It must be tough, being a weekly disseminator of irony and satire, and Scott Feschuk does not hit my funny bone every week; but his comment on Ignatieff this week is without equal and should be included in the next edition of John Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations: " [Ignatieff’s] problem isn’t that he left Canada for 34 years. The problem is that his intellect failed to clear customs on the journey home” [my italics]. Priceless!
However, don’t blame Ignatieff for not taking the risk of asking us –the electorate –to think. He is surely mindful of the dictum that a politician’s first duty is to be elected, and remembering that no politician ever went wrong underestimating the intelligence of the average voter..
Friday, May 29, 2009
“Stephen Harper and Israel: No crass political calculation” –Ezra Levant, Star OPINION, May 29/09.
While not a Stephen Harper fan by any measure, I must agree with Ezra Levant that he deserved the Saul Hayes Award. His, and other’s criticisms, that the various human rights commissions excesses as “egregious” and “abusive”, is well founded.
While I agree in the main with Mr. Levant’s points in his article, I must question one aspect of Saul Hayes’ pronouncements, namely that “the Nazis had the right to wave a swastika.”
There is a limit to the freedom of expression. While you have a might have a right to make offensive statements that you believe is true; when these statements go beyond being opprobrious and incite hatred and violence toward another person or group, it is no longer worthy of protection. Anti-Semitism might have been latent in pre-war Germany, but the Nazi propaganda fuelled the visceral hatred that presaged and enabled the Holocaust. The Jews there hoped it would abate; not acerbate. But it didn’t –lest we forget.
While I agree in the main with Mr. Levant’s points in his article, I must question one aspect of Saul Hayes’ pronouncements, namely that “the Nazis had the right to wave a swastika.”
There is a limit to the freedom of expression. While you have a might have a right to make offensive statements that you believe is true; when these statements go beyond being opprobrious and incite hatred and violence toward another person or group, it is no longer worthy of protection. Anti-Semitism might have been latent in pre-war Germany, but the Nazi propaganda fuelled the visceral hatred that presaged and enabled the Holocaust. The Jews there hoped it would abate; not acerbate. But it didn’t –lest we forget.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
“What price our pseudo-empathy” –Steyn; Maclean’s June 8 issue.
Most of the time I feel like wringing Steyn’s neck, but I still keep reading his column. His incredible stew of hyperbolae, sarcasm, feigned indignation and pseudo-righteousness makes for good entertainment and considerable hilarity. His quip about Mariam Farahat is caustic and wonderfully stated. Unfortunately, it’s not a joke. His picking on Obama, not so much. But hey, we’ll take the good with the bad. Iconoclastic, contumacious contumely is rare in today’s politically correct media, especially written intelligently. Carry on, soldier!
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Jean sparks feeding frenzy”–Star May 27, 2009.
Let me see; we have a multitude of problems in this country, not least a dire economic situation and record deficit. So what should occupy the great unwashed masses, the Canadian public and the media? Well, of course, our Governor General dining on traditional seal meat with her Inuit brethren and fellow citizens in Rankin Inlet –these terrible “Neanderthals” who insist on continuing the age old tradition of hunting and eating seal.
Have these bleeding hearts ever been in an abattoir? Have the righteous Europeans seen how their native livestock is treated? It’s easier to focus on a small group of Newfies hunting seal for a living, or Inuit doing what comes naturally.
A Kudos to Jean for having the “guts” to eat raw seal liver. I could not do it. And I am certain the Inuit appreciated the gesture.
Hey, at least we got some International attention, eh?
Have these bleeding hearts ever been in an abattoir? Have the righteous Europeans seen how their native livestock is treated? It’s easier to focus on a small group of Newfies hunting seal for a living, or Inuit doing what comes naturally.
A Kudos to Jean for having the “guts” to eat raw seal liver. I could not do it. And I am certain the Inuit appreciated the gesture.
Hey, at least we got some International attention, eh?
Sunday, May 24, 2009
"NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT!!"
"I am completely ticked with this disruption by less than 3% of a city's population and every one a foreigner wanting the country they adopted to solve the problems of the country they left.
Round up every Tamil protester, provide transportation and send them back to "help out." Sort out your own mess. Don't blame the country you chose to live in because that country will not devote massive resources to your cause.
