Voters have proven over and over again that foibles count less than agenda as Donald Trump has proven with his resilient popularity despite his many moral and ethical failings.
As for the blackface brouhaha, the media has in fact blown up the scandal as if it was the end of the world.
I'm not so sure it is.
Canada is largely a liberal country with the Conservatives generally winning power when the NDP and Liberals split the liberal vote, but the reality is that substantially more Canadians fall on the left-hand side of the political spectrum than the right.
It remains amusing and somewhat sad that the political undoing of Trudeau may (and I repeat 'may') be undone by something so stupid as wearing blackface twenty and thirty years ago.
Like Al Capone whose many crimes went unpunished, it was simple tax evasion that finally sent him to jail for eleven years, ending his lifelong criminal career.
I fully expect this scandal to peter out, but not without repercussions for the Trudeau brand and his holier-than-thou political persona.
For Canadian voters, the alternative is the uninteresting and decidedly bland Andrew Scheer, who has impressed nobody with his anyone-but-Trudeau campaign strategy, a man without morals or even a plan, destined to be a caretaker if elected.
Perhaps that's a good thing considering the damage the Trudeau Liberals have wreaked upon the Canadian pocketbook with massive and unnecessary deficits used to buy voter loyalty, something that Canadians should be ashamed of for accepting.
But Andrew Scheer's election to the Conservative leadership was predicated on a fraud, whereby Canada's dairy industry bought up thousands of phoney memberships in order to support him at the convention in return for his commitment to retain the cartel status of the dairy industry in Canada.
That cynical and fraudulent support led him to a razor-thin victory, something he had the chutzpah to gloat over in his victory speech, guzzling a carton of milk at the podium in tribute.
So the choice for Canadians this election is grim.
A lame-duck Prime Minister Trudeau whose bread and butter feminine/environment/apology game plan is destroyed or a Prime Minister Scheer who has proven that before even getting into power, he will unabashedly play ball with the powerful special interests.
As for the NDP, their numbers are about to be returned to the also-ran status, the party stupidly dumping Thomas Mulcair in the deluded belief that they were a stone's throw from power. Mulcair was, in fact, the best that it was going to get and replacing him with turban-clad Jagmeet Singh ensured that the NDP's power base in Quebec would be destroyed.
As for the Greens, they remain a protest vote for the radical granolas, and while they will pick up votes from the NDP, they are destined to their traditional role of filling a couple of Parliamentary opposition seats in useless and sad ignominy.
Which leaves the only politician who tells it like he actually sees it, Maxime Bernier, who has attacked all that the majority of Canadians hold sacred.
His branding of the saintly, useful idiot Greta Thunberg as unbalanced was perhaps a death blow to his campaign for legitimacy. But he voices concerns that a minority of Canadians hold but are too afraid to say out loud.
His position on immigration, climate, coddled Quebec and big government may be a lot more important than the media will admit, branding him 'Mad Max' for his heretical beliefs that run counter to liberal media bias.
At any rate, if Trudeau gets elected it will be a subdued and diminished leader that will take us forward.
There will be no more moralistic preaching, no more holier-than-thou pronouncements and no more pseudo-feminism or radical environmentalism.
The bread and butter of the Trudeau persona will be forever changed and it remains to be seen exactly what it will be.
On the international scene, Trudeau is a diminished and mortally wounded leader, seen as a fraud, particularly in the United Staes which views blackface as an unpardonable sin.
The newly-minted NBC late-night talk-show hosted by
In light of the blackface scandal, he is seen as a pompous moralistic fraud whose comeuppance is well-deserved.
The mocking is devastating.
I saw a photo of Trump and Trudeau shaking hands which was mockingly captioned as "Trump still keeping company with white supremacists." Ha! Ha!
While voters may not punish Trudeau at the polls, the legacy of the blackface incident will haunt his political future.
Just one future protester in blackface at a Trudeau campaign rally will be enough to destroy the moment. The blackface tool will be exploited mercilessly by his enemies and opponents.
Paradoxically, a diminished Trudeau may be preferable to the puffed-up moralist and spendthrift of these past four years.
If we are destined to re-elect Trudeau, then the new version might well be more palatable than the last.
And so this election is the saddest of all in-memory where voters will undoubtedly hold their nose as they vote for whomever.
