226

‘A courageous warrior’


 

The Conservative side has released the trailer for Stephen Harper: The Movie.

See previously: Stephen Harper and Canada, a love story, parts one, two, three and four.


 

‘A courageous warrior’

  1. I count two errors in this post. Well done Wherry.

  2. His voice is far too nasal for that speech. Make him do one where he explains how to do changes fo the capital cost allowance scheme.

    And for many of the new Canadians Kenney has been dispatched to court, Canada has not always been their home.

  3. His voice is far too nasal for that speech. Make him do one where he explains how to do changes fo the capital cost allowance scheme.

    And for many of the new Canadians Kenney has been dispatched to court, Canada has not always been their home.

    • What a trite speech; nothing but platitudes. I laughed aloud when they talked about courageous leaders, as The Clumsy One lumbered into the shot.

    • That was my first thought too – man, what a nasal voice. When you watch clips of him speaking, you don't catch, but when you're forced to listen to just his voice, Harper comes off as hectoring and uptight.

      • Kind of suits someone of such plummage, doncha think? We're still waiting for him to cross the road…

  4. awesome. especially love the title sequence at 55-56s.

  5. awesome. especially love the title sequence at 55-56s.

  6. Oh my.

    Is he going to run his whole campaign on emptiness and images devoid of any substance?

    I like the recent take on his French version of this series of "I'm a bigger patriot than any of you shmucks" ads:
    [youtube zOeF1K4MCj4&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOeF1K4MCj4&feature=player_embedded youtube]

    A little bit more, um, real, shall we say.

  7. Oh my.

    Is he going to run his whole campaign on emptiness and images devoid of any substance?

    I like the recent take on his French version of this series of "I'm a bigger patriot than any of you shmucks" ads:
    [youtube zOeF1K4MCj4&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOeF1K4MCj4&feature=player_embedded youtube]

    A little bit more, um, real, shall we say.

    • there's something a little odd about that one, can't quite put my finger on it…

  8. For "a courageous warrior" they used a supporting shot of Stephen Harper — lifelong civilian — walking out of/on Parliament?

    Patriotism may not be the last refuge of a scoundrel, after all.

    Jingoism is.

  9. I truly feel inspired…
    … to vote for anyone other than a Tory candidate.

  10. I truly feel inspired…
    … to vote for anyone other than a Tory candidate.

  11. there's something a little odd about that one, can't quite put my finger on it…

  12. Incredibly bad.

  13. Incredibly bad.

    • really? the action, the love story, the scenery, and then the rousing conlcusion, this had it all. I would love to be ina position to have films like this made about me, I'd wear an iPad around my neck and play it on loop… "suck it monkeys, Canada roolz!" is what I'd say.

      • well, judging by the production values of this ad, you could probably afford to make your own

        • I don't think so, I just love using the star wipe too much.

  14. Got to admit, I liked this one.

  15. Got to admit, I liked this one.

    • seriously, they hired professionals on this one

      • I have to watch it a couple more times before making up my mind. Bearing in mind it's all in the eye of the beholder and that the natural response to this is: Yea Canada! My first impession was that the Harper voice over was awful…too overbearing…too something…and the footage too quick and disjointed …nit picking? Probably? I may come around after another viewing or two, we'll see?
        Rationally this has winner written all over it though.

        Ok second impression: Way too much bass on the voice over [ or something like that] Great images, but too fast and disjointed. Great speech…really good. Reminds me of the pez's speech in Armaggedon. A winner all around. Course i hated it, so they should run it lots. :)

      • Yeah. All those useless Arts Majors desperate for work.

    • Yes, but ironically right?

    • For it's lack of content and bizarre imagery?

      "Canada is and always has been our country?" (Well, it was someone else's country, then the French's, then the British's, then the French again, then the British again … but then, yes, it was ultimately OURS, by act of the UK Parliament.)

      "And we want Canada to be a True North that is as strong and as free as it can be in every way that matters …" (Which ways matter to the Harper Government?)

      "Faithful to our commitments" (Straight-couple shot. Cute.)

      "Loyal to our friends" (Fighter jets with which to cooperate with our Russian allies/defend against the Russian menace.)

      "A courageous warrior" (Stephen Harper — lifelong civilian.)

      "An example to the world" (Stephen Harper — at the UN????? For realz?)

      • I wonder why they showed such old footage of soldiers — looked WWI — don't want to remind us of the current missions?

      • "Canada is and always has been our country?"

        I listened to it on radio and it still sounds good. But that first phrase did jar…man that was insipid. Thankfully it got better [ i'm a sucker for a well written speech…what can i say?]

