Shades of a BJ

By BJ I mean, Bill Jefferson…you know, former President Bill Jefferson Clinton…what did you think I meant?

Your mind is in the gutter again dear reader.

But seriously folks, President Clintons second term was filled with scandal after scandal, the least of which featured him lying on the stand about getting oral (is it or isn’t it) sex. By the Bush/Gore election of 2000, it didn’t matter that Bush II was wholly unqualified for the position for the seat of the presidency, just that he didn’t look at the time like a guy who would further embarrass the country.

I’ll give you time to ponder that last sentence…come back when you are done crying.

…

Good, let’s move on.

Voters can be a skittish bunch. When the economy is flourishing and there are good jobs to be had, most voters will not want major changes in their government, even if your administration is mired in scandal. In North America, it used to be that people felt relatively safe on this side of the Atlantic because there was no force on Earth that could amass an army, navy and air force mighty enough to sustain an invasion of either the United States or Canada. Security wasn’t the biggest issue here because we had the best defense in history, the Atlantic Ocean.

From the onset of the Atomic Age to 9/11, we here on this side of the pond have learned the hard way that our security is now maintained ever so precariously. In today’s political sphere, security trumps all else, including personal freedom. As they said after this passed election in the US, “security moms” made all the difference. God only knows if that’s true but it does speak to a larger sentiment; so long as I can get MY kids to school, and stop at the store to buy MY family bread, without being blown to smithereens, I’m perfectly willing to live under fascism. Just ask any Russian still living there who would be willing to vote for Putin again because of Chechnya.

Scandal plus the promise of security in the face of Muslim fundamentalism and terrorism equals a new conservative government in Canada, our friends to the north. According to The Times Online UK:

Canada today elected its first Conservative government in 12 years as the traditionally peaceable voters decisively ended their love affair with the scandal-riven Liberals.

The Conservatives, led by Stephen Harper, will have 124 seats in parliament. Although 31 below the 155 required for an absolute majority, the party has 21 more seats than the defeated ruling party.

Harper states that the conservative agenda is to pass tax cuts for the middle-classes, increased military spending and closer ties to Washington, which includes possibly entering into a strategic defense initiative and passing an alternative to the Kyoto Protocol. One of Harper’s aims is to increase spending on the Canadian military, expand its "peacekeeping" missions in Afghanistan and Haiti and tighten security along the border with the United States.

Some of Harper’s social agenda involves backing away from rhetoric supporting abortion and gay marriage. It is assumed that under Harper’s leadership, there will be an endeavor to bring Canada and the US back together under friendlier terms since the division resulting from the Iraq War. This goes for social policy as well as military and international affairs as well.

In fact, according to Global Research, a Harper win will give Canada the opportunity assert itself in much the same way the US does, as a partner instead of a subordinate.

A historical analysis reveals that Stephen Harper affirmed the January 2003, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) New Frontiers Project to develop a strategy for shaping Canada's future within North America and beyond. Composed of the chief executive officers of 150 leading Canadian enterprises, the CCCE has been dedicated to building a stronger world influence for Canada, and believes that Canada's best path to growth is through openness to the world and deep integration with the United States. The CCCE together with the U.S. Council On Foreign Relations (CFR) has pioneered principles of security and prosperity that culminated in the drafting of the SPP.

Part of the New Frontiers Project is Reinvigorating the North American Defence Alliance. Since September 11, 2001, "security trumps trade" has become a political mantra in the United States. And, there is a perceived need for improved coordination on security well beyond military matters, thus there is to be an integration with NORTHCOM and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States, one capable of responding not only to future outbreaks of infectious diseases within Canada, but also of working seamlessly with its American counterpart in addressing health emergencies on a continental basis. New Frontiers: North American Security Prosperity

The New Frontiers Project is a document comparable in scope and significance to the Magna-Carta, or The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies' A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.

A Stephen Harper victory would ensure tight integration of Canada into a "One World Government" with the United States. Canada's military would be used by the Pentagon and NORTHCOM.

People only seem to like scandals when they benefit directly from it or when it is well hidden from them. “If you are going to rip me off, have the decency to do it behind my back,” is what most of us seem to say. In Canada, what appears to have led to this change in the political and philosophical structure is graft and cronyism (isn’t it always graft and cronyism?)

From the Times again, “The result was generally considered to be a deliberate punishment vote by the electorate in response to a series of scandals which have swirled around the Liberals. The most serious involved the diversion of tens of millions of dollars supposed to persuade Quebec to stay in the union in a 1995 referendum which ended up in the pockets of Liberal cronies.”

Now Harper isn’t Bush and nobody knows for sure if the Canadians have done gone and washed some of their freedom away for the sake of punishing Paul Martin or wanting to be able to buy bread in relative peace. Though if we’ve learned anything from our reaction to the Clinton era scandals, shame and attention deficit disorder will make a voter do strange and wonderful things, eh.