A talk that speaks for itself

I don't often wade into the pipeline debate because (horrors!) I proudly work in the Canadian oil and gas industry but this presentation is very much bringing to the attention of as many people as possible.Recommend this Post

Prescient Pontypool

Pontypool changes foresaw everything.

I watched this indie Canadian movie a long time ago.  So long ago that I rented a DVD of it.  It was an enjoyable and well done take on the zombie genre.

I saw it advertized on the CBC app as a tie-in to Hallowe'en and thought I would watch it again.  It stood up well as a piece of entertainment.  But the message of English being infected by specific words and idioms which cause those affected to turn into zombies mindlessly attacking others is very much on the mark in 2018.Recommend this Post

Stop saying that P. M. Scheer would be like President Trump

Any rational thought process would illustrate that P. M. Scheer would be like President Pence.Recommend this Post

Little Stephen Harper on the Big Stage

I couldn't change the channel quickly enough so I heard a segment on Stephen Harper on As It Happens.  I suppose there are those that would laud Mr Harper being interviewed about his recent book.  There are others who would point out he was on Fox.

What galled the most, was his claim that Marxism only survived in Academia.  His statement would have carried a lot more weight if he was able to cite some sort of factual backup.  Isn't he supposed to be some sort of intellectual policy wonk?  Without backup, his claim of Universities being a refuge for Marxist elite-ists carries as much weight as the statements of a (hopefully) soon to be ex-US President.

We suffered under his governance void of intellectual rigour.  He hasn't learned anything in 3 years, has he?Recommend this Post

Kavanaugh's tirade to the US Senate Judiciary Committee - Because that is what bullies do

Wouldn't it have been better to try and mend fences?  Perhaps show some empathy? You know.  Show some judicial temperament?  Yes, of course that is what a person would do in normal times.

Instead we get the angry Wahvanaugh tantrum.  In which he exposes the very thinly covered partisan, mean and nasty person nominated by Trump.  Because that is what bullies do.

But that was part of the point.  The angry "conservatives" have had enough.  McConnells Flying Monkeys (the MFMs) are rubbing everyone's nose in the fact that they will make a mockery of the process and ram through their guy.  They aren't retreating from him because he is obviously a lying abusive blackout drunk unsuited for the USSC.  They are sticking with him because he is all of that and an extremely hate-filled partisan hack.  They are going to push this jerk onto the highest court in the once great republic.  Because that is what bullies do.

And he has shown the world exactly how he will adjudicate.  He will be on a crusade to destroy the advances made by the US since the 1950's.  He will help in the effort to bring back Jim Crow, rescind a womean's right to choose and a lot more.  He put all of that on full display.  And said: "Try and stop me.".  Because that is what bullies do.

Recommend this Post

But Why Would Putin Choose Kavanaugh?

In my previous post, I proposed a, very speculative, theory that Putin had set the wheels in motion to nominate Brett Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court.  (As pointed out in the comments, Justice Kennedy's son worked for Alfa Bank (often implicated in money laundering schemes and overall Russian intrigue).).

All good fun, eh?

But if Putin was behind this nomination, why would he push for such a gigantic jerk?  Why would Republicans continue to push for Kavanaugh?  If this man is on the USSC, he will be a huge stain on the reputation of one of the main branch of the US government.

But whether you are a Russian tyrant or an Ayn Rand libertarian, you don't want the US government to work.  You want people to lose faith in their country's institutions.  There is no better person to accomplish this goal with regards the presidency than Trump.  And it would be nigh on impossible to find someone more capable of destroying faith in the USSC than Kavanaugh.

Probably baseless and foolish speculation but cui bono?Recommend this Post

Is Putin about to add to his collection of Americans occupying high office?

Those wise in the ways of the Russian GRU (nee' KGB) regularly opine that Donald Trump is the exemplar of the person the GRU would target.  This exposure is due to Trump's known sexual misadventures and financial difficulties following his multiple bankruptcies.

Brett Kavanaugh, the nominee of the Manchurian President (or should that be the Siberian President?) to the US Supreme Court outdoes Trump when it comes to fracture seams Putin could lever open.  He had debts that were mysteriously paid off just before his confirmation hearing.  As for sexual misadventures, as of today, he has one actual accusation of attempted rape come out of his closet and several murmurings of more.  He has a history of alcohol abuse.  And an apparent gambling addiction.

It would be hard to think of someone who could tick more of Vlad's boxes.  Which brings a question to mind.  Trump made a big deal during the election of  a list from which he would draw Supreme Court nominees.  Kavanaugh wasn't on this list.  Much is made of Kavanaugh's strange view that the US President is above the law and that this is the primary reason for his nomination.  Didn't the Kennedy resignation and the Kavanaugh nomination get started in motion after the Helsinki Summit?    Kavanaugh only has one vote and that is a pretty thin shield for Trump to stand behind.What if this nomination is Putin's play to get a seat on the US Supreme Court?

A couple of years ago this suggestion might seem out of left field.  Perhaps it will be today.  But the 2016 election should have taught us that the previously implausible might be the most likely

Recommend this Post

Well at least Lougheed's legacy is safe

Is this the kind of leadership a Kenny government will bring?

Alberta’s loyalty to Canada may be waning after the justice system dealt a blow to the province’s pipeline plans. At least that’s what Jason Kenney, leader of Alberta’s United Conservative Party, told CTV’s Don Martin on Power Play Wednesday.

