Surprise, surprise, surprise! Of course, this backstabbing and negative advertising is just fine because they are Liberals and no one expects honesty or integrity from them – same old same old – lie, cheat and steal – wonder how much they are paying GritGirl – bet it never shows up on their books.

That will be a nice change, because when Dion attacked us, we did all we could to suppress our laughter.

There is a rumour going around that GritGirl is, in fact, Kinsella. It would make sense.

PMSHs government is still ahead in the polls, another poll confirms today…Liberals are running out of time as some good news about the economy is starting.
They (and the media) decided Libs could just sit back and let the economic crisis crush the government.
Libs have nothing to lose by going negative, the recession is not hurting PMSH, and that was their plan A.

Plan B. Go negative, bring out Barney.

Forgive me for being a bit naive here, but am I missing something?

Our Minister of Finance, Jim Flaherty, went to a senate hearing to do the nation’s business. And he made a very strong claim that the video shows to have been complete and utter self-serving bunk.

I don’t even see how this is negative in the traditional sense of a negative ad. Statement and response. Like the other GritGirl videos.

She’s not the only one trying to keep our elected officials accountable for their own statements. Lots of other new youtube videos from all sides going up, including a ToryBoy video that is getting some circulation.

All I want to know is does Michael Ignatieff endorse what Warren Kinsella is saying on his blog?

GritGirl’s parents were really awful naming their daughter “Warren”

This is beyond transparent . . . . time to take names for future reference and do the background investigations now to identify the place/names of who is making these videos and where . . . and then Out them in the Campaign.

Keep you powder dry and your vigil sharp.

GritGirl’s parents were really awful naming their daughter “Warren”

This is beyond transparent . . . . time to take names for future reference and do the background investigations now to identify the place/names of who is making these videos and where . . . and then Out them in the Campaign.

Keep you powder dry and your vigil sharp.

Great post….thanks.

Great post….thanks.

I had it before Warren. You just want to think it’s from him.

None of this is from the party, and you’re just guessing. Not like “TheToryBoy1″ who is putting out AAA, but who works for a Tory MP.

When Michael Ignatieff attacks you, believe me you’ll know it.

I had it before Warren. You just want to think it’s from him.

None of this is from the party, and you’re just guessing. Not like “TheToryBoy1″ who is putting out AAA, but who works for a Tory MP.

When Michael Ignatieff attacks you, believe me you’ll know it.

Dont forget the latest liberal slime piece http://inactionplan.ca .

Dont forget the latest liberal slime piece http://inactionplan.ca .

“Liberals” first to go neg Stephen, really? You weren’t at the PM’s speech at your conference this weekend? The Conservatives have been using member’s statements in the HoC to lob some pretty nasty personal stuff at Ignatieff for weeks. And that’s just in the real world. Never mind the red-meat attack fundraising e-mails to the faithful.

If we’re going to include the cyberworld though, and the actions of sympathetic Web citizens, well, when has the negativity ever ended? And if we’re going to include amateur YouTube vids by party supporters as somehow being party sanctioned adverts just let me know, I’ll compile a list of particularly nasty and objectionable “Conservative” videos I’d like to ask Mr. Harper about.

And just for accuracy’s sake, the first neg shot of the post-Dion era, and to this point the only for broadcast by a party, were the NDP’s anti-Ignatieff radio ads shortly after the return of parliament/end of the coalition. I wouldn’t want Jack and the dippers to feel slighted…

“Liberals” first to go neg Stephen, really? You weren’t at the PM’s speech at your conference this weekend? The Conservatives have been using member’s statements in the HoC to lob some pretty nasty personal stuff at Ignatieff for weeks. And that’s just in the real world. Never mind the red-meat attack fundraising e-mails to the faithful.

If we’re going to include the cyberworld though, and the actions of sympathetic Web citizens, well, when has the negativity ever ended? And if we’re going to include amateur YouTube vids by party supporters as somehow being party sanctioned adverts just let me know, I’ll compile a list of particularly nasty and objectionable “Conservative” videos I’d like to ask Mr. Harper about.

And just for accuracy’s sake, the first neg shot of the post-Dion era, and to this point the only for broadcast by a party, were the NDP’s anti-Ignatieff radio ads shortly after the return of parliament/end of the coalition. I wouldn’t want Jack and the dippers to feel slighted…

WK is running Ignatieff's war room

Figurative guns and bloodbath of course…

Stephen:

Are you familiar with the meaning of the word 'first'.

