As it so often does, the TandT has a big story today about billionaires and politicians honouring each other at an expensive dinner. Today, it's the lead story on P. 1. And quite enough to make anybody throw up. A gathering of "dignitaries" such as J.K Irving, Premier Alward and former Premier Bernard Lord met at the Crystal Palace (Wow! talk about class.) for Champions of Public Education Tribute luncheon hosted by The Learning Partnership. Sounds like a worthy cause to you? Then consider these points.
1. The Learning partnership, like AIMS and the Frontier Institute, is a propaganda front for wealthy but still greedy people, who want to get a foot in the door of the public schools so they can destroy them, and convert them into sources of profit.
The US has been doing this for decades - with the result that UNESCO, which used to rate American education eiigtheenth in the world , now rates it at 136th. J.K.Irving has been a leading figure in this campaign in Canada.
2. J.K. Irving is described as a philanthropist and public education advocate. (Writer Brent Mazerolle certainly knows where Mr. Irving likes to be kissed.)
In fact, Mr. Irving with his pet dogs AIMS and BrunswickMedia, just a year ago launched a savage campaign against the public schools. Partnership is just a nice word for Mr. Irving taking over another function of voters and the government they elect.
Mr. Irving has no business being in any such partnership - any more than he has any business planning the economic future of New Brunswick. What we are watching is the rapid destruction of democracy in New Brunswick as Mr. Irving assumes powers he has to right to. If he wants to have an influence on education, then let him get elected. Let him take public responsibility for his actions. This province, despite Mr. Irving's presumptions and arrogance, still has some traces of democracy in it.
And he's a philtantrophist? The man who has made his billions out of New Brunswickers by payiing the lowest taxes possible, and accepting lavish gifts at the expense of the rest of us.
There is nothing like watching billionaires and politicians standing in a circle to kiss each other's asses.
Then there's yet another large spread on the death of Ian Fowler, and yet again it's in the distasteful lauguage of small town boosterism I have no doubt that Mr. Fowler was a fine man. But the coverage of his death has been in bad taste, and way over the top.
The front page also carries a long story about Mr. Alward giving a talk about nothing - in this case, it's about the importance of medical research. He makes the stunning statement that though New Brunswick lags in medical research spending, the quality of its research has caused an incredible buzz around the country. Right. I have friends in medical research at McGill, and all they talk about is how great things are in New Brunswick.
In NewsToday, the TandT has finally noticed that something is going on in Iran. But, thanks to its reliance on Reuters for information, we don't learn much. There is no mention of how insane a war with Iran could be - or of how Canada would be almost certain to be drawn into it. If you want to know what's going on with Iran, google The Guardian - a British paper.
And that takes us to the used car ads.
The editorial talks about how we have to reduce our debt without raising taxes or imposing tolls. Okay. Thsy seems to leave only one way to do that - reduce New Brunswick's already feeble services. But that won't do it, either. The reality is that we need to raise taxes on those very few New Bunswickers who sit on the largest share of wealth in this province, who refuse to pay their share, and who have the nerve to demand constant constant donations from the rest of us.
Jody Dallaire has a very useful article on cooperatives.
Norbert Cunningham reveals yet another topic he knows nothing about, in this case, broadcasting. I won't comment on TV because I never watch it. But CBC radio is the only source of serious news analysis in Canada. Obviously, Mr. Cunningham is furious because it sometimes criticizes Mr. Harper.
It seems that Mr. Cunningham is one of those people who see a world populated by liberals and conservatives, and conservatives are good and liberals are bad. It might be a discussion point - if only Mr. Cunningham would learn what the words conservative and liberal mean. (His examples of liberal and conservaitve are John Turner and Stephen Harper. Neither of those men has any political philosophy worth mentioning; nor is there any great difference between them.
Does the TandT have a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary? If not, I could lend it one.