23

Hard talk


 

From Michael Ignatieff’s scrum after QP today.

Question: Speaking of narratives, how are you going to respond when the negative ads come out?

Michael Ignatieff: Ah, the negative ads.  I’m trembling in my shoes, I’m quaking.  Look, again it’s part of the same story here.  The Prime Minister backed us off a cliff, caused a parliamentary crisis with uncontrolled partisanship before Christmas.  The Canadian people said stop this.  Wake up!  Grow up!  Do you jobs!  And doing your job means passing the budget, working together, putting aside partisanship.  I’ve had to swallow stuff in this budget I’m not crazy about but I’ve done it because the government, this economy needs stimulus urgently.  To repeat, we’re in the middle of the most serious crisis in a generation.  Let’s act, you know, as if we understood that.  That’s what I’ve been saying. 

They try these foolish partisan ads.  It doesn’t seem to me to create the climate that will allow us to work productively together.  But am I worried about it?  Of course, I’m not worried about it.  They can say what they want about me.  And I do my job, my problem is I want them to do their job.  Thanks a lot. 


 

Hard talk

  1. Hard talk? This sounds very soft. In fact, I feel an “Iggy, not a leader” ad coming on.

    IGGY — TOO WEAK TO RESPOND TO OUR NEGATIVE ADS. (cue: some suitably gayish music)

    HARPER — ALWAYS READY TO ATTACK. (images of soldiers, guns, and inexplicably, donuts)

    IGGY — NOT A LEADER.

    VOTE CONSERVATIVE.

  2. LMAO! What I find truly brilliant right now is that the CPC doesn’t have to actually have any negative ads .. just keep mentioning them every now and then and the net affect is making Iggy look disingenous at best or stupid at worst because of course any poltician doesn’t like negative advertising against them. Negative advertising is not a good term becuase it insults the intelligence of the reader of the article after all something can be very true and not insulting but if damaging then it’s negative. I mean realy folks take the LPC ‘ Soldiers In The Streets ‘ against the CPC ads .. I mean this is very negative but though somewhat effective it was of little use. Then we have the CPC ‘ Not A Leader ‘ ads against Dion personally I never really saw this a negative although it was very effective – Humor is always best take the ‘ Puffin Poo ‘ now that was funny and worked on so many levels too bad it was yanked all the good ones usually are. What is even sillier though is that any one who ever studied our history and read any paper from the early 1900’s and before realizes that we don’t hold a candle to what they were doing back then, not even close, not even in the same ball park!

    • In the middle of a really bad recession, the COnservaitve government decides it needs to spend money on partisan attack ads outside of an election cycle. Perhaps I’m being too hopeful Wayne, but I doubt the electorate will take too kindly to such partisan games in this economic climate and political environment.

      • Leave Wayne to his delusions. It’s only guys like him who get a kick out of it anyway.

        • I guess it’s called stimulus spending, CON style.

  3. Weally? Twuly?

  4. I think it’s very hard to not be partisan about how you view this “will they or won’t they run negative ads and when” thing. To CPC supporters it looks like a sign of strength. Iggy supporters will find it looks like nervousness. My hunch is that negative ads will backfire, but I could be wrong. We’ll have to wait and see.

    And Wayne, just because they threw the most outrageous slanderous mud at politicians a hundred years ago doesn’t mean it’s A-OK to do it now.

    And anon, what do you think qualifies as “gayish” music for the background of a negative ad? Some Pet Shop Boys or something? I think the equating of “gay” with “weak” is a little bit beneath a forum like this.

    • While I certainly do not disagree that Anon could have used a better choice of word than “gayish”, to say that the word is a little bit beneath a forum like this simply shows you have not been reading enough of Kody’s various inane comments through the months.

      • Sad but true. Remember the best advice is always “do not feed the trolls”.

    • Agreed. Meant to say that the attempt would be to tar Iggy with all the classical “weak” imagery that Liberals (or liberals) are often tarred with. As for specific music scores, I’ve no idea — the soundtrack from Brokeback Mountain perhaps?

      • Village People?

  5. I thought Iggy’s response was a good one. That said, I find all the preemptive criticism of the Conservatives’ negative ads a little premature, given that no ads have actually aired yet.

    Also, Iggy’s old writings, speeches and interviews are definitely fair game for the Tories, just as Harper’s were fair game for the Liberals.

    • CR
      I agree, Iggy’s remarks were just what is needed in his particular position. Play it sane Iggy, it just winds the con party pmo types up even tighter then they already are, if possible.
      But do you really want to see stuff about how Iggy dissed Canada at some obscure[ or not ] harvard gala ; or hear, yet again how SH toured all over the states slagging Canada? I know i don’t. But i predict if we do see this kind of dog and pony show, the voter turnout will head even further south. Which may well be what the Harpies want anyway. – sorry for the gratuitous shot Mr H, there’s just something about you that brings the best out of me.

    • To follow on that point, I’m a bit worried that we’re slowly moving towards a world where the only people capable of being elected are those that have never said or written anything that remains in the public record.

      My personal bias is to view The Lesser Evil as an academic discussion and Alberta Agenda (the firewall letter) as a shameful hissy-fit, but I think abuse (not necessarily “use”) of either by political opponents takes us down a disturbing road.

      • If yr right then our future is grim indeed!

    • That said, I find all the preemptive criticism of the Conservatives’ negative ads a little premature, given that no ads have actually aired yet.

      You think THAT’s premature! Just a few comments up, people are criticizing Ignatieff’s lack of a response to the negative ads that haven’t aired yet!!!

  6. Ignatieff went on to denounce future acts of terrorism, if any; economic downturns to come in history; and the outbreak of war in a country to be determined.

  7. To bad Duffy didn’t have his show anymore so he could to screen the ads for free.

    • He’s just waiting for Link Byfield to be his seat-mate.

      Then they will be in the ads.

  8. I can’t wait for the reaction of those who have lost, or are losing, their jobs, homes, and pension savings, to some silly ‘poopin’ Puffin ads’, or whatever other similar reassuring messages from the Harper party.

  9. I can’t believe they’re going negative. Don’t they have anything else better to do, like say, govern our country? Bunch of losers that’s what they are.
    Makes me miss the good old days of the 1990’s..

  10. Is it just me or could all of Aaron Wherry’s reports be summarized by really obvious headlines. This one is:
    LIBERAL LEADER OPPOSED TO ADS TARGETING LIBERAL LEADER.

    I am anxiously awaiting Wherry’s next one: REPORT: PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE BEING STABBED IN THE LEG

  11. The attack ads wont work this time around because, unlike Dion, Iggy won’t have to deal with Taber’s anonymous-senior-long time-liberal insiders echoing Harpers’ ads.

    Also, Iggy happens to be the press gallery’s darling at the moment.

Sign in to comment.