100 Comments

Journalist Paul Wells commented on substack in regards to the Peterson interview that oddly Justin hadn’t really aged a day in office, whilst the past few years have had a weathering effect on Pollievre’s face. This comment struck me about the difference in character and intellect between these two men. Justin simply doesn’t care about Canada. There are no sleepless nights for him. You cannot tread the path he has and be a conscientious person with a moral compass. We are in deep shit and Pollievre knows this, hence the wrinkles and gray hair. What a sad state of affairs.

Expand full comment

I noticed the same thing. Poilievre has aged a lot in a couple of years. Like he said, Trudeau got the party and Pierre gets the hangover.

Expand full comment

I guess it shouldn't shock me that Paul Wells was trying to suggest something other than this conclusion. Sometimes well-established Canadian pundits are incredibly obtuse.

Expand full comment

Trudeau and Trump

Expand full comment

Both men are narcissistic to be sure, but the key difference is that Trump loves the idea of America and its origin story whereas Trudeau hates Canada.

Expand full comment

We are Agreed on the second one. I think we can both agree that when he says he loves Canada, it is his version of the country, whatever that may be.

For someone who goes around constantly apologizeing for the sins of his country, it really makes you wonder doesn't it.

Expand full comment

Trudeau (and the Liberals he leads) can't separate Canada's interests from their own.

When Trudeau says Canada, he usually means himself.

Expand full comment

Trudeau prorogued parliament to have time to find a new Liberal leader. It may take many more months before there is an actual election, as you point out Terry. But Canada in the meantime will have a government without parliamentary support and thus without any real legitimacy, at a crucial time for its economy and international relations. Hold on to your seats.

Expand full comment

I wonder just how many Canadians actually understand this. My guess is about 40%. We have a very uninformed and apathetic electorate. (Witness the number of people who have been upset with Pierre Poilievre for not having a non-confidence motion, without having a clue that such a motion required a majority of the House to have it pass, and that it couldn’t just be ordered like a McDonald’s menu item.)

Expand full comment

Penny, Penny...you're not suggesting we got our just deserts are you?

Actually, after an entire meal of Justin's Desserts, I feel a bit queasy.

Expand full comment

No, I am not. I am trying, in vain, to think of practical, inexpensive ways to remedy this. (And I actually think 40% is far too high an estimate.). Basic, unbiased civics education in elementary and middle years curriculum is a starting point, with straight-forward education continuing through high school. I’m not talking party politics. Media is another problematic influence that could be used for good. It seems impossible to have media report complete facts without bias. One recent example is all the jabber of the weeks of unproductive, filibustering Parliament while failing to cite the origins being the Liberals refusal to provide the documents the Speaker ordered them to provide. I realize it works in both directions, but there is a complete lack of basic facts and truth, so that Canadians who aren’t paying any or sufficient attention get a completely skewed notion of what’s happening, the consequences of which hurt all of us. I am, I’m afraid, tilting at windmills.

Expand full comment
1dEdited

For sure. And I think maybe 5% of Canadians, if that, are aware of any of the revelations/findings that made their way into the questions at at the Hogue Commission, for example. The media -- Corus, CTV, and CBC (obviously) -- covered the findings in a "limited hangout" way by directing attention to sidebar elements and pretending that's what all the noise is about. Sort of a, "just in case you heard something, it's really just about this.."

Deliberately leading people away from the damning details of one of the most significant Canadian stories of the past, I don't know, fifty years, isn't exactly prime journalism. It does have consequences.

Expand full comment

Democracy is work that requires thinking and as Fidel answered one of his subordinates asking why no elections were going to be held, "They only confuse people." (Che was reported to ask if he should shoot him right then?)

My progressive acquaintances all say the world is two dimensional, divided into "oppressors and the oppressed", so choice is easy, a (literal) no brainer. You just need someone to point them out and away you go. Short attention spans mean the finger can point one way today, the other tomorrow. Media is there not for "just the facts" but "what you need to know and how to think about it", mental meals, ready to eat.

The abomination of "retail politics" is the sophisticated advertising techniques designed to trigger an emotional response and action, not thought. Unidentified visual images, bypassing the rational processes are the stunningly effective as virtuoso hordes of Gaza photo "journalists" demonstrate daily.

I see the horizon littered with windmills.

Expand full comment

Teaching how to think, not what to think would help. The problem with democracy is not new and was discussed more openly in the past.

(From "The Honest Broker")

The “basic problem of democracy,” according to Walter Lippmann is that at once democracy depends upon somewhat accurate understandings of the world to inform collective decision making, but our ability to achieve accurate understandings is highly limited.We act and decide based on the “pictures in our heads,” which may or may not conform to truth. Does the impossibility of fully understanding the world make democracy impossible? From The Atlantic in 1919, Walter Lippmann

Lippmann, and other American pragmatists, answered no — so long as enough of us commit together to trying to achieving the best understandings that we can to inform collective decision making in pursuit of shared interests. To paraphrase Lippmann in Public Opinion, the goal of politics is not to get people to think alike, but for people who think differently to act alike. https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com?r=2p8qjy

Expand full comment

That Hurts Penny, eh?

