Ignatieff Running on Charm and Book Sense

[Progressive Tory]

As a Canadian I am so proud of the fact that the New York Times is singing the praises of our next Prime Minister, in the Sunday edition, no less.

Under the heading"

Running on Book Sense and Charm

"WASHINGTON — Michael Ignatieff has caught the attention of the New York Times, serving as the subject of a largely fawning profile Sunday that described the Liberal leader as a keen intellect waiting in the wings to assume power."

"The piece, on the front of the paper's Fashion and Style section, was picked up by the Manhattan media blog Gawker, which asked: "Is Michael Ignatieff Canada's Barack Obama?" under the subhead "Canadawesome."

"All hail Iggy!" read the post."

Canadian Press has picked up the story and is running it under:

Ignatieff is subject of complimentary New York Times profile

It came at a good time for me because I had just finished reading this:

Canadians not always good guys: Amnesty

At least I had something to cheer about.

[jdobbin]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...01?hub=Politics

Michael Ignatieff has caught the attention of the New York Times, serving as the subject of a largely fawning profile Sunday that described the Liberal leader as a keen intellect waiting in the wings to assume power.

"His ascendancy puts his country on the cusp of an unusual moment, in some ways a throwback to the era of the dashing Pierre Trudeau, another smart-set intellectual who served as prime minister," the Times' Eric Konigsberg wrote.

Something Dion never really got.

Harper has been the subject of many pieces in the foreign press. Now it seems we are seeing the same for Ignatieff.

Edited February 2, 2009 by jdobbin

[punked]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...01?hub=Politics

Something Dion never really got.

Harper has been the subject of many pieces in the foreign press. Now it seems we are seeing the same for Ignatieff.

This does not count he wrote for them for years.

[capricorn]

Yeah. As the article points out Iggy was bored with his academic life. When he was approached by Liberal head hunters in 2004, he saw the Prime Minister's job as a worthy project. That's what drew him back to Canada after a 30 year absence.

[85RZ500]

Aw c`mon, he dropped in here looking for a plum he could retire with. The Convenient Canadian.

They compare him to Trudeau, a dumb mistake. We do not need another posturing arrogant intellect at the controls.

Harper may not be Mr. Personality but I trust him a hell of a lot more then the best the Liberals could dredge up.

[Smallc]

Harper may not be Mr. Personality but I trust him

If someone asked me to describe Harper, that would be the last thing I would say.

[Progressive Tory]

Aw c`mon, he dropped in here looking for a plum he could retire with. The Convenient Canadian.

He already has lots of plums. This is another challenge and one that he will rise to. As a young man he worked on Trudeau's campaign. He has now come full circle.

The fact that is, that as New Yorkers were lying in bed thumbing through for the crossword puzzle, they were greeted by the next great world leader, who will put Canada back on the map as humanitarians and a nation that inpires.

No doubt many said "Look, there's Tom Cruise's father!"; though I suspect most said "Look, there's Progressive Tory's long lost brother!"

'Countess Progressive Tory'. Has a nice ring to it.

[madmax]

I prefer this blog to the NYT blather.

http://scienceblogs.com/islandofdoubt/2007...a_another_e.php

As a Canadian, it's long been a bit of an embarrassment for me that Michael Ignatieff is considered one of Canada's leading intellectuals. Worse now that he's also a sitting member of Parliament. But today's quasi-apology in the New York Times for supporting the invasion of Iraq is perhaps the strangest thing he's written yet. As Mike the Mad Biologist and Matthew Iglesias have already pointed out, academia by and large was not in favor of Bush's blunder. So where does Iggy get the idea that it was?

Everybody seems to have their favorite most-absurd excerpt from the essay, which attempts to explore why it is that so many otherwise intelligent people thought invading Iraq was a good idea. Ignatieff offers no evidence that any more than a handful of academics and Chris Hitchens were on Bush's side, but here's the section that really puzzles me.

