Must Reads

Wikileaks Posts Conservative Party Talking Points

Wikileaks has struck the Conservative Party of Canada, posting the party's standard stump speech and opinion piece for this month.  The documents are apparently designed to be used in community events and submitted to local media.

12 Comments

  1. Anon Name says:

    Liberals are the same!
    Our source states: “Just when you thought you elected a real politician, the central office of Stephen Harper comes in to tell your representative what to do. Just like was done when the Harper crew went after Mulroney, no questions are allowed.”

    From thestar.com:

    Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff is letting his MPs from Newfoundland and Labrador break with his party and vote against the federal budget in a key vote tonight.

    Ignatieff said this morning that he is allowing the MPs a “one-time” vote of protest to “display their anger and indignation” at the budget, which they charge shortchanges the Atlantic province by more than $1 billion.

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/581557

    So, your MPs are voting with The Leader, not how the constituents tell them to vote.

  2. Anon Name says:

    In France, some UMP MPs voted against HADOPI
    But if the C-61 vote happened in Canada and Ignatieff told the MPs to vote FOR, I am sure that EVERYONE would vote FOR despite the waves of letters.

  3. Same old tired Harper rhetoric!
    Harper just states over and over, that the Conservatives will continue to lower taxes and that the Liberals will just keep on raising taxes. Harper never has one thing to say about their platform regarding the environment, CO2 emmisions, new and clean energy technologies or funding for those startup companies because he has no real positive vision for the future of Canada or the disappearing technology sector. The only thing the Conservatives care about is old tired internal combustion technology and protecting and continuing with their destructive Tar Sands operations, which alone won’t allow Canada to meet meet it’s Kyoto requirements and will emit twice the CO2 emissions of every car and truck in Canada by 2020. They have cut science funding and have a science advisor who doesn’t even believe in evolution. They have an Environment Minister who used to be their Industry Minister, hence the reason for not having any environmental platform whatsoever. The Conservatives promised transparency and Canadians got the exact opposite from Harper. When his country needed him the most, he ran and hid for months when he prorogued Parliament to save his own job while Canadians continued to lose theirs. Harper and Flaherty kept denying that there would be a recession and that it wouldn’t affect Canada and that Canadians should invest in stocks as the market crashed. The Conservatives started out with huge Liberal created surpluses and spent it all away and now Canada has one of it’s largest defecits in history as they continue to cut tiny little useless taxes like the GST to buy voters as they continue to sink the country. To use one of Harper’s most repeated phrases, “Let me be clear…”, Harper is not a leader and he is an absolute failure as an economist.

  4. Can’t wait to see the Liberal Party’s talking points
    This is not such a big score. Preparing talking points is what political parties are supposed to do. Do you think MPs actually write that stuff they distribute or say in their ridings?

    There is not much in there that I disagree with. Most of it makes a lot of sense, though I think the hard line on drugs is seriously misguided.

    The economic stuff is right on the mark. Canada is doing remarkably well given the global economy, and in all likelihood Ignatieff would raise taxes, whether to fund universal daycare or more environmental boondoggles.

    What is really remarkable about this is that there is nothing more transparent than actually reading a political party’s talking points. Sure, there is a large amount of spin. But that’s politics. I can’t wait to see the Liberal Party’s talking points. We’d all be ahead with even a hint of what their policies actually are.

  5. Get this to the newsmedia
    Could someone please tip this off to the television newsmedia?

  6. LOL!
    Same old card carrying Conservative Steve!

  7. JasonN still ranting about nothing
    JasonN: Seems you would still rather rant against Harper than address the topic at hand.

    Your rhetoric is so tired and off base. Do really think there would be no deficit if Iggy and his coalition partners were still in power?

  8. LOL Steve!
    I did address the topic in my post. It seems you have missed the point once again and tried to “spin” everything around yet again. They should put you on the payroll, you’re worth it!

  9. Hi Jason
    Just thought I would mention to you with regards to the Kyoto protocol that the 57 scientists who promoted this are now outnumbered 12 to 1 by scientists who do not support their research on global warming (conference in Poland 2008). The Conservatives are prudent not to buy into this particular environmental position at this time. They have allocated more money to “green technology”, supported by the provinces, rather than a national one-size fits all. I for one, support more provincial autonomy, which gives fairer representation, rather than the Liberal/NDP position of controlling everything from Ottawa.
    And BTW, you must be under 50, as those of us who are over 50, understand that evolution was and still remains “a theory” (definition: an unproven concept). Many scientists including aetheists and agnostics, no longer view Darwin’s 90 year old theory as current or accurate, so just maybe it’s o.k. if an M.P. holds a different view as well. I respect your choice, hopefully you will respect others’. Regards, jw

