04.16.2011 04:37 PM

OMG, this ad seriously kicks ass

Now we’re talkin’.


  1. msgjp says:

    I have to admit it’s got a nice ring to it. Very well done.

  2. pomo says:

    yes it does. makes me wanna rise up.

    • ghoris says:

      I wonder if Iggy could convince the Parachute Club to come out of retirement for the duration of the campaign?

      • Namesake says:

        My city of ruins

        Now the sweet veils of mercy
        Drift through the evening trees
        Young men on the corner
        Like scattered leaves
        The bordered up windows
        The hustlers and thieves
        While my brother’s down on his knees

        My city of ruins
        My city of ruins

        Come on rise up!
        Come on, rise up!

        Lyrics by Bruce Springsteen

      • Namesake says:

        p.s., it’s Harper who’s slipped the (Golden) Parachute Club into the campaign:

        “Prime Minister Stephen Harper is defending pay raises for Conservative political staffers at a time of budget belt-tightening.
        Harper was asked Saturday about new rules which could result in a financial win-win for Tory aides in ministerial offices regardless of whether the Conservatives win or lose the May 2nd election. The guidelines quietly went into effect on April 1, boosting the maximum salary political staffers can be paid. They also hike by 50 per cent the maximum separation pay they can receive should they find themselves suddenly out of work.

        Those changes come into effect as Harper’s Conservatives are vowing to cut $4 billion a year from the federal budget.”


        • What about this:


          yeah, I know its from a Liberal war room release, but if the facts are straight, the source doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be considered. Canadians of all political persuasion hate this sort of thing, and there’s a neat tie in to the Ontario provincial political scene too.

          The flight manifest for Transport Canada jet C-FKEB – obtained through Access to Information – shows that on September 17, 2009, Mr. Flaherty, Conservative candidate for Whitby-Oshawa, flew from Ottawa to Oshawa with his wife Christine Elliot, MPP, then flew immediately to Montreal for the gala, and then back to Ottawa the same evening. Mr. Flaherty and Mrs. Elliot used these taxpayer-funded flights solely to join their fellow Conservatives for the 25th anniversary of Brian Mulroney’s 1984 election victory.

          Mr. Flaherty did not report the Oshawa trip in his proactive disclosure of travel and hospitality expenses, which leads to further questions about what activities he and Ms. Elliott undertook there on the taxpayers’ dime, said Mr. Holland.

          While the cost of the flight is unknown, Conservative Jason Kenney once pegged the cost of running the Challenger Jet at $11,000 an hour.

          … so figure the taxpayer is out of pocket at least $22,000, using Jason Kenny’s own figures? So that Flaherty and his wife can toast Brian Mulroney?

          Does it get any better than that?

  3. David` says:

    I agree it’s a great ad ,But I feel it’s a bit late.And what about that’ Hope trumps Fear thingy?iN MY OPINION HE SHOULD BE CONCENTRATING ON GETTING PEOPLE TO GET OUT AND VOTE.I’m getting the same feeling iI had two weeks before Ford was elected.

    • Philip says:

      You are absolutely right David. The ground game is super critical right now and to be honest the CPC ground game has historically been better than ours. So we level up. Go out with your local candidate tomorrow, knock on doors and talk to Canadian voters. Hand out the literature and be sure to ask for their vote. And then do it again. The choice before Canadians has never been clearer or more urgent.

  4. Lance says:

    Yeah, it is a good ad, but why weren’t they “talkin'” like this at the beginning when it could have made more of a difference? Along with abortion, and old former leader dudes, this too is so late in the campaign that it reeks of desperation, not to mention that it has been done before; blasting about the old fears isn’t going to work anymore, we can all see that it hasn’t.

  5. Dude Love says:

    So much for the LPC taking the high road in the campaign. Problem is that it is a little too late with only a few weeks left. It will be hard to get this seen with hockey play-offs underway.

    • Namesake says:

      “It will be hard to get this seen with hockey play-offs underway”

      unless they, um, show them DURING the playoffs, dude.

      • Dude Love says:

        Don’t think they have the money to do media buys during the hockey playoffs. One spot would wipe up their budget. How many political ads have you seen during HNIC?

    • TofKW says:

      Umm, more like the Grits need to run this during the hockey playoffs.

