The United States And Canada: Big Brother, Little Brother Relationship

***Please forgive any grammatical errors or poor sentence structure as I didn't edit this post. Thank you.***

The biggest issue for Canadian leaders since, like, forever, has always been how to balance sovereignty without looking like being a puppet of the United States.

The cold, hard reality is Canada depends on the United States much more than the other way around. Canada has little to offer that the U.S. can't do itself. The same can't be said of Canada. We're a semi-diversified, resource-dependent economy. Yes, we're a developed, first-class, tertiary economy, but at the base we rely on America to ensure our prosperity.


Canadian leaders have always generally been conscious and pragmatic about this reality. There's only so-much nationalist rhetoric you can sprout before it begins to impact the economy in a negative manner.

My perception over Canada-USA relations has shifted over the years. From the idealistic 'we're two equal partners' - and everything in between not necessary to discuss here - to my position of today.

That is, Canada takes for granted how fortunate it is to be neighbours with a country like the United States.

We sit next to the most powerful cultural and economic entity in world history. Right there this fact should be discounted in Canadian discourse regarding the United States.

Yet, for some, we still act and speak as if this is not the case.

Trump flushed this out once and for all and it's plain to see. Uncomfortable - even maddening - to Canadians as it is to be spoken to this way but it's closer to reality than not.

Where past Canadian leaders relied on American understanding and generosity to hammer out bi-lateral deals, the current Liberal party is finding out this is no longer the case and in my estimation are completely mishandling this new direction.

The proper and intelligent thing would have been to quietly negotiate and accept the new trade system the United States is pushing. I happen to agree most international deals between America and the world favoured the latter more than it did the Americans. America's share of world GDP went from roughly 50% in the 1950s to 25% today. While this is not exclusively because of trade because it would ignore other factors, the fact America did a lot of the lifting (particularly militarily and through aid) lends some credence to this theory.

While countries benefitted from the benevolence of American economic hegemony where tariffs against American goods and services tended to be higher than those imposed coming in the USA, the United States was essentially subsiding nations particularly those in the West. Added to this, is the fact the United States was the sole military protector of Western civilization during the Cold War.

It doesn't help that two major international organizations: The UN and NATO, are net benefactors of American aid and capital have also raised the ire of this administration.

The former increasingly anti-American in its posture and the latter refusing to pay the minimum requirements agreed by all countries - and this unfortunately includes Canada.

This set up was increasingly rattling Americans. The UN laughing at Trump was possibly one of the most inappropriate thing seen yet in my view.


We give them money
But are they grateful
No, they're spiteful
And they're hateful
They don't respect us
So let's surprise them
We'll drop the big one
And pulverize them

-Randy Newman


As neighbours who have greatly been net beneficiaries from the productivity and innovation of our friend to the south, one would think we'd be mature and intelligent enough to at least see this through an American perspective.

Instead, Canada has taken the ill-advised route of looking at it from a myopic lens; one in which aligns itself with countries that have done precious little for us.

This is why the Americans are not happy with our 'negotiating style'. We're probably making demands and refusing to make concessions thinking this is still 1995. We're not seeing the big picture. Trump is telling them you already lost. You have no leverage.

Now the rattling about we'll 'expand trade' with other countries is fine and all but we're just paying the price of past decision stretching back decades where Canadian politicians basically took the safe and stable decision of keeping Canada neatly tied to the American market. It's not a good or bad thing. Just a reality. We have access to the biggest market in world history and we exploited it to our advantage while, the way I see it anyway, the Americans weren't hostile traders or neighbours.

It was as good as things could get. We're the luckiest bastards in the world quite frankly. And we still 'hate those Yankee bastards'.

The Liberals are needlessly sabre-rattling. They're picking a fight when there need not be one. Trump has been an open book on trade going back to the campaign. He flat out said all along he didn't like NAFTA. And if the Americans don't like NAFTA, then we don't like NAFTA if you get my drift.

It was at that point a 'high IQ' leadership would have prepared for this the second Trump was elected. Instead, as we saw at the G7 meeting (where I feel here too Canada is part of a group of economic powers in spite of itself and largely thanks to its relationship with the United States) the Canadians were just going to push forward with their mostly ideological demands and incoherent positions on pipelines. It was tone deaf as it comes. Gender issues at this junction is the last thing countries like Italy and Japan want to hear, while the Americans, as one example, were set to pay for the pipelines and administer it (as they've always done throughout history. American and British capital mostly built Canada) but Trudeau seemed ill-prepared to hammer out a mature deal that really was in the best interests of Canada as a whole.

So he nationalized the pipelines. The results will speak for themselves but this is neither here or there.

Now, he's in a pickle because Trump decided to pinch him with the dairy cartel tariffs. I'm increasingly of the opinion this was a bit of business genius by Trump because he had to have known this was a thorny question for Canada and this party in particular. He put Trudeau in a corner and I have no idea how they'll wiggle their way out of it.

Leaving aside the utter unfairness of supply-side management to which the Conservatives - including Ontario premier Doug Ford - have bafflingly decided to support, it also should be understood our economy is very much a monopolistic one with limited completion by design.

