23 May Why we can’t have rational political discussions

When Flygbussarna, a Swedish airport bus company, wanted to drive home the environmental superiority of riding buses to the airport, it commissioned a 300-tonne ad.

The Acne Advertising group assembled 50 junked cars into one bus, which it placed along the road to Sweden’s largest airport. The resulting sensation raised environmental consciousness even as it slowed airport-bound traffic to a crawl.

.

Flygbussarna added a live video cam of the “bus,” counted the cars passing the site, and calculated the amount of carbon that would have been saved had motorists taken the bus instead of their cars.

It’s an inspired campaign, but it also demonstrates why can’t have rational discussions during Nova Scotia election campaigns. If a pol here dares even to hint at an inconvenient truth, reporters and rival politicians pile on like pirannas.

Remember when reporters asked Premier Rodney MacDonald to comment on soaring gas prices last spring? The premier responded sensibly:

I think the most important thing we as a government can do, and all Nova Scotians can do, is to purchase more fuel-efficient vehicles, to take up the opportunity for transit.

The Chronicle-Herald turned this into a headline that read:

Premier to drivers: Take the bus

The Herald twisted a premier’s reasonable advice to citizens into an imperious Marie Antoinettism. The CBC and the opposition weren’t much better. Organizations like the Ecology Action Centre, that might have stuck up for the Premier, held their tongues.

Challenged on this dishonesty, reporters and opposition politicians shrugged. “That’s what he said, isn’t it?”

No, it’s not what he said. It’s a smartalec misrepresentation of what he said. But it’s a good bet most voters falsely believe that’s exactly what he said. So don’t feign disgust when politicians stick to bland cliches and scripted talking points on their way to the polls.