Controversy and Don Cherry are not strangers, but usually it's Cherry who does something that provokes lesser beings to react aggressively.
Mind you, Cherry usually comes out on top. Not necessarily because he's right, but because he has a point of view, believes in what he says and does, and is congenitally unable not to speak his mind.
He's the genuine article -- even when he's tweaking the public. He has a sense of humour which sometimes gets him in trouble.
Not for nothing is Don Cherry repeatedly singled out in polls as a Canadian icon -- admired coast to coast, but deplored by some who are uncomfortable with straight talk.
Curiously, the controversy around Cherry being selected for an honorary degree from the Royal Military College is not Cherry's doing.
French professor Catherine Lord objects to an honorary degree for Cherry, implying (if not categorically accusing) that Cherry is anti-French, anti-gay, anti-lesbian, anti-transexual and anti-immigrant, and anti a lot of things that appeal to Prof. Lord.
Rather than try to refute the nonsense, Cherry has shown considerably more class than Prof. Lord, and says he will not accept the degree or attend the ceremonies on Nov. 17 at RMC in Kingston. He doesn't want to add to the controversy.
Can't blame him, really.
For the record, Don Cherry is not anti-French. He's anti-Quebec separatism, and anyone who wants to break up Canada, be they from Quebec or anywhere else, has his disapproval.
As for being anti all those other things cited with such certainty by Prof. Lord, there's not much evidence. If any. Perhaps it can be assumed that rough, no-nonsense, blunt-talking Don Cherry isn't susceptible to the persuasions of the people Prof. Lord is championing in her assault on Cherry being awarded an honorary degree.
But again, he stays out of that controversy.
If you ask me, Prof. Lord is the one stirring up possible hatred by her implications -- encouraging people to see in Cherry characteristics that he leaves alone.
Cherry's disappointment came through in a solid article by Joe Warmington. His outspoken respect for our military, his bonding with soldiers, his admiration for the Van Doos with whom he spent time in Afghanistan, all shine through.
I don't know what the brass at RMC feel about this, but I do know a little about soldiers and I know they relish Cherry's support. Their views on Prof. Lord and her complaints would likely make even Don Cherry blush.
On Coach's Corner at the Leaf hockey game, host Don MacLean displayed a copy of the Sun and brought the rest of the country up to date on Cherry's decision not to attend the RMC ceremonies. He didn't want to embarrass other recipients of an honorary degree. MacLean urged Cherry to reconsider. Cherry said no, his mind was made up.
For what it's worth, Cherry is right.
Let Prof. Lord explain her prejudices and bigotry to RMC students.
It's fair game to take issue with a lot of what Don Cherry believes and says. His views on hockey have always been controversial. Hockey players and hockey fans accept this. We all have opinions.
But when it comes to standing up for his country, and for our soldiers, it's unlikely that Cherry has an equal. Can the same be said of Catherine Lord? Dunno. But when it comes to dignity, values, judgment and just plain class, Don Cherry wins every time.
Hadani Ditmars: Hockey as a Brutal Ballet: A Reflection on Our National Game
Peter Worthington: Don Cherry and Hockey Fights Are Just Part of the Game
If you mean propagating simple-minded false dilemmas, straw-man arguments, and ad hominem attacks against anyone who happens to oppose some military enterprise or other, because they think it's a waste of time, money or lives, then yes, Don Cherry is a winner.
My grandfather fought in WWII. I know what he sacrificed, and what it meant to Canada, so I don't need vacuous old conservative shills like you and Cherry lecturing me on appropriate values.
It is painfully clear that this article by Worthington, nicely summed up by the above quote, is written with the intent to infuriate anyone who is not an extreme right zealot. It's a free country and Worthington has the right to pump out as much of this inflammatory filth as he can. What I can't understand is why Huffington Post has to carry this garbage. There have to be better representatives of the right wing point of view than this.
Straight talk ?
Sure. that's what it is. He is a rough edged common sense wisdom kind of guy.
>>>>>Rather than try to refute the nonsense, Cherry has shown considerably more class than Prof. Lord
Mr Worthington : Please go away. Your opinion column does not give you license to blow smoke up our collective asses.If that is your intention from the start, please stop this dishonest charade and quietly fade from view.
Your column contains many fabricated statements that are easily refuted.
Your attack on Prof Lord is juvenile and unworthy of this web site.
And your conclusion ?
There is no bigger cheerleader for our military that Don Cherry therefore Don Cherry = good / Prof Lord = bad.
You are a movement conservative trying to stake your claim in Canadian politics.
You are dishonest and manipulative.
/end rant
How so ?
*crickets*
"For the record, Don Cherry is not anti-French. He's anti-Quebec separatism..."
B.S!
Here's the record, directly from the CBC website (http://www.cbc.ca/sports/indepth/doncherry/stories/lexicon.html):
"Cherry referred to Quebecers as "whiners" and called freestyle skier Jean-Luc Brassard "that French guy."
Five years later, the Coach ripped Canadiens fans for booing the Star Spangled Banner during a game in Montreal during the U.S.-led war with Iraq, and later went on the Jim Rome show to say "true Canadians do not feel the way they do in Quebec there."
Even in defending his beloved Anglo heritage, Cherry can't resist taking a swipe at Quebec. In 1993 he attracted the wrong kind of federal attention, saying Anglophone residents of Sault Ste. Marie "speak the good language.""
And let's not forget his 'insult' of "Europeans and French guys" as "visor wearers"...
What exactly do these comments have to do with Quebec separatism?
But if you want our troops fighting a un-winnable war started on false pretenses, then you don't "support our troops", you support our military expeditions.
You truly "support our troops" if you want them brought back from ASAP. Period. Because this war is bogus.
Bring them home ! ( 'residual force for training locals' is a lie )
We were not in Afghan to help build schools and infrastructure.
We were there to perform seek and destroy missions against an 'enemy' that wears no uniform and blends in with the population by day. ( see Vietnam )
We were there to build up our credibility with the Americans.
We were there because politicians see so many up sides for their ability to campaign using military symbols and troops as props.
Stop Harper.
They are all peas in a pod after all.
Terms such as "lesser beings", I see them used all the time.
I often find myself part of the smaller crowd of people stuck somewhere between liberalism and conservatism. To me it's simple, a functional society needs a little bit of both, since a purely liberal or a purely conservative society would be devastating to humanity.
Reminds me of Lowell Greens "proof that only we conservatives have our heads screwed on straight". Another nob who while seemingly intelligent, doesn't understand the function of balance in life. Same goes for Cherry and Peter here. They actually believe that they're 100% right, and that anybody against them is 100% wrong (compromise, I don’t know the meaning of the word !!). No place for improvement, no room for growth, just one dominant ideology with no room for dynamic growth. Same can be said about the muslim extremists we're hunting around the globe.
I have relatives in the military. Every time I hear they are out on another mission somewhere, I hope they are able to return to their family, my family, safe and sound. But you know what would be even better? If our political class stopped treating our troops like their own personal GI Joe toys in a sandbox. If the political class treated war as a worst case scenario to be avoided as much as possible, instead of something they seem to seek out to prove themselve "tough".
So to all those people with a bumper sticker on their SUV who think they are superior or more patriotic, I have to revert to the wisdom of Tyler Durden. "Sticking feathers up your butt doesn't make you a chicken." And just being loud and vocal about supporting the troops, without any real debate of what that means or how the impact of political policy, is just BS posturing.