More Harper hypocrisy

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Actually, I think the attack ads have more to do with showing Turdeau to be a debutante with his head in fantasyland than being gay. Partisans just like adding spin, though, so they pop up shouting, "anti-gay", "bigotry", etc.
And speaking of partisans, Cobalt seems to have himself so worked into a lather that there's no way he's going to stop the demonizing propaganda crusade and he blatantly ignores the fact that Harpy isn't doing anything that the Gliberals have done before. So trying to get him/her to look at things from a balanced POV is futile.


Like I said, it's spin. Here's what the Star wrote with the spin they added in red: "A swirl of tiny little stars — reminiscent of Tinkerbell’s trail of sparkles — frames the Liberal leader. He’s shown with a goatee, open collar and his jacket slung over his shoulder.
The flyer produced for Conservative MPs to be sent to constituents contains several negative bullet points about Trudeau that are written in a cursive font, while the points lauding Prime Minister Stephen Harper are in a bolder print font.
The letter “i” in Trudeau’s first name is capped with a star in the Conservative materials — like a pre-teen girl might apply to her name."

IMO that's a pretty obvious and pathetic attempt at spin, too. Kind of what you'd expect from a high-school student writing a class assignment on editorialism. Definitely not professional journalism.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
Anyone who sees a gay connotation in this flyer has to be homophobic...

 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
Actually, I think the attack ads have more to do with showing Turdeau to be a debutante with his head in fantasyland than being gay. Partisans just like adding spin, though, so they pop up shouting, "anti-gay", "bigotry", etc.
And speaking of partisans, Cobalt seems to have himself so worked into a lather that there's no way he's going to stop the demonizing propaganda crusade and he blatantly ignores the fact that Harpy isn't doing anything that the Gliberals have done before. So trying to get him/her to look at things from a balanced POV is futile.

It was just my inital impression. When you didn't like someone in junior high, you called him a fag. This seems along those lines to me. I'm clearly not the only one to get the impression that the Tories are attacking Trudeau's mascuolinity. It's been remarked upon in other media. I didn't use the term anti-gay or bigotry. I used the term sophomoric, which I think fits better. It was on par with what I would expect o from a bunch of Grade 8's if I wanted them to put together a Trudeau attack ad for me.

That's my point of view. I think it's shared, as evidenced by some stories in the media, and also by the fact that so many Conservatives are distancing themselves from this.
 

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
I don't know how well Harper's Trudeau-is-a-fag pamphlets are going over. First off, they are pretty sophomoric in production for someone trying to come off as a statesman. Secondly, they were paid for by taxpayers. That wasn't smart. But perhaps most telling is a growing list of Conservative MPs who don't want anything to do with them and won't be sending them out.

Where do the pamphlets say that Turdoh is a homosexual?

Haven't even heard of any of these pamphlets; but let's be honest here - chances are that the Liberal love affair with baby-t is spilling over into the fantasy that he is equally accessible to Liberal men as he is to women.

Some people are just closet homophobic......can even happen to a liberal:lol:

I don't think sending out sophomoric Trudeau-is-a-fag pamphets paid for by taxpayers' dollars is going to appeal to that many swing voters. Certainly not in urban ridings, which are a growing constituency. A growing number of Consevative MPs don't want anything to do with these pamphelts.

Second time you say that....
How about posting one of those pamphlets so we can judge for ourselves whether it's for real or wishful thinking;-) on your part...

So it is, the second time. Ooops. In my defence--remarkably consistent with the first post at least. :lol:

I'm not going to do your research for you.

More Conservatvies are lining up against the taxpayer-funded attack pamphlet:

Further Trudeau attack ads roil Conservative ranks | Globalnews.ca

Our money for attack ads – how low can the Harper Conservatives go? - The Globe and Mail

It's a pretty sure sign your attack ads aren't going over well when your own party members don't want anything to do with them.

It's hard research when someone is BSing about a so called pamphlet calling Justin Trudeau gay.

Yes, I thik they made a couple of strategic errors. First off, using taxpayers' money to campaign is something that small "c" comnservatives don't like. It goes against your base. Second, to use a chess analogy, you don't move your queen at the start of the game. They should have moved a pawn.



It's hard researching when you only have two inklings. Unfortunately it takes eight inklings to make a clue. :lol:

Making crap up does little for your credibility.

Again, if you researched it, I'm not the first one to note that Harper is taking aim at Trudeau's masculinity--or lack thereof. The cursive princess script. The tinkerbell sprakles drawn around his head. The little star over the i in his first name. Psychologically, it's pretty blunt to all but the angriest of Angry Old White Guys. In my school days, a fag was anyone that lacked the requsitie masculinity deemed appropriate for 14 year olds. This is simpy along those lines.

