Ford: A real "cracker"? - Page 10

BIMBAM · #**181** Posted **May 26, 2013, 6:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migs

Media- reporting on politicians using illegal drugs:
Obama -cool
Ford- bad
Bush- bad
Clinton- cool
Justin- real cool
#LessonHere

There's a difference between smoking a few joints twenty years ago and having been a bonafide drug dealer, presumably with connections to organized criminals to obtain said drugs. Also a difference between having used drugs years ago, and smoking crack while in office. Big difference. If these allegations are true those things are not on the same level and the left wing politicians would be judged equally harshly.

Migs · #**182** Posted **May 26, 2013, 7:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIMBAM

There's a difference between smoking a few joints twenty years ago and having been a bonafide drug dealer, presumably with connections to organized criminals to obtain said drugs. Also a difference between having used drugs years ago, and smoking crack while in office. Big difference. If these allegations are true those things are not on the same level and the left wing politicians would be judged equally harshly.

Where is the evidence regarding Ford? I thought people were presumed innocent in this country. And as far as that G&M article, that is jumping the shark like I've rarely seen before.

That said, I am no fan of Fords but how the media out there is on a witch hunt for him is beyond creepy. Any Toronto Star reporters found up in his tree this evening?

niwell · #**183** Posted **May 26, 2013, 8:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migs

Where is the evidence regarding Ford? I thought people were presumed innocent in this country. And as far as that G&M article, that is jumping the shark like I've rarely seen before.

Last I checked this wasn't a court of law.

Why should we give them the benefit of the doubt when those in the know aren't in the least surprised by this. It's more like vindication. Rob Ford doing drugs? Doug as a drug dealer? Yeah this isn't news to a lot of people.

This isn't a witch hunt over a few joints and trying to put a conservative spin on this is silly.

For what it's worth I wouldn't be surprised if some of our left wing councillors do coke on occasion (or often). But they don't hang out with drug dealers in terrible neighbourhoods, you know. At least be discrete about it haha.

Migs · #**184** Posted **May 26, 2013, 12:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by niwell

Last I checked this wasn't a court of law.

Why should we give them the benefit of the doubt when those in the know aren't in the least surprised by this. It's more like vindication. Rob Ford doing drugs? Doug as a drug dealer? Yeah this isn't news to a lot of people.

This isn't a witch hunt over a few joints and trying to put a conservative spin on this is silly.

For what it's worth I wouldn't be surprised if some of our left wing councillors do coke on occasion (or often). But they don't hang out with drug dealers in terrible neighbourhoods, you know. At least be discrete about it haha.

Thank you for proving my point.

rbt · #**185** Posted **May 26, 2013, 12:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migs

Thank you for proving my point.

The Globe article came up with over 10 witnesses who claim to have bought or had a business relation with Doug. They were naming dates, locations, and amounts purchased (dollar and weight). If they were to have testified in a court of law on that matter, it would almost certainly have been enough to find Doug guilty.

Worth noting is that it was long before their father went into politics. Pretty certain Doug isn't the same person today as he was at 20.

That said, Rob Ford does have problems with alcohol and should be seeking help for that issue.

whatnext · #**186** Posted **May 26, 2013, 2:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migs

Where is the evidence regarding Ford? I thought people were presumed innocent in this country. And as far as that G&M article, that is jumping the shark like I've rarely seen before.

That said, I am no fan of Fords but how the media out there is on a witch hunt for him is beyond creepy. Any Toronto Star reporters found up in his tree this evening?

Jumping the shark? How so?

