Dynasty, s3: Canadian Politics 2018

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

I don't know how the Ontario Liberals manage to do it but the new labour legislation Bill 148 might actually get me to vote for the fuckers one more time, after I was sure I was done with them by 2010 or so. These are some of the most sweeping protections for temporary and part-time workers I've seen any government implement. The way e.g. Tim Hortons franchises are responding to the minimum wage increases are mostly serving to make them look ridiculous. I'm glad I'm not seeing much serious support for the corporations in this regard.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Tuesday, 9 January 2018 14:21 (one month ago) Permalink

Yeah, in my circles Tim's and other businesses like Cineplex have been roundly mocked for their responses but uhhh given the nature of those circles I don't know if I can trust that there isn't a significant chunk of the country that doesn't buy the crocodile tears

Simon H., Tuesday, 9 January 2018 14:25 (one month ago) Permalink

I hate that we have to fight and scrap for even the incredibly modest gains like the ones in Bill 148

Simon H., Tuesday, 9 January 2018 14:26 (one month ago) Permalink

this is the story of my post post-secondary life

infinity (∞), Tuesday, 9 January 2018 17:56 (one month ago) Permalink

Moved from the 2017 thread:

What it comes down to, imho, at least these days, is that laïcité is used by some in Quebec as an excuse for all-out xenophobia, while others are aware of its risks yet knowingly cling to it in spite of its bad rep in the anglophone world because they believe that religion represents a dormant threat to modern societies. Quebec's relative outspokenness in the latter department is sometimes an awful thing (re: that superfluous burqa ban), sometimes a great one (I say this as someone who would never consider moving back to my home country, Romania, in no small part due to its increasingly theocratic, i.e. openly homophobic, sexist and racist, ideology).

― pomenitul, Tuesday, December 26, 2017 11:32 AM (two weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I would agree it is sometimes a great one if the catholic religion was making a big comeback but it isn't. After all, the cross in the national assembly is here to stay. Really the only target is different very small religious minorities.

― Van Horn Street, Tuesday, January 9, 2018 8:09 PM (fifty minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink


But this week, the province's two main opposition parties made it clear that, while they support a commemoration, they believe Islamophobia is a loaded term.
The Parti Quebecois says the term is too controversial, while the Coalition Avenir Quebec deems the word inappropriate because Quebecers "are not Islamophobic."

Ihsaan Gardee, director of the Muslim council, attributed the parties' position to identity politics in an election year in Quebec.

"In our view, when arguing semantics, it draws attention away from the core issues of hate and Islamophobia and anti-Muslim discrimination that are being discussed and how to effectively address them," Gardee said Tuesday.

― Van Horn Street, Tuesday, January 9, 2018 8:12 PM (forty-eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The whole Netflix thing is so weird. I subscribe to Netflix so I don't really mind it not being taxed but it seems ridiculously unfair that Canadian companies that offer streaming services have to be taxed but any foreign companies offering the same service are not required to be taxed. Just seems like an obvious loophole that should be closed (either by taxing everyone or no one) and I don't even get why anybody is debating this.

― silverfish, Wednesday, December 27, 2017 12:23 AM (one week ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The alternative would be a special Netflix tax that would go to help funding Canadian cinema and television series. A bunch of european countries went this route, Germany and France notably. As you know I am certain, instead of that tax, Joly basically bargained with Netflix that they invest 500 millions here in Canada. I really do believe that Melanie Joly is making sure the 500 millions investment is managed by Netflix because 1. Telefilm has been absolutely incompetent at building up a lucrative film industry in Canada whereas Netflix has the strong incentive of building a more efficient and larger infrastructure, retaining talent, etc 2. Netflix is already a much better international distributor than anything Can-Con has ever had access to, 3. Ubisoft (a foreign company) and Cirque du Soleil (a Canadian one) have been successful content creating companies that got shit tons of subsidies (much more than Netflix is getting at the moment), 4. there was a danger that that big three telecoms was going to gobble up the entire private film/tv series content creation market, now there is not only one but two different alternative paths.

I am still not under 100% sure this is best idea. But I am certain that doing nothing would have been way worse.

