Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 5 hours ago, caroljane said: Perhaps the Chinese are familiar with the success of McCain's potato empire, centred in Florenceville, N.B., and wish to make the potato more popular in Chinese cuisine. Perhaps, poetically, they admire the success of the "big potato" Pierre and his deeply-rooted support for our constitution and customs. Perhaps they are indicating that his son will grow into a big potato too. Or maybe , having been through more famines than any other recorded peoples, they feel more comfortable with root vegetables big and liittle, than with foreign warlords. Carol, Nah. I think they don't respect Justin Trudeau very much and "Little Potato" is the way they joke about it. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 10 hours ago, william.scherk said: Well, so much for "Trump of the North," as they say: William, I'm glad that's settled. Now you won't ever have to worry about Premier Doug Ford implementing President Trump's ideas in Ontario, huh? You can rest easy since it's soooo settled... And since that's the case, if I were you, I would kick back and relax... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 This is soooooo wrong on so many levels: “Dites moi, pourquoi la vie est gaie...” pic.twitter.com/JMeOYVekIc— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) June 11, 2018 But I can't help notice that Trudeau's eyebrow is firmly in place. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 On 6/9/2018 at 10:29 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: What's happening in Canada is a microcosm of what's happening all over the world. People, of course, are not happy when they don't get free shit anymore, especially since they have gotten it from the US for decades in exchange for, essentially, nothing. Sometimes they even used it as leverage for not toadying up to dictators. Gimmee more stuff or I'll do a deal with the Communists, etc... Instead, now President Trump is telling them to toady up to whoever they want if that's what they want. Then suffer the consequences. But regardless, they are not going to get all that free shit anymore. Yeah, the left media narrative is that Trump is horribly gauche and embarrassingly uncouth, and is destroying friendships that took years of diplomacy, surrender, weakness, and ass-kissing to build. Translation: Trump is not being guilted into giving everything away and abiding by double standards just to earn the pretend social approval of these ridiculous twats. "News" has been political spin for quite some time, but now it's become little more than reporters reporting their personal misinterpretations and feelings rather than facts. Anything that Trump does, no matter how calmly and reasonably, is reported as an explosive tantrum and psychological meltdown, and sheer, abject stupidity. And it's no longer working at all. It's backfiring. Fun times to be alive! J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 (edited) This note from the Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg helps fill in a few blanks about US foreign policy: "We're America, Bitch." These "Canada Thoughts" help a bit too, though the relation of blobs to entities is unclear: [Added whipped topping] Spoiler Edited June 11, 2018 by william.scherk A blob by any other name is still a blob; Commons resolution ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 (edited) The Hollywood Squares format mated with that of Howdy Doody -- and then cousin-married Family Feud, which later resulted in CNN's primetime format of host, raging Squares, flashing chyrons, barking and froth, and occasional reporting. The occasional reporting is never without spin or attitude and narrative urgency. But anyway, Canadian TV in the 24 hour screamy format of CNN is a tepid affair in comparison, with smaller, less flashy sets, and erstwhile screamers and interruptors in the squares calmly waiting their turns, etcetera. So in the time since the peevish Veep style tweet-fit by the President, Canadian screamy-without-screams TV news is patiently recording what opinions it can from the 20 million or so Canucks with an opinion. The commons resolution is sort of the common denominator. Setting that contrast up ... I've added together TV appearances by Larry Kudlow and Peter Navarro, with Navarro going first, since he doesn't sound like a raddled former cokehead. The video's "moments" have been the fascinating part of the screamy-without-screaming coverage up here. I've trimmed out chyrons and landing lights. So, if you can, put yourself in the place of a Canadian of a certain age, listening to semi-reasonable and then crackhead versions of what is wrong with a restatement of Canadian policy. If you are prone to impatience, try to keep your eyebrows on. Kudlow's emotive notions of knife-crime and prestige are worth the wait and perhaps afterwards a bit of thoughtful reflection. Canadians who follow scream-vision or the local news have had multiple Larrys on the screen ... to help form their opinions. -- in totally unrelated news, I had a couple of Twitter