They are not even pretending to be non biased anymore.

It looks like CBC Power and Politics has given up even pretending to be non biased.

“Our job — and we take it seriously — is to ensure that the information that we put out is fair and unbiased in everything that we do,” CBC President Hubert Lacroix


Yesterdays Question of the Day: "Is money for home-care a better use of taxpayer dollars than funding corporate tax cuts?"

Seriously, this was the question put up on the CBC website yesterday. It is not bad enough that the results of this bogus poll should be obvious, long before the first vote was cast, to anyone who passed grade 6, but the question itself comes right out of Liberal Party talking points and in fact Ignatieff used almost the exact same words himself when announcing the program. Want to make a wager that if you asked the question: Is buying puppies for everyone better use of taxpayer dollars than tax cuts?, that the puppies would win hands down?

Or better yet ( and I DARE you to ask this one Ryan): Is money for home-care a better use of taxpayer dollars than funding the CBC?


Today's question: "Are you concerned about illegal lobbying for government contracts?"

Wow, I wonder what the final results of this QOTD are going to be. DUH!

What does the CBC think they are accomplishing by rewording LPC talking points into their QOTD? Maybe they should get Frank Graves to write their question for them. On second thought...

“Our job — and we take it seriously — is to ensure that the information that we put out is fair and unbiased in everything that we do,” CBC President Hubert Lacroix

Sure you do. 

BC Blue on another fair and unbiased report.

The MSM catches up and Ignatieff spining history away.

The MSM finally catches with a story I broke almost 1 year ago about how PM Harper is in cahoots with the Montreal Canadians for what can be described only as nefarious purposes.

From the MSM Yesterday: “I believe that federal powers have taken over the Canadiens,” (PQ language critic Pierre Curzi) and “It helps federalism more than it does our interests,” (PQ Leader Pauline Marois) CBC, the Sun and the NP.

My posting from October of last year.*

Sources close to the Liberal Party have revealed to me that they are planning a press conference later today condemning the fabled NHL team, the Montreal Canadians, for this logo.
According to my source (Thanks Hedy) not only does the "C" look remarkably like the "C' on the current line up of Olympic apparel , the "H" in the middle obviously stands for "Harper".


*related to this.

Also related:

Michael Ignatieff showed us yesterday just how skilled he is at keeping a straight face while simultaneously speaking out of both sides of his mouth to the media.

"John’s not off to a great start, but we still have to take the high road. I have a responsibility to be tough but civil." and “Canadians don’t like that kind of politics. That’s one of the reasons this guy’s in trouble,” Mr. Ignatieff says. “He thinks it’s all so clever to play these games. Canadians don’t think that’s clever, they think it’s stupid.”

Seriously, the leader of the Party that played political games with: (a small sampling from just this last year.)

the Olympic logo (see above)

abortion

the Jaffer story

the budget vote

prorogation

photo contests

10% ers, H1N1 and FAKE body bags stories

stimulus spending (this one is still on-going)

the home renovation tax credit

threatening elections on principle and then denying it

wants us to believe that his is the party that is trying to make Parliament less toxic.



Sorry Mike but I am calling BS. A party, that to this day refuses to apologize for trumping up a made up story about a communion wafer at a funeral with which they used to try and make political hay out of, can't run around claiming to be the party of the high road and get away with it.

Why the media lets him get away with it I will never know.



More examples of the Liberal high road.

Ignatieff's throne was a rental.

Michael Ignatieff held a little garden party yesterday for members of our ever vigilant media; the same media who have been running with the fake fake lake cost story for the last few day.

There were lots of tweets about having Ignatieff serve them food, and about the lake set up to mock that other famous lake, but not one comment on Ignatieff spending big money on a rented porta-potty so our poor media could sit in comfort after being fed meatballs along with an extra large helping of Liberal spin on extravagant spending.

The $1,500 "Taj Mahal of portable toilets with granite countertops, wood panelling and almond-scented hand soap" sat near the Liberal's "Fake Lake" which consisted of a children's wading pool, plastic ducks and a remote-control boat surrounded by plastic Muskoka chairs and a printout picture of a lake posted on a stick. Staffers boasted that the whole thing had cost them $19.95 ­ a fraction of the money the government was spending on its Muskoka backdrop.

Funny how this was missed from most comments/tweets/reports on the garden party, but as long as our media were comfortable I guess it is understandable. /sarc off

Ignatieff, Mr. Charisma.

