betsy

UPDATE: Martin Campaign in Markham, Ont. After speeches of several alleged "experts" and whatever in their fields....and after Martin's speech....the reporters all but ignored everything that was said and launched a barrage of questions relating to the military ad. Martin tried to squirm his way out of it by saying all the ad was trying to point out was that you "need a critical mass" in order to deploy the troops efficiently in cases of disasters. A reporter insists that was not the message perceived. Martin also defiantly said that the particular ad had never been aired. Of course he was challenged that it aired in Quebec. He siad, it was not the same ad.

The Liberals' selling out of our military, of all people....really gives the impression what kind of government this is. It's almost like the typical sleaze bag they portray in the movies....the kind who will sell his own mother just for self-gain. The military's image took a blow with that torture incident in Rwanda(?).....committed by only a handful of Canadian soldiers. It took months and hard work on the part of the military to assure the Canadian public...and the world, that our soldiers are not monsters out there hurting innocent people. This despicable ad is saying otherwise! This despicable ad is saying that our own military is out to hurt us, in our own cities! Here, in Canada! An editor for the military paper was interviewed. Military used to be diversified with their choice of government. Some are Conservatives, some are Liberals, etc.., What that ad did was so hurtful that now....they're all anti-Liberals! The veterans are hurt! The families of these soldiers who are now being demonized felt betrayed too....for they were prepared to commit the ultimate sacrifice in giving up a loved one for the good of our country. How could they do this to our own military? It is not enough to deprive them of pride by having them all ill-equiped to go into batttle...or to "hitch a ride" with other country's generopsity.... but to actually do this to them???

Boy, with what the Liberals had done...that enough so-called education to read and listen...and that just enough practice in using that so-called reason...is not even required to tell that we've been victimized! Can't you hear what the people are saying? Can't you see how they are reacting? They're saying, "we've been mugged by a bunch of thugs!" Oh do yourself a favor and quit reasoning like a typical Liberal. Your reasoning is somehow off-key....no matter how hard I try to twist it around like a cube. It does not compute. Tell me, just who is really choosing to keep her/his head buried deeply in the sand?

I wonder if the media is somehow feeling some sort of guilt? For these same media had aided the Liberals in demonizing Harper in the past....only to find that for doing so, in a way, they had aided in the victimization of our system. And they had seen something appealing about Harper's alternative government. Then to make this realization really drive home, they had now seen who the real scary party is....when they felt their own turf (free press) being tampered with. Now they feel they had to rescue the nation. To aid in preventing our democratic system's decay. This probably is an attempt at atonement. Then of course, seeing Harper's climb in the polls...and seeing first-hand the population's response, they feel they have to join the band-wagon. After all, everybody loves a winner....or at least want to be able to say, they supported the winner.

Persistent quizzing of Martin and Duceppe by reporters....the media, or a lot of them...almost seem to be "protective" of Harper these days. I can understand the rebellious and beligerent stance towards Martin (imagine trying to stifle free press)....but the way they grilled Duceppe for attacking Harper....boy, they kept on hammering at Duceppe and persisted that it's because of the polls that he (Duceppe) is trying to implicate Harper in the Options Canada. Duceppe was practically being placed on the defensive by the media! The media seem to be aiding Harper...."innoculating" him more from being harmed by the negative ads.

Just finished COUNTDOWN with M Duffy. Three radio announcers as guests. All said Liberals are really diving judging from all the calls they've been getting. One announcer commented that with all the serious blunders, Martin seems "unstable." I don't think he meant Martin's unstable position in the polls right now.

So far, all we hear (and that includes you) is what the Liberals want us to hear and believe. How can you possibly say with certainty that we are going to get chump change in return for selling out the nation and its social values if we go for the Conservatives? We have not even tried Harper yet. See, here's where the difference is between you and I. Your "boogeyman" is still just a figment of your imagination. My boogeyman is already here! They've been in power for 12 years. I can say with certainty...and with honest conviction....that we all got chump changed by the Liberals in return because of those who persisted in selling out the nation. C'mon Eureka. I know deep in your heart you want a change too. Take the plunge....and be assured in the knowledge that if ever the Conservatives do the same old crooked Liberal-trick, we, as voters, can as easily replace them.