    • Poor lonely Stewart Smith—has the ability to take off his partisan blinders and make an intelligent objective judgment.

      I dislike all ads equally, but the scenery, especially the Rockies, made me tolerate this one.

      • Then you'll be pleased to hear about harper's new stock footage database…

      • Yes, the scenery was good and there were some cute/nice-looking, friendly people.

        And a big flag.

        And there was absence of mean-spirited negativity. Which is an improvement over a lot of ads (and not just conservative ones.

        It also seemed a little, err, vapid and clichéd, don't you think?

        • "It also seemed a little, err, vapid and clichéd, don't you think? "
          nope
          FIGHTER JETS

  16. How pleased is Wherry going to be when the Conservative's win the election, and he gets to keep posting link after link to stuff he doesn't like about Harper?

  17. It's that Mr. Harper was smiling at the end.

  18. really? the action, the love story, the scenery, and then the rousing conlcusion, this had it all. I would love to be ina position to have films like this made about me, I'd wear an iPad around my neck and play it on loop… "suck it monkeys, Canada roolz!" is what I'd say.

  19. Even worse than a lifelong civilian, he's a lifelong desk jockey/politician.

  20. Ha! As long as there is a Liberal Research Bureau Wherry will always have content to copy/paste!

  21. pretty pleased, I'd bet, what of it? I'm pretty pleased when my work finds an audience and my contract gets renewed too.

  22. Even worse than a lifelong civilian, he's a lifelong desk jockey/politician.

    • So is no one else gonna say it?

      Alright then.

      HARPER WALKS FUNNY.

      There. I said it. See what you made me do?

  23. Ha! As long as there is a Liberal Research Bureau Wherry will always have content to copy/paste!

  24. pretty pleased, I'd bet, what of it? I'm pretty pleased when my work finds an audience and my contract gets renewed too.

  25. Heh, if the media want to chase Carson-gate and little girls around at rallies,
    the CPC can still get out our message, thru the social media and local media.

    Another week of Donolo dictating to the media what to report,
    and you guys lose 35% of your market.

  26. seriously, they hired professionals on this one

  27. Yes, but ironically right?

  28. I'm a bit confused by that last point.

    Who is it that is losing 35% of what market???

  29. What is your message? Don't pay any attention to Harper the man going through the motions during this campaign, just imagine the one created by these advertisers? If that is your message, best to lock Harper away right now and just run the ads. Less damage to his reputation that way.

  30. I'm a bit confused by that last point.

    Who is it that is losing 35% of what market???

  31. What is your message? Don't pay any attention to Harper the man going through the motions during this campaign, just imagine the one created by these advertisers? If that is your message, best to lock Harper away right now and just run the ads. Less damage to his reputation that way.

  32. Does this remind anyone of a Molson Canadian commercial?

  33. Does this remind anyone of a Molson Canadian commercial?

    • LOL.. it's the flag. :)

      • nice one

        • Watched with the sound off. Looked like a recut of the "Going off the air" O Canada video that used to come on about 1 am, back in the 70's.

          "We now end our broadcasting day…"

          • Except they always seem to show a shot of Harper when he says 'our country'. I suppose that makes sense. The Government of Canada is no more; long live the Harper Government.

        • Well at least the mystery of why I liked it is solved.

      • And the wheat field… expected to see / hear "Molson Canadian. Made from Canada."

    • I was wondering why I wanted a beer after watching it. It all make sense now.

  34. For it's lack of content and bizarre imagery?

    "Canada is and always has been our country?" (Well, it was someone else's country, then the French's, then the British's, then the French again, then the British again … but then, yes, it was ultimately OURS, by act of the UK Parliament.)

    "And we want Canada to be a True North that is as strong and as free as it can be in every way that matters …" (Which ways matter to the Harper Government?)

    "Faithful to our commitments" (Straight-couple shot. Cute.)

    "Loyal to our friends" (Fighter jets with which to cooperate with our Russian allies/defend against the Russian menace.)

    "A courageous warrior" (Stephen Harper — lifelong civilian.)

    "An example to the world" (Stephen Harper — at the UN????? For realz?)

  35. Odd. Doesn't the Chicken Party of Canada already have the message?

  36. LOL.. it's the flag. :)

  37. Odd. Doesn't the Chicken Party of Canada already have the message?

  38. What a trite speech; nothing but platitudes. I laughed aloud when they talked about courageous leaders, as The Clumsy One lumbered into the shot.

  39. I wonder why they showed such old footage of soldiers — looked WWI — don't want to remind us of the current missions?

  40. nice one

  41. I thought that film was beautiful.
    Thank you Mr. Harper / Conservatives. Makes me proud to be Canadian.

  42. that must be it.