interchanges yesterday with Scott Adams! I am afraid I lost, but still. Today, Tom Nichols took over from me, thank galt. I may poke in a reference here, as it is painful and funny at the same time, so both my fans and detractors can have a moment of unity. Edited June 11, 2018 by william.scherk Afterwords, afterwards -- tried to replace poster with Kudlow, but what the hell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 (edited) The US President returned to the topic of Trudeau, in some remarks after the Kim meetings in Singapore; from Maclean's: Transcript: Edited June 12, 2018 by william.scherk Added the remainder of the transcript. fixed formatting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 20 hours ago, william.scherk said: Canadians who follow scream-vision or the local news have had multiple Larrys [Kudlow] on the screen ... to help form their opinions. -- in totally unrelated news, I had a couple of Twitter interchanges yesterday with Scott Adams! I am afraid I lost, but still. Here's an update on the other histrionic over-achiever, Peter Navarro, walking back part of his stupid comments ... Quote Politico reports: White House trade adviser Peter Navarro on Tuesday walked back his comments over the weekend saying that there was a “special place in hell” for Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, acknowledging that his language was “inappropriate.” “Let me correct a mistake I made,” Navarro said at a conference in Washington hosted by The Wall Street Journal’s CFO Network. “My mission was to send a strong signal of strength,” he said. “The problem is that in conveying that message I used language that was inappropriate.” Navarro said Sunday that his sentiment came “right from Air Force One.” But on Tuesday, he apologized for using language that counteracted his goal of sending a signal of strength. “In conveying that message I used language that was inappropriate and basically lost the power of that message,” he said, according to the Journal. “I own that, that was my mistake, my words.” Kudlow, sad to say, suffered a mild heart attack since his scenery-chewing performance. He is in Walter Reed, enjoying socialized medicine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 Here's a funny little bit exploring a then Conservative Senator's encounter with meek, mild, weak Trudeau -- with some commentary from Senator Brazeau. From the Boston Globe. Quote [...] Trudeau waited out a little flurry in the first round while Brazeau flailed wildly. But when the second round began, Trudeau was landing punches at will. In the third round, after Trudeau had spent several minutes pummeling Brazeau — who appeared to be bleeding from the nose — the referee finally stopped the fight. Point is, underestimating your opponent can be dangerous — especially when it’s Justin Trudeau. He may be pretty and polite, but — as Brazeau can attest — he sure isn’t meek or mild. “About six years ago I would have said the same thing about Justin Trudeau,” Brazeau said. “I was bigger, I had a bigger build. I came out as a bully and I was impulsive.” [...] “It doesn’t seem to me that every comment or tweet is well thought-out,” Brazeau said, which passes for a devastating critique in the understated land north of the border. “Maybe he’s making the same mistake that I did six years ago. Seeing a small, skinny person who might look weak. I underestimated him, and it bit me in the butt.” The charity boxing match, which was televised live in Canada, helped launch Trudeau’s career; Brazeau’s went into a tailspin. Not long after, he was charged with financial crimes, suspended from the Senate, took a job as the manager of a strip club and pleaded guilty to assault and cocaine charges. But after the financial charges were dropped in 2016, he returned to the Senate as an independent. He’s still the youngest member, at 42. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted June 14, 2018 Share Posted June 14, 2018 I was impressed with the Canadian PM. Well done to both pugilists. They were athletes who had gone to the school of hard knocks. I remember boxing in high school, gym class and I was terrible against guys with a longer reach. I boxed one guy who was my weight but he must have been four inches taller than me. I had him on the ropes once but after that burst of energy . . . ouch . . . I lost badly. True-dough had what looked like a Nazi eagle on his left shoulder and maybe something "erased" from his right shoulder. Does anyone know what was there? Wow. Justin's wife is gorgeous. Was that four years ago? My respect for the "boyish" PM is higher now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted June 15, 2018 Author Share Posted June 15, 2018 In the first preliminary skirmish before the commencement of the Trade War (rural division) - Canada has triumphed! Our farm team has beaten your farm team, Trounced them, actually. Great game, best part the ritual handshake after the game. This is what I hope for after the War. Toronto Marlies win the Calder Cup against the Texas Stars, first time a Canadian team has won it in 18 