And here's where they found 
their girl:
Wonder what she's looking at? It seems terrifyingly huge, and its frankly hard to imagine something like that belonging to a Conservative. (Except maybe to Stockwell Day who, I am told, is hung like a horse).
h/t to Jason, who never visits porn sites but apparently knows someone who does.
Update: Contrary to some of my commentors, there is no contradiction between being a girl in a stock photo and being a porn star. You might say our girl became a porn star the moment she appeared on the porn site. The definition of the term "porn star" is very loose. Girls have said to me, "Jesus, BCL, you're a regular porn star. I should be paying YOU."
I would never correct them.
From the first ad:
ReplyDeleteAnd when your ex waves a hand in your face and says, "No you di-un," calmly reply, "Yes I di-id"...
The Conservatives actually have ads with copy like this?
Really?
...No, really?
They should stick with the porny ads like the second one. Now, that's content a Conservative is more at home with.
Anyone who relies on Jason Cherniak's research and opinions does so at his own risk. He either talks before he does his fact checking or he's too dense to figure things out before blurting out his ignorance on his blog for the world to see.
ReplyDeleteThought you knew that BCL - Cherniak is a putz.
Dear BCL readers:
ReplyDeleteI actually visited Jason's site - and lo and behold, his research was wrong... again, but to the putz's credit he's re-posted with a correction. In fact he corrected it yesterday. The photo was not from a porn site but was a stock photo.
That doesn't seem to have deterred BCL who prefers to broadcast the first error-laen post. Where Jason is just plain incompetent BCL is mendacious. At least BCL doesn't have his "comment moderator" gizmo on so he can arbitrarily censor comments that don't fit his little ideological/partisan script as he does routinely.
The photo was not from a porn site but was a stock photo.
ReplyDeleteI already knew that Biff. It's still funny. I'd have laughed if the Liberals had done something similar.
Lighten up, you humourless cretin.
In any case, I think the actual Conservative ad is far stupider and more risible than the issue being mocked here.
When we can expect a Conservative rap ad?
"Yo, yo, yo...free market, small government, bizotches!"
Are you going to post an update with the new information that the photo in question is stock photo, and that your headline and story are completely false?
ReplyDeleteOr are you going to do the Liberal thing and say you were just joking, like Cherniak tried to do?
See http://rjjago.wordpress.com/2008/02/22/cherniak-is-a-putz/
"Now if the new media lawyer had taken a minute to look it up, he would have found that it’s an easy to locate royalty-free stock photo from istockphoto.com - right there at the top of the Google search. What a bloody putz. Is this the kind of thing Liberals get excited about? What a scandal! - Tories use stock photos."
This has become quite the theme with you unfortunates lately...
ReplyDelete"THIS IS OUTRAGEO!!!...KOff koff... HILARIOUS!! Yeah, Hilarious! That's it."
Larry Joe
Meh, whatever. Maybe 500 people, nearly all Liberals, will see this, out of 33.5 million Canadians.
ReplyDeleteI keep telling you we can bake a bigger blogsphere "pie" if we are factually accurate.
Maybe you don't want a bigger "pie"? Maybe you and other bloggers deliberately shit the bed to scare off the "normals"? I'm genuinely perplexed as to why you appear to deliberately post factually inaccurate stuff on a daily basis.
Pay-per-post? Are you getting paid by payperpost.com? Careful, Google might remove you from their index.
I'm wondering if BCL lets Ti-guy run his blog for him on weekends.
ReplyDeleteThat would explain this post's utter and blatant disregard for truthfulness.
Only an idiot would have taken that picture from a porn site.
ReplyDeleteThere are far better pictures on porn sites that they could use.
The libs should latch on to this idea. They may have been able to sell the Kyoto accords better had they shown some pornographic clips of the ladies who reside in Kyoto.
And the point of this posting is... what?
ReplyDeleteSurely you're not suggesting that Tories are purposely seeking out porn stars to engage Canadian youth in their party.
Where are you and Jason Cherniak going with this?
What I find even more interesting is the fact that this ad is obviously aimed at young guys who aren't getting laid. If there is one thing the Conservative Party doesn't need more of, it's young guys who aren't getting laid.
