The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

4 -- PORT PERRY STAR -- Tues. August 28, 1984 editorial comments / UL TELL you ONE Trims, Rowwie ~-- THE CORONATION 15 EAS, GETING JHE CROUMW JEWELS 15 SOMETHING ELSE ! --- or TES rw vr we ww - - chatterbox by John B. McClelland TT Te TT TE REAGAN'S POLITICS Last Thursday evening, I found myself sitting in front of the TV set watching Ronald Reagan deliver his acceptance speech at the Republican National Conven- tion in Dallas, Texas. Ronald Reagan has not been one of my favourite politicians over the last few years, yet as I watched this 73 year former actor give his 45 minute speech to an ob- viously partisan audience, I found myself almost mesmerized by what I was seeing and hearing. Reagan is no great orator, yet the audience (and me) were hanging off every line. He was interrupted numerous times by rounds of applause (orchestrated to be sure as this was a Republican convention) but some were entirely spontaneous. And more than once I had to stop myself from joining in that applause. This is the man who is being given credit for injec- ting new life in the Republican Party in the United States. He's 73 years old, falls asleep during important meetings (like the one with the Pope) gets confused about where he is sometimes, makes funny little jokes about nuking the Russians when he thought the radio mike was turned off, and easily admits that when it comes to policy, he leaves the details to others and con- centrates instead on setting the agenda. This is the man who didn't have to fight a messy primary to get his party's nomination. This is the man who is given a very, very good chance of re-election when Americans go to the polls on November 6. Watching him on the tube, it suddenly occurred to me just why Ronald Reagan is so darn popular south of the border. And there are probably more than just a few Canadians who wish he was running for office in this country. No matter what you may think of the Republicans and their flirtation with the 'new right' or his policies on this or that, it is impossible not to like Ronald Reagan. He comes across as sincere, honest, persuasive without any hard sell, uncomplicated, and just about every sentence he utters makes good, common sense. Indeed, common sense government is a major plank in his platform. Everything he says is totally defensible. He says he wants to bring volunteer prayer time back into the schools. What's wrong with that? How can any reasonable human being argue against that value? He says he wants to the size of the federal government. A great idea and it sells south of the border. He talks about a tax reduction for all income earners. About time, they say. He makes reference to the brutal Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and in the next breath says the United States is the only nation on earth with the might to stand up to the Russians. Is he right? He talks about values: the family, work, pride, patriotism, dignity for all Americans, help for the tru- ly needy. What he doesn't say is anything specific. He doesn't give his opponents any ammo for counter-attacks. But what's more, at least in the speech I heard last week, it came across in such a way that if you opposed Ronald Reagan, you opposed what he stands for: the family, prayer in the schools, a strong America, self reliance, full employment, the flag itself and all those gold medals, the U.S. athletes won at the Olympic games. In that speech last week, Ronald Reagan went on for nearly 45 minutes and didn't make one specific pro- mise. He didn't drop a single election plum or goodie. Granted, he may have to get specific as the campaign heats up in October. But not once did he challenge his audience, or threaten them, or make them feel uncom- fortable. On the contrary, he made even me feel com- fortable. Had I been an American, I would have felt very comfortable. He didn't talk about any of America's problems: drugs, crime in the streets, the desperate poor, the homeless, the lack of medical facilities for those without means, and so on. But he did talk about the flag, about pride in one's country, about how great America is, about individual freedoms, about less government red tape, about peace through strength, and about how the Democrats are to blame for every malaise that has hit the country for the last half century. It was a masterful performance and when the cameras cut to shots of the audience, one aw nothi but smiling, adoring faces, young and old alike, many of them waving the Stars and Stripes and breaking in- to the chant "USA, USA, USA." How many times have you heard the audience in this country break into a "CA-NA-DA" chant at a political rally or meeting? In short, Ronald Reagan, is winning because he is telling Americans that they are winning, at everything, and partner, it is hard to argue against that. Contrast, if you will, that approach with what is go- ing on in Canada. We have three party leaders running around the country and