― Van Horn Street, Tuesday, January 9, 2018 8:23 PM (thirty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Wednesday, 10 January 2018 02:01 (one month ago) Permalink

a long time coming


Canada appeared to be mounting a case on behalf of the rest of the world, since it cited almost 200 examples of alleged U.S. wrongdoing, almost all of them concerning other trading partners, such as China, India, Brazil and the European Union.

The 32-page complaint homed in on technical details of the U.S. trade rulebook, ranging from the U.S. treatment of export controls to the use of retroactive duties and split decisions by the six-member U.S. International Trade Commission.

infinity (∞), Wednesday, 10 January 2018 19:03 (one month ago) Permalink


No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Wednesday, 10 January 2018 19:24 (one month ago) Permalink

Btw re

Yeah, in my circles Tim's and other businesses like Cineplex have been roundly mocked for their responses but uhhh given the nature of those circles I don't know if I can trust that there isn't a significant chunk of the country that doesn't buy the crocodile tears

― Simon H., Tuesday, 9 January 2018 09:25 (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I thought that it was interesting that Michael Coren, who can be very conservative (at least on social issues) came out so strongly against the corporations and in favour of the raise. The CBC business panel I watched the other day was also mostly supportive. Even the Ontario PCs mostly seem to agree with a $15 minimum wage but want to get there a little slower.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Wednesday, 10 January 2018 19:29 (one month ago) Permalink

Well, that would be interesting. Wonder what would happen to my job.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Wednesday, 10 January 2018 20:49 (one month ago) Permalink


pomenitul, Wednesday, 10 January 2018 21:13 (one month ago) Permalink

sending good vibes yr way sund4r

as long as you don't mind living in canada, it's not so bad once canadians have good work experience stateside and then return home

it would suck having to end your stay prematurely due to this though

i became a us citizen half a year ago but will end up moving back for good probably in a year

infinity (∞), Wednesday, 10 January 2018 21:30 (one month ago) Permalink

Thanks, guys. Tbh, I already consider coming back, for reasons I won't go into fully (but I'm spending a third of the year in Canada as it is; long distance relationships are hard). There's no guarantee I'd be renewed for another year anyway and I could probably come in on another visa if I had to. Still, it definitely raises questions.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Thursday, 11 January 2018 02:27 (one month ago) Permalink

Interesting - BC Supreme Court rules that indefinite solitary confinement is unconstitutional: https://bccla.org/2018/01/bc-supreme-court-ends-indefinite-solitary-confinement-federal-prisons-across-canada/

Also, not sure what to make of these exemptions to the new labour legislation that the Ontario legislature passed last week. A little disappointed: http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/provinces-new-wage-laws-wont-apply-to-film-and-tv-workers-or-students-18-and-under

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Friday, 19 January 2018 03:02 (one month ago) Permalink

holy moly, patrick brown

while my dirk gently weeps (symsymsym), Thursday, 25 January 2018 06:24 (three weeks ago) Permalink

yeah just read the details of the allegations, jfc

Simon H., Thursday, 25 January 2018 12:55 (three weeks ago) Permalink

I'm re-watching Season 5 of the Wire and last night watched the episode where Carcetti and Norman are watching Rupert Bond's press conference on Clay Davis' indictment. Norman to Carcetti: "You'll need to have a comment. Try not to sound too gleeful about it."

My first thought after hearing it this morning was that this was probably Kathleen Wynne and her chief of staff's first exchange this morning.

Haven't read the details and probably don't want to. Ugh, good riddance.

Federico Boswarlos, Thursday, 25 January 2018 15:16 (three weeks ago) Permalink

conservatives in this country are really hard to distinguish from maga chuds. twitter comments on any media accounts regarding the brown story are all about feeling sorry for patrick brown and thinking its a conspiracy theory.

khat person (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 25 January 2018 17:04 (three weeks ago) Permalink

Could be nothing. On the other hand...


Simon H., Tuesday, 30 January 2018 15:18 (three weeks ago) Permalink

Wow @ the hints in the comments.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Tuesday, 30 January 2018 16:40 (three weeks ago) Permalink

If this turns out to be real that's....going to be one hell of a thing.

