We know Donald Trump did. It’s why he’s a fascist. Throwing an opponent in a democracy in jail – simply because they disagree with you – is fascism.

And now we know a lot of Canadian Conservatives feel the same way. They want to throw Rachel Notley in a cage because they hate her – because she disagrees with them. Because she’s a woman, perhaps. Because she’s not doing what they want her to do, almost certainly.

 

It was around the 40-second mark. Did you see that unctuous, servile weasel Chris Alexander? Grinning when the crowd starts chanting “lock her up” about Rachel Notley? Not telling them to stop?

These people aren’t conservatives. Real conservatives value true speech, I believe, and they defend democracy.  They value debate.

Fascists don’t.

Comments (44)

Neo-Nazis in Toronto. Queen East park, 2 pm. A bunch of them. 

Here we go. 

Comments (31)

In Ontario, where I live, I don’t think any single group has destroyed the reputation of what was once a noble profession – the profession of law – more than personal injury lawyers. With their 50 per cent contingency fees, and referral fees, and “litigation financing,” and whatnot, they are a disgrace. 

You see them leering at you from the backside of every bus, and even above urinals at the ACC: you won’t pay a cent! We only get paid when you get paid! Trust us!

Well, you shouldn’t. And the “lawyers” at the very bottom of trial lawyer barrel are Diamond and Diamond – who have now finally been exposed in a huge Toronto Star exposé this morning, here.

Some of the highlights:

• Their “award-winning” trial lawyer has actually never tried a case 
• They don’t actually work on most cases – they just refer them somewhere else for a fat fee
• Clients say their private information has been given to other lawyers without permission
• The face of the Diamond firm has been charged with passing off counterfeit money in a casino
• He has called one client a “fag” and others at the firm call clients “retarded”
• They are the subject of umpteen complaints about advertising and ethics 

Not every personal injury lawyer is a scumbag, of course. Many years ago, I worked with a few who seemed to be decent. But they, in part, let this weed sprout up  everywhere. Money talks, I guess. (Oh, and do you want to know one of the main reasons why insurance is sometimes so expensive? It’s because of fraud, and because of outrageous contingency fees and referral fees charged by trial lawyers. That’s why.)

And what has the law society done about this? Pretty much nothing. What have the CBA and OBA done about it? Nothing that I am aware of – and I used to sit on their executives. What has the province of Ontario done about contingencies and the like? Zero, zippo, zilch. Diamond and Diamond are scummy, to be sure, but the blame for this appalling situation is not all theirs. Others let it happen. 

I think the Star is just getting started on this issue. (At least, I hope so.) We will see what they do next – and what the once-noble legal profession does. 

If anything. 

Comments (17)

New popular vote totals from AP:

• Clinton 65,124,828 (48.2%)

• Trump 62,652,263 (46.3%)

• Johnson 4,457,409 (3.3%)

• Stein 1,429,050 (1.1%)

 

Comments (34)

One in Ottawa, one in Toronto.

The federal one:

The government should develop a proportional voting system and hold a referendum to ask Canadians whether they want a new system, a special parliamentary committee says.

The special committee on electoral reform also recommends Elections Canada conduct a public awareness campaign on the current first-past-the-post system and a new one.

The Liberals, in their own report, however, recommend a further engagement process on the federal voting system that “cannot be effectively completed before 2019.”

“We contend that the recommendations posed in the Majority Report regarding alternative electoral systems are rushed and are too radical to impose at this time,” stated the five Liberal members of the committee in a statement.

The Ontario one:

Ontario has passed a sweeping set of campaign finance reforms to clamp down on cash-for-access fundraising, end corporate and union donations, impose tighter caps on individual contributions and put restrictions on SuperPAC-style third-party advertisers.

The Election Finances Act – which was prompted by a Globe and Mail investigation into pay-to-play fundraising – passed its final vote in the legislature Thursday morning with all three parties voting in favour.

The new law leaves a handful of loopholes, but still represents the most substantial campaign finance reform for the province in a generation. It takes effect Jan. 1, 2017.

It will prohibit all provincial politicians, candidates and senior political staffers from attending fundraising events; ban corporations and unions from donating; cap donations from individuals at $3,600 per political party annually, down from more than $30,000 under the current system; and third-party advertisers wishing to influence elections, who currently face no spending restrictions, will be capped at spending $100,000 during a campaign period and $600,000 in the six months prior.

Both of these reforms are huge, historic and – sorry, Tories and Dippers – mostly to the credit of the Grits.

The federal one sees the Trudeau Liberals acknowledging what some of us have said for quite some time – a change to democracy needs to be democratic.  It can’t be rushed.  And it can’t be legitimized by four vague sentences in the Liberal election platform.

The Liberals have accepted that, and are now saying this can’t be rushed.  It is the New Democrats and the Conservatives – with the majority on the committee – that are now trying to push through an ill-defined referendum.  Shame on them.