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering if BCL lets Ti-guy run his blog for him on weekends.
ReplyDeleteOh no, you di-un!
Listen up, Conservatives...the brightest among you have impressive skills in very narrow fields of expertise, and most of the rest of you are either loud-mouthed blowhards or barely sentient. And you're all humourless. Any humour found among Conservatives is usually an emergent property.
Acknowledge it, operationalise it, seek remediation and move on.
"THIS IS OUTRAGEO!!!...KOff koff... HILARIOUS!! Yeah, Hilarious! That's it."
ReplyDeleteLarry Joe
Oh, thrillsville. Larry Joseph Garvin is here.
Where's my emergency oxygen supply?
LOL.
ReplyDeleteDo you people know the difference between facts and wishful thinking?
Jason got smacked for this idiocy yesterday why set yourself up for the same treatment?
Fools.
I think handing out untendered contracts for 120,000$ in violation of regulations (or using Holocaust victims as fodder for pranks) are probably more serious errors, lil' nonny.
ReplyDeleteTi-guy,
ReplyDeleteI find no humour in dishonesty.
Since bottom-feeders like you are oblivious to honest discourse, I don't expect you to understand and therefore agree.
I find no humour in dishonesty.
ReplyDeleteYes you do, sock-puppet. Well not humour, exactly...but something.
A substitute for sex, perhaps? Or the thrill of mouthing off to complete strangers because you don't have the balls to do it in real life or because you fear mommy and daddy will ground you?
Wow. Holy Jumping Jehosephat. Looks like Liberals and Cons have something in common. They both like to surf porn at work.
ReplyDeleteDid I hurt Ti-guy's feelings by calling him "dishonest" and a "bottom-feeder"?
ReplyDeleteBCL please come to Ti-guy's rescue and correct your post. He's in over his head again - distinguishing truth from lies is too much of a tall order for this aptly named small man.
"Or the thrill of mouthing off to complete strangers because you don't have the balls to do it in real life or because you fear mommy and daddy will ground you?" - Thai-Guy
ReplyDelete...sez the anonymous commenter known as thai-guy...
Did I hurt Ti-guy's feelings by calling him "dishonest" and a "bottom-feeder"?
ReplyDeleteNot at all. You irritated me with your baseless, lying assertion.
...Bottom-feeder? You either don't know what this term means, or you think using it is devastating regardless of whether it has any basis in fact.
...call me a cunt or a pepsi instead. That at least doesn't sound so contrived and strikes me as more heartfelt.
...sez the anonymous commenter known as thai-guy...
Shouldn't you be giving your fat wife a tumble this morning, Richard?
Now...that's bottom-feeding.
Ha, the last time one of my associates called you a Pepsi you had a conniption, called it hate speech, and demanded BCL delete the comment!
ReplyDeleteOne of your associates?
What names have you sock-puppeted under, William G.? You're not teh Richard himself, since you're not obviously retarded and/or drunk all the time, so grow a pair and fess up.
Anyway, I should have chosen a Jewish-sounding pseudonym. That at least would have prevented the righties from hurling racist epithets.
*sigh*...Live and learn.
So...it's cool if we call you Thai Guy now? Awesome.
ReplyDeleteHey Thai Guy, when's the next child molestation junket?
Oh come on, I was just kidding.
Hey Thai Guy, when's the next child molestation junket?
ReplyDeleteI think you need to ask NAMBLA-watcher Richard Evans about that. He would know.
Seriously, you people need to be confronted with Holocaust victims and child abuse survivors. Maybe one them can finally slap the fucking smirks of your faces every time you think using those issues is simply hilarious.
Fascinating how he switches from foul mouthed thug to frightfully offended PCer mid-whinge, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteTell us more about your deepest cares, ideally while spewing insults.
Dance monkey!
Just to clarify: there is no contradiction between being the girl in a stock photo a being a porn star. You might say our girl became a porn star the moment she appeared on the porn site. The definition of the term "porn star" is very loose. Girls have said to me, "Jesus, BCL, you're a porn star. I should be paying YOU."
ReplyDeleteI would never correct them.
