“Sadly, Canada, you’re in the bottom three tonight”

Related Articles

The Article

The liberals’ Globe and Mail and their sister, the liberalvision CTV network, have had their polling firm which is called something like The National Committee of Co-opted Liberal-Left Strategery and Compliance with Leftists Trendy ‘Tudes in the Hood Council, do another one of their hideously stupid polls.  It seems to me these are designed only to test the progress of the “progressive” liberal media’s latest of their ongoing efforts at driving Canada ever leftward (a job that is never done, apparently) so that they can massage and adjust their media message accordingly, and ultimately achieve their ignoble ends.

There’s simply no other reasonable explanation for the stupidity of constantly polling a nation’s people regarding whether or not they’re kinda like tired of its war yet, today, and how they think the war should be micromanaged on the field—taking prisoners, what to do with them exactly, whether to negotiate with the enemy, and over tea and buns?  Or scones?…

But the reporting of the absolutely predictable results of their polls (they’re designed to be this predictable, I think), simply adds humour to the stupidity. Read this sneering reporter’s (apparently his name is “CTV News Staff”) condemnation of the opponents of his man General (“Taliban Jack”) Layton of the you’ve got to be kidding party at CTV.ca, after their polling and media effectiveness testing division drummed-up another one of their claptrap polls, in which it is revealed with much fanfare that most Canadians believe we should now “negotiate” with the savage, barbaric, Islamofascist terrorist enemy (clearly my adjectives, not CTV’s.  CTV opted for the word “Taliban” instead, because that’s what they call themselves.  If they called themselves “The Good Guys”, the liberal media would obediently call this “Canada’s war against The Good Guys”): 

Canadians support talks with Taliban: poll
Updated Sun. May. 20 2007 11:00 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

[…] When NDP Leader Jack Layton called for peace talks with the Taliban last fall, Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay later called the approach “naive.” Some wags started calling Layton “Taliban Jack.” 


Yeah.  Like me.  Because the good Peter MacKay, like my fellow members of the sensible set, know that what General (Taliban) Jack was calling for was for our troops to summarily split the joint, and to then supplant them and our fighting mission with a cabal of nobs like Buzz Hargrove and Svend Robinson to negotiate, instead, almost like civilized people, with Mullah Mohammad Omar, over tea and buns. 

But let’s quickly hit the dictionary while we’re here: “Wags” means humorous or droll people.  A “Droll” person is described as a buffoon.  But I’m sure the reporter meant it in a nice way.  No bias here.  Have a nice day.

According to the liberal media style guide, when they want to emphasize opposition to conservatives, the media calls the opponents (always unnamed) “critics”, as in, ”…but many critics are known to be against the Conservatives’ policy…”.  But when they’re speaking of opponents of their socialist brothers in arms, they’re dismissively called “wags”.  As in “some wags…”  Thank God for editors or it’d be “buffoons”

I actually think they (liberals) hope polls like this will show with great authority that Canada should cut and run like little girls and effete boys donning pantywaists from all the “hard stuff” that life presents, and then deploy the official “cross yer fingers” foreign relations tactic espoused by General Taliban Jack, supplemented by more of those yummy national social programs which are designed to further weaken a person’s resolve and to rely even more fully on big government.

Agenda-driven media liberals like this who constantly poll Canadians about matters of war as if war should be fought on the basis of daily changing polls, are simpletons of the highest order, with nothing better to do.  Only pinheads believe that American Idol-style pop-sociology polls conducted by self-inflated experts who make cash by testing their liberal media boss’s agenda-driving techniques —and then reporting the results as if conclusive—are doing the nation a service.  They’re not. They’re harming the nation’s resolve, its morale, and that of our fighting troops.  Worse:  I think they’re doing it on purpose.

Damaging the resolve and the morale of a nation and its troops is an effective technique used in all wars by all enemies.  It is said that the object of the battles of war is not to merely kill all of the enemy, cause horrendous damage, and generally destroy the place, but to so destroy the morale and resolve of the enemy that they ultimately just give up, leaving the place largely intact.  This tactic succeeded in Afghanistan and both Iraq wars, at least initially, when in a matter of weeks, huge enemy forces literally threw up their hands and surrendered in the face of apparently insurmountable odds. 

But nothing except the lessons not learned from the Vietnam war could have prepared me for the foe using—and thus being—the media in my own country.  Liberals and their media are doing to our country what our enemy seeks to do to win the war—causing a loss of morale and our national resolve.  So that we lose.  Go team. 

And all this media combat action is to help their masters score cheap political points, and gain power. 

As if to prove it’s all political, in the same article there is a palatable sense of glee in the reporter’s writing when he suggests that ”[The pollster’s Mr.] Donolo said 57 per cent of Conservative Party members supported the idea of negotiations.”  So they asked exactly what political party those polled belonged to, huh?  This revelation betrays two facts:  (1) that of course most Conservative Party members are not conservatives, which is what I’ve been saying without polling for years (think Stronach and Brison and half of the “conservatives” you hear from and talk to today); and (2) the poll was political more than anything else, and done with a pro-liberal-leftist peacenik agenda in mind, rather than with what I would call a neutral attitude: a patriotic, pro-Canadian, let’s win this war attitude —an attitude which was apparently suppressed if it existed at all in this case.  Such is the manner of all liberal media reporting on this war on terror.  And, as we can see, the subsequent, successful, testing results.


Joel Johannesen
Follow Joel

You can use this form to give feedback to the editor. Say nice things or say hello. Or criticize if you must. 

    Your Name (required)

    Your Email (required)

    Your Message

    Do you Have a File to Send?
    If so, choose it below

    This is just a question to make sure you're not a robot:

    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

    — Normally this would be an ad. It's a doggy. —spot_img