[Scape]

link

Quote:

What on Earth possessed Harper yesterday to challenge Iggy to a duel? And less than 24 hours later refuse to show up? And then lie about the incident?

Here's Harper's "explanation" in Halifax today for why he's turning chicken in revoking his own challenge yesterday to Ignatieff for a one-on-one debate:

We were open to all kinds of options. Our first preference was a direct debate with the leader of the coalition. Mr. Ignatieff insisted that his first preference was to have his coalition partners with him at the debate. That’s the format that was proposed. We’ve accepted it.

We've learned - or re-learned - these past few days how hard Harper has worked to rewrite the history of his many flirtations with a coalition of opposition parties including his own to deny power to the party winning the most seats. We've heard less about his climbdowns on writing to Ralph Klein with a brainwave on Alberta separatism (the scurrilous "firewall" letter of which Mr. H no longer speaks), and that Belgium, sight unseen by Harper, has a better form of government than Canada (still without a government a year after its most recent election, there's talk in Brussels of the country splitting up on ethnic lines as the former Czechoslovakia did); and JIm Flaherty's transports of admiration for a now-insolvent Ireland's ultra-low corporate-tax regime, which should be applied post haste to to Canada. The Tories forget all these things, and the MSM, appreciating that people change and ideas are in flux, hasn't dwelt on them.

And that, as an incident like this shows, was wrong. Since we've not challenged Harper on his past, we're all condemned to relive it. In the fake costing of 65 jet-fighter planes (Harper cost, $17 billion; real cost, $29 billion) to the non-costing of new and expanded prisons that would be required by Harper's proposed tougher sentencing guidelines. (The outside estimates are roughly $9 billion.) It was a vote on that contempt of the people's house, and not the budget, that brought this government down last Friday.

But this episode is astonishing, a Harper rewrite of events that unfolded just yesterday. To the question of how far Harper will go in insulting the voters, there is no apparent answer.

Soon after Harper suggested the notion yesterday of squaring off with Iggy alone in a televised debate, Iggy's immediate response in fact was:

A one-on-one debate? Any time, any place.

Iggy tweeted that response to the world, aware of the consequences of backing out.

Harper or his war room quickly decided the leaders' hustings challenge of a one-on-one debate was not such a great idea. So within hours, Harper was pulling back his own idea, in the most disengenuous way.

Harper yesterday tweeted Ignatieff:

Curiously, my team proposed 1:1 to TV consortium today; however, your team did not speak up.

That is, excuse me, horse dung. The "teams" take their orders from the leaders. If the teams were tied up in logistical knots about an agreed-upon mano-a-mano, they'd just have to figure it out. Because their leaders were on record agreeing to a duel, and voters give a rat's ass about logistics.

Each would invite accusations of cowardice if he backed down. So Harper has tried his best to depict Ignatieff as being the one to back out of a one-on-one debate.

And that's a lie.

Kinsella dumps all over Harper today as a "chicken."

It's worse. In this incident, Harper has shown himself to be cowardly and a liar.

I don't use either word lightly. I admonished Duceppe for his Day 2 labelling of Harper as liar for distorting the intent of the notorious 2004 letter signed by Harper, Duceppe and Layton, making themselves available for the G-G's consideration as a coalition government seeking to deny Martin the chance to lead a minority government. There's enough wiggle room in the wording of that document to make "liar" uncalled for.

The PM's conduct yesterday and today are different. The PM lied to Canadians. A bald-faced lie, and not about the actual intent of an arcane document seven years ago. But on the question of who said what when in recent hours about a challenge to a duel - something any voter can relate to.

I don't get it. Partisan sentiment aside, what Harper and Ignatieff said is on videotape and printed-out tweets. Common sense says you can't try the gambit of the cheatin' good 'ol boy of C&W songs, who, contronted by his wife, asks: "Who ya gonna believe, me or your cheatin' eyes?"