The TMX court decision is disappointing and caused a construction delay.  But does a "leader" automatically opt for threats?  Particularly a past member of the government largely responsible for the NEB mess?

The negotiations during the NEP were tense and anger at Ottawa was very real.  But did Peter Lougheed ever threaten to leave or cut off the rest of Canada?  Not that I am aware of.Recommend this Post

The Conservatives are going to have problems finding a new whistle

The Harper Conservatives learned the hard way that overt racism is a great way to lose elections.  The Scheer-per Conservative Party has spent a lot of money building a narrative built on (not so) crypto-racism, (not so) crypto-libertarianism and (not so) crypto-social conservatism.  The Conservative "hidden in plain sight" alliance with Rebel Media is evidence enough that the Conservatives are as alt-right as the GOP in the US.

Now that Bernier has flown over the metaphorical cuckoo's nest and started a party that will campaign on a sterner version of the Conservative platform without the "(not so) crytpo-" part, what can their messaging possibly be?  To date they have been able to draw close to the Liberals during the dog days of the Liberals mandate using dog whistle messaging.  This is during a period when their message has not been given too much critical analysis.  How can they differentiate themselves enough from both the Liberals and "Bernier's Beauties".  If they go left, they lose core support.  If the go right they alienate all but the craziest of their support and can't build enough to pass the Liberals.

Usually it is the centrist party that is fighting on two fronts.  It will be interesting to see how the Canadian alt-right will handle a similar battle.Recommend this Post

A Possible Path Forward Sir John A's And Other Statues

This doesn't have to be an either we take the statues down or we don't situation.

Whether the statues are of Sir John A. MacDonald, Hector-Louis Langevin or other "Men of their time", there is an issue to come to grips with.  There is ample evidence that Sir John A. undoubtedly harboured prejudices against First Nations.  The most recent compendium of this stain on his legacy I have read is here.  If that doesn't do it for you, there are innumerable articles to drive the point home. 

Yes, there are some good markers in his record.  But that is not the point.  We need to address the racism of his record.  That response is an attempt to negate the evidence of his misdeeds.  In a way, removing the statue gives us a pass when it comes to dealing with his failings.  Canada needs to find a path to reconciliation with the First Nations without losing the good.  As a parallel point, Winston Churchill was undoubtedly a racist and imperialist.  But would we want to remove evidence of his contribution to defeating Hitler?

It is, at this point, worthwhile to draw a distinction between Canada's statues and the Confederate statue debate in the USA.  The dark side of SJAM has only recently entered the public discourse.  This may be overdue but such is the case.  Most of the statues being removed from the Southern States are not Civil War relics.  Most were erected during the Jim Crow in a response to the Civil Rights struggles of the 1950's and earlier.  I have not read any evidence that the statues in Canada were erected as a way to consciously underline the oppression of the First Nations under SJAM and others.

I propose that in a good faith effort at reconciliation, we remove the statues into storage when requested by the AFN or other legitimate entities.  Then have accepted authorities on the subject thrash out the bad (don't forget the Pacific Scandal) and good of his record and put it on the Heritage Canada website.  Replace the statue with a new plaque that reads something like this:

Sir John A. MacDonald was the founding Prime Minister of Canada.  He was, like all historical figures, a complex person.  Details of his legace may be found by scanning this QR Code.

Recommend this Post

Something to encourage American patriots

This post is dedicated to American family, friends and any other Americans who happen to read this missive.

As I witness the events unfolding south of the border, it brings to mind a face off Canada had against the Soviet Union.  They spent decades preparing for an attack at the heart and soul of our self-image.   The people they deployed to mount the attack were among the very best in the world at their craft.

When they thought they were ready and that Canada was weak, they made their move.  The approach was directed and followed by the highest levels of the Kremlin.  Brezhnev himself was a fanatical fan.  That is right a fan.  Of hockey.  They were determined to beat us at our own game at the height of the Cold War.  A proxy battle on ice

And things looked grim.  We were down 3-1 in an 8 game series as the team headed towards Moscow.  A lot of Canadians started taking the side of the Soviets and said they were better than us.

In Moscow, Team Canada had to face bad food, bugged rooms and crooked referees.  It was no holds barred.

Going into the final game, the Soviets announced they were going to declare victory unless Canada won outright.  What happened?  Why don't we let Foster Hewitt spell it out for us?

Perhaps there is an allegory here.  Can a totalitarian system reap the rewards of decades of preparation and defeat a free people?  Not if the don't let them.

Recommend this Post

My take on the Saudi's Hissy Fit

Two things.

First, bravo to Canada for standing up for human rights.  Perhaps, due to the encroaching tide of nativist hate from starboard, we will have to stand alone.  But I am for standing.

On the other hand, Chrystia Freeland did this by tweet?  I have a significant amount of respect for Minister Freeland and expect more from here than handling manners in this way.  The world is suffering from one person in a position of authority who tweets about important business.  That is one too many.

Release a statement to the press.  Hold a press conference.  There are many better ways to let the KSA know of our disapproval.  Don't give them the ammunition by using Twitter.  Use established diplomatic protocols for publizing our views.  We look the better for it.  And the Saudi's still would not be able to mount a response that passes the blsuh test.

In the final analysis, props to Canada for calling the KSA out, brickbats to the craven "leaders" in the USA, UK and elsewhere.  Who cares about the Saudi's?  The KSA is beneath contempt.Recommend this Post