More lies from the Liberal leader

[punked]

The point is...he told a bald-faced lie about himself - trying to make himself seem more.....Canadian. Martin, Chretien, Harper, Dion - they wouldn't lie about themselves in that fashion. It speaks to his character - he's played loose and fast with many statements.

To be fair Canadians did pay for his PRIVATE school because his Father was a Canadian diplomat. Somewhere in the 30,000 dollars a year Canadians paid to send Micheal to a PRIVATE school inside Canada because he was to good for our public schools. He has the patronage of the Canadian political system and the Liberal party of Canada to thank for that. However I don't think that plays well with us Canadians who send our kids to public school, and enjoyed the system Canada provides. It was good enough for us, just not him and he rubs it in our face.

[ToadBrother]

To be fair Canadians did pay for his PRIVATE school because his Father was a Canadian diplomat. Somewhere in the 30,000 dollars a year Canadians paid to send Micheal to a PRIVATE school inside Canada because he was to good for our public schools. He has the patronage of the Canadian political system and the Liberal party of Canada to thank for that. However I don't think that plays well with us Canadians who send our kids to public school, and enjoyed the system Canada provides. It was good enough for us, just not him and he rubs it in our face.

Give me a break. This bizarre anti-elitism is getting out of hand. You Tory supporters would have everyone believing that anyone with any kind of academic career is either an unforgivable snob or an ivory tower type. I'm an average enough Canadian, pal, and I don't hold Iggy's schooling, at the grade level or beyond, against him. I think he's terrible political leader, but that has nothing to do with where he went to school.

You sound like some inbred Ozarkian hick who distrusts any man in a suit. What's next, a banjo performance with John Voight?

[Smallc]

Wrong target toad. That's the socialist you're talking to.

[punked]

Give me a break. This bizarre anti-elitism is getting out of hand. You Tory supporters would have everyone believing that anyone with any kind of academic career is either an unforgivable snob or an ivory tower type. I'm an average enough Canadian, pal, and I don't hold Iggy's schooling, at the grade level or beyond, against him. I think he's terrible political leader, but that has nothing to do with where he went to school.

You sound like some inbred Ozarkian hick who distrusts any man in a suit. What's next, a banjo performance with John Voight?

That isn't the point he was acting like he went to public school when really the bulk of his schooling was at private school paid for on our backs. That aint right.

[nicky10013]

That isn't the point he was acting like he went to public school when really the bulk of his schooling was at private school paid for on our backs. That aint right.

Uhhh, he went to UCC starting at the age of 11. Does that constitute the bulk? Well, one could argue. However, considering the fact that his first university was indeed a public university, that argument goes by the wayside. He's a U of T alum.

[Keepitsimple]

Oh, stuff the fake outrage. There are plenty of real reasons to be critical of Iggy, but he isn't the first politician to try to rewrite his past and he won't be the last. Harper did it in turn, so did Chretien, Martin, Mulroney, Trudeau and on and on and on and on.

No outrage here....just the facts. I wasn't aware of any misrepresentations of Chretien, Martin, Mulroney or Harper.....they were all pretty proud of their formulative years and upbringing. Trudeau may be the exception because of his flirtations with socialism and non-committal against nazi-ism....which was largely ignored by the media until the book Young Trudeau started to reveal his younger alter-ego. Ignatieff is trying so hard to fit in that even HE doesn't realize how far he is straying from the truth. Really - no outrage....the man is who he is....and to state otherwise is just foolish.

[Bonam]

To be fair Canadians did pay for his PRIVATE school because his Father was a Canadian diplomat. Somewhere in the 30,000 dollars a year Canadians paid to send Micheal to a PRIVATE school inside Canada because he was to good for our public schools. He has the patronage of the Canadian political system and the Liberal party of Canada to thank for that. However I don't think that plays well with us Canadians who send our kids to public school, and enjoyed the system Canada provides. It was good enough for us, just not him and he rubs it in our face.

Meh what's with all the proletariat rage? Some guy sent hits kid through a better school. Good for him, congrats to the dad and the kid both. Move on.

[August1991]

Uhhh, he went to UCC starting at the age of 11. Does that constitute the bulk? Well, one could argue. However, considering the fact that his first university was indeed a public university, that argument goes by the wayside. He's a U of T alum.

From what I can gather, prior to going to UCC at age 11, Ignatieff studied at a private school in the UK (his father was an ambassador in Europe in the mid-1950s). BTW, after U of T, Ignatieff was educated at Oxford and Harvard.

