Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Canada’

A local radio show was appropriately covering the recent mass media interest in a groping story from 18 years ago that suddenly came out in June, 2018, against the Prime Minister of Canada. It actually happened, as we learned from the woman, herself, who actually wrote the local newspaper article the following day.

I tweeted many points, and I feel that they are all useful to sum up the important issues and my thoughts on the matter:

CBC even deliberately covered up on their July 2 the National report that it was the reporter who wrote the article the day after the groping incident, and they aren’t the only source that isn’t reporting that.

I don’t think we would/should make much of the issue at all, with the woman not publicly coming out about it now, were it not for Trudeau’s remarks that he wouldn’t have been so forward if he knew she was a national reporter — very damning words.

If the NDP standard was applied to the PM, he’d be gone even from the Liberal caucus, as the NDP dumped an MP just for not taking non-verbal cues construed as sexual harassment — not even groping anyone, unlike Trudeau.

Getting out ahead of a crisis is mostly an issue in the private sector, where bad PR can be very damaging to the company, so even CEOs can be expendable — politics is a very different beast, particularly when you’re the PM.

It’s possible, and we may never know, that the groped reporter was paid off by Trudeau right after that article, given that, he, from his own admission, was concerned about negative national publicity.

Some articles have even misled with the narrative that this incident happened long before Trudeau had a political career. It’s widely acknowledged that he was officially political, and sought the PM job ever since his father’s funeral speech.

The political timing is revealing and key, Mike, as Kinsella (an enemy of Trudeau and some other Liberals, as a former Liberal partisan himself), put the story out after Trudeau let Kent Hehr stay in caucus after a report, despite the multiple allegations against him.

Notice the incongruity, too? He says he remembers that day well, but then doesn’t remember any negative interactions. Something doesn’t add up, directly in his statement, because the article published a day later quoted him as effectively acknowledging the grope.

Yes, Trudeau’s remarks about not groping her if he had known she was a national reporter was somewhat dismissive of her status, but note that it was pre-Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, so I think it was mostly a case of his concerns over his political reputation+future

That is, that if the incident 18 years ago happened with today’s social media, it would’ve been as bad as if she hadn’t been a national reporter, whereas then, only a national reporter could be a potential political threat.

A particular case where Trudeau is failing to give a proper response is by not saying, yes, I acted inappropriately, and that was the mindset I had at the time, from my own failings and the culture, and thankfully, we have finally been addressing that with MeToo.

Trudeau may deliberately be playing coy if there are other women out there that he had groped at the time, and by acknowledging guilt, he could bring other accusers out, and it would really damage him. He’s making a political calculation of acting dumb.

Read Full Post »

Thanks to this satirical article on the Beaverton, about the radical Leftist professors and administrators at Wilfrid Laurier University in Canada, who forced a grad teaching assistant into tears when they confronted her for playing a clip from Ontario’s public broadcaster, of a debate with professor Jordan Peterson, Americans are now discovering Canada’s version of The Onion, The Beaverton.

“WATERLOO, ON – Officials at Wilfrid Laurier University are launching a probe to determine how a TA who showed her students a clip from The Agenda became exposed to the extremist organization and its radical leader, Steve Paikin.

The clip featured a debate on the use of gender neutral pronouns. The university is still trying to ascertain how the TA got hold of such a graphic and disturbing clip.

(continued)”

Read Full Post »

Kevin O’Leary, nicknamed “Canada’s Donald Trump,” has announced his run for the Conservative leadership.

He actually had the nerve to announce it the morning after the previous evening’s French language debate, due to the fact that he isn’t fluent enough in French and didn’t want to embarrass himself. What may be a non-issue for most non-French speaking Canadians, as a would-be Prime Ministerial candidate, and therefore the Head of Government, it’s not asking much to be fluent in both official languages.

Pundits and others were repeatedly speculating and asking about whether he would run, and it was looking more to be the case, but in the era of the Web, one can get an indication of these things if you know where to look in relatively obscure corners.