Ignatieff needs work, lots of it, and the good folks at CTV have brought in some outside help to assist.

An American academic has some advice for Canadian Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff: stop talking issues and start talking morality. George Lakoff, a professor of linguistics at University of California Berkeley, told CTV's Power Play that his studies of the language of politics show that the most successful politicians are those who connect with voters by using a few simple principles.

How very nice of CTV for trying to help out like that, but I am not sure if this guy really knows anything about Michael Ignatieff.

"What Ignatieff does is he talks about the details of policy rather than start with the moral principle … and saying: ‘Here is why this is right,'" he said.

"Secondly, you have to connect with people. People have to feel that you're authentic, that you're believable and that you care about them."

Ignatieff talking about the details of policy? What is this guy talking about? What policy? The only thing the Liberals do is complain about conservative policy and whatever meager policy they may have or even agree with, they end up changing their mind later and flip flop on it. Afghanistan, HST, asbestos, free votes, immigration policy, corporate taxes, etc.

As for Ignatieff trying to be authentic; well that is kind of hard to accomplish when you are just playing a role and pretending rather than being truthful and authentic with yourself. Remember Ignatieff's own words ""Nothing is personal in politics, because politics is theater. It is part of the job to pretend to have emotions that you do not actually feel."

Too late CTV, your obvious attempts to resurrect the political fortunes Ignatieff are not going to work. Perhaps you might want to take George Lakoff's advice to be authentic and honest for yourself and just report the news, quit trying to influence it.

Whitewash.

The CBC releases its interim report on bias/balance.

Report here.

Executive summary here.



A couple of quick thoughts. The report does NOT include CBC's massive coverage of the prorogation issue in the report (even though it falls right in the middle of the events used for the report) and they totally gloss over 'climategate' which the CBC did not even mention at all for days after it became known. They do however include coverage of the PM visiting India and China ( of course these were good news stories which conveniently balances the other crap) and the CBC praises it own coverage of H1N1 (on which Mark Sakamoto agrees) and seems to think that diversity in who reads the news is just as important as the news itself.


More to come...

Ignatieff: I am more Canadian than you are.

Michael Ignatieff:

“As everybody knows, I’m just visiting,” Ignatieff said, joking.

“They say it makes me less of a Canadian,” he said, of his former ex-pat status. “But I’m here to tell you it makes me more of a Canadian.”

First he claimed that he was not the one starting a culture war, now he is claiming to be more Canadian than those of us who have not lived abroad for 34 years and missed 34 years of our collective history.

Seriously, has this guy lost it? The polls seem to reflect that he has.

The arrogance of Ignatieff is off of the scale.

Ignatieff: We didn't start the culture war, they did.

Ignatieff gets up in front of a paying audience and attempts to re-write history.

Ignatieff said the Conservatives have accused the Liberals of “trying to start a culture war’, but suggests it’s the Conservatives that have really done that. The Liberal leader said “let’s be clear: we didn’t end the 25-year consensus on a women’s right to choose. They did.”

Really? I could have sworn that it was Ignatieff and the Liberals that first played the abortion card with their criticism of the maternal health initiative; a program to help save the lives of women and vulnerable children in the developing world with such things as safer drinking water, inoculations, and improved nutrition.

The Liberals brought the subject of abortion up and they were the ones that tried to, and continue to, play divisive political games with abortion including their motion which ended horribly for Ignatieff and the divided Liberals.

But it is the conservatives who started this entire thing. Ya, right. (Springer has some thoughts on this as does Sandy here.)



And I bet Iffy said it all with a straight face. The same way that he said he was in politics to unite and not divide.

BS! Do they teach revisionist history at Harvard?

My sympathies to the suckers that paid for the privilege of having someone lie to them.


More arrogance from Iffy: He is now claiming to be more Canadian than the 99% of us who didn't live elsewhere for 34 years!

Edited for spelling. Thanks M!

"I decided to disclose this event to the public because I play a public role and consider that I must be transparent at all times,"

Pablo Rodriquez: "I decided to disclose this event to the public because I play a public role and consider that I must be transparent at all times,"

All is good except for the little detail that Mr. Disclosure and transparency came clean a full 28 days AFTER the incident.


I wonder what took him so long and if the the big news 28 days ago might have had some influence on just how transparent he was.


ATTENTION MSM: When did Ignatieff find out about this, and was he running in front of any camera available slamming Rahim Jaffer knowing full well what was going on with his own MP?