  43. Yes but to whom? The same people who voted conservative last time? Don't you need to attract a dozen or so new voters?

  44. Yes but to whom? The same people who voted conservative last time? Don't you need to attract a dozen or so new voters?

  45. that must be it.

  46. I thought that film was beautiful.
    Thank you Mr. Harper / Conservatives. Makes me proud to be Canadian.

    • You sure you don't mean "makes me proud to DRINK Canadian"?

  47. Ugh…Goebbels, now Leni…

  48. Ugh…Goebbels, now Leni…

    • now, now; let's keep some perspective here, okay? Leni Riefenstahl's films were even awesomer than this one.

      • Nah, this one's better — Dolby Digital Plus to filter out the cluck, cluck chicken sound.

  49. …..and that would be different in what way from the past 5 years ?

  50. That's really sad.

    Personally, I was proud of being Canadian years ago. Nice that you can finally catch up though.

  51. Oh gawd, that is soooo bad.

    A nasal shout-out over a mass of maple-syrup covered images, and except for one quick shot….all 'white folks'. Most of them grey-haired.

    Must be meant for the nursing home crowd.

  52. I have to watch it a couple more times before making up my mind. Bearing in mind it's all in the eye of the beholder and that the natural response to this is: Yea Canada! My first impession was that the Harper voice over was awful…too overbearing…too something…and the footage too quick and disjointed …nit picking? Probably? I may come around after another viewing or two, we'll see?
    Rationally this has winner written all over it though.

    Ok second impression: Way too much bass on the voice over [ or something like that] Great images, but too fast and disjointed. Great speech…really good. Reminds me of the pez's speech in Armaggedon. A winner all around. Course i hated it, so they should run it lots. :)

  53. Oh gawd, that is soooo bad.

    A nasal shout-out over a mass of maple-syrup covered images, and except for one quick shot….all 'white folks'. Most of them grey-haired.

    Must be meant for the nursing home crowd.

  54. That's one of the best of this type of speech I've heard Harper make. Yeah, a few twirly-twirly lines, but overall, it was quite stirring. This will go over well. Its the kind of thing the Liberals usually do but Conservatives have felt beneath them.

  55. That's one of the best of this type of speech I've heard Harper make. Yeah, a few twirly-twirly lines, but overall, it was quite stirring. This will go over well. Its the kind of thing the Liberals usually do but Conservatives have felt beneath them.

  56. Unfortunately, in their brilliant strategy of pissing off the national media and working directly with the local media, they have also managed to piss off the local media.

  57. now, now; let's keep some perspective here, okay? Leni Riefenstahl's films were even awesomer than this one.

  58. Unfortunately, in their brilliant strategy of pissing off the national media and working directly with the local media, they have also managed to piss off the local media.

    • It was truly tragic that this intrepid reporter had to wait at a hotel for a whole hour for the PM to arrive and then had to travel by bus to a destination not far away while locked up in that bus with other intrepid reporters.

      ted—just because that intrepid reporter looks foolish by whining about something so stupid doesn`t mean you must appear equally foolish by linking to her silliness.
      Did you ever think that she might have some preconceived ideas about PM Harper and that might effect the quality of her reporting ?

      • Could Ted & Aaron be one in the same? That had all the makings of one of Aarons posts.

      • So they drag local reporters out to Sidney for an event in Colwood? And the burning issue there is that overpass.
        So Harper does a Kim Cambell on it – a campaign is no time to talk about local issues. Way to blow off the Con candidate.

  59. Poor lonely Stewart Smith—has the ability to take off his partisan blinders and make an intelligent objective judgment.

    I dislike all ads equally, but the scenery, especially the Rockies, made me tolerate this one.

  60. This was a great ad all around [ few technical flaws] It actually saddens me that this is not the real SH. [ only the idealized one] I'm sure on some level he dreams of being that man; but he isn't, or wont let himself be so. He just can't deal with legitimate dissent.
    I loved the idealism, yet i despise the man.

  61. This was a great ad all around [ few technical flaws] It actually saddens me that this is not the real SH. [ only the idealized one] I'm sure on some level he dreams of being that man; but he isn't, or wont let himself be so. He just can't deal with legitimate dissent.
    I loved the idealism, yet i despise the man.

    • So you know who the "real" Stephen Harper is, do you? lol

      But when Conservatives dare to have their opinion on the "real" Iggy and his motivations for coming back, you all go bonkers. Yes, you'll justify these double standards. I know. I know.

