Beyond The Commons

Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

The Commons: Rise up

by Aaron Wherry on Saturday, April 16, 2011 12:32am - 205 Comments

Michael Ignatieff had been speaking for something like an hour, without so much as a sip of water, pausing only to let members of the audience pose questions for him. Eleven hours earlier he’d been in Orleans, standing in a family’s garage, between their snowblower and their barbecue, to explain how a Liberal government would help families just like this take care of sick and aging loved ones. Now he was standing in the middle of a hotel ballroom in Sudbury, surrounded on all sides by rows of people—both faithful partisans and the merely curious.

He’d taken 13 questions and offered 13 responses and maybe he’d swayed a vote or two. Maybe he hadn’t. Whatever he’d accomplished, Day 21 of his first campaign as leader of the Liberal party of Canada was nearing its end. After this was a drive to the airport, after that a flight to Regina. By this time tomorrow he’d be in Edmonton, preparing to fly to Vancouver.

Before he left though he wanted to tell these people in this hotel ballroom about this song he’d been thinking about. “While I was on the bus this afternoon I found myself thinking about a wonderful singer called Bruce Springsteen,” he said. “Does everybody like Bruce Springsteen? I like Bruce Springsteen.”

It was not immediately clear where this was going.

“Bruce Springsteen is a great singer and somewhere in his work there is a wonderful song called The Rising,” he continued. “And in that song there’s a wonderful refrain—Rise up. And I began thinking about it today because we’re in a funny place in this election campaign right now.”

Mr. Ignatieff periodically breaks the fourth wall to become a sort of meta-politician. He confuses his previous life with his current one and becomes a journalist named Michael Ignatieff covering a politician named Michael Ignatieff. It is usually self-deprecating. But this was different. This was the politician acknowledging reality. Or taking stock of what seems to be his reality. Whatever was about to come, he seemed gripped with something.

“We’ve got a prime minister who shut down parliament twice and Canadians kind of shrugged,” he said. “We’ve got a prime minister who’s found in contempt of parliament. It’s never happened before in the history of our country and people say, kind of, ‘So what?’ We got a prime minister who tried to shut down the long-form census and people thought, that’s crazy, but kind of, ‘So what?’ And then we have a prime minister who just went out and smeared a member of his own caucus, tried to destroy her public reputation, and people say, kind of, ‘So what?’”

Two middle-aged ladies in the front row behind him shook their heads, appearing genuinely disgusted.

“And then we’ve got a prime minister who’s got a convicted criminal who was his chief of staff. Convicted five times of fraud and people say, kind of, ‘So what?’” he went on.

At first his sentences had been trailing off—the politician acting out the apathy—but now they seemed to be hardening.

“And then we’ve got a prime minister who’s got, right now, in his election campaign, four people accused of election fraud. And people say, ah, kind of, ‘So what?’ And then we’ve got a prime minister who allows only five questions to the press, the press are following him around, they only get five questions and if they ask six he walks away. And people say, kind of, ‘So what?’ And then we’ve got a situation where at Guelph university the other day, students lined up for two hours, some of them voting for the first time in their lives, to vote. And a Conservative operative tried to shut it down and stop it and some smart Conservative lawyer downtown tried to write a letter to get 700 votes by Canadian students disallowed in a federal election in Canada and people say, kind of, ‘So what, it’s just all political games, who cares?’”

It seemed for sure now that he had some kind of answer and indeed, with the full attention of six hundred eyes secured, here it came.

“And I kept hearing that refrain from Bruce Springsteen—Rise up. Rise up. Rise up, Canada!”

He nearly shouted this. The crowd began to clap, but Mr. Ignatieff kept on, talking louder over the swell, realizing his moment.

“Rise up! Rise up!” he cried. “Why do we have to put up with this? Rise up! Rise up! … Rise up! This goes beyond partisan politics! This goes beyond the Liberal party! This is about our country! This is about our democracy! Rise up! Rise up!

The crowd was now standing. Someone called out the refrain. Having built this up, he moved to justify his creation.

“We have got to fight here. We have got to stand and fight. This is not about me. This is not about the Liberal party. This is about the kind of democracy we hand to this child and this child and this child,” he declared, pointing to children in the audience. “We gotta rise up. We gotta stand and we gotta fight and we gotta win. This is not about the Liberal party of Canada. This is about the country you love. So rise up, Canada!”

It would seem to matter only marginally that he had confused his Springsteen songs*.

“Good night,” he said to the cheering, “thank you, merci.”

He and them were thus roused.

And now he has 16 days to make something of this.

*The refrain “rise up” is from My City of Ruins, which appears two tracks after The Rising on the 2002 album of the same name. The chorus of The Rising goes “Come on up for the rising,” while the chorus of My City of Ruins goes “Come on rise up.” In hindsight, they’re basically the same song, In fairness to Bruce, it was 2002 and we needed at least a couple songs like that.

