Revanchist Review

Tuesday, August 30, 2005

My Application for the Supreme Court

I just read on the Globe and Mail website that Canadians are invited to submit names to Justice Minister Irwin Cotler for nominations to fill the vacancy in the Supreme Court of Canada with the impending retirement of Alberta's Mr. Justice Major.

I thought I would share my application letter with you.

Dear Mr. Cotler,

I would like to put forward my name as a candidate for the Supreme Court of Canada. I thought my wife would have made a great Governor General but no one asked her to apply and she wasn't on Helen Scherrer's Christmas list so our family missed out on that opportunity. It was so kind of you to open up nominations for the Supreme Court of Canada to all Canadians. I mean talk about inclusivness and celebrating diversity. You are awesome Mr. Cotler.

I meet the basic criteria of having been a practising member of a Canadian law society for at least 10 years - 32 in fact. Well, I went on the retirement roll of the BC Law Society on December 31st, 2004, but I am certain my application for reinstatement will be processed before the deadline for applications is attained.

As for my other qualifications, I must first suspend my most prominent virtue, humility before I list them. I didn't have time to importune a friend of mine to put forward my name so I need to be my own tout. It worked for Rosie Abella so why shouldn't I try it too.

I am a Westerner and the vacant position is that of a Westerner so I assume that gives me a leg up on some of the eastern wannabes who are eager to don the ermine skins.

I was born in Saskatchewan, was married in Alberta and live in British Columbia. I spoke French before I spoke English, was a Roman Catholic for the first 25 years of my life, an agnostic for 10 years and a Christian and an Anglican since the age of 37. I am thinking of becoming a Roman Catholic again because they have a leader with the power to enforce discipline and Mr. Martin is a Roman Catholic isn't he, or has his bishop outed him. It is either that or becoming a Liberal again. Will you be sending out invitations for the next leader of the Liberal Party soon? I might throw my name in that ring if somehow I don't make the cut as a new Supreme.

I have voted for the following parties federally: Liberal, Progressive Conservative, Reform Party, Alliance Party, Rhinoceros Party and Conservative. Provincially I have voted NDP, Socred and Liberal. I think this shows I am willing to listen to different arguments and I am willing to be persuaded to change my mind. And once persuaded I am even willing to change my mind. In fact, once persuaded I can do pretty much whatever I please so I think I would be a perfect Liberal appointment to the Supremes.

I read a lot and I write passably well. I have read Carlos Castenada and Lloyd Axworthy and have drool marks on page 4 of a book by each of them to prove it.

My favourite stack in law school was the Tasmanian Law Review section. I could sleep there undisturbed for over an hour and my snoring bothered no one. Ralph Goodale once stepped on my hand while searching for some obscure reference with which to impress Otto Lang, but I forgave him - for stepping on my hand that is. When Rosie Abella uses a decision from Tasmania to support some new definition she next invents, I might not have heard of the case but at least I will know where to find it.

I am a good listener, I don't think I would fall asleep while the court was in session. My judgments would be well reasoned and even better written. I would resist the temptation to use too many big words. I know the difference between enormousness and enormity, and resist those who say there no longer is a difference. Now don't get me wrong, I can deal with change and I know how important that is in the life of a Supreme.

I have visited every Canadian province but Newfoundland. My favourite latin maxim is "ex opere operato" - the effect is in the doing. (That is why I am applying for this position and not just talking about it to my friends and my dog.) I will do a quick review course before my appointment so I can get on top of some of those other quaint phrases like, "reductio ad absurdum" and "de minimus non curat lex" or my law school favourite "nemo dat quod non habet"

I have visited Barbados, China, Chile, Cuba, but not Haiti. I have visited England, France, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Greece, Spain, Luxembourg, Italy, Hungary, French Polynesia, New Zealand, Mexico and the United States. There must be others but I can't remember them and I put my passport in the washing machine after our last trip and...

I offer this travel itinerary as evidence I understand the human condition and would have no difficulty dealing with the multi-cultural nature of Canadian society. Also I like Thai food, though not too spicy. I once had Jamaican food, but not Haitian.

Oh yes, and I once wrote a paper in 3rd year law school for my Law and Poverty class which required me to research some aboriginal issues. I met David Ahenakew and had a beer or two with him in a bar in Prince Albert. I wouldn't let that experience prejudice me if his appeal is heard after my appointment. Come to think of it I might fall asleep during some of Doug Christie's submissions, but I will ask Rosie to lend me her notes.

