In my opinion, just closing our eyes and putting blind faith in the "entitled messiah" Iggy does not reflect change. If all us Canadians from all different back grounds have come together, I would hope that we demand real change and not just what some consider as lesser of the two evils.
The Liberals under Iggy are infact "lesser of the two evils," when compared with the Cons.
Chretien was a good man and so was Martin. Dion was also a great guy. I could see any one them as a good viable option right now against Harper. But that is not the case.
Had Iggy been PM during the Iraq war, there is no doubt that Canada would have been involved in that war. No one denies that. (Now, Iggy has flip flopped and says he was wrong, but only after entering Canadian politics and figuring out that Canadians are infact against war; but that doesnt change the fact that Canadian lives would have been endangered had he been PM at the time)
He supported last year's Israeli war against Palestinians (operation cast lead that killed 1200 Palestinian civilians: hasn't changed his views on that)
He supported torture. (But now, he has changed his views after he realized canadians dont like people being tortured)
My point is why arent people considering all these facts when deciding whom to vote for, and instead are settling for the lesser of the two evils?
If you and your family were going on a cross canada tour on a tour bus, and had to hire a driver, and you had two choices: the first driver has a history of crashes, but says he has changed his ways now and besides has a fancy smile, dresses spiffily, talks articulately, and says he's of royal lineage. The driver's name is Ignatieff.
Another driver has a clean record. Nothing fancy--just likes to get his job done and says the only thing he cares about is to get you and your family safely across. His record clearly show him do that within provinces. The driver's name is Layton.
Which of the two drivers would you hire?
