Queen Kim
The Progressive Conservatives (an oxymoron in he class of “safe sex” and “politically correct”) are killing me.
Draft one of this column talked of a June coronation for Defense Minister Avril Phaedra (“B.S.”) Kim Campbell. It seemed ol’ Bare Shoulders would go unchallenged as Michael Wilson, Don Mazankowski, Barbara McDougall and Perin Beatty all dropped like flies, thereby changing Tory Blue to yellow in record time. Her acclamation was all but assured, but then things took a turn. Environment Minister Jean Charest because the sacrificial lamb, and I thought that current Revenue Minister (and former world champion figure skater) Otto Jelinek would also enter the fray. Draft two was born.
“A wise political move” said your humble columnist. Sure the party saves $7 million by skipping a convention, but B.S. needs a formal coming out party against plausible challengers. Garth Turner, Pat Boyer and Jim Edwards don’t cut it. Charest is an up and comer of the bright young minds in the party while Jelinek would fill the role of the cagey veteran. Two relatively solid challengers.
Of course, neither has a real chance unseat B.S.. Charest, no matter how bright, is only 34 and just too young to be a leader. Jelinek though was intriguing, and the “twirling palindrome” was riding a wave of figure skating sentimentality. He’s a solid politician, but it remained that even if Kurt and Elvis, Isabelle and Lloyd campaigned for him, he would only get the silver medal. After all, having the best double Axel at the convention only counts for so much. But, at the eleventh hour, Jelinek bailed out, citing family reasons. As draft three is written, the queen appears safe from a major challenge…for now. Don’t be surprised though, if somebody is waiting in the wings, ready to pounce a chance to unseat the heir apparent.
As for B.S., why has her star risen so quickly when we really don’t know anything about her? A big reason is her political savvy. While she is pro-abortion, her Bill C-43 as Justice Minister gave lip service to pro-lifers while promoting death of babies; dubiously walking both sides of the street. Remember what happened south of the border last November with another candidate who had a penchant for compromise in a public opinion atmosphere of “change?”
Formerly married to a chess player of international repute (we’ll call him Mr. Campbell), she makes moves Bobby Fischer would be proud of; her biggest pawn so far being the media.
Three bullets – two victims
American Michael Frederick Griffin has set the pro-life movement back further than he can possibly realize.
If you’re not up to the speed, Griffin, as part of a Rescue American protest in Florida city, fired three shots from a .38 caliber revolver at point-blank range into abortionist David Gunn.
But the question begs, despite Gunn’s former occupation, how can someone who is “pro-life” take another life in such fashion? Compounding the situation, American pro-life organizations, while not condoning Griffin’s action, didn’t exactly condemn it either. Don Treshman, national director of Rescue America told the New York Times, “While Gunn’s death is unfortunate, it’s also true that quite a number of babies’ lives will be saved.”
Don’t these people get it? Does the word “backlash” ring a bell? With the new pro-abortion President and Attorney General, how much easier will it be for Congress to pass the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrance Act (FACEA), which would make the type of efforts by rescue groups a federal offence? Closer to home, Ontario Attorney-General Marion Boyd is kicking into higher gear, preparing an injunction application to ban pro-life protesting at “clinics” and “harassment” of staff. On both sides of the border, the political and public repercussions of the shooting will be felt for a long time.
Griffin loaded, aimed and fired. He nailed Gunn, but he also shot the pro-life movement square in the foot.
