When two people in a relationship are the same, one is unnecessary

The reason Mr. Harper maintains a significant lead over Mr. Ignatieff’s Liberals is because there is no significant difference between the two.

- Both of them would have put Canadian soldiers in Iraq, and both of them are saying “Oops” now.
- Both of them think the tar sands should go full speed ahead.
- Neither one of them has a real plan to deal with climate change.
- Both of them seem to have mixed feelings about being Canadian.

If Harper and Ignatieff would both take largely the same direction when in office, then one of them is unnecessary – the one not currently in office.

Canadians might as well go with the devil they know.

On the Iraq war then:

Stephen Harper: In an interview with [Fox News], Harper said he endorsed the war and said he was speaking “for the silent majority” of Canadians. Only in Quebec, with its “pacifist tradition,” are most people opposed to the war, Harper said.

Michael Ignatieff: A year ago, I was a reluctant yet convinced supporter of the war in Iraq.

And the Iraq war now:

Mr. Harper: On Iraq, while I support the removal of Saddam Hussein and applaud the efforts to establish democracy and freedom in Iraq, I would not commit Canadian troops to that country.

Mr. Ignatieff: The people who truly showed good judgment on Iraq predicted the consequences that actually ensued but also rightly evaluated the motives that led to the action. They did not necessarily possess more knowledge than the rest of us…. What they didn’t do was take wishes for reality.

On the tar sands:
Mr. Harper: By 2015, Canadian oil production is forecast to reach almost 4 million barrels a day. Two thirds of it will come from the oil sands. Even now, Canada is the only non-OPEC country with growing oil deliverability.

Mr. Ignatieff: “This is where a chill falls over the room because everybody expects me to say they’re terrible and shut them down,” he said belletristically. “Absolutely not.” He went on to describe an August visit to the sands — which, as even I have conceded in this space, provide a fairly convincing preview of hell. But Ignatieff told his Vancouver audience they were “awe-inspiring.”

O Canada:
Mr. Harper: Canada appears content to become a second-tier socialistic country, boasting ever more loudly about its economy and social services to mask its second-rate status, led by a second-world strongman appropriately suited for the task.

and

Whether Canada ends up as o­ne national government or two national governments or several national governments, or some other kind of arrangement is, quite frankly, secondary in my opinion…

Mr. Ignatieff: I loved my own country, but I believed in America in a way that Canada never allowed.

and

Ignatieff called America his country on national television.

Related posts:

1. Michael Ignatieff is Playing the Waiting Game As we’re all probably aware of by now, (since NOTHING...
2. Ignatieff Blames Harper for Upcoming Budget Deficit Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff lashed out at Harper for the...
3. Political Profile: Michael Ignatieff On December 10th, 2008, Michael Ignatieff became the interim...
4. Unite the Left? Democracy is about choice. It’s about the right to look...
5. Baseless: Stephen Harper’s Liberal Solution HCBAX9NPSJB8 It is a truism that the Conservative’s base votes....

Tags: Conservative Party, Liberal Party, michael ignatieff, stephen harper

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 29th, 2009 at 11:02 am and is filed under Federal Government. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.