The issue here is only partly that Ignatieff is pretending to be a "man of the people", "just like one of you". Ignatieff states in the quote in the OP that Canada's "publicly funded" system is good and "made him".

The problem here is that it is the same usual Limousine Liberal hypocrisy: "Do as I say and not as I do." These people create and promote a system that they never use in a society that they will never experience.

Ignatieff is like the administrator of a public transit system who drives to work in his own car - and then he has the audacity to say that public transit is critical to the city.

[g_bambino]

[His] 30,000 dollar tuition to go to the most expensive school in Canada because he was to good for our public schools. It is a slap in the face.

So, anyone who attended a private school is ineligible to hold public office on the grounds that they're... What? A snob?

I never took you to be the kind of person who'd engage in the far left's inane class warfare.

[punked]

So, anyone who attended a private school is ineligible to hold public office on the grounds that they're... What? A snob?

I never took you to be the kind of person who'd engage in the far left's inane class warfare.

Nope they just can't pretend they attended public, and they certainly can't when we the tax payer sent him to that private school because his Dad was a big wig in the liberal party and got an appointment because of that. It just reminds you all that is wrong with the system.

[g_bambino]

Nope they just can't pretend they attended public, and they certainly can't when we the tax payer sent him to that private school...

Well, it's already been pointed out that he went to the University of Toronto, which does receive funding from the Crown. However, that's all irrelevant to your saying, more than once, that Ignatieff went to a private school because he was "too good" for the Canadian public school system; as though the fact he attended Upper Canada College, separate from his "lying" about what schooling he got, was in itself grounds on which to hold the man in contempt. That's a Bolshevik, labour union, anti-elitism type of thinking that's quite irrational and always reveals itself to be totally hypocritical.

[nicky10013]

That's a Bolshevik, labour union, anti-elitism type of thinking that's quite irrational and always reveals itself to be totally hypocritical.

There's a high degree of anti-intellectualism from the right, as well.

[Smallc]

There's a high degree of anti-intellectualism from the right, as well.

Yes, and it's disgusting no matter where it comes from. This idea that someone is bad because they've decided to further their knowledge is something I can't understand at all.

Edited July 30, 2010 by Smallc

[nicky10013]

Yes, and it's disgusting no matter where it comes from. This idea that someone is bad because they've decided to further their knowledge is something I can;t understand at all.

I can, it's the thought that since someone has more schooling it automatically means that they're better which is completely irrational. You could be the smartest person on the planet and still be an absolute piece of trash human being.

[Mr.Canada]

What schools he went to growing up don't matter at all.

It does when he's trying to pass himself off as someone who was educated through the public school system.

Harper actually did go to public schools and graduated from one here in Toronto, Richview CI in Etobicoke.

There's a high degree of anti-intellectualism from the right, as well.

That's not it at all. The problem is that Ignatieff is trying to pass himself off as a regular Canadian when this guy is anything but. Private schools, Harvard, Oxford. A chateau in the South of France plus various other properties. Ordinary Canadians don't have those types of decadent things.

He is trying to be something he's not and it's hurting him. He is a latte Liberal and needs to stop trying to be Joe Canadian, have a beer and a BBQ. That just not who Ignatieff is, why he's faking it, I have no idea. People would have more respect for him if he just would be himself.

Whoever is handling him should be fired.

Edited July 30, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[ToadBrother]

It does when he's trying to pass himself off as someone who was educated through the public school system.

Self-aggrandizing and bending one's past is par for the course. Look at Chretien, who spent his whole political career passing himself off as the little guy from Shawinigan. Hell, the Liberals created and still largely insist upon a heavily mythologized version of Trudeau's life.

[g_bambino]

There's a high degree of anti-intellectualism from the right, as well.

True, but here we can split anti-elitism into two branches: anti-intellectualism and anti-privilege. A certain segment of the far right does seem to believe it's okay to be wealthy, just not too smart.

[+]

Edited July 30, 2010 by g_bambino

[August1991]

There's a high degree of anti-intellectualism from the right, as well.

True, but here we can split anti-elitism into two branches: anti-intellectualism and anti-privilege. A certain segment of the far right does seem to believe it's okay to be wealthy, just not too smart.[+]

And here, I always thought that it was the Left that favoured egalitarianism, and opposed wealth, privilege and elitism. The fact that many now perceive the Right as being egalitarian may explain alot of Western electoral politics over the past 40 years or so.