all they talk about is how much trouble we're in. All we ever hear in Canada are the negatives: unemployment, the deficit, interest rates, inflation and so on, and on, and on. Hell, listening to politicians in this country makes one ashamed to be a Canadian, to even live here. You wouldn't dare wave the maple leaf flag at a political ral- ly. Somebody might drag you off and have you certified. But not so in Reagan country He is simply saying "look, things are getting better. Trust me. vote for me and things will get better still" How can you argue against that" (Turn to page 6) Strange Campaign The political pundits and media gurus whose job it is to dissect and analyze federal elections may be a long time putting their fingers on the campaign now in its final week before the vote on Tuesday, September 4. To say the least, this has been a strange campaign, and if the recent public opinion polls are accurate, a cen- tral element has been the demise of Prime Minister John Turner and his Liberal Party. The polls say that unless there is some kind of a dramatic turn-around in these final few days, the Liberals are headed for a major disaster on September 4, even in the province of Quebec, which they have virtually 'owned' for more than 20 years. Much has been said and written about Mr. Turner since the campaign got underway, and when his fortunes began to pale early, people started to ask the question why. After all, Mr. Turner won the Liberal leadership in a tough fight with Jean Chretien in June. He has been hailed as the 'new guy" on the Liberal block, a former Cabinet minister who quit a decade ago because he couldn't see eye to eye on anything with Pierre Trudeau. A lot of ordinary Canadians couldn't see eye to eye with Mr. Trudeau either. But if Mr. Turner was to put distance between himself and Mr. Trudeau, his chances were dashed at the starting blocks over the infamous patronage issue. It appears as if Mr. Turner was totally bamboozled by the former Prime Minister in his approval of these patronage posts. It was some way to put a new stamp on things. Not long afterwards, Mr. Turner found himself in more hot water over the "pat on the bum' incident, a non-issue if there ever was one. This received far more national attention than it deserved, and Turner was forced to spend a lot of time answering questions about and ultimately offer a public apology. ¢ His campaign was sputtering before it got off the back burner, much to the delight of Brian Mulroney and the Conservatives. Then came the resurrection of Keith Davey to try and salvage the campaign for the Liberals, a move that was greeted with much suspicion as Mr. Davey is forever linked with Pierre Trudeau. Again, this was very much a 'non issue' but it occupied the front pages of the newspapers and put Turner on the defensive. Mr. Mulroney went into a holding pattern, trying simply to avoid the "big gaffe" and rather than the Con- servatives winning the campaign, the Liberals were los- ing it day in and day out. Television was not kind to Mr. Turner. He appeared desperate, gesturing wildly with his hands, and the net effect was that rather than listen to what he was saying, viewers were watching him. Throw in the debate on women's issues which was widely criticized, the emergence of a host of splinter parties pushing a single issue, and the sight of the Prime Minister wide-eyed, flustered at every turn and gestur- ing wildly with his hands and arms, and you end up with a campaign which almost defies political logic. One final defiance of that logic happened on Sun- day when Mr. Trudeau made one of his rare public ap- pearances in this campaign. He showed up on the streets of a heavily ethnic riding in Toronto, stumping for his old buddy Jim Coutts. The television caught him kissing a lot of ladies, young and old, there were scenes of smiling faces, a brief time warp back to the Trudeaumania days of 1968. The polls say the Liberals are headed for the op- position side in the House of Commons, there is even a chance that Mr. Turner himself will not be elected in his Vancouver riding. Mr. Trudeau makes one brief ap- pearance and basks in the lime-light of an adoring crowd. It has been a strange election campaign, to be sure. Through it all, Mr. Broadbent of the NDP has cam- paigned as he always does, with a healthy dose of sincerity and good old-fashioned common sense, forc- ing attention on the issue. Yet the polls say the New Democrats will be hard pressed to hang on to the 31 seats they now hold in the Parliament. Strange indeed. There is an old saying that the only poll that really counts is the one on election day. But one can't discount the value of the public opinion polls taken in the last cou- ple of weeks. Overwhelmingly, they say that Canada will have a new Prime Minister and government on September 5. Whether Mr. Mulroney ""won" the country, or Mr. Turner "lost" it will be immaterial But Canadians have a right to expect that any change will be a change for the better.