Tuesday, April 23, 2019

Ford Nation

The last provincial election was tough for me. The Liberals deserved to be booted. The NDP didn't deserve to govern, but I really don't like Doug Ford. He strikes me as ham-fisted and thoughtless. He thinks he's like his brother, but he isn't. Whatever you thought of Rob Ford, he helped people. He was in the job for two reasons -- to be liked and to be of service. He was well liked by those he served, and he made an effort to serve everyone who asked.

When Patrick Brown was first accused of sexual misconduct, and summarily excised from the PC leadership, I wondered if the Liberals had something to do with it. Now I wonder if it was an internal thing -- or external, but from the right.

Ford's election as PC leader was an astonishing reversal from the *expected*. Comparisons to Trump ring true to me, not just on the surface level, where both men are bombastic and boorish and rather stupid, but also in the manner to which they came to power. Few within the kingmaker class would have predicted either outcome. I'm not suggesting that democracy was thwarted in any way, or that their victories were invalid, simply that a series of unforeseen events shaped the races in ways no one could imagine.

I'm not a fan of how Ford operates, in what seems to be a very autocratic way. He has smart people around him, a couple of whom might have been more deserving of the leadership than he, but everyone seems to defer to Doug. I concede that this is pretty much always the case in politics -- Trudeau, Harper, Trump .... so maybe Ford is just following precedent. What bothers me I suppose, is that while I feel like the PCs are my 'side', with him as their leader, they aren't. It's like being in a political wilderness. I suppose anti-Trump Republicans feel this way.

Even if you agree with everything Ford is doing, his manner creates distrust and apprehension, even from people who are onside --  because although he was voted in on the promise of change, people want change as a process - not some bullish demolition, but a gradual dismantling and renewal. Sometimes, radical change is required, but some things - autism funding, libraries, public health, endangered species et al - are not necessary all at once. Rapid change requires thoughtful and thorough communication. Change for the sake of change serves no one. And reversals and tweaks to proclamations just prove you haven't thought things out before you've spouted off.

Doug Ford was no more ready to run a province than Justin Trudeau was to run the country. Just because he's 'conservative' doesn't mean I can support him. Even when I think they're doing something right, Doug's manner of handling every policy, every idea, makes it feel suspect.

Ford has become the PC brand. To buy-in, you have to take him and I don't. And what bothers me about the small-minded, blustery way he governs, is that he appears to be speaking for conservatives and I fear that will be used to our great disadvantage come federal election time. He comes off as mean-spirited and dumb. I think he is a real liability to the CPC. So long as Doug keeps talking, the 905 is very much in play. Before the provincial election, Doug was a novelty. Now he's the reality and I think a lot of people are second-guessing that decision - doesn't matter that the Liberals were truly a worse option. That's not going to factor in when people are at the voting booth in October. Enough Canadians like to see themselves as liberal anyway, that Doug Ford's exhibition of 'conservatism' could mitigate all of Trudeau's disasters.


Thursday, April 11, 2019

Cratering too early

Often we see that a politician peaks too soon before an election for his own good. Then he'll plateau or even drop in the polls and when the vote finally comes, everyone recalls those high numbers back when, and wonders what happened that the bottom fell out.

Timing is everything in politics. A six-week election cycle is too long for many candidates. After four, the wheels start to fall off. People can't sustain the energy, and positivity (or negativity) required to keep up the act for so long.

With our current system of fixed elections, the next election cycle starts the day after the last. Everyone is constantly campaigning. Voter fatigue is a huge issue, I think. It can take an epic event to engage or enrage voters to step out of their apathy and actually care about an election when they're forced to digest politics daily.

That epic event happened for Justin Trudeau back in February, and has been happening ever since.

While the SNC-Lavalin affair and its various collateral boondoggles might seem like a gift to the opposition parties, timing might be the saving grace of the Prime Minister.

We've had two full months of the scandal and its subsequent fallout, and the Prime Minister, while showing signs of agitation, remains leader of his party, with the support of the majority of his caucus. His personal polling numbers have tanked, yes, but the Liberals haven't dropped to levels that really challenge their ability to rise up and win come October. There has been no surge in any of the opposition parties, and there is no reason to believe that it might happen at all, if it hasn't by now.