  62. well, judging by the production values of this ad, you could probably afford to make your own

  63. It was truly tragic that this intrepid reporter had to wait at a hotel for a whole hour for the PM to arrive and then had to travel by bus to a destination not far away while locked up in that bus with other intrepid reporters.

    ted—just because that intrepid reporter looks foolish by whining about something so stupid doesn`t mean you must appear equally foolish by linking to her silliness.
    Did you ever think that she might have some preconceived ideas about PM Harper and that might effect the quality of her reporting ?

  64. Nah, this one's better — Dolby Digital Plus to filter out the cluck, cluck chicken sound.

  65. Gotta love it how these Tory ads infuriate Wherry as his Liberal universe comes crashing down on him. How he suffers.

  66. I don't think so, I just love using the star wipe too much.

  67. I can't believe they used "hope". Maybe they picked it up cheap at the Obamas' spring yard sale.

  68. I can't believe they used "hope". Maybe they picked it up cheap at the Obamas' spring yard sale.

    • Hopy Changy. Without the changy.

    • You're probably correct. It's said that the next Shephard Fairey poster for Obama has him rolling his eyes comically while clocking his thumb to the right. One iconic line beneath, 'Them?'

    • Colbert has forever ruined the cheesey patriotic, faux patriotic political ad. And thank God for that.

    • Dear Lord, I think I *did* turn epileptic.

  69. Could Ted & Aaron be one in the same? That had all the makings of one of Aarons posts.

  70. So you know who the "real" Stephen Harper is, do you? lol

    But when Conservatives dare to have their opinion on the "real" Iggy and his motivations for coming back, you all go bonkers. Yes, you'll justify these double standards. I know. I know.

  71. Then you'll be pleased to hear about harper's new stock footage database…

  72. Yes, the scenery was good and there were some cute/nice-looking, friendly people.

    And a big flag.

    And there was absence of mean-spirited negativity. Which is an improvement over a lot of ads (and not just conservative ones.

    It also seemed a little, err, vapid and clichéd, don't you think?

  73. This video is inspiring. Who's with me? Let's invade Canada!

  74. This video is inspiring. Who's with me? Let's invade Canada!

    • yes, let us plunder it's vast mineral wealth and build staggering houses along it's near endless coastline! Who's gonna stop us, the wuss with the glasses doing the narration?

      • him and his STEALTH FIGHTER JETS

  75. "It also seemed a little, err, vapid and clichéd, don't you think? "
    nope
    FIGHTER JETS

  76. So they drag local reporters out to Sidney for an event in Colwood? And the burning issue there is that overpass.
    So Harper does a Kim Cambell on it – a campaign is no time to talk about local issues. Way to blow off the Con candidate.

  77. Colbert has forever ruined the cheesey patriotic, faux patriotic political ad. And thank God for that.

  78. Watched with the sound off. Looked like a recut of the "Going off the air" O Canada video that used to come on about 1 am, back in the 70's.

    "We now end our broadcasting day…"

  79. Well at least the mystery of why I liked it is solved.

  80. Also, wasn't it the "local media" that started the story on the two girls? I was under the impression that that story was from the London Free Press.

  81. Cats, my goodness, I actually agree with you.

  82. yes, let us plunder it's vast mineral wealth and build staggering houses along it's near endless coastline! Who's gonna stop us, the wuss with the glasses doing the narration?

  83. Yeah. All those useless Arts Majors desperate for work.

  84. That was my first thought too – man, what a nasal voice. When you watch clips of him speaking, you don't catch, but when you're forced to listen to just his voice, Harper comes off as hectoring and uptight.

  85. I suspect that a television ad featuring footage of Harper at a urinal would draw nothing but fawning praise from Dennis, and a stern talking-to to those who dare critique The Courageous Warrior.

  86. I suspect that a television ad featuring footage of Harper at a urinal would draw nothing but fawning praise from Dennis, and a stern talking-to to those who dare critique The Courageous Warrior.

    • lol, you're more than welcome to point out one word I said about the ad itself. I realize logic and reason is a problem for some on here. If it is, I suggest holding back on the smartass comments. It doesn't work. lol

      • So you don't like the ad? It is incredibly cheesy. I thought the whole genre was a bit strange when watching those from the US, as it presents politicians in the same way as entertainment products. Interesting.

        • Not sure what I think about it, but I obviously don't feel as strongly about it as the Harper bashers do on here. To me, that's the story. They keep telling us that a fourth $300 million election in seven years was vital for our democracy, yet we've spent a campaign so far obsessing with ads and facebook nonsense. Wow.

          • "a fourth $300 million election in seven years"

            Math beats Dennis_F!

            I bet you're outraged about filling your taxes twice every year.

