hit counter script
« Internal memos reveal leadership campaign message tracks
BC Hookers get media training for Olympics, paid for by the taxpayer? »

May 17, 2009

If the Canadian media were a focus group…

…the Conservatives would never run negative ads. Heck, we’d just surrender to a few more decades of Liberal rule.

On Macleans Capital Read blog, journalist Aaron Wherry breathlessly tells us what our betters think of the latest round of Conservative ads. Wherry headlines the article “Schoolyard tripe! Poisonous! Demeaning! Anti-American!” and proceeds to list criticism from non-partisan voices such as Jim Travers, Angelo Persichilli, the Edmonton Journal, the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star! Who are these voices of reason? Reading them makes it so clear that to armchair political analysts, the Conservatives have made a disastrous misstep in running negative advertising, because nobody likes negative ads, and of course, such ads don’t work.

Thousands of dollars worth of focus groups studying the reactions of average, everyday Canadians would seem to indicate otherwise. The decisions that go into these sorts of adverts are not made on a whim. Political calculations are much more involved than started from one’s prejudices against conservatism and then spewing under-informed analysis in 750 paid words or less. There is a method to the Machiavellian madness. From the gender of the narrating voice, to its tone, to the imagery of the ads and the theme, it would seem that the Conservatives have concluded through some expensive research that Canadians seem to have a problem with Michael Ignatieff’s seeming self-serving interest in returning to Canada. “The ads will backfire”, “Canadians are turned off by negative ads”, “This isn’t the United States (oops)” are the sounds coming from the Parliamentary Press Gallery and other members of the media elite in this country. They claim to tell us what we think when it’s clear that they’re out of touch with the effect that those ads will have on us as Canadians.

The other elites — those that reside in the Liberal Party — tell us who should raise our kids, what kind of cars we should drive and whose feelings we should not offend, are of course the producers of these ads:

This may only be the first government that Mr. Wherry’s has covered, but some perspective please. The difference between these two ads and the latest round of Conservative advertising? The Grit ads were baldfaced lies; how’s your healthcare, your “scrapped Kyoto accord”, your right to choose and who was it that was prepared to work with the Bloc Quebecois? Where are the soldiers with guns in our streets?. In contrast, the Conservative ads are true. Michael Ignatieff was out of the country for 34 years, has mused that taxes will go up and the video wherein he says “you have to decide what kind of America you want, right? You have to decide. It’s your country just as much as it is mine” is undoctored. These are Michael Ignatieff’s own words. In fact, they’re so true that the only line of defense is to attack the process.

Funny that the Liberals are silent on this and it is the media who comes to their defense.

This entry was authored by Stephen Taylor at 05:06 PM | Tweet this | Add a comment
| Feedback | #
  • SD
    Great post, Stephen. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on whether or not it was wise to use an attack ad to criticize the LPC's use of attack ads, thought. However, I haven't seen that one on the television yet, just online.
  • I'm fairly sure that one won't air. I think that it was just a trick to prepare the ground for maximum earned media.
  • Cat
    I think what the Liberal MSM and Liberal gripers hate most is that the Conservative ads simply follow the strategy that's bankable via votes come election time. And who do we have to thank for all of the lessons on these so called "attack ads"...why, none other than the Liberals and Mr. Kinsella, who has written very explicit books on how to get those ads up and running effectively.

    Tha's why the LPOC have lost their edge, and why the CPC ads are in fact truth ads using Iggy's own words to define him as "just visiting" - it absolutely works and the LPOC can't stand it.
  • terry1
    CAT, Mr. Kinsella is just back from some surgery and is chomping at the bit to respond to the Harpercrite ads. Wars of words are funny things and some can bite you in the the wrong places. WK is good at making that happen.
  • east of eden
    Funny how the rabid and un-informed Lib sheep like to make up stupid names for Mr. Harper. When I see names like "Harpercrite", I think "un-informed, unsophisticated slob incapable of rational thought". And, of course, discount the comment completely.
  • Conservatives do it too (Dee-yawn, LIEberals...)

    It's very annoying on both sides.
  • Ted
    Exactly. Thank you Stephen.

    Let us not forget: Liberanos, Iggy.me, IRuby, Obamessia, Iffy, Iggo Waffle, Citoyen Dion, Cretin, etc.

    And on the other side: McChimpy, ReThuglicans, CONservatives, etc.

    It is not a trait of one side or another, but the nasty, juvenile habit of the drooling, hyper-partisan.
  • Liz J
    Soldiers in the streets was the most amateur, pathetic piece of innuendo and outright lies ever put out as an "attack ad". The voice on that ad sounded very much like Liberal shill, Susan Smith.

    The bottom line, truth cannot be argued with or about, these are in fact truth ads. If the truth is inconvenient for the Liberals and Ignatieff there's a problem, the people have a right to know the truth. If the facts are not in keeping with getting their newly crowned leader elected to the top job, what exactly are they hiding?

    Forgive us if we come to the conclusion they were only concerned with dressing a manikin for the window with nothing to offer in the store.

    There's little doubt the media and the Liberals are very concerned these truth ads are hitting a chord.
  • terry1
    Liz J, maybe the next liberal attack ads should show millions of Canadians lining up at soup kitchens. That would be factual after a Harper government. Just look st Harper's so called law and order thoughts and those 2004 ads may some day ring true.

    The so called truth ads have responses coming so lets see hiw you like those.
  • east of eden
    We could counter with the same thing during Trudeau's era. You are obviously too young and un-informed to know of the havoc which Trudeau wreaked on Canada. Try double-digit unemployment, double-digit inflation, double-digit interest rates. Try old businesses folding and the beginning of outsourcing. Then, dear lady, come back to us with something reasonable and rational instead of Liberal speaking points.
  • hollinm
    The fact remains that while Liberals think the Canadian population is stupid there is nobody in this country who believes that unemployment is being caused by the Conservative government's policies. The know as all right thinking people know that the recession was brought on by the United States and spread quickly around the world.
    Canadians give the PM good marks for handling the economy. So you and the rest of the Liberal band of liars can try to descredit the PM but I suspect not many Canadians will believe whatever slime you want to spew.
    On the other hand the truth ads which quote the Count's own words will cause people to say...what the hell?
  • terry1
    Mervin, the troll. Please tell us then why harper is so far down in the polls if he's managing the economy well. Is it the fact he lies all the time and people simply don't trust him? I'm looking for an answer.
  • Who are you talking to?
  • terry1
    Hollinm... he posts under Mervin H.........h in other blogs and is continuously slamming anything liberal.
  • Omanator
    Terry1. Lets have the truth shall we. We have the lowest unemployment of the G7. Our economy is stronger than any of the G7. We have the best banking system.
    Of course the claim that Stephen Harper is responsible for the world economic malaise is a blantant lie.
  • terry1
    Harper inherited the strongest economy in the G20 from the Liberals and promptly screwed it up. He took a $10BB surplus and has forecast an $85BB deficit in two years.

    I'll pass on that strength.
  • Michael Read
    Attending a great book launch event at the Cato Institute a couple years ago for John Geer's "In Defense of Negativity". He pretty much dispels all the myths about negative advertising - people don't like them, they depress turnout, they're baseless, etc. One of his arguments, interestingly enough, was that negative ads were more likely to be sourced and accurate than positive ads. The reason for this he infers is that negative ads need to be sourced to inoculate them from potential lawsuits. The study is obviously American; the two Liberal examples above are neither sourced not accurate. Interestingly, the Conservatives ads on Ignatieff that the left is huffing and puffing about this weekend are both.

    Since I am a Canadian in the United States, one might wonder why I would defend these ads. First, my current presence is essentially temporary. Once I finish my doctoral degree, I'll probably head home. If I find a job here, I might stay. At the same time, if something opens up in Lordknowswhereistan, I could go there, too. Second, and most importantly, when I come home, I'm not coming home specifically to run for office with the less than obvious intention of becoming Prime Minister of a country I spent my entire adult life avoiding.
  • terry1
    Michael Read.... you might stay in the US if you find a job there. Wow, isn't that a similar career path to the present Liberal leader. Teaching at Harvard, a very prestigious internationally recognized school, was not such a bad career choice. Even your last Tory PM sent at least one of his kids there,maybe to be taught by IGGY.

