I’m not sure what comment is more appropriate here.

A) THE IRONY.

B) I always knew Americans were interesting in warmongering and torturing.

But then, I am imfamous for completely misunderstanding the bulk of other people. I don’t get the Common Man at all; not even one bit.

“Gerard Kennedy is fairly young and charismatic.” – IIRC, he’s also not bilingual, which is a death sentence in the Liberal Party.

” Ken Dryden is a bonafide Canadian icon and an amazingly eloquent speaker and writer.” – yes, but can he covert that into votes? I don’t think so. He’s never really been put into a position of any authority in all his time in parliment, so it implies that he’s just there to bring in some kind of “Star power”

“I don’t like Michael Ignatieff, but even he would probably be a serviceable party leader, and the man can speechify like a demon.” – Except that in his initial foray into the political arena, he made so many rookie errors that he went from “Future powerhouse” to “Oh God, no, just stop.” Nevermind that his politics are a little futher right than most Liberals are comfortable with.

I don’t understand the Rae thing either. It’d be like asking John Tory to run for the Federal Conservatives at this point.

Would comparing him to Hillary Clinton (if she actually wins a pyrrhic victory for the nomination) be too much of a stretch, from your description? Rae to Clinton, that is. Not the puppy.

That is a very cute puppy.

Speaking as an American wholly ignorant of Canadian politics (start warmongering and torturing, you’ll get our attention), is Michael Ignatieff the same guy as the writer/historian. Or is that a totally different Bizarro world Ignatieff?