JCT: I'm running as an independent candidate in the St. Paul's
Ontario provincial byelection in Toronto and received this
invitation from the Rogers Cable Network:

Goldhawk Live
Date: Thursday, September 3, 2009 4:01 PM
From: "Kelly Todd" <Kelly.Todd@...>
To: johnturmel@...
Hello,

On Monday, September 14th Goldhawk Live will be taping an all-
candidates debate for the St. Paul's riding.
The taping will take place from 4:00-5:00 pm at the Rogers TV
studio located at 855 York Mills Rd.
Candidates representing the PC, Liberal, NDP and Green Party will
be involved in the formal debate.

All other candidates will be featured in the last portion of our
program and will be given the opportunity to voice their "pitch"
for a duration of approximately one minute.

Candidates who are interested in participating in Goldhawk Live
must confirm before Monday, September 7th.
Details regarding directions and parking will be sent once the
candidate is confirmed. Thank you in advance, Kelly
Kelly Todd Producer, Goldhawk Live
Rogers TV - Toronto 416.442.2846
kelly.todd@... Local matters. Only on RogersTV.

JCT: This is the typical cheating going on. Build up the prestige
of the favored candidates while denigrating the disfavored
candidates as unworthy of equal attention. Same four all the
time, nothing much new ever.
Anyway, since I'm in the Supreme Court right now challenging the
CRTC decision the media don't have to include all candidates in
debates anymore. The R. v. CBC Vezina decision where the Ontario
Court of Appeal ruled debates didn't have to include everyone.

So they don't have to even give me my minute anymore. There's
nothing I can do while the court has ruled that excluding
candidates is still democratic other than my current challenge in
the Supreme Court. But what are the odds the Supreme Court will
judge the exclusion of candidates from debates a serious issue
worthy of their consideration. Probably not much.

Right after Big Brother announced they were fixing the game for
the televised debate, I get another fixed game announcement:

From: Brian Baker <bbaker@...>
Subject: Format for the Town Crier Debate, Sept. 10
To: "Brian Baker" <bbaker@...>
Cc: gcameron@..., <emcmillan@...>
Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 5:15 PM

Dear attendees of the candidates debate,
Attached is the format for the Sept. 10 debate at First
Unitarian Congregation of Toronto, 175 St. Clair Ave. West.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
myself or managing editor Gordon Cameron. Best,
Brian Baker -- News Editor / Reporter
Town Crier Newspapers
E: bbaker@... W: http://www.mytowncrier.ca

JCT: The format was equitable until they got to the question
period where voters would be forced to select 4 candidates to
respond to the questions. Why not five? Could it be because there
are the Big Four and the rest of us? I objected and cced email
copies to the other candidates:

Turmel: Re: Format for the Town Crier Debate,
Date: Sept. 10 Tuesday, September 8, 2009 11:28 PM
From: "John Turmel" <johnturmel@...>
"Brian Baker" <bbaker@...>
Cc: gcameron@..., emcmillan@...,
turmel@yahoogroups.com, danish@...,
votechris@..., mariusfrederick@..., eric@...,
sue@..., pm@...---

Jct: I think limiting the questions to only the usual Big Four is
wrong. All candidates should be treated the same and the audience
should not be encouraged to treat us differently.
---

JCT: One other candidate responded:

From: Marius Frederick <mariusfrederick@...>
Subject: Re: Turmel: Re: Format for the Town Crier Debate,
To: "John Turmel" <johnturmel@...>
Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2009, 4:13 AM

You are correct, yesterday I had to talk to 680 News about only
mentioning the 4 main stream parties.
---

Re: Turmel: Re: Format for the Town Crier Debate,
Date: Sept. 10 Wednesday, September 9, 2009 8:42 AM
From: "John Turmel" <johnturmel@...>View contact details
To: "Marius Frederick" <mariusfrederick@...>

Jct: Get used to not being mentioned. That you can't correct.
But don't get used to being excluded. The organizers have created
an exclusion mechanism for the audience to use since they can't
restrict all questions to the four favored parties themselves.
When I'm excluded from a question, I leave the stage and pass out
my flyers, quite a disruption, until I'm invited to participate
back on stage with the others.
And of course, the pressure has to be put on the Big Four. If
they won't participate in a crooked format, the format changes.
If they will, Big Brother wins. It's the Big Four Favovites who
are the bad guys for taking the unfair edge, not only the crooked
referee for giving it to them.
Start pressuring the Big Four to get us all on the Rogers debate.
I've been on with 10, we can be on with 11.
---

Re: Turmel: Re: Format for the Town Crier Debate,
Date: Sept. 10 Thursday, September 10, 2009 12:26 AM
To: "John Turmel" <johnturmel@...>
From: "Brian Baker" <bbaker@...>Cc:

We've limited it to any four candidates at a time for the
sake of expediency with the allotted time we have for the
debate. I apologize if it was not made clear.
Voters can direct their questions to any four candidates.
Not just the Liberal, PC, NDP or Green camps. Best,
---

JCT: "Best," after giving me the shiv. I wrote back:

From: "John Turmel" <johnturmel@...>
To: "Brian Baker" <bbaker@...>Cc:
danish@..., emcmillan@...,
eric@..., gcameron@...,
mariusfrederick@..., pm@..., sue@...,
votechris@..., turmel@yahoogroups.com, medpot-
discuss@yahoogroups.com---

Jct: It was made very clear.
To include one of the small-party candidates forces the voter to
exclude one of the big-party candidates.
Voters should not be put in the position of having to prejudice
the debate. 99% of other debates I've attended permit all
candidates the same treatment, responding to all questions
together, I see no reason and no expedient worth turning it into
an exercise in failed-democracy.
I can tell you that in the past, when I have been excluded from a
question, I leave the stage and go pass out my literature until
I'm invited back on stage to respond. I won't sit there like a
lump on a log while the same four candidates keep getting asked
all the questions.
And why not five candidates?
I can also tell you that in the past, when all the candidates
agree that all the candidates should be treated the same, we are.
So I expect all my opponents to endorse letting all candidates
answer all questions. We'll take a straw poll tomorrow night.
---

JCT: So, tomorrow night, we find out if the favored candidates
are going to stand up to the moderator for the disfavored
candidates equal participation in the questions in anticipation
of whether they favored candidates will stand up to Rogers for
the disfavored candidates in the equal participation of the whole
telecast.

We can't expect the CRTC or the courts to tame Big Brother, we
can only hope our opponents have the sportsmanship to not accept
such an unfair court-approved flaw in the Canadian democratic
process. When the favored candidates refuse to accept the unfair
advantage, there's nothing for Big Brother to do but open the
show.

Hope the cops don't have to be called.
At least I'm not on probation any more if they do!
Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.