It takes some guts to insert anyone critical of the Fords smack dab in the middle of Ford Nation these days. After all, these are the same people who openly threatened to cut Sarah’s head off on Facebook (I wish I was kidding).

But Catherine Porter of the Star did it anyways, standing outside of Rob’s cherished Humbertown Mall with nought but a sign inviting people for a talk, and a smile, asking Ford supporters what they thought of their man these days.

Of course, it wouldn’t be Ford Nation if at least a few of them didn’t throw out insults like their corpulent hero, but thankfully a few people decided to talk to her and provide us with a glimpse into the brilliance that makes up their ranks.

The person that stood out, for me, was one Robert Tycholiz, a former drug addict turned musician, and a die-hard Ford backer.

“I have a lot of faith in the mayor. The things he’s done for the city are the ones he promised to do,” said Tycholiz, 54. “I believe him.”

The word “believe” here is really very appropriate, because it exposes a sort of blind faith. And it would have to be blind to claim that the mayor has “done” anything for the city outside of an extra $0.12 each day in your pocket (but only if you can afford to drive a car; go figure), and privatizing half of Toronto’s garbage collection (which doesn’t exactly qualify as the City Hall “gravy” that Rob used to scream about).

I guess this is enough to impress some people. Fine.

Then there’s this little gem:

“Anybody on coke, addicted to coke, could never carry weight like Rob Ford. He’s a big man. Those drugs slim you down like nobody’s businesses,” he said. “He’d have to be very, very stupid to have that happen, and I don’t see him as a stupid man.”

To claim that Ford’s tenure has shown much intelligence is a huge stretch. And about drugs like cocaine slimming you down like “nobody’s business”…

This is Chris Farley, in case you don’t recognize him; a jolly, good-natured, and infinitely more intelligent version of Rob Ford who died of a cocaine overdose, and who remained quite beefy right up until the end. Farley exhibited the same sweaty, ruddy-faced demeanor that Ford does, making accusations of Ford’s drug use all the more plausible.

But not to Ford Nashun, the people who are willing to believe a known public liar (remember how vehemently he denied his Florida DUI charge? Or the drunken hockey incident?) over overwhelming evidence and fact. Reality clearly doesn’t matter. They’ll buy whatever the fat man is shoveling, even if that happens to be so much fetid bullshit.

The questions I’m left with at the end of all of this: should these people be allowed to walk around without a chaperone and some sort of protective head gear? And for God’s sake, we’re letting them behind the wheel of a car?!

Although I tend to lace my political analyses with a lot more profanity and not so subtle calls to action, I’m heartened to see that the mainstream media seem to be waking up to what’s happening — at least here in Canada.

Christopher Hume’s piece in the Toronto Star today, for example, demonstrates a willingness to no longer tip-toe around the issues. Although I wish I could quote the entire article, the last few-ish paragraphs sum it all up perfectly:

It was painful to watch our prime minister and chief environmental scofflaw, Boss Harper, squirm in New York last week as he tried to talk his way out of his antediluvian attitudes to climate change.

It was just as excruciating to witness Sheriff Ford’s efforts to deal with reports of a video of him apparently smoking crack. The man has yet to mount any defence beyond, “ridiculous.”

Through it all we remain so polite, deferential and glad to be of use, that a good many Torontonians lined up to denounce the media that did them the favour of revealing the mayor for what he is, an overgrown man-child who does what he wants, the city be damned.

Harper, by contrast, knows what he’s doing. He knows his actions are reckless, but to him ethics are a nicety leaders can’t afford.

Neither Harper nor Ford respect government, its institutions or the positions they hold. Both believe themselves exempt. To them, Canadians are gullible or too preoccupied with getting by to hold them responsible.

As bad as things may be, Canadians are terrified they could be worse.

I applaud you, Mr. Hume, for taking a stand against the blithe illegality and corruption of our various levels of government. Now we just need more people to do the same.

You know how it is … you’re strolling down the street thinking to yourself, “you know, it’d be nice to have a massive, fatal coronary right here and now”. Except every time you’ve tried that, those damn EMS people come by and resuscitate you.

Well, you’ll be pleased to know that the Toronto Star has put out a handy-dandy guide to the best spots to kick off in such a manner. And wouldn’t you know it, the place to be is in my old neighbourhood; what what!!

It’s been almost a year since I reached out to the Star to see what was happening with their complaint against the mayor. You may not remember it — it had to do with how Ford was excluding media from City Hall (and especially the Star).

