Conservative attack ads

[DrGreenthumb]

Martin's shameful last gasps of how Harper's hidden agenda was going to destroy Canada......soldiers in the cities - we're no making this up.

What would you call uniformed guys with guns fighting a "war on drugs" if not not soldiers?

Not really that big of a stretch.

And Monty don't tell Tony Clement that the Liberals want to hire "drug dealers" because we don't want Pharma-Tony in the Liberal cabinet either.

[Progressive Tory]

And Monty don't tell Tony Clement that the Liberals want to hire "drug dealers" because we don't want Pharma-Tony in the Liberal cabinet either.

I don't think Clement has anymore room in his pockets after running Ontario's healthcare (into the ground) He wore a sweatshirt that said "I can be bought, but I don't come cheap'. He think he still has it.

$30M spent on security for Harper since 2006

"Harper's security costs totalled $10.7 million during his first year in office and rose to nearly $13 million in the 2007-08 fiscal year, according to documents obtained by The Canadian Press through Access to Information laws." It borders on paranoia

[normanchateau]

I see no problem with Harper's attack ads as long as Ignatieff responds with attack ads. Among Dion's many strategic errors was not allowing his campaign workers to engage in negative advertising:

http://www2.canada.com/victoriatimescoloni...8a-140b3068208f

Harper will fire in desperation with all the ammunition he has. Ignatieff's challenge will be to fire back. Given Harper's long history of boneheaded decisions and hypocrisy, it should not be a difficult challenge. Perhaps Canadians will finally learn of Harper's membership in the Northern Foundation.

[fellowtraveller]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090301/...ies_tackle_iggy

Looks like Harper the mad dog sociopath is back.

He learned everything he needed to know from Jean Chretien.

[capricorn]

"Harper's security costs totalled $10.7 million during his first year in office and rose to nearly $13 million in the 2007-08 fiscal year, according to documents obtained by The Canadian Press through Access to Information laws."

It just goes to show you how lazy the media is today. Not a peep about the personal security costs of previous PMs to offer a comparison. A similar story, also dated October 2008, appeared in the Toronto Star. At least the Star added this:

"Comparable costs to provide security for previous prime ministers were not immediately available."

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/525056

It borders on paranoia

The risk assessment for Harper's personal security is conducted by the RCMP, not the Prime Minister. So if there is paranoia it is the RCMPs paranoia, not Harper's. But don't let that get in the way of an opportunity to slag Harper.

[KingIggy]

I was a Progressive Conservative, something Harper calls an oxymoron; which was more to the centre. That party was disbanded, but I never liked Paul Martin as a PM (Only as a finance minister) and for awhile voted NDP. I turned away from Harper when he said that Canada should be in Iraq, but completely turned off him when he went on a rant against Canadians to save his job, and ran a campaign based entirely on lies.

Now that the Liberals have a just left of centre leader, I'm backing Ignatieff. I worked on Flora MacDonald's campaign when she represented Kingston. If I lived in Sweden I would probably join the Feminist Party. Fortunately, with Ignatieff, women won't have to worry about fighting for our rights.

I recently joined the Liberal Party and will do what I can to promote the Party locally. I haven't really been inspired since Flora retired, but am now inspired again. I will no longer have to hold my nose when I vote.

Rationality and measured moderation, as opposed to Neo-Con insanity.

Same reason Joe Clark opposed Harper and clan from day one.

[jdobbin]

He learned everything he needed to know from Jean Chretien.

Except how to win a majority.

[bush_cheney2004]

Except how to win a majority.

...but not how to lose one in a hurry.

[Oleg Bach]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090301/...ies_tackle_iggy

Looks like Harper the mad dog sociopath is back.

So Iggy is full of empathy - compassion - love and social benevolence - put it aside that he is a cut throat opportunist and a career careerist - just another sociopath with a Harvard book smarts - Harvard is the home of all sociopathy....is that a law school?

[jbg]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090301/...ies_tackle_iggy

Looks like Harper the mad dog sociopath is back.

More name-calling, just what you attack? Touche.

[jbg]

Rationality and measured moderation, as opposed to Neo-Con insanity.

Same reason Joe Clark opposed Harper and clan from day one.

Joe Who? Never heard of that one.