Go back home and speak out there against the atrocities that you see happening and help fight it from there. Sacrifice yourself, your sons, your daughters and your wealth, as little or as much as that might be. Put your money where your mouth is not our money and our families where your mouth is!!
Our ancestors stood up to carve out a way of living that we enjoy today. They did not go to your country, accept your hospitality then disrupt your way of life & demand you fix the injustices that they themselves would not address. Accept responsibility for allowing your country to fall into the chaotic state it is in today!! Don't shirk your own part and think we will arbitrarily shoulder your social debts."
Don Warnell
RCAF/1St Cdn Sigs Regiment/Airborne/4yrs attached to RCN east coast
Round up every Tamil protester, provide transportation and send them back to "help out." Sort out your own mess. Don't blame the country you chose to live in because that country will not devote massive resources to your cause.
Go back home and speak out there against the atrocities that you see happening and help fight it from there. Sacrifice yourself, your sons, your daughters and your wealth, as little or as much as that might be. Put your money where your mouth is not our money and our families where your mouth is!!
Our ancestors stood up to carve out a way of living that we enjoy today. They did not go to your country, accept your hospitality then disrupt your way of life & demand you fix the injustices that they themselves would not address. Accept responsibility for allowing your country to fall into the chaotic state it is in today!! Don't shirk your own part and think we will arbitrarily shoulder your social debts."
Don Warnell
RCAF/1St Cdn Sigs Regiment/Airborne/4yrs attached to RCN east coast
"NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT!!"
"I am completely ticked with this disruption by less than 3% of a city's population and every one a foreigner wanting the country they adopted to solve the problems of the country they left.
Round up every Tamil protester, provide transportation and send them back to "help out." Sort out your own mess. Don't blame the country you chose to live in because that country will not devote massive resources to your cause.
Go back home and speak out there against the atrocities that you see happening and help fight it from there. Sacrifice yourself, your sons, your daughters and your wealth, as little or as much as that might be. Put your money where your mouth is not our money and our families where your mouth is!!
Our ancestors stood up to carve out a way of living that we enjoy today. They did not go to your country, accept your hospitality then disrupt your way of life & demand you fix the injustices that they themselves would not address. Accept responsibility for allowing your country to fall into the chaotic state it is in today!! Don't shirk your own part and think we will arbitrarily shoulder your social debts."
Don Warnell
RCAF/1St Cdn Sigs Regiment/Airborne/4yrs attached to RCN east coast
Friday, May 22, 2009
A right to defend Sri Lanka – Bandula Jayasekara’s letter to the editor May 22/09.
I am surprised that The Star printed Mr. Jayasekara’s thoughtful letter, gainsaying your favourite Haroon Siddiqui. It has been my, and others’ experience that you never print any letters criticising you favourite columnist.
I have been astounded at the one-sided reporting from Sri Lanka of the media in general, but The Star in particular. I have no axe to grind here, but I truly resent people supporting terrorist organizations and insurrectionists, whether by sending them money or sitting down on the Gardiner Expressway.
Let’s see if you have the balls to print his one too.
I have been astounded at the one-sided reporting from Sri Lanka of the media in general, but The Star in particular. I have no axe to grind here, but I truly resent people supporting terrorist organizations and insurrectionists, whether by sending them money or sitting down on the Gardiner Expressway.
Let’s see if you have the balls to print his one too.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Rethinking the rules of citizenship –Martin Regg Cohn, Star May 19th
Rethinking the rules of citizenship –Martin Regg Cohn, Star May 19th
Mr. Cohn brings up several valid points in today’s column. I would like to make a few comments.
The earlier immigrants, after WW II, came here to escape from the ravages of war, and later, for economic reasons, to escape the poverty of their homelands. Many of them, Finns, Italians, Portuguese and others came with little or no education but with strong backs, a willingness to work hard, and to build a future for themselves in the new land. Because of language difficulties, but also because of cultural differences, they stayed with their fellow countrymen whenever they could. This was especially so with the large cohort of Italians that came in the fifties and early sixties. Many never learned to read English, and they still speak with heavy accents. But they paved our roads, dug our ditches, built our houses, and cut our hair. They were frugal and industrious, spreading out from Oakwood & St.Clair, to Mimico, Weston and Woodbridge; moving northward as their families and fortunes grew upward. Yes, it was easier for a labourer to find work in those days, as Canada was in a post-war boom, but nevertheless, their lot was not an easy one, though few complained, and even if they did, no one would listen. There was no ESL for newcomers, nor immigrant services and little help of any kind.