      • Dude Love says:

        This ad has been on Youtube for a few days and nobody has noticed it. Seems like the LPC has used up most of their television buy money with the warm and fuzzy ads.

    • Tybalt says:

      I have seen it twice now on TV, and I don’t watch much (almost any) TV. So the message is getting out.

      It’s a funny ad. Massively over the top. The swirling Harper at the beginning cracks me up. OOH SCARY.

  6. AP says:

    I agree that “now” we’re talkin’ … but we should have been talkin’ a long, long time ago.

  7. Harvey Martin says:

    It’s about time we started talking about the issue Canadians are most concerned about. It’s about time the Harper gang some of their own treatment. They seem to think they have an exclusive franchise on attack ads. They can dish it out, but can’t take it. A bunch of thin-skinned pussies they are.

  8. James Curran says:

    Is there a media buy for this one?

  9. bigcitylib says:

    Fuck nice.

    (Have absolutely no idea if it will work, though. Nothing’s working for anyone. I’d even bet the NDP bump wears off in a day or two.)

  10. Q says:

    When you’re out of options, Layton has momentum at your expense (get ready for the old Liberal ‘vote strategically’ messages), and you just can’t get traction in the polls against Harper, then this is your last choice. Guess the Ignatieff War Room has decided it can’t convince Canadians to BUY Iggy so they’re only shot at a respectable loss is convincing Canadians to SELL Harper to prevent a potential majority.

    I’m thinking maybe the best bet this year is to go to the polls and abstain my ballot so my disatisfaction with all the leaders and they’re complete lack of vision for our country can be recorded.

  11. jack says:

    This ad has been out on you tube for days maybe it just got picked up by the media today?It is great. Will it have an impact? Need to have a lot more of these. At the least maybe harper will comment but I doubt it. But there are a lot more historical quotes from him that need to come out.

    Even then, will Canadians care?

    • Ron says:

      hey jack
      harper already commented
      said libs the great defenders cut health care transfers in 94
      and cons have carried on the funding that carriea till 2014
      if they amplify that message it could back fire on the Libs

      • Lance says:

        See what I mean about a response? The Tory war-room could have a similarily hard hitting ad in response like that out by contrast in a matter of hours, or even days with two weeks left.

        • catherine says:

          Then the Libs could respond by saying that, unlike Harper, they had a plan to get the deficit under control so that they could invest in healthcare, which forced the Harper government to continue the agreement. They slayed the deficit left behind by a Con govt and successfully negotiated healthcare with all the provinces and they have a good plan to do it again, unlike Harper. Maybe they could throw in the Vaughn deal. Yeah, the Libs can take on Harper on this one, particularly since Ignatieff hasn’t slammed public healthcare like Harper has.

      • Namesake says:

        It’s a pretty bogus retort, considering how much worse our fiscal position was then, and considering how they — and by they, I mean the previous incarnation of the CPC party and especially Harper himself — wanted the cuts to be even deeper:

        “Reform claimed credit for pressuring the Liberal government to initiate spending cuts and focus on deficit reduction in 1995, though the party had wanted even deeper cuts.”


        “Harper emerged to national prominence during the 1993 federal election campaign as principal drafter of the Reform party’s economic platform. Titled ‘Zero in Three,’ it proposed to reduce the government’s multi-billion dollar deficit to zero within three years. Liberal leader Jean Chrétien was shocked. This was a ‘slash and burn’ approach that would devastate Canada’s social programs.”


      • jack says:

        That was part of the plan to get out of the.con debt……kind of like debt harper has built done now with a structural deficit. Then, after Libs fixed that, they made a health care deal to 2014 yrs, harper took credit for it. Harper now has huge debt again, 100 billion in two years. And his budget has an 11 billion hole. And the jets will cost double he says. And provinces have to pay to operate the new jails and harper stated he won’t help pay for that thus driving provinces deeper in debt. You see he has raised costs by a huge amount and cut revenue. He is squeezing all the money to drive to private health care. He’s on the record stating he wants private health care and no Canada health act.

        why won’t he tell us where he sees the Canada health act in 10 years. Why is he not penalizing the provinces already operating private services. He could gain hundreds of millions for the government. Open your eyes man. It’s already happening. He wants private health care.

