, 10.04.2022 02:07 PM

My latest: renounce and denounce. It’s easy.

When a bad person supports you, what should you do?

Well, if you’re a normal human, you say you don’t want or need the support of the bad person, and you denounce and renounce them.

If you’re a politician, apparently, it’s more complicated. Apparently.

When Barack Obama’s pastor was caught saying that America was a terrorist state, and that the Sept. 11 attacks were self-inflicted, Obama dithered. The future president took weeks to renounce and denounce the pastor. When it became apparent the controversy wasn’t going away, Obama finally quit the pastor’s Chicago church, calling his words an “outrage.” He went on to become president.

A few years later, the one-time Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke, endorsed Donald Trump’s presidential ambitions. At first, Trump told media he’d repudiate Duke “if it made you feel better” – and that he “knows nothing about white supremacists.” As with Obama, when the controversy grew too big to ignore, Trump repeatedly and angrily disavowed Duke. He went on to become president, too.

Up here in Canada, there are similar examples. In 2004, former Conservative MP Randy White complained that the Charter of Rights was being “used as a crutch” by certain people – assumedly, non-whites, women and gays – and that a Conservative government would put up “checks and balances” to stop that. “To heck with the courts,” White said.

White’s comments happened just days before that year’s election, and Harper did not denounce them quickly or clearly enough. The Paul Martin Liberals would win, and Harper would not go on to be Prime Minister until much later – and after White was no longer a Conservative candidate.

In 2018, Justin Trudeau had his National Lampoon-like trip to India, which was a total fiasco. Among other things, Trudeau brought along a man who had been previously convicted of attempting to assassinate an Indian cabinet minister. When the Indian media started shouting questions at him about it at cartoonish photo-ops, Trudeau eventually realized the extent of the damage, and said “this person should never have been invited in the first place.”

But the damage was done. Trudeau would go on to lose his Parliamentary majority, and the disastrous India trip would be widely cited as one of the reasons.

Which brings us, in a circuitous route, to Pierre Poilievre.

Like many other politicians (see above), the newly-minted Conservative leader has been endorsed by – or gotten too close to – bad people. Unlike those politicians, however, Poilievre has been slow to renounce and denounce. In some cases, he’s adamantly refused.

So, there was James Topp, a Canadian Armed Forces member who – in uniform – urged his fellow soldiers to disobey orders, and never get vaccinated against COVID-19. Topp would go on to lend support to Diagolon, a white supremacist group whose members are among those arrested in February for allegedly conspiring to murder police at the Coutts, Alta. border crossing.

Not only did Poilievre not renounce and denounce Topp, he marched with him in Ottawa at the end of June, in full view of media cameras.

Shortly after that, a smiling Poilievre was photographed with a happy-looking Jeremy MacKenzie, the leader of the aforementioned white supremacist group, Diagolon. MacKenzie, who is a racist and thug, would later be arrested on a Canada-wide warrant for weapons and assault charges.

Poilievre didn’t denounce MacKenzie for the Diagolon stuff – he actually claimed he didn’t know what Diagolon was, even though the media had been asking him about it for months. Instead, he (appropriately) denounced MacKenzie for making a disgusting, despicable comment about his wife.

Then, this week, Poilievre was embraced by Alex Jones of InfoWars. On his Sept. 30 broadcast, Jones said: “We got the new Canadian leader who’s set to beat Trudeau – who is totally anti-New World Order. You look all over the world, we are rising right now.”

Jones is a bit better known. He has done so many evil, hateful things, we literally don’t have room to catalogue them all. Recently, however, he has been in the news for saying that the mass murder of children in Sandy Hook, Conn. in 2012 was “staged,” and urging his deranged followers to attack the parents of the dead children. A jury in Texas said Jones needed to pay $45 million in damages for that.

And now, Jones is singing the praises of Poilievre.

I don’t believe, not for a moment, that Poilievre supports Jones in any way. I believe he will denounce and renounce these bad people. Eventually.

The question for Pierre Poilievre isn’t what he believes, or what he thinks about these bad people, or about renouncing or denouncing the bad people.

The question is this: Why do the bad people keep coming back?

40 Comments

  1. Warren,

    Trying to get credible answers on this has so far been as effective as beating a dead horse. What in the world are thise OLO strategists thinking? So Byrne is going to run the next campaign. How ironic is that?

  2. Douglas W says:

    MacKenzie + Jones = blanked stares from most Canadians.

    Getting by: getting harder.

    • Martin Dixon says:

      This. Jones didn’t even know his name.

      • Martin,

        You must not be an avid American news watcher. They are positively nailing his hide over the Sandy Hook massacre and his dishonest and disgusting comments.

        • Martin Dixon says:

          Ronald, I actually have been since CNN started. Politics is basically kind of cute up here compared to there. My point is Jones did not even say his name in his “endorsement”. Not even news.

  3. western view says:

    Q: Why do the bad people keep coming back?