Well, the much-maligned Integrity Commissioner recently released her report on the incident and decided that there was nothing to follow up on. In other words, case closed.

Unsurprisingly, no one from the Ford camp is so much as mentioning the decision. I suppose it must be a foregone conclusion now that Rob Ford gets away with breaking every rule and law out there, why should this be any different? And, of course, further discussions about the balance in the office of the Integrity Commissioner are completely absent. In other words, if she’s questioning the mayor and doing her job, then of course she’s irrelevant, biased, and just the scum of the earth. If she’s siding with him, it can be ignored so that she can continue to be demonized.

But let’s put this to the side for moment and see what the report actually said. First, some history.

In February 2011, members of the City Hall press gallery put together a brief note stating what they expected of the mayor as a public servant:

The Gallery expects that all of its members will be treated equally and fairly. As such, all media releases, circulars, agendas, notice of scrums and other events, and other official communications from the City of Toronto, including the mayor’s office, must be communicated equally to all members of the Gallery, without favour or prejudice.

Ford ignored this and didn’t respond (surprise!)

In December of that year, a formal complaint was filed and, indeed, Rob Ford was once again found to have been doing exactly what he’d been accused of doing:

The complainant provided examples of bulk distribution of news releases and statements made by the Mayor to the media that were not given to journalists writing for the Toronto Star. The Mayor acknowledges that these were not delivered to writers for the Toronto Star. A search conducted of press releases from the Office of the Mayor during the relevant time period identified the recipients.

Additionally:

The former Press Secretary for the Mayor confirmed that after taking office the Mayor’s flatly stated position was, “I do not talk to the Star.”

Furthermore:

One journalist for the Toronto Star described the situation as an “underground economy” in information. Material was often provided on an “off the record” basis. Another journalist from the Toronto Star described the relationship-building with the Mayor’s Press Secretary as a “long hard slog” which improved over time.

And just to clarify:

The subject of the Mayor’s relationship to the media was discussed with many of those interviewed in this investigation. Staff members from the Toronto Star spoke about the difficulty of doing their work without up to date information about the Mayor and his activities. This complaint was not limited to the Toronto Star. Other journalists described the flow of information out of the Mayor’s office in these terms:

• “few and far between”
• “we aren’t kept up to date regarding what he is doing”
• “occasional” statements
• “less than once per week and sometimes once per month”
• “It is not as if we have a direct line to the Mayor”
• The Press Secretary is “inconsistent” in responding to journalists

…

On the continuum of “sparse or sparser” access, members of the Press Gallery said that the Toronto Star has less access than others. The media members interviewed, and those who commented publicly on the issue have said a number of times that a Mayor should be even-handed with the press and treat all outlets “fairly.” Others felt strongly that there is a democratic obligation on the part of elected officials to be open with the press and to be fair in access to information about their activities.

In the end and despite this overwhelming evidence, the Integrity Commissioner ruled in favour of Ford:

I conclude that on the particular facts in this case, there was no breach of the Code of Conduct by Mayor Ford. The reasons for this finding can be summarized as follows:

• There is an accepted practice of elected officials, including the Mayor, determining how and when they will grant access to the media, by way of interviews, answering questions during scrums or providing information about their views, outside of the formal and publicly accessible mechanisms that exist for ensuring transparent municipal democracy;
• The Mayor did not interfere with the access of Toronto Star reporters to significant avenues of information about the workings and agendas of City Council, the public service, or other councillors;
• The City of Toronto has an open access policy for disseminating information to the media and to the public;
• The Mayor’s personal policy of “not talking to the Star” was incomplete, with his knowledge and approval, as shown by the following:
  • distribution of some bulk e mails to thestar.ca;
  • distribution of most bulk e mails to other members of the Star Media Group, all falling under the direct supervision of the Publisher of the Toronto Star;
  • distribution of all bulk e mails to the affiliated sister company of Metroland;
  • the unofficial and multiple “work arounds” by staff and Toronto Star journalists, known, tolerated and cited by the Mayor in his defence.
  • The originating story which led to the Mayor’s reason for not speaking to the Toronto Star was written during a political campaign and was newsworthy because of his status as a public and political figure;
  • The ability of the press to publish, comment and otherwise hold politicians to account for their media communications practices.

So once again, Rob Ford smugly walks away from the fray because there’s really nothing in place to hold him to account.