    Your hypocrisy can possibly be blamed on your youth and lack of experience in thw world.
  • east of eden
    Way off base, dear lady. Read his whole comment. You may realize how idiotic your comment is when you do read it. I do understand, however, that you are merely a Lib robot who spouts Lib speaking points. He said, in case you missed it, that he would NOT return to Canada to run for office. The last line of your comment is laughable - you are actually commenting on yourself, dear lady. Now run along and do your homework.
  • Gabby in QC
    Terry1 is a lady??
  • Omanator
    Michael Read. I don't think anybody would comment on some one who studies or even works in the US for a few years. But when a Canadien spends 34 years abroad and puplicly denigrades his country, it becomes a different matter. Then he wants to be crowned Priminister ? Yea ,right.
  • cantuc
    Any body else notice that all those simultainious liberal hack attacks all have a slightly different slant or angle ?Co-incidence ? I don't think so . I can just imagine the e-mail traffic . Ok , so you're going with anti-american , which one should I do ?Canadians are tired of this ? ok ,Have a nice day , and thanks for the direction , Cat-meat .
  • Anonymous
    That 2004 ad was totally over the top, but it was also something of a political masterpiece.

    God, it's terrifying every time I watch it!
  • Paul O
    It does strike me as more than a little odd that using Ignatieff's own words constitutes an "attack" on Ignatieff.

    Will they ask the Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada to stop attacking Ignatieff in future?
  • Liz J
    We've recently been privy to Liberals eating their own, (Dion), but calling the words straight from the proverbial horse's mouth "attack" ads is more than a little odd. They're accusing Ignatieff of attacking himself so are they saying he is lying as well, he didn't actually spend all those decades away or say the things he actually said caught on video?

    Pretty pathetic.
  • terry1
    We as liberals are proud our leader has spent those many years becoming more worldy instead of being a mousy right wing think tank writer trying to figure ways he could build walls around Alberta. Our guy is not a narrow minded mean man. After all he is in the party where most canadians like their politicians to be policy wise.
  • NovaDog
    Liberals are proud of their leader, some Liberals are actually taking credit for sending Mr Ignatieff out into the world 34 years ago.

    Mr Ignatieff- Canadian if necessary, but not necessarily Canadian
  • FoxtrotBravo
    Ignatieff didn't leave Canada because he was a scientist that needed to use some piece of expensive and sophisticated equipment that was only availabe in some other country.

    Ignatieff didn't leave Canada because he had a passion to study some facet of nature that exists in certain parts of the planet.

    Ignatieff didn't leave Canada because he was an archeologist that needed to study ancient ruins an civilizations that existed in areas now in parts of other countries. And so on.

    No. Ignatieff could have just as easily read and written his history books from anywhere in Canada as he did in the UK and US, except that Canada wasn't sexy enough for him (except for Algonquin Park). He is a sorry pathetic, arrogant fool, and those that see something in him that isn't here are even more so.
  • terry1
    At least his stated goal is to unite Canadians and not divide them. Maybe he learned some good things about real democracy that they don't teach at the very narrow minded NCC.
  • east of eden
    We're already united, lady. All this talk about division is simply a Liberal fantasy.
  • Omanator
    Terry1. If he really said this than we are in deep trouble. It appears to me that the only way to unite the country is to shovel trucks loads of money into Quebec, not to mention that fact that almost all of the Ministers have to come from Quebec.
  • kingston
    Wow, Terry, you amaze me, then if your so proud of your leader and the years he spent away and the things he says in the ads, why are you b@tching about them. We both know if some conservative came back into the country after 34 years away and wanted to be PM you would be losing your mind.
  • Michael
    I'd be losing my mind because I just couldn't believe that a conservative could be that worldly.
  • terry1
    kingston, maybe Iggy learned that you don't reduce taxes so you can borrow the money back , and then some, from the same people later on. Maybe he learned that telling the truth is important, something that escapes every tory PM, some of whom even take cash from scumbags while in office and who should be living in a certain part of your town.

    Maybe he also learned that this country is full of people who have lived a good part of their lives elsewhere only to find Canada as the best place in the world. I'm talking about the millions of immigrants you tories continue to insult. There are many many candians who live their lives abroad for various reasons some of them because they are Canadians and are respected by their peers in the bigger world out there you Tories seem to deny exists. At least he has travelled and learned and became a worldly citizen of the world and understands it well . The current temporary occupant of the office had never ever left Canada in his life when elected PM. That shows in his very poor performance where his only effective means of governance are negative growth, dirty politics, deficits, divisiveness and meannness.

    So, Kingston your support of this man and his non policies amaze me even more. The very fact he's trying to govern like a liberal, and failing badly, ought to tell you something. He runs a freak show.
  • east of eden
    "I'm talking about the millions of immigrants you tories continue to insult" - got any specific examples, dear lady? If not, then retract your speaking point.
  • Magic Mark
    Terry,

    I'm glad you acknowledge that Michael Ignatieff only tells the truth. Let's review some of the his truthful statements, shall we?

    1. "If I am not elected, I imagine I will ask Harvard to let me back." - Michael Ignatieff
    2. "America... it's your country just as much as it is mine." - Michael Ignatieff
    3. "I am horribly arrogant and sure of myself." - Michael Ignatieff
    4. "I'm not going to take a GST hike off the table." - Michael Ignatieff
    5. "We will have to raise taxes." - Michael Ignatieff
  • terry1
    Magic mark, you missed it this time

    At least Iggy doesn't speak with a forked tongue:

    1. how about income trust promises? Harper lied and changed the law!!!
    2. How about 4 year elections unless defeated...Harper lied and had an election
    3. how about running from parliament and poroging it while the country was in the middle of a serious liquidity crisis. More lies and cheating.
    4. We have no recession now and won't have one...Harper in October 2008

    Keep it up and I will also. This could be fun
  • Jen
    I can't remember the exact words MM, but help me here anyway. Was it not Ignatieff who said that he admires the prime minister stephen harper for the way he handled the media.
    Didn't Ignatieff say that quebec is a nation
    whereas the prime minister who upon hearing Ignatieff's idea had no choice but to clarify it that quebec is a nation but within a united canada.- a big difference.

    Michael Ignatieff said live on Global NATIONAL TELEVISION when questioned by KEVIN NEWMAN if he, IGNATIEFF, still supports the coalition. Michael Ignatieff answered "that he HONOURS his signature on the coalition agreement"
  • FoxtrotBravo
    terry1,

    Please help us learn more about Mr. Ignatieff. Could you please provide a couple of examples of things that you have heard Mr. Ignatieff say, that could only have been learned by living in the UK and the US for 30 odd years, and which would directly benefit Canadians if he were PM?

    And if you can't provide any such examples, I may have little bad new for you, please don't take this the wrong way but .... your emperor isn't wearing any freakin' clothes!
  • terry1
    foxtrot bravo, why don't you tell us some of the things Harper accomplished before he became PM,especially his time at the NCC. Please quote some of his writings about things like walls around Alberta, abortion, religion in the fabric of the nation and other backwards garbage. Please tell us how a so called economist can lower taxes and then have us pay the money back in later years via massive current deficits. He's like an alcholic with unlimited credit cards in a liquor store.

    So please show us your emperor's wardrobe.
  • east of eden
    No, no, no - you were asked a question so answer it without changing the channel. You made a comment but you did not back it up. You obviously were blowing smoke and your comment is nothing. No back-up, no meat. Sorry, bzzzzzt, you lose. You know, you sound exactly like a formerly visible commenter who did nothing but spout speaking points and BS as well as always trying to change the channel. It is well-known that when somebody tries to change the channel, it means that she realizes that she lost. Bzzzzzt. You lose. No proof, no credence.
  • east of eden
    Hahahahahahahaha. More wordly. Oh, give me a break. Where have you been, dear lady, other than your parents' basement. Good grief. Face the fact - internationally, Harper is highly respected. Face the fact - he has a big heart and is not a narrow-minded mean man. What do you call Chretien blatantly lying about scrapping the GST? What do you call the corruption and theft during the Lib years? What do you call Martin making EI harder to obtain but using the premiums to create a false surplus. Lady, you are so off-base.
  • terry1
    liz J...You mean to tell us the Liberals are the only party who eat their young. Ask Joe Clark about that and the fact he lost his leadership to a guy who took brown envelope cash in hotel rooms while still in office.

    As they say, democracy is not perfect but its miles ahead of the next best thing. I apologize in advance if my party didn't quite live up to your narrow minded standards. I think you should focus on how many times Harper has ignored democratic principles in his quest to stay in power. You might learn something although that seems unlikely.
  • terry1
    Stephen, the libs have plenty of ammo and will use it when and if they need to. Harper has so many targets for them to hit its going to take time to make sure they get the right ones with maximum effect.