Bookmark and Share
  • TakebackCanada

    I got chills reading that.

    Now we've got a battle cry!

    • Lizz

      Lots of worried Cons out already : we must be doing something right : Rise Up.

      • Poker Face

        You don't read polls, do you. We're well ahead, and it would take a gaffe of epic proportions to bring that support down. The CPC support floor is about where the Liberal cieling is. You see how that makes it impossible to win, right?

        • Lizz

          Harper is the problem : with a new leader the Cons would be in majority territory.

        • Pat

          Polls are misleading. More votes in the West won't win Harper any more seats. Something like Iggy at 33% could match Harper's at 38%. Not sure of the exact numbers, but you get the point.

    • Bill D. Cat

      To shortly be followed by vomiting after seeing it .

    • madeyoulook

      Then your leader has started to figure out this politics thing, rallying the troops… or, rallying you, anyways…

    • Captain Awesome

      This is not about the Liberal party of Canada. This is about the country you love. BYAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!

  • OriginalEmily1

    A week is a lifetime in politics….2 weeks is more than enough time.

  • FVerhoeven

    Mr. Ignatieff periodically breaks the fourth wall to become a sort of meta-politician. He confuses his previous life with his current one and becomes a journalist named Michael Ignatieff covering a politician named Michael Ignatieff. It is usually self-deprecating. But this was different. This was the politician acknowledging reality. Or taking stock of what seems to be his reality. Whatever was about to come, he seemed gripped with something."

    Or he simple wishes he were back on campus.

    For anyone who has attended some secondary schooling, it is easy to remember the creation of realities by means of slogans. On school campuses across this country and around the world, students join the cause by simply singing the slogan over and over again. And it works every time, within that school setting.

    It's when coming out of school and discovering that the world is more complicated than can be expressed by simple slogans that reality hits home.

    Seems to me Mr.Ignatieff is still stuck in the school setting. He still believes resorting to empty slogans can do the trick, and maybe it can. But that would only mean that most Canadians voting in favour of such empty slogans are also stuck in a reality not yet hitting home.

    Time will tell.

    I had always thought Canadians to be more mature.

    • Andrew (not PorC)

      Conservatives are equally guilty of selling bad ideas by wrapping them in clever slogans. This is essentially what politics is all about. Distilling your message down to some vaguely accurate, mostly misleading soundbite for the consumption of the vast majority who barely care.

      • Loraine Lamontagne

        How true,. One of my favourite was selling to the Canadian media and public that budgetary surpluses were a theft and a sign of incompetence for a government that had a huge debt to pay down. Look where these idiots have gotten us now.

    • Selena

      Deceiven' Stephen was also an instructor at university. He specialized in poisoning the minds of economics students with the BS, discredited theories of Hayak and Friedman latterly known as neocon "trickle-down" economics. Well, we're being trickled up on now.

      • Harper is a liar

        I don't recall Harper ever being an instructor at a university? As far as I know his bio is, a job his dad got him at Imperial Oil in the mailroom and working for the lobby-stink-tank NCC. Otherwise he's always been living off the political teat of Canada's government.

      • madeyoulook

        Hay[e]k "discredited," eh? Try "ignored at our peril." And try to spell his name right. All that's left to figure out is when the pain sets in.

    • Bonnie Kosowan

      How about Harper's "The Coalition says 'YES', (with chorus), the Conservatives say 'No' (no chorus, cuz Harper's the only one who gets to say no. Something like that you mean maybe. I like Iggy's better, it's got real power and lot's of voices are going to be singing that phrase out loud and in their heads. It sticks.

      • FVerhoeven

        Oh, yeah, let there be no doubt about it: it will stick!

        Anything will stick to a confused mindset.

        Just wait which part of the country will 'rise up' most spontaneously after Ignatieff has formed a coalition goverment by handing over the balance of power to the BQ.

        And that time there will be no confused mindsets involved, believe you me!

        • KeithBram

          So you prefer the country to be run by the Bloc Albertois? Because that's the way you're sounding… just like the BQ / PQ. Take a look in the mirror, FV, and you'll see Marios staring back.

  • FVerhoeven

    "Michael Ignatieff had been speaking for something like an hour, without so much as a sip of water……"

    Well, that could be the problem right there. Give the man some water when he needs it most!!

    • modster99

      was he delirious? lol

  • modster99

    It is amazing how a reporter can put his own personal, I won't say spin, because that sounds like it is intentional, but flavor might be a better word, to a story.
    John Geddes covered the same speech, and it didn't sound near as impressive as Aaron makes it out to be. Is that because Aaron got 'caught up' in the moment, and if so, what does that say about his objectivity? After reading John's article, I thought, "Seems like Ignatieff has some fire in him after all. Probably too little, too late, but nice to see." As I read Aaron's article, I was expecting to hear about how the sky opened up and a voice said 'this is my candidate'. – lol
    I would guess it would be hard to be objective as a journalist, as we all have our biases, but I would expect that they would at least try. . ..