Martel’s “Canadian hotel” citizens, new and old, are a more recent phenomenon, partly as a result of our economically integrated society, or “globalism”. Educated Canadians find it easy to work overseas, and in many cases, immigrants –Chinese in particular –park their families here to obtain a Canadian passport and an education for their children, while the father works in the “old country”. For educated Chinese, it is easier to work in their expanding economy there, where their education is recognized and the language is familiar, than drive taxis or work in Chinese grocery stores here. Expatriate Canadians do not contribute to Canadian society the way one domiciled here, and might in fact be using more resources and services for their family’s education and medicare, than they contribute in taxes. This problem was illuminated a couple of years ago when hundreds of expatriate Lebanese-Canadians had to be “rescued” during that country’s short conflict with Israel.
A reasonable ability to speak one of the official languages is a must for anyone expecting to succeed economically here in today’s economy. There are not enough unskilled labour-type jobs to accommodate the number of immigrants now arriving. In the case of family reunification, language might not be as crucial for dependent parents, but another issue is the extraordinary strain these newcomers put on our social and medical services, free to people who have contributed nothing to the Canadian economy.
As to knowing about our past, a rudimentary knowledge of Canadian history and traditions should be a minimum; but I have to say that even the Canadian born are sadly deficient in historical knowledge, and are more likely to cite American history than their own. For this, I blame our schools and the various Provincial school officials.
There is no easy way of forcibly inculcating love for flag and country; and we would not want the jingoism and excessive patriotism that lead to xenophobia and wars in the twentieth century. What we can do and must do, is gently nudge our children towards becoming responsible and loving citizens, teaching them how the past is our heritage, our mores and our culture, and how it can also be part their future.
As an immigrant, albeit an old one, I can understand that a new-Canadian has affinities to his “old country” and its culture; such things as the foods one grew up with, our native language and even religion, has strong emotionally strings attached to it. I had it rather easy; I was young and single, and intent on adjusting. I started off with only rudimentary English, but learning a language is also much easier when you are young. I believe, though, that when it comes to politics and societal commitment, your loyalties must be here, not there. If you cannot accept this, then you don’t belong, and unless you are a true refugee, you should be encouraged to return whence you came.
Mr. Cohn brings up several valid points in today’s column. I would like to make a few comments.
The earlier immigrants, after WW II, came here to escape from the ravages of war, and later, for economic reasons, to escape the poverty of their homelands. Many of them, Finns, Italians, Portuguese and others came with little or no education but with strong backs, a willingness to work hard, and to build a future for themselves in the new land. Because of language difficulties, but also because of cultural differences, they stayed with their fellow countrymen whenever they could. This was especially so with the large cohort of Italians that came in the fifties and early sixties. Many never learned to read English, and they still speak with heavy accents. But they paved our roads, dug our ditches, built our houses, and cut our hair. They were frugal and industrious, spreading out from Oakwood & St.Clair, to Mimico, Weston and Woodbridge; moving northward as their families and fortunes grew upward. Yes, it was easier for a labourer to find work in those days, as Canada was in a post-war boom, but nevertheless, their lot was not an easy one, though few complained, and even if they did, no one would listen. There was no ESL for newcomers, nor immigrant services and little help of any kind.
Martel’s “Canadian hotel” citizens, new and old, are a more recent phenomenon, partly as a result of our economically integrated society, or “globalism”. Educated Canadians find it easy to work overseas, and in many cases, immigrants –Chinese in particular –park their families here to obtain a Canadian passport and an education for their children, while the father works in the “old country”. For educated Chinese, it is easier to work in their expanding economy there, where their education is recognized and the language is familiar, than drive taxis or work in Chinese grocery stores here. Expatriate Canadians do not contribute to Canadian society the way one domiciled here, and might in fact be using more resources and services for their family’s education and medicare, than they contribute in taxes. This problem was illuminated a couple of years ago when hundreds of expatriate Lebanese-Canadians had to be “rescued” during that country’s short conflict with Israel.
