Friday, April 17, 2009

DeSmogBlog still biased. (And water still wet.)

Elevating out of the comments, though, we can see why here. Short answer: the guy who runs DeSmogBlog is a BC Liberal supporter and his firm has received contracts from the government.

Keep that in mind when you read the latest disingenuous screed. They're wrong on the merits, and dishonest to boot. I'm done with them; and you should be, too.


janfromthebruce said...

Great post Adam. Went to the hook and a poster Kispy added this:
Here are a few facts that have surfaced recently, to support this claim:

1. Hoggan's business associate, Richard Littlemore, is posting misleading anti-NDP posts on Hoggan's 'environmental' website, DeSmogblog:

2. Littlmore is quoted in an interview with Sean Holman on Public Eye site as never even properly researching the NDP's position before posting a negative story on the web site:

3. The Public Eye is reporting today that: "TransLink board member and former Teck Cominco Ltd. corporate affairs director Sarah Goodman has joined Tides Canada as its business development and services vice president. In 2007, the organization provided grants to many of the environmental groups best known to British Columbians - including the David Suzuki Foundation, ForestEthics, the Pembina Foundation for Environmental Research and Education, the Sierra Club of BC Foundation and the Western Canada Wilderness Committee.":

The trend is emerging. The neo-cons realize that they are vulnerable on the environement, so they announce what looks on the surface like a progressive policy, and then line themselves up on executive boards of these organizations by stacking AGMs, and taking control of major sources of funding.

These so-called environmental organizations which have sandbagged the NDP on the opening day of the election campaign have lost all credibility in my view - joining the ranks of Patrick Moore as pseudo-environmental pariahs.

With links.

Desmog like votefortheenvironment are just "greenwashing" shells for the libs/soc cred group.

Sad to see the Dave Z. foundation sucking on the corp tit, tied to the shell game.

Desmog is a joke - it screams partisan.

ADHR said...

I'd find it easier to take them seriously if they'd just put a BC Liberal button somewhere. I don't blame the Blogging Tories for being partisan (I blame them for other things) but they admit to being... well... Tories.

Incidentally, think it's a coincidence that I got an email from Blogger saying my blog had been reported as a potential spam blog? Just fourteen minutes after I posted this here post?

ADHR said...

Although, now that I'm looking at it, my Daily Twitter post was only four minutes before the email. So maybe that triggered it....

bigcitylib said...

Fellas, Layton and James have disgraced themselves on this issue. James has ensured her own defeat, if she doesn't recant. Time to try a little introspection as to why the NDP looks so bad rather than blame the bearer of the bad news.

Anyone torn between Green and NDP can write off the NDP from today forward. Deal with it.

ADHR said...

Considering you still don't grasp that the BC Liberals have no affiliation to the Liberal Party of Canada, I don't think I'll be taking your astute analysis terribly seriously. Or seriously at all.

Ian said...

I expanded on this today and looked into as many of the founders/runners as possible. Very few don't have ties to Liberals in one form or the other. Sad attempt.

Steve V said...

Wow, this is really getting pathetic, watching NDP supporters systematically reduce their environmental credibility to ZILCH, all in the name of protecting their own.

I guess David Suzuki, and all the other LEGIONS of environmentalists are Liberals too.

Don't get mad when people call a spade a spade.

Beside, didn't the BC NDP support a carbon tax TWO years ago? The horror...

Oemissions said...

When it comes to political games, I am uite sure the Liberals play more of those than do the NDP.
Now, having said that, I am disappointed that the NDP is not running on a more flexible position on dealing with the carbon tax.
Carole James has a stubborn strak but I can't believe, or I would not want to believe that she is speaking on a decided by members policy.
She had a chance to immediately add some "we need to study this further" before being adamant.
This is going to send people to the Greens oris it possible that Suzuki, Berman etal will vote Liberal???

ADHR said...

Steve V, ladies and gentlemen. He only knows one song, but he sings it well. Okay, passably.


The policy isn't great, that's for sure. I have to think she's trying to drive rural voters to the party, but that strategy may backfire badly. I guess we'll see. The remainder of the election may be defined by another issue entirely.

Oemissions said...

Very sorry about the typos. I vacuumed my laptop keys and did something weird but its ok now, I hope.
I listened to all those rural responders on BC Almanac. I grew up rural and I know that for a huge percentage of them,they would not even think of taking a bus. A train, well... maybe. But a big fat pickup or an SUV is their style. People will always find excuses why they have to drive.
I live on Salt Spring Island We finally got a bus. Young people, a few seniors and low waged workers use it but most people will say: it doesn't come up my road when they are really saying: I choose NOT to Park and Ride.
I am very very anti auto. There are just too many on the planet and I can no longer tolerate the NOISE, stress and stink.
Now that I am a grandmother I have great concern for my grandchildren and I want to see a less polluted world for them to grow up in.
I find environmentalists generally very weak about this auto problem.We have been over congested for decades.
I wish that Carole James would see that too.
I appreciated the info on smogblog and forwarded your post to friends in the NDP who are canvassing for a really good candidate here. Gary Holman. Our former CRD Director. Murray Coell,our Lib MLA should really be in Harper's group.
Do keep us posted!

Oemissions said...

Oh, I forgot to mention Andrew Weaver. He was on CBC this am criticizing the NDP for not supporting a carbon tax.This IS serious.

A BCer in Toronto said...

Considering you still don't grasp that the BC Liberals have no affiliation to the Liberal Party of CanadaWell, I grasp it, and it pains me that there's no truly moderate, progressive alternative in BC. It's not the BC Libs, although I agree with then on the carbon tax issue. And it's certainly not the BC NDP. That's never been more clear.

BC politics, while always entertaining, is far too polarized.

The Mound of Sound said...

Adam, in your New Democratic Party fury you completely miss the point. The issue isn't about DSB as much as you would like to distract us into believing it to be. It's about genuine, established, credible environmentalists denouncing the plainly self-serving and rank policy of Carole James. Surprise but being a New Democrat doesn't mean you're always on the right side of issues. You're merely on the side you choose and that, at times, is the one you consider most expedient, rightly or otherwise.
In many ways you come across so much like evangelical nutjobs. Step back, take a deep breath and let it go.

ADHR said...


I agree it's probably a bad decision, from a policy standpoint. And I share the worries about whether this will actually pan out from a strategic standpoint. (It might: not all voters are as informed as you.) It's still possible to alter the strategic thrust of the campaign, though -- Campbell might announce something that the NDP can jump on.


I don't think polarized politics is necessarily a problem, unless there's reason to think that BCers generally aren't being fully represented without a moderate party.


While you might want to talk about something else, I want to talk about DSB's inability to admit their partisan bias. Surprisingly, you don't get to dictate the course of conversation on someone else's blog. (But feel free on your own.) Really, what response did you expect? I'm not going to talk about something other than what I'm talking about, despite your desires to the contrary.

I didn't comment on the DSF, Sierra Club, et al., because I didn't really care what they said. I still don't, as you've given me no reason to think that my position, as explained over the past week or so, is inconsistent with theirs, i.e., that repealing the carbon tax is short-sighted, but the BC Liberals are no prize on the environmental front, either. Given that you chose to speculate on my motivations rather than comment on my arguments, I suspect you don't have any reasons to give. Feel free to try to prove me wrong.