Does Harper endorse Ezra Levants ramblings? EZ-L rules the movement, after all, and apparently served coffee to the war room last election. He's your Rush.

Holding fire? Or just got a crappy aim? You guys spent a month trashing WK in the HOC and what did it get you? Squat. Thats what happens when Ezra Levant is the head of your political movement.

Now some hot liberal girl lays a whupping on you and you whine. What are you looking for, affirmative action for knuckle-draggers? A press corps that doesn’t acknowledge when Tories reject science?

C’mon ST, man up

Holding fire? Or just got a crappy aim? You guys spent a month trashing WK in the HOC and what did it get you? Squat. Thats what happens when Ezra Levant is the head of your political movement.

Now some hot liberal girl lays a whupping on you and you whine. What are you looking for, affirmative action for knuckle-draggers? A press corps that doesn’t acknowledge when Tories reject science?

C’mon ST, man up

Hmm. Well, firstly, the video itself is intellectually dishonest. Flaherty says, “no one predicted this global recession”.. and the quotes all refer to U.S. or Canadian recession.

As now there are attacks on the Minister of Science because he refuses to answer questions regarding evolution – while I note no one is asking all the Liberal Catholic members about their position on Abortion..

..well, it’s all so “amateur hour”. When the guns get loaded up on Michale Ignatieff, it will be a bloodbath. At one point, when he had just resumed being a Canadian a few years ago, I actually saw him as a potential ally to the conservative cause..

- he has pointed out that the “Michael Moore-style left” has undermined the noble goals of the U.S. seeking to spread democracy under what he calls their “pseudo-Marxist realism”
- he spent the great part of the last three decades living elsewhere, and, apparently, referring to himself as “American”. When asked about it by Peter Newman in a Maclean’s interview published on 6 April 2006, Ignatieff said: “Sometimes you want to increase your influence over your audience by appropriating their voice”
- In August,2006, Ignatieff said he was “not losing any sleep” over dozens of civilian deaths caused by Israel’s attack on Qana during its military actions in Lebanon;
- Ignatieff was a prominent supporter of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. Ignatieff stated that “The United Nations lay dozing like a dog before the fire, happy to ignore Saddam until an American president seized it by the scruff of the neck and made it bark.”
- in his writings, Ignatieff has suggested that western democracies may have to resort to “lesser evils” like indefinite detention of suspects, “coercive interrogations”, targeted assassinations, and pre-emptive wars in order to combat the greater evil of terrorism;
- The measure of Michael Ignatief was illustrated in his dismissal of Ukranians seeking an independant state as evident in the comments in his book, “Blood and Belonging” where he wrote, “Ukrainian independence conjures up images of embroidered peasant shirts, the nasal whine of ethnic instruments, phony cossacks in cloaks and boots, nasty anti-Semites. ” He went further in stating that “My difficulty in taking Ukraine seriously goes deeper than just my cosmopolitan suspicion of nationalists everywhere. Somewhere inside, I’m also what Ukrainians call a Great Russian, and there is a trace of old Russian disdain for these ‘little Russians’”

..as the saying goes..”we’re just getting warmed up.”

Hmm. Well, firstly, the video itself is intellectually dishonest. Flaherty says, “no one predicted this global recession”.. and the quotes all refer to U.S. or Canadian recession.

As now there are attacks on the Minister of Science because he refuses to answer questions regarding evolution – while I note no one is asking all the Liberal Catholic members about their position on Abortion..

..well, it’s all so “amateur hour”. When the guns get loaded up on Michale Ignatieff, it will be a bloodbath. At one point, when he had just resumed being a Canadian a few years ago, I actually saw him as a potential ally to the conservative cause..