Simon H., Tuesday, 30 January 2018 16:56 (three weeks ago) Permalink

I know someone who has worked with a prominent provincial politician here in B.C. who sexually harassed her and who was just generally a pig around the office. It would be huge news if it ever gets out.

khat person (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, 30 January 2018 17:14 (three weeks ago) Permalink

don't know this guy, but:

Intern scandal brewing in Ottawa as the #metoo movement meets Justin Trudeau. Story soon.

— Andrew Krystal (@AndrewKrystal) January 30, 2018

Simon H., Tuesday, 30 January 2018 21:26 (three weeks ago) Permalink

his timeline is a treat. Gregg Zaun and Christie Blatchford retweets.

khat person (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, 30 January 2018 22:46 (three weeks ago) Permalink

if it is him, this would be awfully brazen: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-careful-metoo-1.4511093

rob, Tuesday, 30 January 2018 23:57 (three weeks ago) Permalink

i kinda doubt it's him, just bcz of the wording of the kinsella piece. but if it is, that would be pretty insane.

while my dirk gently weeps (symsymsym), Wednesday, 31 January 2018 03:20 (two weeks ago) Permalink

to my scandal-loving disappointment, Kinsella intimated that Trudeau was not the figure he was writing about:

The Internet is a vanity press for the deranged https://t.co/00iFn6Jy0n

— Warren Kinsella (@kinsellawarren) January 30, 2018

sean gramophone, Wednesday, 31 January 2018 03:31 (two weeks ago) Permalink

maybe it's his dude gerald butts?

while my dirk gently weeps (symsymsym), Wednesday, 31 January 2018 03:36 (two weeks ago) Permalink

my scandal-loving disappointment

I've never voted for the Liberals federally but this is still relieving to me.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Wednesday, 31 January 2018 03:48 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Nova Scotia mayor comes out

iCloudius (cryptosicko), Friday, 2 February 2018 16:58 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Glad now it's 'in all of us command' instead of 'in all our sons command'.

Van Horn Street, Saturday, 3 February 2018 05:17 (two weeks ago) Permalink

i've been parsing that line wrong all along. i always thought the patriot love was in "thy sons' command". possessive sons', command as a noun.

adam the (abanana), Saturday, 3 February 2018 06:08 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Wait, I've read it that way my whole life. It only just occurred to me that it makes more sense if "command" is a verb and "sons" is plural. Speaking to Canada in the imperative still seems odd, though.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Saturday, 3 February 2018 12:27 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Yep, me too.

bumbling my way toward the light or wahtever (hardcore dilettante), Saturday, 3 February 2018 12:48 (two weeks ago) Permalink

I think I probably did think about it once or twice and then forgot. If the original line was "thou dost in us command" as per [Removed Illegal Link], that is a much better line than either the one we grew up with or this new one. Are we also going to take the cross out of the French lyrics? Lol j/k.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Saturday, 3 February 2018 12:48 (two weeks ago) Permalink

I keep trying to imagine this happening to the White House and failing: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/24-sussex-drive-trudeau-not-living-1.4511732

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Saturday, 3 February 2018 12:51 (two weeks ago) Permalink

This seems like a good history of the anthem: https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/o-canada/

In The Common School Book of Vocal Music, published by the Educational Book Company of Toronto in 1913, the original line "True patriot love thou dost in us command" was changed to "True patriot love in all thy sons command." This particular change was also included in a version published by Delmar in 1914, and in all versions printed thereafter. There is no evidence as to why the change to “sons” was made, although it is worth noting that the women’s suffrage movement was at its most militant and controversial around 1913, and by 1914 and 1916 there was an enormous surge of patriotism during the First World War, at a time when only men could serve in the armed forces.

I figured the 'thy sons' version probably took off because of the war, but didn't connect it to the suffragettes.

Up to the middle of the 20th century, public discussion relating to the anthem, evidenced by letters to the editor in the country’s major newspapers, tended to revolve around the appropriateness of the phrase “stand on guard for thee” and the controversy associated with the tune’s perceived similarity to Mozart’s “March of the Priests.”

My view, having had to listen to the damn song every morning for years, is that we ban it forever and enjoy some peace and quiet.

jmm, Saturday, 3 February 2018 16:31 (two weeks ago) Permalink

(also, "peoplekind" is hilariously clunky. why not "humankind"?)

