In politics today, baloney baffles brains!

Bullshit baffles brains!
Baloney baffles brains!

I am sure that a lot of Canadians and Americans, whether moderate liberal or conservative, understand my post title: “Baloney baffles brains.”

Unlike any other time in my life, have I been faced with a political establishment and a mainstream media in both countries that whines and complains day in and day out about issues that are totally unimportant to most of us.

In Canada, not only the public funded CBC, but the private networks as well, are absolutely useless in terms of offering balanced coverage. I mean, flip your TV channel or Twitter thread to one of them and it will be anti-Trump 24/7 and not a negative word about our immature Pollyanna prime minister, Mr. Trudeau.

And, yes, the Canadian media and naive Canadians are responsible for the government we now have because during the summer and fall of the 2015 federal election campaign, they waxed lyrical about “Justin” while simultaneously trashing everything Harper.

All hogwash. Sunny ways indeed!

Think about it. How many Canadian readers now remember the near hysterics about the Mike Duffy trial and the so-called corruption in the PMO because a senior staffer had paid the public treasury back some $90,000? Paid back mind you.

Compare that to now. We have a federal Liberal government that is getting away with spending millions, if not billions, we don’t have. Yes, I know, the Harper government had a huge deficit for a while because of the 2008/09 recession. But, they had a plan to pay it down, which they did, handing the country over to the Liberals in October 2015 with a $5 billion surplus. 

Of course, there is the current hysteria and cynicism going on in the U.S. Look, I don’t particularly like the crudeness of some of what President Trump says, but the proof of his effectiveness should be in the results of what he does, not whether he kicks CNN’s drama queen Jim Acosta out of the White House.

As a Canadian, I am envious. If only our economy was booming the way the U.S. economy is booming. I mean, the U.S. currently has the lowest unemployment rate in decades. And, they have all the pipelines they need. Therefore, any lack of political correctness on Trump’s part is irrelevant to the everyday lives of Americans.

Which makes me miss a certain former Canadian PM by the name of Stephen Harper. If ever any leader was competent, it was Harper. True, he has a very different temperament than Trump but the same type of inner strength, day-to-day, to ignore negative press and Liberal whining.

Yes, I used to criticize Harper on this blog for not fighting back. Having worked for an MPP in the Mike Harris PC (Progressive Conservative) government, I knew responding to negative press issues quickly worked. But, in the end, the Ontario Liberals toppled the Ontario PCs too — something the Ford government needs to remember.

Which brings me to why, in our current political climate, spouting baloney really does seem to baffle brains. In other words, well-meaning people hear untruths and exaggerations so long, they begin to believe them. We got Trudeau because of all the “sunny ways” media baloney which was based on hollow promises, out right lies, and virtue posturing. And now the U.S. have a Democratic House for the same reasons.

So, what does all this mean to Canadian conservatives? In my opinion, what it means between now and the October 2019 federal election, is all we are going to hear and read about — 24/7– is pro Max Bernier media coverage (including upbeat photo ops) compared to the anti-Scheer narrative that “Scheer is weak.” Why? Because Liberal progressives clearly remember that the Reform/PC vote split guaranteed that federal Liberal governments would be elected.

From my point of view, then, the crux of the matter is that until Canadian conservatives shovel their way through the current baloney and realize that there is little chance a Bernier-run conservative party can overcome the current CPC (Conservative Party of Canada), there is little I feel like writing about.

C/P at Jack’s Newswatch.

Man wins women’s world cycling championship

Image taken from Twitter.

Political correctness is truly over the top when a biological man is not only allowed to race in a women’s cycling world championship but allowed to win. Winning in the age 35-39 sprint category, Peter Hasson identifies that trans woman as Rachel McKinnon, a Professor at the College at Charleston, South Carolina. Representing Canada in the race, which was held recently on October 14th, 2018 in Los Angeles, McKinnon apparently had no problem with her being a biological male competing against biological women.

Look, as someone versed in developmental and cognitive psychology, I do not have a problem with a biological male choosing to live life as female. I realize they go through a great deal of therapy and difficult life choices to get there, including in some cases, re-assignment surgery. But, that whole process is by their choice which I accept as society’s new reality.

However, when that process becomes unfair, as in the case of sports, I do have a major problem because men and women develop differently both psychologically and physically. For example, male bones, joints and muscles mature differently from females in their teen years.

