Liberal Attack Ads

[shoop]

Why? Because they said it? Why not check out elections canada then?

Shoop... we both know that all of his contributors have not been named.

We also heard the other three leaders say the same thing last night. Come on.

[newbie]

http://www.elections.ca/scripts/webpep/fin...tributions.aspx

well, I tried.

[tml12]

You know, I don't bye into the religious groups thing. Yes I know that Harper is right of centre. That being said, I don't believe all this Liberal garbage that the man is right of right of right...

When I was a teenager, I was a socialist. Now, I am centre-right. People can change

[BubberMiley]

If Harper was in the United States he'd be considered, in all likelihood, a moderate Democrat. His position on same sex marriage would put him on the left wing of the Democratic Party. His position on health care would put him on the left wing of the Democratic Party. His position on abortion is moderate enough to put him anywhere from centre to centre right of the Democrats.

If he was in the UK he'd be somewhere between the centre of British Tories, and the centre right of the Liberals.

Even in Canada none of his positions are particularly shocking or right wing. Unless, of course, you consider every Canadian who doesn't believe in same sex marriage to be "way out there" on the right.

Once again, you're deliberately forgetting every position he had prior to 2004. Do you think a former president of the NCC, an organization founded by Colin M. Brown to fight against the creation of public healthcare, could logically fall under "the left wing of the Democratic Party" unless he's just lying to get elected?

Someone whose positions fall somewhere in the centre-left of the Democratic Party would never have said "Your country (the USA) and particularly your conservative movement, is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world."

You're either very naive, or you're also willing to misrepresent Harper to get him elected.

[newbie]

You know, I don't bye into the religious groups thing. Yes I know that Harper is right of centre. That being said, I don't believe all this Liberal garbage that the man is right of right of right...

When I was a teenager, I was a socialist. Now, I am centre-right. People can change

And how old was Harper just a few years ago? Not exactly a teenager. It have been my experience that the lefties have more openness to change, not the other way around.

[Shakeyhands]

I find it funny that the Conservatives are acting all haughty and incensed at the "Attack" ads that contain quotes from the leadership and supporters of the CPC... I hardly think they have the moral authority to complain about

“unprecedented” attack ads they say are dishonest and mean-spirited.

They have smeared the entire Liberal party as crooks and liars from the get go even though an independent judge found no evidence of wrong doing beyond those named in the Gomery Commission report.

It's plain funny, also not e that the CPC is using the Republican gambit of saying the party is in disarray....

Attack ads inflame Tories

oh and btw... the CPC isn't the Tories, they are the Reform/Alliance.

[Canuck E Stan]

It have been my experience that the lefties have more openness to change, not the other way around.

Your right there,lately we have seen the lefties change their mind every day.

[scribblet]

Why? Because they said it? Why not check out elections canada then?

Shoop... we both know that all of his contributors have not been named.

We also heard the other three leaders say the same thing last night. Come on.

It wasn't required to reveal leadership donations then, but somewhere I saw a link on it, Harper did reveal them. I'll be darned if I can find it now.

[Hicksey]

I find it funny that the Conservatives are acting all haughty and incensed at the "Attack" ads that contain quotes from the leadership and supporters of the CPC... I hardly think they have the moral authority to complain about

“unprecedented” attack ads they say are dishonest and mean-spirited.

They have smeared the entire Liberal party as crooks and liars from the get go even though an independent judge found no evidence of wrong doing beyond those named in the Gomery Commission report.

It's plain funny, also not e that the CPC is using the Republican gambit of saying the party is in disarray....

Attack ads inflame Tories

oh and btw... the CPC isn't the Tories, they are the Reform/Alliance.

The only reason nobody has been arrested is because they refuse to name the people who took the stolen money into their campaigns.

[BubberMiley]

You know, I don't bye into the religious groups thing. Yes I know that Harper is right of centre. That being said, I don't believe all this Liberal garbage that the man is right of right of right...

