I have in my hands the document that for some reason is still up on the Liberal Party of Canada's website. It is the document sent to the Governor General requesting that she take what I called the Three Stooges of Coupscam seriously. Michael Ignatieff's signature is on this document and it is still up on the Liberal Party of Canada’s site, despite the fact that the leader wants people to forget that he was part of this ridiculous political adventure.
In case you have not read the document, allow me to read it to you:
To her Excellency the Right Honourable Michaelle Jean, Governor General of Canada
We, the majority members of Canada's House of Commons, humbly inform you that we would vote in favour of the motion proposed by the Official Opposition and that you read as follows:
That in light of the Conservatives failure to recognize the seriousness of Canada's economic situation and their failure to present any credible plan to stimulate the Canadian economy and to help workers and businesses in hard pressed sectors such as manufacturing and the automotive industry and forestry, the House has lost confidence of the government and is of the opinion that a viable alternative government can be formed within a present House of Commons.
Underneath those words in this document, which I will be happy to send you, are many, many signatures. One of them is Michael Ignatieff. As a matter of fact, he signs his name twice, as do all the other legal co-conspirators. One of the signatures is almost illegible as if to indicate, he wasn't proud of having his name attached to this rag. Nor should he have been. But pride aside, his chicken-hearted, chicken scratch is scrawled on the document for history to witness and you would think that it was something he would never want to publicly talk about, but keeping Ignatieff from talking and double talking is not easy. After all, when a man is repeatedly told that he is the smartest man in the room, it's hard for him to accept the news that his propensity to be loquacious on both sides of important issues makes him either:
a) A typical pol;
b) A typical self-deluded talking head; or
c) Dumber than a bag of hammers
And now here’s the self-inflicted hammer as chronicled by Globe and Mail blogger Dan Cook:
December 1, 2008: "I support the [coalition] accord because it's fiscally responsible, it provides responsible economic leadership in tough times and it also conserves the basic principles of national unity, equality, that our party has always believed in." — Liberal leadership candidate Michael Ignatieff
Fast Forward six months and you now have this:
May 10, 2009: that would be this past weekend the same Michael Ignatieff now the freshly minted and coronated and venerated leader of the Liberal Party of Canada says and I quote "There was also a question concerning the legitimacy of the coalition that troubled me." And: "I felt it was very difficult to guarantee the necessary political stability during a time of crisis with three partners in a formal coalition," he said. "That was my first doubt. I couldn't guarantee the long-term stability of the coalition under the circumstances."
So the idea is that this three-headed monster was legitimate six months ago. At least that was his public position. His position now is that it wasn't legitimate and that was partly because it relied on three different heads, one of them being Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Quebecois. Stephen Harper and others said the same thing at the time Michael Ignatieff's allies in the Liberal party and their various media song birds were singing up a storm about how Harper was being so anti-Quebec by his constant references to the Bloc Quebecois being part of this coalition. Is today's Michael Ignatieff being anti-Quebec by retrospectively declaring that the question of the coalition's legitimacy troubled him? By the way, what was it that troubled him the most? The idea that the Bloc was part of the deal or that Stephane Dion would have been made Prime Minister and might have chosen not to relinquish his throne to Michael Ignatieff. I would submit that Ignatieff wasn't the least bit troubled. I would submit that Ignatieff felt that the coalition idea would hit pancake Dion's leadership of the Liberals and Bob Rae, who was the number one salesman in the Liberal party for the coalition idea, would become collateral damage thus paving the way for Ignatieff to have an uncontested leadership. And when you have a silver spoon permanently attached to your tongue, there is nothing troubling about the word uncontested.
Now allow me to give you a more polite analysis from Don MacPherson of the Montreal Gazette:
"If Ignatieff had already concluded that the coalition would be unstable, of questionable political legitimacy and "profoundly and durably" divisive before he signed the petition, why did he still go ahead and sign it? Did the self-described "true patriot," who has lately been so critical of Prime Minister Stephen Harper for dividing the country, place party loyalty ahead of the national interest?"
Michael Ignatieff's careless and reckless political statements
Those are Don Macpherson's legitimate questions about the back tracking, u-turning, double talking dilettante who has never met a position or person or persona that he could not abandon. Two days after the Tamil Blockade of the Gardiner Expressway in Toronto, my question is, "Will Ignatieff abandon his commitment to them?” His commitment to the demonstrators is what stopped the demonstration. It wasn't water cannons from police or stun guns or other weapons of enforcement that terminated the illegal blockage of the east and west lanes of one of Canada's busiest roads on Sunday night. It was the word of Michael Ignatieff. His office sent word that he would press the government for action on the Tamil cause in the Sri Lankan civil war. The implication is crystal clear. The demonstrators have a dog in the election fight ahead. It is Michael Ignatieff and what if he wins, what if they hold him to his promise? Will he govern in a way that suits the demonstrators? Will he get Canada involved in that conflict or is he more likely to find a way to abandon the Tamils and if and when he does, how will they respond?
Over the last few days, we heard many of the demonstrators say that while they regretted unlawful action, they needed to get attention to what was going on in Sri Lanka. And we are told by all the experts that desperate people do desperate things. The Tamils in Sri Lanka are facing desperation and there is no doubt there is despair among many who live in Canada with relatives who are suffering and dying in the conflict far, far away. But there is also no doubt that the organization known as the Tamil Tigers, the inventors of the suicide vest, the terrorists, like all the others, raise money in foreign countries including this one, albeit illegally, to manipulate people when necessary to further its agenda. There is no doubt that if Michael Ignatieff and his Liberals curry favor with the Tamil community and make promises and commitments they cannot deliver, they are jeopardizing the safety and security of this country. I can drive a truck through the various contradictions in Michael Ignatieff's careless and reckless political statements. But while I am unimpressed with him as a man with serious leadership aspirations, my expectations of him are nothing, and he has nothing to fear from me and many others who feel the way I do.
I would ask him to be very cautious about statements that he makes to the desperate among us, who are willing to break the law to get their message across. I have no idea how many more laws some of them might be prepared to break. But I would ask them to take what Michael Ignatieff is saying with a very, very small grain of salt. You vote for anyone you want to. But if you are expecting an Ignatieff government to get Canada involved in any significant way in the Sri Lankan Civil War, it is not going to happen. I hope people will dampen their expectations of Ignatieff in this area. And I hope the day will come sooner rather than later. Too many countries have had too many people die because of reckless, amateur politicians playing with dynamite. I don't want this to happen to my country. I don't need to block a highway to get my point across. I have enormous access to the information highway of this country and right now I would like to use it by saying to the many Tamil Canadians listening, "Please don't take Michael Ignatieff's commitments seriously. You and your families have suffered enough. Don't allow your own desperation to be punished by the politics of expedience, as practiced by the Great Abandoner.”
I’m Charles Adler on the Corus Radio Network.