    Now what will be the tory procedure if the next polls show the liberals still moving further ahead after spending all this taxpayer funded advertising. Remember his donations are tax deductible and therefore its effectively public money he's using to personally attack his opponent.

    Is Harper going to fake another election? Is he going to start more lies and innuendos? Is he going to get the separatists up in arms once again in an effort to destroy his opponent? The world awaits these moves with bated breath.

    By the way when will the Harperites start governing? Its way overdue.
  • Magic Mark
    Funny, I don't remember you supporting the Conservatives move to limit public financing of potical parties back in the fall.

    The least you could do is inject a tiny bit of logical consisteny into your rhetoric.

    Do you support public financing of political parties or not, whiis it?
  • terry1
    I absolutely support public financing of political parties as the path of least resistence in a democracy. However, I don't believe that money should be spent on personal attacks of opponents. The money should be spent on research on how to better our democracy with better platforms and issues that resonate with Canadians.

    Your party raises money in order to promote its right wing Christian ideology as over 80% of its money comes from that core of voters in western towns and farm communities.
  • Alex
    Wait a minute, I thought that the Liberal party wanted to unite Canadians (as you stated already in this thread)? What's with your anti-West bashing? Or when you said Canadians did you mean everyone East of the Manitoba-Ontario border?
  • terry1
    Alex, becasue i quoted the party's source of funds I'm anti western? Get a thicker skin pal.
  • Alex
    I dunno Terry, saying "promote its right wing Christian ideology as over 80% of its money comes from that core of voters in western towns and farm communities" sounded to me like you were getting a jab in there. At least, that's how I read it. If it wasn't your intention to sound that way you might consider rewriting your post?
  • terry1
    I was getting a jab in there. We are a secular society and I don't like religious types of any stripe influencing government unduly. Harper is beholden to them for his financing.,
  • Alex
    You seem to take exception to religious people donating to a political party or having any sort of say in government. While I obviously understand your desire to keep church and state separate, religious folks have the right to have their say in our society as much as any other group, be they atheists, students, left wing, right wing, etc. It's not as if the Catholic church is donating millions of dollars to the Conservative Party.

    If you think the Liberal Party wants to unite Canadians, why do you take so much offense to religious people donating money?
  • terry1
    You continue to read me wrong. The only issue I have is that Harper pretty much only gets donations from that particular group in our Country and therefore needs to do their bidding as he cannot afford to lose the their donations. if he had a broader range of funders he would be in a better position. Of course Central Canada has written him off and he won't ever get any money there. Next the voters of Central Canada will write him off.
  • Alex
    You seem to have pretty reliable sources on where these donations are coming from. Seeing as the Conservatives receive many more donations than the other parties, I'm finding it a bit difficult to believe that the Conservatives are only getting them from "religious types." Certainly the West accounts for several donations, but you might be surprised to find out that Western Canadians represent a very diverse group of people. All parties pander to their bases, so your point is still pretty ambiguous.
  • terry1
    1. Prove me wrong.
    2. I didn't say ONLY religious types

    The donations thye get were set in motion by Presto and Stock boy some years ago when they went around preaching their reform gospel in churches all over the west. thos doantions continue today and form the strong base of Tory donations and support. Look at where Harper would be today if Albertans were not politically deaf and blind.
  • mecheng
    It puts a smile on my face that Liberals think this way.
  • Alex
    "Look at where Harper would be today if Albertans were not politically deaf and blind"

    Yeah, I think you've destroyed your point about Liberals standing for all of Canada. Like other regions in Canada, Alberta has its own set of values and political leanings. The fact that you call Albertans politically deaf and blind basically prove that Liberals still think people who don't vote for them are "wrong" and somehow misinformed, when the reality is your party has lost the trust of many, many Canadians and has yet to win it back. In other words, your party hasn't learned anything.
  • terry1
    So you think that people who vote like sheep are in the know somehow?

    My point is that no where in the western world do people keep governments in power as long as they do in Alberta. That's got nothing to do with being Liberal or anything else. 72% of Canadians have lost trust in Harper per the latest polls.
  • Alex
    Gee whiz, it's as if Albertans have some sort of engrained cultural system of beliefs and values that the Liberal and NDP parties (provincially and federally) do not meet.

    Also, what percentage of Canadians don't trust Ignatieff based on those same polls? 65%? Yeesh.
  • Jen
    I am very happy and at peace knowing that the prime minister of Canada believes and treasure God and through GOD's help and guidance the PM and his party has succeeded to reign for three and years hopefully longer.
    PM has promoted our beloved NATION to the world; he also recieves great reviews amongst many nations and amazingly he is very well like by the american media.
    Also the prime minister stands firm with ISRAEL-GOD'S HOLY LAND.
  • terry1
    Jen , you just gave me another reason to ban religion from the national political arena. All extremists are driven by religion and it sounds like you fit the category
  • Jen
    Thank you for the compliments-God Loves you very much Terry 1- you are just clouded with mistrust-don't blame you. But, there is a very big difference between the corrupt liberal party of canada that ignored you completely as the rest of us when they refuse point to stand and vote for the ANTI-TERRORIST ACT BILL ; that's right Terry, you like the rest of us are not worth their vote nor is our nation.
    I think that you are upset that the liberal party that you voted for for years, would turn against you and canada when they stole, mistreated our troops with lousey equipment, cut their funding and which the liberals still owe us $ millions and more.

    The prime minister and his party are the party in the HOC to rise and vote for the ANTI-TERRORIST ACT BILL. , he promoted your/our country canada to the world.
  • Magic Mark
    Do the Conservative raise money to promote a Christian ideology or run attack ads? Which is it Terry? You can't be starting to run out of tinfoil already!
  • terry1
    Of course they did and Stevie wonder decided to do with it as he pleases which is his modus operandi. The attack ads are also to please his supporters who wonder if he's become an NDP type with all the deficits he's building up.

    No tinfoil here but you're long out of magic potion.
  • I take you highly DEFENSIVE tone as further evidence that these ads are going over like a lead balloon.

    BTW, people spent millions on focus groups that told them New Coke and Green Ketchup were winners!
  • New Coke and Green Ketchup are of course the exceptions to the rule.

    Defensive? Who me? You better take that back!
  • Don Ellis
    I've seen the so called attack ads and am still wondering where the attack is. Seems factual, he was out of the country for 34 years and was parachuted into his riding. True or not, fact or not, same guy that said Isreal has the right to defend itself and when talking to another news organization says its a war crime. Which is it? Liberals can call Conservatives Neo Cons and rednecks with reckless abondon and not be called negative, but call a Liberal out and God forbid. By the why, as you can guess, I'm a Conservative, but am voting Liberal in the Nova Scotia election because the Leader and Candidate in my riding are good people. Weird eh!!
  • Ted
    Factual? Can you please show me where Michael Ignatieff ever uttered the words "I'm just visiting"? or "I'm just in it for me"???
  • Magic Mark
    "If I am not elected, I imagine I will ask Harvard to let me back." - Michael Ignatieff

    I think that pretty much kills two birds with one stone.
  • east of eden
    I guess it shows how dedicated a Canadian he really is...NOT.
  • You conveniently ignored mentioning Rex Murphy and Van Tandt of the Sun Media chain when you went on your "liberal MSM rant" up there, Stephen,.. but you wouldn't want to wreck your narrative, now would you?
  • Kelly
    Good post.

    I think these ads will be doubly effective given Ignatieff's penchant for running off-leash. He reinforces them daily by just er....being himself.

    He is wooden, aloof, and a little too patrician for for the average Molson Liberal and that is exactly what the majority of delegates were arguing during the last Liberal leadership race.

    Funny, that.
  • Ted
    You missed one of the ads from 2006 that is probably even more relevant to today.

    Remember this one: http://tinyurl.com/qwj96c?

    To quote:

    "When you've been in power for 12 long years.When your party has been named in a judicial investigation. When scandals continue to engulf your government. What message can you possibly take to the people of Canada? "PM plan negative campaign" [Globe and Mail]"

    This current government is reminding me so much of the last government... in its dying days, desperate to cling onto to power, with no ideas or plans, all it could do was go negative.
  • aa
    You're adorable. You think that Conservative policy is not attractive to Canadians. Your road to success is to destroy Liberal reputations and hope that Canadians hate Liberals more than Conservatives.

