would seem that even the Harper regime is not totally immune to the public will.