Liberals Freak Out Over Nothing

A shocking series of events have taken place recently with liberals attacking and blasting Poilievre publicly for staying consistent on his rhetoric to defund the CBC.

Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge, flanked by NDP and media allies, took shots at Poilievre for his messaging and labelled his rhetoric as extremist and negligent to rural and indigenous communities relying on the CBC.

Their attacks are filled with nothing but vitriol and straight up lies, trying to label Poilievre as something he is not.

The liberals are struggling hard to attack Poilievre on any sensible ground and it got us thinking; Will the debate rage on until Poilievre assumes his place as a prime minister, or will people come to agree with his reasoning as time goes on?

Poilievre Drives the Liberals Mad

Pierre Poilievre has not let on his justified and absolutely popular rhetoric surrounding the CBC and his calls for it to be defunded for a myriad of reasons that include but are not limited to wasting taxpayer money while shovelling liberal propaganda down all of our rejecting throats.

This rhetoric as I just said has gained him immense and justified popularity among the common sense conservative base, and among the few common sense liberals that actually resonate with his message and his reasoning behind the call for CBC to be defunded.

They could clearly see how the CBC has used their money to do absolutely nothing productive except for stuffing their pockets while their viewers run away from them and their boring hollow content.

One group of people that don’t see this however is most brainwashed Trudeau liberals that try to turn this rhetoric into the absolute extreme and come up with the wildest excuses to defend the CBC from Poilievre and his factual argument.

Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge and her press secretary Charles Thibault-Béland argue that a “strong public broadcaster” is critical for reliable information, particularly in an age plagued by rampant misinformation.

Which is such a hilariously ironic statement to use as a defence for the CBC – which for all intents and purposes has acted as the liberal government’s number one source for propaganda for the past decade or so

Pascale proceeds to then attack Poilievre and frame his approach as reckless and further endangering communities reliant on CBC broadcasting in multiple languages, including eight Indigenous languages.

But if miss Pascale here actually did her research properly and dived deep into Poilievre’s argument without taking a surface level stance with no knowledge about it, she would have realised that Poilievre’s defunding pitch would only include the english language services and keep the french services alongside every other language.

Poilievre and His Words are Misconstrued

Poilievre’s main problems stem from the main English CBC and their various unaccountable scandals throughout the years. And he is no stranger to calling CBC out on their bullshit.

NDP MP Niki Ashton also wades into the fray, drawing attention to the impact on rural communities. Ashton declares, “If Pierre Poilievre wants to champion these communities, he’d be fighting to end media deserts, not expand them.”

But what does expansion and opposing it have to do with taking down a symbol of propaganda and misinformation? How does Poilievre fighting for a more honest and true media landscape means that he is trying to hurt it further and further? The liberals and the NDP will never truly or honestly answer these questions because at the end of the day they know the answer and they are afraid of the truth.

It’s this sort of selective outrage that keeps the echo chambers alive—highlighting the hypocrisy while promoting one’s own political agenda.

The CBC’s handling of political scandals and their occasionally tepid criticism of liberal policies certainly feed into this narrative. Amidst these charged exchanges, Marla Boltman, executive director of Friends of Canadian Media, offers a more cautionary perspective. She questions what a Canada without CBC would look like, suggesting the broadcaster serves as a “strong counter voice to misinformation.”

Certainly, there are myriad independent voices and alternative media outlets that could fill the void, offering diverse perspectives that challenge the mainstream narrative.

The CBC has been Doomed from the Start

Interestingly, while the pros and cons of defunding the CBC are fiercely debated, what is glaringly absent from much of the discourse is the acknowledgment that the media terrain has irrevocably changed. Global digital giants dominate the information highways, and public broadcasters like the CBC struggle to compete anyway.

Catherine Tait, CBC’s president and CEO, recognizes this, emphasising the challenge posed by global entities that lack commitment to Canadian interests. While Tait makes a compelling case for modernising CBC, it’s worth pondering whether reforming the public broadcaster truly aligns with the changing consumption habits of Canadians.

And the last time they tried to fix all the issues with the CBC and its messaging and media, they brought on a panel full of supporters, loft leaning personalities, and LGBT activists.

So, you know; the typical group of people that will either approve whatever the CBC is doing right now or drive it further and further into obscurity through failure and scandals.

This gave us the answer to the ultimate question in this situation; Does throwing more public money at the problem guarantee a solution, or is Poilievre’s proposal of reallocating funds towards more pressing needs, like housing, a more sensible approach? And I think we all know the answer to this debate.
We have already witnessed what the CBC does when they have copious amounts of money being handed to them on a silver platter, they lie, steal, and obfuscate the truth from all of us when they are being held accountable after being caught red handed.

As this debate rages on, it becomes increasingly clear that Canada’s media landscape needs a total and complete revamp at the hands of Pierre Poilievre and common sense conservatives.

So maybe we will finally get rid of these brainwashed maniacs attacking Poilievre for justifiable concerns and calls to nip corruption at the bud.