Harper says Ignatieff has no moral compass

[jdobbin]

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

Stephen Harper tried turning a caucus scrap over his Tory predecessor from a liability to a political advantage for his Conservatives on Wednesday.

The prime minister argued that his rocky relationship with Brian Mulroney proves he values ethical government -- and the Liberals don't.

The comments came after a raucous Conservative caucus meeting in which several of Harper's own MPs decried what they felt was mean-spirited treatment of a former leader.

Guess we could have figured out that Harper was going to use the moment to attack. I wonder if his caucus is buying it.

As Harper says:

"I think what Canadians will see when it comes to a very difficult issue of government conduct and government ethics, this government has behaved responsibly and the other party, the other leader, has absolutely no moral compass."

The Tories are hoping that inquiry will embarrass the Liberals rather than the Conservatives.

[Fat Freddie]

I think it's safe to say Ignatieff has pulled a Dion. If Harper is willing to say things like this, I would bet the Conservatives already know something that will make the Liberals look like total idiots.

[Smallc]

The Conservatives do know something.....they know that their poll numbers are falling. As a result, they try to paint a picture of Ignatieff for the public. Good luck to them with that.

[August1991]

[rhetorical question]Ignatieff has no moral compass?[/rhetorical question]

I started a thread with the title: Ignatieff - A Flake

(If you haven't flipped through the thread, some of the quotes are even funny.)

----

Harper's comment isn't about Ignatieff. It's about Mulroney and so Harper, the politician, has several choices:

1) This happened 15 years ago so who cares.

2) Chretien did worse.

3) Throw Mulroney under the bus.

4) Ignatieff would be a bad PM.

For Harper, the choice is obvious. Nevertheless, I admire Harper's way of doing this.

Edited April 9, 2009 by August1991

[Sabre Rider]

ahem, Mr. Harper? Pot, kettle, black sir, pot, kettle, black.

[jdobbin]

Harper's comment isn't about Ignatieff. It's about Mulroney and so Harper, the politician, has several choices:

1) This happened 15 years ago so who cares.

Hard to make that argument when Harper is looking back 15 years on Igntaieff.

2) Chretien did worse.

And better.

3) Throw Mulroney under the bus.

Risk a backlash from the PCs in his party.

4) Ignatieff would be a bad PM.

His only viable choice but then he will have to convince people that he would be better. At the moment, he's the boss and the boss is having trouble.

For Harper, the choice is obvious. Nevertheless, I admire Harper's way of doing this.

Yes, he is brilliant. He has the Liberals just where he wants them and will call a snap election in the next 12 months.

[noahbody]

ahem, Mr. Harper? Pot, kettle, black sir, pot, kettle, black.

Without looking, how many times would you guess the word "kettle" shows up in a search?

a) 1 time (original)

2 times (could be a coincidence)

c) 20 times (okay, that's getting old)

d) over 200 times (let it die please)

[bush_cheney2004]

Without looking, how many times would you guess the word "kettle" shows up in a search?

a) 1 time (original)

2 times (could be a coincidence)

c) 20 times (okay, that's getting old)

d) over 200 times (let it die please)

....besides, what's wrong with being called "black"?

[Visionseeker]

[rhetorical question]Ignatieff has no moral compass?[/rhetorical question]

I started a thread with the title: Ignatieff - A Flake

(If you haven't flipped through the thread, some of the quotes are even funny.)

----

Harper's comment isn't about Ignatieff. It's about Mulroney and so Harper, the politician, has several choices:

1) This happened 15 years ago so who cares.

2) Chretien did worse.

3) Throw Mulroney under the bus.

4) Ignatieff would be a bad PM.

For Harper, the choice is obvious. Nevertheless, I admire Harper's way of doing this.

First problem with your analysis that Harper had cozyed with Mulroney not so long ago. The public sees them as part of the same team. Then a bus pulls up... Harper can't finesse himself out of this any more than Martin could following the sponsorship enquiry. If Mulroney come out of this with egg on his face, Harper is tied to the yolk; if Mulroney is completely exonerated, the old PC side of the party starts to ascend.

The Dion would make a bad PM meme worked because nobody could understand the guy. But Iggy seems to have that snakeskin salesman touch. Smears can't overcome an awed public.

I sense we are headed for an early winter election where the outcome is a forgone conclusion.

[85RZ500]

Moral, we won't know for sure until the attack ads surface or the election runup starts. Compass, sure he has, the Convenient Canadian has lived everywhere but here.

[Visionseeker]

Moral, we won't know for sure until the attack ads surface or the election runup starts. Compass, sure he has, the Convenient Canadian has lived everywhere but here.

And Harper, man of the people, has worked in Ottawa (on the taxpayers dime) almost entirely since 1984. Want to personally fire a career civil servant, the next election is your chance to do so.

[tango]

YEEEHAWW!!!