Expand full comment

It hurts Canada and Canadians.

Expand full comment

And when you read about people asking them to sign my petition to ...........

Gawwwdddd!

Expand full comment

Are you trying to tell some kind of inside joke, Mark? Because nobody understands what you are on about.

Expand full comment

Thanks for that, I thought it was just me.

Expand full comment

My understanding is that liberal rules require 4 months for a leadership race. Proroguing parliament isn’t about giving time for a new leader to be elected unless they massively change their bylaws and shorten the leadership cycle. Trudeau will still be leader of the liberals when parliament resumes unless the liberals take shortcuts in the leader race.

If Trudeau cared about Canada he would’ve called an election and then the liberals could’ve found a new leader afterwards. Instead whoever is the new leader will find themselves with certain defeat and possibly not even a seat in the HoC.

Expand full comment

He could not of planned it better.

And now the debt is no longer his concern.

Expand full comment

"could of" ?? Mark, you are illiterate.

Now I know not to take you the slightest bit seriously.

Expand full comment

Now now, Grant, don't be a literary snob! Lot's of people say "could of" instead of "could have" these days. (Not me of course....)

Expand full comment

Block and move on , wunderkind

Expand full comment

Can you elaborate ?

Expand full comment

The meaning of that statement is if he had sought or planned to make governing the nation any harder for the incoming government, no matter who that might be, he could not have timed it better.

Expand full comment

How about some of millions whose visas are set to expire go back to their country of origin? Are we obliged to keep them?

The shortage of housing on the West Coast is unbelievable. An entire generation can’t even afford rent.

Expand full comment

We would only be obligated if people are citizens of Canada 🇨🇦.

Expand full comment

Very Good Question

Expand full comment

Millions of Canadians should register to become Liberal Party members, then run Kevin O'Leary as a candidate. Or Mickey Mouse. That might make them think twice about their constitution.

Expand full comment

What a cluster! God help us all.

Expand full comment

When I met Jordan Peterson in 2016, the thing that struck you most forcefully was how laser-focused he was on the individual he was interacting with. He gave every individual his full attention, paused to understand and consider their question or point, and gave a direct and penetrating response. He was the epitome of a clinical psychologist.

After he returned from his near-death experience in Russia, his technique morphed into the Ezra Levant style of interviewing. By which I mean: ramble on for 5 minutes about his own ideas, then ask, "Isn't that right?" "Well, only in part..." [cutting off the interviewee] "OK, so here's another one of my ideas." Rinse and repeat. It often devolves into a parodic self-interview, especially when he gets onto his hobby-horse of Biblical exegesis. Difficult to watch now. It's a shame.

Expand full comment

I do think that Peterson is changed since his dreadful near fatal illness. His writing is over long, over done, needs serious editing.

He does not deserve the harsh criticism/vilification either.

He is an interesting and intelligent man, to be sure.

I agree with some of his views, disagree with others.

I should watch the interview, though.

Expand full comment

I agree with your comment on JP, he definitely is distracted from the speaker in front of him. This showed in the interview with Terry Glavin.

Expand full comment

Imagine how different Trudeau leaves Canada compared to how he found it. It’s probably even worse than what Mulroney took over from the PT.

Expand full comment

Much Worse, its up to us to fix it!

Expand full comment

"probably"?

Expand full comment

"No amount of tax-axing is going to deal with this..."

I'm not so sure, Terry. If Canadians had the stomach to cut off 100% of the numerous welfare streams aimed at the illegals, the visa-expired, and even the legitimate immigrants to Canada, I think a huge proportion of them would self-deport fairly quickly. It's the free hotels, free living allowances, free child care, free health care; it's the free access to the tax-free underground economy; it's the pay-to-protest programs - it's a complete ecosystem of perverse incentives that keep the undesirables in Canada. End that and Canada will have enough housing and health care for the truly committed Canadians within a year or two. But who has the stomach to be so unwelcoming? We are just too "compassionate" for our own good.

Expand full comment

I ask this in all seriousness, because it appears that more Canadians are still more concerned with PP's anticipated "cuts, cuts, cuts" than with Trudeau's unending $62billion deficits. Delusions of socialism are still rampant in Canada.

Expand full comment

So we have a resignation. Debt not my responsibility. Foreign Interference what Foreign Interference? Tariffs what Tariffs? Immigration and undocumented workers not my problem. Drug and crime, homlessness, racial hatred.........

Not my problem. Nope not your problems, They are all ours.

Thanks again I will be thinking about the Legacy that you have left my grandkids.

Expand full comment

"If you simply happen to be domiciled even temporarily in this country, you only have to be 14 years old to cast your vote for the next leader of the Liberal Party of Canada."

