Tory endorses Mihevc!

Some folks here in the centre of the universe were surprised, this afternoon, when John Tory endorsed Councillor Joe Mihevc. Yours truly was not one of them.

Joe may be a deeply-orange Dipper, but he’s also the kind of politician who has always worked hard to do right by his community – and to actually get good things done at City Hall. Mihevc and Tory may have once had different party affiliations (Tory’s, presently, is Toronto and none else), but the two of them are mostly cut from the very same cloth. Both know that scoring political points is not nearly as important as actually getting results for the people they serve (take note, Ms. Keesmaat).

On Tory’s campaign, as I’ve related before, there are Liberals, Conservatives, and even a few Dippers. There are non-partisans, professional operatives, first-time volunteers, and grizzled political veterans. This, I think, is what Tory does best: he brings people together to get results. He’s good at it.

Joe’s opponent is Councillor Josh Matlow, who I consider to be a self-absorbed pain in the ass. Joe likes to point to positive results; Matlow likes to have microphones pointed at him.

John Tory’s election campaign maintains a healthy lead in the final days, but he’s still working like he’s way behind. Anyone who knows John will tell you they’re not surprised that John is hoping for a council he can work with — regardless of political leanings.

And it should also not surprise anyone that John Tory sees Joe Mihevc as one of those people.

Kanye West

Look, I loathe his music with an intensity that is brighter than a hundred suns.  But he’s impossible to ignore, today, because of this.

I am not a psychiatrist, and neither is just about anyone else I know.  But I will hazard a guess, here, and say that Kanye West suffers from mental illness.  It’s apparently known that he has been diagnosed as bipolar, and he’s reportedly off his meds.

So.  Unlike not a few folks (who should know better) I won’t laugh at the guy.  He’s sick, looks like, and he needs help, per the cliché.  Maybe even a bit of compassion.

But his music still fucking sucks.

John Tory sets the Agenda

For those still making up their minds about who to vote for in the biggest election in Canada, watch this. My guy John Tory goes head-to-head with a real pro, Steve Paikin.

Oh, me and Nick get talked about at the end. I’ll bet 99.9 per cent of voters couldn’t tell you who we are, even if they were offered 500 million bucks (which is what Ms. Keesmaat’s reckless promises will cost you annually, BTW. A seventeen per cent increase in your property taxes.).

Another ex-Calgary punk asks me why I support John Tory


I like much of your PoV & insight and that you run this nice place for people to vent on things CDN & Political. So thanks! As a fellow Dogan, Grit, former Punk & former resident of NW YYC it’s cool to know that there are people who know how good a Chicken on the Way corn fritter tastes, may know who 10 foot Henry was (not the poseur who has him today!) & who may have also voted for Karen Gainer.  

But you’re not really good with the Mayor thing are you? I just watched your dude (I almost left off the “e”) on the TVO. Man! you are TOTALLY backing the wrong horse for Mayor of YYZ!  Mr Tory is; well; not really very good is he? No wonder he needs a war room fella like you.

(Full disclosure, I have a viscera dislike for Mr Tory, who may be a nice fellow, but he just oozes both one on one setting, in a room full of people & on the TV that haughty Rosedale, Orange Order, Hog Town, “listen to your betters & don’t interrupt me whileI’m having Tea at Eaton’s College Street” attitude, I have hated since we moved to TeaHo in the 1960’s from YUL)


He and his wife came to see Shit From Hell at the Bovine Sex Club. They stayed the whole night and were buying drinks for everyone.

He came to my birthday party. My Irish relatives didn’t know who he was. He was serving them drinks. Later, they said to me: “Who was that nice guy?”

Yesterday, I was with him at a political strategy meeting and he talked about a council candidate who opposed him most of the time. But he said he wanted to help that candidate, “because he has a good heart.”

You’re wrong about this guy. He is a good man.

And he stayed for a whole SFH show. Hell, not even our kids will do that.

The Patrick Clown Show, plus bonus caucus resignation phone call tape!

ABOVE: Brown says he didn’t resign – but here’s the tape proving that he did!

Good people of Brampton, take note.  Let’s recap the events that led to Mr. Brown being dumped at your doorstep.


Follow all that?  I don’t either.

Bottom line: this guy is a political train wreck. He shouldn’t be dog-catcher, let alone mayor of something.



