Attention undecided voters! Ignatieff peddling Green Shift 2

Talk about a Liberal Party of Canada’s scary hidden policy agenda! Apparently, the poison pill is on Page 46 of the Liberals’ Red Book # 2 — better labelled Green Shift Redux — and released by Michael Ignatieff this past Sunday. 

It boggles the mind. I mean the Canadian people soundly rejected Stephane Dion’s Green Shift in October 2008. Yet, the Liberals are apparently peddling Green Shift # 2 in spite of that sound rejection but calling it something else, hoping no one will notice.

You know what that kind of arrogance suggests? It’s damn the torpedoes. Damn the Canadian people. Just as in Ontario, the nanny state, the Liberal Party knows what’s best for us. Well, sorry, but they don’t. All they know how to do is spend money they don’t have and cause absolute havoc to the economy. And, the leader of the Liberal Party, Michael Ignatieff and his supporting former MP props always surrounding him,  have the absolute audacity to talk about the Conservatives not being accountable or transparent.

Without a doubt then, the Liberal Party of Canada is not even close to the political centre any more. Liberal strategists, their leader and their candidates are locked into an entirely left-wing green ideological agenda. But, while that would be bad enough, the agenda they are locked into no longer makes sense because it is based, not only on faulty and misleading science — that human activity is responsible for global warming trends — but on the faulty premise that somehow a Cap and Trade market system in Canada could have any affect on “global” emissions.

Yet, the push towards corruption and a devastation of our 21st century life styles continues. As writes, the Cap and Trade carbon emissions system contemplated by the Obama government in the U.S.,would primarily would hurt the little guy — that’s you and me.  How much worse in Canada, particularly since Ignatieff wants Canada to go it alone!

 Although CTV, CBC and CPAC seem more interested in carrying on the tradition of the faux scandal of the day, listed below are some excellent media sources related to the Liberals’ Cap and Trade system, as well as related issues within the Liberals’ Red Book # 2  — from journalists that care about the bigger and more important issues. (H/T and Joanne at Blue Like You)

  • “Saskatchewan Premier’s concern about impact of Liberal green plan on West” Winnipeg Free Press
  • Lorrie Goldstein on “Cap and Trade — Useless, Dumb & Reckless” — Toronto Sun
  • Kelly McParland on “Liberals wrapping costly revolution in soothing blandishments” — National Post
  • Andrew Leach column “Liberals’ significant climate plan cloaked in silence” — Globe and Mail 
  • The Red Book, it isn’t” — National Post editorial
  • Michael Den Tandt on “Michael Ignatieff’s policies target Jack Layton’s base” — Toronto Sun

Ignatieff says of Harper: You can’t trust “that guy”

Speaking of not trusting “that guy,” we now find out that it is the leader of the Liberal Party, Michael Ignatieff himself, that we can’t trust. And, while I think of it, might I suggest that the Liberal Leader not constantly refer to Stephen Harper as “that guy” — which he was doing even before the election was called. Because, that kind of condescending manner actually tells us more about him than it does “the prime minister.”

But back to telling the truth. We now find out that the emperor (Count) has no clothes. As my blogging friend Joanne at Blue Like You writes this morning: “Whose lying now?” (H/T Dr. Roy on Twitter.) Indeed!  Canadians will recall that Ignatieff was all over the air waves yesterday bragging about, yes bragging, how he would answer questions from anyone, anytime, anywhere.

Well, that was nothing but bravado, because it appears that the truth is the exact opposite. In fact, we are now learning that Ignatieff is actually afraid to debate Stephen Harper one-on-one. And, yet we had to listen to Roger Smith on CTV and the CBC’s Terry Milewski (and others) go on and on about how few questions they could ask the PM. What petulant babies they are. I can clearly remember former Liberal PM Jean Chretien limiting access to the media during election campaigns and I don’t recall such a reaction then.

And, oh yes, I don’t want to forget the various journalists and media pundits (e.g,. CTV’s Bob Fife and Craig Oliver come to mind) recently suggesting that because Ignatieff used to be a professor, he would win any debate with Harper, hands down. Well, that’s a lot of hot air. Having been a former professor myself, I can say unequivocally, that there are lots of professors who can’t debate effectivelly — especially those who think they know it all but don’t.

Well, thankfully some in the media are starting to hold Ignatieff’s feet to the fire. As Stephen Maher wrote today:

The Liberals privately rejected Tory proposals that would have led to more one-on-one exchanges between Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff in the leaders’ debate, and then changed their tune in public, says the chairman of the Conservative campaign.”

In fact, it is long past time that the Canadian media travelling with Ignatieff stop walking on egg shells and treat him the same as Harper. Because, as the old saying goes, if Ignatieff can’t stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen.

I spy with my little eye behind Ignatieff’s “red door”

It’s time to play the “Red Door/Blue Door” federal election endgame, based on actual or proposed fiscal and other policies. Although unintentional, the game was introduced yesterday by Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff during his media scrum in the foyer of the House of Commons. Surrounded by his fawning and adoring caucus — what Mark Bonokowki of the Toronto Sun refers to as his “props” — Ignatieff told us how Canadians had to decide which door to open, the red door or the blue door.

So, let’s play “I spy with my little eye” and think about what we might expect to find behind Ignatieff’s red door.

I know, for instance, that I would find a political party that was arrogant and felt so entitled to power that they found it necessary to remind me continually that only they were the natural governing party in Canada.

I know I would also find a huge pile of money — money that represented the millions upon millions of dollars that was misused or stolen during the Sponsorship Scandal.

As well, I know I would find a table with three politicians behind it — a Liberal, an NDP and a Bloc Member of Parliament — and their signed coalition agreement

And, no amount of Liberal pre-election spin will change what I and other Canadians imagine we would find behind Ignatieff’s red door.

Now, what might I find behind the blue door?

I would find a government who has managed the economy so well that the country is the envy of the G7 and beyond.

I would also find a government that has dozens upon dozens of accomplishments.

And, I would find a prime minister in Stephen Harper who is respected, both domestically and internationally.

Has the Conservative government been perfect? No. Can they do better? Absolutely. But, the Red Door/Blue Door game really does concentrate the mind. Now, what do my readers think they would find behind those doors?


Endnote: This post was published for at least 30 minutes this morning before it suddenly disappeared when I was updating it to correct a typo — as I often do — the first time that has happened in the four years I have had a blog on the server.

What happened I have no idea, but the post here now is a complete replacement. That said, while it is not word for word as the original text, the meaning and intent is the same. By using the Red Door/Blue Door analogy, Michael Ignatieff has thrown down the gauntlet without realizing its implications — something he would likely never have done had he actually lived in Canada during the Sponsorship Scandal.