Blue Like You

Wow! Did we all watch the same Ontario Leadership Debate last night?

Depending on which editorial or column you read this morning, opinions range all the way from a clear win for McGuinty to an uncontested Tory victory; with Howard Hampton picking up a few points along the way. (Interesting to see the Star and the Record at odds.)

However, the biggest surprise by far was reading Lorrie Goldstein’s Point of View - Game, Set and Match to McGuinty. What??????? But on closer inspection, I wonder if Lorrie is suggesting that it wasn’t McGuinty’s actual performance which won the debate, but rather his handlers’ clever manipulation of the media and public opinion:

Even the wording of the questions revealed how McGuinty has convinced everyone — including the debate organizers — that a relatively minor promise by Tory is the defining issue.

So is he saying that the Liberal strategists won the debate?

Geoffrey Stevens doesn’t think so. I rarely agree with Stevens’ POV, but today I almost choked on my morning java:

Whoever prepared Premier Dalton McGuinty for the leaders’ debate last night should be fired. He or she should be drummed unceremoniously out of the Honourable Fraternity of Political Savants and Gurus.

The Liberal strategy was appalling. McGuinty did what a prize fighter should never do - he led with his chin. He opened with a video in which he did a mea culpa, apologizing to Ontarians for breaking his 2003 election promise not to raise taxes. “I hated it,” he declared, rather pathetically.

Yes, I wonder who had that brainstorm? Stevens goes on:

I’ve been covering leaders’ debates for years and I have never seen one as one-sided as last night’s. If TVOntario’s Steve Paikin had been a referee rather than a moderator, he would have stopped the carnage at the 30-minute mark and declared a TKO victory for the tag team of Tory and Hampton.

And here’s his knock-out punch for McGuinty:

If other people watched the same debate that I did, John Tory should gain some momentum. He looked stronger and more confident than McGuinty. He looked more like a premier than the premier did. If I were grading the leaders’ performances, I’d give Tory an A, Hampton a B-plus and McGuinty, to be charitable, a D.

Will Dalton have time to heal before Ontario voters have to make a final decision? I suppose it depends how gullible and disinterested the electorate is.

One thing for sure. The Hampton-Tory tag team worked remarkably well, as it has in the past when dealing with ‘Colle-gate’ or Cricketgate, when the NDP and PC’s combined force and persistence finally led to Dalton crying ‘uncle’ and calling in the Auditor General Jim McCarter to investigate the slush fund controversy.

Leadership debates allow the candidates to talk straight to the people. With the exception of those new taped bits at the beginning, the format is relatively free of spin and interference from handlers who try to divert attention and control access.

Make your decision, Ontario.

Do you really want four more years of a healed Dalton McGuinty?

I wonder what Warren Kinsella is thinking this morning about the editorial from the national paper that frequently hosts his column?

Warren, how low can you go? Keep going buddy. Ontario will catch on.

This is worth a look too. The truth about evolution in Ontario curriculum.

While Dalton McGuinty is busy announcing how he plans to spend our money, a few items of concern are coming to light.

Well one tidbit is old news, but it has not yet been resolved. Christina Blizzard discusses the Colle-gate affair and the ensuing fallout, which she feels is still an issue (‘Liberal handouts will backfire’):

Provincial auditor general Jim McCarter released a report on what’s been dubbed “Colle-gate.” He concluded that while there was “no evidence” that any organization received a grant because of political ties, the connections were there.

“However, in some cases those ties did exist and, when this is combined with a process lacking openness and most of the normal accountability controls, it can create the perception of favouritism if the organization ends up obtaining a grant,” McCarter said in his report.

New Democratic critic Peter Kormos says that just because the auditor couldn’t find evidence that political ties resulted in grants being handed out, that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

“To suggest that somehow it was an accident that some groups got money while another didn’t is extremely naive,” he added.

“He (McCarter) merely indicates that his investigation was unable to disclose those. That’s why the question of the nature of the relationship between some of these organizations and the Liberals in government warrants further inquiry,” Kormos said.

So Dalton’s claim of exoneration rings pretty hollow.

Then there’s the new development regarding a possible conflict of interest in the Ontario Power Authority.