When I was a teenager, I was a socialist. Now, I am centre-right. People can change

But don't you find it a little convenient that Harper's image as a moderate conservative coincided directly with his leadership of the CPC? You don't have to believe the "Liberal garbage" TML, just look at every bloody thing the guy said prior to 2004. It seems you're being deliberately naive in the vain hope of finding a politician you agree with.

And people can change, yes, that's true. But people with well thought-out beliefs (and yes, Harper is no ideological slouch) do not change with the wind. They just make it appear so to become elected.

[shoop]

Look how far back the Liberals had to go for the speech Martin attempted to hammer at.

Since that speech Martin has flipped on:

BMD

SSM

Iraq

Changing views isn't exclusive to Harper...

But don't you find it a little convenient that Harper's image as a moderate conservative coincided directly with his leadership of the CPC?

And people can change, yes, that's true. But people with well thought-out beliefs (and yes, Harper is no ideological slouch) do not change with the wind. They just make it appear so to become elected.

[BubberMiley]

I would believe Harper has changed his views if he had indicated he has changed his views. Fortunately, he's not as hypocritical as his apologists.

[tml12]

You know, I don't bye into the religious groups thing. Yes I know that Harper is right of centre. That being said, I don't believe all this Liberal garbage that the man is right of right of right...

When I was a teenager, I was a socialist. Now, I am centre-right. People can change

But don't you find it a little convenient that Harper's image as a moderate conservative coincided directly with his leadership of the CPC? You don't have to believe the "Liberal garbage" TML, just look at every bloody thing the guy said prior to 2004. It seems you're being deliberately naive in the vain hope of finding a politician you agree with.

And people can change, yes, that's true. But people with well thought-out beliefs (and yes, Harper is no ideological slouch) do not change with the wind. They just make it appear so to become elected.

I am not ignorant as to every quote Harper said. They were idiotic quotes that were foolishly said.

Yet, he has promised to renew federalism (we are badly in need of it) and put his money where his mouth his on a variety of issues that matter to Canadians. And I am ready to give him the benefit of the doubt.

[uOttawaMan]

It's all just bs for the apathetic, uninterested masses, who don't try to learn about the issues, who just listen to their TV.

Just put whatever you have to on the TV to get them all to vote for you and you win.

[Guest eureka]

How is federalism renewed by destroying it?

[Canuck E Stan]

How is federalism renewed by destroying it?

Good question to ask Martin, as he shows Quebecers marshall law/anti-military ads, but doesn't show them in English Canada.

Great message to send to Canadians for the federalist cause.

What kind of federalist message is this?

No wonder Captain Canada keeps tripping on his cape and can't get off the ground.

[Harare]

I'm quite sure that Harper's hidden funding was at least as large as the $300 million that disappeared into brown envelopes in Quebec. You Libs are pathetic, trying to make something out of this while conveniently ignoring 33 odd RCMP investigations.

I wonder how much money Paul Martin Steamship lines saved thru tax avoidance by using a loophole his Finance Dept created ?

[Hicksey]

You know, I don't bye into the religious groups thing. Yes I know that Harper is right of centre. That being said, I don't believe all this Liberal garbage that the man is right of right of right...

When I was a teenager, I was a socialist. Now, I am centre-right. People can change

And how old was Harper just a few years ago? Not exactly a teenager. It have been my experience that the lefties have more openness to change, not the other way around.

After the outright lie about the military, I think the integrity of all the ads is called into question.

If they lied once, there ... as well as the many, many times over the last 12 years about what they have promised Canadians they would do once elected -- I'm inclined to believe the remaining 11 ads are lies or misrepresentations just the same.

After that one, I think its on the Liberals to provide proof for each or rescind each they cannot provide proof for.

[mar]

After the outright lie about the military, I think the integrity of all the ads is called into question.

If they lied once, there ... as well as the many, many times over the last 12 years about what they have promised Canadians they would do once elected -- I'm inclined to believe the remaining 11 ads are lies or misrepresentations just the same.

After that one, I think its on the Liberals to provide proof for each or rescind each they cannot provide proof for.

That's not very logical is it?

First, the principal thing about the military ad was the incompetence of presentation. Nobody is disputing Mr. Harper did talk about and increased military presence in Canadian cities.