Is it a given that the Liberal Party's membership registration system is secure enough to effectively block registration attempts made by unknown actors who are situated outside the country?

Expand full comment

There is nothing about this iteration of the Liberals that can be trusted to enure to the benefit of Canada or Canadians. A “post national state” doesn’t care about citizens.

Expand full comment

Lynn, I have some great property in Florida that might interest you.

Expand full comment

What a clever comment. Do you have more where that one came from?

Expand full comment

The $54,000 question is….will Trudeau retire to Florida?

Expand full comment

Too downmarket for a Trudeau.

Expand full comment

Beijing

Expand full comment

Maybe he'll retire to Tofino! Decompress at the Wickaninnish Inn for a few months. Fly back and forth to Rossland/Whistler/Revy...

Expand full comment

He ought to fulfill his potential as a canoe rental attendant, smoking weed and explaining to tourists while portaging how nothing was ever his fault. Will he be feted by the EU/UN types? Join the board of a multinational cannabis conglomerate? Retire to Vancouver or Geneva? I looked up what happened to Ardern, and found she got a documentary about her ("Prime Minister") into Sundance and was made Dame Grand Commander of the New Zealand Order of Merit. So, not exactly suffering consequences.

Expand full comment

If we are a post-national state with no core identity, I guess that Trudeau is right that we don’t need borders. And if our history is garbage - so what? Monetary policy is kind of boring, and I guess the budget can balance itself. So, why does Justin want to stick around to find another “leader”? Why would such a non-country even need a leader? Seems like a waste of time, eh?

Expand full comment

Bravo Brian!

Expand full comment

Agreed that Poilievre is the only alternative. Are we prepared for four years of two three word slogans? I hope not.

In my humble opinion , Poilievre is a product delivered to Canadians by some advertising agency, and like all commercials, be aware of what they’re trying to sell.

Expand full comment

Why harp on his campaign slogan as though that's all he says? As Terry noted, Poilievre is economically literate, and he sees what needs to change. The big question is if he is able to pull it off while working against a largely disinclined bureaucracy and a Trudeau-appointed Senate.

Expand full comment

I'm sure you are a fan of these 3-word slogans, though -

-Because it's 2015.

-Budgets balance themselves.

-Transparency by default.

-Canada is genocidal.

-No more FPTP.

-Carbon pollution kills!!!!!

-Monetary policy? Forgetaboutit!

-Church burnings are understandable.

-Catch and release.

Expand full comment

Good one. Forgot ‘the economy is the bankers problem’ and veterans remember ‘we have nothing more to give’. Trudeau was nothing without his PR devised slogans.

Expand full comment

I’m not a fan of any number of words slogans. I’m a fan of serious thought. Poilievre is a manufactured mannequin

Expand full comment

I disagree with you there. poilievre figured out how to market himself to people who only listen to the first few words of a sentence. That’s all. Listen to his long form interviews and you see much more thought and intellect.

Expand full comment

If you think Trudeau is a better exemplar of "serious thought," you are not a serious thinker. There were two options on offer; neither one is anyone's idea of a genius, but if you only have shade for PP, you are the problem with Canada.

Expand full comment

Where did you come up with impression that I’m a fan of Trudeau? I voted liberal in 2015 in order to replace the tired Harper administration. That was the last time I voted for the Liberals. Truth be told, I’m disgusted by the choices we face in the upcoming election.

Expand full comment

The irony is completely missed by Sheldon. This article links to PP's 101-minute long-form interview by one of the more penetrating interviewers in the political landscape today, yet all Sheldon has to say about it is that he doesn't like 3-word slogans. Oh, yeah, sure, Sheldon, it's obvious you prefer "serious thought." What seems to be more your style is a few minutes mugging for the camera on a lame CBC comedy show, which was Trudeau's answer to the JP-PP interview.

Expand full comment

PP is the real deal, he can even communicate with everyday folks.

Expand full comment

Just want to comment for all the free readers.

Sub to the Real Story!

Expand full comment

Hello Terry, I will never understand why you are so full of animosity toward Trump. Sure, he's somewhat of a gas bag but at least he knows that the FUNDAMENTAL job of the American president is to protect American sovereignty -- something that Slow Joe Biden failed miserably at. And what's your problem with Elon Musk? Right now he has taken up the cudgel against those in the British "Uniparty" who failed in their responsibility to protect a few thousand English girls from the multitudes of Muslim grooming gangs! Let me end by saying that, in spite of your miss-directed criticism of Trump and Musk, I still welcome your column! Keep it up!

Expand full comment

I’m a lucky retiree able to watch and listen for the last nine annis horribilis of Trudeau mania. Something doesn’t smell right I mused about seven years ago. The question is why didn’t political reporters around the hill ask “ Are you serious?” Watching yesterday’s warm and fuzzy love in for all things Liberal by CBC does not give me hope. James Moore’s appearance was the only bright light in the entire day.

Expand full comment