There is also the issue of hormones. McKinnon admits she still has plenty of the male hormone testosterone. She says in the Daily Caller link above, for example, that accepting transgender females competing against biological females is no different than when black males were previously segregated from white males. Sorry, but that analogy doesn’t work because no matter what the color of someone’s skin, a biological male is a male and a biological female is a female.

I mean, take a look at the winning image above. McKinnon is so obviously a biological male compared to the other two female winners. She has a larger body and much larger legs. Not only that, “she” doesn’t stand like a woman does.

Mind you, this issue has been brewing in sport for over a decade now regarding people born with an intersex condition, what used to be referred to as being a hermaphrodite. For example, there was the issue of Olympic African sprinter Caster Semenya, who has such a condition. As Daniel Engber of Slate Magazine, in April 2011 the International Athletics Association responded with guidelines that any “female athlete that tested high for functional testosterone”… be given a choice.” They would either have “to give up competition, or undergo treatment to push her levels back below the ‘male range.'”

Caster Semenya is on the far left in the above image.

More recently, Engber also explains, there was controversy in 2014 over another intersex athlete, namely, Indian sprinter Dutee Chand, who took her situation to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which ruled in her favor. However, after than finding, the standard for testosterone was shelved through 2017 until more scientific evidence could clarify. Unfortunately, with today’s level of political correctness, I know of no one who is brave enough to claim such evidence.

Dutee Chand in the above image.

And, therein lies the problem. Rights versus reality. And the reality is that biological males are stronger athletes than females. For example, “Ross Tucker, an exercise physiologist and supporter of the invalidated testing protocol, told me he’s observed that several women with intersex conditions have been running 5 to 6 percent faster in the past year.” Why? Because they apparently no longer suppress their natural testosterone.

For context on that speed, Engber says that by comparison, “the very best male runners in the world tend to run about 11 percent faster than the very best women.” Meaning, that biological males are automatically way ahead of any biological female in terms of raw speed.

The crux of the matter is for the powers that be in sport to stop this unfair practice now because in the not so distant future, young biological women will not even bother to get into championship and Olympic sports that are dominated by men who are self identified as women.

Continued at Jack’s Newswatch.

Christine Blasey Ford’s feminism not about equality

Judge Kavanaugh & Christine Blasey Ford Sept. 27th Senate Hearing.

If you are a woman who believes women should always be believed, treated like a snowflake, and understand “choice” to only be about abortion, don’t read this column.

Why?

For two reasons: First, because I believe feminism means equality of the sexes and second, because I agree with everything David Horowitz writes today in his Front Page Mag article: “Sorry for blurting it out, but Christine Blasey Ford is a liar.

He sums up his views in this paragraph:

Any fair-minded observer of the Kavanaugh proceedings would have noted that no one – Republican or Democrat – so much as laid a glove on his female accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, even though she had come forward to destroy the life of an exemplary individual and his family. No one, dared to do so. Call this feminine or victim privilege.”

I call it inequality!

Yes, I know Horowitz is male. But so what? When watching the U.S. Senate hearings a week ago, my eyes saw exactly what his saw and my ears heard exactly what his heard. And, that was that neither the Prosecutor (Rachel Mitchell) questioning Ford or the Senators, Democrat or Republican, ever really questioned or challenged any of Ford’s answers.

For example, when Rachel Mitchell asked Ford why her friend did not corroborate her narrative, she answered simply that her friend had health issues. Pardon me? What did her friend’s health issues have to do with the fact that her friend said she had never met Judge Kavanaugh nor did she recall the party in question?

Of course, not all men are disbelieved, only conservative men or men like Judge Brett Kavanaugh who were recommended to the U.S. Supreme Court by a Republican President. In Canada, our Liberal PM Trudeau said recently regarding a long ago groping incident (paraphrased) that he and she simply didn’t remember the event in the same way. And, our liberal media calmly accepted that answer.

Anyway, it’s sad that feminism has come to this. I remember when the modern feminist movement started back in the late 1960s. Like many young women at the time, the new views gave me permission to go back to school and live a life un-thought of by the previous generation of women. Feminism then meant the choice of working in the home or the workforce. And, it had nothing to do with abortion, or its popular euphemism “reproductive rights.”

