Stephane Dion, the so called intellectual, the one who called for honest debate, and the one who decries low brow politics has contradicted all of the above by allowing an already dis proven, deliberately taken out of context, partisan driven and manufactured smear to be used in the official Liberal policy document regarding the Green shift. So much for taking the high road Mr. Dion.
I am referring to the following quote taken from page 15 of the Green Shift document.
"Sadly, Stephen Harper - who as Prime Minister has referred to what he terms “so-called greenhouse gases” -...."
The quote, or rather out context quote, has an interesting history and is a classic example of the Liberal spin machine in action; read on and see for yourself to what depths the Liberals will go in their efforts to smear the PM.
FYI the original words as spoken by PM Harper Dec 14 2006 in an end of year interview on CBC:
The spin campaign:
Jason Cherniak December 14th 2006 (Be sure to read the comments for good lesson on Liberal spin) "Stephen Harper just referred to "so called greenhouse gasses" during his end of session press conference! Apparently, the other parties pay too much attention to them."
Not one to let a little thing like the truth or facts get in the way of a smear; Cherniak ignored the reality of the"quote" as pointed out in other blogs or even in his own comment section and continued with his campaign to heavily promote the smear with the following email to all members of Liblogs.
The Email:
From Jason Cherniak (Thu, 14 Dec 2006 23:43:25):
Hi all,
In his final press conference of the year, Harper referred to "so
called
greenhouse gasses". I don't know about you, but I believe that this is
a
big screw up on his part.
If you agree, please mention it. It is the sort of thing that the MSM
should be forced to pick up.
Blogger Support Services: a non-profit corporation operating as
<http://www.libBSblogs.ca/> Liblogs
per: Jason R. Cherniak
President
Did you catch that? "Force" the media to pick up on the story. A story about a quote that Cherniak knew full well was taken completely out of context but still wanted to promote for his partisan purposes.
December 15th, 2006 Jason goes even farther with his campaign and he posts a conveniently edited video. (Note that he again gets eaten alive for this in the comments but still continues with the smear attempt and lies)
December 21, 2006 a proud Jason Cherniak proclaims his smear campaign a success when it gets picked up by some in the MSM who like Dion himself apparently could not be bothered with some simple fact checking.
"Finally, Harper's slip of the tongue where he referred to "so called" greenhouse gases has been reported in the main stream media.
I first reported this as it happened one week ago. Other Liberal bloggers quickly picked up thestory. We then highlighted the posts on Liblogs news. It was not long before somebody posted a video clip on YouTube, which has now been viewed over 900 times.
Conservatives have two responses to this Freudian slip:
1) It is no big deal because "so called" is the proper way to describe greenhouse gases; and
2) It is no big deal because the rest of Harper's statement supposedly makes it clear that he accepts the science behind global warming.
Neither of these arguments are particularly persuasive. First of all, if it is no big deal then why doesn't Harper say it all the time? Clearly he knows that this is not something Canadians would appreciate. Yes, it is similar to when journalists refer to the "so called war on terror". They are not saying there is no war on terror, but neither are they saying that there is a "war on terror". "So called" clearly suggests a certain cynicism about the subject under discussion.
The second excuse is even worse. You don't go around saying "so called greenhouse gases" unless you have a reason for saying it. My suspicion is that Harper often says this in private and made a mistake by saying it in public. That is why he did not and likely will never repeat the phrase. There is no doubt in my mind that Harper recognized almost immediately that he said something he should not have said. The fact that he tried to cover up his error does not change the fact that he gave us a momentary glimpse into his psyche.
I know that Tories will do everything they can to attack this story. They absolutely hate it when anybody reports facts that happen to counteract their hard sold message that Harper has changed his mind on a number of issues. Before they do it, though, I hope they consider one thing. If Stéphane Dion were to briefly refer to the United States as our "so called ally", nobody would let it slip by.
I can't wait to see the clip on TV.
UPDATE
Little did I know that the Halifax Chronicle Herald already mentioned this. I can't find the date of the article."
Unbelievable, but even more unbelievable is that now Stephane Dion is using this type of crap in official Liberal Party of Canada policy.
I am not sure if Dion is deliberately trying to mislead Canadians with this or if he isn't smart enough to have done his own homework on the words he himself is quoting and actually believes this ridiculous manufactured spin. Either way these are not the characteristics that I would ever want in a Canadian PM.
As I await the usual suspects to arrive and try to defend Dion's use of the quote, or even Cherniak's smear campaign, I will be preparing a follow up post that really shows just how dumb this entire thing is.
Stay tuned.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
..or if he isn't smart enough to have done his own homework on the words he himself is quoting..
Why would Dion do any research on this when it is very clear that he did absolutely no research, and can not produce any numbers, on how his supposed "Green Shift" would actually reduce GHG emissions?
Dion does not care about facts, he cares about only one thing.
Lying and Buying votes, it's the Liberal way.
==
I've never understood this complaint. By adding the "context" that you add, you change absolutely nothing about the meaning of Mr. Harper's use of the phrase "so called greenhouse Gases". All you do is add his complaint that the other parties "only" focus on "so called greenhouse gasses". Fine. Let's assume that is a valid complaint on his part. It doesn't change the fact that he referred to "so called" greehouse gases. You can make whatever argument you want about the "focus" of the parties, but that's not the point that I'm discussing. It is not "out of context" to talk about one issue but not another, unrelated issue.
