HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2008-01-24, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 2008. PAGE 5.
Bonnie
Gropp
TThhee sshhoorrtt ooff iitt
Moving forward
I f you pick up a starving dog and make him
prosperous, he will not bite you. This is
the principal difference between a dog
and a man.
– Mark Twain
You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and
the dog will give you this look that says, ‘My
God, you’re right! I would never have thought
of that!’
– Dave Barry
The wedding, which took place in a small
village in India, was traditional – sort of.
The groom – one P. Slevakumar – strictly
observed each precise procedure in the sacred
Hindu ceremony.
The bride, splendidly turned out in a
gorgeous matrimonial sari, sat through the
rites wordlessly, gazing up adoringly at her
husband-to-be.
It was a scene that had played out for
hundreds of years and for hundreds of
thousands of Indian brides before her.
Well, there was one small difference. This
bride was a real bitch. I mean that she had four
legs. And a tail.
P. Slevakumar was marrying a dog.
It was an Atonement Thing. Fifteen years
earlier, on the outskirts of the village, the man
had callously stoned two dogs to death. Bad
karma.
“After that my legs and hands got
paralyzed,” he explained. “I also lost hearing
in one ear.”
In desperation, Mister Slevakumar consulted
an astrologist who told him he could make
amends by finding an amenable canine
companion and making an honest…er…dog
of her.
No word so far on how that marriage is
working out, but it got me to thinking: isn’t
that typical? Of a dog I mean?
Did anyone stop to ask the bride if she had
any feelings about the marriage? Of course
not.
Dogs do what they’re told. They are the
original Uncle Toms of the pet world.
Try getting your cat to fetch a tennis ball.
She will give you an incredulous look as if to
say ‘Who? Moi?’ And then resume washing
her paws.
Whereas Fido will chase that ball down and
bring it back until your throwing arm or his
heart gives out.
T’was ever thus. Dogs, God bless ‘em, are
the original practitioners of Unconditional
Love. We use them, abuse them, feed them
scraps from our table, leave them out in the
rain – they still treat us like Gods.
Doesn’t matter if you’re a dot-com
gazillionaire or a squeegee kid sleeping in a
refrigerator carton, if you’ve got a dog he’ll
stand by you ‘til the deal goes down. That’s
what dogs do.
Fame? Doesn’t come their way often. Oh,
they had a couple of TV series – Lassie, Rin
Tin Tin – and a couple of movies – Old Yeller,
A Thousand and One Dalmatians.
But that’s pretty small returns for the eons of
uncritical devotion that dogs have lavished on
us.
Mind you, a few dogs have enjoyed their
moment on the political stage. Canada’s 13th
Prime Minister John ‘Dief the Chief’
Diefenbaker got off a good one at a press
conference back in the early ’60s when his
popularity across the country was plummeting.
A reporter asked him if he’d seen the latest
Gallup Poll. The Chief, eyes blazing, wattles
quivering, thundered “Poles? Poles? You know
what dogs do to poles!”
And then there was Pat. Actually, there were
three Pats, all Irish terriers, all belonging
(successively) to Canada’s 10th prime
minister, the slightly loopy William Lyon
Mackenzie King.
Mister King was eccentric in the extreme
and often made it clear that Pat (be it One, Two
or Three) was his closest confidante.
There is no evidence that the PM consulted
with his Irish terriers over crucial government
decisions – his shaving mirror and his dead
mother, yes – but not his dogs.
I would be remiss if I didn’t mention
dogdom’s low point in the world of
politics. That would involve U.S. president
Richard Nixon and his sad-eyed spaniel,
Checkers.
Back in 1952, when the then-vice-
presidential candidate Nixon was facing
charges of receiving payola from wealthy
Californians, he commandeered the national
air waves to deliver his famous ‘Checkers’
speech. Nixon told viewers he was willing to
return any gifts he ‘might have’ received –
except for a little black-and-white
cocker spaniel, Checkers, which had been
given to his daughters. A photo of Checkers,
looking adorable, was then flashed on the
screen.
It was cheap. It was cynical. It was
exploitive. It worked like a charm.
And poor Checkers got to serve as a prop for
a sleazy politico.
It shouldn’t happen to a dog.
Arthur
Black
Other Views Shouldn’t happen to a dog
Many Ontario political leaders have
made mistakes and recovered. Can
Progressive Conservative leader
John Tory?
Tory blundered massively in the Oct 10
election by promising to fund private faith-
based schools, which many voters felt would
further divide students and the community.
John Robarts, Conservative premier from
1961-71, usually is thought of as the steady,
reliable, unflappable “chairman of the board,”
so respected when he left provincial politics a
federal government grabbed him to head a
commission to shape national unity.
But Robarts in 1964 was trying to counter
growing organized crime and introduced
legislation, quickly labeled “the police state
bill,” that would have given the then Ontario
Police Commission power to call people
before it in secret, question them and demand
they produce documents.
If they refused, it could have kept jailing
them indefinitely until they complied and was
an unprecedented breach of the province’s
tradition of protecting civil rights.
Robarts’ attorney general, Fred Cass, at a
news conference this writer attended, admitted
the new law was “dangerous” and some
Conservative MPPs said they and their
constituents were appalled.