O’Leary was a speaker at the Manning Centre’s “If I Run, Here’s How I’d Do It” talk in February 2016, which I came across during the early Fall.

I’ll save you having to listen to the whole video. The summary is that he said he would be critical of Premier Kathleen Wynne’s economic policies, and that’s what he did with his open letters to her and interviews. Another interesting thing was when he was asked about social policies, and he gave the indication that he had no plan to address them, saying the economic situation was a priority.

Keep an eye out, then, for indications like these, instead of relying on paid pundits who have no real clue.

Read Full Post »

I was just talking yesterday with someone about some interesting provisions in the Canada’s Criminal Code, included from a bygone era, where the purpose of criminal law was really appreciated and codified, of fundamentally protecting individual freedom, versus making the state supreme.

One of them I was aware of going all the way back to 2009, from the work of Robert Menard, and it turns out that it had actually been repealed in 2012.

Here it was before repeal, in Section 39:

Defence with claim of right

39 (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property under a claim of right, and every one acting under his authority, is protected from criminal responsibility for defending that possession, even against a person entitled by law to possession of it, if he uses no more force than is necessary.

Defence without claim of right

(2) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property, but does not claim it as of right or does not act under the authority of a person who claims it as of right, is not justified or protected from criminal responsibility for defending his possession against a person who is entitled by law to possession of it.

And here is what the 2012 repeal legislation said:

39 [Repealed, 2012, c. 9, s. 2]

More on the significance and other interesting current and former provisions in a future post.

Read Full Post »

From the June 2, 2016 episode of TVO’s the Agenda with Steve Paikin, the guest, claimed, 2 minutes in, that a report on mental health costs said that the annual cost due to lost productivity in Canada was $51 billion, and is projected to go into the trillions in 30 years. Given that Canada has a current GDP (PPP) of $1.6 trillion, that would be 3% of the economy in annual costs today, yet it’s supposed to go up to at least $1 trillion, when, in 30 years, the GDP will be $2.9 trillion (given a highly generous growth estimate of 2% annually), and the cost will be at least 34% of GDP?

The host had every reason to shocked by the claim. And, folks, just because it’s on a serious television program, doesn’t mean you shouldn’t immediately spot the claim as patently bogus.

Read Full Post »

During the 2015 Canadian federal election campaign, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau, now Prime Minister, promised to borrow money (at interest) to pay for $60 billion in new infrastructure investments, as opposed to the NDP’s plan to balance the budget in their first year.

It was, and remains, a false frame of having to stay in a deficit and grow the debt by borrowing at interest for infrastructure investments when the government of Canada, all its provinces, and its municipalities, have the statutory authorization under the Bank of Canada Act to borrow money, effectively, or, in actuality, interest-free.

For instance, money can be borrowed effectively interest-free when the Bank of Canada issues bonds that are held by the government, and when it buys its own bonds, as the government of Canada is the sole shareholder of the bank, and all profits, after expenses, will go back to the government.

But even better, the federal government can borrow money, interest-free, by requesting interest-free money, to borrow for infrastructure investments today.

So, despite Trudeau seemingly one-upping the NDP in saying that he would invest in critical infrastructure by borrowing today, as opposed to putting off such investments in favour of immediately balancing the budget, he bought into the typical false frame that we have to borrow the money at interest as opposed to borrowing it interest-free.

Read Full Post »

On the October 10, 2015 episode of Exposing Faux Capitalism with Jason Erb, I covered the following issues:

A unique analysis of the upcoming October 19, 2015 Canadian federal election, with a focus on foreign policy and election stunts. I also talk about health care and Uber.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

hatrickpenry

AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE ALTERNATIVE MEDIA

Recovering Austrians

Supporting recovering Austrian Economics addicts and their families

Real Currencies

Supporting People and the Commonwealth and resisting the Money Power by defeating Usury