Thursday, July 23, 2009

Shona Holmes: Useful idiot or puppetmaster?


And here's Buckets, doing a number on Shona Holmes, which raises the obvious question (suggested by a drinking companion last night): Whose idea was it to lie about Holmes' condition in a TV commercial?

That Holmes lied with her claim of imminent death is now indisputable. So who decided to perpetrate that fraud on the TV viewing public?



Did Holmes choose to do that, thereby suckering the American group "Patients United Now?" Or did someone else write the script, and simply had Holmes play along?

It's a simple question -- whose idea was it to lie about this?

AFTERSNARK: All of this proves that leftists are interested only in the politics of personal destruction and attacking terminal cancer patients and hoping they die. Any bets on who seizes on that meme first? You know it's coming.

16 comments:

Ti-Guy said...

Holmes claims in this inteview on As it Happens that a doctor (nameless, naturally) at the Mayo Clinic asserted that she would be dead in six months.

CC said...

That claim flies in the face of what the Mayo Clinic posted on its own web site, where the neurosurgeon stated quite clearly, "We needed to remove the cyst to save her vision."

It did not say to save her life, it said to save her vision. And not to downplay the seriousness of losing one's vision, Holmes' claim about possibly losing her life still appears to be a blatant lie.

Jack said...

Also, one might like to point out that according to http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15739543 the NIH in the US, 98% of patients with impaired vision saw their vision return after surgery.

Ti-Guy said...

That claim flies in the face of what the Mayo Clinic...

Indeed it does. Someone needs to question the expertise/motivations of doctors at the clinic if Holmes's claim is true. Asserting that this condition is terminal amounts to malpractice.

Of course, we know that will be impossible, since the default reaction of institutions these days to uncomfortable questions is something like "no comment." In this context, likely a recourse to doctor/patient confidentiality.

Someone is, however, lying.

CC said...

Ti-Guy:

This whole doctor/patient confidentiality thing can be nad-grindingly annoying when someone releases, very selectively, some medical details, then refuses to balance the presentation by citing said confidentiality.

Once both Holmes and the Mayo Clinic have splashed their accusations all over the Clinic's web page, hanging your case on confidentiality would seem to be a pretty weak rebuttal.

Jeff Orchard said...

Hmmm... proof by anecdote. Typical of the irrational.

Saskboy said...

I thought medical emergencies were sexy. Don't Americans like things that are sexy?

Ti-Guy said...

Instead of going after Holmes at this point though, the focus should be on the CCF and its board of directors (which includes Andrew Coyne) and the Mayo Clinic. These are people and institutions who value their credibility and are thus vulnerable to charges of professional malpractice and dishonesty...which could include manipulating a woman who's not well.

If Canadian liberals/lefties/progressives were better organised (at least organised enough to come together on common interests from time to time), we might have some hope of nipping this kind of crap in the bud.

CC said...

I agree, Ti-Guy, but who in the MSM is going to invest the energy to follow the money like that and point out who's hiding behind the curtain?

Until that happens, the only alternative is to mock and ridicule the frontperson, until one of them finally has enough and thinks, "Why the hell am I out here sucking up the bullets on this?", and turns on their handlers.

Ti-Guy said...

Until that happens, the only alternative is to mock and ridicule the frontperson..

But aren't you afraid of being called a big, misogynist meany again? I'm sure DeBeauxOs is hovering over this discussion somewhere, just waiting for a slip up.

...I keed, I keed.

But not really.

CC said...

Ti-Guy:

Doesn't matter if the frontperson is male or female -- if they're willing to be the scapegoat, then take them down. The same can be said for one Major Stefan Cook, who was undoubtedly encouraged to throw away his job and military career without realizing what kind of disaster he was walking into and how others were quite willing to fuck him over for political purposes.

It may sound harsh but, until people higher up the media food chain are willing to dig deeper, the only alternative is to destroy -- utterly and without remorse -- people like Cook and Holmes. Then maybe others will think twice before doing something similarly stupid and self-destructive.

P.S. I have no sympathy whatsoever for Holmes. As far as I can tell, she has shown no remorse for having lied like she did. If she eventually rolls over on her handlers, I'll change my mind. Until then, crush her.

ThinkingManNeil said...

Holmes has clearly established herself as a blatant and pathological liar, lying not only about her medical condition but on the state and value of the Canadian Health Care system. Granted there are always occasional problems and shortcomings in any state-run health care program, but that doesn't mean you overturn what benefits the vast majority of Canadians into a system that highly profits a few at the expense of everyone else. I know for myself with my own serious, life-long health problems that if we had an American-style for-profit healthcare system instead of OHIP and similar plans right across the country my life would be very difficult indeed, if not impossible.

What's most reprehensible about Holmes is that she's a part of that ideology-driven lawsuit that, without apology or even a sliver of humanity, aims to destroy state-run health care in Canada. This is so utterly despicable on her part that I would strongly urge her to leave Canada for residency in the US and see how well she fares there relying on whatever income she might make and the famous compassion of the "sink or swim" right. How much love would PUN and the CCF show her when her medical bills start piling up from whatever future illnesses that would surely come her way as she ages?

As some as those on the right are so want to say, "Love It or Leave It, bitch"

N.

Lindsay Stewart said...

isn't this sort of extra-national criticism of the motherland just the sort of thing that spurs cons to leap to the barricades crying treason. why does this eevul fibbing woman hate teh canada? how dare she go to another whole country (even a dreamboat sexy nom nom nom country like the yoo ess ay), and bad mouth our home and (screw the) native(s) land! traitor!

Audrey II said...

I vote "useful idiot", "pathetic liar", and "shameless opportunist", as they aren't mutually exclusive and Holmes's soapbox seems to be firmly situated at their intersection.

She and the gang at FOXNews make for good bedfellows (though O'Reilly could not be reached for falafel commentary).

fern hill said...

Looky what JJ found. Shona Holmes, Sex Advisor.

CK said...

Funny you should you use the term 'useful idiot'. One of her supporters infiltrated a group on Facebook recently called me a 'useful idiot'. Wow!

I vote useful idiot. Definitely not the puppet master. This puppet seems to serve alot of right winged puppet masters.

As to the blindness; read what Dr Rolando del Maestro from the Montreal Neurological Institute says about all that; http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/07/31/medicare-ad-exaggeration523.html.
I wrote a letter to her. It's posted to my blog if anyone is interested.