The Liberal Party election strategy has, for a long time, been to promote fear, hatred and division. It used to be Stephen Harper's hidden agenda, but they've upped their game this time -- apparently white nationalists are lurking everywhere in this incarnation of the Conservative Party, along with people who want the world to end in twelve years because of their Climate Change Denial, and there might even be some conservatives who hold socially conservative views on marriage and abortion when we all know, you're not allowed to think like that anymore, even if you never say it out loud, and even if neither of those subjects is an election issue.

Twitter is a shit-flinging show, with Liberal MPs testing what will either stick, or rile enough CPC supporting tweeters to bare their teeth and push back.

They will have plenty of time to provoke and to screenshot and to use ordinary people's frustration at being vilified, as fodder for their vile accusations.

That's politics I guess. Use the weakness of the enemy -- and I guess that's the thing that bothers me most. I don't believe that conservatives view liberals or progressive as enemies, but I do believe that Liberals see us that way.

In an election campaign that has not yet begun, Canadians who are going to hate him have already reached peak-hatred of PMJT, but I don't think that Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party are even close to their peak-hatred of us.

Not looking forward to all the things they plan to accuse me of, and the names they're going to call me. I'm already weary of it and it's barely started. And I dread if their messaging works on vulnerable and fearful people, and propels them to victory on the crushed soul of the nation.

Sounds dramatic, I know. But this is personal. It's meant to be. They want to make you uncomfortable and angry and bitter, because that's how they need other people to see you.



Thursday, April 04, 2019

Just watch him

I used to just think Justin Trudeau was an airhead. Nice enough guy - if he'd done the Ben Mulroney thing and gone into entertainment, a harmless sort of fellow that you couldn't help but like.

His ascension to power has proved him anything but.

There seem to be a lot of people willing to just brush past the SNC-Lavalin thing because it isn't a world-class scandal. Its elements are so simple. Right/wrong. Lies/truth.

It's like some people really think that everyone gets it wrong now and again, so what?

And everyone tells a white lie every once in a while, what's the big deal?

Making a mistake is not a huge deal. Most people are inclined to forgive. We don't want to hold grudges and be angry. Takes too much effort and energy. It's nice to hear a sincere 'I messed up' without an accompanying 'but .... ' or 'I didn't realize...so it's your fault for not having said....'

That didn't happen here, but we can assume they're at least sorry they got caught, right?

So, the mistake is not the issue. It's not about the pressure put on the former AG to do anything. Let's assume it truly was a mistake-- let's give them that.

The mistake is just the opening of our window into Justin Trudeau's lying, self-important, unrepentant, egomaniacal, sinister soul -- yes sinister. The efforts that man and his team have gone to in order to pretend they did nothing wrong is just unreal. It borders on insane. It's like this frenzied outpouring of venom and bile about anyone who dares stray from the narrative -- and even some who had no skin in the game. From the smear-tactics used against Wilson-Raybould, to the leaking of private information about a SCC nominee... and all of the miniscule, mean-spirited steps in between.

It's the lies that matter. That's who he is.

Yesterday he suggested in a speech to The Daughters of the Vote, that this was somehow something to do with diversity and choosing between two women (Wilson-Raybould and  Minister Freeland) as though there was some connection between them that was relevant to anything that's gone on - and what? Lack of trust, so diversity? If that last couple of sentences make no sense, they're about as coherent as Trudeau was in that talk.

Anyway, Justin Trudeau remains an airhead. He's as stupid as I always thought, but he's an airhead with power which is pretty scary. I think much of what's wrong with him is daddy issues. He's living out his father's legacy, pitting region against region, finding reasons for fear, and having one after another 'just watch me' moments.

I can't stand watching him anymore.


Thursday, March 28, 2019

Who's sorry now

So he said it. For once in his life, Justin Trudeau said 'sorry' for something he did.

