Another poll call; morning thoughts (Sept 27)

First things first: I got another call from Ekos last night -- guess they're tracking prior subjects and seeing if we've changed our minds. I haven't, of course. But an interesting question came up as to who would be a stronger leader for the Liberals right now -- Dion, Bob Rae, or Michael Ignatieff? I have to concede, I said Iggy (he was my first choice at the delegate selection vote) -- but when asked who among the current leaders running was the strongest, I still said Dion.

Second: Can I take a moment to say something that's been on my mind?

The way things have been going the last few weeks, we've seen a campaign in Canada where the incumbent is high on style and short on substance; his opponents the exact opposite. And through it all, a very subtle hint from Steve Harper that he is the only one to "defend" Canada's interests and to vote against his ticket is un-Canadian. Of course, he'll never say it out loud but he knows exactly what he's trying to do and his core supporters do as well.

The most interesting thing is his implying that he stands the most for individual freedom while his opponents would stymie it. That Canadians should be free to make their own decisions and the marketplace left to its own vices to ensure food safety, a clean enviornment and so forth.

Interesting plan, except for a major hitch. The first three words in our Constitution are not "We the people." They are "Whereas the provinces." The underlying principle in our Constitution is not "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," it is "Peace, order and good government." While our Basic Law does contain the phrase "life, liberty and security of the person" it is well understood that personal freedom does not ensure good government as in the States, it is good government that ensures personal freedom -- and that no one party has the monopoly on this.

Even before we had a Charter of Rights, it was all three parties that sought to ensure that free religion, free press, free speech was a matter of course if not absolutely guaranteed -- and the way it was done was to ensure government was part of the solution where the private sector failed. That's why we have universal health care. We consider good health a right, not something to be purchased only if the sellers wanted to sell to us -- and it's our general better health than Americans that helps ensure our personal security and freedom.

I have nothing against Steve personally, although I'm sure by this time he'd like to take it out on me personally as well as many of my fellow progressives. But it's just the feeling I have that unless we have an activist government we will wind up less free, perhaps even less so than our American cousins. We pay higher taxes for a reason -- we want to make sure the least of us and the best of us have the same chance in life. Harper is committed to essentially turning everything over to the provinces -- give them a block grant and let them deal with social programs. And to hell with the poor. We saw Clinton and Gingrich team up to do that back in 1995. And the consequences have been a calamity and have made the current financial situation even worse.

When we consider many EU states and their even more comprehensive social programs, something is to be observed. They have generally greater peace of mind, stronger families and -- interestingly -- they still have a free marketplace for goods as well as ideas. And, funny thing, they're also actually happier than we are on this side of the pond. Then, there is the United States. Do we really want to be like our American allies? Or do we want a system based on practical ideas and practical solutions, and perhaps setting a best standards practice that Americans might want to follow?

Do we want a foreign policy that is a carbon copy of the US State Department? Or do we chart our own course and reclaim the honest broker status that Harper destroyed two years ago?

It wouldn't really matter if I was a Liberal or an independent. The fact remains, Harper's Canada is not the Canada I believe in, nor that many others would believe in. Under him the true north, strong and free, would be way less so.

As Kim Campbell said once, "Charisma without substance can be a dangerous thing." Dion may be totally uncharismatic, but I'll pick his substance over Harper's slickness any day.

Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.