... many of those who correctly anticipated catastrophe did so not by exercising judgment but by indulging in ideology. They opposed the invasion because they believed the president was only after the oil or because they believed America is always and in every situation wrong.

Could he be any more insulting? I don't know anyone who opposed the war on ideological grounds or because American is always wrong. They opposed the war because the chances of it actually making Iraq a better place, and the world safer from terrorism, were close to zero.

Iggy was weak and pathetic when he needed to be strong.

Strength and principles do not come with a Harvard PHD . They are a measure of character not credentials.

GWB graduated from Yale and Iggy agreed with him when many intellectuals and regular people knew better then that.

The fact that Iggy choose to ride the tide of US opinion, and not challenge values of right and wrong, demonstrate to me, that Iggy could never make an important decision like J. Chretian did, in NOT going to Iraq.

Iggy is the leader of the LPC who has lots of media contacts around the globe who will write a fawning story. But that doesn't change the fact that Ignatieff is both Ignorant and Arrogant.

[Progressive Tory]

But that doesn't change the fact that Ignatieff is both Ignorant and Arrogant.

A science journalist blogger. You've got to be kidding me. Can't wait to hear what Christopher Golden has to say.

You can't deny the fact that Ignatieff is creating a lot of hype and an endorsement in the New York Times will not be seen as media spin. It's the New York Times! Not the Bohunk Gazette.

Hail to Iggy!!!!

[jdobbin]

This does not count he wrote for them for years.

So you think he wrote this piece too under a pen name? ha

[madmax]

It's the New York Times! Hail to Iggy!!!!

You mean the NYT that supported the Iraq War. That New York Times? I don't believe the NYT had any kind words for Chretians decision NOT to go to Iraq.

[jdobbin]

Yeah. As the article points out Iggy was bored with his academic life. When he was approached by Liberal head hunters in 2004, he saw the Prime Minister's job as a worthy project. That's what drew him back to Canada after a 30 year absence.

And Harper must have been bored with the think tank life and from the destructive course he had taken in years past with the PCs and later Reform. He thought that PM was a worthy project. Now, he is probably wondering why he did it.

[jdobbin]

Harper may not be Mr. Personality but I trust him a hell of a lot more then the best the Liberals could dredge up.

Trust him to run up a deficit for the first time since the 1990s?

[jdobbin]

Iggy is the leader of the LPC who has lots of media contacts around the globe who will write a fawning story. But that doesn't change the fact that Ignatieff is both Ignorant and Arrogant.

So who do you think should be Liberal leader?

Who do you think of as a great mind in Canada?

[blueblood]

Trust him to run up a deficit for the first time since the 1990s?

Considering PMPM's wishlist in the 05 campaign, and the coalition's wishes, I'll cut Harper some slack. People wanted gov't spending, Harper delivered.

[Progressive Tory]

You mean the NYT that supported the Iraq War. That New York Times? I don't believe the NYT had any kind words for Chretians decision NOT to go to Iraq.

Oh for Heaven's sake. What does that have to with anything? I'm sure the New York Times has printed a lot of things over the years that later proved to be false. Like Weapons of Mass Destruction. Do you know who the Times Magazine 'Man of the Year' was for 1933? Adolph Hitler.

They are still the New York Times. A household name, whose ringing endorsement will make Michael Igantieff one as well. Hail to Iggy! I love it.

[bush_cheney2004]

.....The fact that is, that as New Yorkers were lying in bed thumbing through for the crossword puzzle, they were greeted by the next great world leader, who will put Canada back on the map as humanitarians and a nation that inpires.

No...it is more like the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show.....New Yorkers are being introduced to the next world poodle.

[madmax]

So who do you think should be Liberal leader?

The LPC doesn't have leadership races anymore. Who should be crowned???

Regardless, it is the portrayal of Ignatief as something that he is not.

Who do you think of as a great mind in Canada?

About 32 Million people in Canada have great minds. Not all are arrogant enough to portray themselves as having one.

Hows your mind doing???

I never mistake Education and Credentials for a "great mind"?