  12. R says:

    Child fainting link to health issue:

    poor nutrition health issue standing so long for Harper to come for tv interview not give them those kids food to eat during show up




  13. Ron says:

    and let the fear mongering begin
    an effective ad (or will it be viewed like guns in the street from 2006)
    I think it will resonate with some but at the same time you just have to put up an ad showing what the Liberals did in 94 in cutting transfer payments and how the conservatives have carried on funding since coming into office…plus going to 2014
    and put up how Iggy supports a privatized system like the U.S.
    that would be my come back to it

    • JS Rothwell says:

      Hey Ron I’m bbqing Peruvian chicken today. Make sure to grab some of the tinfoil laying around… Though as a former ad man I do love this ad. Hopefully this will make the cons update their production. It looks dated now

      • Ron says:

        yeah I agree
        I’m wondering why the Conservatives haven’t come out with some harder hitting ads
        The previous ones about iggy look “dated”
        Just saw another Liberal ad that shows quick shots “rioting and guns”

        I think they maybe going overboard
        Some people will fall for these ads
        others will view it as desparation

        JS – thanks for the invite and tinfoil

    • imdajudge says:

      This ad works for two reasons. It is an attack ad and if you don’t know that attack ads work by now, well you just haven’t been paying attention.
      But, it also has the appearance of being about the still most important issue to Canadian voters.
      You can punch a million holes in it. Just like you can punch a million holes in the Conservative ads that Ignatieff is an American or Just visiting.
      It doesn’t matter if they’re true, it matters if they raise doubt in the public’s mind. Sad, but very true.

      This is not anything like the guns in the streets ad, which was never aired by the way and was rejected as going too far, just as a reminder.

      It could work, because it’s plausible. It could work because everyone knows Harper really doesn’t believe in universal health care and this could be the one issue that people really would fear in a majority.

      As for not taking the high road, I agree that’s a shame. But when you’re being attack 365 days a year, what option is left but to punch back? Losing. that’s the option. I just don’t think most people will be blame the Liberals for going negative. Staying positive wasn’t working in the sea of negativity. I do have to wonder if they hav ethe money to pay for the kind of advertising that is going to be needed. According to the polls, Liberal voters do seem a bit more willing to get off their butts to vote, but I do question whether they’ll get off their wallets to win.

  14. Matthew says:

    Very effective indeed. I went from being on the fence between Conservative and Liberal to being definitely Conservative. The Liberals have lost the high ground with this ad that peddles as many lies as any Conservative ad I’ve seen. This fear-mongering smacks of desperation. It failed to work in 2006 and 2008. I doubt it will work this time. It’s too bad. I was looking to support a party that didn’t engage in this nonsense. Now that the Liberals have stooped to this, I may as well stick with the devil we know if all parties are going to engage in the same shenanigans.

    • J.G. Love says:

      Ya, like the ad actually changed you choice. Get paid much for that one?

      • pomo says:

        you were looking for a party to support that was taking the high ground and…failing that. will now vote for the lowest of the low. awesome. if this wasn’t a paid post, i’d wager you are just a well-trained ape playing on the keyboard. maybe both. go have a banana.

    • catherine says:

      You’re funny. So, you prefer the lies ($75 iPod tax?) and totally out of context attack ads of the Conservatives, to the actual in context true statements and cuts of Harper. Then, Harper’s your lying-man.

    • Dan F says:

      Attacks & Fear-mongering – Like the Conservatives have been doing for the past 5 years non-stop? and suddenly the Libs throw one punch back at the bully and you don’t like them anymore? You’re ust a Tory war-room troll.

  15. Lance says:

    I’m seeing a common theme here, one of “why did they wait so long?”. So indeed….why now?

    With this ad I see the Liberals actually conceding that a Tory majority is possible. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be necessary to fling this out there after having waited so long.

    Like I said, yes, this is a good ad, but the ones that love it unreservedly should remember that there likely will be an answer, or many answers, in kind and otherwise; there is probably a LOT of raw material still out there to nail Ignatieff with. Oh, you didn’t think it would be THAT easy, did you?