- he has pointed out that the “Michael Moore-style left” has undermined the noble goals of the U.S. seeking to spread democracy under what he calls their “pseudo-Marxist realism”
- he spent the great part of the last three decades living elsewhere, and, apparently, referring to himself as “American”. When asked about it by Peter Newman in a Maclean’s interview published on 6 April 2006, Ignatieff said: “Sometimes you want to increase your influence over your audience by appropriating their voice”
- In August,2006, Ignatieff said he was “not losing any sleep” over dozens of civilian deaths caused by Israel’s attack on Qana during its military actions in Lebanon;
- Ignatieff was a prominent supporter of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. Ignatieff stated that “The United Nations lay dozing like a dog before the fire, happy to ignore Saddam until an American president seized it by the scruff of the neck and made it bark.”
- in his writings, Ignatieff has suggested that western democracies may have to resort to “lesser evils” like indefinite detention of suspects, “coercive interrogations”, targeted assassinations, and pre-emptive wars in order to combat the greater evil of terrorism;
- The measure of Michael Ignatief was illustrated in his dismissal of Ukranians seeking an independant state as evident in the comments in his book, “Blood and Belonging” where he wrote, “Ukrainian independence conjures up images of embroidered peasant shirts, the nasal whine of ethnic instruments, phony cossacks in cloaks and boots, nasty anti-Semites. ” He went further in stating that “My difficulty in taking Ukraine seriously goes deeper than just my cosmopolitan suspicion of nationalists everywhere. Somewhere inside, I’m also what Ukrainians call a Great Russian, and there is a trace of old Russian disdain for these ‘little Russians’”

..as the saying goes..”we’re just getting warmed up.”

Marc Garneau obviously has a different POV from WK and/or Iggy:

On Tuesday, Liberal science critic Marc Garneau said that believing in evolution is not a job requirement for the science minister.

“It is a personal matter. It is a matter of faith.… I don’t think it prevents someone from being a good minister,” said the former astronaut, who has been a vocal critic of the government for its cuts to the three granting councils that fund university-based research in Canada.

Marc Garneau obviously has a different POV from WK and/or Iggy:

On Tuesday, Liberal science critic Marc Garneau said that believing in evolution is not a job requirement for the science minister.

“It is a personal matter. It is a matter of faith.… I don’t think it prevents someone from being a good minister,” said the former astronaut, who has been a vocal critic of the government for its cuts to the three granting councils that fund university-based research in Canada.

Once again the grits attack Evangelical Christians. Most Muslims also adhere to the Creation story. You gonna bring Barney to a mosque catsmeat?

Once again the grits attack Evangelical Christians. Most Muslims also adhere to the Creation story. You gonna bring Barney to a mosque catsmeat?

See, Iggy's problem isn't so much whats on the record of his past statements, its the ass clowns and naively useful individuals that surround him that are going to be his problem.

Here's a hint.

Is Mark Holland still around? Hedy Fry? How about Micheal Byers?

If its not clear, here's another clue of whats going to hit the LPC.

Those blue liberals, the one's that wanted Chretien gone so Martin could take his “entitlement”…most if not all of them in the party are sworn enemies of Kornflake..and he wants payback.
So if it came to a decision for Iggy between throwing one of them under the bus or Gilligan….what happens when Warren is the sacrifice?
Warren has never been one to go quitely.

So please Iggy, keep him on your team where he can do the most damage to liberal party unity.

Re: the GritGirl video's contention that everyone else but the Conservatives saw the recession coming (I posted this information on another blog a couple of days ago for the benefit of someone who asserted the same thing):

From walesonline.co.uk:
“PM admits no-one saw recession coming – or knows when it will end
Jan 24 2009 by Tomos Livingstone, Western Mail
GORDON BROWN admitted yesterday he’d failed to foresee the worst economic crisis to hit Britain for 30 years – as the country was declared to be officially in recession. …”

From aefeldman.com:
“Wall Street Gurus Say No Recession in 2008
As a new year begins recession fears are looming, but Wall Street gurus remain optimistic about 2008.  Despite the subprime credit crisis that contributed to a volatile second half of 2007, the U.S. Economy will beat the odds of a recession, re-accelerate over the course of 2008 and help to stabilize most financial markets, according to Mesirow Financial’s fourth annual Investment Outlook.  A separate UCLA Anderson forecast suggests that despite rising oil prices, sinking housing prices and a turbulent stock market, the nation will escape a recession in 2008. …”

From bloomberg.com:
“A Recession Shouldn't Be in Your 2008 Forecast: John M. Berry
Commentary by John M. Berry
Jan. 2 (Bloomberg) — Some analysts were predicting a recession would hit the U.S. economy in the fourth quarter as consumers, hurt by falling house prices and the high cost of gasoline, cut spending.
It didn't happen, and there's no reason to think it's going to this year either.
Economic growth will be slow in the first half of 2008, and the unemployment rate, which was still a low 4.7 percent in November, is likely to rise. Housing sales and construction will continue to be a drag for months to come.
On the other hand, economic growth should accelerate in the second half of the year as financial-market conditions and the U.S. trade deficit improve, …”