Politics isn't about "great minds". Some would say Dion had a "Great Mind".

Politics is about governing and making important decisions for the betterment of Canadians.

A bad decision such as going to Iraq, shows me that this "Great Mind" lacks Wisdom. It also shows a lack of character when the going gets tough and public opinion goes against what is moral and proper.

To here Progressive Tory bleed that Iggy couldn't speak out because of US popular opinion, demonstrates the lack of character of Ignatief. This is when he needed to speak out. Not be one of the sheep. This is when leadership is required.

Iggy cannot apologise to the people most affected. They are dead. And he supported their death. People were tortured, innocent people were tortured. And he accepted their torture.

This is a "great mind"....................... or is this a coward?

Edited February 2, 2009 by madmax

[bush_cheney2004]

...A bad decision such as going to Iraq, shows me that this "Great Mind" lacks Wisdom. It also shows a lack of character when the going gets tough and public opinion goes against what is moral and proper

Mixed message here....do you want wisdom or populism?

To here Progressive Tory bleed that Iggy couldn't speak out because of US popular opinion, demonstrates the lack of character of Ignatief. This is when he needed to speak out. Not be one of the sheep. This is when leadership is required.

He did speak out...in support of the invasion.

Iggy cannot apologise to the people most affected. They are dead. And he supported their death. People were tortured, innocent people were tortured. And he accepted their torture.

Does this mean it is OK to torture guilty people?

This is a "great mind"....................... or is this a coward?

Neither....it is a politician.

[madmax]

Mixed message here....do you want wisdom or populism?

Chretian had Wisdom. He lead the country away from the Iraq War and not into it.

He did speak out...in support of the invasion.

Does this mean it is OK to torture guilty people?

Neither....it is a politician.

I leave you with the last words above. There is nothing to debate, only agreement.

[bush_cheney2004]

Chretian had Wisdom. He lead the country away from the Iraq War and not into it.

More reality than wisdom...Canada was in no position to engage in Iraq, particularly given obligations to NATO and Afghanistan. PM Chretien deftly (but not bravely) straddled the fence.

I leave you with the last words above. There is nothing to debate, only agreement.

I am only drawn to this cock fight because, as usual, a member has proposed instant credibility for Iggy because of a foreign newspaper with curious alignments on Iraq and the political neurosis that is all consuming.

[Alta4ever]

Chretian had Wisdom. He lead the country away from the Iraq War and not into it.

At a huge cost to the lumber and beef industry, had he at least given words of support, I doubt these to industries would have suffered the fates that they did.

[jdobbin]

The LPC doesn't have leadership races anymore. Who should be crowned???

I hear you there. I believe that many Liberals assumed that the party would be hurt far worse to have Dion or an interim leader in place and have Harper call a snap election.

Also, too many potential Liberal candidates didn't deign to run this time for a variety of reasons, probably because of the amount of work involved in re-building.

No doubt the amount of debt in running played a big part in Rae and Leblanc's decision not to go all the way to May.

I can only imagine it will be the same for the other parties when they have their own leadership races. The issue of small donations and leadership runs does not lend itself to having an expansive list of candidates.

Regardless, it is the portrayal of Ignatief as something that he is not.

Think we saw the same for Harper by some of the media as well who expounded on his strategic genius. It is why I said in my first post that we have seen this before.

About 32 Million people in Canada have great minds. Not all are arrogant enough to portray themselves as having one.

I don't know that he is the one trying to portray his intellectual genius. I think he has come to realize that there is a big difference between academia and politics.

You might believe he is arrogant but then again some people just have a face that you want to punch square in the nose. Perhaps he is such a person. I know some people who can't trust Layton because of the mustache.

Hows your mind doing???

Well, I have already had my shot at running for office.

In any event, my impression is that any future Liberal leader needs a few basic but important qualifications before running.

The first is that that they have had a Liberal membership for at least a few years. When Rae announced he was running for the leadership and had to tear up his NDP card and take out a Liberal membership, I believed he was overstepping.