This is, of course, in response to Ford’s latest bluster about how people need to sue him when he calls them liars (I’m sure it makes sense to him).

The Star’s Robyn Doolittle seems to be gunning close to the core Rob Ford issue of the moment: his alcohol / drug abuse. Not terribly surprising given both the rumours and some earlier contacts (this date last year, in fact):

The story, apparently, is that Rob made another slovenly mess of himself at a war veteran’s charity ball, and had to be shown out.

Three members of the Garrison Ball organizing committee said Ford was asked to leave because he appeared impaired. One said, “he seemed either drunk, high or had a medical condition.”

Doolittle goes on to name a variety of sadly but understandably anonymous (all fearing the mayor’s wrath),  sources who detail the alcoholism that Rob Ford is “battling with” (seems like a warm embrace to me, but that’s just my take). Some of the guest descriptions of Ford from the military ball, however, should remind us that there’s probably more than alcohol involved:

“incoherent,” “stumbling,” “rambling,” “intoxicated,” “slurring,” “seemed to be drunk,” “was nervous, excited, sweaty, out of it.”

I’ve had my fair share of alcohol, and I can’t say that I’ve ever been nervous or excited. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I know that Fordites are going to cling to their main mass no matter what, but to the rest of us, doesn’t it seem like maybe it’s time for a random drug test? And before anyone raises a fuss about inequality, I’d definitely be in favour of all the Councillors taking one.

An astute twiterrer noticed a motion by Councillor Adam Vaughan to not ban press or journalists from City Hall. The full text of the motion reads:

No media conference, no media event or news release by The City of Toronto and/or any agency, board or commission of the City, and/or any staff, hired consultant or elected official of the City of Toronto shall exclude by name any individual journalist or news organization.

The twiterrer in question alludes to this “ban” referring to the Toronto Star which has been quite critical of Mayor Rob Ford — as have many people and organizations. And Robbie doesn’t hide his disdain for the paper so this is certainly believable.

Here’s what I find extremely troubling; freedom of press and freedom of expression are ensconced in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [section 2 (6)]. For Councillor Vaughan to have to pass a motion to guarantee this freedom at City Hall suggests a very troubling trend of silencing dissent, criticism, and opinions that are not directly shared by Ford and his cronies.

If this motion does indeed turn out to be a response to Ford’s attempt to exclude the Star from reporting on City Hall, his claim that the paper is “openly working against the democractic process” would be beyond hypocritical. Criminal, even. And again, this isn’t unimaginable — Ford has been accused of backroom dealings in things like the Port Lands redevelopment project; even some of his hand-picked Executive Committee are distancing themselves because of the public outcry.

The vote on this motion is supposed to take place next week on September 21 and 22. I’m sure many Torontonians would love to hear the details of why Vaughan thought it was necessary to make the motion. It may turn out to be a simple case of political grandstanding so passing judgement is definitely premature. However, I wouldn’t put it past Robbie to be trying to silence his critics, and if this is the case then we’ve got a serious problem at City Hall.

The Toronto Star reports today that in their hour-long “Red light test” (at what appears to be somewhere around the intersection of York and Queen’s Quay), the majority of cyclists broke the law and ran the light.

Unbelievable! I mean, who would’ve been able to guess that something like this could happen in a city like Toronto?!

There were probably even more laws broken but the numbers shown in the video are enough in and of themselves.

So for his most-hated pick for his “Toronto’s Worst Buildings” list, the Toronto Star’s Christopher Hume chose the soon-to-be-completed Trump Tower, the be-lidded one’s contribution to our skyline and, apparently, the upcoming record holder for the tallest eyesore, erm, building in Toronto.

According to The Don’s typical hyperbolic pronouncements, the staggeringly priced units (starting at just under $1 mill. and going as high as $20 mill.), are “superior” by virtue of the fixtures (your choice of faucets makes you a better person), and by the sheer height from which you can look / spit down on the common rabble from on high.

I get the impression that Chris had made up his mind about this “Worst Buildings of Toronto” selection a long time ago. The sore-thumb slab that Humie affectionately refers to as “condominiums”, however, doesn’t jump to mind when I think of Bloor and Lansdowne. In fact, I don’t remember the last time I was out in that area; now I don’t care to remember.

“I don’t know what to say in its defense except that, I guess, that it provides housing for a large number of people”, is the only positive comment that the Chris offers. I would only add a voluminous barf sound of some sort to round off that review.