You might want to ask Iffy the next time you see him because he is all about good timing. Or is he?


Monday update: Bias? What bias?

A question for Jack Layton

Jack, a hypothetical for you. Would you resign from the NDP caucus if on the day the election writ was dropped you were named in a lawsuit from, well lets just say, a conservative blogger from Alberta as an example?


If not, perhaps you could take Senator Ruth's advice and.....



update: BMO says the lawyers named in the lawsuit (including Shory) are not part of the fraud.

Related: Don't believe me about the law suits Jack, listen to Paul Szabo .

Carolyn Bennett's Greatest Hits!

Now available from Ardvark Records: Carolyn Bennett's Greatest Hits.

This is sure to go down in history as the definitive Carolyn Bennett Collection. So order your copy today!

This album has it all. From her latest single, A Real Job: "Women of Canada want to hear about early learning and child care; that is the key to their economic independence, to be able to get back to school, to get a real job, to be able to go to work."

to her very popular, Prisons for Children : "Well it certainly uh uh, the approach to child care is just spiteful its its its canceling the supplement for our most vulnerable children. There is actually no plan for early learning and childhood education . So its a good job they're putting more money for prisons in the budget because we're gonna need them if we don't get this early childhood right."

And who could ever forget Body bags: “This is an absolute disgrace. This is morally appalling. This Reform-Conservative government deserves to be condemned in the strongest terms for this insensitive and callous act,” said Dr. Bennett. “Instead of flu-kits, instead of preparing and planning to get the vaccine on time – instead of planning to save lives – they spent their time planning on how to deal with the deaths.” and the follow up to Body Bags: I am sorry. “We would never do anything to offend; we did believe that raising attention for the real dire needs that we saw when we were [in Manitoba] was uppermost in our minds.”

and what about this timeless classic, and my personal favorite, Bob Rae: The reason I got into politics was because of the mess Ontario health care was in "after five years of Bob Rae" .



But wait, that's not all. Buy now and Ardvark Records will throw in a sex toy (certified safe by Ardvark Labs) at no extra charge!


If you only buy one album this year make it this soon to be classic record of Carolyn Bennett's Greatest Hits. It makes a great gift for those hard to shop for Liberals on your list.

Hurry supplies are limited. Operators are standing by.

Update: Now including her latest singles:  PM Harper is a dictator and Canadians are too stupid to understand for themselves.

Ignatieff muzzling Liberal candidates.

How else can you explain this?



Heat? From whom? The 'misquoting media' or from the OLO?



Background. The Original story in the so called "international newspaper".

I wonder if the author, Sebastian Fest, has an audio recording of that interview? If he does and would like to clear things up, I would be more than happy to post that audio on this blog to get his side out to Canadians.


.

John McCallum blames Martin and Graham...

and forgets that he was part of the government of Paul Martin too.

(UPDATE RALPH GOODALE playing political games with the Haiti earthquake @ bottom of post)

John McCallum, the star Liberal MP, who yesterday caused quite a stir with his war crimes allegations was busy today trying to suppress the self immolation.

Here is McCallum on Charles Adler. (starts approx the 7 min mark with Adler, and McCallum comes on @ 24min @

This is priceless spin.

McCallum: When I was Minister of Defense the buck stopped with me, not the soldiers that took orders from the government. (*)

Adler: .....(Asks why his government handed them over to the Afghans when the possibility of abuse was suspected)

McCallum: When I was Defence Minister we did hand them over to the Americans. I was Defense Minister under Chretien It was the Martin Government that made that decision; I was not in Defense at the time.


Wow, the guy tosses Martin under a bus for this decision and never mentions that he was a member of that very same Martin Government. In fact he was a Cabinet Minister in Martin's Government, but I guess that if you can forget the type of car you drive why not that you were a member of a government and a minister.


Attention Liberal war room. More face time for McCallum please.

---------------

More games: This time it is Ralph Goodale politicizing the earthquake in Haiti.




Peter Donolo is a communications genius I tell you. Genius!

"I agree with this. Big time."

Things were not always so happy in Liberal land.

Warren Kinsella wrote on his blog October 11, 2006. "I agree with this. Big time." (Note: Link is now dead)


And what is "this"?