Banking and telecommunications, for example, are carefully crafted fiefdoms leaving Canadians with little by way of choice. Contrast this to the United States, though not without its own absurdities and imperfections, is far more open an economy. For instance, our banks can freely go into America and buy assets. The favor is not returned. Worse, Canadians seem to think this is an example of Canadian 'enterprise'. Kinda easy when we don't play fair, right?


A while ago I read a comment by someone who was 'standing by Trudeau' assert 'we won't be bullied. What concessions will Trump give?'

To which someone else answered, presumably American, 'you have unfettered access to the greatest market in world history. Good enough?'


As for the bullying, I don't see it as such. We made it into bigger than it was. He wants a different deal and was willing to use American leveraging power to get one. I see nothing inherently wrong in that. We've taken for granted over the years the Americans rarely flexed their muscles. We're just not used to seeing a President who exerts American might. Even then, they're willing to negotiate a deal that's mutually beneficial. The deal with Mexico is actually a good indication this is in fact the case. By all accounts, both sides are happy with the deal struck.

Canada saw this as Mexico 'backstabbing' them. I saw how could you have thought this was a solution in the first place? Bypassing the Americans with political theatre and to try and 'stick it to Trump' was foolish and naive and bound to unravel the second the Americans knocked on Mexico's door.

And they did. Mexico aren't fools. They did what was right for Mexico. Just like Canada, they need America. The other factor to consider is Mexico has two things going for it Canada doesn't. One, it's a much bigger country population wise so that in of itself is a leverage card. Second, it has a much larger army than Canada and can actually defend its national borders. They're not as dependent for their security as we are in Canada.

There is though something Canada shares wit Mexico.

Which brings me to the elephant in the room: The Auto industry.

And this is where the ultimate irony lies.

The thing that always, to me, should have always been nestled in the back of the minds of Canadian nationalists is the irony of fighting for companies that are at their root American.

We fight as though we're defending 'what's ours' but in effect fighting for something that we're lucky to have in the first place.

General Motors, Chrysler and Ford are American corporations. Not Canadian.

They can close up shop anytime and leave with their ball.

The notion we're owed some sort of favor from Americans from their own companies is typically, well, Canadian.

The same for Mexico. Mexican and Canadian auto workers - splendid and productive as they are I'm sure - work for American companies. It's American capital and engineering originating in the United States is what gives us the jobs.

So when they come to the table asking for something, I'd think a little harder and keep this in mind.

Ah! Fine then. No deal is better than a bad deal they cry!


And then what?

One person said, 'they can't get our water'. Newsflash Canada: If the USA finds itself in desperate need of water, it will get it. Had we maintained somewhat of a respectable army capable of defending our borders, maybe we would have a chance. Natural resources need to be defended and America indirectly protects Canada.

Oh, we can expand trade with Europe! Perhaps. But that won't replace the United States.

Not by a long shot.

Never mind the issue of geography but it betrays the geo-political international game to which the Americans exert major influence and power. Even the Europeans know this. And the Chinese. And the Russians. So, Canada would abandon its incredibly beneficial position so immeasurable in its positives to go and....trade in a shark tank where the Chinese and Russians play?

Are the Trudeau Liberals that irresponsible if not naive and dat?

Moreover, you think the Europeans would be as generous, patient and gracious as the Americans?

You think they'd stand by any of our 'bi-lateral' deals when and if push comes to shove?


Whenever I press a fellow Canadian about what happens after, they sound like George Costanza. You know the scene where he's talking with Jerry about unrealistic jobs he can take including being a baseball General Manager or sports broadcaster after he quit his job? Yeh, that's how Canadians sound when I ask for a rational and workable alternative to the United States.

Quite the pickle. Quite the bind.

No matter how you cut it. Our economics and cultures are so intertwined, it's like veins in the human body where you can't really cut through it without damage.

My advice? Put on your big boy pants - if we have any - and get the damn deal done.

Because if we don't, it won't be good for Canada.


Trump Calls Out Canada

What truly baffles me is Canadians who don't seem to grasp the vast majority of our prosperity comes by way of our relationship with the United States. No one else. America.

Our economic and cultural ties are so intertwined, it would be like trying to cut their veins in the body if we wanted to extricate ourselves of our dependence on the America.

Not that we could even if we wanted to.

The notion of we can just expand trade deals with Europe is faulty and naive.

Europe can't give us what the Americans can both practically and not. They're too far in case you haven't noticed and militarily we're forever committed and tied to their protection.

We made that bed and we need to lie in it.

So it's perplexing our negotiators would even attempt to play a dicey game with the mightiest economy in world history. The odds are so stacked against us it's laughable. Not even David had worse odds against Goliath.

We simply have no leverage.

Canadians need to drop the faux-nationalistic act, put on their pragmatist pants, and get a damn deal done.

Degenerate UN Laughs At Trump

I'm way backed up and very busy these days. What a year. I haven't had much time to formulate my ideas into a coherent post for some time. I have a bunch of drafts but haven't had much time or energy to refine them.

I will get to Wendy Mesley's unprofessional and pathetic interview of Maxime Bernier shortly. That one had me fuming.

Anyway. Just wanted to quickly comment the UN laughing at Trump mentioning that his administration has had achievements in the first two years.

