Ignatieff The American

[KeyStone]

Michael Ignatieff around President Obama reminded me of teenage girls around the Beatles. Now he's going to have his picture with the President shown in Times Square. This is a great use of Liberal money. I'm sure the Americans will be impressed when they see their President in a picture with some guy who thinks he's more important than he actually is.

When Iggy became leader of the LPC, I thought he would be very good. He's really disappointing me. First he tells Obama that Canadians are "concerned" about Omar Khadr. Then he tells Obama that he has a hard time working with the government of his own country. I guess Iggy wants to be the terrorist friendly leader. I once thought I might vote for him, but not after his sit-down with President Obama. Dion may actually be better than Iggy.

There is nothing wrong with asking for Canada to take custody of a boy who committed a crime as a fifteen year old, as opposed to letting him remain in indefinite and untried detention.

Furthermore, he isn't a terrorist. He fought against the Americans when the Americans invaded another nation. That makes him a soldier not a terrorist. He wasn't killing children, or blowing up schools, or UN facilities as terrorists do.

Plenty of good reasons not to like Ignatieff, but defending the rights of a Canadian who committed a crime when he was fifteen is not one of them.

[Oleg Bach]

Lets end the spite against Khdar - forget his family for a moment- He is in his orignial cultural surroundings - in a compound where fierce gun fire is exchanged with Americans who are considered invaders. After the fire fight they send in a few mulit-million dollar air craft that bomb the place till it is rubble - all are dead but one 15 year old kid. In come the invaders who have killed everyone so they assume - to do a final clearing...Khdar is there - all are dead - what do you think HE thinks the entering force is going to do to him at that moment - KILL him of course - and if not for the death of the "medic" ( they always mention that the medic was some sort of heavenly angel of mercy)..

that diversion that broke the rythm of the Americans who's only purpose at that time was to make sure all were dead. If the kid tossed the grenade it was justified at that moment. If he had not tossed it chances are he would be dead. I am not a sympatizer to any such cause as the boy was involved in..... In his mind it was either them or him ------------and the constant reference to "medic" is tiresome and the emotional response has run it's course - During the last push into Berlin - did the Americans gather up all the boy scouts defending the place and charge them with war crimes?

[capricorn]

Ignatieff's entire life has been a direct path to becoming a world leader. I'm proud that it will be as a Canadian Prime Minister.

I believe the following may have been written just for you PT. It encapsulates everything I think and feel about Ignatieff.

The audacity of Michael Ignatieff

Naive and egotistical, Canada's Liberal leader isn't the saviour his supporters believe him to be

---

And so for all the budget's flaws – and he listed many of them – all Ignatieff offered by way of amendment was for the government to be held accountable: "We will require regular reports to Parliament on the budget's implementation and its cost – one in March, one in June and one in December." That was it. After all the seemingly noble rhetoric about "helping Canadians", about "pay equity for women" and about "the green economy", after all the drama of the past couple of months, all Ignatieff wanted was three reports. His kingdom for three reports.

---

But why not demand more in return for his support of the budget than three reports? Why not propose tangible amendments addressing Employment Insurance, for example, or the coming deficits? Why not seek to differentiate himself from Harper, and the Liberals from the Conservatives, in a genuine and meaningful way? And why antagonise the New Democrats? (New Democrat leader Jack Layton responded to Ignatieff's caving in by suggesting that the new Liberal leader was just like his ineffectual predecessor, Stéphane Dion, that a new Conservative-Liberal coalition had been established and that Ignatieff's demand for reports was "a fig leaf".)

Why did Ignatieff do what he did? Because he has no interest right now in bringing down the government and thereby being compelled to share power. Because his political career has been about his own glorification, about his desire – for it seems to be the only reason he entered politics in the first place – to be prime minister. He may generously be called a chameleon, a shifty academic difficult to pin down, but perhaps more accurately he ought to be called an egotist who is sure of his own superiority and who seems to lack any real passion for the country he intends to lead.

---

He may not be the party's saviour, let alone another Pierre Trudeau – Liberals long for the next Trudeau like Republicans long for the next Reagan and Conservatives for the next Thatcher – but he has certainly boosted the party's credibility. Yet it is not at all clear what sort of a leader he'll be, nor ultimately how successful he'll be in the long run. Indeed, while his academic credentials are undeniably impressive, he lacks political and parliamentary experience, much-needed during these turbulent times and with a minority government in power. And his positions on such matters as pre-emptive war and torture, both of which he has defended in terms of his "lesser evil" theory – as in, they're lesser evils than, say, terrorism – are rather controversial, not to mention deeply unpopular among Canadians.