October 11, 2006

Mr. Michael Ignatieff, M.P.
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
Dear Mr. Ignatieff:
On behalf of the Canada-Israel Committee, I am writing to express profound concern about your comments over the weekend regarding the recent conflict in Lebanon. In what appears to be very straightforward language, you accused Israel of having committed war crimes in Qa’na – an assertion you explicitly anchored in your expertise in the area of international law and the conduct of war. Notwithstanding attempts by your campaign team to provide a different context for the remarks, we remain troubled by them and what it may suggest about your overall orientation to the Middle East, Israel’s values as a vibrant democracy and the challenges Israel faces from those determined to destroy the Jewish state.
If your intentions were not to accuse Israel of having committed war crimes in Qa’na, we would ask that you issue an immediate clarification – in both official languages – that clearly sets out your view of the issue and unambiguously rejects the suggestion that Israel is guilty of any such conduct. Should you choose to offer such a clarification, we will undertake to circulate it widely within the pro-Israel community. Should you choose not to issue a statement, we would feel obliged to convey that message to our constituency as well.
Sincerely,
Marc Gold, National Chair

-------------

Related: More blasts from the Liberal Past:

Thomas Hubert, Vice President of Communications for the Young Liberal of Canada (B.C.), wrote the following on his blog:

“One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter ... History will remember Hezbollah as an organization that stood up to the most vile ‘nation’ in human history.”

And this from the comment section on another Liberal Blog



BigCityLib had some thoughts on the "monster" within here.


A run down of Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj quotes can be found here. (Worth reading)

And finally back to Warren again who wrote the following: August 20, 2006 – Why is the author of this blog (deadlink to thelongwalk.ca) a putative supporter of Gerard Kennedy, and claiming to be a member of the Liberal Party of Canada’s executive in BC, writing things like this on Cherniak’s blog?(see photo above) Is anything going to be done about this? If Bill Graham and Denis Coderre have any say in the matter, I doubt it. And people still ask me why I don’t feel comfortable in the Liberal Party of Canada anymore. It’s rather self-evident, I’d say.


and for an added bonus this on

August 22, 2006 - By the by, some folks are asking why Jason and I are now paying attention to the likes of the (for now) anonymous "Big City Lib" and, in Jason's case, Martha's anti-Israel communications guy. It's a fair question.

My grandmother, God rest her eternal soul, had the best view on situations like this one. "Once you've decided to clean out one toilet," said she, "you may as well clean out all the toilets."

Well, she didn't actually say that, but I can see her saying that. And it makes sense, don't it?

Pass the Brillo pads.

August 21, 2006 - Just received this, late, from the Kennedy campaign. Good statement, albeit late. It should have mentioned Hubert, however.

Now - does anyone know who is behind "Big City Lib"? Say this much for Thomas: he at least used his real name when spewing hate. Big City Lib lacks the courage of his convictions, it seems.

***

Those Liberals. One big happy bunch.

The facts on the Liberals spin on Durban1, and as you may have guessed the facts get in the way again.

Marc Garneau demonstrates the problems of the Liberal Party.

Does the Liberal Party of Canada have any idea what they stand for?


I don't think so.


Here is Liberal MP Marc Garneau 'lost in space' on CBC's Power & Politics with Evan Solomon from November 10th 2009.

Perhaps Garneau, Ignatieff's Quebec Lieutenant, should be more worried about this guy rather than trying to spin non existent Liberal policies and values on the CBC.


Update: from the comments Another blogger on Garneau's visit with the CBC.

Ignatieff's Communication Problem.

Jill Fairbrother, 48 is Michael Ignatieff's director of communications. A former lobbyist for a garden-care product firm in Mississauga, she is the girlfriend of Ian Davey, Ignatieff's chief of staff . The two met during the 2006 leadership campaign and there has been some muted criticism of the fact that the two work together in such senior posts in Mr. Ignatieff's office. Fairbrother is considered to be a part of the Rosedale gang, the inner circle of Ignatieff advisers from Toronto which also includes Ian Davey, Alfred Apps, Dan Brock, and Rocco Rossi.

In short Jill Fairbrother is the person who has the unenviable position of trying to spin correct all of Ignatieff's many communication blunders; not an easy task considering Ignatieff's propensity to put his foot in his mouth. She may currently have the hardest job in Canadian politics.


I first noted Fairbrother's name in the media back in late 2008 in a blog entry by Kady O'Malley, then at Macleans, who called out Fairbrother on a "non answer" to her query. Not a good start and Kady rightfully nails her on it, but that was only the beginning as Fairbrother would soon be officially appointed as Ignatieff's communications director and she would be very busy putting out the fires started by her boss. However not all of the communications problems can be neatly placed at the foot of the leader himself; some of the blame must be placed elsewhere, including the lap of Fairbrother.

