In yesterday's post by Liberal blogger and Stephane Dion apologist Jason Cherniak, he alleged that Conservative candidate Peter Kent was less than sincere:

Peter Kent is running against Susan Kadis for the Conservatives in Thornhill. As I've mentioned before (#2), he tries to leave the impression that he lives in Thornhill by doing things like referring to "our community". However, the truth is that Peter Kent lives right downtown in Toronto-Centre.

Now in that previous post referenced, Jason does acknowledge something very relevant -- Peter Kent does have a home in Thornhill:

[Peter Kent] even says very prominently:

If you see me on the street, or in a restaurant, or at the mall...please take time to say hello. The same invitation holds if you're strolling along John Street...and see me working on my house and garden.

There is only one problem - Peter Kent does not live in Thornhill. He did recently buy a house in the riding, but it is currently under renovation and he continues to live downtown. I do not mean to suggest that you need to live in a riding to represent it, but I think there is something very wrong with deliberately trying to mislead people. Peter Kent needs to come clean about his current residency. York Region doesn't like fake.

What about this house in Thornhill?  Well, here's the scoop from Peter Kent:

When I received the nomination [in March 2007] to stand as the CPC candidate in Thornhill, we purchased a house in the riding to demonstrate our commitment to the community.    Since then - early 2007 -- we've been enthusiastically working to restore this lovely 1842 fixer-upper.

Here is a picture of Peter in front of his home (click to enlarge).  Clearly he is pleased with his new digs:

It is actually a heritage home, with a name: "Fisher House".  As such, renovations must be carefully considered and made according to guidelines designed to protect the historical and architectural integrity of the property.  In fact, Peter's property is specifically called out in the guidelines as an example, drawing attention to the Victorian turned posts that are a distinctive feature of the veranda.

So he has a home he bought in the riding to show that he does not intend to be an absentee MP.  And the home he bought is one that requires particular consideration of the community and history of Thornhill.  It's not just a mailing address.

And he hasn't even been elected as an MP yet!

Michael Ignatieff moved to Toronto and bought a nice place in Yorkville, then found out he would be parachuted into Etobicoke-Lakeshore.  Should he have moved into the riding?  He said in an interview that he did not want to ask his wife to move twice, and I understand that.  I'm certain Michael Ignatieff makes himself available to the people in his riding, and spends time enough there to understand the issues in the riding, especially on how they affect federal politics.

I'd say Peter Kent buying a heritage home and carefully renovating it shows at least the same level of sincerity.  So is he renovating it himself?  Yes.  He's renovating it right now, even as I write this.  I know because I've been bugging him while he's trying to get work done.   He's a very patient guy.

Is Peter Kent sincere?  His neighbours think so:

I'm working at the house this morning....and lost almost half an hour when a couple of neighbors popped over to check out this week's progress.

As for my invitation to folks to stop me on the street or the health club (due there in an hour)...or in restaurants and malls...a fair number of Thornhillers do just that regularly.

Peter Kent tells me renovating an old house is a big job, more so since it is a heritage property, something us bloggers might not appreciate.  The enjoyment and satisfaction Peter is getting out of the work he's doing has come across in his correspondence with me.  Apparently his neighbours sense it too.  They might be impressed with Peter's work to properly restore this bit of Thornhill heritage.  They're certainly interested.

Is Peter Kent "faking" the renovations?  The heritage committee doesn't think so.  In fact, in October 2007, the committee recommended an Award of Excellence for the work being done by Peter Kent:

HERITAGE MARKHAM RECOMMENDS:

THAT Heritage Markham receive the report of the Award of Excellence Sub-committee as information and that the following nominees be recommended for Heritage Markham Awards of Excellence (2007):

Restoration – Private Residential

• Lane house, 111 John Street Thornhill

Congratulations on the nomination.

I don't pretend to have Jason Cherniak's sense for when someone is being "deliberately misleading".  That's a skill a lawyer needs.  Still, was a line crossed when he all but called Peter Kent a liar?  What else could "deliberately misleading" mean?

If Peter Kent seemed in the least upset about what Jason Cherniak wrote, I might suggest an apology was in order.  Frankly, I get the impression that Peter seemed to enjoy the opportunity to talk about his home in Thornhill and the work he's putting into it.  With that, I'll leave him to his work on making a home out of this important, if until recently neglected, Thornhill property.

And we can leave Jason Cherniak alone in his effort to protect the people in Thornhill from deliberately misleading fakers.  I'm sure if he accuses enough people of being insincere, he might actually be right once in while.

Correction: From Jason Cherniak: "However, it's miseading to put quotes around the word 'faker' when I never used that word! Normally quotes are meant to show that the person actually wrote what you are quoting."

Jason is right.  He called Peter Kent a "fake", not a "faker". 

Yup, he got me on that one.  He called Peter Kent a "fake" for buying a heritage property in Thornhill, a riding Kent intends to represent, and then spending the time and money to renovate the historically sensitive home in a manner that has been formally recognized by the community of Thornhill as being respectful to Thornhill, its past, and its present.  Just to set the record straight.  A "fake", not a "faker".  Right then.

By the way, as a blogger, Jason Cherniak is a poor example of how it's done.  Here is Jason's update in response to my posts about Peter Kent:

Notice he doesn't provide the link to the piece that "solves" his "concern".  You would think that after calling Peter Kent deliberately misleading and now saying his concerns have been addressed, he would provide his readers the chance to see what it was that has prompted this about face.

Jason Cherniak writes in puerile manner.  The bit about Peter Kent selling his home is childish.  I was actually embarrassed when I read it.  Maybe his readership likes that sort of taunting, so maybe he's just faking it.  But to churlishly refuse to link to the posting that prompted him to update his piece is a manifestation of the low regard with which he holds his readers.

His readers might like it when Jason uses taunts of the sort you'd hear in an elementary schoolyard, but I doubt they'd appreciate having Jason take it upon himself to refuse to allow them to see the original source material for themselves, and instead only his own edited and filtered version.

If you want to see the original post on Jason's blog, here's the link.