This apology came swiftly and almost seemed real -- but here's why I'm not impressed:

It was at that $1,500 per person fundraiser where Justin Trudeau was at his most authentic.

This wouldn't have happened at a townhall -- he'd have known it was public. But there, with his fellow Laurentian elites, Trudeau was in his element and he played to them. This is who he really is -- this is his comfort zone. He rose to their laughter and struck again, and again. These are his people. He was at home, and enjoying the mirth of the crowd as he dismissed this young woman and her pedestrian concerns.

Had the whole thing not been filmed, he'd have never spared an ounce of 'sorry' on her.

In that moment, it didn't occur to him that someone who spent $1,500 to be there  must have been very serious about their concerns.

But what's $1,500 to a Trudeau or his fellow well-heeled Liberals. Chump change.

The Liberal Party, its members, its MPs --  should start really thinking about whether they want to be associated with this kind of bozo eruption.


PM for who?

He's shown often, that he is the Prime Minister for Liberals -- and not all Liberals -- Liberals who agree with him. His contempt for his own MPs and fellow liberals when they don't fall into line with Trudeau-think is well known. Don't dare even try to run for the party if you have any reservations about abortion whatsoever. You're not allowed. You must think along party lines -- Fine - anyone who wants to belong to a party like that - your issue. You march in-step if that's your thing.

But what about the rest of us -- or more importantly, the least of us? The MOST vulnerable people in Canadian society are those living on reserves. Their issues are life and death, every single day. And government after government has failed them.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised to change the way we deal with First Nations issues. He sure has. Never have I seen a Canadian Prime Minister treat someone with a genuine, legitimate concern with such utter derision. Listen to the following clip from Free Grassy on Twitter, where someone asks her Prime Minister why nothing has been done in over 500 days, to remedy the problem of mercury in the water in Grassy Narrows:

She says: people from Grassy Narrows are suffering from mercury poisoning and you committed...

He says: Thank you for being here tonight. Thank you for your donation.

OMFG. The disrespect... the disregard... the distain. The utter lack of empathy. HOW is this man our Prime Minister???

She paid $1500 for the opportunity to raise her concern - look what she got in return.

She does not deserve this man as Prime Minister. None of us do.


Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Justin has jumped the shark

Like with most things, a sincere acceptance of culpability and an apology likely would have washed the SNC-Lavalin scandal away.

People like moments when other people genuinely admit their humanity: "I made a mistake."

Justin Trudeau doesn't know how to do that. We've all noted that he is an ace at apologizing for the wrongs of others, the problem is, he has no ability to see wrongs committed my himself.

Whether it was his upbringing, or whether its a character flaw, Justin Trudeau believes Justin Trudeau is always right, otherwise, actor that he is, he'd have been able to feign a competent enough sorry to pass. But Justin's attitude seems to have been -- why should I? and instead he's spent the better part of two months blaming and vilifying others.

Well, it's too late for sorry now. Even his boldest supporters have to see what he is, and if they want to soil themselves and keep him afloat, so be it, but I think even average Canadians are shocked at his utter disregard for the law and for us.

Attempts to paint people as racist or homophobic aren't going to float this time around, because they're aimed at all of us this time -- because all of us see through his charade of 'nice'. He never was nice. He could seem nice because he was rarely challenged and he lives a life of absolute unmitigated privilege. Anyone could seem nice if they never had to work or worry. He doesn't understand real-life stress - and now that he's facing some challenges - he's made some very suspect decisions.

I've never been a fan of Justin Trudeau, but it bothers me how easily he waltzed in, charmed the world and decided he could do all the wrong things because he was just so sure that he had all the right reasons.

It was too easy for him to take the helm of this country when he'd never done a serious thing in his life. And he still doesn't see that it's time for him to go. He's still trying to find ways to blame everyone else. I used to hope he was trounced come election time, but he's doing so much damage, I hope for once in his life he does the right thing and resigns.

Angry Liberals have to start aiming their venom in the right direction.



Friday, March 22, 2019

A different take...

My younger daughter and I commute to and from downtown together every day, and lately many of our conversations have been about politics.