However, in but a few short years, something backward happened. The concept of feminism changed. It was no longer about equality and choice for both sexes. It was only about equality and choice “if” you were also pro-abortion, pro-lesbian, pro career, anti-male and against a woman’s right to choose motherhood and child rearing as a career path.

Proof of that crash was a Canadian feminist magazine out of Winnipeg that I initially subscribed to in the late 1970s called “Herizons.” It became so one sided that I eventually cancelled my subscription.

Fast forward to today. The crux of the matter is that I still believe in the equality of men and women and real choice, whether a man or woman wants to work in the home or follow a career. In other words, if feminism was really about choice and equality, Ford would have been questioned to the same extent as Kavanaugh. Yet, as Horowitz said, she wasn’t.

It is truly sad that the original feminism of equality and true choice in the 1960s became closed to at least half the female population — the half that wants to work at child rearing in the home, the half that are pro-male, the half that are pro-life and the half that are conservative.

Cross posted at Jack’s Newswatch.

Liberals no longer believe in elections

An example of the media linking Ontario’s Doug Ford to U.S. Donald Trump in the red hat. Published by The Times, May 30, 2018.

The one thing I have noticed over the last 20 years is that when election results are not in favour of the Left, that election is considered illegitimate.

As I wrote yesterday, the day after the NDP Rae Government turned over the Ontario legislature to the Mike Harris Conservatives, two weeks after the election, there were Left wing protesters marching around the Ontario legislature yelling “SHAME.” Shame for what? Shame for winning? They hadn’t done anything yet.

In 2011 in Canada, the Stephen Harper Conservatives won their first majority government. Immediately after that win the anti-Harper noise started about how the Conservative was a fake win. Why? Because they had allegedly used robocalls to misinform voters — both before election day and on election day. All nonsense, of course, because all the political parties had used robocalls.

More recently, our friends in the United States had an election in early November,2016. All the polls in the U.S. showed Hillary Clinton ahead by a mile. Yet, it was all lies. Either that, or people just weren’t admitting to pollsters ahead of time that they planned to vote for Donald Trump to be President.

Yet, there we were at 2 in the morning watching the numbers favouring the outsider. Knowing what happened to Harper, I wondered what the Left’s narrative was going to be. Well, as it turned out, it didn’t take long for the “Russia influenced the election” nonsense to start.

Fast forward to 2018 and the Ontario election in June. The Doug Ford Conservatives won a strong majority in June, just 3 months ago, and yet the Left is again trying to stop everything he promised to do via lawsuits. And, note the cartoon above of someone like Ford in a red hat like Trump’s Make America Great Again, published in The Times on May 30th, 2018. The innuendo for the type of Ford voter is clear.

Check out Brian Lilley’s column yesterday. First, the Ford Government put forward a Bill to reduce the size of the Toronto Council. The City of Toronto sued the Government. A justice ruled in favour of the Council. Ford declared the Not Withstanding Clause, something that Premier’s in Canada can do. That war continues.

Then, there is the issue of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. It is also suing the Ontario government over the reduction of Toronto City Council. Remember, the CCLA is supposed to be a non-partisan organzation. Yet, headed “by Dalton McGuinty’s former attorney general Michael Bryant….the CCLA has all but abandoned any pretence to impartiality.”

And, let’s not forget Greenpeace. They are suing the Ford government because Ford cancelled the Cap and Trade Program shortly after the election. Greenpeace claims there was not enough public consultation. Never mind that Ford made it very clear during the entire election that was what he was going to do and then won the subsequent election with cancellation as part of the platform.

This liberal sore loser, anti-democratic trend is unfortunate at best and poses a threat to a functioning democratic tradition based on a “loyal opposition”.

The crux of the matter is that those on the left side of the political spectrum in both Ontario and the U.S., are trying to undermine fairly fought elections in the mistaken belief that only their party should be allowed to win. Put succinctly, while they may not realize it, what they are promoting is dictatorship.

C/P at Jack’s Newswatch.

Protesting Mike Harris versus Doug Ford

The dictators are on the side that did not win the election. I am hearing rumblings that the media and left are much nastier against Ontario’s Premier Ford and his government than against Premier Mike Harris back in the late 1990s. Not so far, actually. First, a look back at the initial Harris mandate from 1995 to 1999.  While some people may not clearly remember that period, I certainly do because I was there.

