Harper - A Flake

[LesterDC]

You know zilch about Ignatieff other than the fact that he has been absent from Canada to pursue employment. I think you should tone down the rhetoric until such time as he actually does something by which you can actually judge him.

I don't think that Ignatieff is a viable solution for the Liberal Party... Maybe he likes dogs instead

[Mr.Canada]

I don't think that Ignatieff is a viable solution for the Liberal Party... Maybe he likes dogs instead

LOL. That's more like it LesterDC, see the humour in it all. That was a good one.

[capricorn]

I don't think that Ignatieff is a viable solution for the Liberal Party...

I'm not a Liberal Party supporter so I'm pleased you think Ignatieff is a poor choice.

Maybe he likes dogs instead

Dion has Kyoto. See how far that got him?

[capricorn]

There's no sense rubbing peoples noses in it, that's just cruel.

It's just that you make it so easy.

[ToadBrother]

It shows that he is in touch with everyday Canadians. Ignatieff cannot say the same.

Oh come on, he's a cold bastard whose every attempt to look like some sort of Tim Horton's portrait of a Canadian, he is no ordinary guy. Certainly his handlers and the Conservative Party at large has tried to make him appear like a slightly-smarter Average Joe, but he ain't.

Anybody who has actually learned anything about him knows damned well what he is, you Johnny Canuck he ain't.

[LesterDC]

Oh come on, he's a cold bastard whose every attempt to look like some sort of Tim Horton's portrait of a Canadian, he is no ordinary guy. Certainly his handlers and the Conservative Party at large has tried to make him appear like a slightly-smarter Average Joe, but he ain't.

Anybody who has actually learned anything about him knows damned well what he is, you Johnny Canuck he ain't.

Haha, Mr.Canada employed the same argument that got GWB elected down south..

[ToadBrother]

Haha, Mr.Canada employed the same argument that got GWB elected down south..

I don't think Harper is a moron like that mock-Texan aristocrat's simpering idiot son down south. Bush was well and truly a moron. Harper is a damned smart guy, but he is not Johnny Canuck. He is not a beer-drinking hockey-loving normal dude. He's a cold, intellectual strategist. This is clearly the Tory plan now, to try to further humanize him. It's rather pathetic, because I actually suspect that he and Ignatieff have a great deal in common.

[capricorn]

Harper is a damned smart guy, but he is not Johnny Canuck. He is not a beer-drinking hockey-loving normal dude. He's a cold, intellectual strategist. This is clearly the Tory plan now, to try to further humanize him. It's rather pathetic, because I actually suspect that he and Ignatieff have a great deal in common.

I don't know that I would qualify it as pathetic but I fully agree with your assessment. The race is on between the two camps to humanize their respective leaders. Although I think Harper's handlers have a head start.

[democrassy]

I don't think Harper is a moron like that mock-Texan aristocrat's simpering idiot son down south. Bush was well and truly a moron. Harper is a damned smart guy, but he is not Johnny Canuck. He is not a beer-drinking hockey-loving normal dude. He's a cold, intellectual strategist. This is clearly the Tory plan now, to try to further humanize him. It's rather pathetic, because I actually suspect that he and Ignatieff have a great deal in common.

Iraq - torture - - lots in common

One difference that I predict - Harper is the sweater clad hand shaking dad who can be tempermental and bitterly partisan - a limiting factor in trying to achieve the profile of a statesman .For Iggy I don't think you will see him lose his cool and do the petulant, nasty rebuttals that Harper has made famous and this may be the difference when Canadians chose their next PM

Harper does deserve kudo's though for his calm demeanor during the debate

[capricorn]

Iraq - torture - - lots in common

I would agree that at one time both agreed with US action regarding Iraq. On the question of torture, no. Harper has never made public pronouncements on torture whereas Ignatieff has endorsed some types of torture as being acceptable.

For Iggy I don't think you will see him lose his cool and do the petulant, nasty rebuttals that Harper has made famous and this may be the difference when Canadians chose their next PM

Iggy has not yet been tested. I will reserve judgment until I see him in action.

[Oleg Bach]

Wise.

[democrassy]

I would agree that at one time both agreed with US action regarding Iraq. On the question of torture, no. Harper has never made public pronouncements on torture whereas Ignatieff has endorsed some types of torture as being acceptable.