A reasonable ability to speak one of the official languages is a must for anyone expecting to succeed economically here in today’s economy. There are not enough unskilled labour-type jobs to accommodate the number of immigrants now arriving. In the case of family reunification, language might not be as crucial for dependent parents, but another issue is the extraordinary strain these newcomers put on our social and medical services, free to people who have contributed nothing to the Canadian economy.
As to knowing about our past, a rudimentary knowledge of Canadian history and traditions should be a minimum; but I have to say that even the Canadian born are sadly deficient in historical knowledge, and are more likely to cite American history than their own. For this, I blame our schools and the various Provincial school officials.
There is no easy way of forcibly inculcating love for flag and country; and we would not want the jingoism and excessive patriotism that lead to xenophobia and wars in the twentieth century. What we can do and must do, is gently nudge our children towards becoming responsible and loving citizens, teaching them how the past is our heritage, our mores and our culture, and how it can also be part their future.
As an immigrant, albeit an old one, I can understand that a new-Canadian has affinities to his “old country” and its culture; such things as the foods one grew up with, our native language and even religion, has strong emotionally strings attached to it. I had it rather easy; I was young and single, and intent on adjusting. I started off with only rudimentary English, but learning a language is also much easier when you are young. I believe, though, that when it comes to politics and societal commitment, your loyalties must be here, not there. If you cannot accept this, then you don’t belong, and unless you are a true refugee, you should be encouraged to return whence you came.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Flaherty's miscues give us reason to worry
Guelph Mercury:May 12, 2009 Gerry Barker
One might describe Finance Minister Jim Flaherty as the Alfred E. Neuman of Canadian politics.
Neuman, the Mad Magazine icon with the jug ears and stupid wide grin, was famous for the expression: "What me worry?"
For starters, the ebullient Flaherty who breezed through the country saying the recession is mild and we'll come out of it better than any other country, has now changed his tune saying it is more serious and deeper than first presumed.
"Relatively speaking," he recently told the Canada-UK Chamber of Commerce in London with a straight face, "this is a mild economic recession."
He'd better say a ton of Hail Marys for that big one.
The member from Whitby-Oshawa announced spending $9.3 million to clean up Oshawa harbour. He was met with a blistering protest from members of the Ontario auto industry who are facing either not having a job, huge reductions in pay or pensions, or job "furloughs" at no pay.
But Flaherty's biggest lie is about the issue that won't go away.
He ripped $35 billion from Canadian investors when he announced Oct. 31, 2006, that income trusts, the income of which millions of Canadians relied on for support, were to lose tax status in 2011.
He acted without a shred of evidence that there was "tax leakage" as he proclaimed. His senior department officials argued that the government was losing up to $500 million a year in revenue because of the legal tax treatment of income trusts. The rationale ignored the 38 per cent of income trusts held in RRSPs and RIFs that would eventually be totally taxable.
It was an artful dodge. Even the Bank of Montreal and Royal Bank of Canada concurred with a major independent study, instituted by former finance minister Ralph Goodale, that there was no income trust "tax leakage." The minister stuck stubbornly by his decision.
Already there has been fatal fallout as the Tories, stigmatized with the fiscal rape of investors, failed to win a majority last October. Conservative investors defected in the thousands. It cost Stephen Harper control of Parliament.
How did this happen? The furious arguments of insurance and corporate lobbyists were determined to destroy the tax status of competing income trusts. Chief focus among these were the annuity products sold by insurance companies whose sales had taken a beating in the past 10 years because of soaring public investment in income trusts.
Without any public input or debate in Parliament, Alfred E. Flaherty met the enemy and, guess what? They is us!
It was the greatest government theft of private wealth in history. And the Tories wonder why their bunker mentality has resulted in their job approval polls slipping behind the Liberals.
The Tories cut the GST, costing Canada $10 billion in lost revenue in an effort to seek a majority. Yet they knowingly bray that this specious income trust $500-million "tax leakage" has a basis of fact and evidence. But they refuse to reveal the underlying "evidence" for the public to evaluate and comment.
Canada's recession has two faces: The monetary one in which the economy has fallen off the cliff; and the political one, where government wanders aimlessly, like Diogenes, hopelessly searching the world for an honest issue.
You cannot surround yourself with fawning "yes" men and expect to meet the most serious economic crisis the country is experiencing since the Great Depression. You don't prorogue Parliament for two months in the face of shattering economic collapse just to save your government.
