Liberal 'Values' Include Ugly U.S. Campaign Tactics
Liberals attack Harper for pro-American stance while embracing the worst of America's politics
 

January 18 2006
Counterbias.com
ROBERT FURS
  

Paul Martin’s Liberals, to all who’ve been subject to the endless talking points and visuals coming from their war room, have rooted their message on a claimed commitment to Canadian values and the rejection of Stephen Harper’s American ones.

So it’s ironic that this same party is using some of the worst components of the American political system to build the engine of this year’s Liberal campaign.

In an incredible fit of desperation in the last days of the campaign, the Liberals seem to have taken everything from the American dirty-politics playbook, smearing Harper with amazing scare tactics in some of the most negative political ads ever seen on Canadian television.

Those familiar with American politics know Karl Rove, the Machiavellian architect of George W. Bush’s rise to power and the strategist famed for bringing the Republican Party into a position of dominance – often by smearing, villainizing and thoroughly crushing his opponents. Canada’s Liberals are adopting a similar style.

It says it all about the Liberal party: appeal to Canada’s soft America-averse voters by denouncing that country’s politics, and paint Harper as America’s best friend, all while using some of the same techniques Bush’s campaign used to beat John Kerry in 2004. Some of these include…

Policy fiction: Republicans told America that electing John Kerry meant legalizing gay marriage. Liberals tell Canada that electing Harper means criminalizing gay marriage.

Fear-mongering: Republicans painted Kerry as weak on national security and soft on terrorists. The Liberals have portrayed Harper as weak on national unity and having a hard-on for American far-rightists.

Devaluating “Values”: Republicans love wrapping themselves in the American flag, painting themselves as upholders of American “values” – indeed, they use that word a lot, mostly to connect their policy to the “values” of “regular Americans”. Unmistakably, the Liberals are using the same tired ploy, with the Values card being the core of the Liberal message. Martin protects Canadian values, we’ve all been told, and Harper doesn’t. Of course, these Canadian Values also happen to be Liberal Values. In effect, like the Bush clan, they’re wearing the nation’s flag while suggesting that the other side wants nothing more than to burn it.

National division: There’s an obvious partisan, ideological split in America, with what seems like a raucous war between the Democratic and Republican populations. The Bush campaign just adored using the word “liberal” as a curse word, essentially a synonym for “evil”. Canada’s Liberals aren’t shy about doing the same to conservatism – especially anything “far-right”. I’m (small-l) liberal, yet I’m no more Canadian than someone with a conservative ideology. The Liberals would tell you differently.

Visual propaganda: We’ve come to recognize the snazzy graphics behind Bush during his speeches. They include few-word messages like “Securing America” and are meant to pound a theme home. Martin’s people are using it, too: “Delivering on lower taxes” was a recent one. Expect to see “Vote Harper, See Canada Die” on a vibrant Liberal backdrop soon!

Opponent obsession: Republicans directed their resources toward demonizing Kerry, while staying clear of their own record and agenda. (I remember that at one point, the Bush campaign website’s front page had five “scary” Kerry photos—and not a single one of Bush!) The Liberals’ campaign has disintegrated from highlighting their positives to talking about how bad Harper might be. For example, Martin opened the second leaders’ debate by explaining why voting for Harper would be a horrific decision.

Demonizing ads: John Kerry wants to eat your children. Stephen Harper wants to disembowel them. Etcetera.

The major difference? The Bush campaign didn’t bring another nation into its festering pit of negativity in order to win the election. Even Karl Rove wouldn’t go that far.

And just as Rove is now failing to maintain his former glory, with his unpopular president and a Republican party mired in scandal, so are the brilliant minds behind the current Liberal campaign. It’s falling apart at the seams. Just think: beer and popcorn, the notwithstanding clause flip-flop, the embarrassing soldiers-in-cities ad, et al.

The Liberals and Republicans are under fire, both suffering major credibility (and legal) problems. The Republicans are projected to lose seats, power and control in the 2006 midterm elections, and the Liberals are predicted to do in 2006 what was recently thought impossible: lose. Maybe it’s just a coincidence that these two parties employing similar political tactics are about to get trounced in the polls. Or, better yet, it’s a hopeful sign that the politics of negativity and division is being replaced by one of accountability.

Of course, that’s a bit too hopeful. The politics of personal destruction and deception will always be around – it’s just a question of how far that deception, corruption and criminality can go.

The Conservatives aren’t innocent by far. They were the first to hit Martin with a negative ad. And I’m worried about giving the reigns of this great nation to Harper, a man who once led the ultraconservative National Citizens Coalition, and went on American TV to complain about our correct decision to avoid entering the disastrous Iraq war.

But, Stephen Harper won’t send soldiers with guns to your street. He won’t hand our country over to Bush – who will, by the way, be out of power midway through a hypothetical Harper first term.

And, the Liberals are not the party of Canadian values.

No party that uses the vicious, negative attack methods of America’s Republican political machine – all while denouncing that same country and that same party – can claim to be the protector of Canadian values.