HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2008-08-21, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, AUGUST 21, 2008. PAGE 5.
Bonnie
Gropp
TThhee sshhoorrtt ooff iitt
Going to the show
T o delight in war is a merit in a soldier,
a dangerous quality in a captain and a
positive crime in a statesman.
– George Santayana
I must say, I’m a little envious. If I were
slightly younger and not employed here, I
think it would be a fantastic experience to be
on the front lines… It must be exciting for you
… in some ways romantic, in some ways, you
know, confronting danger. You’re really
making history, and thanks.
– President George Bush, to troops in Iraq
We are living in historic times, you and I.
The most hapless, obscene and globally
destructive American administration in living
memory and probably of all time is about to be
swept into the Hefty Bag of history.
We don’t know what’s to come next, but for
much of the world it could hardly be worse.
Ironically, George W. Bush probably won’t
be remembered for the thousands of lives and
trillions of dollars he squandered, the
international goodwill he pissed away or for
the environmental degradation he
enthusiastically green-lighted.
He will more likely be remembered for the
stunning mediocrity of what passes for his
mind. George W. Bush truly proved the old
adage that anybody – anybody – can become
president.
The question all Americans must ask
themselves is: How did this abysmal fool ever
get to the Oval Office?
Here is Thomas Jefferson:
“When a man assumes a public trust, he
should consider himself as a public property.”
Here is George Bush: “I am mindful not
only of preserving executive powers for
myself, but for my predecessors as well.”
Here is Abraham Lincoln:
“I claim not to have controlled events, but
plainly confess that events have controlled
me.”
Here is George Bush: “We’re kicking ass”
(on progress in Iraq).
Here is John Kennedy:
“Ask not what your country can do for you –
ask what you can do for your country.”
Here is George Bush: “You know, when you
give a man more money in his pocket – in this
case, a woman more money in her pocket to
expand a business, it – they build new
buildings. And when somebody builds a new
building somebody has got to come and build
the building. And when the building expanded
it prevented additional opportunities for
people to work.”
Here is Barack Obama speaking recently in
Berlin:
“As we speak, cars in Boston and factories
in Beijing are melting the ice caps in the
Arctic, shrinking coastlines in the Atlantic,
and bringing drought to farms from Kansas to
Kenya. Poorly secured nuclear material in the
former Soviet Union, or secrets from a
scientist in Pakistan could help build a bomb
that detonates in Paris. The poppies in
Afghanistan become the heroin in Berlin. The
poverty and violence in Somalia breeds the
terror of tomorrow. The genocide in Darfur
shames the conscience of us all.”
Here is George Bush:
“It isn’t pollution that’s harming the
environment. It’s the impurities in our air and
water that are doing it.”
JFK on war:
“Mankind must put an end to war, or war
will put an end to mankind.”
Here is George Bush:
“I’ve been to war. I’ve raised twins. If I had
a choice, I’d rather go to war.”
That last statement is not only a lousy joke,
it’s a miserable lie. George Bush never went to
war. He and his family twisted and wheedled
and pulled every string available to a rich,
white, East Coast preppy to make sure he
never spent a wartime minute in Vietnam.
Just like his White House henchmen,
Cheney and Rumsfeld.
I guess it’s a back-handed tribute to the
strength of a country that it can survive even
the depredations of a sock-puppet disaster like
George W. Bush and the neocon nitwits who
pitchforked him into power…but it’s been a
long and ugly eight years. American voters
really need to raise the bar this time.
Or as George so memorably phrased it: “We
oughtta make the pie higher.”
Arthur
Black
Other Views Adios, George – and good riddance
Premier Dalton McGuinty has found all
the think-tanks in the world are still not
telling Ontarians the message he
wants them to hear, so he is starting one of his
own.
The Liberal premier will spend $5 million of
taxpayers’ money to create an institute
at the University of Toronto that will research,
and make public, information on
Ontario’s place in a rapidly changing
Confederation.
Spokespeople for both claimed it will be
non-partisan, but don’t believe it. McGuinty
has shown increasing concern Ontario is
short-changed by the federal system,
particularly when it has to continue
subsidizing other provinces while its economy
struggles.
The new institute inevitably will search
harder for evidence that will support
McGuinty’s view and bolster his cause. Those
who fund research by academic institutions in
any case usually find they discover
information favourable to them. Look at the
many studies that conclude chocolate and
wine are good for health.
Think-tanks have multiplied in recent years.
They are, next to polls, the biggest growth
industry in politics, and almost all are
similarly biased. The best known, the Fraser
Institute, devotes most of its energies to
showing that business is over-taxed and over-
regulated. It unearths statistics to show
high taxes are discouraging investment, far-
sighted residents are queuing to emmigrate
and government auto insurance causes
more accidents, because premiums are not
high enough to force bad drivers off the
road.
Its current most celebrated spokespeople are
former extreme right wing Conservative
premier Mike Harris and former Reform Party
leader Preston Manning. No one can suggest it
is non-partisan.
The C.D. Howe Institute’s research
advocates similar right-wing ideals and argues
governments should be wary of actions to slow
climate change that could hurt business and
jobs, private enterprise usually can do the job
more efficiently and cheaply than, for
example, Ontario government liquor stores,
and smaller classes that cost more money do
not necessarily educate better.