    • WesternGrit says:

      Or… seeing polls showing only a 6-9% separation, campaign central decided NOW is the time to strike a harder blow. And for those thinking the Cons will strike back – I’m sure they will – but watch for future Liberal ads. They will be just as strong.

      As far as facts – Harper and Flaherty said every one of the things in the ad.

      Feels good seeing this after 2 YEARS of constant Reform-a-Tory ads – not even giving us a break “off-writ”. And, that constant campaign thing will be the first thing to change when there is a Liberal minority government.

      • Lance says:

        And, that constant campaign thing will be the first thing to change when there is a Liberal minority government.

        Heh, don’t kid yourself; there is ALWAYS campaigning during a minority government, no matter who forms one. You tell me how that is going to stop, as if you know something in that regard that the rest of us don’t.

        And please, don’t insult everyone here about a Liberal minority with that false bravado. It is patently obvious that the Liberals are not going to be able to form a government without some form of co-operation with the other parties after having defeated another minority government (let alone a very possible Tory majoriy at this point). Stop deluding yourself.

        “Or… seeing polls showing only a 6-9% separation, campaign central decided NOW is the time to strike a harder blow.”

        Come on, there has been that level of separation for the whole camapaign.

        No, I’m sorry I don’t buy that. Wait until half the time is gone, when you are still LOSING by the same margin (much worse in the leadership index) “to strike a harder blow?” Why not “strike a harder blow” when the bell rings to start round one and keep up the pressure? Now it just looks desperate, it smacks of “guns in our streets”. It may “feel good”, but if that is all it does at this late stage, then you still don’t get how much trouble you are.

        • catherine says:

          In the first week the polls I saw (mainly Nanos) had the separation at around 11-13%.

          • Lance says:

            And at one point they had them at a 15% lead if I am not mistaken. It goes up and down, but the average lead is about a 27-38 spread.

            Even a Liberal minority is a non-starter now. Ignatieff will not be Prime Minister, not unless there is another Tory minority and he co-operates with the other parties. But he already said he wouldn’t do that.

            “It isn’t over until it is over”, as the old saying goes. But just the same, it is patently obvious by now that Ignatieff isn’t going to win this election.

  16. Nastyboy says:

    Let me guess. This is the new “game changer”.

  17. Patrick Hamilton says:

    Bon Apetit!, Reformers…..

  18. kitt says:

    Naheed Nenshi was in 3rd place according to the polls. Guess who won 🙂

    • Jon Adams says:

      Can’t really compare the municipal to the federal. Nenshi won in a field of 8+ candidates, and his main rivals Higgins and McIvor had the hubris to assume the job was theirs for the taking and were blindsided and steamrolled by his momentum. The CPC has the hubris in spades, but they take any challengers very, very, very seriously.

      And if see the names “Rob Ford” or “Nenshi” justifying any of your baby-headed partisan whinging in the comments sections of this site again, I’m grabbing you fools by your Sour Cream ‘n Onion chip sprinkled shirt-fronts and slapping you until you bleed out the eye-sockets.

    • The Doctor says:

      Nenshi also had clearly identifiable momentum in the polls leading up to that election, even though he was behind in the early going. His polling trajectory was generally in one direction — up.

  19. Wendy Camp says:

    So is this Warren.

    This is a game changer.

    Anyone doubt this guy’s sincerity now?

    Anyone have any doubt what the campaign issue is?


    • catherine says:

      Ignatieff has given a lot of great speeches and answers, and I liked this call to activism. He has to balance it with making sure he articulates how things will be different – with respect to all the (true) charges he levels at Harper – in order for non-Liberals to believe things will change enough to make them rise up.

  20. WDM says:

    Don’t like it. Liberals need to stop running ads like it’s 2004. They don’t work, in my view. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t go negative, but they should go negative on his record. As an aside, not having a more in-depth democratic reform section in their platform really has blunted the impact of their attacks on that subject. Yes, attack Harper for his disrespect for Parliament, but you have to be able to pivot on that and offer up new alternatives.

    • Pete says:


    • The Doctor says:

      I think it was Andrew Coyne who wrote a good article right after Harper’s first election victory on this very subject, WDM. Coyne’s point — which I still have a lot of time for — is that once Harper became a known rather than an unknown (in power), those fear-mongering ads were going to lose a lot of their power. Those types of ads are all about the fear of the unknown. Not to go Rumsfeld on you, but Harper is now a known — he’s been PM for years now.