Fascinating how he switches from foul mouthed thug to frightfully offended PCer mid-whinge, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteYou mean being offended by the horror of genocide and child abuse is just a matter of political correctness for you?
Wow. Talk about being morally bankrupt.
In any case, it's not just the coarsening of political/public discourse that this kind of thing causes...it's also an issue of what you guys are doing to humour, satire and parody...all crimes against humanity, if you ask me.
"You mean being offended by the horror of genocide and child abuse is just a matter of political correctness for you?"
ReplyDeleteNo, I mean that you, in particular, are of such poor character that your cheap, feigned righteous indignation flies like a lead balloon.
We've covered this: you abuse the holocaust and child abuse as agitprop for your own selfish aims of smearing your opponents.
Ask B'nai Brith Canada, they're not impressed with talentless hacks exploiting the suffering of Jewish people while trying to make a name for themselves playing modern day Nazi hunter.
Same with BCL, same with any Liberal you can name. The jig is up. Nobody buys it anymore.
Wow.
ReplyDeleteFor something that is no big deal, the trolling brigade has sure shown up in full force.
Although given that they are trolls, it could be just one doing the usual sock-puppet thing.
In any event, it is apparently outrageous to suggest the photo came from a porn site. That is taking things totally out of context.
I shall presume our little outraged anons are equally outraged at the new con ads that take Dion's phrase "megatonnes of money" out of context.
I find this quite funny, and expect the cons would be embarassed if it hit the MSM, stock photo notwithstanding.
Shouldn't you be giving your fat wife a tumble this morning, Richard?
ReplyDeleteActually, I'll be giving your wife a "tumble" this morning. Seems that with all the time you've been spending hitting on little boys, you've neglected her.
The ad itself is funnier than the fact the cons use porn girl in it.
ReplyDeleteBe a rebel, join the conservatives???
Rebels REJECT societal norms, they do not conform to them.
I find this quite funny, and expect the cons would be embarassed if it hit the MSM, stock photo notwithstanding.
ReplyDeleteI submit that the trolling proves they are embarassed. Probably half the sock-puppets here are trolling from computers at CPC Central itself.
Speaking of which, whatever happened to that Conservative shill /troll Dawg caught a while ago? What was his name again?
I see the censors are out trying to shut you up again TG.
ReplyDeleteSilly little anons...
Actually, I'll be giving your wife a "tumble" this morning.
ReplyDeleteYeah, she told me all about it. Freaky. Why did you want her to roll in flour?
"The definition of the term "porn star" is very loose."
ReplyDeleteNice double-entendre, BCL. Very loose, indeed.
Wow did you ever that wrong.
ReplyDeleteSilly little anons...
ReplyDeleteYou keep mentioning anonymous commentors... Funny... Thai-guy is anonymous too...
Yeah, she told me all about it. Freaky. Why did you want her to roll in flour?
That was the fastest way to find the correct wet spot. Oh, and I showed her how to use a ruler. You're not going to get away with that whole 3"=8" scam anymore...
I didn't know Richard was a size queen. No surprise. Neo-Connies tend to have a lot of closet homosexuals.
ReplyDeleteIt is funny richard is so insulted by the term "silly little anons".
ReplyDeleteOf course I also called him and all those silly anons hypocrites. Apparently that does not bother him.
Don't the cons have any intelligent trolls?
It is funny richard is so insulted by the term "silly little anons".
ReplyDeleteHalf the time, NAMBLA-researcher/Calgary alderman candidate Richard Evans is many of those "silly little anons." On top of everything else he does, the twit sock-puppets as well.
I find it somewhat interesting that there is a surprised girl in the photo, suggesting that the implied convert to Conservianity was her ex - i.e., a male. It's also interesting that they say 'freak out your EX' and not 'freak out your spouse/girlfriend/etc'. Is that because they're implying that you join the CPC to further antagonize your ex (obviously a Liberal), or that she BECOMES your ex soon after you announce your conversion?
ReplyDeleteI also note the way they make a limp-wristed-effeminate(or feminate)-Liberal bash at the same time.
More CPC fear of women. Man, they must SUCK royally in bed.
It is funny richard is so insulted by the term "silly little anons".
