Smith as a politician is was very good at deflecting anything to do with her ethics. She has had lots of practice, hasn't she? She simply changes the subject, and doesn't ever answer the question asked about her ethics. Sadly the mediators never pushed her to answer the actual question asked.
Imagine what it's been like for Rachel all these years across the aisle from these people, this "United Clown Posse." The circus analogy is spot on, except none of this is remotely funny or entertaining, it's actually deeply distressing when this is such a desperately important election. That's often said but when one side doesn't even bloody well "believe" climate change is "real," and although our side obviously DOES, AND even when it's currently manifesting here and now in Alberduh, it's STILL somehow politically risky to even bring it UP?? Pfffftttttt.... (What if she HAD led with it? That would be the true leadership we're all longing for, and dying for.)
Smith of course knew the risk so goaded Rachel repeatedly with it like she was DARING her to acknowledge the elephant in the room, castigating her for the carbon tax like it was literally right out of left field. "There's a special place in hell" expression comes to mind here, or the "banality of evil."
But conservatives like Smith can just keep blundering ahead LIKE elephants in a corn field by simply avoiding the drag of context at all times, including relevance or basic decorum. Hence the "deteriorating discourse" of politics for which culpability is not rightly attributed nearly often enough by the media, who really should bring it up CONSTANTLY, speaking of relevance. Bothsidesism should have disappeared long ago, but clearly people really just don't know what to do with the truly evil OR the unprecedented. The default response of a spluttering deer in the headlights is a variation of what Rachel did last night with that punishing 45 seconds. And truly, WHICH outrage do you focus on in a barrage? And how exactly do you nail down a pile of shit anyway? This was openly stated by the infamous Steve Bannon who, when asked how to handle the media said "flood that zone with bullshit." The added entertainment/novelty factor of delivering it with such bold aplomb and a sneering smirk is also understated. (Neil Postman's book, "Amusing Ourselves to Death" comes to mind.)
And interestingly, another novel aspect of the phenomenon that is the current right wing is that all this rudeness, bald-faced lying and generally delinquent behaviour is weirdly underpinned by religion for gawd's sake....!?
The earplug incident in the legislature early on said it all, the glaring misogyny of the bullying, perpetual bad boy cons (those little boys who have grown into smaller men) and their devoted cheerleaders. This party is so fractured they could barely agree on installing the usual placeholder woman as leader until we get our shit together kind of thing, but she's a convenient puppet for "Take Back Alberta" who have taken over the UCP. A man named David Parker is the actual master "mind," purely derivative though his ideas obviously are.
Meanwhile, the depressing number of low-information voters may well take the rest of us down.
The debate was surreal--perhaps proof of Marshall McLuhan's infamous phrase, "The medium is the message". Having suffered through dodgy, reckless, and dishonest behaviour by Dani Smith and the UCP--confirmed mere hours before by the Ethics Commissioner--TV viewers leaned in to hear more lies. For years I've heard that Smith is a good speaker but as I watched last night what occurred to me is that she is an effective actress with all of the guile of Donald Trump and Rudyard Kipling's Kaa the snake. Shame on the TV networks for facilitating a weak remake of "Network". Alberta wants to hold an election to debate policy but we cannot even fulfill the prerequisites of respect for human decency and integrity. Nauseating.
I watched the debate. I did not like the format. The time slices seemed much too short. I would have liked to see questions from one candidate to the other. I thought the wild card questions were weaker than they could have been. And finally, I would have liked to see at least a half hour recap of the debate by news analysts from each of the broadcasters with possibly partisan commentators.
My candidate choice did not change, it was reaffirmed. I want to read the ethics commissioner's report for myself, now.
The truth seems to be very difficult for Danielle Smith to embrace. In fact, the truth won't fade away, no matter what Danielle Smith says. The Truth Won't Fade Away is a song by a well known British rock band, Procol Harum, which came out in 1991. We unfortunately lost Gary Brooker, in February of 2022, from cancer, and we lost lyricist Keith Reid, this year, who was in his mid 70s.