years, on home ice. This is my kind of faceoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 9 hours ago, caroljane said: In the first preliminary skirmish before the commencement of the Trade War (rural division) - Canada has triumphed! Our farm team has beaten your farm team, Trounced them, actually. Carol, Hogwash. The game just started and the chessboard may be a lot bigger than anyone imagines. In other words, there hasn't been time for the results to set in, and besides, the Farm Team might be doing double duty as a major player in one game and a lowly pawn in another. From that perspective, it looks like a knight or bishop was just taken. Granted, the following is a right-wing site, but the facts are accurate from what I can tell. After Trump’s Relentless Hammering, Trudeau Just Caved and Denounced Iran Well, there goes that... I wonder when the US will invade Canada militarily and Make South Park Great Again? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: ... it looks like a knight or bishop was just taken. Granted, the following is a right-wing site, but the facts are accurate from what I can tell. After Trump’s Relentless Hammering, Trudeau Just Caved and Denounced Iran Well, there goes that... Here's a little more. U.S. welcomes #Canada’s decision to strongly condemn #Iran for ongoing sponsorship of terror & to add #IRGC to Canada’s list of terrorist entities. Iranians are standing up to the corrupt regime's abuses. We support them & call on other nations to hold Iran's leaders accountable.— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) June 15, 2018 Just trying to be helpful. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) It's time to put a target on Tennessee, or at least upon these freeloading elitist cadaver dogs siding with Canada! Edited June 16, 2018 by william.scherk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 2 hours ago, william.scherk said: It's time to put a target on Tennessee, or at least upon these freeloading elitist cadaver dogs siding with Canada! Imagine that. Politician pandering to donors. Whodda ever thunk that? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) All polls are wrong, of course -- since they cannot hope but to 'sample' a much-reduced set of public opinion -- but some are at least indicative of general sentiment among those sampled, given the manipulable questions, context and perhaps emotive 'triggers.' Here's the result of an Ipsos/Global** survey. It may be indicative ... -- the whole issue is fraught with peril for Canadian trade, as highlighted in this image from a Huffington Post Canada story: _____________l______ ** Ipsos correctly called the recent Ontario provincial election ... Edited June 16, 2018 by william.scherk Added link to boo hiss HuffpoCan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 (edited) A tale of two asylum regimes ... or, Faye Knuze disinfo memes Spoiler China Tariffs on Soybeans Could Cost Iowa Farmers up to 624 Million ... China slams countervailing tariffs on billions of US export products Barely 24 hours after the U.S. hit China with new tariffs on imports, Beijing fired a return salvo Saturday in a growing trade dispute with President Donald Trump by imposing duties on a $34 billion list of U.S. goods ranging from soybeans to whiskey to cigars. Beginning July 6, China will slap an extra 25 percent tariff on 545 products from the United States including soybeans, electric cars, orange juice, whiskey, salmon and cigars, according to the Ministry of Finance. China said additional tariffs on 114 more U.S. items, covering chemical products, medical equipment and energy, will be announced later. “The Chinese side doesn’t want to fight a trade war, but facing the shortsightedness of the U.S. side, China has to fight back strongly,” the Ministry of Commerce said in a statement. The ministry also said it was scrapping an earlier deal to buy more American farms goods, natural gas and other products that had been aimed at narrowing Beijing’s multibillion-dollar trade surplus with the United States. The statement said the U.S. step on Friday violated "the relevant rules of the World Trade Organization" and went against a consensus reached in bilateral economic and trade agreements. Such a move, it said, "seriously infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of the Chinese side and undermines the interests of China and its people." "The Chinese side firmly opposes that," the statement said, according to the official Xinhua news agency. Meanwhile, maudlin mollycoddlers are failing to read the mood of Trump supporters on this wee moral ruckus (over zero-tolerance administration policy -- the so-called "child snatch" and "cage" whoopee down at America's southern border). Do the crime, do the time. Do the misdemeanor illegal entry, enter the justice system, which of course means you are on remand. Guess what? When you are on remand you don't get to bring your dog, cheesy floral print, backpack, or child. Did Paul Manafort get to take his best slippers to the klink? does he get his dog's companionship? Are his large adult daughters