All of the other ads are referenced and with a little digging you can find the source when not explicitly provided. You can certainly argue Harper was not responsible for what a conservative columnment in the Washjington Times said about him but then Martin shouldn't be held responsible for what conservative columnnists say about him either and these form a major part of the Conservative attack ads.

What I find totally bizarre on the military ad is why didnt they just say that if Stephen Harper had been PM in 2003, Canadian troops would have served and died in Iraq. Can't argue with that and Harper's recent turn around (WT reply DEC-11) that he no longer supports the Iraq invasion and was misled by the intelligence begs the question as to why Cretien, McCallum, Layton and the majority of the Canadian public weren't misled. Is Harper admitting he is dumber/more gullible/has less judgement than better than 1 out of 2 Canadians? If that's the case if we forget the election and pick someone off the street to be PM we have a better than 50-50 chance of getting a PM with better judgement than Harper.

The more serious question is was he so eager to support Conservative inspiration George Bush that he didn't care if CAF personnel died for an invasion the Canadian public did not support and the U.N. didn't sanction.? Its one thing to say you support the military, another to accept the responsibility that goes with it and principal among the responsibilities is to not put troops in harm's way without sufficient reason.

[wellandboy]

After the outright lie about the military, I think the integrity of all the ads is called into question.

If they lied once, there ... as well as the many, many times over the last 12 years about what they have promised Canadians they would do once elected -- I'm inclined to believe the remaining 11 ads are lies or misrepresentations just the same.

After that one, I think its on the Liberals to provide proof for each or rescind each they cannot provide proof for.

That's not very logical is it?

First, the principal thing about the military ad was the incompetence of presentation. Nobody is disputing Mr. Harper did talk about and increased military presence in Canadian cities.

All of the other ads are referenced and with a little digging you can find the source when not explicitly provided. You can certainly argue Harper was not responsible for what a conservative columnment in the Washjington Times said about him but then Martin shouldn't be held responsible for what conservative columnnists say about him either and these form a major part of the Conservative attack ads.

What I find totally bizarre on the military ad is why didnt they just say that if Stephen Harper had been PM in 2003, Canadian troops would have served and died in Iraq. Can't argue with that and Harper's recent turn around (WT reply DEC-11) that he no longer supports the Iraq invasion and was misled by the intelligence begs the question as to why Cretien, McCallum, Layton and the majority of the Canadian public weren't misled. Is Harper admitting he is dumber/more gullible/has less judgement than better than 1 out of 2 Canadians? If that's the case if we forget the election and pick someone off the street to be PM we have a better than 50-50 chance of getting a PM with better judgement than Harper.

The more serious question is was he so eager to support Conservative inspiration George Bush that he didn't care if CAF personnel died for an invasion the Canadian public did not support and the U.N. didn't sanction.? Its one thing to say you support the military, another to accept the responsibility that goes with it and principal among the responsibilities is to not put troops in harm's way without sufficient reason.

Nice try at deflection and misdirection. It does not address the ad in question, but then again you guys are good at this.

[mar]

Nice try at deflection and misdirection. It does not address the ad in question, but then again you guys are good at this.

Must be very serene to be so devoid of morals that you dismiss either a total lack of judgement or a cynical ploy to cement ties with U.S. conservatives as "deflection and misdirection."

Not quite sure who "you guys" are. Point of the ad was covered in 1 sentence: the ad was ill conceived and badly executed. Nobody disputes Harper said he wanted a greater CAF presence in uran centres. The text of the ad is suggestive but factually correct but the ad was so badly done it was not clear whether it was directed at the Conservative party or the CAF which I presume (not being a Liberal insider or even party member) was why it was not intended for release.

[stignasty]

The conservative "balloon ad" trumpets:

"Ten years ago Paul Martin predicted our streets would be safer but drug crime is up, the homicide rate is up, and more and more guns are being smuggled across the border."

In the ten years that statscan has records:

Homicide is down, violent crime in total is down, "offensive weapons" crimes are down.

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050721/d050721a.htm

Naturally, the liberal-biased media has completely ignored that this ad is completely without merit in its attacks against Paul Martin.