Excellent. I agree with almost everything Philip has written.
ReplyDeleteBernier is the man I will vote for. To have a Quebecer -- a francophone, no less -- stand up and say that he opposes Bill 101 is courageous and incredible.
His opposition to Climate Change alarmism and supply management is reason enough to vote for him.
I disagree with Philip's criticism of Bernier's comments about Greta. People see her for what she is and it is refreshing to see Bernier call her out.
Regarding Trudeau's brownface and blackface incidents:
ReplyDeleteBlown way out of proportion.
Regarding the brownface incident at the private school where he taught: although it was an Arabian Night Gala and he was, I assume, supposed to be mimicking an Arab, his turban was markedly Sikh in nature...and he was photographed at one point that night between two turbaned Sikhs. Well, they interviewed one of them last night on TV and he said he had absolutely no problem with what Trudeau did and for the last 18 years never thought it was racist. Plus, what Trudeau did has nothing to do with Blackface or minstrel shows, something that was an American phenomenon. And it was, after all, a costume ball. So...no harm, no foul.
As for the Blackface and afro Trudeau donned in imitating Harry Belafonte and singing Day-O: well, Belafonte is still alive. Someone should ask him whether he was insulted by it because he is the only one that should have a right to say whether he was hurt by it, no one else. Also, it happened in Justin's high school years...and if he was under 18, sorry, but he gets a pass because he was not an adult.
As for the third incident: like the Belafonte incident, if it happened while he was under 18, he gets a pass.
Canadians are always so eager to separate their wonderful "unique" Canadian culture from American culture...so why is everyone so eager here to embrace American standards when it comes to Blackface or Brownface? Different countries have different standards, so why are we automatically adopting an American one? In Japan, their traditional theatre has actors in Whiteface...no one thinks to call it racist. Why are we automatically assuming racism here? It's Canada...let's use Canadian Culture as the standard...isn't this what liberals are always telling us to do? And not to be overbowled by American culture?
Of course, the whole thing is delicious simply because it makes Trudeau out to be the hypocrite he is because he is the first one to call someone else a racist and play the identity card. Plus, Trudeau is on record supporting the hate law/race law Bill 101 as well as s. 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (also a race law), so the fact that he is called a racist for the black/brownface incidents are misplaced as far as I'm concerned, this label is nevertheless accurate.
Sorry to post yet another time on this subject but, hey, since no one else is commenting, here's another 2 cents from your's truly:
ReplyDeleteI believe there's something else that Justin is going to have to worry about more than the legacy of the black/brownface incidents. And that's what he alluded to yesterday when asked by a reporter how he passed the vetting process to become a candidate for the Liberal Party leadership 4 or 5 years ago. Justin responded that he was embarrassed and therefore didn't mention the blackface incidents.
I assume that this vetting process includes both an oral attestation to the veracity of one's claims about one's past as well as signing a written form in which one has to fill out a full history of one's past including a question worded something like "please include all instances of your past which if ever became public you believe could negatively impact you or the Liberal Party." This is pretty much standard stuff for an application of this kind and I would be surprised if the Liberal Party vetting process for leadership candidates (as well as riding candidates in general elections) doesn't have a form that includes a question like this.
Anyway, assuming that it does, what Justin said yesterday means that he lied on that form. And, if so, I ask: does lying on a form like this constitute fraud? And if it is fraud, is it a crime?
And you can't be guilty of a crime and aspire to be Prime Minister or, indeed, run for a second term as Prime Minister. You have to resign. Immediately.
Talk about constitutional crises.
But, hey, I'm not a lawyer. Perhaps this is just a "tort" or whatever they call it in legalese: that is, his omission was in fact lying but it was done on a form conducted by a private organization for its own internal processes and therefore outside the ambit of the law.
However, if I were one of Justin's rivals in the race for the leadership and I had been truthful in answering the vetting process form's questions honestly and I lost out to someone who had lied and won, I would be royally pissed. Think Gold Medal winners at the Olympics who are stripped of their medals post-ceremony and the second place finisher gets the gold (we've seen that happen several times). Because maybe if Justin had put down on the form: "On three different occasions, I donned blackface" he may have been vetted out (or maybe not...who knows at this point?) and someone else would have become leader. Now, I'm not suggesting that whoever the second place finisher in the leadership race should automatically become Liberal Leader but if I were that person (or one of the other losers) I just may consider civil action against Justin.
