There were two interesting issues discussed in the Concordian (March 1, 2006), the idea of questioning a nominee to the Supreme Court and the Bloc’s idea to separate Quebec from Canada. The Think Globally opinion piece was very superficial in its analysis in an attempt to promote Stephen Harper as the great and wise leader and the Liberal party as insignificant, all the while carefully omitting crucial facts. The author provides not a single name of a Supreme Court justice who was appointed because of patronage and payback, and that is because the Supreme Court of Canada has been free of that and most of the Justices have been exemplary appointees. The current Chief Justice has spoken eloquently of the need to keep the court from becoming politicized, which is precisely why Harper’s decision was a terrible precedent, hopefully never to be repeated again in Canadian history.
The interview with the Bloc Member of Parliament was illuminating, but as is so often the case the journalist did not question the totally fallacious assumption that destroying Canada would improve your life. The Bloc Quebecois is the only party that is rarely if ever criticized, despite its often-racist record and its dishonesty in not admitting that Quebec is one of seven provinces that receives more money from the federal government than it pays in. The Bloc Quebecois’ main interest is power, which is legitimate. What it does not like to admit is it’s to improve their own status, not that of the individuals in this province who would be severely hurt economically by the Bloc’s desire to destroy Canada for their own selfish economic and political interests, to say nothing of the ever-so-subtle racism that occasionally surfaces, which is a much more held belief than many would like to acknowledge.
David S. Rovins