      I realize there’s still the old “but wait till he gets a majority” thing, but on the other hand, a lot of people are obviously sick of this minority parliament gong show we’ve had over the last while too, so I think that’s a bit of a wash among uncommitted voters.

  21. Raymond says:

    Last time I checked, it was the Liberals that gutted health care transfers to the tune of $25B.
    Anyway, it’s almost supper time.

  22. Pete says:

    Its about time we did some kick ass ads…hope they have many more like that ready to roll out.

  23. JH says:

    This is actually a pretty good attack ad. Now I know I’m going to be called a conbot or a troll or whatever by namesake and gang, but it also serves another purpose. It puts an end to all that we’re holier-than-thou-bullspit the Liberals have been inundating the political life of the country with for years. Now it’s out there for all Canadians to see and judge for themselves – Ignatieff can get down and dirty with the best of them – he’s not just an elitist Harvard professor pretty face. Good for him! He will wear this for the rest of his life of course, now that he has joined the ranks of Alf Apps and the ‘natural governing party’ types. What’s next? Maybe we could have a Liberal attack dog pissing on Harper’s pant leg or something?
    I really have no problem with this kind of stuff, but I do like the NDP comedy bits the best.

  24. TDotRome says:

    What’s good about this one is that I’ve actually seen it on tv!! The Grits have done some good ads this campaign, but it seems like they were saving the television money for the last two weeks. We’ll see.

  25. Craig Chamberlain says:

    Edit the Rise Up video as a commercial and send it out asap!!!

    Make “Rise Up” the (un)official Liberal election slogan — Do it now!!!

  26. paulsstuff says:

    So near as I can figure, the comment “it’s time the feds scrapped the Canada Health Act” was actually made in 1997, when Harper wasn’t even an MP, but rather working for the NCC. The other line that is a quote from Hansard, for some odd reason, has the date blurred out, but I’m guessing this was in response to a question or answer about Quebec’s private. for profit health care. My guess is it was probably a quote when there was a comment in the House about a guy named Paul Martin, a Liberal if I remember correctly, who was using a private for profit doctor in that province.

  27. paulsstuff says:

    Dunno Warren. This ad could backfire big time. Quebec is full of private for profit health care right now. So is Ontario, with Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty running the province. So will Ignatieff now denounce private for profit health care? Because I think that ad just opens up a whole new can of worms for the Liberals, especially in Quebec. Probably not the greatest timing for that ad, coming on the announcement Paul Martin will be joining the campaign.

    “Many provinces are following Alberta’s lead. Ontario announced in June 2005 a $30 billion public-private-partnership fund for new schools and hospitals. All this money will go to for-profit corporations. The Cambie Surgery Centre in Vancouver boasts that it is Canada’s “most advanced private surgical centre in Canada” with “more operating capacity than most BC hospitals.” It is proud of its record servicing “famous athletes and celebrities” and known for the outspoken private-sector advocacy of its founder, Dr. Brian Day – or “Dr. Profit,” as he is often referred to. British Columbia has 14 private clinics, which looked after 50,000 paying customers in 2004.

    Montreal was labelled the “private health care capital of Canada” by the Montreal Gazette, which conducted an investigation in February 2005. There is a “parallel system for the wealthy” in that city, said the newspaper, which reported that 90 doctors in Quebec have opted out of medicare, more than in all other provinces combined. One of them, Dr. Sheldon Elmer, is Prime Minister Paul Martin’s doctor. There are at least a dozen private medical imaging clinics and a number of knee and hip replacement clinics. The going rate for hip replacement is between $14,000 and $18,000. Montreal also has the first private emergency clinic and was, not surprisingly, the launching pad for the Supreme Court challenge”.

    • The Doctor says:

      I don’t know that P3 projects really have much to do with privatizing health care, at least in the sense of violating Canada Health Act principles or prohibitions. They’re just more concerned with getting hospitals built.

      Of course unions hate P3s, but that’s because they tend to have this knee-jerk doctrinaire position that everything (including ALL infrastructure of any kind) should be 100% funded by the government (i.e., taxpayers), which is both impractical and, frankly, idiotic.

