Inspired by Olaf (or Charlie, if you smack his ass....) lets consider a world where M. Ignatieff wins the leadership of the Liberal party.
In that world, (which may yet come to pass) we have to ponder that most important question, who will come out on top? Who will beat their opponent in the contest to come?
No, not an election. Nothing that irrelevant.
A much more entertaining notion. Who would be king of the verbal wrestling ring? Will it be Harper, with his sly wit and his ability to twist painful fiction from inconvenient truth? Or will it be Ignatieff, with his cerebral ways, his air of superiority, his mocking pretentiousness?
As much as I would like to see Harper taken to the mat, felled by a linguistic pile-driver, my money is on Harper.
Its not that Ignatieff does not have the necessary wit or sharp tongue; he has that in spades. But so does Harper. And most importantly, Harper knows how to play dirty. When faced with a fact, he spins a plausible falsehood. When pinned by truth, he blames others, or sues them. He diverts and distracts and wearies his opponent, and then; grabs the metal chair from outside the ring and clocks his foe when the ref isn't looking. I don't beleive Ignatieff is truly prepared for the battle he must fight.
So faithful reader, on whom would you place your money? The stern and acerbic Ignatieff, or the sly and dextrous Harper?