Sunday, July 05, 2009

Michael, you may have missed my comment the last time....

Michael, you may have missed my comment the last time but because you have been out of the country for so long I will cut you some slack on it and repeat it for you once again.

The Conservative Party of Canada is a separate entity from the Government of Canada. Got it?

This should be rudimentary basic knowledge for most people but I am afraid to say that if you keep saying stuff like "For heaven's sake, we're in the middle of a recession. We're in the middle of the toughest situation in 25 years and all this government can think of doing is running a $4-million attack campaign against yours truly." people are going to start to wonder if you are really as smart as you claim to be.

I mean if my 12 year old daughter knows and understands the differences between political parties and the government, why don't you?


A rather quick update to help those that still remain confused. Read the fine print.


Gayle said...

If the CPC is separate from the Government of Canada, why did employees of the PMO introduce the attack ads?

Why is the CPC using their 10%'ers to claim the Bloc supports pedophilia?

Maybe you should be telling Harper that the CPC is separate from the government of Canada.

Ardvark said...

Oh my, your comment came less than 1 minute after I posted this. Is my blog under some kind of surveillance?

Are you telling me that, like Ignatieff, you do not know the difference either Gayle?

Ardvark said...

Updated post with a picture to help those who can't seem to grasp that it was not the government that put out the 'Just Visiting' ads.

Good night.

Jen said...

Recession Michael Ignatieff? then return the 40million dollars which the liberal party of canada still owe this nation or shut up.
Ignatieff and the others are no more interested in the canadian public or else they would not stolen from them in the first place.

What Ignatieff means is that the LPOC are in a recession.
AA, how long can the MSM continue playing doggy to the LPOC.
I guess the doggy liked the expensive bones the liberals threw at them-no wonder the MSM wants the lpoc back in government.

Alberta Girl said...

"Why is the CPC using their 10%'ers to claim the Bloc supports pedophilia?"

Gayle - I would suggest you go over to Sandy's blog at Crux of the matter and see that you have once again jumped to the wrong conclusion.

And regarding your statement about the employees of the PMO introducing the ad, all I can say is

link please?

Bec said...

The Liberals sent out a 10%-er in the Spring which I unfortunately received.
I wish I had it here to list the numerous and pathetic inaccuracies which took me half a day to respond too with facts.

Everyone sends them and the media singles out this one? Perhaps because it is true and the others are not quite 100% accurate.
Maybe only 10%?

Does that make Michael responsible for all things from WK? Did he book Time Square, himself?
Ya, that list goes on too.

johndoe124 said...

Maybe when the Liberals actually produce some alternative policies there will be something else to attack besides Iggy.

Considering their past history and Warren Kinsella's involvement with the party, isn't it just a bit disingenuous to expect to be treated differently?

Platty said...

Oh my, your comment came less than 1 minute after I posted this.

Less than a minute to post, an eternity to answer.....


wilson said...

''We're in the middle of the toughest situtation in 25 years and all the ''
opposition leader can do is bitch, whine and cry about the CPC running 'truth ads'...!!!!
Man up Iffy.

Hilarious that Iffy comes to Alberta to give the Bloc support.

Whine and cry about the meanies in the CPC.
Whine and cry, whine and cry, that's his response.

Calgary Junkie said...

I agree this is mediocre rhetoric from Iggy. Not just because people generally understand the distinctions between the Conservative Party and the Conservative Government. But also because people understand that you can walk and chew gum at the same time--i.e. attack Iggy while running the country. It's beyond absurd to suggest the CPC can only do one or the other, but not both at the same time.

But anyway, I see this Iggy talk as being one part of a bigger narrative that he is preparing for the election campaign. That narrative boils down to the good old: "It's time to throw the bums out". What else has he got ?

Iggy's biggest, most dangerous talking point in that narrative will be the level of unemployment, especially in Ont and Que. Not only will he unfairly blame Harper, but Iggy would come out with an alternative economic plan, probably mimicking Jack's favorite "more green jobs". Hence, I see the politics behind Prentice's "cash back for clunkers" trial balloon as a way to undercut Iggy on the green job front.

Ardvark said...

The Liberals seem to have a real problem telling the difference between party and government. Just look at their unofficial slogan "Canada's natural governing party" as an example of this.

It is exactly this type of arrogant thinking and culture of entitlement mentality that inevitably leads to such things as the sponsorship scandal and is reason enough to keep the Liberals away from power for the foreseeable future.

Calgary Junkie said...

