(Michael Ignatieff) is like John Kerry in 2004, unable to shed the burden of having backed George W. Bush. Given the clarity of Canadians on much of post-9/11 politics, Ignatieff is even less likely to win as Harper Lite than Kerry could as Bush Lite.
This is made all the more relevant given the many domestic implications of the war on terror.
Ignatieff was mostly mute during the controversy over Suaad Hagi Mohamud. Her lawyer, Raoul Boulakia, told me that the Liberals under Ignatieff have been reluctant to touch any case that might turn out to be unpopular. "Once they hear the word security, they run for cover. They don't want to touch it."
That was precisely the problem with Kerry Democrats – cowed into silence on key issues when Americans were beginning to crave principled stands.
So we end up with the irony that while Barack Obama is Canadianizing America – health care, human rights, civil liberties, etc. – Harper is stuck in Bush's policies, and the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada cannot articulate a vision of Canada in tune with the times.
All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.
Thursday, September 03, 2009
The reviews are in
Haroon Siddiqui:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment