When will Ignatief stop playing games with us?
- Thread starter cranky
- Start date
Harper is definitely smug and a jerk amongst other things.
I can't stand either of the two
I don't dispute that he is extremely intelligent. What I find repugnant about him are his often pompous and arrogant diatribes. Leaders must exhibit some personality, Iggy doesn't, they must be able to not only engage the public, but have the tools to put other leaders at ease. I don't see Ignatieff that way. There is a constant barrage of complaints about the Prime Minister for this very same thing and some are warranted. Harper does not strike me as the most engaging man either, but he also does not sound like he is talking down to you, which is how Ignatieff comes off.
This is the same aura that plagued Al Gore in his run against GW Bush. In fact during the debates I watched both of them sigh and groan while the other answered a question posed either by the the moderator or opposing leader. That is a trait of a man who is talker not a listener and that is repugnant.
Perhaps you are right, he should be put into a position where he will do more good, because he'll never be PM unless the Coalition Hoopla comes to life after the Conservatives win.
It makes sense.
If you want the dumb vote, it's aesthetics or entertainment value over content.
Maybe Iggy should find a $hitty Beatles song to cover.
If you want the dumb vote, it's aesthetics or entertainment value over content.
Maybe Iggy should find a $hitty Beatles song to cover.
Iggy really hasn't offered a lot of content though or at least content that interests the average person. His platform has been about taking Harper down and cancelling the jets, not exactly a winning formula for getting people to the polls.
I think this election will make Canadian's even more cynical about the electoral process once it is said and done as it has been less about what we need and more about parliament ego.We're probably also going to end up with near the same representation across the country, with the exception of the NDP who look to gain.
Hmm... people say he seems pompous, but I don't see it. To me he's just talking. Mind you, people have told me that after the third beer I get pompous, so I dunno... I just know that to me Iggy seems very normal.
Still, it's nuts the way too many people are basing their vote on how well someone glimmers in from of a camera, because if they'd look at the policies, they'd know that Iggy's offering a well thought out plan, and it's simple... don't spend money on jets and prisons we don't need, do spend that money on education and families, roll back the corporate tax cuts so we can be back-in-black in three years instead of five, and implement a proper GI Bill. Otherwise, you'd be surprised how "stay-the-course" the rest of his plan is to the civilized parts of what the Conservatives are doing.
Hmm... if people are going to get so weird as to vote for someone on the basis of television image instead of policy, what the policy makers should do is *hire* good actors to play the part of being the party leader for the sake of the cameras... sort of like Reagan, who didn't have a clue what policies he was endorsing, but he did know how to play the *part* of being President.
Ignatieff and Harper aren't that far apart when it comes to personality and ideology. It's the Liberal party's lack of vision, it's smear tactics and of course that little thing we all remember called Adscam. Liberals can bitch and complain all they want that the present government is just as bad, but that is yet to be proven. Perhaps if they had not been frothing at the mouth to try and strike while the iron is hot (or so they thought) and forced an unneeded election on the country they might have gotten some much sought after redemption. The only winner in this seems to be mr. Jack Layton who is giving the Bloc a real run for their money while Harper will return to power likely with another minority at the expense of a mere 300 million dollars.
I'd agree the present way our leaders are served up to us like cardboard cut-outs is very disheartening. If there were a leader who didn't talk in sound bites and spew rhetoric and actually outlined a plan that was plausible and not just election crap I'd vote for them.
Reagan knew exactly what he was endorsing.
Hmm... is it "smear tactics" to point out that someone is lying?
As for Adscam... that was a $250 million boondoggle... 1/4th the cost of the $1 billion G8 photo-op.
The liberals didn't want an election, but the budget, refusal to pass being what triggered this election, is so amoral that none of the opposition parties really had a choice.
Indeed... but still, to put things in perspective: $250 million for adscam + $300 million for election = $550 million = 55% the cost of the G8 photo-op.
Harper will wring pennies out of the pockets of paupers, but when it comes to pandering to the whims of global finance and their hunger for Canada's resources, he's *there*.
I think he knew what he was endorsing on the same level that the electorate were led to believe he was endorsing, but I don't think he understood any better than the electorate what the long-term consequences of all that de-regulation was going to mean.
The recession we're still crawling out of was a direct consequence of that deregulation.
All previous recessions except for the Great Depression were caused by manufacturers' inventory surplusses building up too high (i.e. the workers were being too productive) such that they'd lay off workers until the surplusses went down, but because the workers were layed off they weren't spending any money, so the inventories wouldn't go down, and bang, you have an economic slowdown.
In this case however, it was caused by the same thing that cause the Great Depression, which was the vicious feedback cycle caused by unregulated speculative debt-and-finance trading.
All those regulations the deregulators (who got their toe-hold under Reagan) cut, were put in place in the first place to stop another Great Depression from happening, so as soon as they starting cutting the regulations, it was inevitable we'd have another bubble-pop like what happened in 1929.
I think Reagan shared the same superficial understanding of what he was allowing, based upon a super-naive childlike understanding of how economics and finance work, but I don't thing he really knew what can of worms he was opening.
comparing the G8 to an adscam is a very poor comparison.
why not compare the G8 costs with the previous conference in Kananaskis Country during the Liberal years? I think you will find that when you factor in inflation and the relative size of the delegates, etc, that the 1Bill spent is very similar to what the liberals would have spent years earlier if they had to host the same summit to the same magnitude as the conservatives.
why not compare the G8 costs with the previous conference in Kananaskis Country during the Liberal years? I think you will find that when you factor in inflation and the relative size of the delegates, etc, that the 1Bill spent is very similar to what the liberals would have spent years earlier if they had to host the same summit to the same magnitude as the conservatives.
I've always figured that people who toss around that 'elitist' comment about anything are insecure and scared of smart people.
Bad place to look for smart people- who would want the job if they were inclined to do it properly?
From what I can gather from Global News tonight, Ignatieff is toast. :smile:
That means Lucifer has got charge.
You should really get listen and charge of the dumb nuts from Lucifer's offer to his demons to be the last ones eaten if his attitude against God is the best.
Nice form of organizion.
"I vote for you you if I am the last one to be eaten, saith the one down int the entropic pit."
Am I the only one to see Harper as a typical Albertan pouter wondering if Dutch Reform versus all the other religious partis in Albertathere are.;..
I got an idea...
Anyway... anyway of you mutton heads did not get told by Harper how we had a free trade agreement between Iran loving good foothills lamb and your asshole negotiators could not see how to make peace they offered a tonne of Persian carpets back.
What does that have to do with 92-93?
I'll see your irelevant gragh and raise it with this one.
Just that the graph shows the T.S.X. was actually up a bit in 93-94. The graph you have printed is not the one I posted or if it is you've selected the wrong time window. You are a little lacking in the knowledge department. You should check your local book store for a book entitled "Common Sense for Dummies".