Step Right Up, Ladies and Gentlemen - Take Your Pick

How many corners have we? Contenders aplenty, but corners there are four. We will, therefore, adjust our vision to the four sufficiently elevated in public opinion, support and anticipation to give them precedence over the others. Martha Hall Findlay, forgive us, but you don't quite qualify. Don't be so belligerent, my dear, you haven't, despite your protestations, a chance. Experience? none. Background? to those who love you. Potential? Why not, just not this time. You know that old dispiriting line that newly-schooled job-seekers always hear: We need someone with experience.

Well yes, you're right, of course you are. There is exerience and then there is experience. We're talking here quality of experience, not merely experience. You know how it is. Be a good girl now and just go away. The Liberal party is not ready for a woman. It's questionable whether the country is ready for a woman. We've had a female Prime Minister. Well now that was a real quirk. She was highly intelligent, brash and decisive too, but lacking experience; why else would she tell the truth?

All right now. Let's see, who is on first? We'll take it by percentage attributes through pollwork, all right?

1. In this corner is: Michael Ignatieff! A heavy contender some would say, and they're certainly right. He has impressed a lot of people. And disappointed a whole lot more. For a highly intelligent individual he has a sorry habit of letting his mind guide his voice. Rashly, having later to pick up the pieces. We can't afford ambivalent back-tracking in our first minister. He's quoted as having said: "I'm not only not perfect, I'm very fallible". Yes, he is, he certainly is. His considered opinion should be left in his cranium at such critical times. He leaves caution to the winds. "It's about making very careful judgements about what's in the interest of the country, and trying to get Canadians to agree with you on what the interests of your country are," he has said. Trouble is, his judgement has been found wanting, and he has exercised it questionably in trying to get a certain segment of the Canadian voters to agree with him. In criticizing Prime Minister Harper he claims: "He plays politics with everything", which is exactly my point: not that Mr. Harper is seen to be doing just that, but Mr. Ignatieff himself. Witness Iraq and Afghanistan, China and Israel. Vote for this man if you will. Should make for some interesting verbal jousting and pyrotechnical illuminations in the House of Commons.
2. And in this corner we have Bob Rae! Political animal extraordinaire, from an extinguished political family, Mr. Rae has had extensive experience in governance. Ontario will never forgive him. Bob Rae has learned a great deal since his unfortunate stint as NDP Premier of Ontario. Trouble is, he experimented with the Ontario legislature, business and labour, the people of Ontario, their well-being - and failed miserably, while he was gaining his experience. Now re-born as a Liberal, he lacks somewhat in the trust department. Canadians just rescued ourselves from the Liberal governments of Chretien and Martin, both inept, both inefficient, both corrupt. Bob Rae is the inheritor of Jean Chretien's vision of Canada, with all the background Chretien machinations supporting his candidacy. Vote for this man? Go right ahead, make Stephen Harper's job even easier and more secure.
3. Who is that over there? Ah, Stephane Dion! A nice man, a very nice man. Earnest, eager to do the right thing. A champion of Canada, a unified, undivided Canada. Aren't they all? Aren't we all? In his favour: The chair-switch game of French alternating with English, a discredited, absurd formula for ascension to the Prime Ministership. He has intelligence, toughness and passion, but so have I, perhaps not in the same generous proportions, but I'm not running for PM and he is. His campaign chair is who? Don Boudria? tell me you're kidding. I like the man, I really do. I just cannot see this man as Prime Ministerial material - even though he has qualities that Jean Chretien should have had, but did not.
4. That's a dim corner over there; can hardly see - ah, Gerard Kennedy! Another good-hearted person. Canada needs more of them. Mind, how he ended up with the Liberals rather than the NDP is beyond me. He certainly has a vision. One has to automatically respect someone who views his life's work as being the manager of a food bank - two food banks yet. But look here, he looked beyond that and realized he could do more, much more for the people of Canada. Could he but persuade sufficient numbers of his sterling qualities and qualifications. Both of which appear somewhat dimly realized. And unfortunately, a unilingual Canadian for the highest office in the land is a non-starter. You cannot learn on the job.

Kennedy supporters will not move over to Ignatieff, but may move to Rae; could move to Dion; if they share his vision - they're too left for Ignatieff. Ignatieff supporters might view Rae as anathema, could move to Dion, but both he and Kennedy are too leftish for the more right-learning Ignatieff. Dion (despite his disavowal of Ignatieff's "nation" support) supporters might find common cause with Ignatieff because of his "nationhood" recognition for Quebec, while shunning Rae for the opposite reason. Rae supporters might move to Kennedy or Dion but likely not Ignatieff; there's no love lost between the two groups now, reflecting the lost friendship between the two candidates. Hey, all those candidates may just scatter helter-skelter and there goes logic!

And the winning candidate? Martha Hall Findlay!