How dare the mean Tories make fun of Prince Bonehead Trudeau!??!

Attack Ads have a valuable place in our political system.

But morons in the (big L) Liberal media, with a puppy love crush on Prince Bonehead, can't handle it when their idol is mocked and have flocked to his defense..



UPDATE: An idiotic Toronto Star columnist has jumped the shark, going beyond the facile comparison of attack ads to "cyber bullying," he has compared them to terrorism:

What does it mean to say these ads “work”? It doesn’t mean public discourse about issues is, in any sense, enhanced. It doesn’t mean voter turnout is increased, or respect for the political process deepened, or the country strengthened. No, to say attack ads work means that the “attacker” benefits, gets more power, earns more money, has more control, while the “attacked” is weakened, diminished, left powerless.... 

Lots of nasty things in our society work, in this sense, quite nicely. Yes, let’s start with bullying. It often works rather well, in the tawdry way we’ve defined: Creepy little twerps with crummy self-esteem feel important when they humiliate others. 

Terrorism works, too, as we’ve been reminded again recently — a whole city was shut down, every major media outlet placed on monovision, by two losers who are now famous around the world. If that’s not a victory, what would one would look like?

And incidentally, the Star has the concept backwards - terrorism, like attack ads, doesn't work if the targets are capable of responding  effectively. Ask Osama bin Laden if you don't believe me. And if one dead and one wounded, incarcerated and one soon-to-be-tried-for-a-capitol-offense Boston Marathon terrorist, who have shamed their Islamist ideology is The Star's idea of "victory," then it explains a great deal about their vapid, defeatist, self-pitying editorial philosophy.

Former Drama teacher Trudeau has lame response to "in over his head" ad

Liberals may lap up Justin Trudeau's wimpy response to the Conservative attack ad "just in over his head" launched against last week.

In a cheesy classroom setting Trudeau effectively reminds us that he isn't up to the job to which he aspires. Repeating "he worked hard" to get where he is, with his paper-thin list of accomplishments, implicit is that the hardest work he ever did was manage to get the surname "Trudeau" on his birth certificate.

His father's looks, his mother's brains

A day after winning the Liberal Party leadership, the Conservatives launch an attack ad against Justin Trudeau. The theme of him not being too bright is one they will hammer away at for the next 2 years. And Trudeau has given them plenty of ammunition.

By crying wolf about `abuse` NDP`s Horvath does a disservice to women in politics

Politics is a tough business.

It`s not for the thin-skinned. It gets personal, it gets nasty, and the higher up you go,  the meaner it gets and that is how things have been since democracy began in ancient Greece.

Ontario NDP leader Horvath

For a politician to succeed, they have to be able to project strength and fortitude. So it was a bit of surprise last week when Andrea Horvath, the Ontario NDP leader, made a point of her own weakness and inability to  withstand pressure by accusing Premier Dalton McGuinty of `workplace abuse`and `bullying` because his Liberal MPPs criticized her demands for passing the budget and her personally.

Welcome to the big leagues, Ms Horvath,  And in her first big match up at the plate, she struck out with no balls. 

Aside from blinking when McGuinty threatened an election rather than enacting her amendments to his Budget, she embarrassed herself and her party by suggesting that her political rivals criticism of her was a form of workplace abuse and mistreatment. When making the nonsensical allegation, she even went so far as to engage in ludicrous theatrics by having her staff hand out postcards to reporters citing a Woman Abuse Research Consortium website on the impact of verbal abuse and other mistreatment in the workplace. 

Too bad she couldn`t squeeze out a few crocodile tears for added effect. 

The implication being that women can't handle the rough ant tumble world of professional politics at the same level as men, which as anyone who's seen Margaret Thatcher of Hillary Clinton in action knows couldn't be further from the truth. But it does appear to be the case with Ms. Horvath.

Compared to some of the insults politicians regularly endure, the Liberals saying she is `not to be trusted` and she `betrayed a deal`` are pretty mild. If those minor barbs were too much for Horvath to handle, imagine how she`s fold like a house of cards if she came under real pressure. 

Actually, you don`t have to imagine;  it`s a matter of public record. 

It`s unfortunate that we live in a time and a place of societal self-absorption, where anyone who disagrees with you is a `bully`and the highest status one can achieve is that of `victim.` 

We have a right to expect better than that from those who aspire to lead and make decisions for the public. 

I`ve argued before that attack ads, decried by some, are in fact a critical and necessary component of the political process. If a politician can`t withstand criticism from relatively benign domestic rivals, imagine how poorly they would  represent their constituents` interests when facing a real foreign adversary.  

The ability to withstand pressure is a process that weeds out politicians who aren`t up to the task of leadership.  Ms Horvath`s petulance and whining to the media in the face of that pressure showed where she falls in that process.

The importance of attack ads in our political process

A silly debate that never disappears from the political scene is whether "attack ads" should be allowed.

Aside from the free speech component of the matter that make attack ads constitutionally protected, the motives of people opposed to them is rather transparent. It's because the candidates they support are vulnerable to them. The previous two Liberal leaders were particularly harmed by attack ads in Canada's last two national elections.

Stephane Dion was the target of a very effective Conservative ad campaign leading up to the 2008 election that portrayed him as "not up to the job" of being a leader. Michael Ignatieff was similarly harmed in the 2011 election by being successfully characterized as an elitist who was "just visiting" Canada for the sake of  personal ambition.



The raucous nature of political campaigns are really about pointing out not just the advantages of one side, but the deficits of the other. This relatively minor test of fire is an important element of the election process for a very basic and obvious reason. If a candidate who wants to lead a country is incapable of dealing with an attack ad from a fairly benign domestic political rival, how could they possibly function as a leader on the world stage, dealing with potentially hostile foreign interests?

In that sense, attack ads are the most basic test someone who wants to be put in a position of power and responsibility should be able to overcome. If they can't, they have no busness asking millions of Canadians to entrust them with that responsibility.