When I took grade 10 math in 1965, we were introduced into the "new math" of sets, subsets, and the good old Venn Diagrams.

For Gayle and others, try this: Draw two intersecting circles. Circle A on the left represents all members of the Conservative Party of Canada.
Circle B on the right represents all members of the Conservative Government of Canada.

The paper is now divided into four seperate areas:

1. The area where the circles intersect--these are members of BOTH the Party and Government (eg. Harper)

2. The area of Circle A only--these are members of ONLY the Party (eg me)

3. The area of Circle B only--these are members of ONLY the government (eg many beauracrats)

4. The area outside of both circles--these are members of NEITHER the party or gov't (eg Iggy)

That might help understand the distinctions between the Party and Government.

Jen said...

since the liberals fundraising is doing so well and they feel good about the money they make, will be short lived since they owe taxpayers 40million dollars.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

The Liberals seem to have a real problem telling the difference between party and government. Just look at their unofficial slogan "Canada's natural governing party" as an example of this.

Wow. I never thought about it that way, but you're right!

Being elected as the party to form Government is a privilege - not an entitlement.

And that's what they find so difficult to grasp, it seems.

Platty said...

Of course, as we all know Jo, they are entitled to their entitlements....


maryT said...

If their fundraising is so great, then they should support eliminating the 1.95 subsidy. Iggy supporting the Bloc says, yes the coalition is still alive and well, we just want it hidden from the public.
The Bloc has voted against, as the ndp has, every bill involving crime, plus the anti-terrorist bills.
Noticed in a pic of Iggy today, he did appear to have jeans on, but he certainly had a big belt buckle. Wonder if he will ever wear it again.

Ardvark said...

There are really only 2 choices here with what Ignatieff said. 1 he really is not aware that the CPC and the government are different entities, which I find hard to believe, or 2 that he knows this but deliberately choose those words in an effort to spin and deceive the listener,the Canadian public.

Either way it does not make him look good and undercuts the image which he is trying to sell the voters.

Sandy said...

Hi there -- I just put up a related post with a H/T to you. Check out Crux of the Matter.

Ardvark said...

Thanks Sandy. i used to have your blog in my sidebar but took the link down when you went into hiatus. If you promise to stay around for awhile I will put it back up ;)

Jan said...

I wonder if there are any clever journalists who would like to quiz Ignatieff on the difference between the CPC's and the Conservative government. Perhaps then we would know if he actually does know the difference. This would be quite helpful to him if he ever hopes to be P.M.

Jan said...

For those of you who do not yet know it, check out House of Commons website. You can find out how your MP (or any of them) voted on each bill in parliament. The Bloc voted (without exception) as did the NDP, NOT to support minimum sentences, nor just for human trafficking but CHILD trafficking. These bills address REPEATED sexual offenders. Why? Because the Bloc apparently do not support minimum sentences--yes that's it. The NDP just vote against anything Conservative on principle. That's the reason, despite months of debate --no compromise. In spite of the police, the provinces, etc. demanding that the government do something to protect our children, these two parties voted against every bill the gov't has introduced on crime (as well as a number of Liberals). Our children remain with NO voice and no representation from those we count on. We should hold these MP accountable for their voting record. They have let Canadians down and are NOT co-operating with either the gov't nor the will of the people.

Sandy said...

Ardvark -- I promise to stay put for awhile. I came back because I was convinced to work on the Ontario PC leadership campaign.

I guess I was burned out. 3 1/2 years is a long time. But, I seem to have a new energy now.

Hopefully it will last. LOL

Anyway, I will be adding your URL to my favourites as well.

Ardvark said...

I understand completely.

I myself am supposed to be taking a bit of a break for the summer as well, but with Ignatieff coming to town and the press giving him a pass on his many half-baked statements it is hard to stay away.

Rich said...

Gayle: just to clue you in the ads were introduced by the staff of Conservative Party of Canada and not the PMO. And these ads were introduced to let people know exactly what Ignatieff is all about.

These are not attack ads, the just high light comments Ignatieff made about Canadians while he was outside the country. Example listen to the comments he made about Quebecers; listen to the comments he made while in the U.S. in support of George Bush and the Iraq war; listen to the comments he made in the U. S. about how Americans are supposed to act in his country the United States.

If these ads are so evil, let Ignatieff come out and deny all the comments made

Gayle said...


Again - it is not the LPC who do not understand the difference between the CPC and the Government, it is Harper.

