New Year, Same Old Liberal Spin

Good tidings to you, BT boys and girls! It's a new year, one in which Dalton will go down for the count.

This year, my resolution is to explode every piece of Liberal BS I come across for the benefit and enjoyment of all. (It's going to be a messy year indeed.)

We've already dealt with the Harris boogeyman and the idea that Deregulation Kills. That's two arrows in the Liberal quiver blunted, but there's another nasty tactic that you just know those Liberals are going to use, and that's because they use it every. single. time. I like to call it "A Conservative Said Something".

This is more annoying to me than the Hidden Agenda, which we'll touch on closer to the election. Hidden Agenda is an implication that there is something we Conservatives want to say or do, but won't say or do.

A Conservative Said Something involves taking something a conservative (ANY conservative, anywhere, anytime) actually did say or do, lamenting how horrible it is, and then implying that ALL conservatives think this way, and if you vote for this conservative or any other conservative, then you are also horrible.
This is the M.O. of The Blogging Tories In Their Own Words.

For those of you who don't know about TBTITOW yet, let me explain: The person or persons running this site pick through the BT blogs, find posts or comments that people are supposed to find horrible and offensive, and post them.

If you don't like a post or comment that I or anyone made, and if that post or comment bothers you, that's fine. But TBTITOW goes farther than that. This is how they introduce the blog:

"According to one its more prolific members, Roy Eappen, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is appreciative of the Blogging Tories’ efforts, and has acknowledging that the group has not only “helped to counter a media that is not very friendly to the party”, but has “helped hold the party’s feet to the fire.”"

So what our friends at TBTITOW are trying to say is the following:

1.This blog is a collection of posts from Blogging Tories that people are supposed to find offensive.
2. Stephen Harper endorsed the Blogging Tories and said they hold the party's feet to the fire. (He "has acknowledging the group", after all. Whatever that means.)
3. Therefore, Stephen Harper endorses the posts that people are supposed to find offensive.
3a. Well, actually, Roy Eappen said that Stephen Harper said the Blogging Tories helps to counter unfriendly media and hold the party's feet to the fire.
4. Therefore, according to someone who isn't even actually Stephen Harper, Stephen Harper endorses the posts that people are supposed to find offensive.
4a. Well, actually, the only part of the sentence above that concretely describes Stephen Harper's feelings about the BTs is that he appreciates their efforts. Everything else is kind of hard to interpret because there is an undisclosed person "has acknowledging" the group, which could be Harper, Eappen, or someone else altogether.
5. Therefore, according to someone who isn't even actually Stephen Harper, Stephen Harper appreciates the efforts of the BTs, and by "appreciating their efforts" it means he, or possibly someone else altogether, actually agrees with all the posts people are supposed to find offensive.

But wait, there's more! It turns out that "the more prominent members [of the Blogging Tories] include Rick Anderson, Keith Beardsley, Monte Solberg, and MPs Maxime Bernier and David Anderson."

Wow! That must mean that if you are on the same blogroll as the people making posts people are supposed to find offensive, you must AGREE with the opinions in the posts people are supposed to find offensive! The title of the blog is, after all, "The Blogging Tories In Their Own Words." It isn't "*Some Of* The Blogging Tories In Their Own Words."

And it goes farther, too! Some posts, like this one, are from blogs which aren't part of the Blogging Tories anymore. But what's that at the bottom of the post in red type? "Moose and Squirrel asked to be removed from the Blogging Tories on November 28, 2010. These words pre-date its removal. "

Get it? These words appeared, and were allowed to stay, on BT for a period of time before the blog was removed! So, even though these particular words, which people are supposed to find offensive, were removed, they were, at one point, endorsed by BT, which means they were endorsed by Stephen Harper and conservatives everywhere, and that all conservatives are horrible people.

Now, why was this blog removed? Was it "too conservative"? If so, that must mean that "real conservatives" aren't welcome on BT. But wait! The blogger asked to be removed. That must mean BT itself isn't "conservative enough!" But wait again! Here's a post that TBTITOW draws attention to where not-very-nice things are said about Red Tories. This post was allowed to stay on BT.....so Red Tories must ALSO be unwelcome on BT....and on and on it goes.

Do you see what TBTITOW is really trying to do? Not only is it trying to turn people who otherwise wouldn't care about what conservatives say, but it is also trying to pit conservatives against each other. Because some conservatives....some BT members, even....might see one of these posts, and go, "Well, um, I don't agree with that..." and then it becomes an issue of what or who is allowed on BT. Pretty soon we're all looking over our shoulders, trying to make sure everything we say is appropriate and doesn't offend anyone.

Now, this sort of silliness isn't confined to anonymous blogs. The Liberal war room's recent attempt to torque the recent nomination challenge in Eastern Ontario into "The Landowners Are Taking Over The PC Party" is more of the same.

You see, "Joe and Jane Frontporch", as they are called by Liberals who like to talk down to people, really don't care about some dramabomb out east. And the Liberals KNOW they don't care. What the Liberals really want is for this to happen....intra-party sniping about who really speaks for the conservative movement, which mushrooms into one wing of the party staying home during election time, which leads to a Liberal win.

A lot of Conservatives, myself included, are wary about what the Liberals are going to do to us with respect to human rights commissions later this year. But what people are overlooking in all of this is that the only reason Liberals want to talk about human rights commissions is not because they actually care about them, or are well informed on the subject. It's because the Liberals know that a) it can be used to try and scare ordinary voters into thinking the wrong things, and b) that it will scare conservatives into trying to avoid the issue or backing down.

If b) happens, then it is a lot more likely that a) will happen.

These are Liberals. They don't really care about the people they say they care about. How do we know this? Because the Premier who styles himself as the only thing protecting Ontarians from the forces of darkness out in Eastern Ontario sat idly by and let his civil servants access "militancy and extremist" websites.

Now, I don't want to imply that the Premier, his war room, his entire caucus and party, and everyone who has voted or may be voting Liberal agrees with the stuff these civil servants were checking out while they were supposed to be working. I'm just saying that stereotyping is a bad idea and that Liberals will be called out on their misleading spin by yours truly throughout 2011. :)

Oh, and, um, since TBTITOW will no doubt be looking at this blog, I recommend that they fix the grammar error in their sidebar that I pointed out in this post. That thing is truly offensive.