    Your strategy destroys confidence in the political system. Harper is perceived as a nasty brutish man because of these tactics. Is that really the price to pay to get power? And you want it at that cost?

    By any measure Iggy is a successful Canadian. His accomplishments far exceed anything that Steven Harper has ever done.
  • east of eden
    Well, let's see - are you speaking of political or personal? Either way, Harper has done more for CANADA than Ignatieff has done. Is it not amusing that leaders all over the globe admire Harper but the narrow-minded Liberal sheep cannot see past their masters' lies?
  • terry1
    Bravo AA. Also, some tories should go to your meetings as their addictions don't seem to recede.
  • aa
    You're adorable. You think that Conservative policy is not attractive to Canadians. Your road to success is to destroy Liberal reputations and hope that Canadians hate Liberals more than Conservatives.

    Your strategy destroys confidence in the political system. Harper is perceived as a nasty brutish man because of these tactics. Is that really the price to pay to get power? And you want it at that cost?

    By any measure Iggy is a successful Canadian. His accomplishments far exceed anything that Steven Harper has ever done.
  • Ted
    Two big differences and two big similarity between the old Liberal ads and the current Conservative attack ads on Ignatieff's character, patriotism and dedication to country.

    1. Difference #1: Those were run during an election. I'm not sure there has ever been a negative ad, let alone a full negative ad campaign like the anti-Dion negative ad campaign and now the anti-Ignatieff ad campaign run by the Conservatives. Canadians are asking: why these attack ads? why now, when we are in the middle of a recession and have more important priorities?

    2. Difference #2: The Liberal ads, which are pretty horrible by the way, try to scaremonger you into being afraid of what Harper might do as PM in government; they basically make up a story about Harper to scare you away from a Harper led government. The Conservative ads attack Ignatieff's patriotism and dedication to country and his character; they are personal character assassination attempts the way the Liberals have never done.

    1. Similarity #1: It comes from a desperation of a government that has lost touch with what Canadians want its government to be dealing with. The Conservatives recognized this in 2006 and did not run negative ads until near the end. Now, they have no clue and have mistaken what Canadians want them to focus on and prioritize. They have simply lost touch. And Canadians can see clearly the naked attempt at deliberate distraction and trying to change the channel.

    2. Similarity #2: Canadians rejected those ads and its government.
  • east of eden
    Ted - Ignatieff threatened to cause an election so, therefore, the CPC went into election mode. There was no reason to NOT take Ignatieff seriously - unless he was lying about bringing down the government. Was he serious or was he lying? Let's face it - the guy is always shooting off his mouth and then backtracking. Can you people not see that? Wait, no you can't. You and Terry1 sound like a suspiciously absent troll so I know that you are incapable of it. Sorry for suggesting it.
  • Ted
    Is that what you honestly believe happened? But for Ignatieff saying something should be done about EI, the Conservatives would never have launched a non-election period campaign of character assassination attacking his patriotism and dedication to country?

    I've got a bridge to sell you EofE. Good price, too.
  • Lyn
    This is a pretty whiny blog - the liberal bias is BS and you know it. You just want to blame someone for the Con failures.

    We have "one'" Liberal leaning newspaper (The Star), The Globe and Mail are centre leaning slightly to the right and all the rest are conservative leaning newspapers. Do the math and quit bellyaching. It's not attractive to see a big boy cry.
  • east of eden
    What are you smoking, dear lady?
  • terry1
    Hopefully not east of eden poison.
  • Jason Cherniak
    After what happened with Dion, I'll never ignore an attack ad no matter how stupid I think it is. However, the reality is that the media picked up on the "weak" message from the Dion ads and it affected how they reported on him. Will they pick up on the "just visiting" message from this Ignatieff attacks? I think that's much less likely, but I won't deny that it is certainly possible.

    Like any attack ad, it will only work if people believe it and there is no response. Ignatieff would somehow have to play into the "character" of just visiting. What would that entail? Did the "celebrity" ads against Obama work? Is this a similar focus? Only time will tell.

    Perhaps the real question will be whether people actually believe the message. I think many people are unlikely to believe that Ignatieff actually said what he is shown saying in the ad. Others might believe it, but decide that they don't care because Canadians like to give people a chance. Have you ever tried to convince a person that somebody they don't know is an ass? My experience is that they need to be personally screwed by that person before they take the evidence seriously, no matter how conclusive it might be. (Of course, I don't think the existing ads have provided conclusive evidence.)
  • Michael
    Oh please. The notion that the media in Canada are "liberal" is the biggest crock of shit ever spewed. Surely, the CBC has a left of centre view of the world; I'll give you that. But CTV, Canwest (and their respect papers like G&M, etc) and others can hardly be accused of being liberal or Liberal friendly on the whole.

    The Conservative ads are bitter, insular, narrow minded, petty, and ill-timed. Period.

    As far as your "truth" is concerned, it's also complete bullshit. You can paint the truth in any light you want by taking it out of context. Beyond this, where truths about Ignatieff cannot be denied (e.g. he did live abroad for 34 years) the questions become: how is this relevant, and what does this say about the Conservative opinion of other Canadians who live abroad? By saying they are less qualified to be Prime Minister, you are saying quite simply that they are less of something than, say, you are.

    It's complete crap, and your party will pay dearly for it at the polls. Do you know why?

    Because every failed product successfully passes its focus group.
  • Liz J
    Do you realize what you are saying when you say the Conservative ads featuring Ignatieff in his own words are "bitter, insular, narrow minded, petty and ill-timed"? There's no truth to the facts? The facts are taken out of what context? He's been away for decades, that's a given, cannot be denied and it certainly isn't a positive for an embryo politician to be so naive to assume he can run the country. These truth ads are not for Liberals, they're for the people of the country who need to know who this stranger is who jumped at the opportunity to take over the reins of power. Returning to Canada wasn't on his radar but opportunity knocked.

    So, if the truth is a problem, tough, your really bankrupt. Other Canadians who live abroad are not putting themselves up to become PM, unprepared, without any political experience, including leadership.

    Leave it to the Liberals to do a window dressing job with nothing in the store.
  • Mark
    I agree with Ted. The 2006 Conservatives ran ads that said what they would do when they came to power. They were positive, I will, I will. That was when Harper was given a chance to govern. Since then it's been the negative ads and Canadians have certainly not given him a majority. Sure he's the Prime Minister but I think when the next election comes it will still be a minority. I know he tired the cuddly vest ads, that didn't work. Canadians are looking for a strong, decisive leader, not one that starts a fight and then pulls the plug on parliament when he knows he's going to lose. Don't get me wrong, I'm not here to back Iggy. I'm disappointed that Harper could have gone the distance instead of dropping his pants. The Conservatives should be running positive pieces about Harper. Forget Iggy, he only has to open his mouth to get himself in trouble.

    One more thing, why are they running the ads now? No one is looking at Harper, the news is all about Dhalla and Mulroney. It's a great week for the backlash to be on someone else and here we are debating the bad judgement of the timing of these commercials.
  • Hoarfrost
    Why are the Federal Conservatives so quiet on the main issue of the day? I have become a single issue voter.

    Abolish or hamstring the HRC'S.

    What kind of tedious game are you all playing. This is the defining issue of the day. It is time to STAND UP and be counted.

    I don't care about side issues such as attack ads right now. Thank you anyway.
  • Liz J
    Appears you've put out the right bait Stephen, you've struck a nerve. They're crawling out of the woodwork trying to do the impossible, call Ignatieff's own words attack ads.

    The truth ads are not going over well with the Liberals or their media shills. They are getting a message out to the public who deserve to know more about the tall dark stranger, who returned after several decades because he was made an offer, the opportunity to take over the reins of government. If that doesn't happen he has said he will return to Harvard. Bean Town awaits.

    Nothing says it better than than the man himself. We are putting out the information in his own words, there's more to come.
  • terry1
    Liz J.. the definitive word here is bait. some of us have spit at that bait. The only ones who really took it are the tory sucker fish.

    you can bet there's more to come and harpercrite won't look pretty.
  • Liz J
    Speak louder, can't hear you for your heavy breathing.
  • "Appears you've put out the right bait Stephen, you've struck a nerve."

    You can keep telling yourself whatever you want, but the simple fact the attack ad "response" has "struck a nerve". That's sort of the thesis of Stephen's post, or does LOGIC escape you?