Unless you're completely in the partisan bag with your head up your ass, yes, it is true Trump has done well despite all the odds stacked against him. Just look at the disgusting disgrace of the DNC ruining Kavanaugh's reputation based on bull shit. My hope is the GOP don't back down, find their balls and just simply lose their shit on those assholes.  The worst thing they can do at this point is withdraw Kavanaugh's appointment because this would be tantamount to conceding the narrative to the left. Never do that. Just like we need to never apologize.

The Trump economy - largely due to his policies and little to do with Obama - is doing very well, he's resetting stale international trade deals and speaks up for Christians persecuted in the world. Never mind the endless stream of impressive enactments from pardoning people like Jack Johnson to 'right to try' legislation. I'm not going to enumerate them but there have been successes in just two years and against great odds.

But the idea that a derelict, corrupted and inefficient body like the anti-Israel fricken UN - where dictators and failed states with atrocious human rights records sit on Security Councils and have Human Rights seats -  has the unmitigated balls to laugh at the United States is staggering and astonishing. The list of failed UN initiatives - Rwanda anyone? - in the 20th century should keep some self-awareness lurking within its rotting halls.

When I see shit like that I see a bunch of losers who lost a game and they don't even know it.

The Americans should not pay their dues to that ineffectual body.

Give 'em hell Trump.


DAZN Outbids Champions League From Terrestrial Broadcasting


I'm speechless. For years I settled in and watched Champions League soccer on Sportnset/TSN and now it's....gone. Poof.

What a bitter disappointment.

DAZN signed a three-year deal and have no plans to cut broadcasters in on it. This means if you want to watch soccer you'll have to stream it for $20 a month.

Stream soccer on my shitty lap top? For $20?

No thanks.


I'm not paying to a company I don't know. I have no idea how their service is both on the signal (which I can imagine it being problematic) or customer service.

I'll just have to swallow this pill and watch highlights on the internet.

Just a terrible development for soccer fans in Canada.


So You Want To Be A 'Diversity And Inclusion' Officer

So you want to address the problem of lack of diversity in our world. You firmly believe it's all the fault of constructs that minorities aren't more represented or women don't go into certain fields.

It's time for action to fix this.

You apply for a 'Diversity and Inclusion' gig at ACME Woke inc.

You get the job.


You're now part of a cottage industry that capitalizes on a social engineering practice that seeks to prop selected groups to be promoted at the expense of others. Naturally and usually whites, and depending on where, Asians.

It's social engineering by other means. In your quest for 'diversity', people who deserve certain positions or fall prey to these illusionary good intentions, pay a heavy price. But this is unseen and not an issue for you.

What matters is to stay the course: Diversity is our strength.

You repeat this to yourself over and over.

You have achieved your dream and have carefully selected team of diverse people. 

You have equality of outcomes. You now want equalized results. 


You're now in commie dead zone.


Shorter: It's a creepy job to have. It doesn't apply, of course, to top men.

Just to the plebes.

Story of socialist tinkering in our lives.

It's a mind set for losers and destruction.


The illiterate ignorance of this is shocking as it still persists to this day.

You still have people who think 'gulags were compassionate' and educational institutions.

This is evil thinking and depraved of humanity.

And this sort of thinking is finding a home in the modern Democrat party of the United States and increasingly the Liberal party of Canada.

Folks. These people aren't liberals. 

They're progressives who hold socialist values.

They're illiberal.


Give 'Em Hell Norm

Well, it was bound to happen.

The asshole fascistic shit heads finally got Norm MacDonald. The genius comedian that towers above all mostly because of his unrelenting guts to tell uncomfortable jokes that make sensitive people squirm.

The best we can do is continue to mock (and wait out) this incredibly dark period in free speech in comedy.

But you can't ignore it.

Or else you'll end up with cowardly comedians who risk nothing to tell unfunny jokes that are an insult to the craft and out intelligence. Trevor Noah, Seth Meyers, Silverman, O'Brien, Kimmel, Wolf, Colbert, Maher etc. - none of these people have nay fucking guts.

Norm MacDonald puts every single one of these posers in their places.

They're not comedians. They're PROPAGANDISTS posing as comedians.

From me to them: Fuck. You.

Go get 'em Norm. Let them eat shit.


Instead of directing their faux-ire at comedians, maybe the gutless pukes can focus on things like this?

Yup. Those are far left sites (including the violent Antifa)  expressing and calling for the assassination of Donald Trump freely operating on Facebook and Twitter.

Are you starting to get the picture?

Dorsey and Zuckerberg are just a couple of progressive punks.


Ford Invokes The Notwithstanding Clause; Called A Dictator

At least no one has called him 'literal Hitler' so far like they do with Trump, right?

In any event, here's what I think.

I've said for years the notwithstanding clause should be murdered. It's an opt-out clause that has final say over liberty.

But it was, recall, applauded by many as an example of 'great Canadian democratic compromise' by probably the same people who are calling Ford for invoking it.

How can something be dictatorial if it's a legitimate tool of government at the disposal of politicians? When it was created did people actually think it was never going to be used? Quebec used it and no one seemed to mind. Although, again, on a philosophical level it's a ridiculous clause but politically it's legal.