    • OriginalEmily1

      This isn't a newsite…this is a blog

      • modster99

        macleans.ca is a newsite
        Aaron wrote an article and has a byline. It would very well be in next weeks issue (although I doubt that it will).

        • OriginalEmily1

          Yes, and this is not the news page….it's the blog page.

          A blog is like a diary….it's meant to convey 'flavour'….and thoughts…and the atmosphere about the event

          If ignatieff gave a barn-burner of a speech….a blog will reflect that.

          • modster99

            This article could very well end up in the next issue. We can post comments about any article that macleans put on the site. Do you have a subscription? Do you know that a lot of the articles that we comment about end up in the printed mag? If some of it doesn't make it into the mag, it is not for lack of trying.

            As far as flavor, I was just pointing out how two different (and lets admit – liberal) reporters give very different coverage of the same event. We don't get to see it often, so it is neat.

            As far as barn burning, I would guess it would depend on whose article you read. . .

          • OriginalEmily1

            It might…it might not…however, it's currently on a blog.

            Most 'articles' here were in the magazine first…then sometimes posted as a blog entry to get opinion Other impressions never go to the magazine. The magazine can only cover so many stories….this site can cover an infinite number of them

            I don't think either writer is Liberal, although they are likely liberal….and of course they would have 2 slightly different views of the same event. That's the whole point of having 2 different people cover the same event.

            I get the same impression of 'barn-burner' from both items though.

            Harper doesn't do barn-burners…or questions for that matter….so it's harder with him. LOL

          • Just Joe

            Pants burners, then?

          • OriginalEmily1

            LOL perfect!

          • Harper is a liar

            And Harper drink water between every sentence he makes be it interview or speech. It may be to keep the "pants on fire" flames down to a cinder while cameras are rolling.

          • OriginalEmily1

            LOL good point! That might well be why he does it!

          • modster99

            I will guess by this post that you don't read the paper version. Most of the content is on the site first, or at the least, at the same time. The paper version has most of the same material. Before you comment on it, read an issue and compare.

            I think I used the small l liberal. My point was that you normally can't compare two different versions of the same event. That is what made it unique.

            I wasn't talking about Harper as all. Funny how you can make everything relate to Harper – I am starting to wonder if you have a secret crush on him. Are you around the same age as him? Do you find him dreamy?

          • OriginalEmily1

            Get serious dude, and leave the sexism behind.

          • modster99

            Sexism, where do you see sexism? You liberals are masters at inventing a slight. . .

    • Claudia Lemire

      Welcome to Wherry's world!!

  • Joshua

    Comments that are not favourable to Iggy……are being removed.but not when they are against Mr. Harper

    • OriginalEmily1

      No, they are not.

    • Andrew (not PorC)

      Yes, liberal media conspiracy, blah blah blah.

    • modster99

      this would be the first I have heard of comments being removed.

      I would imagine that they censor for swears, though.

    • criselis

      Quick someone is hiding under your bed! Lock yourself in the closet!

      Harper for supreme leader

      I shall monitor and report back

    • Harper is a liar

      There is a report link people can use if they feel you are being vulgar or whatever. Were you?

    • Thwim

      Intense Debate has a known problem with some comments not showing up for a while after they've been posted.

      That said, it wouldn't be the first time Maclean's has disappeared comments. Although I haven't ever seen them do it for something other than one of their writers committed a bad gaffe and got called on it.

      • KeithBram

        Sometimes they just disappear into the ether. Sometimes the filters they have will block posts for things they shouldn't; a few days ago a filter that was supposed to block a specific spammer whose online name included "harper" ended up blocking every post wth Harper's name for a short period until they fixed it.

        So posts periodically vanish for a variety of reasons that aren't good but which are not – as Joshua implies – due to a conspiracy.

  • Rob

    Hitler knew how to manuver people, as did Stalin and Mao, Ignatiev learned from the masters.

    When Ignatiev loses he’ll go to his villa in the south of France or estate somewhere in England. Does his wife afford such a lifestyle, not really, this luxury Ignatiev enjoys came from the backs of peasants in Russia before the revolution when his family hid money in England before fleeing. Long story short, he’s not the poor imigrant boy he wants folks in Canada to believe.

