OTTAWA -- Former foreign affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy is urging Liberals to elect almost anybody but Michael Ignatieff as party leader on grounds the Toronto MP would rob the Liberals of a clear alternative to the Conservative government on the likeliest wedge issue of the next election: Canada's military mission in Afghanistan.
So Lloyd is on the Stop Iggy! band-wagon. He really lays into Ignatieff, calling him:
...a creation of "downtown Toronto powerbrokers" who does not understand liberalism, has no common touch and will lead the Liberals to another defeat by robbing them of a policy on Afghanistan that is distinct from the government.
All standard stuff, but I think the "no common touch" charge is especially worthy of note. Reading Iggy, watching him speak, its hard to see him able to connect with anyone possessing an IQ of less than 160 (and indeed I think his "rock-star" appeal among Canada's Intelligentsia is all to do with the fact that, finally, a "smart guy" has a chance to become PM).
But so much brainpower and so little good judgment! As Lloyd says:
"Afghanistan is going to be the wedge issue in the next election," Axworthy said. "Mr. Ignatieff has shown horrible, bad political judgment on that issue. And he wasn't just a supporter of the war in Iraq, he was an outspoken apologist and advocate for it. It would make it impossible for a Liberal party to provide an alternative to the Conservative government if he was leader."
Axworthy is a Rae supporter, but presumably the "conversation" he expects Iggy's leadership rivals to have before the convention might have Rae stepping aside to support Dion, who is probably the most viable anti-Iggy candidate available (and walking proof that intellectuals don't have to be stupid).
Well, I'm off to roam the Kawarthas.
7 comments:
That is a clever title. Only thing? I'd change it to "Lloyd says Iggy is Axworthy. I think it's a bit clearer that way. Otherwise, great job. I wish I'd thought of it.
As for Axworthy's assertions about this having an impact on the election, I doubt it. As I suggested on my own blog:
a) These kinds of issues don't have the impact on elections like some people think.
b) None of the other Liberals are offering an alternative to Harper in the way Axworthy thinks either.
However, being seen as Bush/Harper-lite on foreign policy is something I don't think a lot of Liberals can stomach regarding Iggy. I just wondered what took so long for someone to say so publicly.
its hard to see him able to connect with anyone possessing an IQ of less than 160
I wish people would drop these hyperbolic estimates of Ignatieff's intelligence, as though his thought were so deep and complex the ordinary person could have trouble understanding him.
Newsflash: he's no smarter than the rest of us, and his writings aren't especially complex or profound.
And even if he were possessed of the 'intellect off the richter scale' (Michael Valpy), it didn't stop the superbrain from being utterly wrong on Iraq, while the majority of ordinary Canadians (whom he scorned for it afterwards) were right.
I love it, now we've got "Anybody but Iggy, the sequel".
Another former Liberal cabinet minister, Lloyd Axworthy, has crawled out from the dark, damp basement of obscurity to gorge on the flesh of a Liberal leadership candidate.
Thank you for reposting this. Glad to see more liberals coming out swinging against Ignatieff.
Who thought party renewal wouldn't take a fight?
Gotta love it how Ti-Guy offers one sentence in response to my many, yet somehow I'm depicted as the troll.
I offered my analysis here. I offered a more detailed one on my blog. If you have a rebuttal for it, I'm more than ready to take you on, you coward troll.
Fact of the matter is that foreign policy, even foreign wars, don't have the impact on domestic politics that people like to think. Just ask Bush, Blair, and Howard. And that's Iraq. Next.
Thought of the title myself.
It's rather (hmm, how to put it nicely?) inconsistent of Lloyd Axworthy. He's been one of the main advocates of the "duty to protect" under international law.
Who does he think is going to enforce it? The US remains the largest contributor due to the huge capability gap.
Moreover, what's with the double-standard? Why is it ok for Lloyd but no one else? Is it because Lloyd has little connection to the US?
Although I keep reading the same drivel, thanks BigCityLib. Good blog, silly Lloyd.
Post a Comment