Take for example the recent problems with cancellations :Ignatieff was going to go to China over Labour Day; he cancelled. He was to hold a huge fundraiser in the Toronto area; he's delayed it. He was to go back to Harvard University to participate in a panel celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Carr Centre for Human Rights Policy; he cancelled. He was to speak at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce convention; he cancelled. A case of Ignatieff just changing his mind a lot or more of a problem with his handlers and story control? Speaking of story control what happened with the recent story about how Ignatieff was going to have an "adult conversation" with Canadians over taxes, but instead had to come out the very next day and deny ever wanting to treat Canadians as adults turning the glee expressed by some Liberals over the idea into just another embarrassment. How did this story get to the press in the first place?

While Ignatieff may have played some part in the above problems he certainly cannot be blamed for this one: The dueling press conferences. (from the CBC) Running communications for a political party is a trying task at the best of times. Even more so when you're competing with...yourself.

Picture it: the Hall of Honour of the Centre Block. Liberal MP Wayne Easter and the party's spin-machine, Warren Kinsella, camped outside the door to the Conservative caucus meeting. Clearly waiting to do something. But, what...

Three sombre -looking Liberal staffers stand behind Easter with 8 x 10 photos of Conservative MPs who have, according to Easter, denounced the whole cheque-signing "scandal".Easter explains how this is must be stopped.

Wouldn't be a bad little stunt if only: in the room right next door the Liberal caucus is launching the Pink Book on women's issues.

Cameras and reporters gathered around Easter. And although there were other reporters and cameras in the room for the launch, one media event can't outdo the other.

Suddenly, Ignatieff's director of communications, Jill Fairbrother arrives in the scrum and abruptly whisks Easter away. She didn't look pleased. And the "stunt" ended awkwardly. Amateur hour. (Jane Taber covers the same story here)

More of the same: From the recent Toronto Star story on Ignatieff being wrong on Arar: The Star requested an interview to discuss Ignatieff's statement, but his spokeswoman, Jill Fairbrother, declined the request."It's clear and I don't think he'll have much to add if the subject is torture." When told that Ignatieff was wrong and asked if she could verify the quote, Fairbrother said she no longer had a tape recording of the interview. I am not overly knowledgeable of the job a of communications director but wouldn't keeping copies of interviews be one of those things that should be done for the protection of your boss? With 1 Terabyte hard drives available for under $100 at Futureshop I can think of no reason why every word spoken by Ignatieff cannot be saved.

Speaking of job descriptions; would becoming part of the story be listed among the duties of a communication director? Fairbrother's name again came to the forefront in the media around the time that Liberals in Quebec were enjoying the last few days of having a lieutenant when Denis Coderre tossed a hand grenade into the inner workings of the LPC. Denis Coderre:“The message sent by these recent events is the following: if you want to get your way in Quebec, you only have to short circuit the party’s Quebec authorities and instead go to the leader’s Toronto palace guard who have a total misunderstanding of Quebec social and political reality.” and "Should he follow his Quebec lieutenant while working closely with a credible team? Or his Toronto advisers who know nothing about the social and political realities of Quebec?" It is interesting to note that when Fairbrother became part of the above story that she, as the person paid to talk to the press for the Liberals, had absolutely nothing to say on the subject.


I said earlier that Fairbrother might currently have the hardest job in Canadian politics dealing with all of Ignatieff's communication foul ups, but it is clear that not all of those communications mishaps are the fault of Ignatieff, and Fairbrother is not doing him any favours or making her job any easier by being part of the problem. The Rosedale gang strikes again?


UPDATE: A must read from the CBC: Big Shake up in the OLO.
"It's not yet clear who will be shuffled but two sources said they expect that Director of Communications Jill Fairbrother will be moved, to make way for a francophone." ht Cantuc in the comments.

Also from the same story: "Liberal finance critic John McCallum said Donolo would be an experienced hand in the leader's office. "I think it will be good for the party."

Hey John, does that mean that Davey was NOT good for the party?


Wednesday Update: From Dan Cook's Blog: Tuesday evening: "Just trying to get a note out to staff. There is no news. No resignation(s). No new chief of staff." — Jill Fairbrother, spokeswoman for Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff

Tuesday evening: "I am pleased to announce the arrival of Peter Donolo, who has accepted the role of chief of staff." — Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff

Like I said, a communication problem.

