I am Groot

And many might agree with him. The thing is that there is no way to disagree with the prevailing narrative on these social issues without deeply offending and outraging people. Even someone pretty good with words, and a consistent supporter of left-wing causes like JK Rowling, who chose her words carefully and mentioned her respect for trans people has still drawn howls of fury, including threats of rape and death. There is simply no way to politely disagree on the trans issue without enraging many supporters. So the first party is a public person stating his position on a policy issue. The second person is just someone spewing insults and accusations because he disagrees. And make no mistake, such accusations can be deadly, these days, destroying careers and severing friendships. I also dislike the Left's new favorite word 'hate'. It seems like another escalation on the effort to make hyperbole ever more outrageous. Again, no matter how you put it they'll call it not just hate but dangerous. Even the damned judges are now using the same language in talking about the need for the 'safety' of groups. Why should that be allowed? Surely he can easily prove his case that the school board guy is a homophobe and hateful? Why? Was B's speech particularly thoughtful and insightful? It seems from the report it was nothing more than spewing insults. Why is it important to let people spew personal insults at other people?

AFAIK know he has said he'd remove the carbon tax. But regardless, there are political promises made before an election and then there's what's done after. Trudeau's pursuit of climate action has little to do with accomplishing anything other than making himself look good to liberal and possibly liberal voters. I don't think he honestly gives a damn about climate change.

And no one gives a shit about them. The Liberals dismiss them as conservative voters. The Conservative party dismisses them as people unlikely to ever vote Liberal anyway.

He's a lifelong member of the Laurentian Elites, and apparently good at finding no more and no less than is requested by those who appoint him to inquiries. Now that this has been confirmed I suspect no one will ever appoint him to another, though. His credibility is shot.

It was a different time and the world still seemed to believe playing up to China, bringing then into the WTO and other international organizations and helping them improve their economy through capitalism would turn them into a more friendly and more humane country. They were clearly wrong. I think just about everyone acknowledges that today. Plus it was a purely ceremonial position.

Because it would cost us money while accomplishing nothing. I'm not into virtue signalling.

The last time I was at the National Museum of History (5 years ago) about three-fifths of the museum was given over to native history. I seem to recall an exhibit on gold, and maybe a visiting one from Egypt. There was very little about Canada after the white men arrived. I think even then the Museum felt ashamed of covering that at all. I don't know if there are museums in other cities that actually cover Canadian history, but the ones in Ottawa/Hull couldn't be bothered. I suspect all this will do is give museum curators an opportunity to cover history since the arrival of Europeans in a way that will make them more comfortable, focusing on the evils of colonialism, the cruelty with which the natives were treated, the environmental damage, and things like the head tax for Chinese and refusing to allow ships full of Sikhs or Jews to land. I'm sure they'll find a way to insert sad stories of how women were treated badly and unequally, too. Then how racist we were towards all immigrants coming to Canada. John A MacDonald will be mentioned prominently, but only with regard to natives and residential schools. No other PM will rate a mention. No accomplishments or triumphs will be shown. It will be a continuous sad litany of abuse and racism and homophobia and probably transphobia if they can figure a way to work that in.

Do you think the world would be a better place if we refused to supply coal? It's one of the most common industrial/energy products and is plentiful around the world. If China didn't buy it from us it'd buy it from Australia or Russia or a dozen other countries.

Meh. This was a policy for about thirty years before being repealed. During that time maybe one-third of native kids went to residential schools. And most of their parents wanted them there, recognizing that only through education did they have a chance of prospering. Attendance at school was mandatory for white kids, too, btw. If you didn't send your kid to school the government would take them away from you. And you were beaten at schools for almost any deviation from rules, be it a residential or white school. Why?

There is damn little sanity in Texas. The place is like a crazy, third world country a lot of the time.

Doubt it. The church and its clergy have been intolerant pricks for a lot longer than they've been sensitive and caring. In my mother's time, you could hear a gentle sermon from one church and thundering denunciations and threats of eternal damnation in another. Depends on the mindset of the priest.

No. I take it as an insult to Canada, to Canadians, to our history and traditions. And yes, 'everyone does it' is, in fact, a defense when EVERYONE DOES IT. If Canada acted better than almost everyone else and no worse than most then that's a pretty good thing to chalk up on the history page. It's certainly not something for continuous hand-wringing, guilt, shame, and handing over vast sums of cash to every native with a sob story (unverified). As you are a progressive, I get that any sense of affiliation or protectiveness or sense of pride in Canada is a confusing thing to you. But conservatives tend to feel otherwise. An attack on a nation is an attack on all its members, so to speak. Of course, if you believe we're not a nation, as your prime minister does, then that would just confuse you too.