    I would rather vote for a Prime Minister who fought tooth and nail to lower the GST by 2 percent which saved the people HUGE dollars in home purchases, vehicles etc.. Sure, it’s only 5% now but the Liberals wanted it raised upward to around 10 or more percent. GST on our gas bill this month was ten bucks, under Liberal CONTROL it would be over $20. That is only home heating, what about everything else regular folk have to buy. Let’s use toilet paper as an example. Pretty soon no hard working taxpayer can NOT afford butt wipe they’ll use junk mail instead and plug~up the Toronto, Quebec city sewer systems. Ha, Peasants REVOLT~ I’m joke but the fact is our Prime Minister has made some of his campane promises come true even with the horrific controls the Liberal party continues to enact . On a plus side Prime Minister Haper hasn’t cost taxpayers BILLIONS in under radar scams.

    As for constant harping on our jet fighter plane replacesments. Canadian companies are involved in developing/improving F35s . Creating jobs in OUR COUNTRY and it’s sickening watching worn out F18s drop from the sky. It’s humorous reading that leader hopefuls think fighter planes should go through the government TENDERING PROCESS. Ummmmm. Anyone who has been involved in government tenders would roll over laughing at the idea of quoting on fighter planes.

    Pretty dam sad when Liberals sent our young army to battle into sandy dessert WAR wearing como GREEN. Talk about sitting targets for the enemy. Perhaps it is time to send the big talking heads overseas to fight the battles they create … Just a thought folks.

    • Loraine Lamontagne

      You sound angry. Please don't try to seize a ballot box.

      • Bob

        You look desperate. I'm not going to let you stuff a ballot box.

    • Just Joe

      Canadian companies are involved in developing/improving F35s

      Oh, really? They're doing a great job of advertising that claim:
      http://www.lockheedmartin.com/canada/products.htm…

    • BCer in Mtl

      "Anyone who has been involved in government tenders would roll over laughing at the idea of quoting on fighter planes"

      You may want to check on that with Alan Williams, former assistant deputy minister at the Department of National Defence (DND) responsible for procurement.

      But I guess you're just much more expereinced and much smarter than he is, so you must be right.

      • Jenn_

        Huh. I used to be involved with a company that submitted tenders for national defence. I don't remember laughing. But it wasn't for fighter jets, so that must be all the difference in the world.

        • Bob

          It is… a tendering process is when you let many companies bid on a project. There might be a single company in the entire world that can produce a fighter jet with the capabilities of the F35 and they are doing it for the Pentagon. The tendering process is a joke in these circumstances. It's not like buying a bunch of firewalls and sending an RFP to a dozen vendors.

          • BCer in Mtl

            "There might be a single company in the entire world that can produce a fighter jet with the capabilities of the F35 "

            Ah, but there's the problem . . . what are the capabilities we as a country need?

            Are we satisfied that the requirements defined by the USA and the developed (and hopefully achieved) by L-M for a single-platform, multi-role fighter are right for Canada's needs?

            Or is there some value to the users of the equipment, and the taxpayers of Canada, defining what our specific needs are, based on long-range Defence and Foreign policy objectives? That definition could result in our seeking a different platform (or even platforms) for our specific needs.

          • Jenn_

            Thanks, BCer. Just what I was going to say. I also remember the booklet of requirements they wanted, down to the size of the grommet or screw and such. But now it appears 'whatever you have is fine by us' is the way we're going.

          • BCer in Mtl

            continued . . .

            Don't forget, because the F35 was developed to incorporate a lot of commonality for the needs of the USAF, Navy and Marines, there will be a lot of design compromises that are likely to render it a sub-optimal choice for the each of the services for which it is intended. One key rationale fr developing the platform was to minimize procurement costs, but it is becoming apparent to most informed observers that as the individual service requirements are increasingly not being met, additional development costs need to be invested, resulting in a higher cost product (and probably reducing commonality in the process)

            So, yes, it makes ample sense for the buyer to shop around and subject prospective suppliers to competition. On a scale more familiar to most, you probably would have a hard time getting a break on price if you marched right into your local Mercedes dealership and announced that is the only car I want to buy, now what can you do to make a good deal for me?

            Or do Conservatives only believe in competition when it suits them?

    • Selena

      Congratulations, your the winner of the Godwin's Law on this thread: Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies). "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."

      Simple arguments………

      • Jenn_

        And as the very first word, I didn't read any more. I just read BCer's quote.

      • Poopypants

        To be fair, we should give Rob some credit for referencing Hitler, Stalin, Mao, AND the House of Romanov. I'm wondering why he didn't throw in Pol Pot or Kim Il Sung though. Maybe he thought that would be exaggerating.

    • stim

      Let's not forget who brought in the GST.

    • Juergen

      Well spoken Rob, agree with you 100%

    • KeithBram

      You know, there's at least equally valid grounds for pointing to the named despots as Harper's mentors, if you want to get into games of silly hyperbole.

  • http://rodcroskery.wordpress.com rodcros

    Wherry's a clever writer, and on this one he outdid himself. He's always a pleasure to read.