Iggy has not yet been tested. I will reserve judgment until I see him in action.

Torture was good natured humour as in torturing opposition parties

Agree on reserving judgement with Iggy but at first blush my inclination is that Iggy will be more of a statesman than Harper and this could be Harpers downfall

I am also happy that Libs have picked most fiscally right of possible choices but admittingly their options were both in the left field bleachers

[capricorn]

Torture was good natured humour as in torturing opposition parties

No. We're talking torture in the literal sense.

Ignatieff has argued that Western democracies may have to resort to "lesser evils" like indefinite detention of suspects, coercive interrogations,[24] targeted assassinations, and pre-emptive wars in order to combat the greater evil of terrorism. [25] He states that as a result, societies should strengthen their democratic institutions to keep these necessary evils from becoming as offensive to freedom and democracy as the threats they are meant to prevent.[26] In the context of this "lesser evil" analysis, Ignatieff discusses whether or not liberal democracies should employ coercive interrogation and torture. The 'Lesser Evil' approach has been criticized by some prominent human rights advocates, like Conor Gearty, for incorporating a problematic form of moral language that can be used to legitimize forms of torture.[27] But other human rights advocates, like Human Rights Watch's Kenneth Roth, have defended Ignatieff, saying his work attempts a difficult balance between competing values.[28] Ignatieff has adamantly maintained that he supports a complete ban on torture.[29]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ignat...r_Evil_approach

If we are to take Ignatieff at his word, he means that it is acceptable that Omar Khadr be held indefinitely in Guantanamo or some other detention centre. That would be at odds with many in the Liberal Party who feel Khadr is getting a raw deal.

I am also happy that Libs have picked most fiscally right of possible choices but admittingly their options were both in the left field bleachers

Ignatieff may prove to be more right wing than Harper. Ever think of that?

[democrassy]

No. We're talking torture in the literal sense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ignat...r_Evil_approach

If we are to take Ignatieff at his word, he means that it is acceptable that Omar Khadr be held indefinitely in Guantanamo or some other detention centre. That would be at odds with many in the Liberal Party who feel Khadr is getting a raw deal.

Ignatieff may prove to be more right wing than Harper. Ever think of that?

Torture issue is off the table... Maybe I should have added a smiley face and reference to opposition

RW in what sense?

[capricorn]

Torture issue is off the table... Maybe I should have added a smiley face and reference to opposition

The comment was presented without humour and commanded a serious response. OK you were joking, I accept that.

RW in what sense?

Given that a large slice of Ignatieff's adult life was spent in the US and his beliefs seem to align with Republicans, I think it's a valid question. Is he a hawk or a dove? It remains to be seen.

[democrassy]

The comment was presented without humour and commanded a serious response. OK you were joking, I accept that.

Given that a large slice of Ignatieff's adult life was spent in the US and his beliefs seem to align with Republicans, I think it's a valid question. Is he a hawk or a dove? It remains to be seen.

Your question of RW vs LW invites vagueness - fiscally, socially, militarily/foreign policy, etc..

From you hawk/dove perspective I assume you are limiting question to issues that refer strictly to military/foreign policy

If so I would say they are on the same page and definitley hawks in relative terms (Canada) based on their initial responses to Iraq at least - Harper may have put chains on hawk with trying to achieve a majority recently and ditto for Iggy trying to become Liberal leader but hard to say where they would be if either achieved supreme(aka majority) power

[capricorn]

If so I would say they are on the same page and definitley hawks in relative terms (Canada) based on their initial responses to Iraq at least - Harper may have put chains on hawk with trying to achieve a majority recently and ditto for Iggy trying to become Liberal leader but hard to say where they would be if either achieved supreme(aka majority) power

Agreed. Much is unknown territory at this stage. A debate between these two on foreign policy would be a sight to behold. I look forward to it.

[democrassy]

Agreed. Much is unknown territory at this stage. A debate between these two on foreign policy would be a sight to behold. I look forward to it.

This is an excellent link on Ignatieff vs Rae et. al. on foreign policy

Big bad americans are an easy target for doves but their emotional argument is well intentioned but often insincere

http://colbyfile.blogspot.com/2006/08/mich...ign-policy.html