The problem is that Ignatieff is trying to pass himself off as a regular Canadian when this guy is anything but. Private schools, Harvard, Oxford. A chateau in the South of France plus various other properties. Ordinary Canadians don't have those types of decadent things.

He is trying to be something he's not and it's hurting him. He is a latte Liberal and needs to stop trying to be Joe Canadian, have a beer and a BBQ. That just not who Ignatieff is, why he's faking it, I have no idea. People would have more respect for him if he just would be himself.

Whoever is handling him should be fired.

I don't disagree with you Mr. C. You point out how most people perceive Ignatieff (and this quote) and why this is a serious problem for the Liberals. (I think strenuous reaction of the anti-Harperites here and elsewhere is evidence of how damaging an otherwise innocuous quote is for Ignatieff.)

My point is that this is far worse for Ignatieff. This is what he said:

"Everything that has ever happened to me that has been good in my life happened because I have had the enormous good fortune of being a Canadian citizen. Born here. Educated here. Had a publicly-funded education here that gave me my start."

He's presenting Canada as a wonderful, publicly funded, egalitarian society - good for everyone else (but of course he would never submit to it). It's as if he manages a public hospital in Canada and advocates strongly for State health care but then sends his own family to a private clinic in the US for their care.

I am reminded of Quebec politicians who restrict English instruction (as a second language) while ensuring that their own children go to private schools and become bilingual.

In the case of Ignatieff, I don't even think he's aware of the hypocrisy. I pegged him as a flake several years ago. Bourque now calls him Iffy. He's known as the King of the flip-flops.

I met him in Montreal during the Liberal Leadership race in 2006. At the time, I gave him the benefit of the doubt. But thinking back on this meeting, and what has happened since and what I have read of his writings, I'm beginning to think that he's just not that bright.

Ignatieff has all the style and demeanour of an intellectual; his problem is that he just isn't that smart.

Edited July 30, 2010 by August1991

[ToadBrother]

In the case of Ignatieff, I don't even think he's aware of the hypocrisy. I pegged him as a flake several years ago. Bourque now calls him Iffy. He's known as the King of the flip-flops.

All I can say is that the guy had the upper hand in the spring of 2009, with the Tories being battered about after the first Prorogation, and he blew it completely. Even after the second prorogation clearly late last year, which was hardly received by most Canadians with glee, Iggy couldn't capitalize on it. I can't speak to his smarts or not, but what I can tell you is that the man is a supremely incompetent political tactician. I think the polls show that. Most folks don't like Harper and don't want to give him anything close to a majority, but they clearly have absolutely no faith in the Liberals under Iggy. He can't even do self-aggrandization right (and that's Political Leadership 101).

The problem for the Liberals is where to go next. I can think of two or three prominent Tories who could probably pick up the ball if Harper quit or was ousted, but I can't think of any Liberals in the wings. Bob Rae may very well be electoral poison in Ontario, Justin Trudeau is too young and I think Liberals forget that outside their own minds the Trudeau legacy isn't exactly a wunderland of candy canes and faerie tales.

The chief issue is that the Tories are an amazingly united party. Whatever I think of Harper's style of political management and the uneasy feelings I get about him, the fact of the matter is that the guy has welded Reform and the PCs together again. The Liberals are a chaotic mess, and the only thing I can think of that keeps them from tossing Iggy out the door is the fear that a proper leadership race would rip them apart, but frankly, I think they should chance it. It's not like there's going to be an election this year (at least I think the odds are heavily stacked against it), so now is the time to do it. Otherwise Harper is going to run over Iggy like a cat under a cement truck.

[nicky10013]

All I can say is that the guy had the upper hand in the spring of 2009, with the Tories being battered about after the first Prorogation, and he blew it completely. Even after the second prorogation clearly late last year, which was hardly received by most Canadians with glee, Iggy couldn't capitalize on it. I can't speak to his smarts or not, but what I can tell you is that the man is a supremely incompetent political tactician. I think the polls show that. Most folks don't like Harper and don't want to give him anything close to a majority, but they clearly have absolutely no faith in the Liberals under Iggy. He can't even do self-aggrandization right (and that's Political Leadership 101).