---

With an air of haughty detachment, an arrogant sense of entitlement to leadership, limited charisma, Bush-friendly positions on key foreign policy issues, hardly any record on (and relatively little knowledge of) social and economic issues and next to no experience in the political trenches, Ignatieff is hardly the saviour so many Liberals delusionally think he is.

---

To me, though, he has never seemed to be much of a Canadian, and certainly not enough of one to be our prime minister. It's not that he has spent so much of his life overseas – mostly in Britain and the US. It's that he has seemed to aspire actively to be anything but Canadian, and more specifically to be American. Which is fine, in a cosmopolitan sort of way, but he comes back to Canada with an air of condescension about him, as if he has seen the world and conquered it and has now decided, with the coaxing of a party eager for him to lead it back to the promised land, to sully himself in the world of politics supposedly on our behalf but really because he just wants to be prime minister, so great would it look on his resumé, a capstone to a long and successful career.

Today's Canada is very much Trudeau's Canada, the Canada of Trudeau's vision, for better and for worse. Trudeau was, like Ignatieff, an intellectual, but, unlike Ignatieff, he obviously cared deeply about this country and sought to leave his mark on it, which he did. Ignatieff may feel "passionately and proudly Canadian", and there may be a bold vision behind his egotism, somewhere, but he has a lot to prove before he should be considered anything more than an opportunist, if not a self-absorbed charlatan.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/ci...-canada-economy

[Alta4ever]

Are you talking to yourself, or haven't quite figured out the quote function?

Politically, that's another matter and another story. But your horse is in parliament now and he seems to have sold you out.

I post while working. sometimes what is typed and what is ment are two diferent things, I usually get the opportunity to post while speaking on the phone.

[waldo]

I believe the following may have been written just for you PT. It encapsulates everything I think and feel about Ignatieff.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/ci...-canada-economy

not a problem - some inconsequential blogger who states a preference for Bob Rae over Ignatieff... for full disclosure we should really link to his actual blog and quote his summary statement, as below:

Still, he's better than the alternative, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his vicious band of Bush-lite Conservatives.

you're welcome... carry on

[Progressive Tory]

I'm sure the Americans will be impressed when they see their President in a picture with some guy who thinks he's more important than he actually is.

When Mr. Chretien decided not to join the U.S. in the War in Iraq, Harper headed south and ran around like Henny Penny, telling Americans that he personally represented the majority of Canadians who wanted to go to Iraq. The Washington Post, the Wall Street journal, Fox News; thinking he was more important than he actually was.

But then of course he came back to Canada and when he realized that he did not represent the feelings of the majority of Canadians, spent the next six years trying to convince us that he never wanted to go to Iraq. Plaguerized speeches and letters to the editor of American newspapers said otherwise.

Stockwell Day practically imploded on TVOntario with Steve Pakin, trying to deny that Harper ever wanted to enter that war. Mr. Pakin gave him three chances to correct his lie, but he got tight lipped and wouldn't budge. (He co-wrote the letter to the Wall Street Journal).

Do you think Americans will remember the Times Square ad? Do you think they care that Harper wanted us in Iraq? It's a non-issue for them. However, it was very funny and I'm glad that the Governor General and Mr. Igantieff found their own PR after Harper tried to ban the cameras. He would have done the same thing back in the day, and in fact did.

It was a funny 'in your face' on the day that Harper was in New York. He's just sorry his PR people didn't think of it.

BTW. Didn't our GG look great with Obama? She is so beautiful.

[Progressive Tory]

In come the invaders who have killed everyone so they assume - to do a final clearing...Khdar is there - all are dead - what do you think HE thinks the entering force is going to do to him at that moment

Children who helped the resistance during WWII became national heroes. It's always a matter of perception.

However, the majority of Canadians want Kadr returned, but not freed until he faces charges. I'm not for simply releasing him, but allowing him to have a fair trial.

Mr. Ignatieff actually was speaking for the majority of Canadians and as leader of the opposition is allowed to bring up whatever he wants. I actually got an e-mail petition adressed to him, asking him to talk to Obama about Mr. Kadr. It didn't say to free him, just to bring him home.

I think Canadians will get their wish.

[bush_cheney2004]

...But then of course he came back to Canada and when he realized that he did not represent the feelings of the majority of Canadians, spent the next six years trying to convince us that he never wanted to go to Iraq. Plaguerized speeches and letters to the editor of American newspapers said otherwise.