Moreover, it's not like Ford wrote and forced it into Ontario law without a vote. It was there having been democratically created.

This predictable reaction from the left is not surprising as it reminds me of when Harper was elected they screamed, '66% of Canadians didn't vote for him ergo he must work with Parliament!'

No shit sherlocks. Like all Canadian governments who generally garner 30% of the vote.

Ford is trying to cut down the size of government and a judge blocked him. The judge acted inappropriately in my view and got in the way - like the activist liberal Federal judges of the 9th circuit in the USA did with Trump's travel ban in which SCOTUS eventually ruled in his favor - of a duly elected official trying to do his job.

Reduce the size of government. It's too big. Quebec should do the same thing.

Go get 'em Ford. Stick it to the bastards. Particularly the left-wing parasites launching various lawsuits against the government.


Of Serena And Academics

I don't delve too much into the excruciatingly stupid world of Twitter and its rabid army of busy bodies, faux-righteous warriors and general all around buffoons.

But sometimes a story pops up that catches my attention and while I was just going to ignore it at first, the Serena Williams outburst happened and figured to tie the two together.

First, the academic lashed out at Quantas because one of its stewardesses did address her as 'doctor'. 

“Hey Qantas, my name is Dr O’Dwyer. My ticket says Dr O’Dwyer. Do not look at my ticket, look at me, look back at my ticket, decide it’s a typo and call me Miss O’Dwyer. I did not spend 8 years at university to be called Miss,” she wrote.

She later tweeted:

Copping so much flack for this tweet. This was not about my ego. It was about highlighting one of a thousand instances of sexism that women encounter every day. It’s not about the title, it’s about the fact that this wouldn’t have happened if I was a man.

Notice how both (see below for Serena's excuse) turn around to defend and justify the inexcusable by using sexism as an excuse.

Which is bull of course.

They were both driven by a sense of entitlement. They let their egos drive their emotions.

In the case of the academic, two things spring to mind for me. It's a ludicrous statement because men with PhD's don't always get called 'doctor' and for the most part, and this key, don't make a Federal case out of it. So her accusation of 'what if it happened to a man' rings profoundly hollow and stinks of ignorance.

We have a few doctors in our circle of friends and not one commands we address them as doctor. We have actual doctors who don't expect to be called doctors for crying out loud.

Sounds to me this person is absolutely concerned about status and titles or else why tweet that nonsense?

I don't know if this is the first time this happens to her or if its often (she may have expanded on that on her twitter account). Nonetheless, whatever happened to facing life with self-deprecation and grace?

Moving on to Serena Williams, I'm going to assume you already saw or read about how the citations unfolded during the match.

After her 20 minute meltdown, she now faces a $17 000 fine for her behaviour during the U.S. Open final which culminated into the fans booing the winner Naomi Osaka.

Could you believe that? Take a bow you jerks. Jerks all around.

But it's okay. Serena tried to make it all better:

"I don’t want to be rude. She played well. Let’s make this the best moment we can, let’s not boo any more,” said Williams."
Except you already made it about you. 'Let's make this the best moment we can?' We? The best way to have done this was for you to stand back and have the decency to respect the sport and your opponent.

I don't know why the media (mind you, it's sports media where the most faux-woke breed work. The cowardice they show never ceases to amaze me) loves Serena. They glossed over her unsporting behaviour and focused on her addressing the crowd as being 'gracious'. Billie Jean King in particular was going to make sure she was going to be a candidate for being the most insufferably nauseating.

They way all talking gibberish dancing around what everyone knew: Serena was wrong. Only Navratilova had the courage to state the truth.

Let's give her a sportsmanship award. Why not? These days we give some many awards undeservedly why not?

“To lose a game for saying that, it’s not fair. How many other men do things? There’s a lot of men out here who have said a lot of things. It’s because I am a woman, and that’s not right.” Williams also rounded on Donna Kelso, the supervisor for the Women’s Tennis Association, and told her “I’ve worked so hard to be in this position.”

The stats don't back her up. 

How can anyone support her despicable behaviour? Especially tennis people.

At least she didn't say black woman. I'm so sick - and often disgusted - by this gratuitous bull shit about race and women now. I don't see how it justifies the behaviour. Why don't you show true courage and just accept you were wrong?

Furthermore, this from someone who threatened to ram tennis balls down the throat of a female umpire.
"Now Williams lost her temper – something that has happened twice before at the US Open. During the 2011 final, she accused chair umpire Eva Asderaki of being “a hater” and “ugly inside”.And even before that, in 2009, her semi-final against Kim Clijsters ended in another point penalty after she told a lineswoman “If I could, I would take this ----ing ball and shove it down your ----ing throat.”

She continued:

“For you to attack my character is something that is wrong,” Williams continued. “You will never ever, ever be in another final. You are a liar.” Then, when she called Ramos a “thief” for taking away a point from her, he gave her a code violation for verbal abuse, resulting in the game penalty that carried Osaka to 5-3 in the second set."

How dare you apply the rules against me as I struggle to beat a player who is better than me today!