For example, two weeks after the 1995 election, all the new members went to Queen’s Park to give their oath of office. As a newly hired EA and Communications Strategist, I was invited to attend with my Niagara area MPP and his family. He gave his oath of office and we had lunch in the legislative dining room. It should have been an exciting day but outside it was bedlam with protesters, having surrounded the main building, shouting “Shame.” Remember, at that point, the new PC Government hadn’t done anything yet.

Two months later, the Ontario Legislature opened, the Cabinet was sworn in and there was a Throne Speech. I was there that day as well sitting in the gallery reserved for those invited by the MPPs.  It was a very hot day and all the higher windows in the legislature were open. As a result, the noise from the protesters was so loud you could barely hear yourself think.

Then, mid-afternoon, there were 2 credible bomb threats. In the first instance, the local police had us all go to a lower floor and file out the back door to the actual Queen’s Park green space. An hour later, shortly after we were all back inside, there was the second threat and we all had to find our way through the connecting tunnels to other government buildings around Queen’s Park.

And we shouldn’t forget the daily and weekly protests everywhere throughout Ontario — for years. Sometimes, those protests, especially the ones organized by the unions, had as many as 100,000 people attending. As well, for months I had to arrive in Toronto by 6 am in order to get quietly in the back door of the legislature because the protestors would arrive around 7 am to scream and yell and block the entrances.

We knew that Ford was going to be fighting Justin Trudeau at every juncture — but did we know that he’d be taking on Pierre Trudeau’s legacy achievement too in his early days as premier?

Now to Ford. A couple of weeks ago, Ford enacted a Bill that would reduce the size of Toronto Council. Immediately, the City of Toronto slapped a law suit on the Bill. Why? Because that is how the left works. If they can’t get their way one way, they will turn to the courts to get it another way.This time, however, after what most people considered a very poor judicial ruling, Ford announced that his government would be using the “Not Withstanding Clause (NWS).”

When I heard that, I actually cheered out loud. And, no, the dictators are on the side that did not win the election. The reality is that Saskatchewan used the NWS once and Quebec several times with barely a negative ripple in the media.

The crux of the matter is that the years the Mike Harris Conservatives governed Ontario, particularly from 1995 to 1999 were hell, not only for the elected members, but anyone just trying to make a living by working for the Executive Branch.

While I am sure those in the Ford caucus and those working for them feel the same way as I did, it is not nearly as bad, yet.  I mean, Stephen LeDrew wrote on the National Post: Settle down Toronto. Doug Ford isn’t changing anything important.  A lot of the anger over the notwithstanding clause is just people still angry that Ford got elected.”

In other words, Ford just needs to continue to do what he is doing and what Harris did — full steam ahead so that he too can keep the promises he and his caucus made to their voters.

C/P at Jack’s Newswatch.

Group think is destroying universities

teachers in today's elementary and secondary schools, as well as those in universities, need to teach students how to think, how to argue and how to get ready for the real world, a world that, yes, sometimes is tough to navigate.

As my title says, social justice group-think is destroying our schools and universities. It is destroying them because too many teachers in those contexts feel it necessary to refute and deny the very Judeo-Christian values that are the foundation of our Western Society — values such as personal responsibility, freedom of choice, individualism and faith in God.

Instead, social justice scholars are teaching humanist/atheist neo-Marxism ideology — a one size fits all ideology that values collectivism and the intrinsic goodness and perfectability of human beings.

For example, check out the negative reaction to the blog post by University of Chicago Professor Rachel Fulton Brown, called “”Three cheers for white men.” written initially in June 2015. Many of those reactions are updates on her blog called “Fencing Bear at Prayer.” To begin with, she was condemned by a graduate student of social justice radical feminism, whom I will not identify, which eventually went viral.

On the positive side, there is essayist David Solway’s The University is ripe for replacement dated Sept. 7, 2018, as well as The unbearable whiteness of being dated September 9th, 2018. And, don’t miss the “Milo Chronicles.”

There are also petitions from both sides of the spectrum. Which means, that at this point in time, there are still academics who value the Western foundations Brown talks about. For example, University of Ottawa Professor, Janice Fiamengo, who has a series of videos available, put up a video (# 86) explaining the entire issue. See that video below.  Fiamengo is a very brave but principled academic in my opinion.