Both the Globe & Mail and the Star feel confident enough to run these stories. That should tell you something.

vid · #**187** Posted **May 26, 2013, 3:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migs

Media- reporting on politicians using illegal drugs:
Obama -cool but not a hypocrite about drug use
Ford- bad opposes drug use and belittles drug users
Bush- bad opposes drug use and belittles drug users
Clinton- cool but not a hypocrite about drug use
Justin- real cool but not a hypocrite about drug use
#LessonHere

#LessonLearned

MolsonExport · #**188** Posted **May 26, 2013, 9:46 PM**

Jumping the shark? Chasing the green dragon, maybe. Hashing up dirt on Mr. Asscrack and his nefarious brothers.

kwoldtimer · #**189** Posted **May 27, 2013, 12:51 PM**

Today's Globe and Mail article on the issue takes all of this past any sort of joke/buffoonery. I will say no more until the truth is known.

whatnext · #**190** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:19 PM**

Embarassingly for Toronto, Ford's core support remains unchanged despite the scandal:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/05/..._allegations_and_denials_poll_finds.html

RyeJay · #**191** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

Embarassingly for Toronto, Ford's core support remains unchanged despite the scandal:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/05/..._allegations_and_denials_poll_finds.html

I have noticed a conservative tendency to stubbornly not change position.

Even if Ford was overwhelmingly proven guilty and left office -- you'd still have a large portion of the suburbs begging for the next right-wing wackjob.

Migs · #**192** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

Embarassingly for Toronto, Ford's core support remains unchanged despite the scandal:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/05/..._allegations_and_denials_poll_finds.html

What scandal? The media manufactured one? There is no evidence and all the media can come up with is unnamed sources talking about the brother from his high school years. Witch hunt if I've ever seen one, they better find that video because if they don't all it does is make Ford look like the victim.

Pavlov · #**193** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyeJay

I have noticed a conservative tendency to stubbornly not change position.

Even if Ford was overwhelmingly proven guilty and left office -- you'd still have a large portion of the suburbs begging for the next right-wing wackjob.

Why would the buffoonery/crack-smokery of Rob Ford damage the next right wing candidate or right wing political ideology in general?

Migs · #**194** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid

#LessonLearned

Illegal drug use is illegal drug use. The law doesn't take into consideration whether one is hypocritical or not.

Pavlov · #**195** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migs

What scandal? The media manufactured one? There is no evidence and all the media can come up with is unnamed sources talking about the brother from his high school years. Witch hunt if I've ever seen one, they better find that video because if they don't all it does is make Ford look like the victim.

FYI "unnamed sources talking about the brother from his high school years" stating that Doug Ford sold hashish = evidence that Doug Ford sold hashish. You can argue that it is not particularly reliable evidence (although, absent some sort of conspiracy, ten eye witnesses who were familiar with Doug Ford is pretty strong constellation of evidence), but it is absolutely evidence.

Pavlov · #**196** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migs

Illegal drug use is illegal drug use. The law doesn't take into consideration whether one is hypocritical or not.

I believe that vid was quite clearly discussing the media, not the criminal law.

Migs · #**197** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyeJay

I have noticed a conservative tendency to stubbornly not change position.

Even if Ford was overwhelmingly proven guilty and left office -- you'd still have a large portion of the suburbs begging for the next right-wing wackjob.

The only whack jobs are those in th media who write stories with no evidence and the sheep that follow. It's all about the evidence, without it all you have is partisan rhetoric.

Pavlov · #**198** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migs

The only whack jobs are those in th media who write stories with no evidence and the sheep that follow. It's all about the evidence, without it all you have is partisan rhetoric.

Again, I don't think you understand what the word "evidence" means.

Migs · #**199** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reesonov

FYI "unnamed sources talking about the brother from his high school years" stating that Doug Ford sold hashish = evidence that Doug Ford sold hashish. You can argue that it is not particularly reliable evidence (although, absent some sort of conspiracy, ten eye witnesses who were familiar with Doug Ford is pretty strong constellation of evidence), but it is absolutely evidence.

No it is not evidence as there is no accountability. If I said an unnamed source told me you did something illegal, is that evidence legitimate or should my source be accountable for their comments.

Migs · #**200** Posted **May 27, 2013, 2:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reesonov

Again, I don't think you understand what the word "evidence" means.

I do understand it. Unnamed sources is not evidence, if a person doesn't have to give their name they can say anything. Can an anonymous person testify in court? Nope.

IMO using unnamed sources as the basis of a column is coward journalism.