          • 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011. That's four in seven years. Look, I know this fact is very embarrassing for some of you. I know it's become extremely difficult to justify this fourth $300 million election in seven years. But please don't piss on us and tell us it's raining. That's not how you win elections, or even justify frivolous ones in the first place, right?

          • Why am I only getting one tax return this year, I'm filling two every year! Dennis_F

            You can say 3 elections in 6 years, that's a more valid and imposing point. If you want to to include the 2004 election, you have to the years of government that precluded it, making it 11 years.

            Unless you want to avoid having to explain why it's the Conservatives who started the trend of an election every 2 years, you know, back in 2006.

          • Why do we have to abide by your strange rule of including the years before the 2004 election? Unbelievable how the same people who say we don't have democracy can't even stick to the facts about how many elections we've had in the last seven years.

          • It's not a very strange rule, in statistics it's called Mutually Exclusive events.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutually_exclusive

            This election comes at the end of one session of parliament. The 2004 elections came at the end the session of parliament that started in 2000, making it the 4th election in 11 years. You can count elections as starting OR ending parliament, but not BOTH at the same time, which is what you're doing with your fallacy.

            And if it's so bad to have so many elections then blame Harper for launching the 2006 elections only 2 years after the 2004 election, he's the one who set the trend.

  87. Bless you, Stephen Harper, for your courageous fight to keep Canada beautiful, strong and free!!

  88. And the wheat field… expected to see / hear "Molson Canadian. Made from Canada."

  89. Universe comes crashing down? I envisioned at most a face palm or perhaps a head shake. Maybe a trite giggle.

  90. Universe comes crashing down? I envisioned at most a face palm or perhaps a head shake. Maybe a trite giggle.

    • I dunno. He's the one who seems obsessed and one-sided about this. Sure doesn't seem to be a light matter for him. In fact, it's like his life depended on it. Like a religion maybe. Again, I dunno.

      • You sure you're not projecting?

        • You sure you're not just being knee-jerk like Wherry? lol

      • Any politician wrapping themselves in the flag should be treated in a light manner (eyes glaze over, break out the shovels, etc). This post is no different.

        • Yeah, it's not like every politician in the history of the world has tried to wrap themselves in their nation's flag, including a man who came back to Canada after over thirty years and wrote a book, wait for it, trying to wrap himself in his rediscovered country's flag.

          I'd love for some of the Harper haters on here, including Wherry, to finally apply the same standards to all politicians. Just once. Once!

  91. Your ticket to the next Harper townhall is in the mail, Bobbi.

  92. Your ticket to the next Harper townhall is in the mail, Bobbi.

    • How do you know my address? Are you with MacLeans, and will you email it here?? This is great news!!
      THanks you!

  93. You sure you don't mean "makes me proud to DRINK Canadian"?

  94. Let me guess; it's when Harper says "Honourable in our dealings; faithful to our commitments". True of Canadians generally, I suppose, but it nearly made me gag to hear those words come from Harper. Might have worked if he'd said "your"…

  95. Let me guess; it's when Harper says "Honourable in our dealings; faithful to our commitments". True of Canadians generally, I suppose, but it nearly made me gag to hear those words come from Harper. Might have worked if he'd said "your"…

  96. lol, you're more than welcome to point out one word I said about the ad itself. I realize logic and reason is a problem for some on here. If it is, I suggest holding back on the smartass comments. It doesn't work. lol

  97. I dunno. He's the one who seems obsessed and one-sided about this. Sure doesn't seem to be a light matter for him. In fact, it's like his life depended on it. Like a religion maybe. Again, I dunno.

  98. I have to admit, after being somewhat critical of the Prime Minister in the past, I feel bad after watching that video. Prime Minister Stephen Harper is here for Canada. HERE for CANADA. Not somewhere else, for some other country. HERE for CANADA. If I had the chance, I'd shake his hand and say thank you for protecting and defending Canada from all things reckless and unnecessary. All I gotta do is show up at one of those Conservative rallies, right?

  99. I have to admit, after being somewhat critical of the Prime Minister in the past, I feel bad after watching that video. Prime Minister Stephen Harper is here for Canada. HERE for CANADA. Not somewhere else, for some other country. HERE for CANADA. If I had the chance, I'd shake his hand and say thank you for protecting and defending Canada from all things reckless and unnecessary. All I gotta do is show up at one of those Conservative rallies, right?

    • better not.

    • Bit of a reach there buddy. Keep up the good fight though.

      • Are you kidding? The Harper ad is obviously an homage to the Pawlenty ad. It's pretty blatant. It's the first thing I thought of when I saw it.

