Thursday, August 31, 2006

Media begins to help clarify Ignatieff's positions... on everything

Reading the Georgia Straight today helped shed a little more light on the stances Michael Ignatieff has taken on various issues.

WesternGrit has read "Blood and Belonging", and "The Lesser Evil", so I had a pretty good idea of what the non-distorted views expressed by this candidate are... Still, it seems the general public had been getting a lot of blarney from various sources, about what Mr. Ignatieff really stood for. Having read his books, I was surprised at how slanted certain opinions of him are.

It was refreshing today to read the Georgia Straight's editorial. As Liberals we owe it to our party to ensure that no-one who could possibly be leader be desparaged in such a malicious manner that it hampers our party's ability to win an election - or to grow in the future.

As Liberals we need to ensure that we all listen to our candidates carefully, and make well-informed, wise choices. Several of the folks running for our leadership would make better leaders than Stephen Harper. They all paint some part of a greater Liberal vision - be in left, center-left, or pure "centrist". WE - as a party - need to ensure that all parts of that greater liberal/Liberal vision are allowed to be at the table, and are part of a broad coalition of ideas that will lead to the defeat of the neo-Cons and their portly leader.

Be we supporters of Kennedy, Ignatieff, Dion, Dryden, Fry, Bryson - or any other candidate - let's ensure that we consider the party 1st and foremost. A leadership campaign should not do damage to a new leader, or the party. It should, however, create the membership and momentum that is needed to defeat a terrible government.

1 comment:

Cerberus said...

Bravo and well said.

Like him or not, discount him because he doesn't speak in politicalspeak or soundbites (and thereby opens himself to be twisted by Conservatives or detractors) or not, but what does the endless attack on the frontrunner tell us about who should be chosen instead of him? If party members decide they don't want him, how do we decide who we do want if all we have are attacks focused on one man?

As Rae and Ignatieff (and I'm sure others) have said, we may be in the middle of a leadership campaign, but as Harper has demonstrated through government spending and announcements, we are also already in the middle of a federal election.