[jbg]

He is a sociopath because he keeps repeating what hasn't worked in the past at getting him a majority.

A sociopath means someone with no conscience, who can lie and be sincere about it. Examples are Bernie Madoff, Bill Clinton.

Why not learn something about psychology?

[Progressive Tory]

I see no problem with Harper's attack ads as long as Ignatieff responds with attack ads. Harper will fire in desperation with all the ammunition he has. Ignatieff's challenge will be to fire back. Given Harper's long history of boneheaded decisions and hypocrisy, it should not be a difficult challenge.

The general concensus in reading comments from newspapeprs, etc. is that people are appalled that during an economic crisis, our Prime Minister has made going after Ignatieff a priority, just because he's gaining on him in the polls. I thought Stevie said he would never allow polls to affect the way he governs. (I wish something would)

So far Ignatieff has not taken the bait, with all the 'American' and 30 years in the U.S. nonsense, because frankly, that's what it is. Nonsense.

If the Cons bring out the big guns now, I say let them fire; because Canadians won't like getting caught in the crossfire of a war that Harper promised us wouldn't take place. Besides, they'll eventually run out of ammo and will have nothing left for the real battle of an election.

I say bring it on, because the only thing Ignatieff needs to do is remind Canadians that Harper really doesn't give a damn about anything other than winning, and the Canadian people be damned. Conservative attack ads will work against the Conservatives.

[Progressive Tory]

So Iggy is full of empathy - compassion - love and social benevolence - put it aside that he is a cut throat opportunist and a career careerist - just another sociopath with a Harvard book smarts - Harvard is the home of all sociopathy....is that a law school?

He got his PhD at Harvard and ran the Human Rights Dep's for five years. Cut throat opportunist? He's not the one planning attack ads in the middle of an economic crisis, but instead wants to focus on that economic crisis. How dare he put Canadians first, that 'careeer careerist', whatever in hell that's supposed to mean.

Ignatieff was a journaist, author and filmmaker who was offered teaching positions at Ivy League Universities. It wasn't the other way around.

[Progressive Tory]

...the only thing that will get Harper out of office is the same thing that got the liberals out - scandal....and the PM is fully aware of that and guarding against it....It's evident that the "law suit' seemed to have worked - everyone got gagged.

Then jhang onto to your hat because it's going to be a rough ride.

Many believe the "In and Out" investigation was launched by the Liberals, but it started with a forged receipt presented by a Conservative cabinet minister for payment. The clerk entering the information noticed that one looked completely different from others for the same PR firm. They contacted the firm and learned that that I had not isssued it but suggested that someone borrowed the document, used white out on the numbers and then photocopied it, filling in their own figures. This caused them to look further, and guess what? Oh, oh!

All those boxes are sitting waiting to be opened and when they are, you might want to duck.

[MontyBurns]

I recently joined the Liberal Party and will do what I can to promote the Party locally.

Perhaps you can find some Liberal-friendly ad agencies locally to help promote the party.

[Progressive Tory]

who can lie and be sincere about it.

That describes the entire Conservative campaign to keep their jobs. It was one lie after another until Canadians woke up and realized that this was not a 'coup' anymore than it was a 'coup' when Harper himself tried it in 2004. He lied about the flags. He lied about the legality. He lied about Duceppe being part of the coalition (though Harper did include Duceppe in 2004)

Maybe, by your definition at least, he really is a sociopath. He sure sounded sincere when he was lying through his teeth. I thought he was just a hypocrite, but maybe it really is a mental disorder.

[Progressive Tory]

Perhaps you can find some Liberal-friendly ad agencies locally to help promote the party.

Don't need to. Harper's attack ads will do it for us.

[fellowtraveller]

Don't need to. Harper's attack ads will do it for us.

Our leading Liberal apologist resents the lack of funding that keeps the Liberals from keeping their tradition of sleaze up on the airwaves.

What is it about the Libertal Party that prevents ordinary Candians from sending them a loonie or two?

[Progressive Tory]

Our leading Liberal apologist resents the lack of funding that keeps the Liberals from keeping their tradition of sleaze up on the airwaves.

What is it about the Libertal Party that prevents ordinary Candians from sending them a loonie or two?

