, 10.10.2022 08:19 AM

KINSELLACAST 231: Adler, Lilley, Mraz give thanks – plus The Chats, Doki Doki, Front Bottoms, Alexandra Lahey

16 Comments

  1. Mark Brooks says:

    Great Pod cast! Like the mix of serious Canadian and world issues together with the off the wall music.

  2. Warren,

    I ate pork. To get turkey, I would have had to go to Le Château Frontenac.

  3. Well, I already said that this country is on the way out in no small measure because of this so-called constitution. So, this is only the beginning of the disintegration and disunity. Them chickens are finally coming home to roost. This will spread to other provinces and territories next. And to quote Desmond Tutu: “you won’t see me crying.”

    • Put another way, this country badly needed reform and that was stifled both by the ignorance of the people and successive federal governments who were intent on doing things only their way.

      But like both you and Adler said, Smith better not monkey with the appellate level courts because any leader who does that, does so at his or her own peril. Undermining the judiciary is a fight that no government can win, whether it comes from the first or second order of government.

      That’s why Legault will ultimately lose in the Court of Appeal on unilingual French court documents and ditto should he seek to print National Assembly laws exclusively in French (as Lévesque once did). Ironically, the Constitution Act 1982, which I rather despise is crystal clear on the matter. (I like the Charter though.)

  4. Warren,

    The CDS is only telegraphing what’s ultimately coming down the pike. Is it inevitable? No, but it is likely.

  5. Warren,

    I find the critics list to be an interesting one. I see that MRG and EF are absent from that list. I expect both of them to express unqualified support for the leader. As a result, I imagine each will return to a role in due course. After all, both of them are too competent and capable to be left on the shelf for too long. That would be illogical and not in caucus’ best interest.

    • Martin Dixon says:

      Our local guy(Larry Brock) should likely be justice critic or at least associate critic. But he did support Charest(not my idea) so he should be happy he at least got something.

      • Martin,

        It amused me to see how practically every living, breathing MP was almost falling overthemselves to suddenly put distance between themselves and the Chong Act, as I like to call it. Worked for some but not for all.

        As you know, I like political life insurance so I’m for keeping it. You know, to turf any potential dud we might end up with in the future. So far, the leader is not heading in that direction. I hope Pierre is smart enough to keep it that way.

        • Martin Dixon says:

          At least they have had the balls to impose it on themselves. JT, not so much because he likely knew it would end badly.

  6. Martin Dixon says:

    As I have said. The dirty little secret that I am a traitor to my class for pointing out.

    https://thoughtleadership.rbc.com/canadas-recession-to-arrive-earlier-than-expected/

    Worst thing that can happen to me is to have that dumbass Justin not get re-elected. I am doing fine. It is a generally a zero sum game. Thank you very much.

    • Martin,

      Diagnosing a recession is always an exercise in checking out the rear view mirror. The St. Louis Fed does not see it yet. Admittedly, their stats are about a month behind the curve:

      https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NGDPRSAXDCCAQ

      But far more important than whether we’re in an actual recession is the fact that it already FEELS like we’re in one. Translation: continued political momentum for the CPC so long as the leader doesn’t make a major mistake. So far, so good, where Pierre is concerned.

    • Personally, I would gladly take an economic hit if it almost guaranteed that that PhoneyBaloneyPM had his political ass finally kicked to the curb. That ultimately depends on female voters and everyone knows it.

      • And for caucus to be most effective, female MPs need to be schooled as much as possible in regard to monetary and fiscal policy and then sent out en masse to interact with women and men during the campaign. Women-to-women interaction in the next election will pay huge political dividends if this is done right. Our female MPs don’t have to become the next Powell or Yellin but they need far more knowledge than they presently have to score big in the art of convincing during the next election. For the record, male MPs lack the exact same knowledge but we’re somewhat ahead with men already in most polls, so educating males although also important, is not the priority.

  7. Doug says:

    So why was the convoy different than the early 2020 blockade of rail lines by climate change and indigenous rights protestors, or the 2016 storming of Energy East hearings in Montreal?

    A criminal is a criminal is a criminal. Anyone that blocks infrastructure or interferes with government operations should face charges. Their alleged cause is irrelevant. Is it surprising that the convoy happened given the lack of consequences faced by protestors after those two events?

    Similarily, non-enforcement of drug laws in BC sets precident for non-enforcement of gun confiscation in AB, SK, MB and ND.

    Non-challenge of blatantly unconsitituional language and employment laws in BC set the stage for AB’s Sovereignty Act.

    The Liberals divide and conquer to their electoral success, but ultimately drive the country further apart and erode federal institutions.

    • Doug,

      I can’t argue with your logic but governments are hypocritical and cynical at best. They go only with gradation and ignore the rest. And quite naturally when it’s their friends or natural constituents, well…

      The convoy was PPC and CPC. Need I say more?

  8. Martin Dixon says:

    Straight out of Bannon’s play book. What people don’t get. This also sums up why it is difficult for each side to compromise. “If you give an inch, they will take a mile” is a true problem. I just finished reading The Great Dissenter by Peter S. Canellos. It is the story of Supreme Court Justice, John Marshall Harlan. The Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Co case of 1895 concerned the imposition of a federal income tax of 2% on income over $4,000. One of the arguments against it was that it would lead to confiscatory tax rates. The Wilson–Gorman Tariff Act was ultimately struck down but not for that reason which was dismissed as doom-saying nonsense. Not quite. After the 16th amendment was passed in 1909, federal marginal rates eventually went to 94%. When combined with states that had their own tax, the government was taking close to 100% of income above a certain level.

Leave a Reply to Martin Dixon Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.