Simon H., Tuesday, 6 February 2018 17:43 (two weeks ago) Permalink

he is such a high school teacher

while my dirk gently weeps (symsymsym), Tuesday, 6 February 2018 17:47 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Me cause human contains the word “man.” Sexist.

Srsly, though, what a peoplegling of the language.

bumbling my way toward the light or wahtever (hardcore dilettante), Tuesday, 6 February 2018 17:48 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Stupid phone. *because

“Me cause earthquake! Cave dilettante strong!”

bumbling my way toward the light or wahtever (hardcore dilettante), Tuesday, 6 February 2018 17:49 (two weeks ago) Permalink

I'm gonna start using hupeoplekind

silverfish, Tuesday, 6 February 2018 17:55 (two weeks ago) Permalink

so inclusive

while my dirk gently weeps (symsymsym), Tuesday, 6 February 2018 17:57 (two weeks ago) Permalink

i kinda think trudeau was kidding actually

while my dirk gently weeps (symsymsym), Tuesday, 6 February 2018 17:57 (two weeks ago) Permalink

I think he meant it as a bit of light ribbing. He wasn't mansplaining. The full question is at 1:06:38 here:


jmm, Tuesday, 6 February 2018 18:02 (two weeks ago) Permalink

(also, "peoplekind" is hilariously clunky. why not "humankind"?)

"Humanity" is a perfectly good actual English word but it does seem like ribbing (someone who was asking a very long and convoluted question) in context.

I'm not a biologist but I'm p sure "maternal love" is not the actual definition of "mitochondria" btw.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Tuesday, 6 February 2018 18:37 (two weeks ago) Permalink

good old "people" is fine

though high school teacher will knock off points for being ambiguous by using the word "people" (in chicken scratch along the margin: who? what people? be specific. -5)

infinity (∞), Tuesday, 6 February 2018 19:12 (two weeks ago) Permalink

Yeah, my Apple Oxford dictionary defines "mankind", "humanity", and "people" almost exactly the same way: "human beings considered collectively".

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Tuesday, 6 February 2018 19:17 (two weeks ago) Permalink

"dumb joke" says trudeau

also "person up" is kind of funny


infinity (∞), Wednesday, 7 February 2018 17:50 (one week ago) Permalink

The media's being obtuse on this one. It was pretty clearly a joke if you watched the full clip.

jmm, Wednesday, 7 February 2018 18:52 (one week ago) Permalink

yeah it was a joke and the person he was talking to was a dumbass making a stupid point iirc?

khat person (jim in vancouver), Wednesday, 7 February 2018 18:57 (one week ago) Permalink

Totally. I'm guessing that most people probably don't have the patience to sit through her entire 'question' so they want to get mad at either political correctness or mansplaining instead.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Wednesday, 7 February 2018 19:19 (one week ago) Permalink

I am glad for any chance to dunk on JT so I'm a bit disappointed it was undeserved for once tbh

Simon H., Wednesday, 7 February 2018 19:20 (one week ago) Permalink

Anyway, this is distracting from the Philippines helicopter sale which is what should really be the subject of national discussion (and won't be)

Simon H., Wednesday, 7 February 2018 19:22 (one week ago) Permalink

the trudeau audience member question was thinly-veiled proselytizing for World Mission Society Church of God. i'd call it a cult. you can google it and decide for yourself.

adam the (abanana), Thursday, 8 February 2018 03:03 (one week ago) Permalink

so we all buying some BC wine this week to show where we stand in the big trade war?

while my dirk gently weeps (symsymsym), Thursday, 8 February 2018 05:12 (one week ago) Permalink

With all the press he's getting, it just occurred to me that Jordan Peterson might make a more effective CPC leader than Andrew Scheer (or possibly anyone); then it occurred to me that the CPC and Peterson might realize this soon enough; then I felt ill.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Thursday, 8 February 2018 14:34 (one week ago) Permalink

Apparently he had considered running for conservative leadership (can't remember if it was provincially in Ontario or federally) but decided his work is too important or whatever - aka he's making a lot of money doing what he's doing and knows that political leadership would be more taxing and less lucrative than writing self-help manuals.

khat person (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 8 February 2018 17:31 (one week ago) Permalink

Sund4r, I'm going through a bit of a rough patch at the moment and today felt a little lighter. Until I read your comment.

pomenitul, Thursday, 8 February 2018 17:36 (one week ago) Permalink

Acquittal in the Colten Boushie killing.