So Irwin, that pretty much sums up my resume. I can only hope I catch Mr. Martin in one of his giddy little moods when the shortlisting occurs. Maybe he will like my story or my name. Pretty close to Bono isn't it? Oh, and while I haven't worked for the CBC I do listen to it and it has been neat watching football games on CBC without commentary, how radical an idea is that! And hockey last winter, all those reruns of old Stanley Cup games, I was able to make a lot of money betting against my cousin Marcel. But I digress.

Yours if you want me, I wait with anticipation, but with neither trepidation nor consternation,

B.J. Buan

P.S. Any chance of getting an advance on the sweet salary you pay the Supremes, and maybe the dental plan could kick in a little early!

P.S.S. If for some reason I don't get this appointment could you just slide this application over onto the pile of Senate nominations. Just be sure I am ahead of Gurmant Grewal and Judy Sgro.

Tom Courchene Doesn't Get It

Tom Courchene grew up in Wakaw, Saskatchewan. He was already off at university when I moved there in 1961, but I remember him being around in the summers. His younger brother was a boy scout leader. My fellow scouts and I thought he was real cool when he let 6 of us keep a dozen beer we found stashed in a bale pile in the middle of a farmer's field on one of our overnight hikes. (It was even cooler when I found out later the beer belonged to my older brother, who couldn't believe his bad luck when he found his stash missing).

John Diefenbaker had his first law practice in Wakaw. His former office was next door to the hotel my dad owned. As boys we used to climb on the roof of the hotel and throw rocks on the tin roof of the old office to enrage the alcoholic old lawyer Mr. Mushinski who lived and remarkably practised law from the Chief's old digs. The sight of Mushinski standing on the street in his long underwear with a hatchet in his hand screaming into the black night seemed funny to us at the time. We can be cruel in our youth, can't we? What seemed funny at the time I now clearly recognize as having been reprehensible behaviour.

This is all background to last week's headline in the National Post, presenting Tom Courchene as an expert who recommended that Alberta should share its oil revenue windfall with the rest of Canada, failing which the Federal government should find creative ways to force Alberta to do so. Courchene proposed measures such as increasing the minimum tax levels to prevent the Alberta government from sharing its wealth exclusively with its citizens.

Tom is concerned that unless Alberta shares its wealth people will flock to Alberta from other parts of Canada, something he suggests would be bad for Canada and would damage the federation. - If Alberta spends its wealth on improving its provincial amenities such as education and health then "who would want to stay in Saskatchewan?" asks Courchene."

Now Tom is clearly a bright guy. He has an B.A. (Honours) from the University of Saskatchewan and he graduated from Princeton in 1967 with a PhD in Economics. He has written and had published two hundred and fifty books and articles on Canadian policy issues, including: a four volume series on Canadian monetary policy for the C.D. Howe Institute; In Praise of Renewed Federalism (C.D. Howe); Social Policy in the 1990s: Agenda for Reform (C.D. Howe) Equalization Payments: Past, Present and Future (Ontario Economic Council); Economic Management and the Division of Powers (Macdonald Royal Commission) and A First Nations Province (Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen's)

Tom seems to have spent all his adult life living and working in the corridors of academia in Ontario and Quebec or studying in Eastern US universities. I don't know if Tom returned to Saskatchewan for the province's homecoming this summer. Perhaps if he had he might have reflected more deeply on the issue of redistribution of Alberta's wealth before he mused over what coercive methods Ottawa might use to get its hands on it.

The gap in economic wealth between Saskatchewan and Alberta does not arise from a disparity between the natural resources of the two provinces, but rather from the different choices made by the majority of voters in the two provinces over the last 50 years. Alberta has without interruption been governed by political parties who have favoured entrepreneurialism and which have seen the role of government to be to encourage the private sector to grow and expand and to reward ideas and efforts. Saskatchewan on the other hand, with but few brief exceptions, has been governed by socialist governments intent on aggressively redistributing wealth amongst its citizenry through the active intervention of the state in economic affairs. Bureaucracy rules in Saskatchewan, while private initiative reigns in Alberta.