      • Namesake says:

        but here’s a health-care P3 which really stinks (p-u):

        Fantino’s getting a $10-M federal development grant for his campaign backers to develop the infrastructure of the lands adjacent to the new $800-M hospital to be built in Vaughan…

        thereby giving him misleading credit for having something to do with getting the hospital funded & built (which, um, he shouldn’t, since that’s not a federal matter) AND rewarding his backers, whose company stands to gain quite a bit more, even if it is structured as a non-profit, and who are likely to be drawing very large salaries, as a result.


  28. wilson says:

    That is a hard hitting ad, not so much the healthcare, but the absolute power.

    Thing is,
    if Harper doesn’t get ‘absolute power’, Ignatieff does……. that’s even scarier.

  29. C.W. says:

    They should find some way of combining the health care issue with Liberal ethics/fairness/caring vs. Conservative corruption/contempt/cruelty/cynicism and conclude with something more hopeful – like Ignatieff’s “granite under our feet” line – which I thought was very good, and should be used more.

  30. J.G. Love says:

    I’m waiting for the ad showing 6 guys in suits beating the he’ll out of a woman in an Ontario riding and then throwing her under the bus. Bye bye helena

  31. michael hale says:

    Too little, too late. Where the hell was this ad in week two/beginning week three, when voters were still listening?

  32. Marg says:

    There is actually another Liberal ad that I saw tonight that is even better. Don’t know what it’s called and it isn’t showing yet on the Liberal website.

    I’m in NB and the medicare ad described above has been shown here for 2 – 3 days.

    • pomojen says:

      Wow. This one is very good.

    • Namesake says:

      yes, game-changing (except in that case, it wasn’t) tipped-off media coverage of a raid on gov’t offices in the middle of an election is disquieting (just ask Ralph Goodale; that’s how you lot are in power). And, sure, maybe there SHOULD be an independent investigation of who did the tipping in BOTH episodes. Sure would be nice to undo the 2006 results!

      But the EC official you mentioned was replaced. And his Harper-appointed successor found that the investigation was warranted and the original charges SHOULD proceed.

      So the footage of the raid isn’t the outstanding issue: the substance / subject of it is:

      viz., how the CPC cheated in the 2006 election by deliberately exceeding national spending limits on election ads by systematically transferring money In & Out of local ridings… and then added insult to injury by claiming rebates on that and even had had the gall to gouge the taxpayers further by suing Elections Canada after it ruled that those additional expenses were ineligible BECAUSE they exceeded the limits.

  33. Patrick Hamilton says:

    Are you a full time sycophant, Mr. Tulk?……..

    • James Curran says:

      Spare your bullshit “he wasn’t PM at the time.” The Cons quote Iggy as far back as the day he was born. And they’ve run thousands of no context ads – fisrt with Dion and then with Ig. You obviously live on a different planet than the rest of us.

      You’ve become a bore and it’s now completely evident you ain’t anything but a shill. Bought and paid for.

      • Wayne says:

        You, sir, are the bore. Mr. Tulk always provides well reasoned arguments and never resorts to personal attacks despite being repeatedly baited and taunted.

        Take a page from his playbook.

      • pomo says:

        I’ll give you this – the Incredible Tulk doesn’t call names. It’s a good quality.

        So I won’t call him a bore. Or a shill. Or the Incredible Tulk …anymore.

        But he asks few questions. He doesn’t appear to be interested in understanding people he doesn’t agree with. And he meticulously cherry picks evidence to support his world view. Maybe that’s what that name-calling bastard Curran meant.

  34. Dennis King says:

    Mr Kinsella,

    I read your site often. I always appreciate your comments and positions, though I don’t always agree with them.

    In terms of political advertising, I will defer to your knowledge and experience. Perhaps my 76 year old mother speaks for many when she says she would like them all to just “go away” and get off the tv for a while.

    As a conservative in the birthplace of Confederation, I find it ironic that the Liberals and Dippers don’t want Harper to have “Absolute Power”…yet they had him at “minority” power last month – and they didn’t want that either.

    Dennis K

    As a disclaimer – I am helping a local Conservative candidate here on PEI. He’s a friend, a good family man and will be great for our province. And I don’t have horns growing out of my head! Cheers

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.