Archive

Reflections on Beeton All–Candidates Meeting

October 9, 2015   ·   0 Comments

Dear editor:
I attended the most recent and actually I think the only candidates debate this round for Simcoe for two reasons. One was that my son was dismayed that our incumbent, Dr. Leitch, had not shown up for the debate held at Banting. As part of a history or civics course it was an ample display of what we now are being subjected to as the conservative form of democracy. Now you see ‘me, but more likely you don’t. I explained this to my son using this as a teachable moment.
The other reason I went was because my wife was concerned about barbaric practices. No coincidence that this is the name of the newly proposed legislation proffered by Dr Leitch in Ajax this Friday past. Actually the name of the legislation is “culturally barbaric practices”. My wife had a question germane to the issue and sent me in to be the messenger.
The question is a two part item. One “is there a statue of limitations for this proposed new law?” And two “is changing your last name a function of a barbaric, culturally based practice?” Let me amplify. My wife has had regrets following our marriage. Not about the marriage per se as I understand but that she gave up her family name in exchange for mine. Now there may be a sub-text here of Norwegian origin and an effort to continue to get back at and oppress the Irish, but I am not going to go down that road.
The sub text notwithstanding, the issue was, was she simply plain stupid for giving up her name or was she the victim of a much larger, and sinister, barbaric practice. It seemed that if the Dr. was in the house who better to render an opinion.
However, as I said at the debate, that was not my question. So please don’t answer. But I think the conservative modus operandi is to never let a talking point go untalked.
She answered. I tried to wave her off, but to no avail. It seems that name changes are not barbaric, just plain stupid. And there is no law to fix stupidity…..yet!
Now my real question reads as follows. “The quote is that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. We are as a Canadian nation bombing ISIL. ISIL is bombing Syria. We do not like either ISIL or Syria. In case there was any doubt about Syria let me remind everyone that in the previous 6 months Syria has killed upwards of 1800 children in its indiscriminate barrel bombing of its own innocent population and towns. Therefore it would seem we are friends of Syria. Why have we ended up aligning ourselves and befriending the barbarians? When did we decide that we were a war waging nation when we had an illustrious record as peacekeepers?”
The answer was……well my question was not answered. I and the audience received a mini lecture on the horrors of ISIL. Not my question and I don’t think I look like Homer Simpson.
What is concerning is that even when the conservatives show up for a debate there is no difference between their presence or their absence. Like the proverbial hole in the donut there is nothing of substance. While this is their tactic throughout the campaign and as they have governed, their actions have become even more odious as they constantly try to make a wedge issue the issue of the campaign. By this I mean the turn to the issue of terrorism and barbarism. Also one cannot turn away from the fact that this is a veiled form of racism which is spun at lower depths.
By twisting and turning all issues back, there is no real conversation, debate or discussion. The electorate is not elevated by these practices. Maybe it was good that the venerable Dr. did not show up to Banting. I think in this case this is asbestos as it gets. But it can get worse.
Rick Kelly,
New Tecumseth

Readers Comments (0)