And it's backfiring, for reasons mentioned above, in my opinion: it's not well produced, they used taxpayers money for it, and it's too over the top. There's a lot of Conservatvies MPs trying to distance themsleves from it.

I'm not going to offer another post to your lying and making crap up. You carry on.

Thanks for your permission, captain. :lol:


All ya had to say hon was that it was your opinion. There is no chance for your end run now. Best quit while you're behind. Have a shiny day.

 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
12,399
1,371
113
60
Alberta
Of course it is, when the Liberals received their majority government the official opposition was a party dedicated to dividing and possibly ending the country. The adversarial relationship in that House was largely due to the fact that had the Separatists won it might have been the end of the House. The conservatives under Harper are taking the same approach to the opposition that the Liberals did with none of the justification.

I hate to tell you this CK but the Bloc was only there for one term. After that the Reform Party was the official Op and after that the Canadian Alliance wwhich eventually became the CCP after Joe Clark stepped down. During that time and it was when the Reform was the official Op and well after the Referendum that the Liberal party started stuffing money into its pockets at the expense of the Canadian Taxpayer.

Here's the quickest link so that you can brush up:

The sponsorship scandal, "AdScam", "Sponsorship" or Sponsorgate, is a scandal that came as a result of a Canadian federal government "sponsorship program" in the province of Quebec and involving the Liberal Party of Canada, which was in power from 1993 to 2006. The program was originally established as an effort to raise awareness of the Government of Canada's contributions to Quebec industries and other activities in order to counter the actions of the Parti Québécois government of the province that worked to promote Quebec independence.
The program ran from 1996 until 2004, when broad corruption was discovered in its operations and the program was discontinued. Illicit and even illegal activities within the administration of the program were revealed, involving misuse and misdirection of public funds intended for government advertising in Quebec. Such misdirections included sponsorship money awarded to ad firms in return for little or no work, which firms maintained Liberal organizers or fundraisers on their payrolls or donated back part of the money to the Liberal Party. The resulting investigations and scandal affected the Liberal Party of Canada and the then-government of Prime Minister Paul Martin. It was an ongoing affair for years, but rose to national prominence in early 2004 after the program was examined by Sheila Fraser, the federal auditor general. Her revelations led to the Martin government establishing the Gomery Commission to conduct a public inquiry and file a report on the matter. The official title of this inquiry was the Commission of Inquiry into the Sponsorship Program and Advertising Activities. In the end the Commission concluded that $2 million was awarded in contracts without a proper bidding process, $250,000 was added to one contract price for no additional work, and $1.5 million was awarded for work that was never done, of which $1 million had to be repaid. The total cost of the Commission was $14 million.[1]
In the national spotlight, the scandal became a significant factor in the lead-up to the 2006 federal election when, after more than twelve years in power, the Liberals were defeated by the Conservatives, who formed a minority government that was sworn in February 2006.

Sure there was arrogance, there was also a lot of relief that we still had a country after the referendum. A lot of the bad behaviour that went on was a result of the Liberals still preparing to fight off another separatist movement in Quebec. It was two conservative majorities that led directly to the chaos that almost took Canada down.

You really are a revisionist aren't you. Ever heard of the Meech Lake or Charlottetown Accord. If anything, Mulroney was working overtime to try and please Quebec.

No it's not, the whole point of a democratic system isn't to make it possible for a very narrow interest group to hijack the system, it's to represent as broad a cross section of the population in the interests of building as strong a nation as possible. What we have under Mr. Harper is a control freak concentrating as much power as he can in one office no matter what the long term consequences to the country, even MPs in his own caucus are getting sick of it.

As I said, again and again and again and.... groan again. If Justin Trudeau does not have the stuff to put up with attack ads then he should head back to some school and teach home economics or become a male model. His old man wouldn't have flinched in the face of something like this, but then again he isn't 1/10th the leader his father was.

Anyway, I read the rest of your post, but I'm too exhausted to respond further and lets face it. You haven't heard a word I said anyhow.
 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
All ya had to say hon was that it was your opinion. There is no chance for your end run now. Best quit while you're behind. Have a shiny day.


It was absolutely my opinion. This is a place where people post their opinions. Surprise!