Suppose you now tell me what nations of the world did NOT commit genocide by your new, expanded definition. I'd be deeply and earnestly interested in hearing it, Mr. Moonbeam.

They get this mindless crap from down south, where so many American liberals have been busy wringing their hands with guilt for years now. And have been driven out of their mind by the accidental death of a dumb black criminal junkie. We never had slavery and almost all the black people in Canada are immigrants and their kids, and they make up only 3% of the population anyway, but that hasn't made a bit of difference to the progressives. They're still wailing and gnashing their teeth and cutting down Canada for its 'systemic racism' and saying everything wrong in minority communities is the fault of white people because of how politically incorrect we were in our past. Even though almost no minorities aside from natives were even in this country then! If you could walk around downtown Toronto or Montreal or even Vancouver when Pierre Trudeau got elected you'd be surrounded by nothing but white people. But we're still supposed to be beating ourselves up over historical racism.

A friend had to take her cat to the animal hospital on the weekend. She was in and out in quick order after it had tests and was seen by a vet. There were two vets in the small animal hospital. One of a number scattered around the city. By contrast, there is only one doctor in the big city emergency room hospital up the road. And the wait to see them would be many hours.

People's determination to defend the democratic system is being repeatedly challenged as the realization sets in about just how little government is responsive to what the electorate want, and to their well-being. I really hate it when people cite videos but I'm going to do it here because it's so clear an illustration of the problem in the US - and I doubt it's much different here. In clear, precise language and with charts, Harvard professor Lessig demonstrates how unresponsible the US government has been to what the people have wanted over the last several decades. Basically, what the people wanted made zero difference to what government did. Only what the rich wanted mattered. The only proper governance would be a completely merit-based approach with almost all information other than on individuals available to the public by default. I toyed with such a system in my head before. In such a system government would be a particular university course, and only the best and brightest could get in. Graduates would be appointed, not hired, to low-level positions on small municipal or county councils and closely monitored. The best would go to larger councils. Then the best from those would get to be mayors. The best mayors would be appointed to provincial legislatures, and so on. Until at the top you get the best of the best of the best.

I think he who pays the piper calls the tune. If you abdicate the responsibility to take care of yourself then you abdicate the freedom to make decisions and should become a ward of the state, going where you're told, living where you're told, doing what you're told. If you made such crummy decisions in life you have to have us pay for your food then you don't get to make future decisions on anything. That includes having children, btw. And yes, I do make exceptions for those with disabilities.

That is just the kind of unthinking reactionary crap that keeps the culture wars going. Completely dismiss everyone's concerns about the way society, its traditions, values and history are being torn away in place of nothing but a continual outrage cycle and sneer in a superior fashion at everyone who doesn't believe exactly as you do on every single issue. It's an almost religious zealotry that denigrates all who are unbelievers in whatever the latest progressive fad is and declares them unworthy of having opinions.

Bullshit. Even Trudeau doesn't call that genocide. Even the natives (except the crazy ones) don't call it genocide. And anyone whose ancestors suffered from real genocide, or a real attempt at genocide would spit in your face for using such a comparison. The only way that desperately woke accusation works is if you agree that every nation on earth throughout all of history, and that includes every native tribe here has practiced genocide. Mind you, rather than 'funneling them onto reserves' most of them just slaughtered their enemies or whoever was on the land they wanted indiscriminately But I guess it's only 'genocide' if white people do it.

Jesus God what a drama queen you are. I make a common statement and throw in "you know this" and you get your panties in a twist and demand an apology. Repeatedly! Put me on ignore, you windbag. I could care less.

FTFY

The China loving David Johnson and his lifelong fascination with China. The unreported and unarguably pertinent facts to take into account involve Johnston’s own half-century of participation in Beijing’s strategy to draw Canada into its orbit of influence, and his own personal and ongoing association with figures deeply compromised by their collaboration with Chinese government institutions and by their own vested interest in the catastrophe of the Canada-China collaborations that were spun into high gear after the Trudeau Liberals came to power in 2015. In the 1980s Johnston was laying the foundations of the Canada-China universities exchange program. Later, as president of the University of Waterloo, he oversaw the establishment of the Confucius Institute, a scandal-shredded arm of the Chinese Communist Party’s propaganda and espionage operations in western countries. Widely known in Chinese establishment circles by his nickname “Jiangshan,” Johnston was awarded an honorary doctorate by Nanjing University in 2012, by which time he’d already made more than a dozen visits to China. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/david-johnston-the-right-man-to-whitewash-chinese-interference

Just get lost. I'm done with you. Go sit in a corner and cry.