Problem is, her coach admitted to coaching her but they weakly pleaded but it wasn't "coaching-coaching" (to borrow an infamous style of distraction first blurted by genius of our times Whoopi Goldberg when she described Polanski's rape of a 13 year-old as not being 'rape-rape) - wink.

So she may have lied and called the ump a liar. I think we call this projection?

The bottom line in all this sordid affairs is she lost because Osaka was better. Simple as that.

No, people aren't talking sexism or double standards in sports in the way they would like. Instead, people are finding out it's not as being portrayed. Well, not for the right reasons. They're discussing it in the context of what Serena did. What's more important here is the lesson on how to lose with grace and avoid hogging attention like a narcissistic twit. More on Obama in a later post by the way.

Rather, we're talking about how to lose with grace. How her grandstanding was in poor taste. That she doesn't speak for women. At least, those of us in the real world that actually raise children.

In other words, we're using Serena as an example as to not what to do in those situations.

Ultimately, when these two women were called out, they then played the victim card.

They're not victims. They're the authors of their own script. Face and own it.

Are they not their own moral and intellectual agents?

I wish people like these two stop claiming to be playing and speaking for women.

They don't.

If anything, these are two example I use to teach my daughter exactly not to do in life. If anyone maintained a quiet dignity it was Naomi Osaka and she comes out looking like a true champion.

And for the love of God, can they stop using their after game conferences to lecture people or talk about their agendas?


Canada Has Only Itself To Blame On Trade Spat Mess

Canada is showing its insular and incredibly unrealistic nationalist colors as they try and rationalize away our mishandling of trade talks with our partners.

I suppose it's not surprising there was going to be some 'Mexico stabbed us in the back!' dramatics from some corners of the media as The Globe and Mail did. I can't comment on the article because you have to subscribe and I don't subscribe to legacy media. Judging from those titles, I don't expect to get much out of it as I've seen these sorts of spins in different forms over the years.

The simple fact is Mexico owes Canada nothing. Canadians don't seem to grasp that national interests are a real thing and the Americans are right to be asking for renovations of trade deal.

If you're not paying close attention to the wider context in which the Americans are operating (and it's on a higher level because they have far, far more of a dynamic and complex economic system with global implications and responsibilities at the same time) and just look at from the myopic lenses of Canadian interests, you're going to take a 'we can go out on our own!' posture; even though it's unrealistic and makes me wonder if people who say this understand anything at all about the way the Canadian economy functions in relation to the United States.

In other words, we see a lot of tough talk. Empty tough talk.

Hey, judging from the comments in the CBC, maybe this 'stick it to Trump' shtick just may keep Trudeau's incompetent government still in power in 2019. People just love to get all patriotic.

Trump is reshuffling the global trade system. Whether we like it or not is irrelevant. We don't move the needle in international affairs. The Americans do.

And the system is changing. Already has and it sounds like it blew right past our heads.


The answer is to not to engage in empty nationalistic platitudes.

The proper response was to negotiate in good faith and not make frivolous demands on a U.S. government that's not interest in nickels and dimes like we are.

It doesn't sound like we're getting the message. We're still in the denial stage. Trump is 'out to get us' and 'Mexico stabbed us in the back!'

Whatever makes you sleep at night.

Aways someone else's fault, eh Canada?

Except in this case, we have no one but ourselves to blame for this predicament.


I Hope Canadian Politicians Are Better Informed Than Being Shown On TV

Seems like McKay is confused in the video below.

McKay cautioned Trump about being careful for what he wishes for in proposing American courts could settle trade disputes because the courts have ruled against Trump.

Not exactly. 

A couple of U.S. district judges (in Hawaii and Maryland) have done so and were upheld by appeals courts with appellate powers called the 9th circuit (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) (run by mostly Democrat appointed judges). Given its reputation for liberal judicial activism, it's no secret they would do so. 

SCOTUS - the one that counts - upheld the travel ban. A ban that seeks to block immigration from nations determined to be a threat to national security and selected by the previous administration under Obama. 

Moreover, with Brett Kavanaugh's nomination, the odds favor Trump. 

In this light, McKay's caution rings heavily hollow.

It's one thing for the average Canadian to not know this distinction, but this is a former foreign affairs Minister? Just how ill-informed are Canadian politicians about American politics?

It's inexcusable. If a lowly blogger like me is more aware of how the American system functions than our 'masters', then it's no surprise how poorly we're handling Trump.

Canada seriously needs to wake up and Canadians should view Trump's with different optics. We're completely misreading Trump and rely too much on second information mostly from legacy media outlets who haven't exactly been fair in their reporting.

Trump owes us nothing.

We have UNFETTERED access to the greatest economic entity in world history and we're acting like we're doing them a favor. 

That's how myopic we've become.


Trump is doing Canada a favor to the extent past administrations simply enable our complacency. We simply took for granted our prosperity is intricately linked to American success. Trump, like he did with the EU, is simply telling us to man up a little.

He's not looking to 'destroy' Canada or 'steal our jobs' as Scheer inexplicably said in an absurd Facebook post.

I'm not holding my breath we're taking any lessons here. Sounds like Trudeau is gonna stick to the 'fight Trump' formula we see with Warren and Cuomo and other left-wing moonbats. 