From money.cnn.com:
“Paulson, Bernanke: Slow growth ahead
Treasury secretary and Fed chairman say rate cuts and rebates should keep economy out of recession but warn of tough times.
By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer
February 14 2008: 3:36 PM EST
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson both acknowledged problems in the U.S. economy Thursday, but both said they believe the nation will avoid falling into recession.
The two made their comments at a hearing before the Senate Banking Committee about the economy. Their testimony comes in the wake of troubling economic readings that have raised recession fears on Wall Street. …”

OTOH, PM Harper was slagged for sounding warning bells during 2007 year-end interviews. He did not talk “recession” but did warn challenging times were ahead.

Yes indeed, I believe a certain Barney doll-wielding person may have helped with that video. As a matter of fact, it wouldn't surprise me if he assumed different personae … to post comments under a name very similar to Gary Goodyear's over at AGWN, for example.

I can;t find whether or not this Turk and his association are registered as lobbyists. If not, I expect the proper steps will be taken.

He is a lobbyist (he wouldn't be able to represent an interest such as the University/College teachers if he wasn't)

http://tinyurl.com/c89p5v

He's within his rights to do what he's done… though if I was a University professor and my interests were represented by Turk I'd have to ask if a lobbyist's job is to blacklist themselves or to build bridges with the government.

Seems like Turk is scoring a lot of points with the opposition… too bad they don't make the policy decisions.

“I note no one is asking all the Liberal Catholic members about their position on Abortion…”

When one of those members become the Justice Minister and is considering whether or not to criminalize abortion, have at 'er. Until then you are comparing apples and oranges.

And another thing … or two or three …

I searched for those reports cited in the GritGirl video. This is what I found so far.
Video says: “We believe the global economy is on the brink of a mild recession” (TD report Sept 8, 2008)

But I found this. Some selective citation of economic reports going on, perhaps?
TD Quarterly Economic Forecast Sept. 25, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/d52xkz
“With GDP growth in the second quarter at a mere 0.3% annualized and growth in the first quarter revised down to -0.8%, we now estimate that real GDP growth will come in at a slight 0.7% in 2008. In 2009, economic activity is expected to expand at a tepid 1.2%. [my highlighting] There are three main contributing factors to this continued weakness in the Canadian economy. First, we believe the global economy is on the brink of a mild recession. This, in addition to weakened demand from the U.S., will eat into Canadian exports. Second, a cooling in housing and employment will undermine domestic demand growth. Lastly, tighter credit conditions will likely slow both business and consumer expenditures. Once a world recovery takes hold in late 2009, we can expect a sustained recovery in Canada with real GDP growth of 2.7% in 2010. …”

Video says: “We are forecasting recessions for both the US and Canada” (ScotiaBank Global Economic research Oct 3, 2008)
I found this:
http://www.scotiacapital.com/English/bns_econ/E…
2009-10 Economic and Market Outlook – Heading South For The Winter – December 17, 2008
“Previously enacted fiscal stimulus — in the form of tax cuts and spending increases — is already working to support our economy. [my highlighting] Additionally, several Provinces have brought scheduled tax cuts forward as well as implementing new tax relief. Unlike the ad hoc, deficit-financed U.S. initiatives that have been escalating in recent months, Canadian governments have focused on longer-term, productivity-enhancing investments.”

Video says: “I suggest that we will see a longer and deeper recession in the US than many are thinking … recession is likely here as well …” (Bank of Montreal Oct 10, 2008)
This is what I found:
I tried to find Bank of Montreal reports without results, so finally I googled BM recession is likely here as well …
And got this: http://tinyurl.com/dkdnvm with this header “This is the html version of the file http://www.liberal.ca/pdf/docs/090310_JusttheFa….
Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.”

It was a “document” that imitates the look of other financial reports. Methinks a bit of trompe l'oeil is going on.

I notice all your links are from early 2008. By the summer and fall the economists were pretty clear a recession was on the way. Apparently Harper was oblivious to that along the campaign trail.

Aside from the obvious fact that the CPC have mounted a negative campaign in the House for the past few weeks (as others here have pointed out), I fail to see how comparing Harper's actual words, and Flaherty's actual words, with the actual truth amounts to a “negative campaign”.