Why would either Harper or Ignatieff feel the need to pander to Americans either way? Even Chretien's sit-on-the-fence decision concerning Iraq was just a sideshow to most Americans. Canada's thin forces were already committed to Afghanistan.

Do you think Americans will remember the Times Square ad? Do you think they care that Harper wanted us in Iraq? It's a non-issue for them....

Correct....most Americans still don't know or care who the Canadian PM is, and care even less (if that's possible) about Prime Minister wannabes.

[Progressive Tory]

Why would either Harper or Ignatieff feel the need to pander to Americans either way? Even Chretien's sit-on-the-fence decision concerning Iraq was just a sideshow to most Americans. Canada's thin forces were already committed to Afghanistan....most Americans still don't know or care who the Canadian PM is, and care even less (if that's possible) about Prime Minister wannabes.

You're absolutely right. (I'm marking that on my calendar. The day I agreed with Bush-Cheney. My family will never believe it.)

The Times Square ad will mean nothing to anyone but Harper. It's a funny private joke. No cameras, huh? We'll show you.

Americans don't care that Ignatieff could very well be the Prime Minister of Canada, but more Americans know him from his books and lectures. Not the 'person on the street' Americans, but political leaders. (Even Obama has read 'his stuff') He's very well respected in International circles. As a Canadian I'm proud of that. I'm also proud of people like Wayne Gretzky and Jim Carey, even if they have spent most of their adult lives outside of the country. They are still Canadians.

[capricorn]

not a problem - some inconsequential blogger who states a preference for Bob Rae over Ignatieff... for full disclosure we should really link to his actual blog and quote his summary statement, as below:

Still, he's better than the alternative, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his vicious band of Bush-lite Conservatives.

So? Stickings seems to be a NDP supporter. I do like his take on Ignatieff that he calls an "opportunist" and a "charlatan".

[waldo]

not a problem - some inconsequential blogger who states a preference for Bob Rae over Ignatieff... for full disclosure we should really link to his actual blog and quote his summary statement, as below:

Still, he's better than the alternative, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his vicious band of Bush-lite Conservatives.

you're welcome... carry on

So? Stickings seems to be a NDP supporter. I do like his take on Ignatieff that he calls an "opportunist" and a "charlatan".

So? I do like his take on Harper and his vicious band that he calls "Bush-lite Conservatives".

[Moonbox]

So? I do like his take on Harper and his vicious band that he calls "Bush-lite Conservatives".

Regardless of how lame the Bush-lite references have become over the last few years given how little there is to support them, I don't see how that in any way defends Ignatieff against the criticism presented.

[waldo]

So? Stickings seems to be a NDP supporter. I do like his take on Ignatieff that he calls an "opportunist" and a "charlatan".

So? I do like his take on Harper and his vicious band that he calls "Bush-lite Conservatives".

Regardless of how lame the Bush-lite references have become over the last few years given how little there is to support them, I don't see how that in any way defends Ignatieff against the criticism presented.

c'mon, really - it's a package deal. One can hardly cherry pick the opinion of one lone inconsequential blogger while negating the most salient point he offers... that the guy still feels Ignatieff is a better alternative than Harper.

as for the so-called criticism, the lone inconsequential blogger says he doesn't agree with Ignatieff supporting the budget... although he likes the report card accountability Harper is being held to. The blogger feels a need to resurrect the much discussed Ignatieff position on Iraq. The blogger then offers a personal assessment on Ignatieff without any supporting foundation... just a personal assessment. Have I missed anything?

so far both you guys have broadly referenced to a lone inconsequential bloggers criticism... without actually picking up on any of the bloggers particular points. Is there really anything new presented here? Budget support... Iraq position... and a most personalized bloggers assessment on things like entitlement, ego, personality, etc.

so again, have I missed anything here... waiting, waiting

[bush_cheney2004]

.... I'm also proud of people like Wayne Gretzky and Jim Carey, even if they have spent most of their adult lives outside of the country. They are still Canadians.

So is it true, as is the case with Ignatieff, that one must leave Canada to become a famous Canadian? How is such fame defined? By a Jumbotron appearance in Times Square, US of A?

[Alta4ever]

Children who helped the resistance during WWII became national heroes. It's always a matter of perception.

However, the majority of Canadians want Kadr returned, but not freed until he faces charges. I'm not for simply releasing him, but allowing him to have a fair trial.

