Thursday, April 14, 2011

"Ignatieff’s rebuke of Harper majority hailed as Liberal ‘turning point’"

Interesting headline at the Globe and Mail Wednesday, where Iggy was being praised for a victory in the 2011 English language debates. Who is their source? The Liberal campaign manager. The fact that it came from Donollo is not included in the headline, and headlines always gets more attention than what is written inside the article. The headline as it stands is extremely misleading, because it is the opinion of the person running the campaign. Dimitri Soudas, the top guy for Stephen Harper thought that the Tories won the debate, but Jane Taber didn't turn a Soudas victory statement into a national headline. Jane is quite an active spokeswoman for the Ignatieff regime, which is becoming even more apparent during an election period.

The Globe happens to be running a webpoll pointing to Stephen Harper as the clear winner of the leader's debates. Instead of applauding Harper as the winner, Taber is trying to spin the debates as a historic turning point for Ignatieff. There is nothing wrong with having a partisan opinion, so long as you state your partisan leanings prominently on your posts. Pretending to be impartial when you are anything but is disingenuous. The same applies to Kady O'Malley.


  1. The Globe is now, in its current incarnation, nothing more than a glorified propaganda machine with delusions of past grandeur. Every time I feel that I truly have about zero respect for the current Government(and that happens a LOT) I look at the MSM and its pathological hatred of the Conservatives and am reminded that I REALLY HATE the MSN far more. I'm voting for the Conservatives just for spite at this point.
    So I guess all the media agit-prop has worked. Just not in the way it was intended perhaps.

  2. Just Jane wearing out her Liberal kneepads, nothing here move on.

  3. "The Liberals are calling the 42-minute mark of the English-language debate the “turning point” for Michael Ignatieff and are urging supporters to spread the word, arguing the debate can be won twice – on debate night and in the court of public opinion long after it has taken place."

    That's the opening sentence from Taber's piece. I agree that the headline is misleading but bad headlines are usually the responsibility of nameless editors rather than the article's author. Given Taber's opinion on the Globe's live blog at the conclusion of the debate that Ignatieff had disappointed by not performing to the level he had demonstrated on the campaign trail, I'd put this one down to mundane editorial incompetence rather than media bias.

  4. "disingenuous"? Hell, I'd call it fraudulent, or blatantly dishonest,and would suggest the Editor of the Paper is a con artist.

    These are scary times for the Liberals, it's beginning to look like Ignatieff may take them all the way to third place,with Layton and the NDP forming the Official Opposition.

    I'd love to see it,with a Conservative majority. It might make the Liberals a little less arrogant in future.

  5. Ignatieff says:
    "I am a democrat from the top of head to the bottom of my feet"

    "when outside of canada, I am a canadian, but when in Canada, I am a Quebecor"
    "Canada is a second country"

    Can you imagine what his constituents must be thinking?
    There is more but only could think of these two so far.
    The media are whatever the liberals are.

  6. Warren Kinsella also said that "debates are won long after the debate - when people start talking about them and often who they thought won, turns out to be wrong".

    Seems to be a talking point - if you say Iggy won often enough - people will believe it!!!

    What a bunch of buffoons

  7. uhh..... kinda leaves me wondering how much of that missing $40 mil that b***h Taber has in her pocket.