Second, I believe that a potential Liberal leader ought to have served as a Liberal MP for a least a few years before running for the top job. The learning curve is just too great on Parliament's ins and outs. I can still remember how Axworthy squarely placed a kick to the groin of Mulroney when he was first getting used to the House. It is probably why Mulroney tried to screw Winnipeg for many years after. When Ignatieff ran for the leadership after Martin's defeat, I believed he just didn't have enough experience in the House.

Third, I believe that any potential Liberal leader must be bilingual. And not just functionally bilingual but articulate in both languages. Dion struggled greatly in this and it hurt his performance at all levels.

In the last leadership race, I did not actively support any candidate. I simply thought they all had problems. Not insurmountable ones but ones that would require concerted effort or time.

This least leadership race had three qualified candidates. The major problem was the length of time to elect a new leader, money, the weakness of the old Liberal leader, the inability to constitutionally appoint an interim leader and a possible looming snap election.

It led to what we have today. Not very satisfying but entirely predictable in a minority Parliament where Harper was itching to go against a Liberal party in a leadership race.

I never mistake Education and Credentials for a "great mind"?

Politics isn't about "great minds". Some would say Dion had a "Great Mind".

But not an articulate vision. In either language.

Politics is about governing and making important decisions for the betterment of Canadians.

I don't disagree.

A bad decision such as going to Iraq, shows me that this "Great Mind" lacks Wisdom. It also shows a lack of character when the going gets tough and public opinion goes against what is moral and proper.

It is why in part I didn't support him for the first time he ran. He still didn't get why Canada did not participate. He seems to get it now.

I wish Layton would get it when he advocates for immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. His type of decisionmaking could have cost lives in a big way for Afghans, our allies and Canadians themselves.

I believe we should leave, never thought we should have extended based on our allies' weak support, but I have never thought we could pack up and leave within the time that Layton wanted.

To here Progressive Tory bleed that Iggy couldn't speak out because of US popular opinion, demonstrates the lack of character of Ignatief. This is when he needed to speak out. Not be one of the sheep. This is when leadership is required.

I believe Ignatieff supported the war with the same conviction that a lot of people did.

He was wrong. He admitted he was wrong based on the evidence and the outcome of the war in the years after. Too few people asked what would happen in the time after Saddam was ousted. Those that did speculate gave a very inaccurate assessment.

Thankfully, Iraq held successful elections in the last days. There are still elections ahead in the four provinces deemed to unsafe to hold them and also in the north in Kurd held Iraq. I think Obama will do what he can to withdraw the bulk of the troops. Iraq will have to solve its own problems in the end.

Iggy cannot apologise to the people most affected. They are dead. And he supported their death. People were tortured, innocent people were tortured. And he accepted their torture.

This is a "great mind"....................... or is this a coward?

He was wrong but Canadians can be pretty forgiving.

Tommy Douglas is called the greatest Canadian even though he wrote and supported as an academic eugenics.

[jdobbin]

At a huge cost to the lumber and beef industry, had he at least given words of support, I doubt these to industries would have suffered the fates that they did.

Um, the lumber wars continue today. Why did Harper's close and personal relationship not have any sway on lumber? You can ask the same thing about Mulroney. Or did you think the lumber fight started with Chretien?

As for beef, I guess you forget the Mad Cow scare. Even today it is hard to get some beef down in the States. Do you think it was all Iraq?

Edited February 2, 2009 by jdobbin

[Alta4ever]

Um, the lumber wars continue today. Why did Harper's close and personal relationship not have any sway on lumber? You can ask the same thing about Mulroney. Or did you think the lumber fight started with Chretien?

As for beef, I guess you forget the Mad Cow scare. Even today it is hard to get some beef down in the States. Do you think it was all Iraq?

Our lack of support effected our trade relations, I doubt the boarder would have even been closed to beef had JC given some kinf of support even moral. As for the lumber the issue had been close to being solved but it put us back three years.

So you the great dobbin can't see how political relations effect trade negociations?