Take Yer Pick
Too bad, a one-on-one debate between Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the-man-who-would-be prime minister, Michael Ignatieff, would be a compelling event to witness. Such a match-up would inspire Canadians to make the time to ensure they missed not one single word, not one accusation or counter-accusation spilling from the lips of either of the two men.
Said to be well matched as far as intelligence is concerned, their reactions to one another would be a fascinating experience for the electorate to witness. But it is likely not to be. In a moment of bravado that seemed to swiftly evaporate, the Prime Minister, who proffered the challenge, now seems to think better of it. A sense of self-preservation kicked in alas, in the consideration of how vital it is in the next few weeks to commit no errors.
The electorate, particularly in Quebec, is very quick to take offence. One off-message bit of frank carelessness is all it takes. Umbrage is swift to follow, and with it the collapse of potential votes. Although in the case of Quebec, despite his most earnest attempts, the Prime Minister has been incapable of making any headway; Quebecois are just too given to their belligerent entitlements.
The two candidates for the office of prime minister have much in common, not the least of which commonality is their party platforms on various issues, even though each makes every attempt to demonstrate just how different they are. But the simple fact is that the Liberals' agenda is not all that far off from the Conservatives' even though they cannot afford to make it all that obvious.
And personally, they reflect to some degree, many similarities, quite uncannily. Height, eye colour, astrological sign, domestic pet preferences, number of offspring, music (although one listens, while the other is an accomplished player), favourite film choice, declared inspiration (wives), pastimes. True, these are superficial and superfluous similarities.
But this one is not: each is determined they he and he alone represents the best choice for trusted and capable leader of this great country. One has amply demonstrated his capability, the other yearns to do the same. Who would you pick, the tried-and-true or the also-ran?
Said to be well matched as far as intelligence is concerned, their reactions to one another would be a fascinating experience for the electorate to witness. But it is likely not to be. In a moment of bravado that seemed to swiftly evaporate, the Prime Minister, who proffered the challenge, now seems to think better of it. A sense of self-preservation kicked in alas, in the consideration of how vital it is in the next few weeks to commit no errors.
The electorate, particularly in Quebec, is very quick to take offence. One off-message bit of frank carelessness is all it takes. Umbrage is swift to follow, and with it the collapse of potential votes. Although in the case of Quebec, despite his most earnest attempts, the Prime Minister has been incapable of making any headway; Quebecois are just too given to their belligerent entitlements.
The two candidates for the office of prime minister have much in common, not the least of which commonality is their party platforms on various issues, even though each makes every attempt to demonstrate just how different they are. But the simple fact is that the Liberals' agenda is not all that far off from the Conservatives' even though they cannot afford to make it all that obvious.
And personally, they reflect to some degree, many similarities, quite uncannily. Height, eye colour, astrological sign, domestic pet preferences, number of offspring, music (although one listens, while the other is an accomplished player), favourite film choice, declared inspiration (wives), pastimes. True, these are superficial and superfluous similarities.
But this one is not: each is determined they he and he alone represents the best choice for trusted and capable leader of this great country. One has amply demonstrated his capability, the other yearns to do the same. Who would you pick, the tried-and-true or the also-ran?
Labels: Canada, Human Relations, Politics of Convenience
posted by Pieface | 6:50 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home