It is not like their words were taken out of context or unflattering images were used. It is not like anyone is making false claims such as “the GST will be raised” or “tax on everything”.

These ads are powerful because they are true – which is made obvious by the fact you are not contesting their accuracy, but rather you are attacking the LPC for doing something the CPC have been doing for a while now.

And I do not care if Kinsella is the person behind this or not.

Hey, Ted. I just want to let you know that I'm not ignoring you. Twice it's happened to me that my replies to you over at Janke's somehow get lost in the ether. Why, I don't know.

Come to think of it, a comment I left at Mike Brock's for you in his “Stephen Harper to Libertarians: You’re Naive, and You Don’t Believe in Personal Responsibility” thread was not allowed. Now THAT I find hilarious. A rant about a libertarian's POV on freedom – but the host censors an innocuous comment. I am baffled.

Maybe this one will not get past moderation either :-/

I'm happy to see that WK has found a Tory pulse.

I hope he continues to raise the blood pressure of the nasty tory war room. Iggy can't wait for the war to start.

In the meantime he is busy raisng his profile and lots of money for the party to fund the counter attacks against the verbal diaherra from tory war room production team.

What a waste…just like the tory government.

Gayle – if you can point me to some indication that our Science minister has in any way, in any manner, suggested that he wishes to impose his personal beliefs on evolution on others.. have at it..

(sound of crickets chirping)

Thought so.. now, about abortion, at what point did Stockwell Day suggest that a motion be tabled to outlaw abortion int his country – again, if you can point that out, great..

(sound of more crickets chirping)

So – please, then, explain to me why the media finds it necessary to inquire into the personal beliefs of a Minister where those beliefs have in no way become a part of any government policy, actual or proposed – but seem to have no interest in asking the same sensational, but irrelevant questions of any Liberal or NDP MP’s?

..and, while you’re at it, I’d love it if you would suggest that it’s appropriate to ask any person during a job interview, what their personal religious beliefs are? Is that the suggestion? When we have teachers of our children, should we ask their views on Catholic or Muslim theology that might, in your opinion, be contrary to issues of broad public acceptance? I mean, we have established in Canada that homosexuals have the right to marry and equal rights to protection from discrimination – even in Alberta now.. so, I’m assuming that Catholic and Muslim people shouldn’t be allowed to teach children, or run for office – is that the point?

And as far as the ads being “true” – well, I’m assuming that every Libral MP converted all of their investments into T-Bills and GIC’s – because, apparently, it was common knowledge that the bottom of the world stock market was immenent.. what? They didn’t? You mean Stephane Dion’s carbon tax suggestion didn’t contemplate that the whole world economy was going down the crapper? The fact is that what Flaherty alluded to was exactly right – no one contemplated the depth of our difficulty – including the Liberals – and to say different is revisionist, partisn hypocricy.. which is fine, if you’re a Libral – for the rest of Canadians, well, we’ll just reserve the games to you and the gritgirl/he who shall not be named..

Get real. Seriously.

Gayle – if you can point me to some indication that our Science minister has in any way, in any manner, suggested that he wishes to impose his personal beliefs on evolution on others.. have at it..

(sound of crickets chirping)

Thought so.. now, about abortion, at what point did Stockwell Day suggest that a motion be tabled to outlaw abortion int his country – again, if you can point that out, great..

(sound of more crickets chirping)

So – please, then, explain to me why the media finds it necessary to inquire into the personal beliefs of a Minister where those beliefs have in no way become a part of any government policy, actual or proposed – but seem to have no interest in asking the same sensational, but irrelevant questions of any Liberal or NDP MP’s?

..and, while you’re at it, I’d love it if you would suggest that it’s appropriate to ask any person during a job interview, what their personal religious beliefs are? Is that the suggestion? When we have teachers of our children, should we ask their views on Catholic or Muslim theology that might, in your opinion, be contrary to issues of broad public acceptance? I mean, we have established in Canada that homosexuals have the right to marry and equal rights to protection from discrimination – even in Alberta now.. so, I’m assuming that Catholic and Muslim people shouldn’t be allowed to teach children, or run for office – is that the point?