The consequence of such decisions should have been obvious and predictable to an economist such as Mr. Courchene, though judging by his book titles he is a big fan of redistribution. Saskatchewan has vast oil and gas resources and in addition it has other resources Alberta does not have - potash, uranium, diamonds to name but a few. Saskatchewan also has more grain production and equivalent forest reserves than does Alberta. The failure of Saskatchewan citizens to benefit under our federation from the abundance of the resources they own is mostly a matter of their own choice in the provincial governments they have elected. The failure is exacerbated by the years of power of the federal Liberal Party in Ottawa and the abusive use of it in the past with policies like the National Energy Policy.

The Federation Courchene fears will be permanently damaged should Alberta not voluntarily turn over some of its wealth to the rest of Canada is, I would argue, already severely and perhaps permanently damaged by reason of the years of domination by Quebec and Ontario in the Federal arena.

My recent trip to Saskatchewan convinced me that the Saskatchewan Party will win the next provincial election. If given two terms like the BC Liberals) in which to rid the system of its more gross inefficiencies, wastefulness and lack of accountability then no matter how wealthy Alberta continues to become, many more Saskatchewanians will stay home and many who left it to find opportunity elsewhere will return.

Meanwhile, if the rest of Canada doesn't wake up and see the extent of the disaffection with Ottawa that has developed in Western Canada, and if regardless of all the reasons why the Liberals should be removed from power they are re-elected in January 2006; the cries for Western independence from this flawed Federation will become more widespread.

If Courchene truly values a united Canada and cares for the province of his birth, he should use his intellect to much better purpose than that of shilling for even more Ottawa intervention in the lives of Canadians.

By proposing solutions which are clearly seen as reprehensible to Albertans and to fiscally conservative Canadians generally, Courchene and those of his ilk throw rocks on the tin roof of Western Canadians and they aren't at all happy about it. One day they may just look up and spy the Kilroy nose and beady eyes of their tormentors peering at them over the Manitoba Ontario border and decide enough is enough.

Thursday, August 18, 2005

Are There Dogs and Rowboats in Heaven?

Two friends and I were discussing how important our pets were to us and the question arose as to whether there are dogs in heaven. Attributing the comment to C.S. Lewis one friend said, " I think so, but if there are none there will be a perfectly good explanation!"

I feel the same way about rowboats. There must be rowboats in heaven, and peaceful ocean bays and calm lakes upon which to row them while you feel your heart pound and your muscles strain as your eyes take in the magnificence of nature.

I went rowing today and felt incredibly blessed. Each oar stroke was an opportunity to give thanks for the privilege of being alive and of taking in the splendor of the scenery. Of course not everyone can experience the peacefulness of a rowboat. Many find the equivalent in a hike across an alpine meadow, a long swim in the ocean, a bike ride in the mountains or on the prairie, a game of chess on a verandah with a friend, a nap in a hammock.

Some of us attribute the sense of peace experienced in those circumstances to a Divine order. For others it is a more personal experience and not one related to any sense of the Immanent. I make no judgement with respect to which may be the best or the right explanation for those moments of peace. I only ask that those who don't share my sense of the Divine be open to the possibility that there is more to this world than our individual experiences.

Harvard University is embarking on a project to try and resolve the conflict between Darwinism and Creationism. Unsurprisingly the spokesperson for the project remarked that his expectation is that the project will fill some of the gaps in the Darwin theory and thus make less credible the argument in favour of a Divine role in creation, or to use the politically correct term the theory of Intelligent Design.

I don't think Darwin's theory has a place for dogs and rowboats in heaven, so I will continue to believe that life is a mystery and no amount of money granted to Harvard or Oxford or Yale or other universities will provide the answer to the puzzle.

This much I know, that David Stove got it right when he said, "If Darwin's theory of evolution were true, there would be in every species a constant and ruthless competition to survive: a competition in which only a few in any generation would be winners. But it is perfectly obvious that human life is not like that, however it may be with other species."

More on this in a later essay. For the moment I only want to share my joy in the resplendence of my 90 minutes in my rowboat, and hope each of you found the time today to be in your own equivalent.

I end with this reflection by Nathaniel Hawthorne, in The Celestial Railroad.

"Many passengers stop to take their pleasure or make their profit in Vanity Fair, instead of going onward to the celestial city. Indeed, such are the charms of the place that people often affirm it to be the true and only heaven; stoutly contending that there is no other, that those that seek further are mere dreamers, and that, if the fabled brightness of the celestial city lay but a bare mile beyond the gates of vanity, they would not be fools enough to go thither".

