Pot, meet kettle
Michael Ignatieff has a way with the truth.
Or, perhaps it should be said, Michael Ignatieff often tries to have his way with the truth.
Perhaps Ignatieff should adopt a new personal slogan: "if you're talking dishonesty, you're talking about me."
In a recent news report, Ignatieff claims that Prime Minister Stephen Harper's "partisan attacks are undermining support for the mission."
That's a pretty interesting claim.
Frankly, what's more likely to undermine support for the mission: Stephen Harper suggesting that the opposition parties should support Canadian soldiers (who support the mission), or the Liberal party desperately trying to make political hay out of torture allegations that are more solidly linked to the Liberals than to the Conservatives? Perhaps the Conservatives securing the equipment necessary for the Canadian Forces to do the job that the Liberals committed Canadian troops to in the first place while the Liberals falsely claim that "the mission has changed".
For the record, Canadian forces have been in combat operations in Khandahar since August 2005 -- while the Liberals were still in power. Facetiousness, thy name is Liberal.
What's more likely to undermine support for the mission: the Conservatives espousing a commitment to remain in Afghanistan until the country is stable, or the Liberals introducing a motion to force Canadian troops to withdraw from Afghanistan in 2009, even after a significant portion of their caucus (led by Ignatieff) voted in favor of extending the mission?
The frankly embarrassing nature of some of Harper's attacks notwithstanding, Ignatieff and his Liberal party are doing a much better job of undermining support for the mission than the Conservatives are.
Perhaps the same could be said about the NDP, but at least the NDP is honest about their position, which is something that absolutely cannot be said about the Liberals.
While Ignatieff denounces Harper for his "partisan attacks", perhaps Ignatieff should remember that his party's recent criticism of the Afghan conflict is entirely partisan, as well.
Then again, that would be truthful -- not like Ignatieff lately.
Monday, May 14, 2007
2 comments:
Post your comments, and join the discussion!
Be aware that spam posts and purile nonsense will not be tolerated, although purility within constructive commentary is encouraged.
All comments made by Kevron are deleted without being read. Also, if you begin your comment by saying "I know you'll just delete this", it will be deleted. Guaranteed. So don't be a dumbass.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The liberals saying that the mission in Afghanistan has changed since they were in power has always made me laugh. Sometimes I think I'm the only one who remembers Paul Martin flying across the country warning that our mission is shifting to a combat role and to be prepared for more casualties. The fact is the liberals supported the mission until it no longer served their political agenda.
ReplyDeletePartisan politics at its ugliest.
Sadly, a great many Canadians (mostly partisan Liberals) are willing to believe this.
ReplyDelete