ReplyDeleteI'm not insulted at all. Just making an observation is all. Why is thai-guy anonymous anyway? Is he scared that his on-line reputation would have an adverse effect back in the real world?
Of course I also called him and all those silly anons hypocrites. Apparently that does not bother him.
Why would it bother me? You're the one that looks like a stunned-twat.
On top of everything else he does, the twit sock-puppets as well.
Care to back that up thai-guy? If you can't you're a damned liar...
Care to back that up thai-guy? If you can't you're a damned liar...
ReplyDeleteLike I care if ol' NAMBy thinks I'm a liar.
He has indulged in sock-puppeting many, many times. His latest fraud only underscores what kind of character he has.
Richard - clever argument. Calling me names proves how very smart you are.
ReplyDeleteI guess I will forget about pointing out your inconsistencies and hypocrisies when you can silence me by calling me a stunned twat. I am humbled.
I guess the cons DON'T have any intelligent trolls. That must explain why they think this ad is actually going to succeed.
Shouldn't there be an age limit on calling oneself progressive?
ReplyDeleteIf one's favourite musicians include Gram Parsons, Bob Dylan, The Stones, The Faces, etc., can one reasonably be considered progressive?
Your values are over 40 years old now, they've been implemented, most have them have failed...can't you just shut the hell up and garden?
Hey Gayle.
ReplyDeletePlease shut the fk up. I'm enjoying the battle and your smug amateurish baiting is grating. Now get out of the way so I can see a real fight.
Dante, don't diss Gayle. She is a very clever lady and has apparently read some law stuff. She is way too smart for this blog and that she ever chooses to post here is like having an angel fallen to Earth.
ReplyDeleteHey, Dante....shut the fuck up. Your voyeurism is adding a creepy quality to the lame war I'm having with NAMBLA-Dick and his stable of rent-boys.
ReplyDeleteAnd be civil to Gayle. She always is.
I guess I will forget about pointing out your inconsistencies...
ReplyDeleteYou've failed to point out any sort of inconsistency on my part but, please, keep trying... While you're on the hunt, try to figure out how thai-guy can bitch about "anonymous" commenters when he, himself, is anonymous. When you get it solved, come back and tell the rest of the group.
And be civil to Gayle. She always is.
She may be civil but she doesn't seem too bright...
richard - my mistake. For some reason I keep confusing you with all the silly little anons.
ReplyDeleteReading back over your posts I see you have been consistent in your insistence in ignoring the entire topic in order to direct some rather juvenile insults towards TG.
Your obsession with him is kind of weird, but who am I to criticize. As for the anonymous thing, you know very well he and I are referring to sock puppets.
BCL and TG - thanks for the kind words, particularly the hyperbole :). I do not allow the dante's of the world bother me.
Gayle, did you notice that Noam Chomsky disagreed with your take on the Levant/Steyn/HRC controversy. He believes in free speech and relies on U.S. jurisprudence. Surely you were lurking but not responding. Cat caught your tongue?
ReplyDeleteI guess you're smarter than your Guru now?
Chomsky doesn't even sue the Reich-wingers who've libeled him.
ReplyDeleteToo bad your hero Ezra "The Censor" Levant can't be as principled and consistent.
frances - why would I care what Chomsky thinks? Is he supposed to be my guru???
ReplyDeleteAs for your lurking comment, not sure what you are getting at...
Gayle - I assumed that you were following the discussion on this blog about the Levant etc. controversy since you were, I was going to say, pontificating on it at some length. Anyway the blogger at Dime a Dozen solicited that oracle of the left, Noam Chomsky on the very issue and he wasn't impressed with the fact that Levant and Steyn were being dragged before the H. R. Commission.
ReplyDeleteMost left-wingers worship at his shrine, and to be fair to Chomsky, he does justify his views as he indeed did in this case. Anyway BCL worships at his shrine and hasn't commented. Don't tell me you haven't read Chomsky/
Anyway I'd like to chat but I'm off to a dinner party so gotta go.
Ti-guy go watch the hockey game.
What's Frances talking about? Chomsky's shrine?
ReplyDeleteAnyway I'd like to chat but I'm off to a dinner party so gotta go.
Enjoy the squirrel.