Here is what google says when I google "fraud definition": "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain."
His omission was certainly wrongful and it was certainly deceptive. And it was certainly intended to result in personal gain which was the prize of becoming Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.
So, does it fit the definition? I think it does. Does the criminal code apply here? As a non-lawyer, I have no idea. But if it does, who gets to say it does and what is the procedure for bringing the alleged crime to the authorities?
I have to echo Tony's comments here and say that I agree with everything Philip said. Unfortunately most Canadians do not and I think that actually bothers me more than Trudeau likely winning another term as prime minister. I still think he has a 50-50 chance of winning a majority which really makes me sick.
ReplyDeleteIts a symptom of rot in our society when someone as incompetent, dishonest and superficial as Trudeau is seen by most Canadians as the best person to run this country. He would be great as a host of ECanada teamed up with Ben Mulroney or a PR man for some organization, but running the country let alone a small business he is woefully unqualified.
Things have played out pretty much as I expected with most Canadians shrugging off the SNC affair which frankly should have toppled Trudeau. But he lucked out as his opponents are so pathetic that somehow Trudeau still looks like a better option. How the NDP could have so quickly self destructed is incredible. Thomas Mulcair was far more competent to run this country and would have done a much better job..he even wanted to balance the budget which is rare for an NDP leader to support. Thomas Muclairs work was stellar here in Quebec and unfortunately Canadians chose Trudeau because of his pretty boy looks and positive bs which we all know clearly now was complete nonsense. And then to elect Singh which the NDP should have know would never fly in Quebec is just incredible naivety.
So this tells me that Canada will follow the footsteps of many countries in the past who start to implode from within from moral decay and rot. Most Canadians seem to have no problem with a PM who clearly lied to them on more than one occasion..who pretends to be a progressive, feminist virtue signalling god but is anything but and someone who throws money all over the place with no concern about how this will eventually cripple future generations who will need to pay back all this money.
Most Canadians just shrug when politicians lie, cheat, mislead because frankly I think a lot of Canadians engage in this behaviour too..its become the new normal to manipulate people and situations. We no longer have a strong moral code in this country and that saddens me the most.
Yes, complicated, society has become/always has been shallow when it comes to "his pretty boy looks" à la Hollywood, and lots of Hollywooders seem to run for office and win, like Ronald Reagan, Ahhhnollld Schwarzenegger, James Janos (a.k.a., ex-pro wrestler Jesse "The Body" Ventura who has been on TV and in movies in other roles) and, of course, last but not least, The Donald.
DeleteIt seems people have forgotten he alienated a woman from Sherbrooke, QC who dared ask him a question in English that he answered in French because French is THEE official language of Quebec. On that, he violated his father's own creation, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, back in 1969, that proclaimed English and French are to have equal status and everyone has the choice to address the federal government in either language. I, along with 58 other appalled Canadians files complaints with the Commissioner's Office and about a year after doing so, I received a response stating the complaint was founded. Too bad the mainstream biased news (esp. the CBC) didn't follow up on that one!
An afterthought: Early this morning on 680 News in Toronto (the defunct 940 News in Montreal was a sister station) reported that a vote for the Conservatives is a vote for populism à la Donald Trump and Bojo (PM Boris Johnson of the U.K.). Ved-d-d-d-y interesting...he recently denied Bill 21 in Quebec is racist and his answering an Anglophone's question in French was not due to populism? Puh-leeze!
DeleteToo, Greta Thunberg, the adolescent activist, blows her horn while traveling the world in a jet, and I wonder at who's expense? Hmmmm....
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete(I deleted the above because I made a silly typo, which I missed even after I reread it before posting. Here it is corrected)
DeleteMr. Sauga: I'll do you one better than Justin answering an English speaker in French.
Dr. Victor Goldbloom (he of the "yes" vote on Bill 22 in 1974 while he was MNA of the riding with the largest percentage of Anglos in the province, D'Arcy McGee) while he was Commissioner of Official Languages appeared before a National Assembly committee in the early '90s to comment upon, if memory serves, legislation that affected the pension plans of MNAs, of which he was a former one of long standing.