For a supposedly squeaky-clean, transparent government, there sure is a reek emanating from Queen’s Park.

This morning on Newstalk 570, one of the discussion points was the question of whether or not PSA tests to detect prostate cancer should be covered in Ontario under OHIP, considering that annual mammograms are covered for women after a certain age.

Why one and not the other?

Jeff Allan made the point that the McGuinty government seems to have plenty of money to throw around for cricket, but we seem to be increasingly shortchanged in the area of health care.

If preventative medicine is so important, why aren’t PSA tests covered? And why aren’t eye exams too?

There was an excellent letter in the Record recently which pretty much says it all:

I have been reading a lot in the news about whether we should have a two-tiered medical system — hello, it is already here! There is one system for women and one for men.

Why are annual Pap tests and mammograms for women covered under our current medical system and the PSA (prostate-specific antigen) blood tests to detect prostate cancer in men cost $30?

Today, I read that we are spending $83 million to vaccinate young girls for cervical cancer. What is not two-tiered about all this? Does anyone realize that prostate cancer is not an old man’s disease anymore and it is becoming more prevalent in younger men and one in seven men will get prostate cancer?

Yes, it is a curable cancer but only if it is caught in an early stage. One of the best indicators is the PSA blood screening. Prostate cancer is fast becoming a silent killer of men. And also, the loss of breasts is devastating but how about what men can lose with removal of the prostate — including their lives?

I know all this because I am a prostate cancer “victim” as was my father and grandfather. This was diagnosed by my annual PSA test as the anal exam did not indicate a problem. And guess what? Now that I am a “victim” as they classify me, my ongoing PSA test is covered if I go to the cancer clinic to have it done. We need to realize that this test needs to be covered under our medical program now.

Oh yes, my ongoing treatments for curing my cancer will be covered under our medical system and in my case I took the preventive measures. What about those who do not because of the cost? Let’s level the playing field here. Annual PSA blood tests need to be covered under our medical system.

And guys: This is no longer your “father’s disease.” Discuss this on your annual visit with the doctor, get tested and pressure our government to make this important test covered under our medical program.

Tom Sutherland

Wasaga Beach

Are men being discriminated against in Ontario?

Angelo Persichilli appears to be trying to defend his friend, master Liberal strategist Warren Kinsella in today’s op-ed - “Kinsella scandal covers up real issue“.

So does Sheila Copps - “One quirky comment could prove costly“.

Why would they try to “help” their friend by bringing up this story again today? If it’s a non-issue, as they seem to be suggesting, why not let it die?

Unless, as a reader of Adam Daifallah’s blog pointed out:

It is strange timing for Mr. Kinsella’s little blunder. Just as the excrement is hitting the Liberal fan over the “slush fund”, Dalton’s chief spinmeister is taking a lot of heat over an unfortunate cartoon caption. Could it be Warren taking one for the team?
It has given him a chance to post lots of nice emails about himself on his blog along with diverting attention just before the report came out.

muttsrus | 07.27.07 - 7:50 am

H/T to Vicki for bringing this to my attention.

Let’s not take the focus off Cricketgate. We at least owe that much to ourselves - the taxpayers of Ontario.

What’s going on with these liberal papers lately? Have they all seen the light?

Today’s editorial is scathing - Mismanagement, McGuinty Style:

Ontario taxpayers have a right to feel cheated by such grotesque mismanagement of their money. And to be angry. For years, the Liberals couldn’t find the means to expand Cambridge Memorial Hospital, and even now Cambridge taxpayers have to sink more than $6 million of their own money into the venture. When the University of Waterloo agreed to build a pharmacy school in Kitchener, city taxpayers were stuck with the $30-million construction cost — the province paid zero for that part of the project.

But the day after the Canadian Cricket Association asked for $150,000 in 2006, it was awarded a $1-million grant. That money was supposed to pay only for capital work. However, the Ontario Cricket Association, which ultimately got the $1 million, didn’t need it all and invested $500,000 in a guaranteed investment certificate. Where were the government’s priorities? Perhaps the citizens and politicians of Waterloo Region should wave cricket bats the next time they want help from McGuinty.

Beautiful!

On anther note, congrats to the Record for the great new look on their website.

Oh, and their links work now too! Bravo!!!