Here you go:

"In a new twist, two senior officials from the Prime Minister's Office - Harper's director of communications Kory Teneycke, and press secretary and senior Quebec adviser Dimitri Soudas - provided a background briefing to reporters on the campaign.

The officials said they took unpaid leaves of absence from the PMO, and were acting as Conservative party officials in delivering the briefing. It is unusual for government officials to unveil attack ads, a task that usually falls to party staff."

But you keep on pretending it is the other way around...

Gayle said...

But it is cute how you buy into that "termporary leave of abscence" thingy. I guess they could not find any other staff members of the CPC to introduce these ads to the media. I assume there was absolutely not one single person who did not already work for the GOVERNMENT who could have possibly introduced these ads to the public.

Ardvark said...

Gayle are you saying that they were lying and were not on a leave of absence?

I assume you have proof to back up that claim,and it is not just your misguided opinion.

Gayle said...

Oh, I am sure they took a leave of absence, as a technicality.

So my question is, does the CPC have no other people who can do this? Because when you use government employees to introduce party advertisement, it sure looks like the government is introducing the advertising - especially since one of the people introducing it is the spokesperson for the PM.

You can pretend it isn't, but it is a bit ballsy of you to suggest that Ignatieff is out of line here.

Ardvark said...

Now that we have the distraction about whether or not these guys were on a leave of absence out of the way, I would like to ask you a serious question Gayle.

Ignatieff is supposed to be a real smart cookie, he has written many books and I guess could be considered a wordsmith, he is also fully aware that what he is responsible for what he says as this quote clearly shows, "One rule I understand about this is that you're fully responsible for your words. You're even responsible when they're quoted out of context.

So how is it that this very intelligent writer can make such a simple mistake about the government being the source of the ads?

A mistake or was it done on purpose?

Have fun.

Gayle said...

He made no mistake. The government was responsible for the ads.

So, are you going to answer my question now, or will you continue to avoid it.

Ardvark said...

There you have it. According to Gayle her Majesty's Canadian Government was responsible for the truth ads. Not the Conservative Party but the Government of Canada.
Wow! Call the ethics commissioner because we have got ourselves a scandal. No proof mind you but as long as Gayle says so....

What question? Could someone else introduced the ads? Of course someone else could have done it, hell I would have been more than happy to have done it but they didn't ask me. The ads were conceived, bought and paid for by the CPC. Deal with it.

Gayle said...

Of course the CPC paid for the ads - the government just introduced them. Nice little dodge there, but the truth is that Harper brought this on himself by having his spokesperson introduce the ads, while asking the media not to tell anyone who was introducing the ads.

One wonders why they cared if the media reported that two people from the PMO introduced the ads if there was nothing wrong with two people from the PMO introducing CPC ads?

But how silly of Ignatieff to draw the obvious conclusion that this government and this party are one and the same.

PS. Maybe the fact that the CPC decided to change the colour scheme on the government websites to the official colours of the CPC helped Ignatieff to reach that conclusion.

Ardvark said...

The CPC and the government are not one and the same, and even if you keep saying the opposite it does not change the reality.

Your circular arguments are just wasting my time and go to show just what lengths you will go to spin something. I know Ignatieff is not that stupid to believe that the CPC and the government are the same entity, it is too bad that I can't say the same about you.

This discussion is done.

Ardvark said...

Useless comment from Gayle deleted.

Keep moving those goal posts Gayle. Your question was answered but then it becomes a different question, and so on and so on.

Gayle said...

Oh boy - you delete my comment and then you lie about it. I guess I really struck a nerve there. Now I know what you do when you have been effectively proven wrong - just delete and pretend it never happened.

So much for free speech and a free exchange of ideas. I alwsys knew you conservative types were hypocrites about that.

Never mind - no matter what you want your readers to believe, you and I both know that my point was made, and you were left wanting...

Do have a nice life Aardvark.

Ardvark said...

Gayle, this is the only question I see that you asked: "So my question is, does the CPC have no other people who can do this?"

That was answered.

Your last comment that I deleted was just more of the same Gayle. You keep going around and around and I am not going to play that game because no matter what I say you are never satisfied or move the goal posts just enough that the previous answer does not fit.

Go haunt some other blog.

Gayle said...

Thanks for proving my point.

Ardvark said...

You don't have a point other than to try to spin for Iggy and Gayle, it ain't workin'.

Ardvark said...

As I wrote 12 days ago. This one is done.

Ardvark said...

To whomever keeps repeatedly trying to comment on this post.

I cannot read your comments do some kind of encoding issue. All appears as gibberish.