A while back, one of my commenters asked me why I had such a low opinion of Michael Ignatieff, the Liberal party “leader” here in Canada. The events of the last few weeks have demonstrated why my opinion of Ignatieff as “useless limpdick” is precisely correct.
Some background for non-Canadians. Things here right now are not exactly peachy, much like in the rest of the world. (We’re better off to an extent because our banks weren’t allowed under Canadian law to take the Debt-Gambling Plunge of Death ™ that the rest of the world’s banks so eagerly performed. Interestingly, the reason for this is because under Paul Martin, the then-government-leading Liberal party decided it was a bad idea, despite intense lobbying from the banks and the Tories – including Stephen Harper – to remove those restrictive laws. Why nobody mentions this any more is something I do not quite understand.)
Long story short: the Harper government claims that their stimulus spending is very successful. This is despite most of the stimulus spending actually having been used for capital investment or job creation or, you know, actual stimulus type things. That in turn is because the Harper Tories are frankly pretty shit at their jobs. Now, one of the ways government can spend money very efficiently to create immediate economic stimulus is to boost employment insurance benefits.1 Ignatieff wanted the government to boost EI payments, because the unemployed turn right around and spend the money and it makes the economy go wham. Harper did not want to boost EI payments, because then the government would be giving money to jobless people, and that makes Tories cry.
When Harper said this, Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe immediately said they’d vote no-confidence in the government again, because they hate the Tories like poison anyway and this was just another opportunity to make that point. Ignatieff, however, decided to play chicken with Stephen Harper and say “I want W, X, Y and Z or I will topple your government.” This was moronic, because there is absolutely nothing that Harper likes better than getting to have an election and blame other people for it. Ignatieff was essentially promising to give Stephen Harper what he loved best – or else!
Now this in and of itself would be questionable, but the bigger problem is that Ignatieff decided to play chicken without having the balls to go all the way with it. Because what happened? Stephen Harper said “no,” and Ignatieff caved. Caving is what Ignatieff does. He’s been doing it ever since he became the party leader. Partly he’s been doing it because his support within the party comes from the big Bay Street wing of the party that has whatever money the Liberals still have left, and they want things handled a Certain Way. But mostly he’s been doing it because he is, as previously stated, a useless limpdick who wants to be seen as “reasonable.” So he had a Big Secret Meeting with Harper, and came out and said that the Liberals would support the Tories.
Understand: ten days ago, the Liberals were steamrollering the Tories in Ontario and Quebec polls. (Which, for the Liberals, are really the only ones that matter; if they pick up seats it’s going to be in central Canada, not in the East or West.) Now they’re back to dead even when the country really doesn’t like Harper that much. And why is this?
It’s because Michael Ignatieff is a useless limpdick. Nobody wants to vote for a chickenshit, and Michael Ignatieff is the worst kind of political chickenshit. Stephen Harper isn’t, regardless of whatever other faults he may have. That’s why he survives.
Top comment: Looking at the comments, I can’t help but notice that even Canada’s failures will forever be looked upon as cheap imitations of U.S. failures. — Benman
- Here in Canada, we have “employment insurance” and welfare. The former is essentially something you pay into every month, and then if you lose your job you get some money for a while in place of a paycheque. The latter is classic welfare. What is being discussed here is employment insurance. [↩]
Related Articles
19 users responded in this post
Just for the record, here in the US, we have both employment insurance (we call it “unemployment” and employers must pay into it and then – for a while – it pays people who lose their jobs) and welfare.
Oh, and I’m jealous of the fact that your economy isn’t tanking as badly as ours. I should have moved to Canada years ago, when I was first considering it.
As Summer pointed out, we also have “un”-employment insurance here in the US, though it is paid by employers not by employees.
And it sounds like Ignatieff is pretty much a run of the mill US Democrat. Harper sounds like he’s cribbed the US Republican Party playbook from 1980 up through 2008 as well. Strange – why anyone would want to steal two losing playbooks from US politicians is completely beyond me.
