|
Future PM of Canada (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
Funny thing is, we haven't seen any of Ignatieff's stands on issues, what his politics are, etc.
I honestly think Klein may be the best Conservative candidate. Whether you hate him or not, he's got a good success record. I'd also like to see Preston Manning working as the grey eminence of Conservatives. He sounds silly, but he's got a smart mind. |
I don't think Klein would be a good candidate. The cold truth that the conservatives need to confront is that western conservatism is viewed with suspicion everywhere west of the Lake of Bays. The conservatives will not be a viable threat to hold the government benchs until they have a leader who is either from Ontario (born in Toronto but raised in Calgary does not count) or from an Anglo area of Quebec.
Ah, Preston.... I didn't agree with much of his politics but at least I respected him, and the Reform party. They actually stated their positions and stuck to their guns..... this is the principle weakness of the Conservatives. |
|
|
| EvilTree |
The problem is that there isn't any viable Conservative candidate from Ontario. But at least with Klein, you can present a record of economic success. (Plus a good PR department needed to help)
I was surprised that the Deformed Party did well enough under him during the Cretin era. IMO I think it was Manning who held it together.
Every way we try to look, we can't present an alternative to the Libs. Not now anyways. (Catherine Clark for PM candidate anyone?) :D |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by b4k-oz
BTW...Dear Fir3start3r
You have officially surprised me. I would have never thought you were one to take cheap shots. One must always be careful when they make low blows...bc you lose face when your true flag colours show up. |
No need for surprises.
I grew up in Western Canada and any Western Canadian will tell you, we had no love for the man.
Amusing and a character as he was in a dull Canadian politic environment, his track record was abysmal at best...
I'm far from being anti-patriotic; Canada is the best country in the world bar-none but I failed to see the love affair.
If you're questioning as to why, this article pretty much sums a lot of the main points.
(I'm sure Diginut and few others can concur and/or add to this list).
| quote: |
Why the West has no love for Trudeau
By LINK BYFIELD
Saturday, September 30, 2000
Candour is not always wise when it concerns a man who is dead but not yet buried. Any criticism of Pierre Trudeau at this moment seems base. His family is in grief, his army of political friends and admirers shaken. Gushing adulation appears to be the only acceptable course.
Or so the media seem to think. There were at least six straight hours of doting retrospective Thursday on the CBC, and 12 pages of mostly fawning veneration in this national newspaper yesterday, along with 16 in the other one.
But I think it's eminently safe to say there is relatively little interest or grief when you get away from the East, and away from the competitive melodramatics of the media.
Most of us in the West bore neither love nor respect for the man who has just died in Montreal. Indeed, what's being said about him ranges between irritating and nauseating.
The assertion is being made that Mr. Trudeau was a "great" prime minister. People who say this can never explain very clearly what they mean. It seems to signify that Mr. Trudeau has always fascinated people of a certain age and attitude.
If by "great" we mean he screwed up the country more thoroughly than anyone before or since, Westerners would probably agree. But I don't think that's what his many admirers are struggling to express.
We're told, for instance, that he was a force for national unity. This despite the fact that a powerful separatist movement grew up in Quebec while he was running the country, and a second one, less mature but equally dangerous, was up and running in the West before he quit.
He was a "nation builder," we're told. He had a "vision of what Canada could be." Well, perhaps. These things are hard to quantify.
What isn't hard to count is how much federal debt he left behind. The net federal debt was $17-billion when he came in and $128-billion when he left. There was no federal deficit when he took control, and a $25-billion annual deficit by the time of his departure.
And what have we to show for it? Did we win a war? Did we build a dynamic economy? No, we spent it all on sandwich programs of infinite variety, most of which did no good and are long gone. And our children -- those who haven't moved to the United States -- are repaying it today through fruitless taxation from which they derive zero benefit.
We're told that he was a great champion of human rights and a faithful Roman Catholic. As to his faith, I can't pretend to know. But it's a fact that almost his first act was to legalize abortion, and that during his 15 years of power, about 750,000 Canadian babies were killed. Such a champion of human rights, Mr. Trudeau. And how very, very Catholic.
Similarly, we are forever hearing what a frighteningly deep intellect he had. Long ago, I actually tried to read some of his earlier writing. It was a waste of effort. His jottings were disorganized, superficial, long on jargon and short on thought, and dreadfully, dreadfully dull.
As far as I have ever been able to tell, Pierre Trudeau had three assets: cleverness, style and nerve. In short, he was an actor. He could act like an intellectual, or a lover, or a statesman, or a brawler, and a huge audience followed along, relishing his every word, gesture and hat. In this sense, he was "great." It was this quality that captivated such widespread attention.
Behind that mask, however, he was moody, inconsistent, glib, arrogant and shallow.
Parliament annoyed him, so he bulldozed his Charter of Rights and Freedoms into the Constitution and surrendered statutory supremacy to the Supreme Court.
Quebec nationalism annoyed him, so he invoked the War Measures Act against a small insurgency known to and traceable through an ordinary police force. The price we paid for that stunt was the election of René Lévesque.
Finance annoyed him, so he spent us into a multi-generational national debt.
English Canada annoyed him, so he expanded official bilingualism everywhere across the country except in Quebec, and accused those who objected of racism.