housed in a bunk next to Daddy? Yes, no, and no. Anyway, while this force takes over my keyboard and I blank out ... Maudlin Mollycoddlers? Who wants to hear from useless whingers like Melania Trump or Laura Bush or of thousands of other hysterical exaggerations when asylum-seeking border-jumpers get arrested for misdemeanor illegal entry? The only thing that separates the US and Canada on this matter is discretion. At our border (basically just a magnetic field and sensor array in most places) there are legal, mandatory ports of entry. If you land your laden barge of brown people on one of our shores and not at a port of entry, you will likely be charged with human trafficking, but the people are treated "as if" they had the same rights as those at official ports. They are essentially delivered to the inspection and custody of our integrated border services agency for their 'what do you want?' interview. Who are ya, where did y'all come from, whaddaya want? W5+. The total remand, instant remand in the case of criminal suspicion is remand into this Border Power, which has all the guns and legal teeth it needs to send Homer L Criminalface on a flight back where he originated. But. But everything gets a bit abstract once a refugee claim is made. One might argue that each and every claim made must be approached individually, in adjudication. One could argue that Harsh Measures are indicated, in order to achieve a larger goal. One can argue nine ways to Sunday, but boy are you all riled up today down there. Nobody in Nation A owes a living to someone fleeing Nation S-for-shithole. Any benevolence must be calculated within the axioms of self-interest. Sure, asylum exists in law and practice and international compacts, but practical reality means sometimes benevolence is tempered with cruelty. It might feel like extortion to some soy-based opinion groups and blobs, arguably, but if the GOP and Trump want the "child-snatching" and "cages" to be a warning to seekers of asylum, there we go. How does it go? Feelings, meet facts. Facts, meet feelings. Soybean futures, meet farmer feelings. [The smiley RCMP dude taking a toddler into his arms is flat out propaganda. Faye Knuze's recounting of 'no hug rules' in the "cages" is criminal misreporting. If I weren't in the wrong thread while William blanks out, I'd insert a tirade here about a self-serving Canadian deep state psy-op re a 'happy smiley people' refugee system which is anything but. Truth ain't always pretty but anyway.] Histrionic days like this would be well served by a stern Objectivist or Objectivish storm of moralizing. I'd rather take the time to do a cross-border milk-product run at Sumas WA. Cyclists go to the front of the line. Border Control: "Whattaya want?" Me: "I wanna ride to Piggly Wiggly for a Mr Pibb, a pack of Camel-flavoured disposable illegal-to-sell-in-Canada nicotine vaper, and a bag of cheese-strings." Border Control: "Yeah, they're on special today. Good call. G'head, ride careful." Edited June 18, 2018 by william.scherk Seized control back from a non-volitional consciousness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 In another place resembling this place ... I pretended Carol was talking to me. Since no one is talking to me here. Since the topic is trade. 15 minutes ago, william.scherk said: 1 hour ago, caroljane said: OK, Reagan co-founded free trade negotiations with Canada, which later, after his time and Mulroney's in office, expanded to include the rest of North America and led to the NAFTA agreement. I am sorry I did not spell out the sequence of the process. Do you think Reagan would have balked at including Mexico? I wonder. I do not know enough about him to make any guesses. I know Mulroney was very pleased about it. Readers, if you are bored you will have stopped reading this exchange already and gone on to something more interesting. I've seized cognitive control from Reasonable William, and confess a sin. I understand neither root nor branch of the present disagreement with Carol save that Now Is The Time For All Good Men To Come To The Aid Of The Party. Understanding the factual ins-and-outs of current disputes over trade between the two and then three countries is good. If a given Trump supporter is not keen on or up on details that matter to Canadians, it could be function of the media silo and the coarse-grain of commentariat whoopee. I think cognitive error could creep in if jingoism mates ignorance to birth spite. It may have erupted in this case by foreseeable consequence of concept "Trade War." All war analogies are not apt, but the accompaniments of war, war-talk, inflated language, scape-goating, irrationality and fallacious appeals to emotion, it all rolls out. This may be why some settled opinion (deep Faye) is that Trade Wars Are Bad. The current administration opinion is that Trade Wars are good, in that they are perfectly winnable and that they will end in the Other Entities' defeats. Defeat for 'foreign' mistreatment of American goods and services in global markets, win for America. (I am sure that a more fine-grained analysis