06-16-2004, 12:14 PM
I watched the English language debate last night. (I tried to watch the French one, but my unilingual husband couldn't handle it, and kept groaning and demanding translations. My French language skills were not up to simultaneous comprehension and translation without losing track of the topics, so I gave up.)
I am still disappointed by the lack of vision and leadership on Health Care displayed by all the leaders. They all just want to throw money into the black hole of response to heath problems without addressing any form of prevention.
What surprised and amused me was the remarkable performance of Gilles Duceppe. He was quite candid about the fact that his party will never lead a government of Canada. What this did, in effect, was free him to stay completely on topic when issues were being discussed. He asked good questions and broached policy issues that were deflected and/or avoided by the other leaders. Damn, but I wish he was not a Separatist. His poise, clarity, logic and leadership would make a fine Prime Minister.
A good example was the issue of Defence spending. He was clear that a Foreign Policy discussion has to precede any impulses at Defence spending to ensure that we spent our money on initiatives that matched our Policy initiatives. That was quite the contrast to the other three, particularly Mr. Harper, who just wants to throw money in that general direction.
On the subject of Charter rights, the leaders all reiterated the same thoughts they had broached before, leaving me with the same concerns I expressed earlier in this thread.
Unfortunately, the debate left me with the same dilemma I mentioned before. The devil I know or the devils I am not sure about?
What were your impressions?
I am still disappointed by the lack of vision and leadership on Health Care displayed by all the leaders. They all just want to throw money into the black hole of response to heath problems without addressing any form of prevention.
What surprised and amused me was the remarkable performance of Gilles Duceppe. He was quite candid about the fact that his party will never lead a government of Canada. What this did, in effect, was free him to stay completely on topic when issues were being discussed. He asked good questions and broached policy issues that were deflected and/or avoided by the other leaders. Damn, but I wish he was not a Separatist. His poise, clarity, logic and leadership would make a fine Prime Minister.
A good example was the issue of Defence spending. He was clear that a Foreign Policy discussion has to precede any impulses at Defence spending to ensure that we spent our money on initiatives that matched our Policy initiatives. That was quite the contrast to the other three, particularly Mr. Harper, who just wants to throw money in that general direction.
On the subject of Charter rights, the leaders all reiterated the same thoughts they had broached before, leaving me with the same concerns I expressed earlier in this thread.
Unfortunately, the debate left me with the same dilemma I mentioned before. The devil I know or the devils I am not sure about?
What were your impressions?
And you may call it righteousness
When civility survives,
But I've had dinner with the Devil and
I know nice from right.
From Dinner with the Devil, by Big Rude Jake
When civility survives,
But I've had dinner with the Devil and
I know nice from right.
From Dinner with the Devil, by Big Rude Jake