[Shakeyhands]

Moral, we won't know for sure until the attack ads surface or the election runup starts. Compass, sure he has, the Convenient Canadian has lived everywhere but here.

Boy, you don't let up at all eh... How much buy-in on this Convenient Canadian thing are you seeing?

[Molly]

So gossip-mill backstabbing, outright lies, and bald attempts to slither out of the loop are now defined by our dear Mr. Harper as 'having a moral compass'.

I'd call it 'chutzpah'.

[Cuzzin E]

But Iggy seems to have that snakeskin salesman touch. Smears can't overcome an awed public.

I don't get why any progressive voter would consider the russian aristocrat. Mr Layton is a true man of the people who will break the status quo. Harper & Ignatieff are two sides of the same coin

[Topaz]

[rhetorical question]Ignatieff has no moral compass?[/rhetorical question]

I started a thread with the title: Ignatieff - A Flake

(If you haven't flipped through the thread, some of the quotes are even funny.)

----

Harper's comment isn't about Ignatieff. It's about Mulroney and so Harper, the politician, has several choices:

1) This happened 15 years ago so who cares.

2) Chretien did worse.

3) Throw Mulroney under the bus.

4) Ignatieff would be a bad PM.

For Harper, the choice is obvious. Nevertheless, I admire Harper's way of doing this.

So you also admire how he went from the Libs to the PC's to the Reformers/Alliance and then settled for HIS own party?? No one can beat Harper as the flip-flopper.

[capricorn]

So you also admire how he went from the Libs to the PC's to the Reformers/Alliance and then settled for HIS own party?? No one can beat Harper as the flip-flopper.

What's the big deal? Harper isn't the only politician to have changed political allegiances. Notably, Dion and Pierre Trudeau fall into that category.

Solomon: You know, it’s part of the purpose of these interviews to get people to know who Stéphane Dion is. Your dad was a well known professor. You’re a professor. But as a young man you flirted with separatism yourself.

Dion: Yes!

Solomon: And your dad was a federalist. You, as a young man, thought: 'why not Quebec as a nation?' Why did you change positions from a separatist to a federalist?

Dion: You are mixing two things: Quebec as a nation and separatism. Yes, when I was a teenager I tried to challenge my father on many things, including politics. And each evening I was coming and giving arguments why we should have Quebec as a nation state.

Solomon: Nation state?

Dion: An independent state!

Solomon: An independent state -- well isn’t that what separatism is?

Dion: Yes, separatism is that. And my father was destroying my arguments very, very politely, respecting me, explaining to me why my arguments were not as strong as his arguments for Canada. I respected that a lot. It helped me to become an adult, to challenge my father. And now I am very convinced about Canada. I have this country in my body and I have Quebec in my body as well.

http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/dion.html

A new biography of the former prime minister, whom Canadians have long been taught to regard as a great liberal politician, reveals that as a youth and young man, Mr. Trudeau was an anti-Semite, admired fascist dictators such as Hitler and Mussolini, promoted revolution and longed for an independent and Catholic Quebec that would be home only to francophones.

"We discovered a Trudeau who was remarkably different from what we and everyone else had assumed," authors Max and Monique Nemni write in their book, Young Trudeau: Son of Quebec, Father of Canada, 1919-1944.

---

Nor, it seems, was young Mr. Trudeau enamoured with liberalism. "Liberalism leads to excesses: to unemployment, anarchy," he wrote in jotting down the main ideas of the "first serious book" he'd read, Pour nous grandir by Victor Barbeau.

http://www2.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/...3a6&k=99910

[normanchateau]

Moral, we won't know for sure until the attack ads surface or the election runup starts. Compass, sure he has, the Convenient Canadian has lived everywhere but here.

Other than claiming to be all things to all people, what moral compass does the chameleon-like Professional Politician have?

This Professional Politician who claims to be an "economist" has bounced around from being a Young Liberal to Progressive Conservative to Reform to National Citizens Coalition to Alliance to Conservative without once being employed as an economist. And Harper's membership in the Northern Foundation, should the Opposition decide to dig up Harper's sordid anti-libertarian history, will certainly illustrate where the Professional Politician's moral compass lies.

[Radsickle]

Harper Sucks. He uses phrases he thinks will resonate with the most voters. He doesn't think about important things; he advertises his `brand' and repeats the buzzwords instead. It's embarassing. It's like a smarmy, late-night, TV salesman has taken over Canada.

Edited April 18, 2009 by Radsickle

[tango]

Harper Sucks. He uses phrases he thinks will resonate with the most voters. He doesn't think about important things; he advertises his `brand' and repeats the buzzwords instead. It's embarassing. It's like a smarmy, late-night, TV salesman has taken over Canada.

ya ... and he's not even as charismatic as the vacuum guy either.

[bush_cheney2004]

Harper Sucks. He uses phrases he thinks will resonate with the most voters.....

Well, that's exactly what Ignatieff does when speaking to American audiences. Cloaking Device > ON.