Or Obama-gate, or whatever other clever phrase that the Liberal Party communications staff has come up with. In any case, it's quite amusing.
Let's examine the main point lefties have going. Which is that interfering in the US election is scandalous, and that by leaking details of the Obama campaign's communication with the Canadian foreign mission, Canada may have cost him the Democratic Party nomination for president.
I've recently been at the end of this same kind of logic, when I exposed an anonymous commenter as Don Beemer; it wasn't that his comment was rude, inappropriate and unbecoming of a grown man, but that I robbed him of his reputation by attributing his own comment back to him.
The parallel with the Obama situation, is: not that Obama said one thing to Ohio voters, and another thing to Canada. It's that people found out!
It's so unfair to the American voters, that they had to be exposed to the two-faced truth behind Obama's campaigning.
We as fine, upstanding outsiders, should have "preserved the legitimacy" of their democratic process by not sharing relevant information that goes to the heart of Obama's credibility.
That being said, outing Obama certainly works against Canada's interests. I'd rather have a phony president who believes in free trade, than not. But that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about some member of government "outing" Obama, and we know how unsavory "outing" is to the left.
So what the opposition parties are saying with their wailing is that they condone lying to the electorate by the political candidates.
Nice.... Guess we know what their values are.
I don't know anything about the ethics or legality of what happened. But on a completely childish level, I support what Harper's caste is supposed to have done, as much as I can't usually stand them. As you say, he got caught out in a lie. Aside from that, Obama's people displayed shocking ignorance of Canadian politics to confide in Harper like that. Better he learn what it means to trust Harper sooner than later.
Um 300 - try to keep up here.
Brodie mentioned "Clinton" team had called to say no worries, yet the name was changed to Obama in a CTV report.
It now seems (see National Newswatch) that David Aiken was the reporter who "leaked" the story - although it does not say he was the one who change it.
I first heard this on Dave Rutherford yesterday when he was interviewing a reporter who was in the room when Brodie answered a question about NAFTA and then casually added the "don't worry" comment. Why did it get changed....Who doesn't want Obama ...I would suggest it isn't Harper.
So 300 - get the facts before you denigrate Harper on this one.
Seems that Harper was right not to talk to the press gallery as they seem to want to make trouble for his government.
I had understood the opposite about the Clinton/Obama ambiguity (was Obama, announced as Clinton, later corrected). It's not really relevant, but thanks for the correction. I guess I misread, links appreciated in these cases.
You seem to be trying to absolve Brodie of responsibility for going public, but I can't quite follow your reasoning.
If you're going to take that tone with me, I'd appreciate it if you addressed me as Mr. Baud, M. Girl. (Just joshing.)
300 - Ha Ha - good one(If you're going to take that tone with me, I'd appreciate it if you addressed me as Mr. Baud, M. Girl. (Just joshing.))
It seems that Brodie did not go public but was merely having a conversation with some reporters (which in hindsight should not happen) and casually mentioned that Clinton's??(Obama's) campaign had said it was all just politics.
Of course, his BIG mistake was in having a discussion with REPORTERS as it is obvious that they cannot be trusted to accurately report a story.
If he did say Clinton, my question is - why did it get changed and why? CTV seems very closed mouthed about this. They REFUSED to talk to Dave Rutherford yesterday so it seems that they went into damage control mode.
Stephen Harper is a lefty? Who knew! I understand he is quite concerned about the American voters finding out -- unless ...
I didn't get past the Left's logic part, frankly if they are showing logic I'm afraid.
LOL a politician gets outed for lying and instead of being outraged that he's a liar they are outraged that the public found out he's a liar. Dear god is that what leftard logic is??
Everyone knows that lefties only approve of outing, when it involves a gay conservative.
Add to the saga
CBC exposed CTVs 'source' as Brodie. Can't trust those CBC reporters with secrets!
Brodie doesn't recall saying either name.
'Sources' that overheard the conversation are still saying Brodie said Hillarys camp made the comment.
PMO makes statment Hillarys camp said nothing.