Confusion reigns in the LPC.

Confusion continues to reign supreme in the Liberal Party of Canada.

First we have Ignatieff's claim last week that he would not appoint a new Quebec lieutenant. But his week that sound bite seems to have been tossed out the window as Ignatieff says that he will now name a new Quebec lieutenant. Chucker has the run down and it looks like the flip flop change of heart is due to Ignatieff's obvious confusion regarding the Quebec LP's constitution. For an author and alleged rabid reader he sure has a record for not reading political documents, including the LPC Constitution which he and the "Rosedale gang" trampled on in their hurry to get Ingatieff into Dion's OLO office.

Need more confusion?

Consider this little example: When Ignatieff said the following it seemed at the time to be quite clear "The Liberal party cannot support this government any further. We will hold Stephen Harper to account. We will oppose his government in Parliament." he reiterated this again just the other day when in the House Iffy read his non-confidence motion, but yesterday caucus president Marc Garneau indicated that this was not the case and that the Liberals will evaluate each vote in the House of Commons, and MP Alexandra Mendes agreed that there could be exceptions to categorical opposition to every Conservative bill.

Wow. What is going on over there?


Poor Iggy, when stories like this start showing up regularly in the MSM you know the jig is up.



An older example of Liberal confusion in action from the archives.

.

There are none so blind...

There are none so blind as those that will not see. ( warning: a few WK links appear in this post)

Keep on doing what you are doing because so far it is working great and it does not take a "strategist" to see it either.


Warren sure seems to have a hate on for the National Post doesn't he. It appears that he has a hate on for them almost as much as he did for Paul Martin.

You remember Paul Martin right? The guy who became Liberal leader by instigating backroom shenanigans to hurry the departure of Jean Chretien. The guy that sent out the recruiters to the US to bring Ignatieff to Canada, and the same guy who then appointed Ignatieff in Etobicoke Lakeshore over the opposition from the Liberal riding association.


I guess that some hate lasts longer than others, but if you ask me there appears to be something very odd about the entire situation.

Today's Liberal Press Conference in Montreal.

Sources close to the Liberal Party have revealed to me that they are planning a press conference later today condemning the fabled NHL team, the Montreal Canadians, for this logo.
According to my source (Thanks Hedy) not only does the "C" look remarkably like the "C' on the current line up of Olympic apparel , the "H" in the middle obviously stands for "Harper".


Here is how it will go down:

There is expected to be plenty of outrage.


The media will cover it all, including the event getting live coverage on the 24hr networks.


Not one member of the media will state the obvious and call the Liberals out on how they are not only treating the media like morons with this ridiculous spin but also treating the general public the same way, and if we are really lucky Tom Clarke may make a snide little remark about lawsuits while saying nothing to the obvious spin feeding this joke of a story coming from the pundits sitting right in front of him.


Charlie Angus will again make an ass of himself.


Gayle and Ted will spin this as a show of party unity and a positive for Ignatieff.


The Liberals will lose more votes from people sick and tired of being treated as fools by a political party constantly playing these types of games, while telling you with a straight face they are not.


Bloggers will within a matter of hours of the presser, have exposed both of the Liberal deceit and the press that give the Liberals a free platform for their spin without challenge, for the dupes they are.


The Liberal Party will act as if nothing happened as no apology will be forthcoming from the Liberals or their strategists for smearing the Montreal Canadians, the HBC and all of the designers and employees involved, the Canadian Olympic Committee, and our athletes, (That is a lot of people but when the Liberals smear they do so with wide brush.) and no apology will be forthcoming from the Liberals to the people of Canada for playing politics with the Olympics and again treating us as all as fools.


The media will wonder why they are losing customers and revenue.

Update: More Proof from the Liberals. Come on Mr. Harper, it is like you are loading the gun for them. ;)

Why the "we can do better" party have doomed the CPC.

This is hard to admit as a conservative, but the new Liberal slogan "we can do better" is starting to worry me somewhat because it would appear that the Liberals can do better.

Some examples: They can do H1N1 vaccine better than GlaxoSmithKline , Sanofi-Aventis, Novartis, CSL and Sinovac can, they can do infrastructure better by getting projects done 7 years ahead of schedule, and they can even do video better, just to name a few.