Rights activists picketed the legislature,
Cass resigned and an unknown Liberal back-
bencher, Andrew Thompson, passionately
denounced the bill and on the strength of this
was catapulted into his party’s vacant
leadership, where he remained briefly and
unnoticed until being appointed to the Senate
and becoming its most absent member in
history.
Robarts, who was slow to grasp the impact
of his legislation, eventually withdrew it in
humiliation and there was even speculation his
political career might be damaged
irretrievably.
But the premier rehabilitated himself by
modernizing education and building links to
Quebec and three years later won a second
election and was able to retire undefeated.
Conservative premier William Davis lost his
party’s customary majority in 1975,
particularly because his government was seen
giving favours to donors to his party, and
failed to recover it two years later, after he
contrived to be defeated in the legislature on a
minor vote he argued was one of confidence,
but voters saw through it.
But Davis hung on, stifling party members
who wanted him replaced as leader and re-
making himself partly by accepting opposition
policies including rent controls, and won back
his majority and became the longest serving
premier of recent decades.
Liberal premier Dalton McGuinty is among
those who were forgiven by voters, because in
opposition before the 2003 election he
promised he would not increase taxes, but as
premier quickly imposed a health tax
collecting more than $2 billion a year.
McGuinty claimed with justification it was
partly the Conservatives’ fault, because the
outgoing Conservative government pretended
it had balanced its books, while concealing a
massive deficit.
For four years his party were called
“Fiberals” and McGuinty dubbed “McLiar,”
but lived this down enough to be re-elected
with much help from Tory’s blunder on
schools.
Some opposition leaders similarly have been
able to continue despite fumbles. Liberal
Robert Nixon was allowed to lead his party in
1967, 1971 and 1975, although some thought
he threw away at least one opportunity by
attacking Davis’s personal integrity.
But the Conservatives always had more
troops and money.
Another Liberal leader, psychiatrist Stuart
Smith, was allowed chances in 1977 and 1981
and failed both times, partly because he lacked
political smarts.
On one cold campaign night in Sault Ste.
Marie he said he was glad it was nearly over,
because he would never have to visit that city
again in winter, which did not warm
northerners to him.
Stephen Lewis also led the New Democrats
in three elections, but he had special speaking
talents that made him hard to let go, and New
Democrats realistically did not expect to win
under any leader.
This shows parties have allowed leaders to
stay on after they stumbled. But it can be
argued Tory made the worst blunder of any in
throwing away an election in which he had a
reasonable chance, and there is no precise
precedent.
Eric
Dowd
FFrroomm
QQuueeeenn’’ss PPaarrkk
Some political recovery stories
It happened often on a Saturday. A busy
Friday night, followed by work the next
morning added up to lunch out with my
kids. Where we headed seldom varied as our
weekend hot spot served, in my little girl’s
glowing estimation, “the best mushroom soup
ever.”
On many of these outings we were joined by
my brother’s family, and on these occasions
lunch turned into a livelier session of drinks
and shuffleboard as well. A good time was
always had by all and these occasions are
remembered fondly in discussions today.
When I moved to the area, the Brussels hotel
was one of two still remaining in the village.
Its competitor, the Queen’s, was a ghost of its
once impressive past. I had only ever been in
this establishment, touted in the Belden Atlas
as an example of some of the finest
architecture ever seen at this time, once and
was saddened by its neglected dishevelment. It
was not long after that the formerly elegant
structure was torn down to make way for a
modern grocery store.
And then there was one.
It was with sadness again that I noticed the
chainlink fence around the Brussels hotel last
week and learned it was to be demolished. For
many years the once bustling business had sat
vacant and neglected and though a new owner
had made valiant attempts to revive it, for
various reasons it just didn’t work out. Its fate
thus was sealed.
This leaves yet another hole in Brussels
downtown. Where once the street was a
thriving commercial district, it now seems the
downtown is too much for the population.
Vacant, decaying stores are an eyesore, but
holes in the main street aren’t much better.
Now, a group of concerned citizens have
been thinking of a solution, one that hopefully
will be given serious consideration by all
parties. A petition is being circulated to ask
that the municipality look into a scenario
where the new Brussels Library can be built as
a presence in the downtown. Currently, the
land behind the library is being proposed for
this purpose and there have been some rumours
that a land swap would be not out of the
question.
If so, it seems to be making the best of a
situation that, while not great, is what it is.
The fact that the library is moving from the
Carnegie building is a little discomfiting to me,
though strictly in a sentimental way. As I buy
my own books now, I, with some abashment,
admit I don’t frequent the library. That said, I
love old buildings, and remember many visits
to the Carnegie Library in my hometown. I
have to trust that the decision to build a new
one is the best for ratepayers and that the
former library will be treated with the
gentleness and respect that old age deserves.
Removing the last hotel from Brussels main
street marks an era’s end. It would be fitting
therefore, to have both of these recent
developments balanced with a new beginning.
When the old Queen’s came down, while its
replacement had little architectural value it
generated excitement in the community.
Though the village lost a piece of its past,
something new was taking its place. There was
hope.
So with an opportunity now facing council to
keep the library’s presence on main street, in
addition to filling a vacancy in the streetscape,
we could mourn the loss of yet more of the
village history a little less and look ahead to
tomorrow and progress.
“Wheresoever you go, go with all your
heart.”
– Confucius
Final Thought