    All the usual caveats about the need to respond to these ads, but the fact you guys are reduced to defending the suitability of these ads, in the face of an almost absolute rejection by the media filter, is a GOOD development for the Liberals. These ads say more about the messenger than the message. Ask yourself what are Harper's chief liabilities with the Canadian public? Then ask yourself how these ads PLAY to those negative characteristics. Hello in there.

    One more point, which nobody here has addressed. Go back a couple months ago and re-read the Conservatives hesitations with running attack ads at this time. Those aren't Liberal "worries", your own people have articulated why these ads might not work. Your own people noted the economic environment, noted that Harper can't appear partisan and nasty. What's changed? Oh ya, the WOEFUL polls, which forced this risky adventure. Your own people tell us the danger, Liberals don't need to spin, because you recognized the same. Desperate times however...
  • bert
    Seems to me that the Conservatives have been winning more and more seats since PM Harper became leader and the Libs have been losing more and more seats.Doesn't seem like the Conservatives are losing any support to me,as some of the more ignorant replies state.Terry 1 (TAKE YOUR MEDICATION)..Nothing you say makes any sense.Iggy is a Canadian of convenience,you know it and we know it,but their are a large group of Canadians that the MSM wont get this information to,so the truth ads come out to inform them.And as we all know the Liberals are not intelligent enough to handle the truth,so they send their little errand boys from the MSM to try and twist the facts for them.In other words they let other people do their dirty work for them.Only problem is Terry 1 no one believes the MSM anymore, so they are the ones twisting in their own lies and looking like fools.CASE closed.
  • terry1
    since the case is closed I cannot respond to your nonsense. Too bad, so sad.

    the only meds I take are vitamins...you must need some anti halucination drugs though.
  • terry1
    Slightly off topic but relevant here:
    http://www.thehilltimes.ca/html/index.php?displ...

    Tories play political games with Dhalla controversy, 'lusting' after her riding

    Should not the dialogue be about the abuse of caregivers? Maybe the tories don't really care about people is the message that will evolve here. this has Tory subterfuge written all over it
  • Magic Mark
    Get your own blog or wait till Stephen posts something on this issue. For *bleep* sake, Terry.
  • terry1
    MM,he has already opened that door with his previous blog and I'm simply updating everyone. You apppear to be a newbie here so look down a few blogs and read the Ruby blog.
  • east of eden
    Tell the rest of the story - the column makes some disparaging remarks about your leader, sweetheart. And, duh, politicians play political games. Deal with it.
  • batb
    Stephen Taylor: "Funny that the Liberals are silent on this and it is the media who comes to their defense."

    I know your tongue was in your cheek when you wrote that!

    The MSM/PPG in Canada is an unprofessional bunch of unelected, unofficial-Opposition, bag-(wo)men, cheerleaders, and toadies for the LPC and, in my books, have absolutely no credibility anymore. Anything they say and write about our Prime Minister and his party can pretty much be discounted. You've got to do your own homework to find out what's really going on -- thus many daily visits to this blog and others to get at the truth, not lies, about the state of this Deranged Dominion.

    Our MSM -- God help us, with the likes of I'm-Peter-Mansbridge-and-you're-not, Taber, Oliver, Bonner, Van Dusen, Newman (x two), Travers, Delacourt, Galloway, etc., etc. -- bears a great deal of responsibility for the fact that we've gone from being a democracy with gravitas to an almost-Banana Republic, a mere shadow of our former self. Their love affair with Pierre Trudeau and all things Liberal has blinded them to the reality that most of the rest of us live in, while they've enjoyed the rarified atmosphere of life at court in whichever Liberal-Monarchy a certain Corporation has deigned to put in power.

    Unfortunately, absolute power does seem to corrupt absolutely, and the unhealthy, joined-at-the-hip coalition of the LPC and the MSM is confirmation of the truth of this axiom. There seems to be a growing swell of Canadians who are no longer willing to rely on the MSM for factual coverage of politics -- look at the trouble our newsprint media is in and the popularity of blogs like this one.

    I used to subscribe to two dailies and now subscribe to none, which puts truth to another axiom: You make your bed and you lie in it. Are you listening, you "media pundits"?
  • Michael
    The MSM is 2/3 conservative in Canada. Give it up.
  • batb
    'Seems commenters can't give up the temptation of answering terry1's tedious talking points.

    Rule #1 about trolls: Don't feed them. It worked on a few other recent threads. Personally, I'd like to see it work on all of Stephen's threads. I just scroll down when I see terry1, like I do over at SDA when I see "new" has made a comment.
  • Liz J
    'Definitely have no intention of engaging in debate with trolls. Sometimes they need a little kick though, reason doesn't work with them.
  • terry1
    You simply cannot keep up with the truthful attacks on Harper's poor performance.
  • terry1
    BatB....I'm a fan of your fiction so I read it intently. LOL
  • hollinm
    Kinsella said the media would protect the Liberals when the Conservatives started with the attack ads so there would be no need for the Liberals to run ads opposing the Conservative ads. Well he was right. As ST says they are out in full force to ensure that the Conservatives are maligned and they can generate some sympathy for the Count. The fact remains Canadians will watch these truth ads and will make up their own minds. If focus groups were used I suspect the ads will reflect what they heard in those groups.
    The media should continue to focus on the ads because indirectly they are helping the Conservatives get out the message.
    Interesting the media in Canada with all the serious issues being faced by the country and the world would prefer to discuss a political party's ad campaign. They cannot help themselves. The need to dwell on the insignificant because the more serious issues are too hard for them to understand.
  • terry1
    Mervin, you must be the most prolific troll in Tory land. And you continue to mislead and pontificate as though you are the dictator himself. Is that an alter ego?

    The serious issues in Canada were porogued and delayed by Harper in December so he could finally figure out there was a recession in town. Talk about being dumb and asleep at the switch;this country simply does not trust Harper as his 28% polls tell us.
  • east of eden
    Um, you are calling somebody a prolific troll. Good grief, lady, you are not only a prolific troll but a totally robotic sheeple. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
  • terry1
    EofE...if maybe you stopped and wondered if I was a female or a male you might get some answers. You are like most angry tories and don't think but simply attack. Terrie is the normal spelling for the female version of my name. do you get it? Trying to guess someone's sex on an anonymous blog is simply dumb.

    Stalking me is not going to slow me down and since you have nothing to say in reality I don't really need to respond very often.
  • batb
    BTW, Happy Victoria Day! I'm off to celebrate Queen Vickie's reign and that of her great-great-granddaughter, Queen Lilibet the Second. Many glasses will be raised in their honour ... ;-)
  • terry1
    here's why the media doesn't like the tories and why thye will never achieve majority status under Harper:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RT...

    CALGARY — A bill that has raised the spectre of Alberta parents hauling teachers before human rights tribunals is an offensive attempt to placate ultra right-wing conservatives, says the man whose legal crusade forced the province to rewrite its human rights legislation.

    This weekend, Alberta's teachers slammed proposed new rules that would give parents sweeping rights to pull kids from classes on touchy subjects, and be notified in advance when lessons focus on religion, sexuality or sexual orientation.

    The new measures were included as part of Bill 44, which enshrines gay rights in the province 11 years after they were imposed by the Supreme Court of Canada in a case that caused an ugly backlash in Alberta. In an interview yesterday, Alberta Culture and Community Spirit Minister Lindsay Blackett admitted that the provincial caucus wrote the school provisions into the bill as an olive branch to religious groups and conservative voters who might be offended by the province's move to codify gay rights.
    ...............................