I've been sending them money recently; the first time I ever did that. I'm inspired and am not alone. They're doing OK and are prepared for an election.

However, what is it with the Conservative Party that they have no clue about the Canadian people? What part of we don't like attack ads, don't they understand?

We don't have to counter-attack because Canadians won't be listening to the Conservatives who have just given them one more reason to vote for anyone but. They have strange priorities and twisted logic. A bit too much Karl Rove I'm afraid.

When Harper's 1997 speech surfaced, I was surprised at his views, but what shocked me more was the fact that he was once President of the National Citizens' Coaltion. It wasn't his speech but his affiliation. I wouldn't have known about it if it had not been for that speech.

As the Cons pick apart Ignatieff's books, films and lectures, they will only remind us that he was an esteemed Journalist, professor at Ivy League Universities and wrote award winning books. Hardly anything to be ashamed of, or feel the need to hide.

I can't believe they're that desperate.

Edited March 3, 2009 by Progressive Tory

[Oleg Bach]

Ivy League means nothing. The writer that is impressed by this is also impressed by the super wealthy also - some of who are not respectable nor ethical - we don't know who Ignateiff is yet. Those that hold up men and woman as idols because they are the top of the acedemic heap are foolish - you can not install ethics though education - It is installed in the home...not saying that Iggy is not ethical - but he may just be a highly educated fool.

[madmax]

I've been sending them money recently; the first time I ever did that. I'm inspired and am not alone. They're doing OK and are prepared for an election.

http://www.punditsguide.ca/2009/02/exploring-iggy-effect.php

Lib $3,231,006.16

NDP $1,909,073.49

Grn $666,909.02

BQ $261,168.10

Cons $7,863,803.1

Enjoy.

The link to Pundits Guide above tabulates the 4th Quarter 2008 Elections Canada filings for contributions and cross tabs across parties and time. While it already does not look good for the Liberals ability to mount election campaigns, I took out the distorting effects of the leadership campaigns and made the following observation.

The 4th quarter included election contributions, which are a different animal. In the first 3 quarters of 2008 with the leadership contributions taken out, the Liberal Party raised the same $2.4 million it did in the first 3 quarters of 2007 [already a poor year]. By comparison the NDP raised $3.7 million in the same time period.

Even during an election, one third of the 4th quarter contributions received were for leadership campaigns! Net those out and the Liberal Party only raised, $1.5 million during an election [vs. $1.9M for the NDP, let alone $6.3 M for the Conservatives].

Counter to what I would have expected, even the Liberals election fundraising dropped precipitously. Taking two quarters around the election looks not quite as bad- and the situation was comparable to the 2 quarters around the 2006 election.

But even with the help of that more flattering lens, the Liberal Party raised under $3M in and around the 2008 election [leadership contributions netted out of totals reported], versus $5.1M raised in the 2 quarters around the 2006 election.

Edited March 3, 2009 by madmax

[Oleg Bach]

Ivy League means nothing. The writer that is impressed by this is also impressed by the super wealthy also - some of who are not respectable nor ethical - we don't know who Ignateiff is yet. Those that hold up men and woman as idols because they are the top of the acedemic heap are foolish ---also: When an acedemic recieves awards for his "books" these honours are not bestowed on him by that average Canadian citizen - but the wards are given to acedemics by other acedemics --- kind of a self perpetuating vanity press awards system. Why do people look up so highly to those with letters after their names? The world is full of them - and the world still has most if it's problems unsolved by these types ...I want some honest and pragmatic person in charge and I don't care if they are illiterate as long as they are wise and intelligent and of service.

[MontyBurns]

Our leading Liberal apologist resents the lack of funding that keeps the Liberals from keeping their tradition of sleaze up on the airwaves.

What is it about the Libertal Party that prevents ordinary Candians from sending them a loonie or two?

Funny that nobody wants to send the liberals money. Perhaps the scandals and corruption have something to do with it.

[Oleg Bach]

Funny that nobody wants to send the liberals money. Perhaps the scandals and corruption have something to do with it.

Liberals are cheap - they love to talk about social equality but will still want to shut down the local strip joint in their newly gentrified neighbourhood - those nasty poor strippers ----- heaven forbid that someone has to actually hand over a dollar to a working mother of two...nope - the liberal would rather welfare it to death.