And as far as the ads being “true” – well, I’m assuming that every Libral MP converted all of their investments into T-Bills and GIC’s – because, apparently, it was common knowledge that the bottom of the world stock market was immenent.. what? They didn’t? You mean Stephane Dion’s carbon tax suggestion didn’t contemplate that the whole world economy was going down the crapper? The fact is that what Flaherty alluded to was exactly right – no one contemplated the depth of our difficulty – including the Liberals – and to say different is revisionist, partisn hypocricy.. which is fine, if you’re a Libral – for the rest of Canadians, well, we’ll just reserve the games to you and the gritgirl/he who shall not be named..

Get real. Seriously.

Wilson I don’t know what polls you read but the latest I saw shows the Libs ahead by 1% and Iggy hasn’t even started campaigning yet. He’s too busy raising money so he can match nasties with Harper. And he will far outmatch Harper which is why you Tories are whining..

Wilson I don’t know what polls you read but the latest I saw shows the Libs ahead by 1% and Iggy hasn’t even started campaigning yet. He’s too busy raising money so he can match nasties with Harper. And he will far outmatch Harper which is why you Tories are whining..

Not quite.
““PM admits no-one saw recession coming – or knows when it will end
Jan 24 2009 by Tomos Livingstone, Western Mail …”

Jan. 24, 2009. See?

Not quite.
““PM admits no-one saw recession coming – or knows when it will end
Jan 24 2009 by Tomos Livingstone, Western Mail …”

Jan. 24, 2009. See?

I doubt it was a 'brow-beating.'

Judging from Goodyear's grammatically challenged and literally unintelligible 'clarification' of his view on evolution, Turk and others were probably just using words Goodyear didn't understand.

In this post 9/11 world, everything has changed. Conservatives make it up as they go along.

“But in this latest post-Dion, post-economic collapse round of the war where everyone is supposed to rise above, if the Conservatives are holding their fire so they won’t be blamed”

Why do I have a ten percenter Conservaspam from Stephen Harper (himself) since Ignatieff came to power then? Hmm?

In this post 9/11 world, everything has changed. Conservatives make it up as they go along.

“But in this latest post-Dion, post-economic collapse round of the war where everyone is supposed to rise above, if the Conservatives are holding their fire so they won’t be blamed”

Why do I have a ten percenter Conservaspam from Stephen Harper (himself) since Ignatieff came to power then? Hmm?

From the pollster in question’s website:

“Tories Drop, Liberals Improve in Canada”

Just to add, this is the lowest number AR has had for the Conservatives in two years.

From the pollster in question’s website:

“Tories Drop, Liberals Improve in Canada”

Just to add, this is the lowest number AR has had for the Conservatives in two years.

Is this blog a parody? Or have you not received one of Harper’s ten percenters since the last election attacking the Liberals? And you missed the story about the Conservative MP using her office to attack the Liberals? And you missed the attacks in QP?

You are a joke. A bad joke.

Is this blog a parody? Or have you not received one of Harper’s ten percenters since the last election attacking the Liberals? And you missed the story about the Conservative MP using her office to attack the Liberals? And you missed the attacks in QP?

You are a joke. A bad joke.

That’s a lot of hot air for little payoff, RGH.

1. Do you really want to nail Ignatieff for his one-time support of the Iraq War, when Harper demanded that Canada take part in that war, and plagiarized a speech in the House of Commons to make his point?

2. Ignatieff qualified for British and American citizenship, but never took it. He was always Canadian, and those who knew him at Harvard knew him to be the funny Canadian prof.

3. Ignatieff has unequivocally condemned torture, including in those forms, and in the same work. It’s dishonest and misleading to suggest he supported such tactics simply because he was openly dialoguing with himself about his thoughts in an intellectual capacity. He wasn’t making policy. As an intellectual, it was his job to ask and examine the tough questions from all sides.

Etc, etc, etc…

The only thing you’re going to be warming are the Opposition benches.

That’s a lot of hot air for little payoff, RGH.

1. Do you really want to nail Ignatieff for his one-time support of the Iraq War, when Harper demanded that Canada take part in that war, and plagiarized a speech in the House of Commons to make his point?

2. Ignatieff qualified for British and American citizenship, but never took it. He was always Canadian, and those who knew him at Harvard knew him to be the funny Canadian prof.

3. Ignatieff has unequivocally condemned torture, including in those forms, and in the same work. It’s dishonest and misleading to suggest he supported such tactics simply because he was openly dialoguing with himself about his thoughts in an intellectual capacity. He wasn’t making policy. As an intellectual, it was his job to ask and examine the tough questions from all sides.

Etc, etc, etc…

The only thing you’re going to be warming are the Opposition benches.