Yesterday, I told her what I thought about Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott remaining Liberals in the wake of all that's happened. I was surprised that she a had a completely different take, and it's shifted my perspective some.

My daughter doesn't believe these two MPs should be chased from their chosen vocation by men in authority trying to push them around. She believes that they showed their principles and integrity when they resigned their cabinet posts and elected to sit as backbenchers on the basis of their convictions.

She believes that if they had quit the Liberal Party, despite identifying with the tenets of their policies, they would be depriving their constituents of the representation they deserve, and undermining their own futures.

She believes this scandal will pass, and should these women remove themselves from the Liberal Party at this stage, they would have no standing going forward. By forcing Trudeau to either put up with them, or kick them out, they have asserted their voices as moral compasses of the team, and despite some lingering animosity in the short-term, the party will need to renew, and it's people like Wilson-Raybould and Philpott with their positive images, and their moral fortitude that will be the force to drive that change. If they leave now, they lose out on that opportunity and it won't come around again.

My daughter believes that by persevering in what must be a very uncomfortable environment, these woman are forcing a mouldering party to take stock. Every Liberal MP will at some point, face a reckoning about the events of the past few months, and will be forced to stand with the status quo, or step away. Whether the Liberals get re-elected or not, the behaviour of individuals during this time will matter - if only as part of the historical record. Honour matters.

So, despite my own concerns about Wilson-Raybould and Philpott appearing to try to serve two masters, I see where perhaps the only masters they are trying to serve are their own consciences.


Thursday, March 21, 2019

Team players

Paul Wells' interview with Jane Philpott left me with the same feeling as Jody Wilson-Raybould's statement to her constituents. Nice sentiments, but conflicting.

Put in terms of a personal relationship, since this scandal broke, the behaviour of the PM and his closest people, toward Jody Wilson-Raybould (and frankly, many other women in his sphere) parallels an abusive partnership. I don't think it's a stretch.
  • there's denial (haven't a clue what she's talking about - didn't happen at all)
  • incredulity (I didn't realize - if only she had told us how she felt)
  • rationalization (only happened because Scott Brison resigned)
  • minimizing the problem (20 times over four months? That's nothing)
  • calling the accuser a liar (the people accused are too good to have done what she said)
  • blaming the accuser (she could have said 'no' and if it really happened, she would have quit)
  • resentment about going public (we're like family, this should have been handled internally)
  • suggesting the accuser had ulterior motives for her accusations (didn't want to lose her dream job)
  • promises to be better (this is a learning experience)
  • shutting down the conversation (we've heard as much as we need to hear. It's over)
All of the above behaviours are how abusers manipulate their accusers. People use the term gaslighting far too loosely these days, but when you look at the consistent efforts of the Liberals to discredit the accuser and shut her down, I think it applies here. Just because Wilson-Raybould hasn't backed down, doesn't mean that isn't the goal of the efforts.The mastery of the Liberal at the techniques of abusive partners is really quite astonishing.

It makes me wonder how anyone who has been on the receiving end of this sort of behaviour can continue to be around, and more suprising -- to represent the brand that is inflicting it on them.

I can't imagine still stumping for a team I felt was cheating, or manipulating or interfering -- and yet these women are. Why? One bad apple does spoil the lot if it's not purged. It hasn't been - and worse, every effort is being made to sustain the status quo and to undermine the testimony, opinions and public statements of these women. Why are they still willing to play on the team? Especially when both women contend that we only know part of the wrongdoing -- that there's more (and, my inference) worse to be heard.

None of this makes sense to me. The political interference part, I could forgive on a personal level. The people surrounding the PMO felt they were doing the right thing, maybe didn't feel they were crossing a line -- okay -- let's give them that -- but everything they've said and done since this became public has been done with the aim of maligning Wilson-Raybould, and now Philpott by extension. On a personal level, how do you just shrug off the ongoing campaign to shut you up and to paint you as hysterical and vindictive?

I don't get it. Most of Liberal team has backed Trudeau on this one. I don't know how these women can reconcile their decision to stay on that team.