        I have to say that the sound effects were better in the Pawlenty ad. The explosive handshake was the cherry on top.

      • He is not kidding, but he is also not telling the truth. You would have to be totally stupid not to see that the Harper ad was stolen from this one.

        Methinks paul here might be paid by someone from Craigslist…

    • Why am I not surprised that the Conservatives have produced an inspiringly patriotic piece of publicity for their leader and party and that said ad is remarkably similar to another for a Republican politician?

      Two words…

      John Howard!

    • Wow. What a coincidence…NOT. Is the CPC capable of doing anything original, without first looking south of the border? It may even explain the improvement in production values of the tory ads?
      As i said earlier my first impression was Armageddon…exactly the same feel and buildup to the Presisdent's speech…the soundtrack was even similar.

  100. You sure you're not projecting?

  101. How do you know my address? Are you with MacLeans, and will you email it here?? This is great news!!
    THanks you!

  102. better not.

  103. You sure you're not just being knee-jerk like Wherry? lol

  104. Bit of a reach there buddy. Keep up the good fight though.

  105. I was wondering why I wanted a beer after watching it. It all make sense now.

  106. Why am I not surprised that the Conservatives have produced an inspiringly patriotic piece of publicity for their leader and party and that said ad is remarkably similar to another for a Republican politician?

    Two words…

    John Howard!

  107. The entire team of Republicans should be forced to watch this crap on a 24 hour loop in both the House and the Senate..until they agree to unblock both.

    The entireHarper Government TM should likewise be forced to watch THEIR 'patriotic' ad at a 24 hour Harper rally ( by invitation, of course).

  108. The entire team of Republicans should be forced to watch this crap on a 24 hour loop in both the House and the Senate..until they agree to unblock both.

    The entireHarper Government TM should likewise be forced to watch THEIR 'patriotic' ad at a 24 hour Harper rally ( by invitation, of course).

  109. So is no one else gonna say it?

    Alright then.

    HARPER WALKS FUNNY.

    There. I said it. See what you made me do?

  110. Hopy Changy. Without the changy.

  111. Dear Lord, I think I *did* turn epileptic.

  112. Strange ad. Colbert's was better. What does he mean "Canada is and always has been our country" Is he referring to 1867? Or is this something about being born here versus being an immigrant? Or maybe about Ignatieff working outside Canada?

    And what is an advertisement for monogamy doing in a political ad? Is that some kind of message to social conservatives?

    Also, given recent events, when they superimpose "courageous warrior" with a picture of Harper trying to look like he is strutting – one can't help but think he is not strutting off to a debate.

  113. Strange ad. Colbert's was better. What does he mean "Canada is and always has been our country" Is he referring to 1867? Or is this something about being born here versus being an immigrant? Or maybe about Ignatieff working outside Canada?

    And what is an advertisement for monogamy doing in a political ad? Is that some kind of message to social conservatives?

    Also, given recent events, when they superimpose "courageous warrior" with a picture of Harper trying to look like he is strutting – one can't help but think he is not strutting off to a debate.

  114. Yeah, is someone googling Harper's speeches to see who he might be 'borrowing' from this time?

  115. There are tears in my eyes. Oh wait, just the onions for the sauce. Sorry to hijack Dennis_F's tag line, but…

    Next.

  116. There are tears in my eyes. Oh wait, just the onions for the sauce. Sorry to hijack Dennis_F's tag line, but…

    Next.

  117. No, Bobbi, bless advertising, Bless advertising.

    *sob* It's so beautiful.

  118. No, Bobbi, bless advertising, Bless advertising.

    *sob* It's so beautiful.

  119. You're probably correct. It's said that the next Shephard Fairey poster for Obama has him rolling his eyes comically while clocking his thumb to the right. One iconic line beneath, 'Them?'

  120. him and his STEALTH FIGHTER JETS

  121. Er,

    <object width="425" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L8YwJC_nBgw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L8YwJC_nBgw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="349"></embed></object>

  122. Answered that Craigslist ad eh?

    A bit over the top, but not a bad effort all around.

  123. Answered that Craigslist ad eh?

    A bit over the top, but not a bad effort all around.

  124. Are you kidding? The Harper ad is obviously an homage to the Pawlenty ad. It's pretty blatant. It's the first thing I thought of when I saw it.

    I have to say that the sound effects were better in the Pawlenty ad. The explosive handshake was the cherry on top.

  125. Except they always seem to show a shot of Harper when he says 'our country'. I suppose that makes sense. The Government of Canada is no more; long live the Harper Government.