Gabby, with respect, you are ignoring the point or missing it entirely.

The point is not that some others were also getting it wrong and messed up in their predictions.

The point is that Flaherty said “no one predicted this” when that is so patently false to the point of being a self-serving lie. Edward Greenspan, the former head of the US Federal Reserve, had also already predicted not just a recession but a depression.

So the first point is that Flaherty was monumentally and possibly deliverately wrong.

The second and probably bigger point is, even if many are predicting no recession, if so many leading economists and market people are predicting economic armaggedon and there were already signs of the economy turning, why do Harper and Flaherty tell us that Canada will never go into deficit and never have a recession?

The answer is clear as day: they will say anything to get elected and stay elected.

Nice to see no one is feeding the troll.

So what exactly has Goodyear been considering that is affected by his (unstated) views on evolution?

It's a perfectly legitimate comparison.

This is rather obvious analysis, Stephen.

I see that in the summer and fall of 2008 people were predicting a recession, and in January 2009 Harper just clued in.

Not sure what the first part of your post has to do with this comment. Nevertheless, I would point out that Goodyear was being asked about his belief in a scientific theory, and as he is the Science Minister in charge of determing the funding for different scientists, it is a perfectly valid question. You see, if he does not accept certain scientific theories, or any scientific theories, it might well affect the priority he places on funding certain scientific studies.

I hope that clears things up for you.

As for the truthfulness of the ad – I see you are avoiding the point.

Harper and Flaherty are accurately quoted – and the economists who prove their quotes to be false are also accurately quoted.

Funding scientific studies – which makes his views on well established scientific theories quite relevant.

Mmm, Gayle, the PM referred to in that article is PM Gordon Brown – you know, the guy across the pond, in the UK?

There is more. They all forgot to mention that this Government is spending more money on science than any privious governement.

Ted, the GritGirl video in question is telling viewers the Conservatives misled the country by ignoring the severity of the recession.

The links I've provided both here and above prove that many other people – including many experts – either did not see the recession coming, or saw it as merely a mild one. No one predicted the severity of the recession. That is what Min. Flaherty means by saying “no one predicted this.”

“… even if many are predicting no recession, if so many leading economists and market people are predicting economic armaggedon …”
That is a completely contradictory statement: “no recession” AND “economic armaggedon”?

“why do Harper and Flaherty tell us …” They may have been saying no recession in September and October, maybe even as late as November '08 when they brought down the Economic and Fiscal Update, which had some expenditure cuts and no major stimulus package. At that time, according to the forecasts, they were even thinking of eking out a small surplus. But of course all of that dissipated with the rapidly changing conditions.

And since they were still the government, despite the election campaign, a Prime Minister and his Finance Minister cannot sound alarm bells, because that kind of negative talk can influence the markets. I suppose some of the Conservatives’ opponents would prefer to see them in panic mode. That is not the role of a government.

So your point is that Gordon Brown is also either lying or also could not see what many economists were screaming from the roof tops for months?

The point of the video is to demonstrate that while Harper says no one predicted this, there were, in fact, many economists who predicted this.

The fact you need to deflect this into a discussion about Gordon Brown does nothing to counter the point made in the video.

I wonder about that too. What I don’t understand that nobody is talking about Warrens run in with Judge Gomery in the sponsership scandal. If my memory serves me right Gomery was not enthusiatic about Warren’s participation in the sponsorship scandal. I think it’s time that some one broadcasts his participation to the public. My bet is the most people don’t know about it.

I wonder about that too. What I don’t understand that nobody is talking about Warrens run in with Judge Gomery in the sponsership scandal. If my memory serves me right Gomery was not enthusiatic about Warren’s participation in the sponsorship scandal. I think it’s time that some one broadcasts his participation to the public. My bet is the most people don’t know about it.

Talking about Ukranians. In 1945 Trainloads of Ukranians – which had been brought in as Labor to Germany-
were shipped back to Ukraine by the Russians. When they arrived they all – several thousands of them -
were sumarily executed by the Russians. Ignatieff contempt for the Ukranian people is borne from his Russian Blood.

Talking about Ukranians. In 1945 Trainloads of Ukranians – which had been brought in as Labor to Germany-
were shipped back to Ukraine by the Russians. When they arrived they all – several thousands of them -
were sumarily executed by the Russians. Ignatieff contempt for the Ukranian people is borne from his Russian Blood.