Wednesday, March 20, 2019


So, I guess it's pretty much over. It's hard to sustain outrage without coming off as unhinged.

Much as the Conservatives were right to be outraged during AdScam, their reactions to the scandal hurt their leader and their brand, causing the then, unknown entity of Stephen Harper, to be labeled 'angry' -- a perception that stuck amongst a lot of average Canadians.

They're facing the same dilemma here. Some of their strongest and most talented voices are going to be painted in a negative light. Doesn't matter if they are justified. It only matters how it's framed.

Again, I believe Jody Wilson-Raybould, but her silence right now is a little eerie. She's letting the opposition parties do the dirty work of stirring things up on her behalf. Maybe she feels there's little else she can do, but after the show by the Liberals at the Justice Committee, wouldn't she feel even more indignant about their response, and have some sort of response herself? I don't believe she's just saving it all up. I don't know what to think anymore... but whatever momentum there was to find the truth, it's waning.

Justin Trudeau now says he's looking forward to working with both Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott in the future, so it would appear that bygones are bygones as far as he's concerned -- and the messaging Wilson-Raybould sent out to her constituents? I guess that just means she's satisfied for injustice to be done.

Between the breezy way the Liberals have effectively shrugged away this scandal, and the idea of the upcoming election being based more on identity politics, I think a lot of us are bracing ourselves for the prediction made last year by Justin Trudeau, that this campaign will be the nastiest in history.

I'm not looking forward to it.

The 'us' against 'them' rhetoric has already started, aided in part by the timing of Friday's terrorist attack on the mosque in New Zealand.

What better way to respond to a tragedy than to exploit it.

And then there's that sly way the Liberals have of just dodging anything unpleasant. The Mike Duffy scandal lasted forever -- and it was a true 'nothingburger'. It was a drop in the bucket compared to what governments of all stripes waste, daily -- and the scandal was that someone felt obligated to give it back??????

All of this is why people tune out of politics. You give up half your paycheque to pay for it all, and for what? For a budget that makes promises it won't keep, or if it does keep them, will bankrupt us and where a good half of us are too young, too old or too something to benefit from any of the largess if it ever found its way to where it's supposed to go anyway.

Maybe this is what they all want. Exasperate us to the point where we just turn off the tv, close twitter, and walk away.


Monday, March 18, 2019

It matters where it happens

For all those conservatives bleating on Twitter, how the mainstream media, politicians etc. have made a big deal over the New Zealand mosque terror attacks, and have not shown similar emotion for Christians slaughtered in Nigeria -- you already know the reason.

Whenever anything horrible happens in a western democracy, we watch, we weep, we grieve alongside -- because we see ourselves there. It doesn't matter the race or religion of the victims or the perpetrators, we are the same society. Things like that shouldn't happen here, because we deem our world, the 1st world, to be civilized. When terror strikes in our 'peaceful' nations, it strikes us in a way that brings the devastation home, even if it happened across the world.

It isn't that deaths in Nigeria don't matter, or that Christians matter less that Muslims, and no sane, rational person would ever suggest such. But terrorism, brutality and all manner of violent racism, religious persecution and inhuman treatment of 'the other' is still the norm in countries and regions where society still has a mindset of the ancients. We expect no better. There is no shock in its occurrence. These people share our world, but the expectation of civilization does not exist from us, for them.

If you live in and function as part of a modern society, we expect that regardless of who you are, your race, your religion, your country of origin -- you will not take up arms against your fellow citizens based on their race or religion -- it's that simple.

For people to try to make this a big deal of who gets the most outrage for their victimhood -- shut up. You know better.


Friday, March 15, 2019

Lovely sentiment, but very conflicting

Jody Wilson-Raybould's letter to Liberals and other citizens is uplifting, inspirational and very conflicting.

Much as I agree with her sentiments, I find they don't mesh well with staying in the party. It seems incongruent to me that she could find they behaved so egregiously that she quit cabinet, but that she feels she can somehow work within the party for change.

Trust has eroded -- that's a two way street. Just as she (apparently) lost trust in those within the highest level of her party, surely she must see that they have lost trust in her as well, and therefore, she will have no voice.

