Saw this site linked on MyBlahg this morning: http://republicansforignatieff.com
Some of the quotes they have from Ignatieff are insane. Targeted Assasinations? Pre-Emptive War? I love America?
This guy is Bush-Lite just like Harper. NDP need to get their act together.
So we are supposed to believe the Republican love affair with Harper is over because:
Although the current Canadian Prime Minister is a conservative, he has challenged the United States on the Arctic, he is charting Canada's own course in the Americas, and he has failed to demonstrate a deep emotional connection to America like Michael Ignatieff.
It would at first glance seem Iggy is all for US having all the rights to the Arctic, aka oil, and that he would go further in the exploitation of the America's than Harper. But I would suggest there is no difference between Harper and Iggy, at all. In fact, one could easily pencil in Harper's name for many of their points.
Although born in Canada, Ignatieff has always been fascinated by America.
- As a young man, he believed in America in a way that Canada never allowed.
“I loved my own country, but I believed in America in a way that Canada never allowed”
Michael Ignatieff
(“What we think of America.” Granta. March 28, 2002)
- While living in the United Kingdom Ignatieff pined for America, saying "Someone like me does not exist in America and that seems to me to be terrible."
"Someone like me does not exist in America and that seems to me to be terrible."
Michael Ignatieff
(The Guardian. February 28, 1991.)
- Once in America, Ignatieff called America his country on national television.
- And when speaking to a U.S. Military Academy Ignatieff said he "loved" America."
"Now, this is coming from a Canadian who is not even a citizen of your country, but someone who has loved this country."
Michael Ignatieff
(Lecture to the United States Naval Academy. March 2001.)
Michael Ignatieff has not only been supportive of America he has also been very supportive of Republican ideas and causes.
- He stood with us on Iraq.
- He defended torture, including coercive interrogation.
To defeat evil, we may have to traffic in evils: indefinite detention of suspects, coercive interrogations, targeted assassinations, even pre-emptive war.
Michael Ignatieff
(New York Times Magazine, May 2004.)
- He didn't lose any sleep when Lebanon was bombed by Israeli forces in 2006.
"Qana was frankly inevitable in a situation in which you have rocket launchers within 100 yards of a civilian population," he told the Star. "This is the nature of the war that's going on... This is the kind of dirty war you're in when you have to do this and I'm not losing sleep about that."
Michael Ignatieff
(The Chronicle-Herald, August 14, 2006)
- He loves the tar sands.
Although the current Canadian Prime Minister is a conservative, he has challenged the United States on the Arctic, he is charting Canada's own course in the Americas, and he has failed to demonstrate a deep emotional connection to America like Michael Ignatieff.
That's why Michael Ignatieff is the best choice for Canadian Prime Minister.
Join Republicans for Ignatieff today and show your support for Michael. He's the right choice for Canada, the right choice for America, the right choice for Republicans.
ROFL!!!!!
Yeah Take THAT Harper!!!!!!
does anyone troll the freeper site? someone should provide them the link. Also, Let's have Sara Pailin comment on Iggy. Or maybe Joe the plumber.
ETA: the link in the thread does't work.
Here's one that does: LINK
I don't know what's least surprising to me: that American Republicans are in bed with Ignatieff or that Layton is asleep at the switch?
Illegal Pre-Emptive Wars? Check.
Coercive Interrogation? Check.
U.S.A. lover? Check.
Pillaging the environment for oil? Check.
Bush = Ignatieff = Harper. There is no difference between them. Layton should be pushing this.
Amazing! Harper, who wants to fold this nation into the USA so badly that his first foray into public life was as a stooge for the US HMO lobby to try and dismantle our exalted and exulting universal public healthcare system so that the HMOs from the States can come into Canada and bleed the people of this nation like they've bled the citizenry of the States dry charging exuberant premiums for health insurance only to classify things like appendectomies, chemo therapy and setting broken bones in plaster casts for splints as "EXPERIMENTAL" and therefore disqualified for insurance under the policy restrictions, which change from day to day and situation to situation is now decrying Ignatieff's time in the U.S. PATHETIC!
