Thursday, April 07, 2011

Quick, someone check that chicken's Facebook account!



  • Someone's watched too much West Wing...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:07 AM  

  • Surreal and probably very memorable.

    By Blogger Jacques Beau Vert, at 1:40 AM  

  • So Harper was the one to back out?

    And there were no Canadian flags behind Dion, Layton and Duceppe?

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 10:21 AM  

  • RV: um, yes he was.

    Don't understand your flag comment, or its relevance to the issue for that matter.

    By Blogger saphorr, at 12:07 PM  

  • Flag comment:
    There were Canadian flags behind Dion, Layton and Duceppe. You could see them in every single picture.

    But someone simply said that there weren't, and every ran with it. It became the truth.

    It's the best example of something becoming true not because it was true, but because people agreed that it would be true.

    That's exactly what happened here. Someone said that Harper backed down, and that became the truth.

    Even that article you linked doesn't quote Harper backing down, it quotes people saying Harper backed down. Just like articles quoted people as saying there were no Canadian flags. Same thing.

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 1:16 PM  

  • Love the chickens. Harkens back to the 2003 Ontario election where a guy in a waffle suit pursued Ernie Eves...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:23 PM  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger saphorr, at 1:52 PM  

  • RV: I'm open to being corrected, and I quite agree that memes can persevere without being true.

    But this is one of those cases where it's pretty cut-and-dried.

    As CG documented, Harper issued a challenge, to which Ignatieff responded via Twitter.

    Then the media reported that Harper backed down (here and the NP article I linked). I recall hearing Harper
    being asked about this, and he said something about how since a one-on-one debate wasn't Ignatieff's first choice he would go with the multi-party debate.

    I don't see anyone is contesting the fact that Harper issued a one-on-one challenge or that Ignatieff responded. From then on there's only two things that could happen: Harper agrees and begin negotiating a debate, or he backs down. Obviously the former did not happen, so what other option is there? Even if the "he backed down" is secondhand, isn't the fact that no one-on-one debate is happening evidence enough?

    The only way of avoiding this conclusion that I see is the one Harper tried to take, by claiming that the scope of his initial challenge was limited to the official scheduled debates. To me that stinks of post hoc rationalization however.

    By Blogger saphorr, at 1:53 PM  

  • If Robert Fife said that there were no flags behind Dion, Layton and Duceppe, would that have made it true?

    isn't the fact that no one-on-one debate is happening evidence enough (that Harper backed down)?


    No. No it isn't.

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 4:31 PM  

  • By Blogger Unknown, at 9:42 PM  

  • By Blogger raybanoutlet001, at 2:28 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home