The pathetic show boating of Kavanaugh's hearing:

The Rot At Youtube

The other day I watched this video by the increasingly popular (notice how popular videos get targeted) 'Don't Walk, Run' rebutting Nick Gillespie at Reason TV.

It was reasoned and backed up by facts including from the Pew Research foundation. So is youtube going to ban Pew sources?

Do you see how troubling this is? Even if you build a case through reputable sources, you will be targeted.

Problem is....it runs against the narrative.

Why? Because it runs against the immigration narrative.

Note. Nowhere does it remotely take a negative stance against immigration but takes a dead aim at the notion of 'open borders' and illegal immigration.

I think we've moved past this notion of 'they're a private company and can do what they want' stuff. People who say this are the ones who agree with silencing people they disagree with. We've also move on from 'is it a platform or publisher' thing.

They're just cowardly authoritarian ignoramuses who can't admit what they're doing. Just like the New York Times or CNN don't have the guts to admit they're progressive media outlets, youtube and Twitter refuse to admit they're shills for the DNC/progressive narrative.

I call bull shit too on the 'they pay taxes' crap. Gillespie doesn't specify which taxes exactly because I doubt it's income taxes or else they'd be targeted for rightful deportation.

So he's being misleading. And apparently, to youtube's finest (which means one notch above someone with a lobotomy), to point this out is considered 'inappropriate'.

Folks. There'a a war for information out there and the social media army is against it.

Imagine having to defend yourself to mindless assholes about your work!

I invite you to look at it and see for yourself.

The Sad Stupidity Of Dorsey

The guy who runs that stupid site Twitter.

Yeh him.

I'll show you in two simple links why he and his ilk are full of shit.

One: Hamas.

Still working.

Two: Farrakhan.

Still working.

And plenty others. Like Sarah Jeong and her unbalanced hate and screeds against whites. Not only was she ever in danger of being banned (free speech!), the shitty rag called The New York Times hired her! Wait. It gets better. Even though to a normal and rational mind with a sense of fairness and tolerance her tweets were clearly racist, you have journalists and headlines stunningly asking, 'was it racist?'

I tell ya. Sometimes I wonder if I should just lay off the Internet. Lines of morality and sense of decency get blurred.

In any event and moving along.

But let's ban Alex Jones who doesn't engage in 'hate speech' as those two. Saying:

“Tweets designed to threaten, belittle, demean and silence individuals have no place on this platform.”

Then why are progressives still in operation? Seems to me they're the biggest bullies of them all. I mean, look at Elizabeth Warren basically calling for a procedural coup.

It's just that he says things idiotic illiterates like Dorsey (and people like him) run against their narrative.


Melania Trump Goes Off On NYT

And she's right.

These are cowardly actions by cowardly people who are sabotaging a nation, its people as they attempt to rewrite it.

I absolutely think the NYT is acting treasonous and abdicating its claim to journalistic integrity.

How anyone could possibly think what the NYT is doing is 'honourable' and part of this stupid bull shit 'resistance' defies and baffles the logical and sane literate mind.

It's so bizarre and banana republic in its decision, I don't even know if it's true. Or what angle they're playing here. I'm just going with Occam's Razor and assuming that they're just being dicks

There has to be more to this, no?

I don't care about bias. I care about pretending to be objective while engaging in bias everyone sees.

This is why Fox you can respect Fox more. You know what you get with them. News with a conservative slant. And even then, I see much more balanced debating, reporting and shows on Fox.

Over to you Chuck Todd you disingenuous baby. You were saying about Fox?

Bonus Derp! Chuck Todd's An Asshole!

OMG, Hitler is literally Hitler. Literally.

“It’s not up to the US administration to define the status of Palestinian refugees,” Zomlot said. “The only status the US can define is, its own role in peacemaking in the region. By endorsing the most extreme Israeli narrative on all issues including the rights of more than 5 million Palestinian refugees, the US administration has lost its status as peacemaker and is damaging not only an already volatile situation but the prospects for future peace in the Middle East.”

Shorter: It's your fault if all things go bad. Give us money or we’ll riot and kill our children. We can make things very bad as you've already seen. We won't actually, you know, work for peace because as you understand the Jews have to be thrown into the sea. So why don't you just play nice, keep the charade going and pay up. Why make trouble?


Let's do compare and contrast kiddos. Get your scissors out. If you're left-handed I'm sorry, we don't have left-handed scissors.

Narrative: NBC News:


Fact: USDA: Record high crops.



And finally, this infuriating gem from Ryan Gosling starring in a biopic of Neil Armstrong.

Gosling, a Canadian, attempted to explain away the ridiculous decision to omit the planting of the American flag on the moon.

It was a mixture of Armstrong being a 'citizen of the world' and that it was a human achievement that transcended flags.

"I think this was widely regarded in the end as a human achievement [and] that's how we chose to view it," Gosling said during a press conference for the movie in Venice, according to The Telegraph

"I also think Neil was extremely humble, as were many of these astronauts, and time and time again he deferred the focus from himself to the 400,000 people who made the mission possible."
Gosling added: "So I don't think that Neil viewed himself as an American hero. From my interviews with his family and people that knew him, it was quite the opposite. And we wanted the film to reflect Neil."
So what? His personal feelings have nothing to do with the facts. Using it as an excuse to nix this reality is precisely what we call 'playing with the facts'. Or revisionism.