Nor has the media looked at the effect of mandatory minimum sentences that the ad trumpets. The US experience has been increased costs building new prisons because the only real difference they've made is in the rate of incarceration.

*

[Hicksey]

After the outright lie about the military, I think the integrity of all the ads is called into question.

If they lied once, there ... as well as the many, many times over the last 12 years about what they have promised Canadians they would do once elected -- I'm inclined to believe the remaining 11 ads are lies or misrepresentations just the same.

After that one, I think its on the Liberals to provide proof for each or rescind each they cannot provide proof for.

That's not very logical is it?

First, the principal thing about the military ad was the incompetence of presentation. Nobody is disputing Mr. Harper did talk about and increased military presence in Canadian cities.

All of the other ads are referenced and with a little digging you can find the source when not explicitly provided. You can certainly argue Harper was not responsible for what a conservative columnment in the Washjington Times said about him but then Martin shouldn't be held responsible for what conservative columnnists say about him either and these form a major part of the Conservative attack ads.

What I find totally bizarre on the military ad is why didnt they just say that if Stephen Harper had been PM in 2003, Canadian troops would have served and died in Iraq. Can't argue with that and Harper's recent turn around (WT reply DEC-11) that he no longer supports the Iraq invasion and was misled by the intelligence begs the question as to why Cretien, McCallum, Layton and the majority of the Canadian public weren't misled. Is Harper admitting he is dumber/more gullible/has less judgement than better than 1 out of 2 Canadians? If that's the case if we forget the election and pick someone off the street to be PM we have a better than 50-50 chance of getting a PM with better judgement than Harper.

The more serious question is was he so eager to support Conservative inspiration George Bush that he didn't care if CAF personnel died for an invasion the Canadian public did not support and the U.N. didn't sanction.? Its one thing to say you support the military, another to accept the responsibility that goes with it and principal among the responsibilities is to not put troops in harm's way without sufficient reason.

It is perfectly logical. That ad purposely misled people into thinking that elected Harper would invoke some kind of martial law upon our cities. It's not about what Harper said. It's all about how the Liberals took the message and twisted into some fearmongering message.

It's one thing to simply quote people in your attack ads like the conservatives have been doing. Its another altogether to do what these ads are. The Swiftboat Vets were nicer to John Kerry than this -- and it was widely believed those were some of the more negative ads ever aired. And the fact is that Martin said twice today that he did authorize the ads before he decided that he didn't. (A la John Kerry. If you followed that election you'll see the irony and humor in that last sentence)

As for the Iraq bit, Canada is a slave to the UN. If the UN went with Bush we would have been there -- Chretien or no Chretien. And that's not to mention that it was widely reported at the time that because of the peacekeeping duties we were already performing at the time we wouldn't have the resources to send anyway. So giving Chretien credit for not making a decision that he couldn't make is like patting someone on the back for taking a breath.

[geoffrey]

I like that message in your signature line there Hicksey, it really is sad when the Liberals have to insist in their ads they aren't lying.

As well, none of these ads actually say anything.

They all have the "We just don't know." line. How ridiculous of an attack is that? I don't know what your up to, so your evil? We all know what can be said about those that assume .Maybe the Liberals should read up on some CPC policy and the hundreds of announcements made this campaign.

Then maybe they'd know.

He has said.

These attacks might have worked, if Harper hadn't come out with a very straight-forward set of policy announcements. It's too late to discredit him now.

[geoffrey]

Just to add to my last post. I just reviewed the "Mike Harris" ad.

Do the Liberals recognize their own record on the issues they present?

Environmental Neglect (The increased emissions, higher than the Americans, ect.)

Crumbling schools (Just ask any post-secondary student)

Crumbling hospitals (Ever been to Calgary, we have 3 hospitals for a million people)

Shattered Social Programs (Such as EI being robbed, ect.)

I realise schools and hospitals are provincial issues, and I can't really hold the Liberals to task on them. However, I then also can't see how they can say Harper will destroy them either.

I can't really see how our schools or hospitals could get any worse.