Sorry, Sam, But Your $250-a-plate Party IS a Fundraiser

Michael Geist writes in his blog about the fundraising dinner being thrown by Sam Bulte’s Big Content snugglebuddies:

Now, despite clearly

labelling the event as a fundraiser on her own website,

she’s arguing it isn’t a fundraiser at all.  Instead, in response to

the question “How can we count on you to carry on. . . impartially when

you are taking money from special interest groups?”, the Star reports

that Bulte responded:

“They are not hosting a fundraiser for me. It’s a celebration of my support for the arts community.”

We should all be so lucky to have celebrations where each guest forks over $250. If each of you cheapskates who attended my birthday party had done that, I’d be entering this blog entry in a zignone wool suit from Harry Rosen.

Since what Sam says has often proven to be at variance with what she does, I decided to be empirical and go take a look at her site. Here’s a screen capture of her site as of 10:45 a.m. this morning:

I see the word “FUNDRAISER” in capitals, clear as day. How ’bout you?

I downloaded the invitation, which I’ve put here for your reference [80K PDF], in case someone at her campaign gets smart (unlikely) and replaces it. Here’s what the top of the first page looks like:

I believe that phrases “cordially invite you to an artists’ and creators’ fundraiser for Sam Bulte” and “All funds raised will go to Sam’s re-election campaign” strongly suggest that this “celebration” is indeed a fundraiser. If you’re still not convinced, there’s the note at the bottom of the first page that reads:

Tax receipt will be issued for the eligible portion of the cost

You can hand out tax receipts for “celebrations”? I should’ve handed some out at my legendary hot tub party!

Finally, there’s this legal statement on the second page of the invitation:

Please note the new contribution limits as at January 1, 2004: Individuals may contribute up to a total of $5,000 in a calendar year to a registered party and its registered associations; candidates and nomination contestants. Corporations and trade unions may contribute up to a total of $1,000 in a calendar year to the registered electoral district associations; candidates; and nomination contestants. Crown corporations and corporations that receive 50% or more of their funding from the federal government will not be able to make any contributions.

It’s a fundraiser, all right. What kind of idiots does she take us for?

5 Comments

  1. Anonymous
    Posted January 18, 2006 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    OnlineRights.ca is throwing a little get-together at the Drake on Thursday as well. But ours is a buy-your-own dinner affair where a more balanced spectrum of people affected by copyright can meet, strategize, and share mac & chees. Details are here:

    http://www.onlinerights.ca/

    Hope you can come!

  2. Anonymous
    Posted January 18, 2006 at 10:10 am | Permalink

    MMMhhh. Amazing how much in Denial she seems to be over those things. Or is she just assuming that nobody really cares?

    I have to admit, 10 years ago she may just have gotten away with it and nobody would have noticed.

  3. Anonymous
    Posted January 18, 2006 at 1:57 pm | Permalink

    Has Margo Timmins lost her mind??

    How disappointing to see her on the bill.

  4. Anonymous
    Posted January 18, 2006 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

    Please see

    http://democraticspace.com/blog/predictions/

    specifically

    http://democraticspace.com/blog/predictions/ontario/parkdale-high-park/

    Make it not happen!

    Anonymous Bosch

  5. Anonymous
    Posted January 19, 2006 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

    “has margo timmins lost her mind?” (a previous comment)

    Well the context to this is that she’s married to the president of the CRIA, Graham Henderson.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*