The problem for the Liberals is where to go next. I can think of two or three prominent Tories who could probably pick up the ball if Harper quit or was ousted, but I can't think of any Liberals in the wings. Bob Rae may very well be electoral poison in Ontario, Justin Trudeau is too young and I think Liberals forget that outside their own minds the Trudeau legacy isn't exactly a wunderland of candy canes and faerie tales.

The chief issue is that the Tories are an amazingly united party. Whatever I think of Harper's style of political management and the uneasy feelings I get about him, the fact of the matter is that the guy has welded Reform and the PCs together again. The Liberals are a chaotic mess, and the only thing I can think of that keeps them from tossing Iggy out the door is the fear that a proper leadership race would rip them apart, but frankly, I think they should chance it. It's not like there's going to be an election this year (at least I think the odds are heavily stacked against it), so now is the time to do it. Otherwise Harper is going to run over Iggy like a cat under a cement truck.

The first one was due to money. The Liberals didn't have the cash to fight a national campaign. Over the second, Harper shuttered parliament for 3 months. By the time the house came back to sit the numbers had righted themselves to the point where it would've been a big gamble to run a campaign. I personally would've called an election, then again, I don't have access to the internal numbers so my gamble would've been on hearsay alone. You're right, though. It does look bad.

That being said, the man can speak. I think if an election were held even today, he'd win over a lot of undecided voters. In one on one interviews he's very deliberate which plays into an elitist out of touch stereotype, but on the campaign I think he has the ability to be dynamite (whether that happens or not remains to be seen). Especially in a debat;, there's no one of his intellectual class anywhere close to federal politics. At 5 or so points back (where he's been in the past few months) he could easily leapfrog Harper.

I've also said this many times. The Liberals are far more united than anyone wants to give them credit for.

Edited July 30, 2010 by nicky10013

[nicky10013]

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/07/29/14870776.html

As for which public schools he did go to, it appears Ignatieff was a student at Manor Park public school in Ottawa’s east end. After graduating from Upper Canada College he went on to the publicly funded University of Toronto.

[August1991]

From link above:

That led to questions about what Ignatieff meant by public education. The Liberal Leader is best known for attending schools like Upper Canada College, an elite boarding school that he attended from the time he was 11 years old.

Globe and Mail blogger and former Mulroney aide Norman Spector questioned whether Ignatieff was the beneficiary of a program where taxpayers pay for the children of diplomats to go to boarding school in Canada.

Such a program exists in Britain but a Liberal official told QMI via e-mail that this is not the case, “Mr. Ignatieff attended UCC on a combination of scholarship and his parents’ own money.”

As for which public schools he did go to, it appears Ignatieff was a student at Manor Park public school in Ottawa’s east end. After graduating from Upper Canada College he went on to the publicly funded University of Toronto.

In the 1950s, Canada's foreign service was small and funding of diplomats was on an ad-hoc basis. Unlike the British, we had no established rules. To say that Ignatieff studied at UCC with his "parents' own money" could just as easily mean that the government of the day gave money to his parents for this purpose. Then again, maybe Ignatieff went to UCC on his mother's inherited wealth - which would thoroughly undermine Ignatieff's quote.

Anyway you slice this, the Liberal leader looks foolish.

----

Manor Park Public School? In Ottawa's "east end"? Is this what Ignatieff meant when he said that "Publicly Funded Canada Made Me"?

[nicky10013]

From link above:

In the 1950s, Canada's foreign service was small and funding of diplomats was on an ad-hoc basis. Unlike the British, we had no established rules. To say that Ignatieff studied at UCC with his "parents' own money" could just as easily mean that the government of the day gave money to his parents for this purpose. Then again, maybe Ignatieff went to UCC on his mother's inherited wealth - which would thoroughly undermine Ignatieff's quote.

Anyway you slice this, the Liberal leader looks foolish.

----

Manor Park Public School? In Ottawa's "east end"? Is this what Ignatieff meant when he said that "Publicly Funded Canada Made Me"?

I would probably say U of T. Best school in Canada.

As for looking foolish, no more foolish than Harper pretending to be a good old western boy. He's from Toronto and is (waits for shock and awe) a Leaf fan. He dropped out of U of T and ran to the University of Calgary. Guess it was a little too tough for him.

[madmax]

No he didn't.

How many Canadian Kids go to private elite schools on the public dime?

[Moonbox]

Ignatieff has all the style and demeanour of an intellectual; his problem is that he just isn't that smart.

You almost wonder don't you?