Categories for Musings

Globe and Mail, May 2, 1998:

“…Frank, according to Mr. Duffy, made it acceptable for other media to mention or joke about his weight. For example, the Royal Canadian Air Farce depicts him as Tiny Mike. As well as costing him the Order of Canada, he said the attacks lowered his standing at CTV.

He was advised by his lawyer, David Sherriff-Scott, not to talk to The Globe and Mail about the case. However, in the examination for discovery, Mr. Duffy makes a very convincing case for how much being “Franked” can hurt.

“I don’t know anyone who wants to be held up to ridicule,” Mr. Duffy says on the transcript. “I’ve never met a human being who wants people to make . . . personal comments about them…I’m not sure if your clients appreciate when they put down the Prime Minister for his accent and so on that hurts him personally. Now, one could argue that he asked for that because he ran for office, but the fact is we’re all human beings, and what your magazine, or your client’s magazine, consistently demonstrates is a complete absence of any shred of humanity in relation to other human beings.

“And there is no reason for you to think for one second that Mike Duffy doesn’t have a heart, that I can be hit and not be bruised and not feel it. Of course. And everybody else who is in there feels it too, when they’re attacked. So the idea that you can get some kind of free pass that Mike Duffy is the only human being on Earth who doesn’t feel pain when people make cracks about him, personal cracks, is totally wrong.”

Speech, Sen. Mike Duffy, March 30, 2010:

“I rise to join my colleague, Senator Finley, in support of an inquiry into the state of freedom of speech in Canada…I share Senator Finley’s love of freedom and his concern about the growing phenomena of censorship. I approach the subject from the perspective of someone who, as a journalist for more than forty years, has used freedom of speech every day of my life, and has seen its essential role in keeping our democracy healthy…Some people say that if we ban offensive or rude opinions in Canada, society will be more harmonious. But experience around the world shows that’s just not how it works; and if we stop people from expressing themselves verbally, even in ways we find distasteful, they might be tempted to express themselves violently…As a journalist, I know the value of free speech. And as a Senator, I have a duty to protect it. Thank you.”

UPDATE: A response by Mike Duffy is found in comments, below.

Comments (46)

I’ve written about the Earle case before.  While I strongly support a robust human rights regime, I think taking a comedian before the CHRC for being a comedian – for pursuing his art, if you will – is completely inappropriate.  And, therefore, arguing jurisdiction at the outset was the right and proper thing to do.

Your thoughts?

Comments (11)

I was sorry to read about his death in this week’s Hill Times.

Some years ago – while I was in the midst of defending my friend, and my friend’s reputation, during the Gomery Pyle schmozzle – McInnis wrote to me, to pass along a few kind words about the importance of taking a stand, and standing up to thugs.  Even if they’re in your own party.

I understand he had a difficult time due to the role he played in the Reform Party-Heritage Front affair, but I hope he found some peace at the end.

Comments (0)

…I think a certain columnist has been talking to a certain former senior Canadian politician.

That’s what I think. What do you think?

Comments (10)

The first protest I ever led was on Parliament Hill in 1984 – against the Trudeau government’s approaches to post-secondary education.  We didn’t overturn any cars or set effigies alight, but we did secure a meeting with Jim Peterson, and we attracted lots of media attention to our cause.  (We kept at it, too.  I even later made a mock run at the Conservative Party leadership, to force politicians to focus on PSE.  We held a car wash to come up with the entrance fee, but came up short!)

I’ve remained  passionate about PSE, since then, because I believe that (a) our collective future depends on it and (b) reducing university and college campuses to playgrounds for the rich, as in much of the US, would be an unmitigated disaster.  Post-secondary education must remain accessible and equitable for all.  It’s in our own self-interest, along with being the right thing to do.

Thus, I’m pretty happy by this move by the McGuinty government.  It will help kids struggling under massive debt loads – and it will help ensure that PSE remains a right, and not a privilege for a few.