I'm trying to follow the details of Stanley's version. For it to have gone the way he says, all of these have to be true: a) he mistook how many bullets he put in his gun, b) he pulled the trigger more times than the number of bullets he thought he put in, c) for no reason, he believed his wife was under the truck, d) for no reason, he pointed his gun at Colten Boushie's head, e) he had an exceedingly rare hang fire of more than a fraction of a second. Practically any shooting could be given a story like that.

I also don't know why this wasn't pressed further, i.e. had it been a hang fire with the barrel extended, the casing should have stayed in the gun, I think? (I don't have a good sense of how a semi-automatic pistol works so don't know what weight to give this):

Burge asking how if the barrel was extended, was there a spent casing in the vehicle. If the gun looked like that, with the slide locked back, Burge contends, the casing should not have been ejected.

— Charles Hamilton (@_chamilton) February 5, 2018

jmm, Saturday, 10 February 2018 14:23 (one week ago) Permalink

Has anyone been following the story of Morgane Oger, VP of the BC NDP, publicly requesting the identity of a woman who carried an anti-transgenderism sign and publicly contemplating a human rights complaint? I feel like there might be a legitimate free speech issue here but it is hard for me to find information on it outside social media and blogs that have a strong slant, such as Feminist Current (Meghan Murphy, CW for trans-exclusionary feminism). Afaik, the party itself has not commented officially.

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Sunday, 11 February 2018 23:24 (one week ago) Permalink

Yeah. Know all about it. Murphy and her cohort of sock puppets are transphobic bullies. Nicely aligned with a large group of anti-trans right-wing evangelists who also hate Morgane because of the gender/sex Ed program they are trying to ban from schools out in loservelle BC. Morgane’s a very vocal supporter/activist in the BC school system. Lovely bunch.

everything, Monday, 12 February 2018 00:58 (one week ago) Permalink

A lot of the names on the “open letter” (groan) are fake, anonymous or in one case fraudulent.

everything, Monday, 12 February 2018 01:05 (one week ago) Permalink

And as probably highest profile trans person in Canada Morgan’s a huge target for these bozos.

everything, Monday, 12 February 2018 01:08 (one week ago) Permalink

I don't think it's at all clear that Oger is calling for the woman to be punished for hate speech...I think she wants to start a dialogue, which is generous of her

while my dirk gently weeps (symsymsym), Monday, 12 February 2018 05:11 (one week ago) Permalink

I might agree with a Conservative senator?: https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/02/13/iranian-canadian-professor-died-by-suicide-in-tehran-lawmakers-confirm.html

I don't think it's at all clear that Oger is calling for the woman to be punished for hate speech...I think she wants to start a dialogue, which is generous of her

Fair point but where will Oger take this if the woman is unconvinced by the dialogue?

No purposes. Sounds. (Sund4r), Wednesday, 14 February 2018 01:46 (six days ago) Permalink

tbh i didn't read up to the beginning of the twitter thread, just the link and the wonderful arguments after, so Oger says she may reluctantly consider a human rights tribunal complaint...which I hope she doesn't

while my dirk gently weeps (symsymsym), Wednesday, 14 February 2018 03:31 (six days ago) Permalink

You can't make a complaint against an individual. The context is that the woman with the anti-trans sign was one of a handful of people who attended the Women's March to protest a trans-woman being invited speak on the main stage (not Morgane Oger though she was present.) You could theoretically make a HR complaint against the organisers of the march for not providing a safe environment free from hate speech. Oger's is not going to do that since the organisers are not anti-trans types. Maybe the woman was there as part of some kind of organisation, so a complaint could be made there. But I doubt Oger would bother as she's otherwise said a few times she's reserving her activism to systemic problems ie. not going after outliers like these TERFs.

Not to say it's not concerning or serious but it blew up because of Twitter and it's kinda a social media mess. The march was otherwise a big success.

everything, Wednesday, 14 February 2018 04:36 (six days ago) Permalink


So the verdict in the trial over the killing of Colten Boushie has spurred the liberals to do something, what it will be remains to be seen.

khat person (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 15 February 2018 00:34 (five days ago) Permalink

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.