In the end, the American flag was used. It wasn't a UN initiative. It was an American one.

It was American engineering and tax dollars that made it happen. Sure it was a human achievement and the man on the moon does transcend national borders but the Americans did it and you don't disrespect this.

The breathtaking arrogance to take something a country did and declare it belongs to the world is nauseating. People are fully capable of accepting this achievement was uniquely American but that it was a positive for humankind.

It was a weak explanation. It rings hollow.

To ignore this fact of history is wrong and absurd and has become a regressive pass time of the modern progressive left who just rework it to fit their lousy narratives.

Why not just have Denzel Washington or Sandra Bullock or Caitlin Jenner play the role of Armstrong and have him plant the Rainbow flag at this point since facts don't matter.

Hey, why not have a film about WWII and not have any American flags anywhere including Pearl Harbour and Iwo Jima because Hollywood finds some of the soldiers who fought really weren't fighting for America but for the world army! 

Why not? It's all unicorns and sophistry now anyway.


This is why you need Stossel in the classroom:


Couldn't agree more. It's been my understanding of Canada since I was in my 20s. It doesn't take genius to grasp this fact but it does take a lot of honesty.

Heck, I don't even consider Canada a true G7 country.

The United States is the mightiest and most diversified economy in world history. It doesn't need Canada as much as you think.

As I've increasingly come to realize, the Americans humour us. They have been more than gracious with Canada. We have nurtured a special relationship over te years and we should once and for all understand our place in it.


Ah....but they won't listen. 

See Chuck Todd's latest at The Atlantic linked in my recent CBC post. I didn't save the link for this post and too lazy to pull it up. Plus, it's not worth it.

Todd goes off blathering on about how he and his colleagues are purveyors of the truth and 'gosh darn it are doing the best they could' (like his joke of an interview with Cortez-Ocasio) pretending the reader doesn't notice he works for a network that rehired Brian Williams and one in which has been repeatedly caught lying. A network that buried the Weinstein story and edited evidence in the Zimmerman-Martin case.

Oh. Neve you fucking mind the NYT (as if it's already not a rag) going the route of anonymous op-eds and hiring third-rate racist hacks.

Did I mention Dan Rather?

And then there's fucking CNN.

He babbles about 'talking points' in the right-wing media and how he wishes he can be 'tougher' on it never mentioning MSNBC's Maddow is driving rates up with probably the biggest fraud-talking  point in my lifetime with the Russia story.

Go fuck yourself Todd.

Literally. Here's a dildo and shove it up your ass.


Just as a point of reference. How fact checkers aren't infallible. It's always worth keeping a 'healthy skepticism'.

Privatize The CBC: Reason #40505

I'm a proponent of cutting off the CBC from tax dollars because I simply don't like being forced to pay into something a) I don't use and b) have no say in the content even though taxes are used to fund it.

For example, I don't like Neil MacDonald as a writer. So why should I be forced to pay his salary?

Don Pittis is another.

I don't think it's too much for people who possess intellectual clarity to grasp socialism and the parasitical scumbag who ran it in Venezuela ran that country into the ground while plundering its wealth.

Chavez's daughter is worth billions.

I'll give you a second to process this. There should be one outcome as to why this is the case in your mind.

Hint: Her father was a lousy commie revolutionary. Maduro is that plus less smart.

Kids. It's not that difficult to play this game. Morales is doing the same in Bolivia. Castro did it to Cuba decimating that island while imprisoned and murdered people just like that psychopathic piece of shit Guevara did years before.

But let's keep blaming CIA coups, the greedy capitalist Americans and...now Trump.


Moving on.

Alas, in the progressive world, see, it's not socialism or left-wing ideology that sank Venezuela.


According to Pittis it was populism.

Yes, populism. Of course, it doesn't take a genius to figure it out why the left takes this position. Trump is considered a populist (even though some of his policies had origins in the DNC) and ergo populism is dangerous because Trump is dangerous and well, then they connect the dots in the bizarro world they inhabit and somehow think this is what destroyed Venezuela.

Never mind that when Venezuela was rolling along, they said it was because of socialism.

But these aren''t people with a particularly strong principled outlook and they'll just engage in sophistry the minute it suits them. Think how McCain went from 'racist crazy' to 'beloved hero' with the left.

His also pretty imaginative with the meaningless jargon. For example, "Economic populism" is a term he uses in this absurd piece in the CBC.

The populism of Bernie Sanders though - which is truly a dangerous mix of socialism and stupidity - is considered a-okay.

Look, I'm not going to break down the article. It's too sophomoric to waste time on.

It's just a really idiotic spin or derivative of 'it's not real socialism'.

'Useful lessons' my ass.

My point is tax payers who don't agree with this sort of faux-intellectual masturbation shouldn't be forced to pay for this garbage.

The CBC is indispensable you say? Have a pledge drive and make people pay who agree voluntarily pay for it.

All the power to the CBC and the people who support it.

Just leave me the fuck out of this shit.



Chuck Todd publishes his own nonsense.