“So your point is that Gordon Brown is also either lying or …”

No, Gayle, my point is the one I made from the start: some experts did not see the recession coming, and others predicted a mild one.

Unlike you, I don't put words in someone else's mouth, nor do I descend to the level of calling a PM like Gordon Brown a liar. Am I to understand your pathological hatred of Stephen Harper apparently now includes Mr. Brown as well?

I see your recent holiday hasn't improved your disposition any.

Is Gordon Brown an expert? I always thought he was a politician. If that is your best example of “some experts”, then you are really stretching.

Willfull blindness is not a good quality in our political leaders. I should think listening to all opinions would be the prudent thing to do. Again, I point out that the video quotes many actual experts who said the opposite of what Flaherty and Harper claimed – which is why it is such a powerful video, and, presumably, why you are forced to resort to quoting a politician from a different country rather than address the facts set out in the video.

And while your diversion into accusing me of calling Brown a liar is interesting, that is not what I said. Do try to read the entire sentence rather than parse out words that you think establish your dubious point.

Finally, this is not about me. Can I suggest you stop trying to change that?

“… this is not about me.”
Gayle, with you it is ALWAYS about you. There's been plenty of evidence of that elsewhere. Anyway …

“Do try to read the entire sentence …”
Dear, I'm not the one who mistook PMs in the Jan 2009 article I referenced.

“… the video quotes many actual experts …”
They are “actual experts” only if they agree with your POV, otherwise not, right?

“… why you are forced to resort to quoting a politician from a different country …”
Umm, maybe because it's a GLOBAL recession?
And for your info: Gordon Brown is not just a run-of-the-mill pol.
From Wiki:
Brown has a PhD in history.
He served as Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Labour government from 1997 to 2007 under Blair before he became leader of the Labour Party.
Since you and your fellow travelers have been accusing PM Harper and his Min. of Finance of not seeing the looming recession, it is very legitimate to compare PM Harper to another person in the same position, i.e. a leader of a country. You know, what you might call comparing kiwis to kiwis (the apples to oranges cliché is SO passé).

BTW “… parse out words …” is inaccurate.
From dictionary.com:
“1. to analyze (a sentence) in terms of grammatical constituents, identifying the parts of speech, syntactic relations, etc.
2. to describe (a word in a sentence) grammatically, identifying the part of speech, inflectional form, syntactic function, etc.
3. computers. to analyze (a string of characters) in order to associate groups of characters with the syntactic units of the underlying grammar.”

What I do is select certain pertinent phrases to illustrate or rebut a point. You may have noticed I often use ellipses (dot-dot-dot.) so as not to copy and paste the entire sentence. That has nothing whatsoever to do with parsing.

I am not saying Harper did not see the recession. I am saying he is lying about not seeing the recession. And then he lied when he claimed no one predicted it – as proven in the video.

You want to believe both Flaherty and Harper were lying. Believe what you want. It is your still unproven theory.

But don't worry, you won't be subjected to a witch hunt.

The comment space here is growing smaller while the chasm between us is growing larger – so let's leave it there. See you on another thread.

I can personally assure you (not that my assurance is valuable to you by the sounds of it) that I do not moderate comments at my blog. I do, however, due to comment spam have my spam filter set very aggressively.

I will attempt to find your comment (if it exists) amongst the hundreds of spam comments in my filter and publish it ASAP.

Gabby,

Don't bother arguing with Gayle. She will never admit she was wrong even in the facde of overwhelming evidence. What I find funny though is in all her twisting and turning to prover herself right she condradicts herself with this little gem: “I am not saying Harper did not see the recession” when in fact that is exactly what she said. I just can't fathom her pthalogical hatred for PM Harper.

Maybe Steven Harper did not smile at her.

Quoting out of context is just as dishonest.

I hope he stays with Iggy. In time WK will be a millstone around Iggy's neck

Maybe you misunderstand sarcasm.

Funny how in all these posts, not one of you can demonstrate that anything gritgirl has posted is false.

Typical of your lot to resort to personal attacks instead of dealing with the facts.

You mean like “do you know how hard it is to set priorities”?

Because that was certainly quoted out of context.

Harper and Flaherty, however, were NOT quoted out of context.

You mean like “do you know how hard it is to set priorities”?

Because that was certainly quoted out of context.

Harper and Flaherty, however, were NOT quoted out of context.