  126. So you don't like the ad? It is incredibly cheesy. I thought the whole genre was a bit strange when watching those from the US, as it presents politicians in the same way as entertainment products. Interesting.

  127. I detected a very slight flavour of the upbeat, positive intonation and rhythm of some of President Kennedy's speeches. Perhaps Harper believes his majority will bring him to a similar position in Canada's history. (In French, one might say of that idea–and the video: "Mon Dieu, mais çà, c'est vraiment du camelot!")

  128. I detected a very slight flavour of the upbeat, positive intonation and rhythm of some of President Kennedy's speeches. Perhaps Harper believes his majority will bring him to a similar position in Canada's history. (In French, one might say of that idea–and the video: "Mon Dieu, mais çà, c'est vraiment du camelot!")

    • Ooops, late night confusion: "Mon Dieu, mais çà, c'est vraiment de la camelote!" (Although, one could also say "Mon Dieu, mais Harper, c'est un véritable camelot!" as well, while free-associating about the Kennedy era. But I really mustn't make late-night comments like this in the future…)

  129. Ooops, late night confusion: "Mon Dieu, mais çà, c'est vraiment de la camelote!" (Although, one could also say "Mon Dieu, mais Harper, c'est un véritable camelot!" as well, while free-associating about the Kennedy era. But I really mustn't make late-night comments like this in the future…)

  130. He is not kidding, but he is also not telling the truth. You would have to be totally stupid not to see that the Harper ad was stolen from this one.

    Methinks paul here might be paid by someone from Craigslist…

  131. P.S. And you're not welcome here.

  132. P.S. And you're not welcome here.

  133. Kind of suits someone of such plummage, doncha think? We're still waiting for him to cross the road…

  134. "Canada is and always has been our country?"

    I listened to it on radio and it still sounds good. But that first phrase did jar…man that was insipid. Thankfully it got better [ i'm a sucker for a well written speech…what can i say?]

  135. Wow. What a coincidence…NOT. Is the CPC capable of doing anything original, without first looking south of the border? It may even explain the improvement in production values of the tory ads?
    As i said earlier my first impression was Armageddon…exactly the same feel and buildup to the Presisdent's speech…the soundtrack was even similar.

  136. Not sure what I think about it, but I obviously don't feel as strongly about it as the Harper bashers do on here. To me, that's the story. They keep telling us that a fourth $300 million election in seven years was vital for our democracy, yet we've spent a campaign so far obsessing with ads and facebook nonsense. Wow.

  137. These are nothing more than movie trailers, especially the screen shots near the end where the names come up like the actor who is playing the lead role. Although Harper's ad is more offputting, with his bellowing, uninspiring voice trampling all over the whole thing.

  138. These are nothing more than movie trailers, especially the screen shots near the end where the names come up like the actor who is playing the lead role. Although Harper's ad is more offputting, with his bellowing, uninspiring voice trampling all over the whole thing.

  139. "a fourth $300 million election in seven years"

    Math beats Dennis_F!

    I bet you're outraged about filling your taxes twice every year.

  140. 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011. That's four in seven years. Look, I know this fact is very embarrassing for some of you. I know it's become extremely difficult to justify this fourth $300 million election in seven years. But please don't piss on us and tell us it's raining. That's not how you win elections, or even justify frivolous ones in the first place, right?

  141. Why am I only getting one tax return this year, I'm filling two every year! Dennis_F

    You can say 3 elections in 6 years, that's a more valid and imposing point. If you want to to include the 2004 election, you have to the years of government that precluded it, making it 11 years.

    Unless you want to avoid having to explain why it's the Conservatives who started the trend of an election every 2 years, you know, back in 2006.

  142. Why do we have to abide by your strange rule of including the years before the 2004 election? Unbelievable how the same people who say we don't have democracy can't even stick to the facts about how many elections we've had in the last seven years.

  143. It's not a very strange rule, in statistics it's called Mutually Exclusive events.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutually_exclusive

    This election comes at the end of one session of parliament. The 2004 elections came at the end the session of parliament that started in 2000, making it the 4th election in 11 years. You can count elections as starting OR ending parliament, but not BOTH at the same time, which is what you're doing with your fallacy.

    And if it's so bad to have so many elections then blame Harper for launching the 2006 elections only 2 years after the 2004 election, he's the one who set the trend.

  144. You're desperately counting sessions I'm counting ELECTIONS.

    Are you seriously trying to tell Canadians that they're not being asked to vote in an election for the fourth time in seven years?

    This is just more silly desperation games by an opposition that kept telling us we need yet another election for democracy. It's hilarious.

  145. Any politician wrapping themselves in the flag should be treated in a light manner (eyes glaze over, break out the shovels, etc). This post is no different.

