Second Thots

Sometimes one has to step back, take pause, and have some "second thots"

Friday, November 02, 2007


The Susan Delacourt Watch Continued

I was busy at the time, so I didn't get a chance to post Susan Delacourt's E-mail reply to my original post announcing the creation of this watch. Here is her E-mail:

I have noted your initiative with interest. Though you may think you know everything you need to know about me, you should also know that I'm quite serious about libel and slander and won't hesitate to forward your postings to a lawyer if necessary. I hope you are an expert in what constitutes fair commentary and you have the resources to back up your claims.
I'm posting it now because it's time for the second instalment of the Watch.

I have sat back patiently since, reading one headline after another that, yet again, seemed favourable to one party. But it wasn't enough for me to take time out of my schedule yet. I kept watching, and kept waiting until something resembling balanced reporting showed up. It didn't.

My patience ran out when Ms. Delacourt writes us yet another story today that must give her Liberal readers hope in a political landscape otherwise filled with despair.

Mind you, in today's article, there's nothing new — except what essentially amounts to an announcement of Liberal party intentions. There's no actual indication that the Liberals will get what they want, but I suppose it's news to our favourite reporter and her admirers in a certain party.

Therefore, if we want to know what Liberals are thinking at any given moment, we know which reporter to turn to, don't we?

Will I get sued for thinking such thoughts in this country? We'll see.

Well I think for the moment anyway, you're safe from all lawsuits.

It would hardly enhance Ms. Delacourt's professional reputation to be seen as picking on the feebleminded or the deluded. The potential only indication of bias in the article is in her pointing out that Dion couldn't back up his claim that the "progressive wing of the former Progressive Conservative party is more and more coming to the Liberal party." (Hint: her pointing that out is GOOD for your side).

You're really quite a fatuous idiot. What we have here is simply follow-up reporting of a legitimate news story, with quotes from the people concerned. I'm sure Ms. Delacourt would have LOVED to include quotes from Conservative spokespeople explaining why they did such an incredibly stupid thing as disallowing Warner's candidacy in a no-hope riding in the first place, but no such quotes were forthcoming, were they?

You seem to have a problem with people merely quoting Liberals in the media. I really think you're going to have to suck it up, lest you go on to prove yourself even more of a fool than you already have.


I suggest you actually read what my criticisms are of Delacourt before you engage in the confidence inspiring tactic of name-calling.

Delacourt writes an entire article on the idea that Warner might become a candidate for the Liberal Party.

That's a story?

I might become the Pope. Is she going to write about that, too?

Of course not. She seems to only write positive spin stories for one party. That's just my opinion.

Are you going to sue me, too?


Susan Delacourt is obviously a cheerleader for the Liberal Party and has been for a long time. While I very much doubt if she is on that party's payroll, her obvious (at least to me) bias does make me wonder if she is an actual card-carrying Liberal Party member.


I don't think she's on the party's payroll.

I guess my point — one which I tend to make tongue in cheek, so to speak — is this: Why does she need to be on the payroll, when she essentially does so much work on their behalf, while somebody else pays for it, and it's all on the up-and-up from an election financing standpoint. ;)

When you have a reporter who is so favourable to one side, it's better than having them actually work for you. Isn't it? ;)


Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?