would find that yes -- some local dislocation is also predictable, but egg meet omelet) Maybe if you are in the Blob of Trump support, the way to help win a Trade War is to act like a warrior. Bellicosity is just the frosting on an otherwise predictable cake. When William gets back control of the keyboard from his moral blank-out, I expect he will transfer this to the Cross-border whoopee thread and leave a link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 1 hour ago, william.scherk said: A tale of two asylum regimes ... or, Faye Knuze disinfo memes Hide contents China Tariffs on Soybeans Could Cost Iowa Farmers up to 624 Million ... China slams countervailing tariffs on billions of US export products Barely 24 hours after the U.S. hit China with new tariffs on imports, Beijing fired a return salvo Saturday in a growing trade dispute with President Donald Trump by imposing duties on a $34 billion list of U.S. goods ranging from soybeans to whiskey to cigars. Beginning July 6, China will slap an extra 25 percent tariff on 545 products from the United States including soybeans, electric cars, orange juice, whiskey, salmon and cigars, according to the Ministry of Finance. China said additional tariffs on 114 more U.S. items, covering chemical products, medical equipment and energy, will be announced later. “The Chinese side doesn’t want to fight a trade war, but facing the shortsightedness of the U.S. side, China has to fight back strongly,” the Ministry of Commerce said in a statement. The ministry also said it was scrapping an earlier deal to buy more American farms goods, natural gas and other products that had been aimed at narrowing Beijing’s multibillion-dollar trade surplus with the United States. The statement said the U.S. step on Friday violated "the relevant rules of the World Trade Organization" and went against a consensus reached in bilateral economic and trade agreements. Such a move, it said, "seriously infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of the Chinese side and undermines the interests of China and its people." "The Chinese side firmly opposes that," the statement said, according to the official Xinhua news agency. Meanwhile, maudlin mollycoddlers are failing to read the mood of Trump supporters on this wee moral ruckus (over zero-tolerance administration policy -- the so-called "child snatch" and "cage" whoopee down at America's southern border). Do the crime, do the time. Do the misdemeanor illegal entry, enter the justice system, which of course means you are on remand. Guess what? When you are on remand you don't get to bring your dog, cheesy floral print, backpack, or child. Did Paul Manafort get to take his best slippers to the klink? does he get his dog's companionship? Are his large adult daughters housed in a bunk next to Daddy? Yes, no, and no. Anyway, while this force takes over my keyboard and I blank out ... Maudlin Mollycoddlers? Who wants to hear from useless whingers like Melania Trump or Laura Bush or of thousands of other hysterical exaggerations when asylum-seeking border-jumpers get arrested for misdemeanor illegal entry? The only thing that separates the US and Canada on this matter is discretion. At our border (basically just a magnetic field and sensor array in most places) there are legal, mandatory ports of entry. If you land your laden barge of brown people on one of our shores and not at a port of entry, you will likely be charged with human trafficking, but the people are treated "as if" they had the same rights as those at official ports. They are essentially delivered to the inspection and custody of our integrated border services agency for their 'what do you want?' interview. Who are ya, where did y'all come from, whaddaya want? W5+. The total remand, instant remand in the case of criminal suspicion is remand into this Border Power, which has all the guns and legal teeth it needs to send Homer L Criminalface on a flight back where he originated. But. But everything gets a bit abstract once a refugee claim is made. One might argue that each and every claim made must be approached individually, in adjudication. One could argue that Harsh Measures are indicated, in order to achieve a larger goal. One can argue nine ways to Sunday, but boy are you all riled up today down there. Nobody in Nation A owes a living to someone fleeing Nation S-for-shithole. Any benevolence must be calculated within the axioms of self-interest. Sure, asylum exists in law and practice and international compacts, but practical reality means sometimes benevolence is tempered with cruelty. It might feel like extortion to some soy-based opinion groups and blobs, arguably, but if the GOP and Trump want the "child-snatching" and "cages" to be a warning to seekers of asylum, there we go. How does it go? Feelings, meet facts. Facts, meet feelings. Soybean futures, meet farmer feelings. [The smiley RCMP dude taking a toddler into his arms is flat out propaganda. Faye Knuze's recounting of 'no hug rules' in the "cages" is criminal misreporting. If I weren't in the wrong thread while William blanks out, I'd