That's a pretty sweeping statement from someone who is quite obviously a CPC supporter. As such, how is it that you would be aware of the thoughts and feelings of ALL Liberal supporters??? Have you conducted a nation-wide poll that we don't know about??? Would you care to cite a site supporting this wild claim??? Gee, from the way you're addressing him, and the condescending tone of your post, it certainly seems that there is at least one Conservative who doesn't like him. How quickly you forget Carolyn Parish and her sweeping "I hate those American bastards!" Did we hear any strong castigation from Martin? Nah. Then Carolyn did that parody on TV. He needed to be pressured by an outraged and emabarrassed public before he slapped her wrist weakly. If I sounded condescending, it was as I've explained to USA_Liberal, I was misled by the message of his post.

That topic was about Ads....at least that's what the title said. Unfortunately, I do not have a lot of time to spend to read everything. Besides, my concern is about the intimidation of the press. Although it is somewhat related to the negative ads, I do not wish for the topic on negative ads to branch to another direction (intimidation of press).

CTV aired the newsclip on Mike Duffy versus John Duffy. It's much worst than I said above. At the end of his statement, Mike Duufy sternly said: "We will not be intimidated as journalists!"

A letter was written by a soldier, and excerpts of it were read by a reporter on TV. The gist of the letter was that "I am fighting for democracy and offering my life for my country...suddenly I am being portrayed as someone who will harm my own cities." Of course John D said that ad does not count since "it was not aired." NDP strategist said, "then how come on the net, it says, 'paid for by the Liberals Party'? Both strategists demand that Martin should at least apologize to the military. John D insists Martin will not apologize for something that was not aired.

Last night, right after the debate, Mike Duffy was talking with John Duffy (Libereral strategist) and two other strategists from Conservative and NDP. Mike D asked who's idea was it to make that ad (Military). John D said, "Marin talked of several points in the Debate (enumerated some)....but why do you keep talking about that ad? (Here is where Mike D got ANGRY. I mean, you see his face really red...and was trying to hold his temper since they're live on TV. HE was pointing a finger at John and really blasted him) Mike D: "Why do I keep taliking about it? Why? Because this is all about INTEGRITY, John! This is important information and the people have a right to know! Just a while ago YOU TRIED TO INTIMIDATE ME FROM BRINGING THIS UP ON THE SHOW!" (Yes, he clearly said, "INTIMIDATE" me!) Mike D. looked flushed and you could tell, still angry...throughout the rest of the show. At first I thought John D had already walked out....but later, he was still there....but you could tell, John was subdued. It had been commented to before about the attempt to stop the press from bringing up scandal questions, or trying to influence the media. And as I've said before....there is some sort of brewing hostility....and rebellion coming from reporters). I wonder if this incident will come up in the news or be talked about? My God, this is scary.....when a governing party is practicing this kind of censorship....towards the press, especially....wake up, Canada!

USA_LIBERAL, On a lighter note, my first reaction when I read your post was : Boy, an American moving to Canada? My reply then would've been: You think being a Democrat makes a difference here? The Liberals hate ALL Americans! Ironically, now that you're here....the ones you don't like (Conservatives) are the only ones who like you.

Of course it was an insult to "a lot of Canadians", if taken to mean as it was printed. And I say A LOT of Canadians, for majority have said that they want a change of government. And CORRUPTIONS was the one reason resonating and echoing all over Canada! It must indeed be the level of intelligence and understanding of the "average" Canadian who is proving that he can be fooled and bought...or of the new moral standard that no longer sees anything wrong with corruptions....that only abet and encourage the gradual decay of our society.