Aux barricades, mes amis!
One might describe Finance Minister Jim Flaherty as the Alfred E. Neuman of Canadian politics.
Neuman, the Mad Magazine icon with the jug ears and stupid wide grin, was famous for the expression: "What me worry?"
For starters, the ebullient Flaherty who breezed through the country saying the recession is mild and we'll come out of it better than any other country, has now changed his tune saying it is more serious and deeper than first presumed.
"Relatively speaking," he recently told the Canada-UK Chamber of Commerce in London with a straight face, "this is a mild economic recession."
He'd better say a ton of Hail Marys for that big one.
The member from Whitby-Oshawa announced spending $9.3 million to clean up Oshawa harbour. He was met with a blistering protest from members of the Ontario auto industry who are facing either not having a job, huge reductions in pay or pensions, or job "furloughs" at no pay.
But Flaherty's biggest lie is about the issue that won't go away.
He ripped $35 billion from Canadian investors when he announced Oct. 31, 2006, that income trusts, the income of which millions of Canadians relied on for support, were to lose tax status in 2011.
He acted without a shred of evidence that there was "tax leakage" as he proclaimed. His senior department officials argued that the government was losing up to $500 million a year in revenue because of the legal tax treatment of income trusts. The rationale ignored the 38 per cent of income trusts held in RRSPs and RIFs that would eventually be totally taxable.
It was an artful dodge. Even the Bank of Montreal and Royal Bank of Canada concurred with a major independent study, instituted by former finance minister Ralph Goodale, that there was no income trust "tax leakage." The minister stuck stubbornly by his decision.
Already there has been fatal fallout as the Tories, stigmatized with the fiscal rape of investors, failed to win a majority last October. Conservative investors defected in the thousands. It cost Stephen Harper control of Parliament.
How did this happen? The furious arguments of insurance and corporate lobbyists were determined to destroy the tax status of competing income trusts. Chief focus among these were the annuity products sold by insurance companies whose sales had taken a beating in the past 10 years because of soaring public investment in income trusts.
Without any public input or debate in Parliament, Alfred E. Flaherty met the enemy and, guess what? They is us!
It was the greatest government theft of private wealth in history. And the Tories wonder why their bunker mentality has resulted in their job approval polls slipping behind the Liberals.
The Tories cut the GST, costing Canada $10 billion in lost revenue in an effort to seek a majority. Yet they knowingly bray that this specious income trust $500-million "tax leakage" has a basis of fact and evidence. But they refuse to reveal the underlying "evidence" for the public to evaluate and comment.
Canada's recession has two faces: The monetary one in which the economy has fallen off the cliff; and the political one, where government wanders aimlessly, like Diogenes, hopelessly searching the world for an honest issue.
You cannot surround yourself with fawning "yes" men and expect to meet the most serious economic crisis the country is experiencing since the Great Depression. You don't prorogue Parliament for two months in the face of shattering economic collapse just to save your government.
Aux barricades, mes amis!
Monday, May 11, 2009
Tamil protest on the Gardiner Expressway in Toronto.
While one can sympathize with Tamils who have relatives in Sri Lanka, it does not follow that we should accept their recent behaviour, shutting down the Gardiner Expressway with their “protests”.
This is another situation in which immigrants drag the problems of their origin countries into Canadian society, involving people who have nothing to do with the situation. This is especially so with Tamil-Canadians, who now are causing distress and inconvenience to the general public, insisting that the Canadian government get involved in their native country’s strife.
It is not without reason the Tamil “Tigers” have been declared a terrorist organization, and their terrorist activity now involve using civilians as shields in their battle with the legitimate government of Sri Lanka. Such behaviour is now reflected in their Toronto demonstrations, where they put their children in harms way on the Gardiner expressway to further their case for government intervention on their behalf.
It behooves our local government and our police to arrest and charge the leaders of the group that blocked the expressway, and to send children’s aide officials to investigate and possibly charge parents who put their children’s lives at risk. I must wonder how long these people would survive if they showed this type of behaviour in their native country. They are trying the patience of fellow Canadians, and stand to lose any goodwill they might have gained otherwise.