Wake up!!!
There is no such thing as man-made global warning and the world is not going to end in fifteen years if we don't do anything about it right away.
How arrogant are we that we think we can change the way the Earth, Sun and Moon affect our planet.
I look forward to standing behind a politician who tells Dion and his wealth-distribution plan and Al Gore and the Hollywood crowd to go to hell.
We should be worrying about man-made pollution instead and I'm all for looking at ways to rid ourselves of our dependancy on oil.
NeilD
A couple of points without going over all of the arguments that you missed/ignored on this the first time
around. You can reread your own comments section for that.
First off, are you sure you want to stick to the "he said it" so it must reveal his true intentions (as defined by you) argument? You just never know when this type of logic will come back to bite you in the ass.
There is nothing wrong with using "so called"; it is very common phrase and does not imply, as you are trying to make it sound, that the speaker of those words does not believe something. To do so is just plain BS and there are numerous example to back up this point.
The words were used to show a contrast between the different approaches of the government and that of the Liberals; by leaving off half of the words from the quote as you have done in this case, you do change the context of what was said, and in the end its meaning. You cannot leave out half of what is being compared/contrasted and not change the meaning of what was being said; but you already knew that.
I am surprised that this smear has found its way into a Liberal policy document. For Dion to use this smear in such a way speaks volumes about him, his so called intellectual abilities, and his ability to separate fiction from reality.
Ardvark the Liberal court jester Jason Cherniak (or elven ears as some people know him) is a fool. He has blinders on and only sees witless Dion. He wouldn't know the truth if he slap him in the face. He calls for a debate with Dion and Harper, but he's afraid to debate anyone in his blog (heavily edited). If Dion told him to jump of a cliff he would do it.
In this spin:
http://jasoncherniak.blogspot.com/2008/07/election-timing.html
He debates it would be wrong for Harper to have a election in the fall. In fact he should be questioning Dion plans to force a election in the fall for the reasons he has stated. Harper has no control over when a election is called. Jason seems to forget about this.
You are right that I ignored Harper's argument about the focus of the parties. I don't dispute that. My point is that in making that argument, Harper referred to "so called greenhouse gases". This begs the question of what he means by it.
You say it is empty. Presumably you also think references to "so called" terrorists in the middle east are empty. You're entitled to your view, but I disagree. In my opinion this a perfectly legitimate argument.
If you are right that the words "so called" are empty, then why do you care if Dion mentions them? If you're right, then nobody will care. I think your real complaint is that you know it sounds bad and you want Dion to stop saying it.
Don't get mad at the Liberals for catching a slip-up by Harper. Get upset with Harper for slipping up.
So, using the Cherniak Logic, we can take anything Dion says, chop it up, use it to slander the message and the messenger, and Cherniak would think that to be fair play.
Good to know....
==
I guess I should not expect too much honesty from a party that has an environment plan that will not even spend a single dollar towards the environment.
Be sure to drop by again tomorrow Jason, you might find my follow up post interesting.
"So called" doesn't mean "so called" anymore? What a load of bunk.
This kind of back pedaling is laughable from the people who often simply use quotation marks (or raised eyebows in person) for speaking to their base. For example, they are incapable of referring to gay marriage without putting quotes around the word "marriage". They never refer to a fetus as anything but a baby, or even a child. They love referring to anything connected to women's issues by weaving the word SOW into it.
These CPC people are masters of the innuendo and the code word. They do it in nearly every speech or writing I have ever seen from them. And now claiming "so called" doesn't mean exactly that? Please. Harper was sneering that dealing with climate change is worthless and foolish. He did so by belittling the idea that there is such a thing as greenhouse gases by calling them "so called".
Referring to "so called" greenhouse gases is a clear attempt to discredit the science involved. The basic "greenhouse effect" is one in which CO2 will reflect long wave radiation (such as the heat reflected from the surface) back, while allowing short wave radiation (such as from the sun) through is quite easily proven in a laboratory.
Calling that bit of science into doubt indicates the speaker is either dishonest or badly misinformed. That science is truly settled. You can dispute the conclusion that a net increase in retained thermal energy (i.e. rising average global temperature) is occurring by disputing the measurements taken. You can dispute whether there is more energy radiated to the earth accounting for warming.
But the basic fact that greenhouse gases do have the properties they have is simply pandering to ignorance. It seems Harper does that a lot. From what we have seen of his controlling nature, it makes sense, since ignorant people are more easily led, more easily roused, and more easily stampeded into whatever direction you'd like to aim them.
"So, using the Cherniak Logic, we can take anything Dion says, chop it up, use it to slander the message and the messenger, and Cherniak would think that to be fair play."
1) You all are ALREADY doing that! Remember "you think it's easy to make priorities"? Everybody knows he didn't mean it the way it was portrayed.
2) What is the meaning of Harper's use of "so called greenhouse gasses" instead of just "greenhouse gases"? In all this whining, you fail to give one definition other than the one I'm using. Unless, of course, if you stand by the ridiculous argument that the words "so called" have no meaning.
I guess you guys are correct; there can be no other explanation for using the words "so called" .
Post a Comment