Sir/Ma'am....what you're saying is an insult to a lot of Canadians. Since you had just recently turned your back on your own country.....using a president you don't like as a convenient excuse....it is understandable that your values may not be the same with a lot of Canadians. Corruptions is not part of Canadian values. We show our love of country by trying to stop it from destroying our system. We do not just abandon our country that easily....whether we like the one who sits in power or not. Let me straighten up a few things here. both my parents are Canadian born, and although i never aquired a canadian passport, by law, the citizenship was always there. i have not abandoned my country. my love for both sides of the border are the same. George Bush's policies in itself didn't play a role in my move here. It included the appeal of Canadian values, excluding Conservative viewpoints. Of course corruption is not a part of Canadian values, i never said that. It is rare in Canada, all I suggest is that the conservatives are so desperate that they will milk out every drop of the corruption card to get elected. My point was not to say that the Liberal party reflects Canada's corruption, rather to point out that to me, and many other Canadians Stephen Harper is a scary guy. A friend yesterday suggested to me that he'd rather vote for the devil that he knows as supposed to the one that he doesn't. what canadian values are you specifically talking about ? lets clear the air. hope to hear from you soon. It's good that you've straightened that out. Your topic title plus the post was misleading. Integrity, family, honesty....those are the values I'm talking about.

Martin tried to censor the reporters! And iy's been commented by quite a few. No wonder there's been some hostility coming from the press now.

I was watching the early news this morning and two journalists (one from Montreal) are predicting that Harper will win some seats in Quebec. Monteal guy says there's really some movements in Quebec. I don't know when this interview with them was conducted...I'm only assuming it was sometime after the debate. I guess it's still too soon to assume anything at this point....boy, this is stressful. For me.

Nevertheless, Harper's response was brilliant. He stressed on the danger of giving absolute power to the courts....and equal danger of giving absolute power to Parliament. He stressed the importance of balance. Martin is the one who really sounds scary to me.

Analyst/strategist said that a very likely scenario will have the Liberals going on an all-out blitz attack on Harper AFTER the debates....when it will be hard on Harper to respond.

Sir/Ma'am....what you're saying is an insult to a lot of Canadians. Since you had just recently turned your back on your own country.....using a president you don't like as a convenient excuse....it is understandable that your values may not be the same with a lot of Canadians. Corruptions is not part of Canadian values. We show our love of country by trying to stop it from destroying our system. We do not just abandon our country that easily....whether we like the one who sits in power or not.

Boy, it's a good thing Robert Redford and that Alex whats-his-name did not move this side of the border....or we'll never hear the end of the whining.

I think this took away from Captain Canada's rant, it made the viewer watch Duceppe instead of listenenig to Martin. Probably got a chuckle from Bloc supporters. It took away from Martin's on camera time because everyone was watching Duceppe's facial expressions. Including the camera. They weren't so strange ... just facial variations on the gallic shrug. Yes! It was a clever way of "rebutting" what Martin was saying. It really was a scene-stealer.

I don't know...he seemed too "VOTE NDP!" for me. He was like that in the last election. He kind of goes into these uncomfortable poses. He is like that Video Professor person on infomercials...too "Buy ME, BUY ME!" Wow! Yes! I was trying to think who he reminds me of.....you're right! Even that posture and way of looking at the camera! It's the video professor!

Martin - Desperate. Duceppe - entertainingly direct. I like his style. Came out honest and with integrity. But he is a separatist. Layton - He's like a commercial break. Everytime he spoke, he always end up with that direct sales pitch. It was annoying. Dodged the "Swingers Club" -values question. Fuzzy areas around this guy. Harper - Direct, focused and with believable goals. I felt he really knows what he is planning and doing, thus he gave me a feeling of confidence about him. He may not match the breezy ease at which Martin dealt with the debate,....but then, I don't hold it against him, for he is still new at this. He did not resort to cheap theatrics and bogus passion to grab attention. His vision and his platform..and his believable resolve in doing what he is promising did that. And his smiles .....you could almost hear the strategists reminding him, "don't forget to smile!" His effort at it was just poignantly endearing.

Journalists after the debate were saying Martin flip-flopped with thie not-withstanding clause. That at the first debate, barely three weks ago, he said exactly the opposite. They all dismised this sudden, bizarre announcement, as a sign of desperation.