The Institute for Research on Public Policy
is not as one-track an advocate for business,
but its leanings can be gleaned by the fact it
was headed by Hugh Segal, a former senior
aide successively to Conservative premier
William Davis and Conservative prime
minister Brian Mulroney and unsuccessful
candidate for national leader before landing a
cozier seat in the Senate.
There are think-tanks more to the left, but
less known because they have less money and
fund fewer studies. The Canadian Centre for
Policy Alternatives advocates increased public
spending to compensate for drastic program
cuts by Ontario Conservative governments
when they slashed taxes between 1995 and
2003.
The Tommy Douglas Research Institute
defends state medicare against its many critics
and you would not expect anything else
from an organization named after the former
New Democrat premier of Saskatchewan
generally regarded as the founder of
medicare.
But think-tanks that support a cause often
are not identifiable by their names. People
would not recognize immediately that
CropLife Canada represents manufacturers of
pesticides and the Fair Air Association
opposes curbs on smoking it says take away
smokers’ rights and cost jobs.
The think-tanks Ontarians currently notice
most probably are those whose representatives
constantly pontificate on TV about hostilities
in Iraq, Afghanistan and other trouble zones
and are based mainly in the United States, and
most are ultra-conservative.
The Heritage Foundation was created by
brewery billionaire Joseph Coors, who
financed Ronald Reagan’s early elections and
whose own brother described him as “a little
bit right of Attila the Hun.”
The American Enterprise Institute, Centre
for Security Policy and Competitive Enterprise
Institute have much the same views, while the
Centre for American Progress and Americans
Coming Together have voices more from the
centre.
One question Ontarians should ask is
whether McGuinty should spend $5 million on
a think-tank mainly to collect more
ammunition for a propaganda war with the
federal government.
Another is that most think-tanks are
recognized as biased. McGuinty’s inevitably
will come up with research showing
Ontario gets a raw deal, but will anyone
believe it?
Eric
Dowd
FFrroomm
QQuueeeenn’’ss PPaarrkk
It’s brought snickers, bemused, often
doubting looks. I’ve been told I’m a saint,
tolerant, a good sport.
What none of these people seem to realize
however, is that there’s nothing amusing about
what I’m saying. There is nothing about it that
makes me any of the aforementioned. The
simple truth is that when I say I’m going to a
car show, it’s because I want to.
A few weeks ago through conversation with a
friend, I learned that I am a far, far better person
than I had ever before thought. Sainthood she
bestowed upon me after my simple mentioning
of the fact I was going to a car show. Actually,
so outraged was she on my behalf, that it was
not enough to have anointed me as martyr. She
then proclaimed me medal worthy as well.
And nothing could convince her that I was
not a loyal pup led by no choice of my own to
places I’d rather not be.
Then while dining with Mom and Dad one
night last week, we discussed the upcoming
weekend and what I was going to be doing. I
should no longer have been surprised by, after
mentioning a car show was on the itinerary, my
mother’s grin, the raised eyebrow, the skeptical
twinkling of her eye.
“What?!?” I cried. “I like them!”
I do. I love walking under a bright summer
sky, looking at hundreds of classic cars.
Unfortunately though, as I tried to respond to
Mom I discovered that I can’t seem to explain
what does fascinate me.
My Dad understood though. At least in part,
An old auto body man, he talked about the
glossy paint jobs, how clean some of the motors
are. It is, he said, nice to look at.
Certainly, unlike cars from the past 20 years
or so, there is a grace and beauty to these autos,
from the earliest Model T to a sporty Camaro
that begs attention. Heads will turn when a
Scorch-hued 1969 ’Cuda slides down the street.
A bright orange Charger, a shiny Super Bee are
guaranteed to draw more than a glance when
passing by.
And it was always that way. When I was in
high school, the boys who had these cars never
went unnoticed. When my husband purchased a
1967 Coronet RT in the late 1970s, I couldn’t
miss the fact that guys tended to look when I
drove that car. I humbly admitted to what
sparked their interest and it sure wasn’t me.
Reminding Mark about this the other day got a
chuckle as he remarked that the car he drives
now is older than the RT was at the time. And
trust me, there’s nobody paying attention when
he cruises by in his drab, but reliable Reliant.
No, those old gems are art. And wandering
around a car show is tantamount to being at any
gallery exhibit. Beautiful things to see, at your
leisure, in a relaxing setting.
However, the attraction goes beyond the
aesthetic. There is a nostalgia factor, obviously.
There is the history.
There is also the ambiance. Under a sky-blue
canopy people of all ages leisurely meander
through decades, often accompanied by the
music that defined those times. They can’t hear
the stories these treasures hold, but they can
imagine. Drag races and cruising down country
roads, rendezvous in secluded scenic settings,
rocking, rolling fun at high school parking lots,
and late nights at drive-ins are secret tales held
by the muscle cars. Family picnics, Sunday
tours with ice-cream or trips to the beach are
locked inside the four doors of that big sedan.
No, I suppose anyone who’s never been can’t
understand the attraction. I’m not even sure I
always do. But it doesn’t matter. I just know I
wouldn’t miss it for the world.
Premier gets own think-tank
Letters Policy
The Citizen welcomes letters to the
editor.
Letters must be signed and should
include a daytime telephone number for
the purpose of verification only. Letters that
are not signed will not be printed.
Submissions may be edited for length,
clarity and content, using fair comment as
our guideline. The Citizen reserves the
right to refuse any letter on the basis of
unfair bias, prejudice or inaccurate
information. As well, letters can only be
printed as space allows. Please keep your
letters brief and concise.