For conservatives having the Liberals doing all of those things better should be worrisome, but it pails in comparison to the their latest. The Liberals can do democracy better as they appear to have found a better system by doing away with nomination races along with all of that pesky voting stuff.

Here is what Sheila Gervais, a former national director of the Liberal Party had to say:

"We've turned into one big appointment society, it's a perfect democratic deficit storm."

"They appoint the leader. The leader in turn appoints the election apparatus . . . . None of them have an elected basis and then these people have the right to choose and appoint candidates?"

"This simply has very little link to some of our most basic tenets of democracy. There is no power to the people in these types of processes." (h/t The Halls of Macadamia)

Well said Sheila but you forgot to mention that Michael Ignatieff has NEVER actually won a nomination contest of any kind as he was also appointed in his own riding of Etobicoke-Lakeshore* in 2005.



PM Harper might as well hand over the keys to 24 Sussex right now because if the Liberals can do democracy better, there is no telling what they will show us up on in any possible upcoming election. We are doomed.


Update: Democracy sort of lives in Outremont, but dies a painful death in the Montreal riding of Jeanne-Le Ber as Quebec lieutenant Denis Coderre has his judgement questioned, the candidate Ms. Le Prohon gets moved around like a piece of meat, and the Liberals of Jeanne-Le Ber get told what to do and have the option of choosing their candidate taken away from them by the guy who was appointed to his own job.

And so it goes in the Liberal Party of Canada.







*Well there should have been a nomination race for Etobicoke-Lakeshore in 2005 but the seeds of the "appointment society" were first sown when "Two would-be candidates for the nomination claim they were locked out of party headquarters when they tried to file their nomination papers by last weekend's deadline. Both were subsequently disqualified, leaving Ignatieff to be acclaimed." (h/t Warren Kinsella.)

Fact checking the Liberal fact checker.

Fact checking the Liberal fact checker. Alternate title: How many lies and distortions can we squeeze into a web page.

A couple from the LPC's Just the Facts: ( my comments in parenthesis)

Liberals vs. Conservatives on culture:
- The Conservatives slashed $45 million from the culture sector. ( yes they did but why the convenient leave out of this :spending on cultural programs in the second year of Stephen Harper's Conservative government will be $509-million or 15.2 per cent more than it was in in fiscal 2006, the last year of Paul Martin's Liberal government.)
- Liberals defend culture and artists. We have promised to restore the funding cut by the Conservatives in 2008. While the Liberals were in power, this key sector’s budget was a high priority. ( Paul Martin priority #2,467 I guess. How can you restore funding to a sector that is getting more money now than it was in 2007? So unless you are planning on making massive cuts to the arts, as Martin did in the early 1990's, it would be impossible to 'restore' funding to 2007 levels.)
- The Conservatives have left Radio-Canada to fend for itself while the Liberal Party wants to ensure its long-term financial stability. (the CBC gets 1.1 Billion dollars from the federal government, not exactly fending for themselves is it.)
- The Conservatives introduced Bill C-10 giving the government the discretionary power to censor films while refusing to subsidize productions considered contrary to “public order”. The Liberal Party, on the other hand, has fought tooth and nail against this censorship law. ( Note quote of the words “public order”. November, 2003, when Paul Martin was about to take over from Jean Chrétien as Liberal Prime Minister, and after what they described as a long period of industry consultation, Deputy Prime Minister John Manley and Minster of Heritage Sheila Copps proposed that Canadian film and video productions will receive tax credits provided that "public financial support of the production would not be contrary to public policy." So you have fought tooth and nail against a policy that it turns out was basically written by the Liberal Party have you? Considering that John McCallum called the bill "sensible" and not a peep was heard from ANY Liberal MP when the bill was before Parliament, I would hardly call that or even the re-write of history on the origins of the bill, fighting tooth and nail against it.)

Liberals vs. Conservatives on EI:
- While Liberals believe that all Canadians have the right to the same EI coverage, regardless of where they live, Conservatives rejected this proposal and failed to present anything constructive as part of this summer’s EI working group. ( but yet we have the government introducing improvements to EI and now we have the very same Liberals trying to fast track this non constructive and apparently non existent legislation through both houses of Parliament. Lies and political games with this one, a double bonus)



I wonder what a Liberal fact checker makes now a days? It looks like easy money to me; just distort or make stuff up, re-write history, hit enter and collect your brown paper bag of cash at the end of the week for services rendered.

h/t Christian Conservative.