insert a tirade here about a self-serving Canadian deep state psy-op re a 'happy smiley people' refugee system which is anything but. Truth ain't always pretty but anyway.] Histrionic days like this would be well served by a stern Objectivist or Objectivish storm of moralizing. I'd rather take the time to do a cross-border milk-product run at Sumas WA. Cyclists go to the front of the line. Border Control: "Whattaya want?" Me: "I wanna ride to Piggly Wiggly for a Mr Pibb, a pack of Camel-flavoured disposable illegal-to-sell-in-Canada nicotine vaper, and a bag of cheese-strings." Border Control: "Yeah, they're on special today. Good call. G'head, ride careful." I'm not seeing any solutions in there. What do you propose, Billy? J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 (edited) On 6/18/2018 at 10:35 AM, william.scherk said: A tale of two asylum regimes ... or, Faye Knuze disinfo memes When the "legacy media" acts to manipulate public opinion, persuasion knobs all turned up to ten, it almost seems as if one impulse is driving the storm. America is in day two of huge outrage against its security apparatus. Where did this come from, why were knobs set immediately to stun? Some might say that because the story is presented so simply, a one sentence narrative, the reception is generally going to be brief, even cliched or reflexive. As Korben pointed out regarding Appeal to the Children elsewhere, everyone not a moral monster is on the side of the children. Until the media waves serve to disrupt and overturn order? The simple story casts its simple cast in a struggle, a public square squabble over values and power, a squabble out of communication office control. The scrimmage on the border-children is lead story on the Hollywood Squares-format media still. Opinion pages and cultural behemoths like Facebook and Twitter are raging still. All the first Ladies, ladies of general respect and affection in American hearts -- or at least positive survey responses, all the Ladies spoke out in terms of values. The wedding planner of the zero-tolerance party is said to be "He's got Devin Nunes Eyes" Stephen Miller, supported by the Chief of Staff, which means to me the President is not going to back down from his political perch on this one. So, what happens? When the focus is not on Tucson 'child sex trafficking camps,' or Q-Anon great purges of Them, the child-abusers, the Clinton sex-ring crime family Illuminati Cabal. When we aren't mentally rounding up folks for a revenge-fantasy military-tribunal and mass hanging offshore, when the encounter between state and child is one of "rescue" incarceration, how will it end? In reality. The potency of Faye's wave right now is keeping the issue a-bubble in many intersecting realms. Faye's impulse drives towards an outcome we will call X. Rescind. The President will not by his volition bring on outcome X. Sez me. I think it's a fantastic moment for a case study. Which outcome comes at the end of this raging hoopla? America has so many interlocking parts and interests, being the largest open society on Earth. I had to remind myself how this kind of thing ended up in Canada. In our own Arctic civility, we raged. We did, we really did. "Sure, Jan." Quote Canada puts asylum toddlers behind razor wire By HEATHER MALLICK Star Columnist Fri., Dec. 14, 2012 It has come to this: Canada puts small children in jail. “They are not jails,” insists Immigration Minister Jason Kenney. “In the case of the Toronto one, for example, the main one, it’s a former three-star hotel with a fence around it.” So Kenney told CBC News when it presented him with the fact that 289 children of asylum-seekers are being held in Canadian detention centres while their parents’ immigration status is being decided. He had no comment on what can been openly seen and photographed: children’s outdoor slides surrounded by actual razor-wire fences, guards, surveillance cameras and rooms with barred windows. Of the detained children, 75 are under 5 years old, 65 are aged 6 to 9, 55 are 10 to12 and 92 are between 13 and 17, the CBC reported. It would be one thing if these children were allowed to live with their families, but no. Canada keeps the fathers in a separate section of the building. Children and their mothers can visit them only at set times. It’s like a divorce court where fathers are automatically presumed at fault. When you make the decision to come to Canada to seek asylum, you come with your family. Whether Canada says yes or no — and there is great dispute over whether we decide these matters fairly or not — you assume that your tiny children will not be taken from your arms. Canada does that. The consequences are terrible. The bewildered and frightened children can’t sleep, aren’t in school, are bullied, bereft and psychologically scarred. As the CBC reports, Britain, Belgium and Japan are among the nations that have followed the Convention on the Rights of the Child and stopped locking up children as their parents’ cases wind through the courts. It’s not as if the Conservative government suddenly had a bright idea on how to contain