Had there been a stampede out the door following the resignation of Jane Philpott, I might say there was something to the concept of change from within. Instead we've had support for the Prime Minister from the rest of cabinet, and from the rest of caucus, yawns and shrugs and support for the status quo.

We've just had a Liberal dominated committee refuse to hear the rest of the details of her story -- I'm sorry. I just don't get it.

While I believe the allegations of the former AG, in my opinion, she discredits herself by continuing to pledge support for the brand.

The brand is the problem. How does she not get this?

You might like the Carbon Tax, and support action on climate change -- you might agree with every plank in their platform, but if the leadership of the Liberal Party still doesn't get why its behaviour in the SNC-Lavalin affair is wrong, how can she reconcile working along side these same people?

This is not a government problem. This is not a Canadian problem. This is a Liberal problem.

How can something your company's leadership has done, be so bad that you would quit your position, but then with no changes, no admissions of culpability, no acts or words of contrition -- you still feel that it was a worthy enough company that you want to maintain your relationship, and to represent the brand.

Doesn't compute.


Wednesday, March 13, 2019

This is where it gets tricky

So the Liberals did what Liberals do, and have adjourned the Justice Committee until next week, budget day -- so they can ponder 'next steps' and bury their vote behind budget coverage.

This is where Sheer needs to remain calm and not get all accusy and irrational.

He should not be making demands or acting indignant.... he should simply say that the Liberals are behaving in a manner to which we've become accustomed over time. This new ilk brings with it the old ways. Anyway, we trust that one way or another, the truth will out as it always does.

Poise, calm and confidence.

That's what this requires from the opposition. Too often the Conservatives come off hysterical at every turn.

This obfuscating, lying, manipulating, on the part of the Liberals is business as usual. It happens all the time. Any over-the-top rhetoric just adds to the illusion that this is an anomaly for them. It isn't. This is how they work. It's how they've always worked.

New generation, that's all.



Tuesday, March 12, 2019

PMJT is no ordinary guy

Although we keep getting news on the repercussions of the SNC-Lavalin affair, I honestly don't see it affecting the PM's chance at re-election.

He seems to have weathered the storm, mostly by just doing what he always does, which is saying a bunch of nothing.

There have been suggestions that without Gerald Butts in the PMO, that going forward with be hard for PMJT, but Butts didn't die. He resigned. As this scandal slowly recedes from the public interest, you don't think Gerry will be back there, advising his friend, even if in a non-official role? Who's to say he won't be re-hired. He did nothing wrong. He's spoken 'his truth'. A couple of weeks from now, they could slide him back in and who's going to challenge it?

The biggest concern to me as we move toward October's election, is that much as Trudeau doesn't deserve to be PM, I don't think Sheer does either. Lisa Riatt? Her I could get behind. Sheer does have a good team, but as the face of the party, he's just really bland and uninspiring. His attacks on Trudeau seem desperate rather than poised and reasoned -- even if they are well deserved.

The cult of personality got Trudeau elected. It wasn't his progressive agenda. People don't really believe the promises politicians make anyway. It was that 'star quality', and while it's lost a lot of its luster, I think people already knew he was stupid and didn't care. The question is, will it matter to them how poorly he's treated the people surrounding him, because that, more than the scandals and missteps, is where he's fallen the most. He had put himself on such a pedestal, and he's toppled off soundly.

Just seeing the bits and pieces of his public personality -- the time he elbowed the NDP MP in the chest in the House of Commons because he felt compelled to drag a Conservative MP to his place, his name-calling, his reported temper in private ... there are a lot of personal behaviours that smack of the spoiled little rich boy not ever wanting to be challenged, and not being able to deal with not having his own way. Some of them bubble to the surface and he seems unable to control them.

I think the only way the Conservatives win the next election is to exploit that, but wild demands of resignation, exaggerated outrage and petitions won't do that. Trudeau's temper comes not when he's full out besieged or insulted or attacked -- but rather when he's resentful, spurned or impeded in any way.