**

Ontario students to get more loans, flexibility in paying back debt (Ont-Student-Aid)
Source: The Canadian Press
Mar 29, 2010 11:33

TORONTO – College and university students in Ontario will get more financial aid and more flexibility on loan repayment options as the province moves to increase new post-secondary spaces this fall.

The changes to the Ontario Student Assistance Program include 1,000 new graduate scholarships, a new grant for part-time students and additional support for married students or those with children. The Ontario Student Opportunity Grant threshold, which caps annual student debt, will increase to $7,300 from $7,000 for a two-term academic year, the first increase in 12 years.

Students will also be allowed to keep more of the money they earn from part-time jobs and will get a no-interest period on student loans for six months after graduation.

The changes, which provide details of an $81-million plan promised in the fall economic statement, will improve assistance for about 188,000 students.

The tuition fee framework is also being extended for two more years, limiting tuition fee increases to an average of five per cent annually.

The Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance, which represents more than 140,000 university students, welcomed the move, calling it a “huge step forward for students relying on government aid to access higher education.”

The alliance says the changes mean the weekly loan limits will increase to $150 from $140 per week.

They also tie the maximum assessment for textbook and supplies costs to the rate of inflation.

“The sustained regulation of tuition fees is promising, however, students in Ontario continue to pay the highest fees in the country,” said OUSA executive director Alexi White.

INDEX: EDUCATION POLITICS

Comments (8)

Possible lawbreaker.

BR Ignatieff Veil
Source: The Canadian Press
Mar 27, 2010 3:13

MONTREAL – Michael Ignatieff is weighing in on the Muslim face-covering debate that’s raging in Quebec.

The federal Liberal leader says he supports controversial legislation that would force veiled women in Quebec to uncover their faces when receiving or delivering public services.

Ignatieff says the bill represents a “good Canadian balance” between religious freedom and equal treatment.

Some Muslim groups and other commentators have harshly denounced the bill, branding it as intolerant.

Ignatieff, however, says it’s “ridiculous” to say that Quebec is more intolerant than other parts of the country.

He says all modern societies are grappling with how to reasonably accommodate cultural and religious differences.

***

I’m not “grappling” with this one, personally. I don’t agree, at all, with the position that my party – or the governing party – have taken, here.  That likely places me in a small minority, but I’m okay with that.

It’s fair to say, however, that I’m also not overly exercised about what Quebec proposes to do:  it’s a poorly-drafted law, one that will face (so to speak) an inevitable constitutional challenge. I just cannot foresee such a law surviving a Section Two Charter review – nor it being regarded as particularly reasonable, under a Section One check.

On the other hand – if I am wrong, and I’m often wrong – and the law eludes a Charter challenge, prepare yourself for the inevitable: every kook and bigot with some spare time on his hands may commence litigation against the Sikh’s turban and beard, the Jew’s kippah and the Hasidic Jew’s clothing,  the Hindu’s tilak facial markings, the styles favoured by traditional Mennonites and the Amish, or perhaps even the ostentatious display of a nun’s habit.  I mean, why not, right?  Any one of those things may serve to obscure a person’s identity in some way. Fair’s fair.

There may indeed be occasions when the provision of certain government services reasonably require that we see a person’s face – checking a passport, crossing a border, perhaps even voting when a person’s bona fides can’t otherwise be confirmed.  But, say, popping by a government office to pay a parking ticket?  Will the new law prohibit that, too?

I think we’re in rather dangerous territory, here, but I’m interested in your thoughts, as always.

Comments (53)

I have always admired Courtney Love. Not for the drug abuse stuff, obviously, or for her shockingly-poor approach to parenting, or that extremely unfortunate incident at Strummer’s funeral.

I’ve admired her for her music – which has always been strong, and fearless and honest – and for her guts. She’s been accused of every crime imaginable – killing her husband, killing Nirvana, never actually ever writing a song herself (because Cobain or Corgan really wrote her stuff, don’t you know). I always figured that she and Yoko Ono – the other much-reviled rock’n’roll villainess – should get together. They’d have a lot to talk about.