This is another situation in which immigrants drag the problems of their origin countries into Canadian society, involving people who have nothing to do with the situation. This is especially so with Tamil-Canadians, who now are causing distress and inconvenience to the general public, insisting that the Canadian government get involved in their native country’s strife.
It is not without reason the Tamil “Tigers” have been declared a terrorist organization, and their terrorist activity now involve using civilians as shields in their battle with the legitimate government of Sri Lanka. Such behaviour is now reflected in their Toronto demonstrations, where they put their children in harms way on the Gardiner expressway to further their case for government intervention on their behalf.
It behooves our local government and our police to arrest and charge the leaders of the group that blocked the expressway, and to send children’s aide officials to investigate and possibly charge parents who put their children’s lives at risk. I must wonder how long these people would survive if they showed this type of behaviour in their native country. They are trying the patience of fellow Canadians, and stand to lose any goodwill they might have gained otherwise.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
“Ignatiaeff yet to deliver substance” –Chantal Herbert, Sunday Star
“Ignatiaeff yet to deliver substance” –Chantal Herbert, Sunday Star
Mr. Ignatieff has a stellar record in academia, but as a politician, he has yet to sparkle. While it is encouraging to have a brilliant academic as a potential Prime Minister, intelligence has only a weak correlation with rationality and “emotional intelligence”. Hopefully, he has it all. What he does lack, though, is the charisma and easy manners of Chretien, or even better, an Obama. He needs to develop and clarify his ideas and plans for his party, providing voters with substance and a true alternative choice; and avoiding trite phrases and platitudes like “hope” and “yes we can”. Those are all ready well worn by Obama. Chantal Herbert’s definition of Ignatieff’s convention speech as “cardboard cake lathered in sticky icing” is hilarious but too true.
Michael Ignatieff is no doubt a man of substance, a strategic thinker and a tactician, every bit Harper’s equal. However, he needs to soften his demeanour, learn to smile with both his mouth and eyes; thus winning the hearts as well as the minds of Canadians. Otherwise, he might end up as just an English-speaking Dion.
Mr. Ignatieff has a stellar record in academia, but as a politician, he has yet to sparkle. While it is encouraging to have a brilliant academic as a potential Prime Minister, intelligence has only a weak correlation with rationality and “emotional intelligence”. Hopefully, he has it all. What he does lack, though, is the charisma and easy manners of Chretien, or even better, an Obama. He needs to develop and clarify his ideas and plans for his party, providing voters with substance and a true alternative choice; and avoiding trite phrases and platitudes like “hope” and “yes we can”. Those are all ready well worn by Obama. Chantal Herbert’s definition of Ignatieff’s convention speech as “cardboard cake lathered in sticky icing” is hilarious but too true.
Michael Ignatieff is no doubt a man of substance, a strategic thinker and a tactician, every bit Harper’s equal. However, he needs to soften his demeanour, learn to smile with both his mouth and eyes; thus winning the hearts as well as the minds of Canadians. Otherwise, he might end up as just an English-speaking Dion.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
“Iggy’s morally contemptible words” – Mark Steyn” in Maclean’s May 11th issue.
It seems that Maclean’s has chosen this issue to gang up on poor Iggy –see Allan Fotheringham (p.14) and Mark “off the wall” Steyn (p.60). While Fotheringham makes some valid points about Ingnatieff’s latest book; Mr. Steyn goes off on a tirade about the tangential subject of a drunken aborigine by the name of Pauchay who, in a drunken stupor, left his child to freeze to death in the snow. Mr. Ignatieff’s “prose style” in commenting on this sad story might be unfortunate, but the appellations “contemptible” and “poseur” is nothing but bombastic vituperation. Mr. Ignatieff could be accused of being stiff, formal or even awkward; but indifferent or a “poseur” he is not.
I know Maclean’s are “broadminded” and try to embrace the breadth and length of the political and social stratum, witness your various critical comments on Stephen Harper; but Steyn has transgressed the limits of tolerance with his boorish rant.
PS. I would have sent a copy of this letter to Mr. Steyn, but his e-mail address does not –for good reason I’m sure –appear in your magazine.
I know Maclean’s are “broadminded” and try to embrace the breadth and length of the political and social stratum, witness your various critical comments on Stephen Harper; but Steyn has transgressed the limits of tolerance with his boorish rant.