P.S.: Fag. :lol:
 

Cobalt_Kid

Council Member
Feb 3, 2007
1,760
17
38
I hate to tell you this CK but the Bloc was only there for one term. After that the Reform Party was the official Op and after that the Canadian Alliance wwhich eventually became the CCP after Joe Clark stepped down. During that time and it was when the Reform was the official Op and well after the Referendum that the Liberal party started stuffing money into its pockets at the expense of the Canadian Taxpayer.

Here's the quickest link so that you can brush up:

You make the separatist movement and referendum seem like such a minor thing, Canada barely avoided the same kind of division that took other nations apart in that era. And having another party that was talking about western sovereignty probably didn't help matters much.

You really are a revisionist aren't you. Ever heard of the Meech Lake or Charlottetown Accord. If anything, Mulroney was working overtime to try and please Quebec.

Ever hear of NAFTA, I've got plenty of American relatives and friends, more than a few of which were claiming we were about to become part of the US thanks to Mulroney. If the separatists had won that probably would have occurred. Mulroney didn't bring this country together, by the time he was done the conservative party disintegrated and the Bloq was the official opposition.

As I said, again and again and again and.... groan again. If Justin Trudeau does not have the stuff to put up with attack ads then he should head back to some school and teach home economics or become a male model. His old man wouldn't have flinched in the face of something like this, but then again he isn't 1/10th the leader his father was.

Anyway, I read the rest of your post, but I'm too exhausted to respond further and lets face it. You haven't heard a word I said anyhow.

And as I've repeated over and over, the government isn't there to be Mr. Harper's play thing, Canadians are getting tired of the endless games and no real vision for this country other than it becoming "Harper" Canada.
 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
It's your opinion now. Previously it was implied and spuriously defended as fact.


Umm, no. It was opinion. I said other media had pointed it out--that's the extent I defended it as fact.. That doesn't mean it's fact; that just means some other people have the same opinion, so it may not be unreasonable.

Swing-and-a-miss.
 
Last edited:

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
12,399
1,371
113
60
Alberta
Ever hear of NAFTA, I've got plenty of American relatives and friends, more than a few of which were claiming we were about to become part of the US thanks to Mulroney. If the separatists had won that probably would have occurred. Mulroney didn't bring this country together, by the time he was done the conservative party disintegrated and the Bloq was the official opposition.

Why yes, yes I have heard of NAFTA.

Kim Campbell led the PC party into the 1993 where they were decimated by the Liberal Party under Jean Chretienhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Chrétien, who had campaigned on a promise to renegotiate or abrogate NAFTA; however, Chrétien subsequently negotiated two supplemental agreements with the new US president. In the US, Bush, who had worked to "fast track" the signing prior to the end of his term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing into law to incoming president Bill Clintonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton. Prior to sending it to the US Senatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate, Clinton introduced clauses to protect American workers and allay the concerns of many House members.

Thus began the Softwood Lumber debacle...

The rest of your post is shrill drama.
 

Cobalt_Kid

Council Member
Feb 3, 2007
1,760
17
38
Why yes, yes I have heard of NAFTA.

Kim Campbell led the PC party into the 1993 where they were decimated by the Liberal Party under Jean Chretienhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Chrétien, who had campaigned on a promise to renegotiate or abrogate NAFTA; however, Chrétien subsequently negotiated two supplemental agreements with the new US president. In the US, Bush, who had worked to "fast track" the signing prior to the end of his term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing into law to incoming president Bill Clintonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton. Prior to sending it to the US Senatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate, Clinton introduced clauses to protect American workers and allay the concerns of many House members.

Thus began the Softwood Lumber debacle...

The rest of your post is shrill drama.

So it's all Kim's fault now?

And I'm guessing Chretien had more pressing issues to deal with at the time, like the fact he had the separatist issue dominating everything. It's amazing how a leader- whatever his faults- who was successful in holding Canada together at a crucial point is also blamed for being responsible for everything that's wrong with this country.

Modern conservative thought is amazingly flexible when it comes to avoiding any responsibility it seems, or facts based on the ways the current conservative government operates.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
12,399
1,371
113
60
Alberta
So it's all Kim's fault now?

And I'm guessing Chretien had more pressing issues to deal with at the time, like the fact he had the separatist issue dominating everything. It's amazing how a leader- whatever his faults- who was successful in holding Canada together at a crucial point is also blamed for being responsible for everything that's wrong with this country.

Modern conservative thought is amazingly flexible when it comes to avoiding any responsibility it seems, or facts based on the ways the current conservative government operates.

Yes that was it. I was blaming Kim or was I quoting Canadian History?

Dude you sound like a complete zealot freak.