For the umpteeth time in a campaign not a week old, Harper has stepped on his own message. But it's Week 1 and no one's paying attention. At least that's one of the truisms of the game. I have a feeling, though, that this item has legs, as Variety would say.

If the folks at Grit ad agency Red Leaf aren't splicing up footage right now for ads running during the NHL playoffs they should be fired.

Update

No name yet for the Tory campaign plane. Scott Feschuk suggests Chicken Wings.

Wow.

[Gunnair]

Shamefull... really.

[dino_bobba_renno]

The worst part of it isn't even mentioned in Scapes article:

Quote:

“We were open to all kinds of options. Our first preference was a direct debate with the leader of the coalition. Mr. Ignatieff insisted that his first preference was to have his coalition partners with him at the debate,” Harper told reporters during a campaign stop in Halifax.

Just unf%$@ beleivable. All he had to do was just leave it alone, it was all ready in everyones mind. But no, he has to come out looking like a third grader.

[bootlegga]

The real reason Harper won't debate Iggy;

Attachment:

balls.JPG [ 18.39 KiB | Viewed 341 times ]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/61267535@N03/5578307316/

[RUEZ]

Wow, a chicken and a liar. Holy moly.

[dino_bobba_renno]

You know, I was all most ready to jump to his defense until I read where he said that. There's a right way and a wrong way of going about things. That was all most like watching someone trying to eat a popsickle through their bum.

[sandorski]

dino_bobba_renno wrote:

You know, I was all most ready to jump to his defense until I read where he said that. There's a right way and a wrong way of going about things. That was all most like watching someone trying to eat a popsickle through their bum.

Nah, that's just good Porn!

[ShepherdsDog]

Gunnair used to do that until he got brain freeze.

[FieryVulpine]

One less reason for me to vote Conservative.

That and the local candidate is a little too religious for my tastes.

[DrCaleb]

Good article Scape. Reminds me of all the reasons Harper is not a conservative.

[OnTheIce]

Regardless of how many feet Harper has in his mouth now, it's kinda sad what our political situation had turned into here in Canada.

[Yogi]

Harper suggested a 1 on 1 debate, then backed out!

Attachment:

flipping-the-bird.gif [ 5.61 KiB | Viewed 223 times ]

[kenmore]

The weasel backed out of one on one debates. ...

[dino_bobba_renno]

kenmore wrote:

The weasel backed out of one on one debates. ...

Kenmore, what on earth are you going to do when the Liberals finally win and Harper retires, which is just a matter of when not if.

[Curtman]

Open letter to Stephen Harper

Quote:

Dear Mr. Harper:

I am writing about the one-on-one debate that you challenged me to two days ago.

You will recall that when you issued your challenge, I immediately responded, accepting it with enthusiasm.

As you stated, there are only two people who can be Prime Minister after May 2nd: you or me. Canadians truly deserve to see us go face to face in a contest of ideas, values and very different visions for our country. That is what democracy is all about.

Like many Canadians, I was disappointed and puzzled when you reversed your commitment, and tried to back out yesterday. I don’t understand why you have gone back on your word, or why you would wish to disappoint Canadians.

However, it is not too late for you to rectify the situation. Since our original exchange on Wednesday, many invitations to host the debate have come in from prestigious organizations across Canada. So there are any number of venues and times to choose from.

Perhaps I can make this easier for you. I will meet you at the time and place of your choosing. There is no need for complicated or convoluted debate formats. Just two podiums – and you and me. A true, honest-to-goodness battle of ideas and visions.

This is the kind of contest that Canadians are yearning for. I know because I have been meeting ordinary Canadians of all ages, backgrounds and political allegiances at events across Canada. It’s absolutely exhilarating. In fact, I would recommend that you try it.

In closing, I urge you to reconsider your reversal and stick to your word. I strongly believe our fellow Canadians deserve this chance to see the different visions of leadership between the only two people who can become prime minister of this country at the end of this election.

Sincerely,

Michael Ignatieff
Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada

I think that's why Harper only allows 5 questions per day. That's only 5 chances to stick his foot in his mouth.