    This is the kind of press that more than helps the Liberals...I'm glad we still have a free press and they well know the Harperites would suppress that if left in a position to do so.
  • east of eden
    This has nothing to do with Harper. Are you trying to incite some homophobic comments or something? What is your game, lady? BTW - parents should have the right to know what their children are being taught. School should be for teaching practical knowledge. Those of us of a certain age learned about the birds and the bees the old fashioned way - on street corners and pool halls - pinball parlours, etc. and other means. We did not need to learn it at school - we learned how to spell, write comprehensably, we learned to NOT use an apostrophe to indicate a plural. We knew when to use "between" and "among" properly. We learned what we needed to go out and be a productive adult. Your generation of teens is learning bubkus.
  • terry1
    More of your insightful stuff once again......I am a male in my late 50's.........hows that for stupidity?
  • MaryT
    MIMI was out of the country for 34 years gaining experience and knowledge. What did he learn. Being in London and living in France he must have met a lot of leaders in exile, just waiting to go home. I think DeGaulle was one of those. We had the assaninated leader of some mid east country, and there were many others he must have read about while writing all that history. Is that where he got the idea, I am the Liberal PM, in exile, just waiting for the right moment to make an appearance.
    And how can some trolls here refuse to admit that it is their great leaders own words in those truth ads. Just because they can't believe he said those things makes them the fools, not us.
  • terry1
    No one said they were not truthful but it was stated they were attack ads.....there is a difference. The only untruthful one is Harper himself.
  • east of eden
    Terry - your personal hatred of Harper skews any logic which you may have once possessed. You sound exactly like our dearly departed friend known as "G". The fact that you are obsessed with Harper says a lot about you - none of it good. Therefore, any and all of your comments are invalide because they are: a) Liberal Sheeple Speaking Points, and 2) motivated only by your personal hatred of a man you have never met. Your comments - pffft. Not valid.
  • Liz J
    If the Liberals wish to call them attack ads, which they do, as do their shills in the media, they are saying that telling the truth, putting out facts about their leader, re-running what he has said in his own words, from his own mouth, then he is attacking himself.
  • terry1
    The implications he is not a real Canadian are disgusting and unethical. then again ethics is a course never ever taken by Harper
  • Pat
    Great stuff Stephen!!! As you so clearly point out, when the information is true, attack the process. Well said.
  • Pat
    Actually Terry1:

    This is the kind of press that more than helps the Liberals...I'm glad we still have a free press and they well know the Harperites would suppress that if left in a position to do so.

    It's generally the Leftist's that tend to be the Censors, mind you, that's only the info. that history provides, not the lofty Red Star & Co.
  • gimbol
    Two points.

    One, I have yet to see the liberals bring out an ad in response. They said (Iggy said) they where going to be responding to the adverts, and I assumed that meant inkind. Now if they don't do so, does this mean they can't argue the truth (which validates the CPC message) or they don't have the money to buy the ad time.

    Point two: this is kind of important, but if you recall it was in a previous election that Harper responded to something from the liberal war room with something like "I can take a punch". That to me is the best response. Now I'll elaborate a bit on that because it real message that comes out of the ad. I also recall someone many years ago that responded to this kind of attack by saying "I've heard worse things from better people" or something to that effect. This is the point that Iggy misses when he portrays himself as Trudeau, when he responds he gets upset, and becomes flustered....definitely not "sophisticated" like the Harvard scholar he supposedly is.

    Iggy just got defined as the great pretender.
  • gimbol
    Here's a point the libearls seemed to have missed.

    One: The response Squidward promised hasn't materialized yet, he's talked about it, but to date nothing. Now, I'm no political chess player, but I've been reading a lot in the past and currently that the liberal party is now being lead by a someone that supposed to be smarter than the average canadian. I'm not going to dispute his level of education as known that he was privilaged to get the best education money could buy, an education level most canadians can never hope to afford.
    But if he's so super smart, would he not have a better response than just to say he's going to have one?
    To be fair, I guess I should assume he just wasn't prepared for it, just as he probably thought that the story the TORSTAR was going to release on Rudy Dhalla was not going to be critical because it was the TORSTAR.
    Secondly, and this expands on the point about the response to the ads. I remember how Trudeau used to respond to this kind of thing and Iggy seems to be channeling Paul Martin instead. If I where you guys I'd be getting on the horn to libHQ and telling them that if they want the reincarnation of Trudeau either tell Iggy to do it right or not do it at all.
  • Liz J
    What Ignatieff seems to be doing instead is acting like the highbrow, taking the highroad. It appears he has no clue about the facts of politics, getting down and dirty is part of the game. The truth ads put forward to inform the people of the man who aspires to lead them are tough to fight. He can't really counter them without contradicting himself.

    The Liberals count heavily on the media to be their 5th column, they never disappoint. The TORSTAR has taken them aback so they're off to lick their wounds with nowhere to hide and nothing to counter attack. They've been checkmated.
  • terry1
    Iggy will not take these ads lying down. He will respond in his own way on his time frame. Your instant response timeframe is not in Iggy's interest. He may respond jsut before he brings down the incompetent Tories for economic mismanagement, or, it maybe next week. Its his call but he will respond and Kinsella will be there alongside him.
  • Richard
    brings down the Tories for economic mismanagement ...

    1. it can not be done. can you not count seats? he'd need help from the bloc and that's not happening.
    2. don't you recall, your brilliant Iggy supported the budget?

    you really ned to go back to WK and get some new talking points, Gayle.
  • terry1
    gee, am I that scary here?

    you call me gayle......I'm a he and have no idea who gayle is
    some have called me offensive
    some have called me defensive
    two trolling broads here are trying to avoid answering my posts
    one guy thinks i'm a woman because my name is TERRY

    It must be tough being an angry tory these days all thinking the stink ads are going to save your leader's butt. Have fun but your party's over and the fat lady is warming up.
  • batb
    If the Canadian media were a focus group ...

    ... we'd just get more lies.
  • Liz J
    Right, and we can't abide any more lies, in fact we will not stand for it.

    Don't you just love how the Liberal mouthpieces brag about when Iggy will bring down the government? As if he can do it on his own, like it's his choice and his alone to make, the others will follow his lead like Lemmings falling over the cliff.

    We all await the attack of the great Kinsella, shaking in our boots at the possibility of anything from the stuffed toy attacks to soldiers in the streets with guns and tanks.
  • Ted
    "Right, and we can't abide any more lies, in fact we will not stand for it."

    And yet, you continue to support Harper?
  • Pathetic.

    You; not the "mainstream media", the same mainstream media that almost unanimously endorsed the Conservatives in both the 2006 and 2008 elections. Biting the hand that feeds you, are we?
  • Bruce
    Wow, the Liberals really do live in the land of fairy tales, lollipops and unicorns. Many of them will soon be joining the hapless Dion in staring blankly out of the windows while all of them mumble something that only they can hear.
  • paulsstuff
    Don't know if the ads are striking a nerve or not Stephen, but I have to say I don't remember ever seeing so many Libloggers commenting on one of your posts. Correct me if I'm wrong.
  • Liz J
    Ditto paulstuff, I was about to note exactly that. The traffic on this thread from Libs is telling indeed.
  • Liberal
    "Ditto paulstuff, I was about to note exactly that. The traffic on this thread from Libs is telling indeed."

    Telling of what? That we're all scared?

    Irritated by Taylor's hypocrisy and bad taith. That is all. But tell yourself whatever fairy tale you need to get through the day.
  • Liz J
    So, Mr./Ms Liberal, you say you're "irritated by Taylor's hypocrisy and bad taith [sic]".
    What constitutes hypocrisy and bad faith here? Were you looking in the mirror perhaps?

    You have to remember the facts free of spin are not what we can count on from the majority of the MSM. They're all Liberal hacks. Using truth ads is a method to inform the people who have a right to know as much as possible about a stranger who aspires to become PM. I'll let you in on a little secret, there are more than a few Liberals not exactly sold on the anointed one either.

    The saying "actions speak louder than words" could be rejigged in this case to 'reactions speak louder than words' , it appears Liberals and their shills are foaming at the mouth over the truth being put out.

    Hypocrisy? Bad faith? No, but I've seen plenty of it from the Liberals who are so blinded by their lust
    for power they promise the moon, put up a storefront , dress a mannequin, but nary a mention of what's in the store.
  • batb
    'Love Eric with an accent aigu. LOL! 'Got a nice hairdo, too?

    Obviously, Eric-with-an-accent-aigu, you haven't been watching the MSM lately, or reading the print media, or you've been doing so with blinkers on and earplugs. Are you familiar with Janie Taber, Owl Eyes Oliver, Don the Broooadcast Newman, Julie Van Dusen't, all the Susans: Bonnar, Riley, Ormiston, Delacourt, etc., etc., Don-smirk-smile Martin, I'm-Peter-Mansbridge-and-you're-not? There isn't a conservative in the bunch and they take up a lot of print space and camera time. There ARE a few conservative commentators but not a whole lot.

    Lib-left members of the MSM and the PPG are legion. 'So many Liberal misdemeanours and downright crimes -- and if it hadn't been for the National Post, the new kid on the media block, who blew the whistle on Adscam and Power Corp's behind-the-scenes influence on the LPC and its leaders, most Canadians would think the Liberals were as pure as the driven snow. We wouldn't know about Shawinigate, Adscam, the HRDC scandal, the Kyoto Accord's Mo Strong, etc., etc.