Accidents Speak Louder Than Words

Annie Lennox coined the title in one of the tracks from her Medusa album. I thought of how appropriate the line is in response to this morning's editorial in the National Post by John Duffy, Liberal party apologist and advisor. (I noted he is a volunteer advisor, perhaps to suggest he has more credibility than one who is paid to be a Liberal flack.)

After every train wreck, this Martin led Liberal government has trotted out some spokesperson, who like Baghdad Bob stands before us and tells us all is well while the ruins of his city smoulder behind him. Scott Brison has perfected the role, Jean Lapierre often gets the French speaking part. Now the new man Duffy is put forward to declare "It's Official, the GG controversy is over." Mme. Jean has spoken and she is not a separatist and has never been a member of a political party. How comforting!

And to add credibility to his bald assertion that all is well, Duffy offers that the "hyperventilating" members of English Canada who have picked up on the news that Mme. Jean once raised her glass to toast the oppressed Quebec independistes are merely allowing themselves to be pawns to the separatist agenda.

Now Mr. Duffy as the latest Charlie McCarthy for the Liberal Party is free to express his opinion, and to its credit the National Post gives him space to air his views. But please let's not buy it folks. The most charitable explanation for Martin's nomination of Mme. Jean is that the train was wrecked because someone didn't check to see if the line had been switched.

The most likely explanation is that Mr. Martin is truly a Howdy Doody who has no idea what he is doing, and he is being guided by advisors whose goal is to advance the deconstruction agenda against yet another Canadian tradition and institution, the office of Governor General.

A retired member of the Canadian Armed forces reminded me that the process of deconstruction began under the present GG, Adrienne Clarkson. All portraits of Queen Victoria were removed from the walls of Rideau Hall because they offended Mr. Raulston Saul. My friend noted also that there are no longer any portraits displayed of the Governors General of Canada who were British citizens.

Tradition and history have no place in the new Canada. We are now multi-cultural and inclusive and we don't want to offend any sensibilities. The John Ralston Sauls and the Jean-Daniel Lafonds of the new Canada lead the march to the ramparts of the present day sans-culottes, and like lemmings the press and the usual elites dance merrily along behind.

So Mr. Duffy or the Globe and Mail's John Ibbitson can reassure us all they want that Mme. Jean's appointment is but another natural evolution of the role of GG in the new Canada, but those who cherish traditional values and virtues are not fooled - accidents indeed do speak louder than words. There is nothing natural about these changes, they are part of a carefully planned attack and they will continue to succeed until enough Canadians wake up.

Saturday, August 13, 2005

The Unbearable Lightness of Being Paul Martin

If the French Revolution were to recur eternally, French historians would be less proud of Robespierre. But because they deal with something that will not return, the bloody years of the Revolution have turned into mere words, theories, and discussions, have become lighter than feathers, frightening no one. There is an infinite difference between a Robespierre who occurs only once in history and a Robespierre who eternally returns, chopping off French heads. Milan Kundera, The Incredible Lightness of Being

In his novel the Czech author Kundera explores the idea of the eternal return, the philosophical concept that everything recurs as we once experience it.

Canada is enduring a period of the eternal return of Liberal governments. When the time comes to respond to polls or to cast ballots in federal elections sufficient numbers of us fail to recognize the signs of history repeating itself. The ravages that Liberal policies have inflicted on our country’s economics and its culture become “mere words, theories and discussions – light as feathers and frightening no one.”

Kundera writes also about how bearing burdens brings us closer to the earth and makes our lives more truthful and real. Conversely, the absence of burdens makes a man’s life light and such a life “become(s) only half real, his movements as free as they are insignificant.”

Mr. Martin has the air of one who has not borne great burdens. The latest imbroglio over his ill-considered appointment of Ms. Jean to the post of Governor-General is but another reminder of how unsuited Mr. Martin is for his role. If we are to believe the words of his own advisor Helen Scherrer (former Heritage Minister, defeated in the last election she is now on the staff of the PMO), she is the person who put Ms. Jean’s name on the list and who urged Mr. Martin to nominate her.

Scherrer’s description of Martin’s excitement over the prospect of one of his favourite French language CBC personalities becoming the GG is a chilling read as it reveals the lack of gravitas on the part of Mr. Martin. Mr. Martin's response was consistent with the scenes of him giddy with excitement at sharing the stage with rock star Bono. In these moments the image of Mr. Martin is one of unbearable lightness.