  10. Disinformation, denial and ignorance go hand in hand! Thank god, we still have free speech(for now!)
    J Webb: Your post is typical of rightwing conservative christian fundamentalist climate change and evolution theory denial. I have heard your side of the debate almost verbatim too many times to count. First of all, age has nothing to do with opinion or facts. Secondly, I am well aware that it is “evolution theory” and I am also aware of the definition of a “theory”(“You” should really spend some time studying the definition of a scientific theory). To frame your argument around the fact that it is only a “theory” and is and therefore scientifically diminished or baseless is not only ignorant, but asinine as well. Gravity is a theory, mathematics is a theory, magnetism is a theory, germ theory…etc.etc. Modern science has advanced us and made sense by accepting these theories as bases for moving forward in medicine, flight etc.(this list is too long to even start). Seeing as you seem to think that age has to do with opinion and facts, if you were several hundred years older than your simple “50+” you would still think that the sun revolved around the earth and that the earth is flat and perhaps we should be burning witches. You can believe whatever you want, that is the way religion works, based on faith and not on evidence or scientific fact, for instance, that those dinosaur bone fossils underground were put there by God as ornaments and never really had a life of their own or that the earth is really only 3-6000 years old, or that a talking snake spoke with the only 2 people to populate the whole earth eventhough we have different skin colours and races for different geographical areas of the world, or that the male and female of every species of creature in the world was loaded onto a boat to be saved from a worldwide flood so that we have all of the species of life we have today.
    I would like the people who read your post to know that it is easy to go on a website somewhere and make a disinformation comment to spark doubt in peoples minds without backing up what you say and that your post is a clear example of that:
    Your use of the word “many” in this sentence, “Many scientists including aetheists and agnostics, no longer view Darwin’s 90 year old theory as current or accurate…” means absolutlely nothing as it has no numerical reference or value and is the typical and baseless type of argument used to disinform people and it is quite frankly, an utterly absurd way of trying to make a point.

    As for your statement about the Conservatives, “They have allocated more money to “green technology”…”, no evidence or proof.

    “regards to the Kyoto protocol that the 57 scientists who promoted this are now outnumbered 12 to 1 by scientists who do not support their research on global warming…”, again, no proof, give us a link or the names of the scientists or how many scientists out of how many. With that “proof”, I can assure you that, their integrity has been undermined by whomever has funded their research or signed their paycheques! After calculating how many scientists from your given ratio of 12 to 1, I am going to assume that you are taking side with the disinformation article that is circulating the internet which goes something like this; “Over 650 Scientists Challenge Global Warming “Consensus”” when in fact there are thousands upon thousands of scientists worldwide who support the “theory that humans are contributing/causing global warming and climate change through our creation of CO2. Or perhaps your argument was based around this inane poll with 31,000 signed names, here’s your link: http://local-warming.blogspot.com/2008/05/31000-scientists-dont-believe-in-global.html
    I am appalled at the fact that you tried to use any of these figures to support your argument and you should be ashamed.
    Perhaps you would like to look at these links with recent polls conducted within the proper scientific community pertaining to the subject at hand:
    http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/index.html
    http://stats.org/stories/2008/global_warming_survey_apr23_08.html

    I have my own “theory” J Webb, based on the information/points and methodology or lack thereof in your post, that you are probably a Conservative voting, christian religious person(notice I don’t use the term “right-wing”, as nobody likes to be given a simplistic label) and probably lives in Western Canada, who continues to use the same old tired baseless way of arguing your disinformation to the masses and always leaving the onus on the reader to go and spend hours of “their” time trying to refute or corroborate your claims because you either don’t have the time to validate your argument or can’t! I respect your choice and opinion, what I don’t respect is disinformation, mistruths and ignorance! Regards, JN

  11. Poor JasonN
    Dear Jason, You have my sympathy when you have to spend your valuable time refuting uninformed, groundless claptrap spouted by brain dead right-wing zealots.
    As a Canadian born while Hitler ruled Europe, I am certainly not among the under 50 crowd who are such an anathema to J Webb. (When are idiots like him ever going to learn the meaning of “theory”?)
    For my money, I think almost everything you have said in the posts up to May 9, 2009 is absolutely right, well written, and well supported by references. I have only this to say: Your diligence in rebutting the moronic and ignorant ranting of the non logic-capable right-wing religious fanatic fraternity is to be admired and quoted to those just interested in learning about the issues covered. It is, however, wasted on those whom you are debating, as I suspect you know. People like these do not ever use the imperfect brains they were born with. They begin with a belief and work backward in an attempt to justify it. Their minds are closed and immune to any attempt to show them the the logic and reliable sources of your assertions.
    It’s a shame, but these people, who constitute most of the Conservative and Republican parties, are, in my opinion, the greatest threat to the survival of the western world and democracy which we face today.
    Keep up the good fight Jason, it is worth pursuing, but remember that these people are unreachable by logic and do concentrate on those who still have a somewhat open mind, not the ignorant idiots who, if clues were dynamite, couldn’t blow their conservative noses.

  12. Link?
    The provided link is dead.