I think you’ve set a record for the amount of times “Useless Limpdick” has been used in one blog post.
Could be worse. In Australia, we’re having an utterly inconsequential political crisis — ‘Utegate’. It’s the sorta thing that would be considered low-bore on a city council for a town with a five-digit population.
Oh, hey, I see someone made a Canadian clone of Harry Reid. How delightful.
Looking at the comments, I can’t help but notice that even Canada’s failures will forever be looked upon as cheap imitations of U.S. failures.
Ignatieff is biding his time until the fall, in the meantime to raise more money (and he’s raising a lot) and continue organizing.
Apologies for the cursing.
Godsdamn, could the liberals find another fucking Jean Chretien already? Seriously, after Dion and Michael ‘Torture’s okay as long as we only do it to brown people’ Ignatieff, Paul ‘Laughs like a little girl’-fucking Martin is starting to look like Winston-bleeding-Churchill.
The Liberals need to stop dicking around, join up with the NDP and the Bloc (who are pretty cool apart from the sovereignty thing) and take the Tories down (yes, I really liked the coalition idea from last winter).
Canadian politics are more fun after a pint.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IF2RYhNhBdw
I’d like to see a “What If” Ignatieff supported a vote of no confidence last week…
How sad to be longing for the days of Paul Martin.
Harper sounds like he’s cribbed the US Republican Party playbook from 1980 up through 2008 as well. Strange – why anyone would want to steal two losing playbooks from US politicians is completely beyond me.
And that, ladies and gentleman, is Canadian conservative politics in a nutshell.
Z,
Sounds like, despite the best efforts of Canadian advertising, Canada simply is no more capable of learning from the mistakes of the USA than the people of the USA are.
To me, its the moderates who are really the sickest people of any political system. These assholes sit in the middle and wait and wait for someone on either side of the political spectrum to not only make a stand for something important to that side but also make it “entertaining” for the moderates as well.
And by “entertaining”, I means someone usually has to either shoot someone or get shot themselves. Only then will the sociopathic moderate people feign interest long enough to get up any start talking about the issue at hand.
I mean look at the Christians. These people don’t care about the message of Christ unless they get to talk about how he got nailed to a block of wood and left to die first. If Christ didn’t die in some horrible fashion, no one would have cared about his message. IMO, Judas should be a saint to the moderate people of the world.
St Judas, harbinger of entertainment.
I’m sorry. I think I went off on two different tangents here and so I will stop now. I blame the cold medicine.
Sorry, I think it’s the extremists who’re more excited by the blood and guts, or at least they’re the ones who call for it at the drop of a hat and over the slightest thing. It’s not the fault of sensible people that the extremists’ incessant, coded raving sounds exactly, to take an example from another recent post here, an Us Weekly “Hot or Not” list.
Extremists are people who look at Eastern philosophy as unprincipled and immature: “YIN OR YANG! YIN OR YANG! CHOOSE NOW, FOREVER!”
Say, Eric S. Smith, are you the former “Left-Field Marshal” from the good ol’ days of trentu.general?
Lia: that would make you the Mad Praetor.
Back on topic, I don’t know that going to an election would have been the smart thing to do, anyway. It might have been doable if the Liberal policy shop had put out a detailed economic recovery plan of their own — seriously, what would they have campaigned on otherwise? Ignatieff’s personal charm?
Why *do* we call it unemployment insurance? Isn’t that a bit like buying “death insurance”?
Makes you think.
Hey Zenrage, I don’t think the moderates are the most inhuman, but I do think they’re the most baffling. They certainly get the most representation from our lukewarm candidates.
[…] under to any challenge Stephen Harper has put forth, mostly because Michael Ignatieff is a useless limpdick, but also because Ignatieff is firmly on the centre-right side of the Liberal Party and […]
You are forgetting something very important. Ignatieff knew Harper was going to have an election, because he admitted to voting non-confidence if he doesn’t win anyway. It was on the news yesterday. You should revise you article 😉