Column: hypocrisy in the form of a cross

Hypocrisy, nailed to a cross.

It is about three feet high, and it is found at the very centre of a massive, baroque throne. It rather resembles something one would find at Versailles, in fact. At a minimum, it is more ornate and more conspicuous than something one would see above the tabernacle, in a church.

And that is what Maurice Duplessis intended, one presumes, when he had it affixed to the blue walls of the National Assembly more than 80 years ago: to resemble a church. Back then, Duplessis – an autocrat and a bigot who ordered Jehovah’s Witnesses arrested for practicing their religion, and who led anti-Semitic campaigns to keep out Jewish refugees fleeing persecution in Europe – called his province “the only Catholic government in North America.”

At the time of its installation in 1936, then, the crucifix was regarded as a literal embodiment of the solemn bond that then existed between the Quebec state and the Quebec church, when more than 90 per cent of the province’s population were Roman Catholic. But the crucifix even survived the Quiet Revolution, after which Quebec finally became a secular state.

Over the years, there have been reports written about it, and debates about it. In 2008, academics Gérard Bouchard and Charles Taylor recommended removing the cross. They said that “it seems preferable for the very place where elected representatives deliberate and legislate not to be identified with a specific religion. The National Assembly is the assembly of all Quebeckers.” All of the politicians in the National Assembly disagreed. They voted unanimously to keep it, in its hallowed spot above the Speaker’s throne.

Aware, perhaps, that they are intensely hypocritical for maintaining the crucifix, some Quebec legislators have argued that the Christian symbol has historical value. But this, too, is a lie. The original crucifix is long gone. The one that is up there, now, is a copy, surreptitiously nailed to the wall in 1982.

During one of the more-recent debates, last Fall – when controversy was raging about “Liberal” government’s bill that would force women to remove veils when getting on a city bus, or going to see their doctor – Francois Legault, the leader of the CAQ, was asked about the decidedly-unsecular symbol hanging above his head in his workplace. Legault shrugged. He said the crucifix should stay. “We have a Christian heritage in Quebec and we cannot decide tomorrow that we can change our past,” said the leader whose very party name is about Quebec’s future. “I don’t see any problem keeping it.”

“A Christian heritage.”

Therein lies the problem, of course. Legault is no longer a mere member of the opposition in the provincial legislature. In a few days’ time, he will be Premier of Quebec, presiding over a massive majority in the National Assembly.

At his very first press conference after the election, then, Legault dispensed with any notion that he would be the Premier of all Quebecois. To the Muslims (with their headscarves), and the Jews (with their kippahs), and the Mennonites and the Amish (with their traditional styles of dress), and the Hindus (with their tilaka markings on their faces), Legault’s message was plain: I don’t represent you. I don’t care about you. You are second-class citizens – or worse.

Here’s what he said, at that first press encounter: “The vast majority of Quebeckers would like to have a framework where people in authority positions must not wear religious signs.” And then, knowing what he wants is wholly contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and every human rights code extant, he went even further: “If we have to use the notwithstanding clause to apply what we want, the majority of Quebeckers will agree.”

From the man who said he would march newcomers to the border who lack the ability to properly conjugate verbs, and expel them – to…where? Cornwall? Vermont? Newfoundland and Labrador? – we shouldn’t be surprised, one supposes. Francois Legault has already revealed himself to be another petty, pitiful aspirant to Maurice Duplessis’ throne. He’s a hypocrite.

Andrew Scheer, however, is seemingly fine with all of that. The Conservative leader was on the phone to Legault mere moments after the polls closed, heaping praise on the Premier-elect, promising future cooperation and all that. Justin Trudeau – looking and sounding like a Prime Minister should – was much more circumspect.

As he has done before, the Prime Minister said “the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is there to protect our rights and freedoms, obviously,” adding that the state should not “tell a woman what she can or cannot wear.”

He went on: “It’s not something that should be done lightly because to remove or avoid defending the fundamental rights of Canadians, I think it’s something [about] which you have to pay careful attention.”

And we are paying attention, now. Before he is even installed, Francois Legault is making national headlines for all the wrong reasons.

Jesus, from his lonely, lofty spot above the National Assembly, might remind Monsieur Legault about what he said in Matthew 23:3. You know:

“Do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.”