  • JamesHalifax

    if you consider Wherry a clever writer.,……you need to expand your horizons.

    Wherry's just another anti-harper shill….his writing is as lame as it is predictable.

    • catherine

      Wherry does a good job of giving us a glimpse of what's going on at Ignatieff's rallies.

      I assume you'd rather read about Harper's rallies, so go find a columnist travelling with Harper. But once you have heard or read about one of Harper's speeches, you know it all. There is a limit to how many times one can write about the trouble lapping at our shores and the reckless coalition.

    • Just Joe

      And you are Lucy Maud Montgomery?

    • Anon

      And yet, you keep squatting on his blog. Job requirement, eh?

    • Mischief

      Sounds great to me!

      No more robot Harper – let's get a little life and vision into this damn election!

  • Wes

    Reminds me of Bob Dole's 'Where's the outrage?' remarks during the latter stages of the '96 presidential campaign, and we know how that ended up. Like Dole, it seems as though Ignatieff is coming to the painful realization that his attacks just aren't working, and that the end is near.

  • Mike514

    I disagree with Ignatieff. I don’t think people are shrugging and saying “so what?” I think Canadians are very concerned about the actions of the Tories and the health of our democracy.

    However, I also feel that Canadians think the opposition is as much a part of the problem as the party currently in charge. There are constant partisan game by all parties (wafergate was probably the nadir in political games). The Liberals abstained from a historic number of confidence votes. When Layton accused Ignatieff of serious absenteeism, Ignatieff didn’t even bother to defend himself during the debate. Committees dominated by opposition members might be justified in ruling against the Tories, but the public is equally justified in taking it all with a huge grain of salt.

    Most recently, the opposition attacked Guergis a while ago and demanded she resign/be fired, and suddenly they’re jumping to her defense? I thunk Canadians are probably thinking “WTF?” not “so what?”

    The list goes on, and I don’t mean to single out the Liberals (only because we’re on the subject of MI).

    It’s not “so what,” it’s more like “I don’t like this, but I don’t buy that the opposition will do any better on ethics, so I’ll judge them on other factors like fiscal management, environment policies, health care, etc.”

    • FVerhoeven

      I think you've captured the public mood.

    • -ME2

      Despite the -21 score I think you have a point. If the Liberals wanted this campaign to be about ethics then they should have come up with a set of policies that curbed the power of the PMO and empowered MPs and made it the absolute centrepiece of their campaign much like the Tories did in 2006 with what would become the accountability act. Without that, it's easy to see how a cynical public just sees it as the Liberals blowing smoke. Personally, I find it odd that up until now the Liberals have been trying to fight this election with their family pack of policies which basically makes the election about the economy which is what the Conservatives would like it to be about.

      • Thwim

        And its' for comments like yours and Mike's above that I keep reading these forums. Well thought out.

        One quibble I'd have with Mike's characterization of events. The confidence vote abstention was Dion's game, not Ignatieff's, and during the Guergis affair they were demanding she be dropped from Cabinet, but were all rather stunned when he turfed her from the party completely. That said, your description may match the public's memory more closely than the facts.

        Still, nice thinking both of you. It's something I hadn't considered before and has a ring of truth to it to me.

        My problem is while I believe the opposition has certainly been too occupied with "gotcha" politics, there are, amongst them, some very serious concerns. I fear that the public's disillusionment with the whole process will end up rewarding the CPC which will do nothing to lessen the liberties they take against a properly functioning parliament.. of course, that's what ME2's comment is about, isn't it?

        Frustrating.

        • Mike514

          You might be right about the confidence motions (haven't bothered Googling it, but I'll take your word for it). I was surprised Layton didn't bring it up during the debates, but it makes sense if it was Dion's game.

          As I say below to Wascally Wabbit, I don't think Angry Ignatieff will win much more support. He needs to talk about his ideas, particularly democratic reform, rather than simply attack the other guy. More positive, less negative. More a vote for something, less a vote against something.

          And as for the thumbs (as ME2 mentioned), I've long ago learned to ignore them. It seems anything even remotely anti-Liberal will automatically yield -5 thumbs down at a minimum. It wouldn't surprise me if some commenters read my first line, and immediately clicked thumbs down.

          (As an aside, since you use Intense Debate, do you know how to sign into Intense Debate on an iPhone? Whenever I post something from my phone, it won't associate my comment with my ID profile. Have you (or anyone else) tried?)

      • Mike514

        LOL I've long ago ignored the thumbs rating system. It seems anything even remotely harsh about the Liberals will automatically yield at least 5 thumbs down. It wouldn't surprise me if some people read the first 4 words of my post, and immediately clicked the thumbs-down button.

    • Pele

      Only too true.

      However, I prefer the dour pragmatism of this Canadian election than the "bite-your-knuckles-and-cry-elephant-tears- over-the-beautiful-blue-eyes-of-the-man-who-raps-about-hope" emotionalism of the recent American election.