Since I retired from teaching university in 2000, I have been watching and listening to the collapse of university scholarship regarding the various paradigms of thought and our Western cultural history. In my opinion, what we are witnessing is a cancer, infecting and spreading throughout the body politic. One of the symptoms of that cancer is the relativistic notion that all human beings and societies are good. I read recently, for example, that a lovely young couple believed in the goodness of man to such an extent, they set about cycling around the world to prove it. The last I read, unfortunately, they were stabbed to death in Tajikistan by ISIS killers.

And, yes, the social justice philosophy is everywhere today. From what young parents tell me, report cards no longer have alphabet grades like A and B because they don’t want to upset the slower students. Or, what about school sports games or Field Day? No one wins anymore. Rather, there is a draw.  So, how do students learn personal responsibility and how do they learn from their mistakes when they are not allowed to fail or come last? They don’t and we know what happens, don’t we? Today’s university students become the snowflakes we hear about today who need safe spaces when conservatives are invited to give talks. Just ask Ann Coulter, Ben Shapiro and Mark Stein, to name a few.

The crux of the matter is that teachers in today’s elementary and secondary schools, as well as those in universities, need to teach students how to think, how to argue and how to get ready for the real world, a world that, yes, sometimes is tough to navigate. If, however, that doesn’t happen over the next decade or two, the consequences will be an end to free speech in the sense of the freedom to have a different opinion, as well as the Judaeo-Christian values which underpin our Western civilisation.

C/P at Jack’s Newswatch.

Earth to Andrew Scheer…

If NAFTA 2.0 fails it will be because both the Liberals and your CPC are holding fast to the dairy supply management system at the expense of other sectors.

Earth to Andrew Scheer. Anybody home? Are you listening to the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) rank and file? Or, are you just listening to those within your party who think they know it all?

I mean, in early August 2018, you seemed indignant that the Liberals were complaining because a CPC MP that had visited Washington was trying to negatively affect the NAFTA talks — while the Americans were working with Mexico to seal a deal. Which they did last week. For example, check out this Globe column from that time period. You are quoted as saying: “This is clearly a cynical political strategy trying to capitalize on stalled negotiations.”

Of course, the Liberals are going to try to blame stalled negotiations on the CPC. But, so what? Why didn’t you say loud and clear that the CPC can’t sit idly by and watch the Liberals fail? Can you just imagine Stephen Harper ignoring the current Washington Liberal gong show if he were still leader of the CPC? Not on your life. Like it or not, he would have insisted on being at the table with the Liberals.

True, the Globe is always negative towards Conservatives. But, my problem is that the MP should have been interfering and you should have been indignant that the Liberals were clearly failing in their negotiations — by trying to include such cultural issues as feminism and ensuring no job discrimination for transexuals. Of course there should not be discrimination but coddling certain “identity” groups will never fly with President Trump and the Liberals should know that.

To put it bluntly, if the Liberals do fail, what can you and the CPC promise to do about it come October 2019? Are you and the CPC prepared for such a possibility and shouldn’t you be talking about what you would do? Can you not play Trump’s game?

Put bluntly, if NAFTA 2.0 fails it will be because both the Liberals and your CPC are holding fast to the dairy supply management system at the expense of other sectors. For example, in Ontario, that is a vote killer since thousands of jobs depend on the auto sector. Yes, I know many jobs would be affected by a change in the dairy system, as well but not as many as in the auto sector. Lower prices on milk products will help consumers, which would not be the case if there was a 25% tariff on automobiles and auto parts.

Other Canadian voices have noticed the wishy-washy way the Liberals and the CPC react to everything American. For example, Canadian writer JJ McCullough put out a great tweet today following up on a Kim Campbell comment. Former PM Campbell, a progressive conservative, waxed lyrical questioning how Canada might have taken unfair advantage of the U.S. over the years. And, McCullough put her in her place by reminding her and all of us all how Canada “is a longtime free-rider on U.S. defence and imposes a ton of protectionist measures on an array of US goods and services.”  As I retweeted: “Well said JJ.

As my title says, “Earth to Andrew Scheer,” which translates as, “Are you paying attention Andrew Scheer?” The crux of the matter is that you need to become the strong leader those of us who voted for you hoped you would be and the CPC needs to be the party of independent thinking and creative policies that are different from progressives.

C/P at Jack’s Newswatch.