Mr. Martin seems never to have had a friend like I had in my law school classmate David. For some reason still unknown to me I was reasonably popular amongst my first year classmates and was elected as class rep on the Law Student’s Association. In my second year I was elected social director, which made me responsible to organize social functions and most agreeably to roam the campus during the first 6 weeks of the term to find suitably attractive candidates for Law Queen (there was no question about the gender of law queen in the late 60’s in Saskatoon). Understandably, these responsibilities and the perquisites that came with them had a certain self-aggrandizing effect on me that I did not immediately recognize. When someone suggested to me that I should put my name in the ring for LSA president, I gave it some serious thought and sought counsel from some friends.

My friend David offered his frank opinion - “You shouldn’t run because you would do a lousy job”. Hurt, I said, “What do you mean? I did a good job as social director and you voted for me. “You would do a lousy job because you only want the president’s job for the status it gives you. You don’t really want to do the job of president”, said David. He was right of course and I was wise enough or at least chastened enough to abandon all thoughts of a political career.

Mr. Martin only wanted the job for its status and to fulfill the legacy that eluded his father. His apparent effectiveness as Finance Minister masked his lack of credentials as a leader. Mr. Martin has risen to the top and it is now clear to many that he has not the weight with which to maintain his perch, and his unbearable lightness sees him shift and twist with every zephyr of polled opinion.

Meanwhile our national state of delusion leads us ignore all signs of how adrift we have become. What will happen should the real burdens facing our world press down on Canada? Will Mr. Martin have the courage of a Tony Blair to say, “the rules have changed”? It would take a remarkable transformation for him to do so.

Thursday, August 04, 2005

Oh Canada, Chapter 11 - Our New G-G

The fix is in and the labels are printed and ready to be applied to those of us with the temerity to question the wisdom of Mr. Paul Martin in today appointing Ms. Michaelle Jean as our next Governor General.

As I move along the conveyor belt toward the political correctness unit of the great Canadian cultural abattoir, I can only wonder which imprimatur will be applied to me. Which label will it be? Bigot, white male, Western Canadian, Conservative - they probably have a special one for folks like me who have chosen to hang their ideas on the laundry line for all to see. I like surprises and remain calm as I advance to meet my fate.

I confess I cringed as I watched Mr. Martin announce the appointment of Ms. Jean on CBC Newsworld this morning. Now that is no surprise to my regular readers as Mr. Martin has the uncanny ability to elicit cringes from me rather routinely. More particularly, I flinched before I cringed, noting first that he had a fresh haircut –a trustworthy tell in the world of politicians. They usually get a new haircut before venturing out to tell the biggest fibs.

The cringe came when Mr. Martin listed the qualifications which make Ms. Jean “uniquely qualified” for the position of G-G. Now let me say this by way of explanation not defence, as the labeling stamp rears its Damoclean hand over my head – based on what I know of her Ms. Jean seems an example of an honest upstanding Canadian citizen. She has persevered to obtain an excellent education, she has traveled abroad, and she has risen high in the ranks of her chosen profession of journalism. She seems bright, would be a welcomed companion at any dinner party, book club discussion, bike ride down the Kettle Valley or boat trip down the Li River from Guilin to Yanghsuo. Her husband looks to be somewhat older than she and is brave or foolish enough to compensate for his bald pate by letting the hair on the back of his head meet his collar. Come to think of it, but for the adventurous nature of her husband when it comes to hairstyles, Ms. Jean bears a striking resemblance to my wife on the basis of qualifications.

My wife should be G-G. In fact, any of the women in her two book clubs should be G-G based on most of Ms. Jean’s qualifications. But none of them was born in Haiti and they never worked for CBC you say. And they never won any prizes for documentary features on abused women or a celebration of the 40th anniversary of the Cuban Revolution. I guess that disqualifies them. Wait a moment, I have a female friend who did spend her career in the CBC, and she is from an ethnic minority, but no she was born in the U.S and never lived in Montreal, oh well!

Alas, my wife is merely the daughter of a WWII veteran and Military Cross winner, he a 5th generation descendant of United Empire Loyalists and Great Lake riverboat captains, land surveyors and son of a coal and ice merchant in the dry Saskatchewan prairie. Her mother’s parents left Fraserborough Scotland at the turn of the century, a cooper father and a fish packer mother with a young daughter, all their earthly possessions in a couple trunks.

I don’t need to burden you with the rest of the details. The general outline of my wife’s antecedents and her story would be familiar to most of you based on your own experience. I have no hesitation in saying that my wife and thousands of other Canadian women are as bright, hard working, educated, well traveled and cultured, as is Ms. Jean to represent all Canadians.