      Ignatieff has to learn to quit the bluster and tell it like it is, or at least like he sees it. Calling for an uprising is ridiculous. He must be getting tired; time for some warm milk and a hot water bottle.

  • hosertohoosier

    That line may fire up people that already support Ignatieff, but it isn't going to win over people that don't. Ignatieff has to tell those people why:
    A. it is in their material interest to vote Liberal
    B. for retrospective voters, why Harper has done a bad job managing the economy

    Ignatieff has an okay story on A (if utterly facile – he's going to have to get new jets, and he voted for much of Harper's crime agenda, so he's going to need jails), but has conceded the argument on B. If that is his approach, he might as well concede the election, because that question is the hill upon which governments live or die.

    • catherine

      Canada doesn't have to get the untested, most costly F-35 jets and not sure what crime bills you are referring to. The ones Harper says he will pass within 100 days are the ones expected to substantially increase the prison population. The 2006 bundled Bill C-2 was passed with the help of both Libs and NDP, but isn't expected to impact that substantially on the prison pop. A more recent bill, opposed by both Libs and NDP, and passed with help from the Bloc, is expect to increase the prison pop by about 1500 but may also be unconstitutional, so the courts may weigh in.

      On the economy, how has that been conceded? I don't think Ignatieff stresses this enough, but he has made the arguments about the surplus and bank regulations that Harper inherited (both of which Harper railed against), about the structural deficit (although he talks about this less now, presumably because this will affect ALL party platforms as Harper has put the budget in an unstable condition even if the economy exceeds all expectations), about the untargetted and irresponsible spending, and about the $11B unspecified cuts. What other arguments/facts about Harper/Flaherty should he be making?

      • catherine

        That should be the 2007 Bill C-2.

  • Selena

    Anyone seriously considering voting for CRAP needs to have their head examined. Unless, of course, you are as dysfunctional as Deceiven' Stephen seems to be.

    • Kevlarman

      Anyone with a different opinion is an idiot.

      Typical arrogant Liberal thinking.

      Disgusting.

      • Thwim

        No, not anyone with a different opinion. Just anyone who ignores what the CPC has done and has been doing. Ignoring Mr. Harper's complete lack of reliability for anything he says, and ignoring his continued attacks on the ability of parliament and committees to have accurate and reliable information so that they can do their jobs effectively.

  • Wascally Wabbit

    Aaron – Iggy's script writers missed a wonderful opportunity. I've already invoked it before the campaign – but I'll do it again – Canadians need to find their Howard Beale moment – "to go to their windows – open them – stick their heads out – and yell – I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!"
    Trouble is – he is part of what they are mad about – they are mad at Harper, and Layton and Duceppe as well as Iggy – hence the switch to Bruce Springsteen!

    • Mike514

      Sounds more like a Howard Dean moment. I don’t think the public will be receptive to angry Ignatieff. He acted a little too angry IMO at the English debate, waving his hands, and raising his voice.

      He needs to act more sympathetic, not angry. Talk more about his platform and give people a reason to vote for him, rather than reasons to hate Harper.

      For example, instead of attacking Harper on democratic reform, talk more about your own ideas for democratic reform. Instead of attacking people with “stop shrugging your shoulders, dammit!” try to say something like “people are responding positively to our platform, and I know you’ll be excited too” or some such thing.

      Sell yourself, and be positive, rather than attacking others and being negative. But that’s just my opinion. Clearly the OLO and Donolo disagree.

    • bergkamp

      " …. Iggy's script writers missed a wonderful opportunity …… Trouble is – he is part of what they are mad about …"

      Was there an opportunity or is Iggy part of what I am mad about?

      Why do we have to listen to this nonsense in first place?

      Look at Iggy's numbers! As if he's going to lead an uprising of pissed off Canadians. Hahahahaha. Canadians are more likely to sit in their chairs than they are to get up for Iggy.

      "But Ignatieff’s personal numbers are worse. Nanos Research publishes an occasional “leadership index” that combines respondents’ perceptions on trust, competence and vision for Canada. At the end of February, Harper’s score was as high as it’s been since Ignatieff became Liberal leader, at 98.9. Ignatieff’s was its lowest yet, at 36.9. His leadership index score has been below NDP Leader Jack Layton’s for 14 straight months.

      Also in February, Harris Decima found that Ignatieff is viewed positively by 25 per cent of respondents and unfavourably by 51 per cent. That’s the lowest positive score of any national leader, and the highest unfavourable rating. The lowest positive rating Harris Decima ever measured for Stéphane Dion was 30 per cent. Ignatieff has been at or below that level for more than a year." Paul Wells, Inside Liberal Effort Resurrect Iggy, Mar 2011

  • chet

    The Canadian press has officially delcared Guerigs not being taken back into the CPC……..drum roll please………a……

    SCANDAL.