"...Some of the wealthiest members of the media are not reporters from mainstream outlets. Figures such as Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge, and the trio of Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and Laura Ingraham have attained wealth and power by exploiting the fears of older white people. They are thriving financially by exploiting the very same free-press umbrella they seem determined to undermine."

What a smug, mendacious, presumptive, paternalistic, arrogant piece of shit Todd is.

All I see is naked projection. It's HIS side (whatever it is at this point. They're just lying assholes to me anyway at this point) doing all the fear-mongering. And if you don't see this, you're not paying close enough attention.

I would have taken him seriously if he made a general overall assertion about the state of journalism pointing out the same bull shit that goes on at ABC, CBS, CNN, NYT and his own god damn network who employed fucking Brian Williams and have repeatedly been caught lying or stretching the truth.


Quote Of The Day: Poland's Working Class Revolution

I hope you all enjoyed Commie Day yesterday (aka as Labour Day).

Always keep in mind the origin of things and their context:

“[I]n Poland we have the very first revolution in the world conducted by the working class, directed not against a capitalist system,” the late American Federation of Teachers’ President Albert Shanker said, “but against a communist dictatorship…


Quick Derp Hits

Once again, I'm pilling up too many links I can hardly keep track of.

I have TWO derps waiting with older stories but it keeps growing because, well, the news-derp cycle never rests.

I just want to get these out.

My take about Papa John's? Simple. He said something that wasn't racist, but interpreted as such, some asshole snowflake squealed and snitched on him and now the opportunistic harpies are out to wrestle the company he built away from him.

And all you need to know about the integrity of the board is they keep airing their dirty laundry to the media.

They're snivelling rats. I hope John Schnatter wins and shoves pizza up their asses.


Same with the idiots trying to boycott In'N Out burger. They didn't learn with Chick-fil-A?

All this 'faux-outrage' is getting to be incredibly deranged. Big fucken shit they give to the Republican party of California? You have access to public information and this is exactly how you shouldn't treat this stuff lest it HAPPENS TO YOU. All you accomplish here is perhaps getting people to a) side against you because you're a dip shit and b) make contributions anonymous.

The establishment has a great reputation for taking care of its employees and offering a quality burger and service. You know, THEY'RE FUCKING JOBS.

And still, you have trouble makers looking to make an political issue out of everything.

Like the clowns politicizing Aretha Franklin's death. And that opportunistic hound McCain.

All you're accomplishing in denigrating Trump on the backs of these deaths is show really how empty your souls really are.

Man, McCain's funeral has been an orgy of insuperability from a bunch of lousy hypocrites.

I digress.

We had INO in L.A. recently. Not bad. A little long to to wait but the same at Five Guys...and Chick-fil-A.

But quality does that. People come and you have to wait.


How dare you give to the political party of your choice!

And how dare you support Trump!

Another example of this unhinged immaturity is Sommerville Mayor Joseph Curtatone calling for the boycott of Sam Adams beer because....guess why?

Because Jim Koch has the temerity to thank Trump for the corporate tax cut.

A tax cut, we should mention, that went from 34% to 21% which is in-line with most industrialized countries including Canada!

Ma verramentte, Joe. Grow up.

Tax cuts are a good thing. 

Honestly, these people are something else.

This is exactly how illiberalism - ie fascism works. They *think* Trump is a *fascist* so they employ fascist tactics (ie bullying, boycotting, censorship and even violence) to win their argument.

They're low life critters is what I'm trying to say.


But T.C., you're exaggerating! No one is calling for violence. To which I can but answer, are you paying any fricken attention?

You just don't see this sort of rhetoric from the right side of the coin. This is an OFFICIAL.


Oh, about those deporting of American citizens. See, um, here's the thing. It was happening UNDER OBAMA TOO.

But no one seemed to care when the Lightbringer was doing it.

It points to shameless partisanship and hypocrisy.


Same with Federal salaries. Obama did it from 2011-2013 and....crickets.

Trump does it...end of the world.

IT'S DIFFERENT THIS TIME! He does it with nefarious intent!

If civil servants down there are any thing like the ones here, they're going to bitch about how bad they have it - even though they kept mostly silent during Captain Classy's mediocre reign.


The Ghost of Cathy Newman lingers.

Move over Cathy.  "Journalist" Patrick Gower says 'hold my beer'.

Regardless of what you think of Molyneux and Southern, the cold hard truth is the treatment they're getting is indicative of how modern sensationalist media and illiberal forces operate.

Notice when he accused Molyneux of going on a rant. Molyneux answered a question (to which Gower would not let him complete) with facts. He didn't go off on a rant. What you do, if you truly are a professional and looking to get to the truth, you counter facts you question with your own facts.

You don't do what this dips hit did.

Ah. But this is not the goal here. The goal here is to entrap the guests into revealing themselves to be Nazi-racists. You see, it's all so transparent and obvious in its shtick. The media ALREADY THINKS it knows the truth and they bring people on like these two people not to genuinely here another perspective but in hopes of tarring and feathering them.

But it never ends up that way. You see, when you present a reasoned argument (think Peterson v. Newman) and the other side attempts to misrepresent you, it's the latter that usually ends up with egg on its face.