This young country of Canada is a nation of immigrants. We are all descendants of people who chose to come here for a variety reasons. Some came to escape poverty, some to escape persecution; a few came from privilege and abundance to pursue even greater opportunity. Ms. Jean’s story is no more compelling than that of thousands of other Canadian women and men, in fact one could argue even less compelling than many.

So what exactly is it that makes her “uniquely qualified” to represent all Canadians in the mind of Mr. Martin, upon whom rest the sole responsibility for the appointment (subject to the Queen’s right to veto)?

Listening to Mr. Martin one can only deduce he believes, or has been told by his handlers that Canadians will believe, that in order to be the G-G one has to come from an identifiable visible minority. The concept that experience, wisdom, proven devotion to public service amongst other attributes might trump the colour of one’s skin or the province which one calls home, seems foreign to Mr. Martin.

I was reminded of Mr. Martin's obloquy to Rosie Abella when he named her to the Supreme Court of Canada. Being the daughter of Holocaust survivors gave her special qualifications to sit on the Supreme Court it seemed. What about being the daughter of survivors of the Great Depression on the prairies, or of Mennonites who escaped Russia, or the son of a father he never knew who was raised by his grandmother, or the boy who was one of thirteen who remembers waking up in bed with two or three siblings a winter morning, his hair frozen. These are all inspiring Canadian stories, but apparently they don't meet Mr. Martin's standards.

Only the most ignorant or obtuse Canadian could fail to have noted that there exists a considerable tension and division in our nation at this time both politically and culturally. The Liberal minority government clings to power with the narrowest of margins. The groans of significant social upheaval can be heard from sea to sea as we meddle with the institution of marriage. If ever there was a time for a political appointment that signaled caution, temperance, conservatism (in the non-political meaning of the much maligned word) surely it was now.

But no, our Prime Minister chooses instead to appoint another career CBC employed, foreign born, female journalist of colour as our Governor General. And, in his public comments he seeks to trumpet this appointment as another signal event to show the world what an enlightened, diverse, inclusive, God in Her wisdom is smiling upon us nation we are here in Canada.

When asked by the first journalist in the post announcement press conference, what Mr. Martin had to say to the more cynical observer who saw this appointment as an effort to bolster the Liberal party fortunes in Quebec, Mr. Martin put on his best pouty supercilious face and declared this was no time for partisan thoughts. Cringe turned to gag reflex and I had to turn off the television at that point.

I sincerely wish Ms. Jean all success in her appointment. I don’t believe it is one she sought. I pray that she might receive the wisdom she needs to fulfill the serious constitutional responsibilities her office carries, should she be called upon to exercise them. Should her tenure be one of a purely symbolic nature, I pray she will carry out her duties with grace and skill.

As for Mr. Martin I pray for an expeditious end to his tenure as Prime Minister. The longer he remains in the position, the more he demeans the office. Not in my lifetime has there been a man who served as Prime Minister who appeared less comfortable, competent and dignified in the role, than he. Mr. Clark is his nearest rival. The scapegoat Prime Ministers Mr. Turner and Ms. Campbell were recognized by all as mere propitiations for the sins of their predecessors.

Mr. Martin fought long and hard for the levers of power, and now that he has them he has proven to be even more inept than any of us could have imagined. The transparently political nature of this latest appointment serves only to highlight once again the cravenness of this Liberal government, and its almost freakish commitment to cling to power.

My long lament for Canada will only be intensified and extended if, in the weeks of debate and analysis which follow this appointment, the prevailing argument emerges that once again Canada has shown the world what an enlightened place we are by dint of this appointment.

In spite of my lamentations I live on in hope that one day soon, a majority of Canadians will fight its way clear of the web of political spin woven by our current Prime Minister and his handlers, and amass the collective will to vote for change.

For my liberal readers I point to Confucius and not Christ for inspiration (Christ being intensely politically incorrect these days as a source of inspiration and wisdom). Confucius was unable to find his philosopher king, and died without hope for the future of civilization. Subsequent history proved him wrong and showed that a philosopher ought to say what he thinks, especially at a time when no one who is anyone agrees with him. Confucianism became the official outlook of the greatest Empire that the world has known.

I am no Confucius and I am no philosopher, but it may be worth your while to give more than a moment’s thought to the reasoning our Prime Minister has used to declare the “unique qualifications” of our G-G elect.