refugee claimants. This is an old technique that has been discredited. Other countries have already tried the method Kenney favours — splitting up families and incarcerating innocent children — and they themselves have had their reputations scarred. [...] Before you click through or dig into the news of that Canadian era, register in your mind your guess. What happened? A lot of people who think like me (or at least a couple I could cite) say "the policy will be rescinded. The scandal can only grow. It risks becoming a simple narrative millstone around the GOP necks up for electoral tribunal in November." I don't think the people who think like me but don't cite are guessing the wrong door. Summer time is deathly on the southern border open zones in Arizona, Texas and New Mexico. The asylum-seekers 'afraid for their life' don't take children across the most dangerous areas. I don't know how this Faye impulse and apparent cliffhanger will end. But I think Trump will be steadfast. He is the Executive. The role of the administration, the cabinet, the agencies, their role is to implement presidential policy. What think you all about "Appeal to the Children" and the predictable outcome of the current impasse between 'rescinders' and 'fuck-noes'? Edited June 19, 2018 by william.scherk Grrrrrrrammar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 Who cares about words in this media swamp climate unless it is outraged yawp? So let's go with images. Laura Ingraham, adoptive mom of 3, attacked for ‘summer camp’ analogy https://t.co/vOg0HPUUYw pic.twitter.com/MtFbmD8h27— Conservative News (@BIZPACReview) June 19, 2018 I kinda like it. A different way to present the truth. And it helps persuade... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted June 23, 2018 Share Posted June 23, 2018 (edited) That Trudeau, barely recovering from the groping, shoe-smuggling, and sunglasses scandals, still floating on Canadian solidarity and forbearance, has shoved through the Pothead Freedom Bill. It's all done and dusted, having received Royal Assent. Now what? Well, the provinces and territories are the implementation bosses, and all have their own finicky rules and regs set for the Day of Legality (October 17) ... which this screen capture captures a bit of; for the full breakdown, click and go: -- here in my community, which votes Conservative federally, generally, the city unleashed the RCMP on a couple of outlets that tried the fakey back-door way to legalization, with so-called "dispensary" models. This is where a 'patient' goes to a (99% naturopathic) doctor for a consultation and a 'prescription' which is taken to the dispensary, as if the dispensary was not a front for potheads. Anyway, here they were raided and closed, due to a face-reading of law. Vancouver city, however, has semi-legalized that fiction-capitalism with city licenses. There's a couple of dozen 'legal' pot shops then, but having to give a 'doctor of woo' personal details rubs some folks the wrong way. It's either the black market or one municipality over, where a woo-based dispensary survives. So, in Chilliwack, an enterprising group of people did something straightforward. They, who happen to be First Nations people, opened a modified shipping container store on a piece of reserve land leased to the principles. So far the RCMP and the City have only made murmuring noises. This shop offers the customer a no-names-taken business model without fiction and quackery. I am told it is doing gangbusters business ... The points being ours might be an interesting model for the USA, when it gets its head out of its ass on pot, and goes Libertarian or Reform. Up here in the commie north, 'reform impulses' sometimes are what you might call "socially-libertarian." Funny how the reformed pot laws put many Gummints in the business, except in you guessed it, Alberta, where it all devolves to the private sector. Provincialism Rules! -- so, here is the remaining weird thing. By Christmas, recreational pot possession will be legal on both sides of the forty-ninth, in Washington state and in BC. So what happens to a traveler going through a port of entry with some bagged pot, brownies, shatter, oil, soap or balm? Jail. On the USA side. To keep the narrative simple, your feds will fuck people up at the border. Ours will seize your handguns but let your doobage pass. Finally, which province has the most Potheads, or consumption per head? If you guess correctly, you win a mail-order gift pack from WSS Enterprise ... Edited June 23, 2018 by william.scherk One comma, I swear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caroljane Posted June 23, 2018 Author Share Posted June 23, 2018 On 6/11/2018 at 4:13 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: This is soooooo wrong on so many levels: But I can't help notice that Trudeau's eyebrow is firmly in place. Michael Hey, I just noticed this and I think they are a cute couple. But mme Macron and Sophie - we are talking Colette sophistication here -endlesss delightful undercurrents- 00-la la Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now