The Citizen, 2007-06-07, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 2007. PAGE 5.
Bonnie
Gropp
TThhee sshhoorrtt ooff iitt
The leaders of Ontario’s three main
political parties have as much colour as
Saran wrap and this may be hindering
the chances of any of them winning a majority
in the Oct. 10 election.
This is not only by comparison to Arnold
Schwarzenegger, because few politicians
anywhere have the flamboyance of the former
muscle-builder and movie star who is now
California governor.
Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty,
Progressive Conservative leader John Tory and
New Democrat leader Howard Hampton lack
colour even by drab Ontario standards.
Polls over the past year have suggested all
have problems turning on voters and none is
assured of winning the election.
They have strengths. McGuinty has
provided more legislation to protect residents
than any previous premier, but lacks style,
characteristics, looks or eccentricities that
make people line up to see him.
The premier recently spent an hour in a fast-
food restaurant and no-one was interested
enough to drop by his table and ask what he
was doing there.
McGuinty does not seem to mind being
anonymous. He strolled through the grounds
of the legislature with Jennifer Mossop, a TV
journalist turned MPP, and reported modestly
that people asked “Who is that guy with
Jennifer?”
McGuinty looks like Anthony Perkins, an
actor, but Perkins was more the shy, brooding
type women like to mother, rather than
someone they batter down doors for.
A British magazine looked at McGuinty’s
photograph and labeled him a “hottie,” but
women are managing to restrain themselves
from rushing police cordons to touch him.
Opponents give him names like “Dodger
Dalton,” after he avoids questions, but not
even these have stuck.
McGuinty often can explain or defend a
policy well in debates, but he has no great gifts
of oratory and no memorable phrases.
Tory is earnest, less stiff than he was,
improving in debate, prone to say “good
gracious” rather than wither an opponent and
definitely a product of Toronto’s reticent well-
to-do, who answer questions as if fearing they
will be asked for money.
Tory has said he is not worried by his
relatively low profile and cannot work harder
or go to more places – he is at the scene of any
shooting within minutes.
The most colourful thing about him is his
wife, Barbara, who joked to a reporter her
husband naturally supports same-sex marriage
because “he’s been married to me for 27 years
and he’s been having the same sex every day.”
Maybe she should run for premier.
Hampton never makes a poor speech,
marshalling words and facts clearly on every
subject, but like his rivals does not have
noteworthy visions or words that inspire.
Ontarians probably would not vote for
someone who is merely colourful, which is all
Schwarzenegger had to offer before he got
elected, although he has proved since to have
some worthwhile policies.
U.S. voters have elected other actors
including Ronald Reagan, who proved a
captive of big business and the industrial-
military establishment; singing cowboys and
in one case a TV wrestler as a state governor.
Ontario voters probably would demand
candidates have more substantial qualities.
But a little colour can pull in extra votes.
Conservative Mike Harris became premier
mainly because of policies, cutting
government and taxes, but was helped stay in
by being uncompromising and a tough guy,
which many admired for a time.
New Democrat Bob Rae was helped become
premier by having a way with words and doing
his utmost to project a boy wonder image.
Liberal David Peterson was aided by
looking a yuppie and modern, in tune with the
times, tie slackened, shirtsleeves half rolled-
up, jogging between speeches, and kids and
even his dog with yuppie names.
William Davis got himself seen as a small
town lawyer when small town values mattered,
although he lived in virtually a Toronto suburb.
John Robarts made himself look a solid,
dependable board chairman, which suited the
times, though he had never run a business.
Leaders are not helped if they look beige.
What’s fair?
Back in the 60s, when I was a pup, the
pinnacle of redneck wit was a curse,
sometimes muttered, sometimes
screamed, at those of us with long hair. (Yes,
Virginia, there was a time when this chrome-
dome had not only hair, but lots of it).
The curse was: “Goddam hippie! Whyncha
getcher hair cut?”
I was always happy to hear the expression
directed my way. It was a form of social radar,
or what I called an ‘umbrellas-in-drinks’
remark.
Experience had taught me to avoid people
who thought cocktails sporting paper
umbrellas were ‘cute’. The same principle
applied to dull-eyed lugnuts who thought hair
length determines character.
Ah, well. Those were unenlightened times
and times change. Or maybe not so much.
Take John Edward’s hair. John Edwards –
and his hair – are contenders for the most
powerful political office on the planet – the
presidency of the United States.
At least they were at the moment of writing
these words. By the time you read them
Edwards may have been consigned to the trash
heap of also-rans.
And all because of his hair.
Edwards has a fine head of it – wavy,
chestnut-brown, full-bodied – and he’s
obviously proud of his tresses.
Perhaps a little…too proud. Last month it
came out that Edwards got two haircuts from a
renowned Beverly Hills hair stylist – and paid
$800 U.S. for the privilege.
Pandemonium! The American press corps
went five-alarm, code-red ballistic.
Talk show hosts ripped Edwards from ankle
to earhole. Editorial writers were shocked and
appalled. Op-ed cartoonists had a field day.