The Ontario political finance reforms – soon to be matched by Alberta, New Democrat friends out there tell me – are equally significant.  They approximate what my boss Jean Chretien did in 2003 – but they actually go a bit further.

The reforms allow partisans like me to appear at fundraisers (and I have done that for years, from B.C. to Ontario, and I will continue to happily do that for candidates and causes I like), but not anyone else in day-to-day politics.  That’s big.  Also big: the third party election spending stuff.  So long, Working Families.

Whenever a politician does something that is directly against their own self-interest, they should be applauded.

I therefore applaud the Trudeau Liberals and the Wynne Liberals.  It’s a good day for democracy, Canada.

 

Comments (53)

Son Four and I were listening to CBC radio on the way back from the Raps game (we beat the Grizzlies, but kind of didn’t deserve to), and some brilliant feminist gamers were on. One said that the Number One Internet Troll had just won the election. “That’s it,” I said to my boy. “He’s President Troll.”

Oh, and he’s 2.5 million votes behind my candidate, by the way. I bet that news gives him a heart attack. 

President Troll. That's it. The number one Internet troll is going to be president.

— Warren Kinsella (@kinsellawarren) December 1, 2016

Comments (28)

A Klaus Nomi tree decoration.  I have lived long enough to see it all.

Click Klaus to see even more, passed along to me by my hipster daughter. Ho ho ho.

Comments (3)

Putting your family in charge of your businesses is the very definition of conflict of interest, you moron. #uspoli @realDonaldTrump

— Warren Kinsella (@kinsellawarren) November 30, 2016

Comments (13)

There’s this take on pipelines, as related by the Ventures:

 

And there’s this take which I would have related on CP24 if they hadn’t cancelled to talk about the Ontario Auditor-General’s report instead:

• pipelines are safer than transporting via rail, cf. Lac Megantic
• pipelines have 500 per cent fewer accidents/spills than the alternatives, cf. this
• our economy is in big trouble without ’em, cf. this op-ed
• as long as we have oil and gas in everyday life, we need ’em, cf. this website
• this ain’t about politics – New Democrats, Liberals and Conservatives all agree we need ’em, cf. this

Does that mean every proposed pipeline should be approved? Of course not.  Trudeau appropriately turned down Northern Gateway, just as the Dakota Access Pipeline should be (but won’t be, by a racist president-to-be).

Oil is being transported via rail right through Toronto neighbourhoods, including two blocks from my house, several times a day.  I’d like that to stop, thanks.

Oh, and good luck in getting the Ventures lick out of your head.  It’s a keeper.

 

 

Comments (20)

A dishonest non-entity who is running for the Conservative Party leadership has a strategy: to yank every fire alarm she comes across.  Her latest stunt? Kill the CBC.

She’s lying, of course.  She was previously in power for many years, and did nothing – absolutely nothing – about the CBC.  In fact, she made certain to appear on CBC as often as possible – more than most of her colleagues.  She’s lying.

So, I won’t even dignify her, or her proposal, by using her name.  But I give her credit: she’s got the mouth-breathing types braying and screeching about the CBC.  Again.

Now, back when Sun News Network was around, I used to go on there all the time to say how much I loved the CBC.  My objective was to give my pal Brian Lilley the vapours, and I think I succeeded.

But, like it or not, the “whither the CBC” debate is upon us, again.  So, I thought I’d stake out my own position.  Here, then, is my ten-point list about why I adore the CBC.  Clip and save.

1. The CBC is one of the few things I pay the government for that I like.
2. The CBC is one of the only things I pay government for that isn’t subject to taxes and user fees after the fact.
3. The CBC goes where the private sector folks don’t, and won’t (ever).
4. The CBC is the only institution – and I include government in this sweeping generalization – that provides Canadians with a true sense of the rest of the country.
5. The CBC does mostly good shows – personally, I think the morning radio side of the business is really, really good.
6. The CBC is popular – it cleans up with the aforementioned morning radio shows in just about every market, for instance, because everyone agrees their product is simply a lot better than the competition.
7. The CBC is giving us solid news coverage when the self-bonusing bastards at Postmedia, et al. are closing up shop everywhere.
8. The CBC is particularly needed when we are more at risk at being swamped by the cultural juggernaut to the South than ever before.
9. The CBC’s supporters, like Friends of the CBC, have done the polling – and the research shows the vast majority of Canadians value the CBC (and particularly its local content), big time.
10. The CBC provides value – and, apart from health care and the CBC, I don’t feel like I get much back anymore.

Now, various assholes will say I’m saying all this stuff because I’m a writer for CBC.  Well, I’m not.  (I did one thing for them, and I don’t presently plan to again – among other things, I get more than 3.5 million visitors on this wee web site every year, inter alia.)

Anyway.  The CBC is here to stay, dishonest CPC leadership candidates notwithstanding.  Because, basically, there’s more of us than there are of her.

 

Comments (35)