Anyway. Courtney, who is unkillable, is back with Hole (but it’s a Hole in name only, as it’s a brand-new Hole), and she is seriously kicking ass. Her new tune, Skinny Little Bitch, is a ball-busting, blood-and-sweat, take-no-prisoners bit of riffage, with Courtney snarling and spitting over top. It’s amazing, and it’s already charted on Billboard, despite being only out for a few days.

As far as I know, the official vid isn’t out yet. But I liked this fan’s work, and I think you will, too.

Kick it, girl.

Comments (5)

Check it out, free of charge. (And check out the top political book, on page 61!)

Then subscribe, subscribe, subscribe!

Comments (2)

I talk sense while Powers channels his inner Mr. Spock.  Link.

Comments (5)

This is a fuzzy shot – taken on my iPhone on the periphery of the craziest pit scene I’ve seen in a while – of Tom Gabel onstage in Kingston last night, as a number of young women accompany him on ‘Thrash Unreal.’ They just climbed up out of the sweaty limbs and the chaos, and started singing along. Against Me! loved it. The crowd loved it. It was a perfect punk rock night.

The Kingston show was at an old Eighties-style disco venue called Stages, on Princess Street. For the past few days, Against Me! – who, as you all know by now, is my favorite band on Earth, the one for which I’d throw it all away and travel with as their geriatric roadie – has been on a cross-Canada stadium tour with Billy Tallent.

Being a punk purist, I do not believe punk rock should ever be experienced in a stadium. It’s Satanism. (I also have never quite gotten the Billy Tallent thing.)

So the Kingston show was special. AM were going to be showcasing some of the new songs on their yet-to-be-released album, White Crosses. And no American audience has heard those songs. And they were going to be there with the Cancer Bats, Canada’s best hardcore band ever. (And no Billy Tallent.)

So I had to get to Kingston. I had to.

My brother-of-another-mother Richard Warman – a ska and punk enthusiast of long standing – joined me there. We were easily old enough to be fathers to more half the crowd, a motley crew of mohawked punks, anarchists, peaceable skins and Queen’s jock types. It was wonderful.

What a show! What a night! The Cancer Bats again reminded the locals why they are the heaviest live act in the country – screeching through some tunes from their new record, due out in a couple weeks – and kicking off with a howling take on ‘Hail Destroyer,’ my unofficial Liberal war room anthem. Their version of the Beastie Boys’ ‘Saboutage’ literally took the roof off the place. Amazing.

Against Me!, meanwhile, came on at about 8:30 – it was an all-ages show, which made me regret I did not have my Cancer Bats-loving daughter with me – and proceeded to kick out the jams like you never get to see a band do anymore, and certainly not in a big aircraft hanger-style hall. They sweated, they danced, they pulled kids up onstage wih them to dance and sing.

Everyone there was close enough to know, to feel, that something special was taking place. It had a sense of community and joy about it that you only get at the once-in-a-lifetime gigs. It was like that.

You had to be there, I think, to capture the singularity of the show.  The only words that capture it, truly, are the stylings of The Great One – Lester Bangs, writing in the NME about seeing the Clash live for the first time, almost thirty years ago.  This is what it was like.  I wish you had been with us.

“The politics of rock ‘n’ roll, in England or America or anywhere else, is that a whole lot of kids want to be fried out of their skins by the most scalding propulsion they can find, for a night they can pretend is the rest of their lives, and whether the next day they go back to work in shops or boredom on the dole or American TV doldrums in Mom ‘n’ Daddy’s living room nothing can cancel the reality of that night in the revivifying flames when for once if only then in your life you were blasted out of yourself and the monotony which defines most life anywhere at any time, when you supped on lightning and nothing else in the realms of the living or dead mattered at all.”

UPDATE: “Thank you for whoever took this picture! .. I was the chick with the short blonde hair beside Tom .. and I can’t explain how much of an amazing experience that was!! I was kind of bummed that I didn’t have anything to commemorate that amazing moment in life, but now I do! Thank you so so so much! Alexina”

Comments (8)