    Ditchburn, Bryden et al at the CP are so overtly partisan it's become comical.

    The woman who the press was treating like a she-devil (when they could tie her to the CPC) now, must, just must.be allowed back into the CPC……so they can proceed to scandalize Harper via his ties to Guergis….who the media are demanding be reinstated.

    Indeed it's moved beyond comical and into Orwellian.

  • http://www.smalldeadanimals.com Kate

    Hey Aaron, a video's worth a thousand water-carrying media words….

    [youtube _7dD-cnNkA4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7dD-cnNkA4 youtube]

    • Jim

      Last line in that video…

      "This goes beyond our country".

      After he uses lines from the first song played on the loudspeakers after Obama's election night victory speech in Chicago.

    • catherine

      The unclipped version is a lot more interesting and informative, but perhaps Harper supporters would not like it.

      • FVerhoeven

        Oh, I am a Harper supporter, and please, give us more of this. Ignatieff in front of a greying crowd trying to save his day………………Hallelujah, Hallelujah………………and amen!

    • ColdStanding

      It sounded sort of half interesting when reading about it in print. Watching the video… not so much.

  • okgranny

    Vote for Health not Stealth!

  • Rich

    It's just…..over.

  • Bob

    You know, Canadians did "shrug" at all of those trumped up "scandals"… and all of the dubious "fraud" charges, which are also not going to amount to anything. The Liberals are always treating Canadians like they're stupid. And maybe as a society in the past we were, but not anymore. We read more, more widely from different sources, we communicate our thoughts more, faster, and in effect it is making us all a bit more sophisticated when it comes to political ideas. It's not surprising to me that the Conservatives are benefiting from this movement. The cheap tricks that have always worked for the Liberals are all well known an easy to spot now. Their tools are all dull. Their mouthpiece (the Liberal friendly mainstream media) have been called out and are being dismissed – their power greatly diminished. Bring on the Conservative majority.

    • LeDa88

      here here!!
      Well said.

    • Tim

      Ah, much easier to see the reply button when I'm not on my BB.
      While I agree with much of what you have said, what I'm not in agreement is your insistence that mainstream media is liberal friendly. Mainstream media (read, bell and rogers) are only friendly to those that make them the most money. And are hardly a tool in either parties box. They are more like thugs for hire. To the highest bidder. The cheep tricks that work so well for the libs work equally well for the cons. They both excel in the art of attack adds, but as you pointed out, society is growing up and recognizing this. But as much as we would like to believe this, most likely to make ourselves feel better, there is still enough ignorance in this world to keep these politicians employed.

  • Realistic

    The "Rise Up" rally cry is really working because a couple of old stiffs from past liberal fiascos have joined the fray. Martin and Chretien will be joing Iggy on the campaign trail to help muster the depleted troops or maybe they are just big fans of "da Boss" .

    • Atchison

      That's only going to strengthen the Tories. Tthere are a lot of blue Liberals who resent those leaders.

  • Darren

    [youtube bBPOK9PIw-0&feature=youtu.be http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBPOK9PIw-0&feature=youtu.be youtube]

    • Bob

      He sounds like a really creepy American politician. Oh and he's also advocating a Coalition attempt to seize power when they lose the election.

      • shouldIsellyourwheat

        Come on, Jack. Bring out the old Parachute Club gang, and have them sing the Canadian anthem "Rise UP", at an NDP campaign event, and send this American imposter home.

        How can a guy from Toronto, like Ignatieff, not know about the Parachute Club, or "Rise Up"? Oh yeah….he hasn't been here for 35 years, and knows eff all about our culture.

        • Scott Ryan

          The Parachute Club is Canadian Culture? God help us all.

    • Atchison

      What an embarassment. Ignatieff pleads 'rise up' seven times before getting a response from his supporters."Our Prime Minister the Right Honourable Stephen Harper" is all that is needed to bring a room of Tories to their feet.

      • http://halooverride.blogspot.com/ Halo_Override

        Pavlov wept.

    • madeyoulook

      Careful about bringing up electoral fraud, sir.
      http://www.google.ca/search?q=ignatieff%20vote%20…

    • Pele

      Hilarious. I can't quit laughing.

      Somebody tell Micheal that this isn't Illinois; it's Canada. Springsteen doesn't cut it here.

      Now if he tried some Gordon Lightfoot it'd probably have some effect. Probably Sundown is more accurate anyway. "Sometimes I think it's a sin when I feel like I'm winning and I'm losing again.."

  • Tim

    “Their mouthpiece (the Liberal friendly mainstream media) have been called out and are being dismissed – their power greatly diminished. Bring on the Conservative majority.” are you joking! The main stream media is not liberal. They cloud and alter the truth all the time. G20. Television consortium not allowing Elizabeth may in the debate. They only show you what they think you should want to see. Open your eyes.

