Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
I actually agree with a lot of the points that Ignatieff puts forward here (and which are conspicuously absent from the first post!). He didn't come out and say Harper should be taken down, and that is it...he has some basis for thinking that:
He accused the government of failing to:
—
Manage the country’s finances. He pointed out that government estimates of this fiscal year’s deficit have ballooned to almost $60 billion from zero.
—
Protect Canadian citizens when they run into trouble abroad. Ignatieff implied a racist motive, charging that people with names like “Suaad Mohamud or (Abousfian) Abdelrazik . . . cannot count on the protection of the Canadian government.”
—
Get infrastructure funding flowing quickly. What little money has flowed, he said has gone disproportionately to Conservative ridings.
—
Provide a timely vaccine against the H1N1 flu virus.
—
Ensure a stable supply of medical isotopes amid a shortage that has delayed cancer and heart tests.
—
Defend Canada’s public health-care system against attacks in the United States.
— Review foreign takeovers of Canadian companies, like Nortel, Inco, Falconbridge, Stelco and Alcan.
I also have a feeling that if the only thing that changed was the names of the parties and the leaders that people on this board would be applauding this move and most of the issues he brings up as being the right thing to do.
|
I have a feeling that points 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 would significantly add to "ballooned deficit" thus making Ignatieff a hypocrite for the criticism in point1.