Now this "REPUBLICOPHILE", this U.S. citizen in waiting and his campaign strategists are throwing an entire nation under a bus in order to retain power he can't manage or control. This hypocrisy is disgusting and is EXACTLY AND PRECISELY 180 degrees from anything that Harper and the gang promised regarding trying to create a functioning Parliament after two elections. If anyone is so rabid in their political affiliations in this nation as to not be able to see through this SPIN then they should be forbade from voting due to their WILLFUL IGNORANCE. Whatever the sins of the Liberals are from the past the only reason why the Conservatives are upset about them is that THEY WERE NOT THE ONES PROFITING FROM THE CORRUPTION. In fact there is not ONE SINGLE Parliamentarian currently sitting in the House of Commons who is deserving or worthy of the seat they're all a bunch of corrupt and twisted self seeking adventurers looking to secure their position in the power structure and feather their own nests at the expense of us poor buggers who gave them the opportunity to do so.
THROW THEM ALL OUT ON THEIR BUTTS! VOTE FOR INDEPENDANTS OR ALTERNATIVE PARTIES LIKE the Canadian Action Party (C.A.P.) and save this country from these elitist parasites!
THis story has to be a conservative spin doctors dream. The Repubs ran such great campaings in 2008 that they lost the house, senate and white house.
so if repubs support iggy that can only mean that iggy loses bad
Layton should be pushing this.
What a great suggestion... except for the small detail that he already has been doing so.
Is this for real? I don't think it is, I think it is genius lefty satire.
This smells to me like a massive troll.
Enough to do me proud!
Just wanted to point out that the website is hosted by the exact same name-server as Conservative blogger Stephen Taylor's anti-coalition website from last December, Canadians4Democracy.ca.
I was wondering if was the Cons trying to put a spanner in the works, which is why I indicated from the get go, there is no difference between Harper and Iggy.
Thanks for the proof!
Stephen Harper is still PM today because Ignatieff's very first decision as leader was to leave him there.
Scott is right. That Liberal voters know about their leader's 79 vote record of having propped up Harper for nothing in return is in large part due to Jack Layton reminding all of us of it.
See Exhibit A, your honour ...
And as for the uncanny similarity between Iggy's views and that of Harper & the Republican Party, New Democrats have not exactly been silent on that matter either ... check the facts with the Harper/Ignatieff Fact Check Challenge!
This morning's big "release" on the site was a clip of Ignatieff from an academic speech in Ireland, where he claimed that George Bush should be included in the list of Americans promoting human rights, like Eleanor Roosevelt. Last week Stephen Taylor was pushing a Canada Day clip of Iggy talking about how Americans should take pride in their country. Sounds like the same source to me.
Sure it is.. I bet he's having fun.
It's fun for everyone...who isn't a Liberal! 
It's quite clear that every time the Liberals vote with the Conservatives, it erodes confidence in the Liberals, and denigrates the Liberal brand. When Martin was PM after the 2004 election he had to get the Conservatives to vote with him several times, which, it could be argued, cost the Liberals the election in 2006. Dion continued supporting the Conservatives, which cost the Liberals even more.
I believe that the Conservative core is now stronger than that of the Liberals, which puts the Conservatives within easier striking distance of a majority government than the Liberals.
This trend is probably good for the NDP in the long run, as progressive voters should (might?) say "screw it I might as well vote for a Party which has no qualms about being progressive".
I also think that if the NDP dropped the "New" and became Canada's Democrats, the Liberals could be squeezed out of existence, or into a "centrist" splinter group like the British Liberal Democrats or the German FDP.
Which puts us about 100 years behind Britain & Germany, but I guess.. better late than never.
There's another way in which Michael Ignatieff is looking a bit Republican these days.
Are you concerned about the environmental effects of Alberta oilsands projects? Iggy isn't.
Ignatieff has been touting the oil sands for several months now. In January, he told business students in Montreal that "the stupidest thing you can do (is) to run against an industry that is providing employment for hundreds of thousands of Canadians, and not just in Alberta, but right across the country."
He told the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce that "no other country in the world would toss away such an advantage with a moratorium or a pause or a stoppage." In Vancouver he described the oil sands as "awe-inspiring."
Liberals are more toxic in Alberta than the tar sands
Iggy is not in power and Harper is the one promoting the Black Hole from Hell. But this is cute its like the Pot calling the Kettle Black. I also though the news that real estate is on the rise and the economy has recovered on the local news another diversion from the real problems at hand as Canada is not an island unto itself.