Sorry to tell you this, but I haven't read Chomsky, and I really could not care what he thinks about the HRC's. It does not change my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI would be more interested if Chomsky was one of the SCC justices who upheld s. 13 of the HRA. But he isn't.
I would be more interested if Chomsky was one of the SCC justices who upheld s. 13 of the HRA. But he isn't.
ReplyDeleteExcept Section 13(1) has never been Supreme Court tested.
I suspect you are referring to a 1988 challenge, where the the SCC upheld a challenge to the H.R.A.
You might note that Section 13(1) was added after September 11th, in 2002, and therefore the 1988 decision is irrelevant.
A challenge to 13(1) would be on completely new territory as there is no real constitution case law behind it.
mike
ReplyDeleteI am referring to the 1990 decision of Taylor that held that this section was constitutional:
13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.
As for the anonymous thing, you know very well he and I are referring to sock puppets.
ReplyDeleteGot some links to back-up the sock-puppet claim? I'm waiting...
crickets chirping
C'mon gayle, put up or shut up...
Oh, I almost forgot... Have you figured out how it is yet that thai-guy can bitch about anonymous commenters while being, himself, an anonymous commenter?
mymymyyyy... Looks like you've got some work to do gayle... Don't want all these nice folks to see you as a lying hypocrite now do you?
Enjoy the squirrel.
It's somehow ironic that you'd mention "squirrel", thai-guy, because there's a rumor out there that you're hung like one...
Have you figured out how it is yet that thai-guy can bitch about anonymous commenters while being, himself, an anonymous commenter?
ReplyDeleteNAMBLA-Richard Evans has been asking this question for years now. It's been explained to him over and over again and he willfully refuses to accept the explanations he's given.
It's astonishing to think of the degree to which he's invested in presenting himself as completely unteachable.
Is it the chronic alcoholism? Is it an addiction that's even more dire? Is it brain damage? Is it child abuse? Is he being paid to harass? Is it his hatred of Eastern Canadians and various other others?
I personally believe Richard Evans should have been charged with online stalking and harassment long ago.
richard - again, I am not sure why you are so obsessed with TG, but I am not going to be drawn into defending of something that exists only in your mind.
ReplyDeleteIf you cannot see the difference between someone who consistently posts as TG, and someone who may one moment post as "biff", and another as "troll on a roll", then there is nothing I can do to help you with that.
richard - again, I am not sure why you are so obsessed with TG
ReplyDeleteI wish I could be flattered by or even able enjoy the emotional frisson that comes from being the target of some wacko's obsession, but NAMBLA-Richard Evans is singularly promiscuous when it comes to his stalking. He's got a whole harem of people in his sights. If I were the jealous type, I'd be miffed.
porn or no porn, this is one of the CONs dumbest and most insulting ads so far. Don't join them for what you believe, or for what they represent, join them to piss off your ex.
ReplyDeleteAfter all, women don't understand politics, so what other reason would they have for joining a party?
...and yet the sock-puppet claims still go without proof...
ReplyDeleteYou know, we expect thai-guy to lie. It's what he does. I thought gayle would be smarter than that though...
richard - are you suggesting I accused YOU of being a sock puppet? Because I haven't.
ReplyDeleteI suspect you may be, but I do not accuse you because, as you say, I have no proof.
I do wonder if you think you have anything useful to add on the actual subject of this post? It seems to me you are devoted to the idea of bashing people without offering anything of substance. That says a lot about you. It is also the kind of behaviour one sees from sock puppets.
...and yet the sock-puppet claims still go without proof...
ReplyDeleteYou admitted here that you sock-puppeted:
"Blogger Richard said...
Ok, let me get this straight... You're giving me the gears because I used a pseudonym directly attached to a domain that I legally own..."
...although I'm sure you'll rationalise it as something else, because you're too mentally-ill/alcohol-addled to be in touch with common sense anymore.
Wow. Thanks for the link TG. That is just disturbing.
ReplyDeleteSome people make their points with intelligent commentary. I guess the ones who cannot do that have to resort to psycho behaviour.
It is sad.
He's been here lots of times, BCL (and not just as a sock-puppet). Do you ever check profiles?
ReplyDelete