    A: For attention and influence.

    Based on the current polling data, it would seem that even the nasty people see a winner in the making.

  4. Jason says:

    Why?

    Because Pierre is their champion, of course!

    An outsider candidate with no connection to federal politics and major globalist parties for the past 18 years, Poilievre promotes simple solutions to complex problems, and as anyone with an education knows well, slogans that fit on a bumper sticker make for better actionable items than any sort of costed platform or expert analysis.

    Plus, he’s good at YouTube storytime for cranky white guys who can’t put their phones down, and really, that’s the only skill needed to be Prime Minister. How can you ignore this masterpiece of a candidate?

  5. PJH says:

    I’m looking forward to seeing M. Poilievre resign from the leadership of the Conservative Party on election night. We ain’t going back to coathangers, M. Poilievre, and we ain’t going back to our closets either, as much as your rabid supporters would like to see it.
    You chose to lay down with dogs, and you’re already waking up with a bad case of fleas.
    I’ll enjoy the weenie roast after your Conservative Party burns to smoking ash on election night.

    • Martin Dixon says:

      Funny. The abortion card again. No one has explained to me yet why Harper didn’t go after it when he had a majority. Hyperbolic nonsense. And the gay card too! Did you bother to watch his acceptance speech? This approach won’t work so I hope it continues.

      • PJH says:

        Pierre Poilievre’s anti-abortion stance was conveniently ditched before this campaign and you know it. This is a man who will say or do anything to achieve power. As for the gay issue, he may be able to trot out a gay MP…..but I know what his supporters said firsthand during the leadership campaign, and I want nothing to do with M. Poilievre or his ilk. I hope the f****r crashes and burns.

        • Martin Dixon says:

          When JT and Biden change their views on abortion, they have evolved and with PP it is a matter of convenience. Got it. You also missed my point on his acceptance speech. As mentioned, he is supposed to be one of Harper’s people and I have asked several times why Harper didn’t bring his feared secret agenda when he had his dreaded Gilead majority. Crickets. Painting PP as a hard right social conservative will not work so I encourage you to continue to focus on that.

          • PJH says:

            Please……M. Poilievre was the poster boy for the CLC in Canada til he realized that it was non-starter for him to achieve his boyhood goal of becoming PM. Thus his neck breaking 180 in his road to Ottawa conversion.
            Id also suggest the number of Con MP coathanger crowd has increased since Mr. Harper’s day…they are in the majority , and they are vocal.
            I’ll also give you another reason why Canadians won’t vote for M. Poilievre…..he’s an asshole. Nuff said.

          • The Doctor says:

            Nobody ever gives a straight or credible answer to that question re abortion and Harper’s majority government. Ever.

            Ever.

          • Dave says:

            Harper had a 60 year plan to ban abortion by slowly wearing down Canadians then coming back from the dead as a ghost and having his son take over and ban abortion.

          • The Doctor says:

            Thanks Dave! Best attempt I’ve seen yet 🙂

  6. Doc,

    Harper recognized abortion as a vote loser if legislation was drafted that was in any way pro-life. Then the SCOC took it off the table, no doubt much to Harper’s delight. Talk about settled law. The yahoos can scream all they want about pro-life policies but that won’t make it into the CPC platform. Not a chance.

    • The Doctor says:

      Most Canadians are unbelievably ignorant regarding the legal status of abortion in Canada. I’d be willing to bet that a microscopic percentage of Canadians could either name the 1988 Morgentaler decision of the SCC if not prompted by a pollster, nor could they tell you what it was about if you asked them what the Morgentaler decision was.

      Furthermore, based on the rants I see on social media, a significant number of Canadians seems to think that the US Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs somehow affects the legal status of abortion in Canada. I’m as pro-choice as it’s possible to be, but it really irritates me when abortion rights activists in Canada try to argue that Dobbs somehow means the right to abortion is in danger here. It’s complete bullshit.

      Words fail me.

      • Doc,

        Apparently some of them aren’t smart enough to know the major damage to their own cause they’re self-inflicting when they’re being dishonest, or disingenuous at best…c’est vraiment pas fort.

  7. PJH,

    Sure, PP has an on the record history with CLC and others. He says he’s now pro-choice and I accept that. But IF that’s bullshit, then I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes come the next election.

    • Martin Dixon says:

      Ronald, to tell you the truth, I don’t think anyone ever “evolves” on the issue. All that matters is how they legislate. And we know how PP’s mentor legislated. PP(that “f***king asshole-nice!-difficult to have a constructive conversation with that kind of language getting thrown around but I digress) will do the same.

      • PJH says:

        Let me tell you something Mr. Dixon, resident apologist for PP, my language is nothing compared to what I heard from your fellow PP supporters on the ph0nes. If had an any inkling of getting behind PP after the fact, it was certainly destroyed during my time on CallHub….Shout out to PEI PP types though, they told you to f**k off but with Eastern wit and charm. I wont speak to this issue anymore, as Im sure the subject is boring Mr. K and everyone else to tears….