Mr. Ignatieff actually was speaking for the majority of Canadians and as leader of the opposition is allowed to bring up whatever he wants. I actually got an e-mail petition adressed to him, asking him to talk to Obama about Mr. Kadr. It didn't say to free him, just to bring him home.

I think Canadians will get their wish.

He commited his crime against Americans, his "fair" trial should be in a US court.

[bush_cheney2004]

He commited his crime against Americans, his "fair" trial should be in a US court.

...or at least an "international court" (that some people are so fond of)....Canada has no jurisdiction in this case.

[waldo]

...or at least an "international court" (that some people are so fond of)....Canada has no jurisdiction in this case.

uhhh... what was his crime? Thought war was hell - and all that?

by not classifying detainees as POWs, apparently, the U.S. believes it has (or had) the right to try the detainees in military (or civilian?) courts... or just leave them languishing behind bars indefinitely, without charge/representation/trial.

[MontyBurns]

Children who helped the resistance during WWII became national heroes. It's always a matter of perception.

However, the majority of Canadians want Kadr returned, but not freed until he faces charges. I'm not for simply releasing him, but allowing him to have a fair trial.

Mr. Ignatieff actually was speaking for the majority of Canadians and as leader of the opposition is allowed to bring up whatever he wants. I actually got an e-mail petition adressed to him, asking him to talk to Obama about Mr. Kadr. It didn't say to free him, just to bring him home.

I think Canadians will get their wish.

I hope the bugger stays in Cuba.

[Moonbox]

so again, have I missed anything here... waiting, waiting

You missed the point where the poster was just agreeing with the blogger's feelings about Ignatieff. In review they were well articulated and intelligent arguments, whether or not you agree with them.

The fact that the blogger dislikes Harper more is unsurprising if he's speaking from the far left, nor does it change his criticism of Ignatieff.

When I criticize Iggy I can also claim that Jack Layton would be far worse. I can criticize Harper at the same time. It doesn't make any of these criticisms any less scathing.

[Alta4ever]

...or at least an "international court" (that some people are so fond of)....Canada has no jurisdiction in this case.

what a farse they are.

[Progressive Tory]

So is it true, as is the case with Ignatieff, that one must leave Canada to become a famous Canadian? How is such fame defined? By a Jumbotron appearance in Times Square, US of A?

There's definitely a larger customer base, so in the entertainment business, that's where the money is. With hockey players it depends on the draft or trades.

A teaching position at an Ivy League school is definitely a high honour for a University professor, and only an idiot would turn it down.

However, much of Ignatieff's time outside the country was spent as a journalist and documentary filmmaker, in wartorn countries. He always travelled on a Canadian passport and his documentary won a Gemini (a Canadian award). He has always been a Canadian and has never sought any other passport of citizenship. Harvard recruited him to head up their Human Rights Department. He didn't answer an ad in the paper.

The Times Square thing was a lark. It won't mean a thing to Americans viewing it, anymore than Harper's insanity after Chretien's decision. When Harper got into trouble was coming back and assuming we don't get Fox, denied he ever supported the War in Iraq.

[Alta4ever]

uhhh... what was his crime? Thought war was hell - and all that?

by not classifying detainees as POWs, apparently, the U.S. believes it has (or had) the right to try the detainees in military (or civilian?) courts... or just leave them languishing behind bars indefinitely, without charge/representation/trial.

Sorry but he was not wearing a uniform that makes him an inssergent and they are not part of the geneva convention, he has commited a crime and must face trial.

[Progressive Tory]

I hope the bugger stays in Cuba.

He won't. Obama is closing it. I think he will stand trial here.

[Smallc]

I think he will stand trial here.

For what? He should stand trial in the US. He should have done so years ago.

[Progressive Tory]

For what? He should stand trial in the US. He should have done so years ago.

Actually, I don't think the US have enough evidence. "The American government claims that Khadr threw a grenade that killed a U.S. soldier. As details of the battle emerge, it is now unclear who threw the grenade and whether the grenade could have belonged to the American troops. and.. Unintentionally released US Military documents reveal that original reports say that Kadr was not the person who threw the grenade."

I think he's become an embarassment to the Americans. However, if he's brought back to Canada I assume they will probably hold him until they can prove whether or not he is a member of Al-Qaeda. I think that's what the poll refers to. We want him out of Gitmo and given a fair trial on terrorist charges, providing there's enough evidence.

Otherwise, I'm sure a new poll will want him released.