Smith as a politician is was very good at deflecting anything to do with her ethics. She has had lots of practice, hasn't she? She simply changes the subject, and doesn't ever answer the question asked about her ethics. Sadly the mediators never pushed her to answer the actual question asked.
Imagine what it's been like for Rachel all these years across the aisle from these people, this "United Clown Posse." The circus analogy is spot on, except none of this is remotely funny or entertaining, it's actually deeply distressing when this is such a desperately important election. That's often said but when one side doesn't even bloody well "believe" climate change is "real," and although our side obviously DOES, AND even when it's currently manifesting here and now in Alberduh, it's STILL somehow politically risky to even bring it UP?? Pfffftttttt.... (What if she HAD led with it? That would be the true leadership we're all longing for, and dying for.)
Smith of course knew the risk so goaded Rachel repeatedly with it like she was DARING her to acknowledge the elephant in the room, castigating her for the carbon tax like it was literally right out of left field. "There's a special place in hell" expression comes to mind here, or the "banality of evil."
But conservatives like Smith can just keep blundering ahead LIKE elephants in a corn field by simply avoiding the drag of context at all times, including relevance or basic decorum. Hence the "deteriorating discourse" of politics for which culpability is not rightly attributed nearly often enough by the media, who really should bring it up CONSTANTLY, speaking of relevance. Bothsidesism should have disappeared long ago, but clearly people really just don't know what to do with the truly evil OR the unprecedented. The default response of a spluttering deer in the headlights is a variation of what Rachel did last night with that punishing 45 seconds. And truly, WHICH outrage do you focus on in a barrage? And how exactly do you nail down a pile of shit anyway? This was openly stated by the infamous Steve Bannon who, when asked how to handle the media said "flood that zone with bullshit." The added entertainment/novelty factor of delivering it with such bold aplomb and a sneering smirk is also understated. (Neil Postman's book, "Amusing Ourselves to Death" comes to mind.)
And interestingly, another novel aspect of the phenomenon that is the current right wing is that all this rudeness, bald-faced lying and generally delinquent behaviour is weirdly underpinned by religion for gawd's sake....!?
The earplug incident in the legislature early on said it all, the glaring misogyny of the bullying, perpetual bad boy cons (those little boys who have grown into smaller men) and their devoted cheerleaders. This party is so fractured they could barely agree on installing the usual placeholder woman as leader until we get our shit together kind of thing, but she's a convenient puppet for "Take Back Alberta" who have taken over the UCP. A man named David Parker is the actual master "mind," purely derivative though his ideas obviously are.
Meanwhile, the depressing number of low-information voters may well take the rest of us down.
The debate was surreal--perhaps proof of Marshall McLuhan's infamous phrase, "The medium is the message". Having suffered through dodgy, reckless, and dishonest behaviour by Dani Smith and the UCP--confirmed mere hours before by the Ethics Commissioner--TV viewers leaned in to hear more lies. For years I've heard that Smith is a good speaker but as I watched last night what occurred to me is that she is an effective actress with all of the guile of Donald Trump and Rudyard Kipling's Kaa the snake. Shame on the TV networks for facilitating a weak remake of "Network". Alberta wants to hold an election to debate policy but we cannot even fulfill the prerequisites of respect for human decency and integrity. Nauseating.
I watched the debate. I did not like the format. The time slices seemed much too short. I would have liked to see questions from one candidate to the other. I thought the wild card questions were weaker than they could have been. And finally, I would have liked to see at least a half hour recap of the debate by news analysts from each of the broadcasters with possibly partisan commentators.
My candidate choice did not change, it was reaffirmed. I want to read the ethics commissioner's report for myself, now.
Thanks for the rundown, I couldn’t bear the thought of watching it.
The truth seems to be very difficult for Danielle Smith to embrace. In fact, the truth won't fade away, no matter what Danielle Smith says. The Truth Won't Fade Away is a song by a well known British rock band, Procol Harum, which came out in 1991. We unfortunately lost Gary Brooker, in February of 2022, from cancer, and we lost lyricist Keith Reid, this year, who was in his mid 70s.
https://youtu.be/MAARSfrDmeE
When you have a preference and you can't say who won the debate, it is pretty clear that your preferred candidate did not win.
Uncomfortable fact.