Here's hoping the opposition has learned a little bit about his psychology, rather than applying tactics that might cause regular people to feel shame or blame or contrition.


Saturday, March 09, 2019

Just another one who got it wrong

Liberal MP Celina Caesar-Chavannes says when she met with PMJT to discuss leaving politics, she was "met with hostility", but we all know she got it wrong:

Matt Pascuzzo, a spokesman for the Prime Minister’s Office, said, “The Prime Minister has deep respect for Celina Caesar-Chavannes. There’s no question the conversations in February were emotional, but there was absolutely no hostility. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, he is committed to fostering an environment where ministers, caucus, and staff feel comfortable approaching him when they have concerns or disagreements – that happened here.”
So there it is again -- another silly woman who just experienced things differently.

You know, I sort of villified Julia Lalonde, the consultant who gave them that mantra about people "experiencing things differently". It isn't that it can't be true. It is true often -- but what bothered me is that the Trudeau government has used it as a shield, rather than gaining insight from it.

Having read a little more about Ms Lalonde, I realize that when she told that to the fellas, her expectation was that they would understand that men and women DO experience things differently -- that yelling, or even elevated voices, insistance on one's own way, even if done politely, persistent communication about something that is uncomfortable -- those things might be typical male behaviour, and to the man, be innocuous, business-as-usual handling of affairs -- but to the woman, (or evern to other men) it might feel like harassment or intimidation.

I used to think Ms Lalonde was handing them an excuse -- now I realize -- she was saying: check your behaviour, guys! She was telling them -- in all of your interactions, DON'T DO THOSE THINGS. I don't think she meant to say it was okay for them to behave in a manner that might to some be uncomfortable, and the women simply took it wrong -- I think she meant for the men she was teaching to grasp that they needed to  learn to moderate their behaviour, not because women are fragile, but because we come from a different perspective - one where men in particular often try to force, bully, pressure, intimidate.

She was saying -- be careful -- you don't want your words and actions to be misinterpreted.

Instead, the men of the Trudeau governement have grabbed onto those words "we experienced things differently" and used them to skewer the women in their lives -- they've simply decided what they've said and done was A-OK, the woman just had the wrong point of view -- no need to self examine, no need to ever better oneself, one's reactions, one's conversation or persuation skills, when a man can simply say the other person (obviously) feels differently about the interaction, and BOOM, done.

The scary part is, that Trudeau used this line in a physical accusation -- what sort of message does that send?

I've no doubt Ms Caesar-Chavannes experienced those encounters differently from Mr. Trudeau. He still hasn't learned that it's incumbent on him to behave in such a manner that it CANNOT be misinterpreted.

But he has so little self-awareness, he really thinks it's everyone else's fault.


Friday, March 08, 2019

This government is vile

You have to read Brad Wall's column in the National Post.

This government is vile.

I remember non-conservatives weeping and wailing about how Stephen Harper was divisive, going to change our country and destroy our institutions, but Stephen Harper's Canada felt little different from Paul Martin's or Jean Chretien's or Brian Mulroney's (which often made me angry). In terms of our basic understanding of who we were and how things worked, the change seemed uneventful. It wasn't perfect. I had my disappointments in the Conservative reign, but Canada was Canada.

Much as I didn't like the Liberals of back then-- I thought they were smug and arrogant and entitled -- they were also sane rational people with a realistic view of the world and our country. I might have disagreed with their politics and policies -- often found fault with them in fact, but I didn't feel their way of governing was going to careen the country out of control to a point where the damage might be irreparable.

Not so this government --- This government has all of the arrogance and entitlement, with none of the smarts. It is so divisive, so uncontrolled, unmeasured, so sure of itself without actually knowing anything at all. It's basing our future on unproven ideologies and the whims of the day.

They support one region over another, time and time again. With its rigid ideological stances, there is no room for concessions, conciliation, cooperation -- it's all -- my way or the highway and that's in all areas - environment, justice -- you name it. They all hinge on that wildly extremist view of climate change, race and gender.

Sad thing is ... they told us all this before they were voted in.