Sure houses are selling as immigrants are packed in like sardines on the buses and in cities as unemployment continues to climb while governments busily cut services. It sounds like more hot air for a housing bubble as unemployment rises to 9% and there sure are a lot more people than jobs.
I'm thinking a fall election as the Liberals give the Conservatives a shake up as the worker isn't buying their rhetoric and the workers wants jobs that pay and they want them yesterday or help until the economy shows real signs of recovery as the world economy is still very much feeling the pain.
My hunch is that the Cons are behind it, but I would be delighted to discover some Dipper created it. the NDP should take credit for it.
Here's the website: http://www.republicansforignatieff.com/
Republicans for Ignatieff website could be dismissed as a partisan prank, but some of it is accurate
Clips highlight Liberal leader's fondness for the U.S. and less-than Liberal positions taken over the years
The site might have wound up being dismissed as a partisan prank were it not for the fact some of the stuff it puts forward is accurate and revealing of positions that conflict with traditional Liberal thought.
For example, Ignatieff's strong defence of the highly polluting oil sands -- months after Liberals were promoting a national carbon tax -- was an unexpected Liberal position.
Equally novel was Ignatieff's backing for the Iraq war in 2003 (later withdrawn), when Jean Chretien's Liberals stood against it.
And, in the past, Ignatieff has written that he considers state actions such as indefinite detention and coercive interrogation to be "lesser evils" in the war on the greater evil of terrorism -- which runs counter to Liberal positions on human rights.
Of course, pre-politics, Ignatieff pursued jobs that led him to broadcast his musings. If all Stephen Harper's past inclinations were similarly documented, surprising positions also might be discovered.
But there's no question that the spotlight on Ignatieff's controversial statements clearly is bad advertising for Liberal voters. Unhappily for the party, Republicans for Ignatieff declares it's "just getting started," suggesting it could become an ongoing annoyance for Ignatieff.
Alas, in the unpoliced world of the Internet, it's inevitable that such rogue platforms will be created. That said, there's nothing stopping "grassroots Democrats" from deviously fashioning a similar website in celebration of Harper.
After all, with the stimulus spending in his last budget, the PM has shown himself to be a pretty liberal public spender.
Moreover, he has aligned himself with U.S. President Barack Obama in pitching a carbon cap-and-trade scheme, which could spell trouble for folks in Harper's political home constituency of Alberta.
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Republicans+Ignatieff+website+could+dis...
Hah!
Who says the Cons are not brilliant with this website. Don't like 'em but gotta give credit where credit is due.
Author Denis Smith says Michael Ignatieff caters to the powerful
By Charlie Smith
The publication of Michael Ignatieff's True Patriot Love: Four Generations in Search of Canada coincides with the release of a hard-hitting book, Ignatieff's World Updated: Iggy Goes to Ottawa (James Lorimer & Company Ltd., $19.95), that suggests the Liberal leader "lacks democratic restraint".
The author, retired political scientist Denis Smith, also declares that Ignatieff "promotes himself as a tough guy-which may not always be a bluff".
"Ignatieff places himself squarely in the Canadian progressive, reformist tradition," Smith writes. "But his predisposition towards the interests of the powerful belies that claim. His judgment is too often the victim of his ambition."
In a phone interview with the Georgia Straight from Ottawa, Smith said he wrote the first edition of the book, Ignatieff's World: A Liberal Leader for the 20th Century?, which was published in 2006, because Ignatieff has demonstrated "very strong support for an aggressive American imperial policy in the world, especially after 9/11". Smith added that he felt that Ignatieff's writings were not well known in Canada.
"There are always limits on what a country can do," Smith said, "but to become prime minister with such a background-a strong commitment to American leadership, and not just benign American leadership but destructive American leadership in the world-I think would be very dangerous for Canada."
The new edition includes a section called "Tough Guy", which covers Ignatieff's time in Ottawa leading up to his rise to party leader last December and the introduction of the federal budget in January.
Ignatieff was a strong supporter of NATO's aerial bombardment of Serbia in 1999 to curb repression of ethnic Albanians in what was then the Yugoslavian province of Kosovo. He was later appointed to the Independent International Commission on Kosovo, which concluded that the NATO attack was "illegal but legitimate".
