Susan Riley: Were You Out of the Country or Out of the Loop?

With all due respect Ms Riley, your article of" another" Michael Ignatieff reinvention was not only blindly partisan but historically incorrect.

Suggesting that Canadians voted for Stephen Harper because of his policies is dead wrong. Polls conducted after the 2006 election, showed that the majority of Canadians voted for Harper " to punish the Liberal Party for the Quebec sponsorship scandal..." It was not his policies or promises, few of which he kept.

In 2008 his success was due to scaring Canadians away from the Carbon Tax.

But if we're talking reinventions, how about this guy? Remember him?



Or maybe you remember this guy:

Stephen Harper has been able to "reinvent himself" into the appearance of someone who is prime ministerial, largely due the fact that he never really speaks to anyone. Everything he does is well choreographed. No one gets near him ... no questions .... no flying blind.

And he has a full time image consultant, paid for by us to make sure that every minuscule detail is handled:

It turns out that taxpayers are picking up the tab for Prime Minister Stephen Harper's personal primper. After two days of ducking media and opposition questions, the Conservatives finally revealed Wednesday that Michelle Muntean is on Harper's government staff. But the revelation raises two more big questions: How much is she being paid? And why is there no government record of her employment. Harper has been travelling with his personal image adviser for major domestic and international events ...

So if you don't like Michael Ignatieff that's fine. If your allegiance is with Harper, that's fine too. But it's a journalist's job to chronicle history, not rewrite it.