PS. I would have sent a copy of this letter to Mr. Steyn, but his e-mail address does not –for good reason I’m sure –appear in your magazine.
“MOUNTAINS OF YOUTH” –Aaron Wherry, Maclean’s May 11th/09
I have nothing against youth, I was young myself once. However, an error of youth is to believe that intelligence is a substitute for experience; while an error of age is to believe experience is a substitute for intelligence. Mr. Ignatieff would do well to ensure that in his drive to rejuvenate his party and policies, he does not ignore or alienate the older constituency. That would be a mistake.
Pure intelligence will get you only so far, unless it is meshed with “emotional intelligence” and “social intelligence.” People can have a very high IQ but be remarkably weak when it comes to thinking rationally. I don’t for moments suggest that Mr. Ignatieff is not rational –in fact, he might be too rational for many – it can be misinterpreted as arrogance. However, youth worship can also lead to perdition politically, unless he keeps one foot on the throttle and the other on the brakes, and his eyes on the road.
Pure intelligence will get you only so far, unless it is meshed with “emotional intelligence” and “social intelligence.” People can have a very high IQ but be remarkably weak when it comes to thinking rationally. I don’t for moments suggest that Mr. Ignatieff is not rational –in fact, he might be too rational for many – it can be misinterpreted as arrogance. However, youth worship can also lead to perdition politically, unless he keeps one foot on the throttle and the other on the brakes, and his eyes on the road.
ALLAN FOTHERINGHAM on Michael Ignatiaeff – Maclean’s May 11th issue.
It’s great to see the old warhorse back in your pages. For 27 years he soldiered on at Maclean’s, through some erratic periods of Maclean’s publication. He was the one stalwart I always read, whether I agreed with him or not. In this issue he aims his verbal gun at Michael Ingnatieff –somewhat unfairly, I hasten to say. While I did not and still do not, think that Iggy was the ideal Leader for the Liberals –I would have chosen Bob Rae –I do think he has the smarts to lead the party out of the wilderness. He is a tactician and a strategist –in every way Harpers equal. That said, I do think he needs a makeover. He is still stiff and formal; uses highfalutin language that might go well with the college crowd, but misses the great unwashed masses. As an intellectual, he equals John Ralston Saul, but as a politician, he must learn to smile, not only with his mouth, but also with his eyes. There is a definite disconnect between his lips and his eyes (see p.14). In many ways, he is Dion speaking English.
I have not read his last book, True Patriot Love, nor do I plan to. I have read other writings of his, and he is eloquent, concise and unambiguous in his dissertations. His Empire Lite was only 127 pages, but there are few words wasted. But, writing for the intellectual elite and writing (and speaking) as a politician is polar opposites. A politician’s first duty is being elected, and while brains and intelligence are requirements, cordiality and joviality is a necessary attribution. Dion butchered the Queens English, but so did Chretien. However, he did it with humour and wit, and thus got away with it.
If for no other reason, I won’t read Ingnatieff’s latest paean to Canada because of his 37- page worship of George Monro Grant, and in particular, his uncle, Chicken Little George Parkin Grant. I was made to read Lament for a Nation in University – Political Economy 101 –and I have not yet recovered from that ordeal.
However, one bad book does not exclude him from high office. Hyperbole has always been the crutch of the scoundrel and the successful politician (sometimes in the same person). I see Mr. Ingnatieff firmly as the latter.
I have not read his last book, True Patriot Love, nor do I plan to. I have read other writings of his, and he is eloquent, concise and unambiguous in his dissertations. His Empire Lite was only 127 pages, but there are few words wasted. But, writing for the intellectual elite and writing (and speaking) as a politician is polar opposites. A politician’s first duty is being elected, and while brains and intelligence are requirements, cordiality and joviality is a necessary attribution. Dion butchered the Queens English, but so did Chretien. However, he did it with humour and wit, and thus got away with it.
If for no other reason, I won’t read Ingnatieff’s latest paean to Canada because of his 37- page worship of George Monro Grant, and in particular, his uncle, Chicken Little George Parkin Grant. I was made to read Lament for a Nation in University – Political Economy 101 –and I have not yet recovered from that ordeal.
However, one bad book does not exclude him from high office. Hyperbole has always been the crutch of the scoundrel and the successful politician (sometimes in the same person). I see Mr. Ingnatieff firmly as the latter.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)