It was illegal because it occurred in the absence of authorization from the UN Security Council. The commission recommended the creation of a "principled framework" to assess "humanitarian intervention" to prevent imminent human-rights catastrophes. Ignatieff was also a member of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, which advised then-UN secretary-general Kofi Annan to redefine "humanitarian intervention" as "the responsibility to protect".
"The document moved beyond the Kosovo Report in defining a humanitarian right of intervention, and with each step, the definition became more elaborate," Smith writes. However, he added, it had no legal force, and some on the left have criticized this doctrine as a means to justify preemptive wars without the authorization of the UN Security Council.
Smith told the Straight that he thinks Ignatieff is a "good writer" but a "bad historian" because he didn't provide sufficient context in his recent books and essays on U.S. imperial policies. To support this point, Smith claimed that Ignatieff regularly visited hot spots and described displaced people or victims of wars, but he wasn't very interested in looking at the ethnic Albanians' military arm, the Kosovo Liberation Army. Similarly, Smith said, Ignatieff wasn't keen to scrutinize claims by the George W. Bush and Tony Blair governments in 2003 that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
"He does side with those in authority-the most powerful that he wants to influence or he wants to impress," Smith claimed.
The book also reviews Ignatieff's views on torture. The Liberal leader has expressed support for "coercive interrogation" with "permissible duress" but emphasizes that he opposes torture.
"Permissible duress might include forms of sleep deprivation that do not result in lasting harm to mental or physical health, together with disinformation and disorientation (like keeping prisoners in hoods) that would produce stress," Ignatieff wrote in his book The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror (Penguin Canada, 2004).
Smith said the way in which Ignatieff seized the Liberal leadership-without appointing an interim leader-is consistent with what he has written about the use of power since 2000. "My guess is it comes from his ambition to exercise power-not with any particular end in mind, but simply desire to hold power," he said.
Smith added that this doesn't mean he supports Prime Minister Stephen Harper, whom he described as "quite objectionable as prime minister".
http://www.straight.com/article-215406/author-denis-smith-says-ignatieff...
North Report- it is precisely because I think it is not impossible for him to become PM that we should be very concerned about this.
Another thing we need to remember- as I have said before a government is in part the dynamic of the house and politics. The nightmare scenario would be an Ignatief government in front of a right-wing neo-con opposition with a weakened NDP. All this could happen. Then there would be no strong opposition to right wing policies with the Cons only asking for more. There is little more right wing than a rightwing Liberal government because the left of centre opposition voice the Liberals bring is gone. The fact that the Liberals speak from the left (usually) when in opposition and govern from the right creates a dynamic that makes them more dangerous in government than even the Cons at times. They may lack some of the particular right-wing excesses of a Con government but they also lack the oversight and opposition. The trade-off is often worse than a Con government. This is why Paul Martin could cut deeper into the safety net than Mulroney ever could. The Liberals opposed Mulroney and the Reform party asked Martin for more. You say not to underestimate Harper. Do not underestimate Ignatief or fail to see just how dangerous he is. He has even less social concern than Paul Martin.
These Liberals scares me, because every time one of them opens their mouth it makes me think Harper is getting closer to his majority.
Ignatieff spokeswoman Jill Fairbrother said yesterday "the only people who could benefit (from the site) would be the Conservatives."
http://www.edmontonsun.com/news/canada/2009/07/15/10136696-sun.html
With 3576 visits to this thread, there would seem to be an amazin' interest in the name Republican . The Cons' propaganda mill works overtime.
Ignatieff spokeswoman Jill Fairbrother said yesterday "the only people who could benefit (from the site) would be the Conservatives."
That's a ridiculous statement. I have to assume that the Conservatives behind this are hoping to see some Liberal votes bleed to the NDP -- or conversely, to stop some NDP votes from bleeding back to the Liberals (and that happens to help the Conservatives in some seats). There's no way that anyone who is concerned that Michael Ignatieff is too right-wing and too close to the Americans is going to vote Conservative as an alternative. On the other hand, I know a lot of Conservatives who prefer to debate with New Democrats (in the House or elsewhere), because debating a Liberal is like trying to nail jello to a wall (so maybe that's what's in it for them).
With 3576 visits to this thread, there would seem to be an amazin' interest in the name Republican . The Cons' propaganda mill works overtime.
