Not a Leader: Russian Invasion Edition!
Don't get me wrong. I think the "NotALeader" Tory attack site has a few things worth chuckling at. Sure, at times the laughter comes because the site is almost a self-parody of itself - the part where you can make you own attack ad comes to mind (actual slide: "leadership means eating your hotdog like everyone else"). But, yeah, it's kind of funny and I didn't at all mind getting an entry in the ill-fated Dionbook.
The problem is, no one who isn't a blog geek is going to find it funny so it's unlikely to win them over a single undecided voter. I guess it might fire up their volunteers a bit but there are so many "belittling" aspects on that site that you have to wonder if it's worth it.
But beyond the pooping puffin and Iggy gun clip, my favourite part of the site comes from an obscure "reputation" page in the "weak leader" section. Here's the section showing why Dion is a weak leader:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read this as:
-Stephen Harper An Overzealous Staffer thinks the Russians plan to take the arctic by force.
-Stephen Harper An Overzealous Staffer thinks we should be "shooting the Danes or the Russians to impose our sovereignty".
Which is a fair policy position to take if you're looking for a war with Russia. Which I don't really think we are.
The problem is, no one who isn't a blog geek is going to find it funny so it's unlikely to win them over a single undecided voter. I guess it might fire up their volunteers a bit but there are so many "belittling" aspects on that site that you have to wonder if it's worth it.
But beyond the pooping puffin and Iggy gun clip, my favourite part of the site comes from an obscure "reputation" page in the "weak leader" section. Here's the section showing why Dion is a weak leader:
As if that questionable statement was not enough, in later months Dion would expand on his policy for defending Canadian sovereignty; or lack theoreof:
"...bring all the scientists of the world to study the Canadian Arctic."
Stephane Dion, Toronto Sun. January 6, 2007
"We are in the 21st century and we will not shoot the Danes or the Russians to impose our sovereignty."
Stephane Dion. Whitehorse Star. December 20, 2007
Dion was right about one thing. We are in the 21st century. Here's a little refresher
for him on what's been happening...
"Russia plans Arctic military build-up"
The Telegraph. June 11, 2008
"Russian bombers launch missiles over Arctic."
The Telegraph. April 9, 2007
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read this as:
-
-
Which is a fair policy position to take if you're looking for a war with Russia. Which I don't really think we are.
posted by calgarygrit at
9:12 p.m.
7 Comments:
That's funny, I was wondering if anyone else would catch on to the whole let's provoke the Russians angle for Harper, the Republicans are doing it with the whole European defence strategy so what the heck, it must be o.k.
By
Frankly Canadian, at 11:22 p.m.
That's in very poor taste, I don't like cynical politicians. I'd like a debate on the future of the country, not mud-slinging. Can't Harper just challenge Dion to a debate on dealing with Russia or Arctic vision or something? Something more grown up, maybe? Buehler?
By
Anonymous, at 11:38 p.m.
Good on you for not throwing a hissy fit like Cherniak at being mentioned in Dionbook.
I actually thought that site was very clever satire for the most part. Unfortunately, it's gone, and the crude parts remain.
By
Anonymous, at 1:11 a.m.
Can't Harper just challenge Dion to a debate on dealing with Russia or Arctic vision or something? Something more grown up, maybe?
There are too many uncontrollable variables in debates. Everything has to be managed, our fratboys are doing fine work making hilarious online content mocking that geek, Dion, and his intellectual ideas and policies.
Team Harper
By
Anonymous, at 7:27 a.m.
Soldiers? With guns? In the arctic? In Canada?
By
Anonymous, at 10:39 a.m.
Yeah, just not in Labrador like Harper promised in 2005.
By
Anonymous, at 12:01 p.m.
CG, nobody's supposed to read any of that nonsense.
It's like the text in an attack ad. It's just there to add believability to the emotionally-manipulative elements. It assaults you with enough superficially-believable quotes and factlets to overwhelm your skepticism and let the imagery do its work.
By
Demosthenes, at 1:06 p.m.
Post a Comment
<< Home