Columnist Maureen Dowd, in The New York
Times, declared huffily that her country was
“definitely not ready for a metro-sexual in
chief”. Fox News, the rabid rottweiler of
modern journalism, wheeled out panels of
pundits who twittered about “the new Breck
girl” while derisively humming “I Feel
Pretty…”
Experts confidently predicted that the
Edwards presidential campaign had hit the PR
equivalent of the iceberg that sank the Titanic.
Well, granted, forking over four
C-notes for a short-back-and-sides not once,
but twice, makes you want to grab
Edwards elegantly coiffed head and give
it a shake – but is that it? Is the guy
cancelled outright because of a pair of pricey
haircuts?
Here’s the thing: in all the breathless
coverage of Edward’s pampered pompadour,
the press jackals ignored the fact that of all the
Democratic presidential candidates, Edwards
is the only one who actually…talks about the
issues.
Katrina vanden Heuvel, writing in
Thenation.com observed “For months,
Edwards has been crisscrossing the country,
giving policy speeches far more detailed and
daring than those of either Hillary Clinton or
Barack Obama. Somehow the press has
ignored him…The U.S. has 50 million people
without health insurance, has falling wages
and high job insecurity, and is mired in a
losing war in Iraq. You’ve got a serious guy
talking about all these issues. And the press
wants to talk about his haircut?”
We live in trivial times with hair-trigger
media ready to tell us all about it. At a recent
U.S. Supreme Court hearing, reporters noticed
that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was slow to
rise from the bench after adjournment. In fact,
she was still sitting, looking confused
and distressed, after everyone else had stood
up.
Pandemonium! Was the Justice sick?
Dying, perhaps?
The internet lit up with rumours and
guesses. Talk show wranglers began lining up
their panels of instant experts.
After all, if Justice Ginsburg was crippled or
gaga, it would upset the entire balance of the
U.S. judicial system!
A few days later, a hale and hearty Justice
Ginsburg revealed the reason for
her…incapacity.
She’d kicked off her shoes under the table
and couldn’t find one of them.
Here in Canada, we are not immune to the
bite of the trivia bug. Parliament Hill hacks
have had endless fun recently with the news
that the prime minister maintained a full-time
‘stylist’ on staff.
Maybe there’s an opportunity for a little
clippers-across-the-border reciprocity here.
Maybe next time Edwards needs a trim he
could borrow Prime Minister Harper’s
personal barber. Guaranteed to come cheaper
than $400 a pop.
Although if he winds up with a hair helmet
like Harper’s, Edwards might ask for his
money back.
Arthur
Black
Ontario’s leaders lack colour
To the young and immature it may not
seem such a big deal — just a quick way
to burn some energy and break the
monotony. After all, it really didn’t cause that
much harm, right?
Last Friday morning, residents of Brussels
woke to find that some of the downtown
planters had been tipped over. Most of the
flowers that had been planted by volunteers
just the day before were lost. Municipal
employees, rather than getting to their regular
duties had to spend valuable time cleaning up
the mess.
The planters are fairly substantial in size.
The vandalism took some effort, likely more
than the culprits would be willing to do if asked
to put their hand to some manual labour.
It’s probable of course that the source of the
problem could be a couple of louts from out of
town, passing through after a bit of drinking
somewhere. It’s possible that it could be older
kids from another area wanting to make trouble
away from home. But it’s also probable that the
mischief was a result of local youths, out too
late, with too much time on their hands.
If it’s the latter, then it’s assumed someone
should have their suspicions as to whom the
culprits might be. One would hope that the
parents would have an idea their children were
out in the wee hours of Friday morning. If they
know they were, then one can only hope they
get a confession and make their children take
responsibility for their actions. At the very
least, it wouldn’t hurt to discuss the
impropriety of this kind of deed, its cost and
the real damage.
Not only do actions like this upset a
community, but they also do a disservice to
youth in general. Many young people would be
as outraged by this behaviour as the adults.
They love the towns they live in. They
contribute to them in a variety of ways, through
volunteering or simply by behaving with
maturity and common sense.
Conversely there are thugs who have no
respect for adults, no social conscience and no
pride in community. Their kind has existed
forever. There have always been the outcasts
and rebels, those who shunned authority and
lived by their own rules.
But, the majority of them, while reckless and
foolhardy, still held a level of fear in their heart
for their elders and law and order. I knew many
people who talked tough, until they had to
come home to face their parents about one
misdeed or another. It was a given, whether the
message had been delivered by police officer,
teacher or neighbour, that there would be
strong consequences to pay at home for one’s
actions.
Just ask anyone over 40 what frightened
them most about getting caught at something.
The answer would almost certainly be having
their parents find out.
Corporal punishment perhaps took the
pendulum too far. But now I fear we’re too
permissive. We worry about the rights of the
young, and rightly so. But what about the
rights of those hurt by their actions? Our small
communities are built by people who give of
their already limited time and dollars. To see
their efforts demolished, the pride they take in
their home made a mockery of, makes these
crimes far more serious than they may
outwardly appear.
A $500 reward is being offered to hopefully
help catch the culprits. When they do, wouldn’t
it be nice if the punishment could fit the crime?
A day of planting under the hot sun, in full
view of the community sounds about right to
me.
Other Views Wyncha getcher hair cut?
Eric
Dowd
FFrroomm
QQuueeeenn’’ss PPaarrkk
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.