    For some reason, up to the NP's bursting on the scene, Canadians would have no idea of the LPC's particular way of doing things -- none of which have been very beneficial to most taxpaying Canadians. Too many members of the MSM and the PPG are on too-friendly terms with the members of the Liberal Party and seem incapable of being impartial or non-partisan when it comes to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his CPC. I'm not asking the MSM to be pro-CPC and PMSH but I would like to see some fairness in reporting, not the twisted spin the Canadian MSM seem programmed to report.
  • batb
    Oh, and BTW, Eric, the reason the MSM endorsed Stephen Harper and his CPC in the 2006 election is because it was clear that PM Paul deer-in-the-headlights Martin was a washout. They could all see their portfolios going down the tubes and Canada spiralling out of control if the Liberals stayed in power.
  • You know, the Bloc Quebecois is opposed by virtually every media outlet except Le Devoir, and yet it continues to win crushing seat majorities and a huge part of the popular vote in Quebec.

    Is the Conservative Party not as strong as the Bloc Quebecois? Does it not have support from the people because of the media's portrayal of it or because, well, people don't want to support it?

    Stop blaming "the media" for your problems. First of all, it is clichéd as hell (do you know that Blogging Tories is pretty much in line with the caricature of Conservatives people on the left have?) and secondly, if you have a good message it will filter through to the people. And if you don't try to make that message while sounding like an ass, the media just might pass along the message for you.

    And newsflash, the "mainstream media" seems left-wing to you because the "mainstream" opinion is left-wing in Canada. Conservatives only have 1/3rd or, at the very best, 2/5ths of support from Canadians. Why would the "mainstream" media take on what is, in fact, a minority opinion?

    And don't give me that "conservative" voices are so hard to hear. From my perspective, they have far more room than they deserve. That so many newspapers endorsed the Conservatives in both the 2006 and 2008 elections demonstrates they aren't so opposed to you as you think.

    Stop playing the victim, you guys are supposed to be the ones in power right now.
  • Beer and Popcorn
    Stephen, I think your post is right on the money.

    I think the ads are really quite brilliant, actually. It's not the downtown Toronto Liberals that the Liberal party is trying to relate to and win back. It's the Eastern Canadians in PEI, NFLD, NB, its the people in the 905 and 705 in Ontario. It's the people in Vancouver, Winnipeg and small cities and towns across Canada. These people rarely hear a conservative voice or opinion from the Canadian media machine. I live in Toronto and it is everywhere here - in elevators, in local community newspapers, the Star, CBC. local TV stations, on radio - ALL LIBERALS - ALL THE TIME.

    But - let's not forget - was this not all part of Mr Trudeau's plan - to make Liberalsim systemic in Canada? Didn't he try to stack the courts, the education system, the Senate, the public service (including the CBC), crown corporations with partisan Liberals? It seems it's not enough for it to be mostly Liberals - in order for it to work it must be ALL LIBERALS.

    I think ads like these are just a reality of competing as a political party in Trudeau's Canada.
  • Liz J
    "Trudeau's Canada", therein lies the problem. Trudeau's Charter coupled with the Multicultural policies we have will eventually take down much of what this country was built on and stood for.

    'Still think Trudeau embraced multiculturalism to cover for the fact his plan was to water down English Canada and eventually our British heritage would be buried. He himself later realized perhaps the multicultural idea may not have been a good one but we're still dealing with it, it's still alive.
  • Jen
    Trudeau, ah yes, this man had a field day with taxpayers' money no one was left out not a lib, nor a ndp nor anyone, everyone's money was used for TRUDEAU's yearly trips with his family to the SWISS ALPS TO SKI.
    TRUDEAU the man the media adored is the man who ran DEFICITS EVERY YEAR and is the very same man who left MULRONEY with a very large DEBT.

    Liz J, If it is good for TRUDEAU to do as he wished- why is the media all over the prime minister stephen harper for.
  • Liz J
    But, but, you must understand Jen, Liberals do no wrong, tell no lies, their deficits don't count, they're simply forgotten. Just like there's no mention of the borrowing from the EI fund by the Liberals to bolster their "surplus".

    No mention of all the shady dealings under Chretien's watch but they're still salivating over Mulroney who wasn't using our money in his dealings with KHS. Not even the outrageous way JC sent Cashbagliano off to Denmark to get him out of sight. That's a story to be kept going if we had some media interested in real scandals. Gagliano was the fall guy, he said he only did what he was told. Who told him what to do? Who gave him the orders to toss millions of our dollars to the wind with no trace? Alas, we will never know, neither will we see the money returned. As Chretien said when asked if he would get rid of the GST, "it's gone", so too is the ADSCAM millions.
  • batb
    Eric: "if you have a good message it will filter through to the people." Guess what? That's what it's done and that's why we have a CPC government in Canada, something the left-wing media in this country are mad as Hell about and haven't stopped griping, moaning and groaning about.

    As for your question, "Why would the 'mainstream' media take on what is, in fact, a minority opinion?" it's disingenuous. It's not the job of the MSM to "take on" either opinions left of centre, in the middle, or right of centre. It's their job to REPORT the news, something our media outlets stopped doing years ago, especially when they became out-and-out cheerleaders for the Trudeau Nation and routinely turned a blind eye to Liberal corruption.

    Why do you think so many of our media institutions are in such deep trouble? Canadians haven't been able to rely on them to report the news but, rather, have had to put up with a steady diet of opinion and commentary on the news, with a decidedly left-leaning, partisan bias. If there are so many Canadians supporting the left side of the political spectrum, how come they're not supporting the left-wing -- even you admit it -- media?

    The Conservatives ARE in power, but, when was the last time you saw a solid news item on Prime Minister Stephen Harper and what he is accomplishing? We had to rely on reports from the U.S. and Europe during the G-8 Summit and photos from HELLO! magazine to see our gracious Canadian "first lady" in a good light. The TORSTAR showed photos of all of the G-8 first ladies and pointed out how "dowdy" Laureen Harper's outfit was compared to Mrs. Obama's, etc. Always a put-down. I have to come to the blogs to find out what my Prime Minister is doing, because the Canadian MSM isn't doing their job of REPORTING THE NEWS. The CBC, which is one of the worst culprits, has a market share of viewers at about 6%. I wonder why?

    As for your argument about the Bloc Quebecois in Quebec, that's a red herring. Only Quebecers can vote for them, so it's a completely different ballgame they're in from the Conservatives.

    Canadians should be able to expect fairness in the reporting of the news. I'm not asking for a conservative-sympathetic media, I'm asking for a media that simply does it's job and makes a distinction between news reporting and commentary/opinion.
  • It's all in the eye of the beholder. Many Canadians feel that many media outlets are too friendly to the Conservatives, and give them too easy of a time. These people likely don't vote Conservative. Many Canadians feel that many media outlets are too hostile to the Conservatives. These people likely vote Conservative. Many Canadians believe that many media outlets are doing their job well, and when they criticise the government it is deserved. These people could vote either way. Members of the media - analysts, commentators, etc. - have a right to criticise the government. If they do so, are their motives immediately suspect? You do understand that whenever a media member praises the government, by that measure, their motives would also be suspect.

    Accept it, deal with it, move on. The constant attack on the media by Conservatives is a red herring of your own. Indeed, the evidence of the 2006 and 2008 elections shows the media is more in the pocket of the Tories than you all think. And, again, I have to say it is sadly clichéd. I follow blogs from all political viewpoints, and you always see the same thing. Tories complain about the media, NDPers post hostile things about Israel. Liberals complain about Conservatives. Old news.
  • Beer and Popcorn
    Hi Eric - are you saying that it's ok that the media is in the corner of the Liberals and that they have the right to these resources that other parties don't because of their affiliations and relationships?

    Is it also OK that taxpayer dollars are spent in supprting the Liberals through the CBC?

    Actually, these are not issues that we should just 'get over', they are structural inequalities in our system which make these ads necessary. Why in your mind and in the minds of other Liberal Canadians must we always play by the rules as defined by the Liberals?
  • terry1
    beer and popcorn...why do we have to play by Harper's rules of calling an election anytime he wants in spite of his new law and why do we need to porogue parliament when things are going badly for the governing party. Save your lame excuses for the ignoramuses you obviously impress elsewhere.
  • Beer and Popcorn
    Terry - either do some thinking before you post or don't bother posting.
  • terry1
    Or simpy ignore the posts you don't like might be your better option. My thinking does not have to impress you nor is it my intent.
  • Beer and Popcorn
    Terry - nothing to do with 'like' - I'm here because I like to discuss the issues.