Good observation George.
The interest is huge, and most Canadians know very little about the new Liberal leader. I think they are about to find out.
Keep an eye on what is happening South of us to Cheney, as it will reverberate here. We are seeing an identical pattern here when the Cons discredited Dion. The Liberals are in the glue now as they panicked, and rushed Ignatieff in without a lot of thought. Now they are beginning to pay the price. And I'm sure this is just the beginning.
How do you know there was 3576 visits to this thread?
Bush = Ignatieff = Harper. There is no difference between them. Layton should be pushing this.
You forgot Obama.
How do you know there was 3576 visits to this thread?
Click on Forum Topics
Click on Canadian Politics
Scroll down to the thread and look at Views, and actually there are now 3,651 hits
On the other hand, I know a lot of Conservatives who prefer to debate with New Democrats (in the House or elsewhere), because debating a Liberal is like trying to nail jello to a wall (so maybe that's what's in it for them).
Bwahaha. I think Iggy could be a throwback to the Southern Dixiecrats. Scary as hell.
But, again, doesn't anyone else feel uncomfortable about this scale of propaganda by those to the right of Vlad the Impaler?
The number of visits to this thread is now 3688. "Interest" has fallen off sharply. Perhaps negative comments will have that effect?
Now that is funny!
Go Iggy......
At 3723, it's clear that whoever posted this elsewhere has had second thoughts in leaving it for the dumbed-down to read on.
I find a country ridden with U.S. style propaganda, and so vulnerable, far, far from humorous.
It's not as though any of this is either new information or made-up information...and it puts it all in one place. If the Conservatives did do it, it's just unfortunate that someone on the left didn't get there first.
Anything is grist for the old propaganda mill, and the frightening effect of the mill on the Great Unread matters diddly squat?
And "the left" is equally capable of this in your mind?
Interesting acceptance of the technology, warts and all.
It's not as though any of this is either new information or made-up information...and it puts it all in one place. If the Conservatives did do it, it's just unfortunate that someone on the left didn't get there first.
My sentiments exactly.
Remember that website, was it put up by NDP Easterners, about Paul Martin.
And the Cons conquer because they can play upon the emotions of the dumbed-down without compunction , any concern for truth, in the fashion of the used-car salesman (the next lowest social category to "politicians" in popular opinion).
The Cons are going all out with these tactics it seems, and they worked before.
The Tories have already sent mailouts to homes in the area attacking Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.
Today, the national director of the Liberal Party of Canada will be in town to start a fundraising trek.
This summer is less about schmoozing and more about serious posturing, it seems.
"Kingston is going to be a very interesting riding to watch in the next election," said Kathy Brock, an expert on federal politics from Queen's University.
"The Conservatives do believe they have a fighting chance here. They're going to put resources into this riding."
They already have.
Late last month, hundreds of households in Kingston opened their mailboxes to find a small, black-and-white pamphlet from an Alberta Conservative MP.
"How long was Michael Ignatieff away from Canada?" it read. "Answer: 34 years!"
It ended with the slogan from Tory television ads that Ignatieff is "just visiting" Canada to become prime minister.
This is stll the most popular article in Vancouver's large weekly circulation, the Georgia Straight - check their website.
Republicans for Ignatieff site could boost the NDP and the Bloc
http://www.straight.com/article-241302/republicans-ignatieff-site-could-boost-ndp-and-bloc?#
Taylor is such a jerk. It would not be a surprise to hear he is behind this:
Republicans for Ignatieff plot thickens
http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2009/08/republicans-for-ignatieff-plot-thick...
I'm changing my mind on this. I think it's someone affiliated with the Conservatives, but not Taylor. Although RepublicansForIgnatieff.ca shares the same DNS Name Server as Canadians4Democracy.ca, I erred in thinking the latter domain name was Stephen Taylor's. It wasn't ... it was operated by the Conservative Party itself according to a David Akin et al. story at the time.
I think they've arranged with some of their American friends to run the thing, so it can't be tracked as a party expense or eventually an election expense. But I don't think it's Taylor anymore. Although by now, I think they're all having great fun exploiting the confusion.
I'm not surprised that Americans would be falling all over themselves to support Ignatieff. Layton is the only true Canadian leader on the federal scene today.
Looks like this was a flash in the pan.