He seemed to have the mind of a dictator, not a democrat. He was fascinated by the cold-blooded determination of the Chinese Communists. He was once overheard by reporters remarking to Fidel Castro how much quicker and easier it would be to run things the Cuban way. Democracy is clumsy, public and messy, and Mr. Trudeau was graceful, private, elitist and fussy.
|
>>Source<< |
|
|
| MarkT |
Give Ignatieff a chance...he *just* formally announced his intentions to run as an MP...he can't be expected to have a "what I will do for Canada if I'm elected PM" speech prepared and ready for the public just yet ;)
as for the alleged "anti-Ukranian" quote from a book of his...perhaps some context is required before any of us comment. Taking ONE PARAGRAPH out of an entire novel, without context, is what lead to a bounty on the head of Salman Rushdie, no?
I would think the Liberal bashers should welcome this candidacy...they *claim* to want change, both with the Liberals being removed from office, but also presumably from within the party itself (after all, we need strong opposition parties, regardless of who's currently in power).
Not to over-hype his running (witness the lack of hoopla around Ken Dryden's position), but Ignatieff could be the beginning of some positive change. He's not a "businessman" or "politician" in the same sense as Marin, Harper and Layton would be identified. He's a *highly* respected academic and journalist, presumably approaching politics from a different light.
give the guy a chance before you knock him down. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| This is the same way they muscled Belinda Stronach into the Aurora-Newmarket riding even though they already had martha hall-findley who is now jobless. No party vote or anything. How democratic! |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
give the guy a chance before you knock him down. |
That arguement can be used on both ends of the spectrum...
The reality is, Canadians are too politically paralyzed to make a decision and are willing to be lulled to sleep, voting for status quo.
I hope this time round with people being more Internet savy they'll get some real information rather than what the state run media (CBC) tells them. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
actually most media is quite biased in the liberal's favour.
It makes me sick how they spin stories around. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
actually most media is quite biased in the liberal's favour.
It makes me sick how they spin stories around. |
It's a political hypocrisy.
They feed us what they want us to hear and we pay for it too!
It's like mad cow disease, political-style! :nervous: |
|
|
| MarkT |
this "biased media" bull is getting *really* tiring...the Liberals are not perpetually in gov't and the ENTIRE ING MEDIA is not in cahoots with the Liberal party.
start throwing some blame elsewhere instead of crying "bias". Face it, Harper has to be one of the most ineffective leaders the Tory party has put forth in recent history.
So is it *really* this awful, biased media? Or is Harper just not up to snuff?
look within before pointing fingers. Mulroney somehow overcame this "biased media" to form a majority gov't...so WTF state would that party be in if there was NO scandal??? Liberal 3/4 majority?
Harper is your problem...not the "Liberal media" :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
this "biased media" bull is getting *really* tiring...the Liberals are not perpetually in gov't and the ENTIRE ING MEDIA is not in cahoots with the Liberal party.
start throwing some blame elsewhere instead of crying "bias". Face it, Harper has to be one of the most ineffective leaders the Tory party has put forth in recent history.
So is it *really* this awful, biased media? Or is Harper just not up to snuff?
look within before pointing fingers. Mulroney somehow overcame this "biased media" to form a majority gov't...so WTF state would that party be in if there was NO scandal??? Liberal 3/4 majority?
Harper is your problem...not the "Liberal media" :rolleyes: |
It is tiring... especially when i see it daily on the tv and in the newspapers.
if you dont see the bias its probably because u are a part of it. |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
Funny thing is, we haven't seen any of Ignatieff's stands on issues, what his politics are, etc. |
EXACTLY!
The reason why we haven't seen them is because they're not relevant. Ignatieff's candidacy isn't about ideas, it's about raw power. The elites want a successor to Paul Martin in their pocket in case the election goes sour for the Lieberals. That's why they and their friends in the media started a whisper campaign for him months ago to lay the groundwork for his coronation (see the original posting in this thread). It's also why they worked behind the scenes to have him undemocratically installed in the Etobicoke riding, grassroots liberals be damned.
Those principled grassroots liberals deserve a clean party they can be proud of, which is why the Lieberal Party must be purged. An election defeat is the first step in that process. |
|
|
| MarkT |
^^^ at least the Liberals know how to produce a competent, effective leader who can lead their party to success.
The Conservatives may want to try the same...instead of putting forth a leader who initially wouldn't commit to anything...and still can't bring success to his party despite a huge scandal for the outgoing gov't.
you call it a "whisper campaign"...others would call it an effective leadership search.
Jay...if the media is so biased and so damaging to every party but the Liberals...then explain the past success of the Conservatives? How did Mulroney manage to lead a majority gov't? Has the media really changed THAT much in the last dozen years that it's impossible to overcome their awful bias?
there are far too many excuses for the lack of success for other parties...baised media...Canadians being dumb, apathetic, *insert whatever term you wish here*, etc.
when will other parties accept that they simply are not appealing to enough voters and that the "biased media" can't remain the excuse? The CBC is not going to disappear, so now what?
When will the Conservatives just admit that Harper simply cannot lead the party to power...that Canadians will not vote for him? Poll released today said that 47% of those polled favour the Liberals being turfed from office...yet the same percentage believe we're better off under the Liberals than the Conservatives...that's indicative of a failure on the part of the Conservative party to appeal to voters.
but ok...keep pointing at the media...while everyone does that, we'll have another Liberal win in the next election...another minority gov't forced to scramble to hold onto power...and we'll all suffer while the leaders continue to bicker and posture instead of enacting any meaningful change in Parliamnet. |
|
|
|
|
