Another advertising scandal for Liberals.

scan·dal
1. A publicized incident that brings about disgrace or offends the moral sensibilities of society: a drug scandal that forced the mayor's resignation.
2. A person, thing, or circumstance that causes or ought to cause disgrace or outrage: a politician whose dishonesty is a scandal; considered the housing shortage a scandal.
3. Damage to reputation or character caused by public disclosure of immoral or grossly improper behavior; disgrace.
4. Talk that is damaging to one's character; malicious gossip.

I would suggest that the definition of scandal describes exactly what happened when the Liberals released their negative advertising campaign. What is the opposite of the Midas touch?

I leave you today with this little gem from John Duffy's book "Fights Of Our Lives" pg.194 John commenting on the Tories chances in 1957.

The Tories long-shot wager was simple: put all your money on the leader, as in a Marlboro print ad with 250 square inches of cowboy and three square inches of logo. It was Diefenbaker's only hope. His Party was locked at 30% voter support, barely alive in Quebec and caught out West in endless three way struggles for the anti-Liberal vote.

The Tories went on to shock the Liberals by forming a minority. A year later, that minority went on to form the biggest majority in Canada's history.

John,I know it is not 1957 but clearly there are parallels and you being aware of the result in 1957 why would you let Harper Define himself for a month before attacking him? Why did you let the Prime Minister down? Do you think you should resign or be fired?

Never mind that you attempted interfere with journalistic integrity and got caught on national TV. You now have an advertising scandal of your own and have failed the Prime Minister of Canada. Shouldn't you resign?