    I'm just saying, I'll do as the others do on this site with replies of yours that are simply partisan garbage and not on topic - ignore them. So there is no need replying unless you've though out the response and it's relevant.

    I'm a conservative and we welcome debate.
  • terry1
    Beer and popcorn stated:
    "I'm a conservative and we welcome debate."

    That's the best joke I've heard here unless Harper is not really a conservative...as a matter of fact the NDP does seem to like him these days.
  • terry1
    BAT B.... you continue to forget that well over 75% of the population in this country is left leaning or at least left of center. The newspapers are for profit organizations not conservative publicity hounds. They cater to the majority of people who buy newspapers. Look at Canwest and the NP as it is going down in flames because its readership is very narrowly based.
  • Bruce
    you continue to forget that well over 75% of the population in this country is left leaning or at least left of center.

    Earth calling terry1.............is that why we have a Conservative minority government that is, so painfully for the leftists, so close to a majority?
  • terry1
    the people of Canada vote heavilyto the left and if the left ever comes together the tories will not see power again for a long long time.
  • Jen
    tories will not see power again for a long long time.

    During which time Terry, SOCIALISM will eat your FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY away. And you like the rest of us will be just numbers. you will not at any time be exempt from it Socialism.. In fact, you are the right person SOCIALIST governments craves for.
    Socialism doen't mean going to some one's house to socialize; Socialism causes many countries to split and escape from.
    The MSM, is a perfect example, they pound you day and night with negative reporting until you just can't take it anymore so you believe them... it is not your fault Terry1, most of us fell prey to the media's daily ritunal of DARKNESS.
  • terry1
    Jen, I will simply point you in the direction of the Bush republicans who were right wing religious nutbars and who screwed the economy the US's reputation and their self esteem as a nation. If Harper had his way we would be doing the exact same things.
  • terry1
    here's some ore names of political people who have spent considerable time outside of Canada or were born abroad...can you please get the party to put out ads about them as well.

    • ABLONCZY, The Hon. Diane, P.C., B.Ed., LL.B. Date of Birth: 1949.05.06. Place of Birth: Peoria, Illinois, United States.
    • MARK, Inky, B.A., B.Ed. Date of Birth: 1947.11.17. Place of Birth: Toysun, China.
    • OBHRAI, Deepak. Date of Birth: 1950.07.05. Place of Birth: Oldeani, Tanzania.
    • SHORY, Devinder. Date of Birth: 1958.08.03. Place of Birth: Punjab, India.
    • TOEWS, The Hon. Vic, P.C., B.A., LL.B. Date of Birth: 1952.09.10. Place of Birth: Fildelfia, Paraguay.
    • WONG, Alice, Ph.D. Date of Birth: 1948.06.30. Place of Birth: Hong Kong.
  • batb
    BINGO!, Beer and Popcorn, in your response to Eric.

    I have no problem when the media criticizes the government, with documentation, but not when they do it ad nauseum with no documentation, using the old trick of asking only Liberal supporters and old media hacks to comment, as often happens on the CBC. Frequently, Don Newman will stack his panels with known NDP and Liberal supporters, which is when I turn to my husband and ask, "Where's the Conservative side of the argument?" and then flip the channel.

    The media is not supposed to speak for any particular side of the political spectrum, but this is not we see here in Canada. It is supposed to report the news and when it uses reporters and columnists to air their opinions, that should be made very clear. It often isn't in the Canadian MSM. And then there's the issue of all taxpayers having to fund the very left of centre, very c/Conservative-negative CBC.

    This is unacceptable.
  • Jen
    Batb, Fairness and balance reporting is what we want. let's see how this plays with you. Tom Clark interviews PETER KENT,former journalist who is now a mp in the conservative party, Tom asked KENT a question which Kent answered but not liking the answer Tom tells KENT to 'COME CLEAN' Yet when Tom asked Ruby Dhalla a question she danced around it, Tom repeated the same question to her three times and each time she refused to answer. At no time did TOM tell Ruby 'COME CLEAN, or answer the question. Instead, he kept his mouth shut.

    The liberals blame the conservatives for not attending to the INFRASTRUCTURE and instead of Tom Clark telling the liberals "hold it right there how can you accuse this government for such a thing when you liberals cut funding to the INFRASTRUCTURE. in the first place?" again, no fairness.

    What I have asked CTV by email is to have open lines to these shows. PP, SUNDAY Q/P etc, but the media refuse. seems to me that they CTV, are afraid of the outcome.
    CBC is a lost case.
  • FoxtrotBravo
    In my opinion, the gold medal standard of news journalism is "NewsWorld with Jim Lehrer", which is a PBS broadcast (oddly enough). The journalists on that show treat the news like a science ... report the facts, keep your opinions to yourself, and be fair and direct with all guests regardless of party or association.

    If you have a chance to do some channel flipping between Jim Lehrer and CBC NewsWorld (or the National) you will undoubtedly see the difference, its glaring: the Canadian news is third rate and extremely unprofessional (in my opinion).
  • terry1
    So here is an unfunded start as a response to the ads of the Harpercrites. I think this one is brilliant.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWpJLIZR1Vg&eurl...
  • batb
    Um, Eric and other l/Lib cheerleaders:

    In a recent Reader's Digest poll asking "Who is your most trusted Canadian?" here are a few results:

    Stephen Harper? 62%, 371 of 595 votes

    Suzuki? 6%, 37 votes

    Mansbridge? 4%, 21 votes

    Bob Rae? 14%, 83 votes

    Nowhere was there any mention of Count Iggula.

    Good points, Jen.
  • Liz J
    Count Iggula didn't make the list because we don't know him. In order to get to know him better we have to buy his book, an autobiography if you please. Of course it helps to pay heed to the truth ads, put out by the CPC, for some of the more important facts about the stranger who aspires to lead the country.
  • Jen
    LizJ, Since the pathetic national media can't tell the public who Ignatieff truly is; the CPC decided to introduce Ignatieff to the public.

    Duceppe has tons of notes on IGNATIEFF, he had it for months.
  • dupmar
    There does appear to be wilful ignorance from Liberal supporters concerning the nature of Canada re their arguments on secularism and Christian influence on public policy. Canada does not follow the US model in this regard.

    Are they aware that denominational schools, Catholic or Protestant, enjoy constitutional protection in our two major provinces, and that Clause 29 of the Charter gives denominational rights and privileges established when the provinces entered Canada precedence over any provisions of the Charter. The threat of undue religious influence, if any, would appear to be much more prominent in Ontario and Quebec, where such influence enjoys constitutional protection, than perceived Christian threat from Western Canada.
  • terry1
    dupmar, just so you know. In Quebec religious school boards have been disbanded for some years now. In Ontario it was the provincial Tories who expanded the Catholic school system and in the last election the same tories tried to expand religious education and got routed at the polls.

    So much for liberal ignorance!! Get your facts straight please.
  • Observant
    It's interesting how many here miss the strategy and objective behind these ads. They are primarily intended to create doubt in the minds of those who traditionally vote Liberal so they will not vote in any next election because they reject Ignatieff as a prime minister of Canada.

    Canadians voting habits are pretty well set, so if the CPC ads can convince traditional Liberal voters to stay home in any next election, that will be success.

    Another objective of these ads may be to create dissent within the Liberal party ranks, by demonstrating to BobRae supporters that Ignatieff is not deserving of the Liberal leadership because of his past record.

    These ads may not bring voters over to the Conservative side, but if they reduce the number of Liberal voters, they will be successful
  • terry1
    here's a little Liberal tit for tat that's is now starting get around the web:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttadqbx4yEU&feat...
blog comments powered by Disqus
Just found out abt the Ford denial. I called his cell today and he confirmed it to me in no uncertain terms that he was announcng in March.
Stephen Taylor - email@stephentaylor.ca
Stephen Taylor is a scientist, political analyst and a blogger. Taylor writes here regularly and is the founder of bloggingtories.ca. Taylor has contributed to Macleans, CTV, talk radio and has been a featured speaker on new media at numerous events including the Western Standard Cruise and the Forum for Public Policy. In December 2008, Taylor organized Rally for Canada, a series of rallies held coast-to-coast to protest the proposed coalition government.