    • Atchison

      Only parliamentary leaders get to debate. Why? Because they will form future governments. If you let May in you might as well include all the independent MPs in the debate. They'd represent an equivalent proportion of Canadian voters.

      • jonatwitan

        Green's received just under a million votes nation wide last election. How many independent MP's received that many again?

        • Atchison

          Who cares if they got a million votes across the entire country. Did they have the confidence of enough voters in a single riding to win one seat? No! They represent a very narrow swath of Canadians and shouldn't be included in the debates.

          • jonatwitan

            Right, I must have misunderstood you when you suggested that the Greens represent the same number of voters as some independent candidate running in one riding.

          • tim

            They represent a much larger swath of Canadians then the bloc, who only field candidates in one Provence. Duceppe has been in the debate since the early 90"s. They represent a larger percentage of the now defunct reform party. In the 1993 debate, Manning participated, even though his party had no seats. In 1993, both the NDP and PC party were in the debate, even though neither had official party status. The green party runs in every riding, and are on their way to equaling the NDP, but yet the mainstream media insist that they jump through hoops just to just to receive parity with the other parties.

          • Atchison

            "They represent a much larger swath of Canadians then the bloc"

            That's why the Bloc received 450, 000 more votes than the Greens in 2008 and 900, 000 more votes than the Greens in 2006. Let us not forget that enough Canadians found the Bloc representative of their views to elect 49 Bloc MPs to the Commons. How many Greens got elected? Oh that's right 0.

    • Bob

      This article is a prime example. Look at the video. It's garbage. And yet Wherry works himself up into a frenzy, ejaculating all over his computer. That's a Liberal friendly article right there. And that's fine, Wherry can write whatever he wants. I highly respect a guy that gets paid to write. My point was simply that I read Wherry (Macleans), but I also read the NP, the Globe, the Wall Street Journal, the Ottawa Citizen, about a dozen different blogs, twitter feeds. It used to be people like Wherry would pump out this puff piece and millions of people would lap it up as their only source of information on the event. Now, I can read a dozen interpretations of it AND get the video.

  • Peterb

    I expect Igantieff and Liberals would like AG to dust off and release some of her other reports while she is at it.

    Liberals misinformed Parliament about millions spent on gun registry: AG
    Last Updated: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 | 4:30 PM ET
    2006 Report of the Auditor General of Canada

    The former Liberal government misinformed Parliament about millions of dollars in expenses incurred by the gun registry, Auditor General Sheila Fraser said.
    The largest portion of her latest report to Ottawa focused on how the government twice failed to properly record tens of millions of dollars worth of overspending at the Canada Firearms Centre.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2006/05/16/gu…

    AG Fraser lambastes Liberals for blowing budget by a billion dollars on registry‏

    AG Fraser lambastes Liberals for blowing budget by a billion dollars on registry. When Canada's auditor general tabled her December 2002 report, she set her sights on Ottawa's controversial gun registry program.
    Sheila Fraser blasted the federal government, run by the Liberals at the time, for exceeding its estimated budget, saying that by the time the smoke cleared and all gun owners and their guns were registered, the program would have cost taxpayers more than $1 billion. Opposition critics were quick to point out that figure is 500 times more than the original $2-million estimate. A look at internal audits conducted by the Canadian Firearms Program suggests the cost of the program has been an issue from the beginning.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2009/10/06/f-…

    • Thwim

      Yes, yes, we get it already, you want to see the CPC ousted after the AG's report on them just like we saw the Liberal's ousted following this report.

    • http://halooverride.blogspot.com/ Halo_Override

      I expect Conservative supporters to be able to spell "Ignatieff" correctly. Yet they persist in disappointing.

  • Sandy

    Couldn't have said it better. Either corruption is challenged or it breeds even more corruption and so far this Harper government though possibly the most corrupt in Canadian history has gone virtually unchallenged and therefore has become even more bold in it's contempt of Parliament and Canadians.

    • Atchison

      Your statements are laughable. The most corrupt government in Canadian history was the Chretien/Martin Liberals who stole hundreds of millions of tax payer dollars and lined their Liberal cronies’ pockets with it.

      At least when the Tories send money to their own shills it builds infrastructure in their ridings instead of paying for luxury estates, yachts, and high falootin swarays.

      • Thwim

        Or to our competitors in the lumber industry in the states.

  • Sarah

    The climax was a bit awkward but the lead up was sincere. It seems to be a general narrative worth repeating.

    • Pele

      A bit awkward? It was plain embarrassing. Sensible Liberals must just watch this and shake their heads into their hands.

      I feel kind of bad for Ignatieff; he's about to get John Kerry'd right out of Canada.

From Macleans