  146. Yeah, it's not like every politician in the history of the world has tried to wrap themselves in their nation's flag, including a man who came back to Canada after over thirty years and wrote a book, wait for it, trying to wrap himself in his rediscovered country's flag.

    I'd love for some of the Harper haters on here, including Wherry, to finally apply the same standards to all politicians. Just once. Once!

  147. Are you seriously trying to suggest that Canadians vote for an election and not for a session of parliament? That sessions of parliament happen independently of elections? That we can have parliament sessions without elections? Isn't that a bit like a dictatorship?

    You're right, Harper's opposition was very silly when they called a very dangerous and unnecessary election in 2006.

  148. Are you seriously trying to suggest that Canadians vote for an election and not for a session of parliament? That sessions of parliament happen independently of elections? That we can have parliament sessions without elections? Isn't that a bit like a dictatorship?

    You're right, Harper's opposition was very silly when they called a very dangerous and unnecessary election in 2006.

    • THEY VOTE IN ELECTIONS. THEY'VE DONE SO FOUR TIMES IN THE LAST SEVEN YEARS. YES? NEXT.

      • I've had a second, dangerous, frivolous, unnecessary, salary this pay period. – Dennis_F, who doesn`t have a clue about mutual exclusivity.

        …and the only reason we`ve had so many elections is because of Steven Harper`s wreckless opposition in 2006!

        • Amazing how some of you try to attack my personal dealings when you can't stick to the issues at hand. My salary is my business. Why the heck is it yours?

          Your ignorant comments about mutual exclusivity have nothing to do with how many times we've had elections in the last seven years.

          That you can't even admit these basic facts says so much about what this election is about: nothing. Thanks.

          • Actually this election is about the Government being held in contempt of Parliament, which means it is interfering with the proceedings of a legal entity. That`s the vote that dissolved this parliament session. If you want to point out an election about nothing, you should look to the election of 2006, when Steven Harper`s wreckless coalition with socialists and separatists brought down Parliament with absolutely no charges against the Government.

            The only thing I'm mocking is your flawed conception of time periods. Of course you don`t have two pay checks per pay period, but the 4 in 7 argument is basically saying 'There are 4 elections in 3 parliamentary sessions.'

          • Everybody had to answer for the 2006 election in the, wait for it, 2006 election – which, by the way, happened in the wake of Canada's largest political scandal. I guess you don't think that's a big deal.

            Similarly, people will have to explain in this election why we're having it. So far, I can' see it. You talk about those trumped-up "contempt" charges. No one's talking about them. Why? Maybe because they were trumped up.

            So, when you want to have elections, that's OK. When you don't, it's not. I don't think Canadians are buying what you're trying to peddle, which is why you're being so desperate about this fourth election in seven years. Thanks.

  149. THEY VOTE IN ELECTIONS. THEY'VE DONE SO FOUR TIMES IN THE LAST SEVEN YEARS. YES? NEXT.

  150. I've had a second, dangerous, frivolous, unnecessary, salary this pay period. – Dennis_F, who doesn`t have a clue about mutual exclusivity.

    …and the only reason we`ve had so many elections is because of Steven Harper`s wreckless opposition in 2006!

  151. Amazing how some of you try to attack my personal dealings when you can't stick to the issues at hand. My salary is my business. Why the heck is it yours?

    Your ignorant comments about mutual exclusivity have nothing to do with how many times we've had elections in the last seven years.

    That you can't even admit these basic facts says so much about what this election is about: nothing. Thanks.

  152. Actually this election is about the Government being held in contempt of Parliament, which means it is interfering with the proceedings of a legal entity. That`s the vote that dissolved this parliament session. If you want to point out an election about nothing, you should look to the election of 2006, when Steven Harper`s wreckless coalition with socialists and separatists brought down Parliament with absolutely no charges against the Government.

    The only thing I'm mocking is your flawed conception of time periods. Of course you don`t have two pay checks per pay period, but the 4 in 7 argument is basically saying 'There are 4 elections in 3 parliamentary sessions.'

  153. Everybody had to answer for the 2006 election in the, wait for it, 2006 election – which, by the way, happened in the wake of Canada's largest political scandal. I guess you don't think that's a big deal.

    Similarly, people will have to explain in this election why we're having it. So far, I can' see it. You talk about those trumped-up "contempt" charges. No one's talking about them. Why? Maybe because they were trumped up.

    So, when you want to have elections, that's OK. When you don't, it's not. I don't think Canadians are buying what you're trying to peddle, which is why you're being so desperate about this fourth election in seven years. Thanks.

Sign in to comment.