Well, Dr. Goldbloom spoke entirely -- 100% -- in unilingual French. A Commissioner of Official Languages who made a point of peppering his speeches wherever he went in Canada (B.C., Newfoundland, etc.) with an equal amount of both French and English.
I pointed this out in a piece that I wrote at the time for a newsletter that Maurice King's organisation CVESPA used to publish, which somehow got into Goldbloom's hands. Because in the next issue was Goldbloom's response to the article, the gist of which was that he didn't speak any English because he wasn't appearing there in his capacity as a Commissioner of Official Languages but as a former MNA.
And then I responded something to the effect: well, if what it takes to use English in a legislature which constitutionally ALLOWS for the use of both official languages is to be a Commissioner of Official Languages, then that is probably the saddest comment ever made upon the usefulness of such an institution.
1 of 2
DeleteTony, Dr. Goldbloom, at least in my opinion, was an apologist, and there was and probably still is no shortage of non-Franco apologists. My late mother (MSRIP), was one and she and I often didn't see eye-to-eye on Quebec affairs. Don't get me wrong, I loved my late mother dearly and miss her to this day, approaching 30 years since her passing, but she was an ethnic minority born in small-town Quebec (Townships), was exposed mostly to Francophones, so perhaps she had a different insight to them whereas I grew up in an English-speaking ghetto.
Interestingly, she didn't care for Bills 22 and 101 and especially didn't like the militant separatists the way the shoved French down our throats, yet she was still an apologist (ga-a-g-g meeeeee!) She once told me a story about a Francophone worker in her small town that started as a floor sweeper and worked his way up from there to a point (as she saw it) where he should have been hired for a management position. He wasn't. The company brought in an Anglophone from Montreal. As if she knew whether or not he was qualified for management?
Maybe there were past injustices done to Francophones, but I came along long after that incident. Should I be punished for another man's unjust jilt?
Most people don't want to, or can't bring themselves to admit Francophones fell short for so long because they were dearly misled by false doctrines, mostly of the Roman Catholic church and by corrupt politicians, most notably Maurice Duplessis. The Church kept these people ignorant and pregnant, and it took these simpletons making up the majority 200 years to realize they were being duped. Is that the fault of the minorities who flourished by not falling for those false doctrines? They moved forward while the majority kept falling for these false doctrines of the Church, AND THEY...CAN'T...STAND IT!
2 of 2
DeleteAfter that 200 year period of falling further and further behind, they finally realized they were duped something awful! They were as ignorant as the country bumpkins in the Southeastern U.S., and those Americans have many of the same anti-Black prejudices over 150 since the end of the Civil War. Quebec, especially in the rural bumpkin areas the likes of Lac St-Jean, the Saguenay and the Magdalene Islands still live the same prejudices when the likes of the visceral Abbé Lionel Groulx were spewing hatred in periodicals, journals and over the radio back in the 1930s. No shortage of those bumpkins in Montreal either, especially the East End (Point aux Trembles and the like) live like the loser welfare bums that they are. Equalization and other transfer payments from the Real Canada enable them to do so.
Oh, and as for Justin Pierre James Trudeau? (Hmmm...another Francophone with "James" in his name like one John James Charest). He's busy giving out millions to an engineering firm to help hire whores and drugs for the son of a deservedly assassinated despotic dictator at our expense. Let's not forget he handed corporate welfare to the tune of $472 million to Bombardier, a life-long donor of millions back to the Liberal party when Laurent Beaudoin (the son-in-law & CEO of the late founder, J. Armand Bombardier) was leading the Company. $472 million to a company that has far from delivered the newfangled streetcars in Toronto on time costing the TTC, millions by having to repair their old broken-down streetcars. They're being delivered as slower than a snail's pace and they're still not working properly compared to their older streetcars. How about Justin Pierre James Trudeau giving away tax dollars to the TTC who should rightfully be compensated but for Bombardier's incompetence? How about him holding some of that $472 million and forking it over to the TTC? What irks me far worse is projections are Toronto is going to vote again for that yutz despite his doing absolutely NOTHING for Toronto. Morons. Thankfully I live in the "905 Region" (i.e., the suburbs surrounding Toronto, area code 905, not 416) and it looks good the 'burbs are going to vote him out. Sadly, Andrew "Dolly Dimples" Sheer is a sheer idiot, but enough of a 2nd Prime Minister Trudeau.