    • PJH says:

      I dont trust PP as far as I can spit…..but you can be damn sure the coathanger crowd will be silenced during the next election campaign. But don’t worry, there will be another Randy White waiting in the wings. It has ever been thus. Refooormers simply can’t help themselves.

      • Martin Dixon says:

        Yes, it is patently obvious you don’t like him. But when you say stuff like “he will trot out a gay MP” are you deliberately ignoring who his leadership team is(and his father’s partner he pointed out in his acceptance speech which you also ignored) or are you just not familiar with them? At least two are gay-maybe more. I don’t know. Sorry but that is not a thing up here anymore so I hope you and others keep focusing on it. Again, it would be nice to get an answer to The Doctor’s question about Harper and his majority which was full of your scary reformers. Inquiring minds would like to know. As far as Randy White goes, maybe he knew the media bullshit about Harper’s secret agenda was the lie that it was so that was why he didn’t run in 06. Every party has lunatics on their backbenches. The Libs have a 911 conspiracy theorist in the cabinet for crying out loud. Oh, but she was allowed to “evolve” on the issue.

        • Martin,

          All I can tell you is that I went totally from being against physician assisted suicide to being almost always in favour, with very narrow exceptions. However, I’m still 100% against euthanasia. Most people mix them up and can’t tell one from the other. In short, I still am against Latimer because Tracy couldn’t give consent. Plus, death is a job that should be reserved only for doctors, not family or friends.

          • My own Mom had two dementias: her last two years were basically hell. But under the Quebec law, doctors could not send her on her way. That was way beyond cruel. The restrictions were far too large in both the federal and provincial laws.

  8. Robert White says:

    Untoward racists flock to candidates most likely to get media coverage so that they can live vicariously through their success at getting the attention of media personalities which somehow lend validation to their proto-Fascist belief system however fleeting it is.

    Mad Max was their former hopeful and now Poilievre is taking the place of their prized fringe right-wing partisan zealot who no longer has the limelight of Canadian media.

    Racism & sexism is supported by the lowest classes of uneducated Canadians with the least amount of formal education. Ignorance is Alberta’s blissfullness. And that’s why the bad actors keep flocking back to that political fringe partisan landscape.

    Dumb as dirt Westerners are proud of their heritage.

    Premier Kenney must be happy to be leaving, frankly.

    RW

  9. william shakesfeare says:

    They keep coming back because past is prologue.

  10. EsterHazyWasALoser says:

    As I have opined in the past, Joe & Jane front porch have bigger things to worry about than crass “got cha” media crap. The price of housing in many parts of this country have reached the point where large portions of the younger generations have had to give up the dream of home ownership, something IMHO that should be achievable to most working people, not the top few percent. Crime has also got significantly worse in may large communities, not to mentio quality of life issues like homeless encampments. I am sure the chattering classes will continue to engage in various pearl clutching exercises over conservative politicians (apparently now a days anyone who doesn’t agree with PM Trudeau is “far right”), but on election day issues that affect the average person’s pocket book will be the difference maker. Wasn’t it James Carville who famously said “It’s the economy, stupid”.

    • Martin Dixon says:

      Here is a prime example from leftie Hepburn from The Toronto Daily Star:

      “In a speech to the Canada Strong and Free Network conference in late September in Alberta, Poilievre told the attendees for the rightwing group that “we need conservatives on school boards, local governments, business leadership, the law, academia and other places where the woke left has been dominating for far too long.

      “Our country’s at a crossroads. Are we going to continue to concentrate power in the hands of fewer and fewer politicians, bureaucrats and elites, or are we going to disperse that power and put it back in the hands of the people by making Canada the freest country Earth?” Poilievre said.

      “So make your plans, carry them out, work together, build on ideas, and most of all, don’t back down.”

      This open courting of the far right is dangerous, potentially posing a real threat to our democracy and way of life. It needs to be constantly called out.”

      Conservative(to the right of JT)=far right. So insane and ridiculous.

      I just heard on Warren’s podcast that The Daily Star is backing some guy with 1% support in the mayor’s race? They don’t exactly have their finger on the pulse.

      • Martin,

        If I want to read the rantings of clearly bought and paid for idiots, I know where to turn. So, I don’t give a shit what these people write.

        The obvious point of this exercise in political mobilizing and extending our freedom is not to quite deliberately associate ourselves either individually, collectively or as a party with those who would make us fall right into the trap prepared by much of the left-wing media. Avoid whackos, zombies and other associated kooks and The Star and its ilk won’t be able to lay a glove on us, or the leader. This ain’t rocket science after all.

        • Martin Dixon says:

          Have to wonder if Hepburn and his fellow travellers are hiding under their desks clutching their pearls because of the centre right council elected in Vancouver.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *