Liberals boot Indo-Canadian MP from leadership race

The CBC -- Canada's answer to Pravda -- reports today that Nepean MP Chandra Arya, featured in this video on WWW, says he's been informed by the Liberal Party of Canada that he won't be allowed to run in the leadership contest to replace Prime Minister Blackie McBlackface. 

In a statement posted to "X", Mr Arya said "While I await their official communication, I am carefully considering my next steps. This decision raises significant questions about the legitimacy of the leadership race and, by extension, the legitimacy of the next prime minister of Canada." 

Mr Arya does not say, nor does the Gliberal Party, whyfor his entry into the race to the bottom weas denied. Surely it has nothing to dfo with his vow to dump the monarchy if elected, or his statement that he doesn't speak French and doesn't believe it will matter to French-speaking Canadians.

More likely, the reason is that Mr Arya is just a bit too Indian (turbans, not feathers) even for the Liberals. In 2023, he sponsored a petition calling on the Liberals to reconsider plans to introduce a foreign agent registry in response to serious allegations of foreign interference in Canadian politics. The registry legislation has since passed, but it's not yet up and running. 

Mr Arya's ties to India have raised eyebrows amid worsening diplomatic relations. Last summer, he travelled to India and met with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. A statement from Global Affairs Canada at the time said Arya "travelled to India on his own initiative and was not representing the Government of Canada."

Mr Arya's premature ejection leaves one other Indo-Canadian MP in the race, viz. Ruby "Slippers" Dhalla, mentioned in "Mark Carney explains why he wants to lead the Liberal Party of Canada", WWW 24/1/25. She is, of course, the dark horse. [Couldn't resist it, eh. Ed.] Adjust your betting accordingly.

Mark Carney explains why he wants to lead the Liberal Party of Canada

The lists have closed. There are seven -- count `em 7 -- deluded Liberal dwarfs who want to lead their party to certain electoral defeat, and have somehow scratched up the 50,000 Northern Peso entry fee. To stay in the race, they will have to come up with another C$50,000 -- $35,000 in real money -- by next week and another C$250,000 after that.

The three leading Prime Minister wannabes are (in order of likely finish -- you read it here first!): Mark Carney (pictured below), Chrystia Freeland (Trudeau's bumgirl), and, in show position, Karina Gould, former government house leader who was forced to read Ms Freeland's latest economic mis-statement after the latter declined to do so.

The remaining four are (in no particular order): Chandra Arya (featured in WWW video, 9/1/25); Jaime Battiste, a certified and certifiable Indian First Nations person; Frank Baylis, an anglophone Quebecker who actually knows how to run a business; and Ruby "Slippers" Dhalla, who represents the Ontario riding of Bramladesh. Walt's advice: Bet the exactor with Carney + any of these four. 

 

Why Mark Carney has thrown his top hat in the ring after denying any interest for many moons is a mystery. Where his entry fee comes from, along with a massive advertising budget (the Liberal Party imposes no limits on such) is, of course, no mystery at all. Walt's man in Ottawa says he was put up to it by George Soros and Klaus Schwab, since he is a former governor of two national banks (Canada and the UK), an approved enviro-wienie, and a true believer in the New World Order.

Two more Canuck Liberals run away from party leadership

The field of masochists vying to win the booby prize of leader of the Liberal Party of Canada got smaller today as two more prominent Grits balked at getting into the starting gate. Philippe Champagne, the Minister of Industry in Junior's cabinet, Christy Clark, the former premier of British Columbia both bowed out.

Their departures cast a spotlight on candidates' French language skills, and their ability to organize support in Québec, a province that's critical to the Gliberals' electoral fortunes. 

M Champagne -- a likeable and not hopelessly incompetent gars de chez nous -- said during an armchair talk in Toronto that he plans to focus on ensuring the government [Is dis a government? Ed.] is ready to protect Canadian industry from the trade threats posed by President-Elect Trump. "It was probably the most difficult decision of my life," said Ti-Phil, "but I think it was the right one at the right time. There are many ways to fight for Canada."

Ms Clark said in a statement to her supporters that Blackie McBlackface had called too short a leadership race to allow her to mount a successful campaign and that she did not develop her French skills well enough to be a strong candidate. 

"I have made the difficult decision to step back," she said. "While we have come a long way, in a short time, there is simply not enough time to mount a successful campaign and for me to effectively connect with francophone Canadians in their language. I have worked hard at improving my French but it’s not where it needs to be today."

Yesterday's revelation that that Ms Clark had actually held a Conservative Party membership card for a couple of years didn't help either.

That leaves two -- count `em, 2 -- possible candidates with any name recognition, neither of whom is fluent in la langue de Molière... ou de Chétien. The first is the lovely and talented Chrystia Freeland, the Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister until, just before Christmas, she quit before Blackie could fire her.  "These people are impossible!", she said. "I'm going home to my children!"*

The other is Mark Carney, an Oxbridge type who still carries around the silver spoon which was in his mouth at birth. 

Mr Carney has been -- and "has been" is an appropriate phrase -- Governor of the Bank of Canada and Governor of the Bank of England. A wag [Dogbert? Ed.] has suggested that he probably thinks the vacant position is that of head of the Federal Reserve. Why else would he choose to announce his possible candidacy on The Daily Show?

Neither Ms Freelove nor Squire Carney have said definitely that they're ready, aye, ready to grasp the nettle that is the prime ministership of the Great No-longer-white North. So far, they're just teasing, something in which the lovely Chrystia has form. Both say they will have more to say "later".

* Note from Ed.: I didn't have time to check the date of that quote. Seems to me I read it here some time ago. But never mind. The deadline looms. 

VIDEO: Canada's Liberals let non-citizens vote; here's what happend

Not many of our readers, not even the Canucks, will know about Nepean ON. It's a suburb of Ottawa, the capital of Canuckistan, a bedrooom community of minions who commute into Boredom-on-the-Rideau every day to do the will of Emperor Trudeau II.

For that reason, the riding (Americans read: electoral district) of Nepean is, for the Natural Governing (read: Liberal) Party, one of the safest seats in all Canuckistan. It was represented by a Liberal even in the dark days following the 2011 federal election, when feckless Michael "Iggy" Ignatieff led the Gliberals to their worst showing in history. They won only 34 seats, a distant third behind the Conservatives and socialist NDP, thus losing their position as Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition.

The response of the Laurentian elites was to make it easier -- much easier -- for anyone who might be persuaded to support the Liberal Party to become a member thereof. The rules were changed to allow anyone over 14 to vote in the party's nominating conventions, without regard to citizenship or lack thereof. You didn't have to be able to understand English/français. You didn't even have to pay for a party card. All you had to do was say you supported the party.

Thus it was that Liberal Associations from coast to coast to coast were flooded with new members, the majority of whom, in some cases, weren't Canadian citizens or even permanent residents. Busloads of them were bused in [what else? Ed.] to the white-minority suburbs of Toronto and Vancouver, as well as paler places like Nepean, to vote en bloc for a new and improved (read: woke) leader. 

The elites said, "Let there be sunny ways!", and lo, Justin Trudeau emerged from his father's mansion to lead the faithful back to the promised land... and the pigs -- the new DEI pigs -- back to the government trough.

One of the troughers was Chandrakanth "Chandra" Arya, who rode Blackie's coat-tails into the House of Commons in the 2015 federal election. The Member of Parliament for Nepean has been sitting there ever since, warming the back benches and hoping the current Parliament will last long enough for him to collect his indexed pension.

Mr Arya's prospects dimmed noticeably with the Emperor's announcement that he might resign (WWW 7/1/25), ahead of a massive anti-Trudeau vote which could occur in the spring. For the Gliberals to survive, they need to find a new leader whom the angry voters will not revile quite so much. 

Alas, there is an understandable reluctance on the part of putative candidates to throw their chapeaux into the ring. As reported here yesterday, Dominic LeBlanc, who was Walt's early line favourite to win, was smart enough to pull out before he was nominated. The only others with substantial name recognition -- Mark Carney and Chrystia Freelove -- are increasingly coy about their intentions.

So... step forward Chandra Arya, ready to save Canada (and, incidentally, the Liberals) from the fate of the American Democrats. Oh my goodness!

The mind boggles at the prospect of a "gummint" headed by Mr Chandra, but in a voting system [Is dis a system? Ed.] where poll officials are not allowed even to ask about voters' status in Canada, anything could happen.  

Walt wishes Mr Chandra many good lucks, by Jove! But we will not open a new book on the Liberal leadership contest until such time as there are three credible candidates... not including him.

LeBlanc pulls hat out of the ring - all bets off

Only a day after I predicted longtime Canadian cabinet minister Dominic LeBlanc would be the last man (?) standing at the end of the Liberals' search for a new captain  of the Titanic, the troughmeister announced today that he will not -- repeat, not -- be running to replace Prime Minister Blackie McBlackface. 

Mr White, as he is called in Canuckistan's other official language, announced his decision in a statement posted to social media this morning. "While I am extremely grateful for the encouragement and the expressions of support I have received from caucus colleagues and Liberals across the country," he wrote, "I have decided not to be a candidate in the Liberal Party of Canada's upcoming leadership race."

His decision came as something of a surprise to his caucus colleagues. M LeBlanc has been a true political survivor, an MP since 2000 -- nearly a quarter-century -- and contender for the Liberal leadership in 2008, before dropping out to support the charisma-challenged Michael Ignatieff.

Speaking on background, a Liberal MP told Walt's Agent 3, "Frankly, we didn't think he was smart enough to get out before the shit-hammer falls." Others, including Judy Sgro, Yasir Naqvi, Jennifer O’Connell, and Ken McDonald, expressed some disappointment at M LeBlanc’s decision not to put his name forward, with some adding they hope he'll reconsider. Their reason? See photo above.

Anyhoo... he's out and all bets are off. A new book will be opened once it is confirmed that there will be more than one entry. Readers who want their money bacl should contact Bernie at the barbershop, who will arrange for someone to drop it off.

"We can be great again!" - The retired general's anti-woke speech the "legacy media" won't let you see

Here's the headline and the lede from an article which appeared in the Ottawa Citizen on November 15th. 

Canadian Forces officers applaud speech slamming Canada's climate change policies, cancel culture, weak leaders

Serving senior Canadian military officers gave a standing ovation to a speech by a retired general who criticized everything from the removal of historical statues and apologies to victims to government climate change policies.

Did you note the date? November 15th. The speech referred to was made by Lt.-Gen. (Retd.) Michel Maisonneuve as he received the Vimy Award, a top Canadian defence award, on November 9th. Excerpts from his anti-woke speech appeared "below the fold" in some of Canada's lickspittle media a day or two later, but no video of the speech itself can be found. Believe me, Ed. has looked!

Nor has a full transcript been published, until today, when the editors of Canada's National Post summoned up the courage to run the full text, which apparently was submitted to them by the general, in response to popular demand. We've copied the whole thing, without permission, and believe Lt.-Gen Maisonneuve will be glad we did so. He wasn't talking just to hear himself, eh!

Lt.-Gen Maisonneuve is a decorated veteran of 35 years in the Canadian Armed Forces, and another 10 as Academic Director of le Collège militaire royal [Royal Military College] de Saint-Jean. He is a huge advocate for veterans, and served as the first Chief of Staff of NATO's Supreme Allied Command Transformation in Norfolk VA. In his November 9th speech, he pulled no punches in describing what he thinks needs to be done to make Canada great again. The emphasis is mine.

The Vimy Award. How humbling; what a tremendous honour. With this honour comes the opportunity to accept this award with a speech that acknowledges the spirit of Vimy and shares with you my vision for Canada today and for the future.

Canada — once we were great. We stopped the Americans in 1812, we gave the world Billy Bishop, Alexander Graham Bell and Lucy Maud Montgomery. We isolated insulin, invented the zipper and the snowblower. 

In World War One we mobilized 620,000 troops. We were victorious at Vimy Ridge. In World War Two we were brave enough to land at Dieppe, and we secured our beach on D-Day. The Devil’s Brigade remains the template for special forces the world over. Our small country boasted the world’s third largest navy at the end of that conflict. We became internationally recognized peacekeepers and more than 80,000 of us served on missions during the Cold War.

We beat the Russians on their ice in 1972 and a young man named Terry Fox continues to inspire us all with his unparalleled courage and determination. We gave the world the Canadarm in space; we won a world series. When the world changed again on 9/11, Canada stepped up — first to join the coalition of the willing and send in ships and JTF 2. Serving with distinction in Afghanistan — we still mourn the loss of our 159 men and women. Canada was a great nation and though we are faltering today I believe we can be great again.

Since this is my speech, I get to share what I believe Canada needs to do to take the world stage again; to be thought of first when it comes to seeking alliances, to be seen as a serious country once again. What will it take? Well, I believe it will take leadership and service. These two crucial foundations of greatness for any nation have somehow become secondary — lost in these days of entitlement, “me first”, “not my problem” and endless subsidies and handouts.

Let me start with leadership. Leadership applies in all pursuits and at all levels. Great leaders are distinguished by the success of those they lead and the entity they lead — be it a country, an army, a corporation or a sports team. When that entity succeeds, we recognize its leader … and when that entity fails, misses, or misses the playoffs, the leader must — should — take responsibility. 

History has given us many great leaders. Ask yourself: would those leaders have been as successful in today’s world? Well, let’s see; today’s world, where social media captures every move and word spoken — taken in context or not. Where cancel culture still flourishes and there is no call for redaction or amendment even when accusations are proved false. Truth is not a requirement; once cancelled, you are done.

Today’s world, where balanced journalism is difficult to find. The practice of presenting the facts — a truthful illustration of an event, a personality or issue that allowed the reader to form their own opinion — is no longer compulsory in mainstream media. The line between "news" and op-eds has blurred and too often we are subjected to sermons written not by seasoned journalists but by first-year graduates of woke journalism schools. Unbiased reporting seems to have died with Christie Blatchford and Matthew Fisher.

Today’s world, where extremism — once the almost exclusive purview of religious zealots — seems to be flourishing in all aspects of our lives, on the right … and on the left. Some of the most popular "causes" and beliefs of today are embraced by all manner of extremists with no thought of how to achieve this utopian ideal in a responsible or plausible manner.

For example, Canada’s prosperity is being sacrificed at the altar of climate change as opposed to being used to help the world transition to clean energy. Throwing soup and paint at the world’s art treasures is as heinous as it is useless. The perpetrators should be punished, not celebrated.

Today’s world is also where taking personal responsibility for our own actions has disappeared from the landscape while the phenomenon of collective apologies flourishes in our country. Individuals and groups fight over who gets to wear the coveted victim’s cloak. But any role they may have played in their own fate or in injuring others is dismissed as learned behaviour, inherited flaws or generational oppression.

So I am not here to debate whether those great leaders of yesteryear would be as successful in today’s world. But nor will I judge the decisions they made in their time against the standards of today. Enough statues have been toppled; erasing our history is not the solution. 

I believe that the most important leadership skills have not changed and are even more so today than ever. Number one is communication — it is more critical than ever in this world of sound bites and mic dropping. A good leader ensures his followers know where they are going and how to get there. A great leader makes them want to go there. A great leader can take a seemingly insurmountable objective and make it possible to achieve in the hearts and minds of their followers.

Thankfully these leaders still do exist in today's world and there is no better example than Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. In his nightly address he clearly, continuously, and passionately articulates the mission to his fellow Ukrainians. Dismissed early on as "an actor, a comedian, a dancer," President Zelenskyy has rallied the world to his just cause. He surrounded himself with good people, made difficult decisions and by communicating, has captured our hearts and souls with Ukraine’s plight. God speed Mr. President and Slava Ukrainii.

Secondly, cohesion, acceptance and tolerance. Today's leaders must stop dividing those they lead! Hasn't history shown us that success as a leader demands cohesion, unity and respect of all those they lead — not just those who agree wholeheartedly with them? Can you imagine a military leader labelling half of his command as deplorables, fringe radicals or less-thans and then expect them to fight as one?

Today’s leaders must find a way to unite; not divide. Leaders lead. There is a difference between making a good decision, based on research and consultation, and making a decision because it is popular or it polls well. The best decisions are those made for the good of the whole — not just good for friends of the leader. Today, special interests have trumped the collective good. Making decisions for the collective good requires strength of character, the communications skills to explain, and a great deal of courage.

Courage remains one of the most important qualities of a leader. The courage of ideas, courage in the face of criticism, the courage to guide and lead. The courage to create a vision for the good of all. The courage to recognize a mistake and accept responsibility — personal — for that mistake.

The second key to bring Canada back to prominence is service. Just a short two months ago, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, queen of Canada, died. It would be impossible to find a better example of service. On her coronation she promised that she would dedicate her life, whether long or short, to the service of all. Over the next 70 years, in good times and in bad, she placed the care of her realm and subjects above all else. She exemplified character and duty and provided us all with an example of dedication to service. She kept her promise. May she rest in peace.

The idea, the concept of service seems to be forgotten in our "me-first" culture. Service to others, to one's country, to humanity must be a noble aspiration. The obligation to give back in gratitude for a life filled with blessings, peace and good fortune should not be innovative. It seems that Canadians have lost the desire to serve and the need to serve their country.

The military — being in the service of one’s country — used to be a most highly regarded profession. Today, I see a military woefully underfunded, undermanned and under-appreciated; a force where uniforms have become a means of personal expression rather than a symbol of collective pride and unity: uniforms are no longer uniform. The idea of serving in our armed forces is getting little traction. Could it be because the moral contract under which our military serve is broken?

Members of the Armed Forces fulfill their side of the moral contract that exists between them and Canadian society — they serve and are ready to serve in dangerous missions at home or abroad to protect our country and project Canadian values. But Canada should also be holding up its end of the contract: providing them with the state-of-the-art tools they need, the best leadership, equipment, education and training to be safe and successful, and looking after them when they become veterans.

In my opinion, we are failing. Because for Canadians generally, the Armed Forces are not important until there is a crisis, and successive governments’ support of the forces reflect that mindset. Our troops who have dedicated their lives to serve this country deserve better.

We are in Veterans Week, commemorating those who exemplified the concept of service by putting their life on the line for us, and honouring those who gave up their tomorrows for our todays. Let's use them as our example to serve.

If more inspiration is required one need not look far: let’s remember the words of two of the finest leaders of our time: Margaret Thatcher believed "There’s no such thing as entitlement unless someone has first met an obligation." And of course, JFK most famously said, "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country."

Soon the festive season will arrive; a season of generosity and benevolence. In the name of service, I challenge us. Offer to volunteer, no matter where: an animal shelter, home for the homeless, seniors or veterans. The most important gift we can give is our time. I challenge us all to donate — instead of selling that surplus coffee maker on Kijiji, let’s donate it to Mission Services or Goodwill or the Salvation Army. I challenge us to be compassionate: give the panhandler enough cash for a warm meal but also ask them their name, wish them well and shake their hand.

I believe we can make Canada better. To find common ground with our neighbour and to unite our country rather than divide it. To apply our leadership and service; to live with compassion, tolerance and patience — but most of all to be proud of Canada and everything we once stood for.

We Canadians live in the greatest country in the world with almost unlimited resources, a tolerant and diverse people, and an educated population who can aspire to the greatest heights. We should be prepared to serve our country and be proud to do so. And our leaders must share this vision. "If not us, who? If not now, when?" Because, as Satchmo has told us, in spite of it all … it is a wonderful world.

I thought the last line was kind of lame, but I understand the sentiment. Take out the reference to Queen Elizabeth and a few others which Americans wouldn't get, and Lt.-Gen. Maisonneuve's address would make a fine campaign speech for... errr... whoever you think could deliver it with a straight face and be believed.

Canada's "Conservatives" bar three SoCons from leadership race

Turns out there are more people who, for some unaccountable reason, want to lead the self-styled "Conservative" Party of Canada than I told you about on Monday. Agent 3, who follows the politics of Canuckistan more closely than I do -- I can't handle the smell up close -- says there are not four, but six candidates who will appear on the ballot when party members vote for a new leader in September.

On Monday, and previously in "The problem with Poilievre", WWW 30/4/22, I gave you the rundown on Pierre Poilievre, Jean Charest, Leslyn Lewis and Patrick Brown, who presently rank in that order in the opinion polls. But who are those other guys, the two in the top row?

Conservative Member of Parliament Scott Aitchison and Independent Ontario MPP Roman Baber have also been accepted by the cuckservatives in charge of organizing the leadership election as "verified" candidates. That means they proved they had at least C$300,000 (about $235,000 in readl money) to get through the toll gate, plus 500 endorsement signatures from members in 30 different ridings. 

Scott Aitchison is the only candidate who could be described as a non-city person. He represents the truly beautiful Ontario riding of Parry Sound-Muskoka and concerns himself with issues relevant to farmers and other real people. In particular, Mr Aitchison wants to see an end to Canada's crazy supply management system, which makes things like milk and eggs cost more than they do across the border. That was the hill Maxime Bernier chose to die on in 2017... and die he did.

(((Roman Baber))) emigrated from the Soviet Union with his family to Israel, thence to Canada. The Jewish lawyer was elected to the Ontario legislature as a Progressive Conservative, representing the Toronto ghetto of York Centre. Whyen he had the temerity to oppose vaccine mandates and lockdowns, he got booted out of the PC caucus and now sits as an Independent. He says he believes in "democratic conservatism", whatever that means.

Today's real news, though, is that the Conservative party elite rejected three putative candidates, even though they had the money and the signatures, because they were "unacceptable" for reasons which were not explained.  According to the party's leadership election rules, the Leadership Candidate Nomination Committee, the group of party stalwarts reviewing applications from leader wannabes, can take into consideration "any other information they see fit to ascertain the suitability of an applicant." They can then recommend to the organizing committee that a particular candidate be barred from running. 

Three candidates have been told "Thanks for coming out. Now bugger off." Joël Étienne, another lawyer from Toronto, and the only genuine French-speaker to put his name forward, told Radio-Canada he personally delivered the required paperwork to CPC HQ Friday afternoon, well before the deadline, but was told that the party wouldn't accept a credit card as payment for some of the necessary fees. M Étienne also said the party rejected some of the signatures he collected as "invalid", withouot saying why.

Joseph Bourgault, a Saskatchewan business owner (Bourgault Tillage Tools, if you need a good hoe), is a social conservative who was strongly endorsed by Campaign Life Coalition. In addition to his anti-abortion credentials, Bourgault was a member of the Freedom Convoy and participated in protests against COVID-related measures like vaccine mandates earlier this year. Obviously such "unacceptable views" (as Mr Socks would say) made him unfit to stand.

Grant Abraham, a consultant [lawyers and consultants, consultants and lawyers -- will it never end? Ed.] also didn't make the cut. In a social media post, his campaign said Mr Abraham was told Sunday he has been "deemed ineligible" by the party. He has criticized Conservative MPs for failing to stop Bill C-4, the Liberal government's ban on conversion therapy. He has also called for a return to a "Judeo-Christian framework" in Canada and an end to secularism. And he's surprised he won't be on the ballot? Really?

That leaves Leslyn Lewis as the only social conservative candidate. (The position of Messrs Aitchison and Baber on abortion and similar issues is unknown.) The Laurentian elites can't touch Ms Lewis because she's too well-known and because... well, you get the picture. She's the "Conservative" answer to the objection that the party is dominated by straight white men.

They have no answer, though, to the charge that the CPC is dominated by the old "Bay Street boys". All of the "acceptable" candidates are from Ontario. Mr Charest pretends to be a Québecer but according to  every poll is reviled by real Québécois. There are no candidates from west of Lake Huron or east of Montréal. Mr Poilievre, born and raised in Calgary, turned his back on the West the minute he arrived in Ottawa at the age of 24, and wouldn't know which end of a straw to put in his mouth. Expect Western alienation to intensify, no matter who wins.

Expect also a flight of real conservative Conservatives to a truly conservative party. No matter who wins, only Max Bernier's People's Party of Canada will be strengthened by the Conservatives' internecine war. Lifetime pct .990.

No room for SoCons in Canada's "Conservative" Party

In four short months, Canada's Perpetual Opposition Party (currently calling itself the Conservative Party of Canada) will hold a leadership convention to replace the Hon. Andrew Scheer, whose inability to talk out of both sides of his mouth about abortion and "gay rights" was demonstrated in last fall's federal election.

Canada's Cuckservatives had no position on "values issues", because they were (and remain) deeply divided. On the left there are the Red Tories who will do and say whatever it takes to win (or at least not lose too badly), even if that means sounding like alt-Liberals. Opposing them are the True-Blue Tories, who claim to be social as well as fiscal conservatives, but don't like talking about killing unborn babies or the nonsense of gender ideology.

It appears that although Mr Scheep himself claims to be a SoCon, the Red Tories had the upper hand in the smoke-filled backrooms. Thus true Canuck conservatives had no party to vote for except "Mad Max" Bernier's People's Party of Canada, and even the PPC was not very strong on the pro-life side, saying merely that they would "allow debate" on the issue. The result, a whoda-thunk-it victory for the Rt. Hon. Justin Blackface, was utterly predictable.

Knives were stuck in Mr Scheep's back within 24 hours, not just be Canada's liberal media (Hello, CBC!) but by those who would be the new leader, notably Peter MacKay, who likened the Tories' loss to "having an empty net to shoot at, and missing." Mr MacHackey is now the leading contender for the leadership, with only a non-entity named Erin O'Toole [Mr or Ms? Ed.] claiming to be "true blue".

Six other "Conservatives" have entered the lists, bringing the total number of contenders for the poisoned chalice to eight. Not admitted to the list, officially announced yesterday, was Richard Richard Décarie, a social conservative whose post-secondary education includes graduate studies in Philosophy – Applied Ethics from the Université de Sherbrooke. M Décarie had submitted the required application, fee and nomination signatures, and was interviewed by the party, as required by its rules. Yet his nomination was rejected.

Why is M Décarie not being allowed to put his name forward? CPC spokesthingy Cory Hann [Ms or Mr? Ed.] couldn't say specifically why not, because "the process is confidential." Walt suggests it may have something to do with M Décarie's very public statements of his belief that being one of the alphabet people is a choice, and that government should defund abortion.

M Décarie has also said that "LGBTQ" is a liberal term, and that governments should work to uphold and restore "traditional values." Some of his opponents, including Mr MacHackey, Erin O'Toole and Marilyn Gladu [Who she? Ed.], condemned his remarks as did current MPs, party strategists and former staff. It appears that M Décarie is about as welcome in today's "Conservative" Party of Canada as a skunk at a garden party.

Walt predicts that on June 27th, Peter MacKay will be chosen as the new Cuckservative leader. Walt further predicts that he will never become Prime Minister of Canada. Never! Lifetime pct .992.

VIDEO: BIG win for populist conservatives in Ontario (really!)

Ontario is right in the centre of Canuckistan -- politically as well as geographically. Radicalism, either to the right or to the left, is for the other provinces. If you look up "moderate" in your dictionary of politics, you'll find, as Example No. 1, Ontario's oxymoronically-named Progressive Conservatives (aka PC party), who governed the province for 40-odd years from the middle of World War II until the mid-80s. The Premier, for much of that time, was a chap named Bill Davis, whose motto was "Bland works."

Since then, except for a brief fit of madness in 1990, when Ontario voters elected an NDP (read: socialist) government by mistake, Ontarians have elected a succession of Progressive Conservative (centre-right) and Liberal (centre-left) governments whose policies vary by no more than two iotas, combining big government, big business and social engineering into a stew of liberal progressive pap.

The present stirrer of the pap, and Chief Social Engineer of the "province of opportunity" is proudly lesbian Premier Kathleen No-Wynne, who has attempted in the last few months to push her Liberal party in a more leftward direction, particularly on "social justice" issues such as public safety (Police bad!) and education reform (Gender ideology good!).

Ms Wynne and her cronies in the Pink Palace at Queen's Park are up for re-election in June. Her approval ratings being as close to zero as to be within the margin of error, she looked certain to be defeated by the Progressive Conservatives, whose leader was a nebbish by the name of Patrick Brown. Having hoodwinked the PC's social conservatives to become leader, Mr Brown promptly flip-flopped on sex education and other social issues, so as to be seen as more "moderate" than Ms Wynne, therefore more acceptable to Ontario voters. He might have pulled it off, too, if he hadn't got caught in the #MeToo foofaraw, as a result of which he resigned on January 25th.

Patrick Brown's resignation threw the PCs into panic mode, since they needed a new leader to take them into the June election muy pronto. Four people their hats into the ring, including Tanya Granic Allen, endorsed by Walt on February 12th, whose goal was always and only to give a voice to Ontario's social conservatives, who hadn't had anyone to speak for them since... well, since forever!

The other three were: Christine Elliott, the widow of a former federal finance minister and darling of the party insiders; Caroline Mulroney, political neophyte but well-connected daughter of Lyin' Brian, a disgraced former prime minister; and Doug Ford, elder brother of Rob Ford, the crack-smoking (etc etc) populist mayor of Toronto until his untimely death in 2016.

Voting for the next PC leader and, probably, next Premier of Ontario was to be done online, all very modern and, errr, progressive. All you had to do was get your party membership by February 16th. Then they would mail you -- by snail-mail -- a "verification code" which you would enter online to send them a scan of your photo ID, after which they would e-mail you a PIN number which you would use to vote, online. The party bureaucrats would then print out your ballot, which would be counted by machine. The votes would then be adjusted -- weighted -- so that all the ridings (electoral districts) had an equal say. What could go wrong?

Yes... what could go wrong? Walt was in Ontario yesterday for the goat rodeo [leadership convention, shurely. Ed.] to find out. Of about 140,000 registered party members, only some 70,000 had received verifications letters. Of those, around 65,000 had actually been able to vote. The result was to be announced at 1500 EST. 1500 came and went. So did 1600, 1700, 1800, 1900 and 2000. Finally, at about 2025, a minion emerged from behind a black curtain at the Hilton Markham Convention Centre to tell the tired and emotional party faithful to go home! Seriously! No result tonight, they said, but we'll let you know "in the short term".

A couple of hours later, while those who hung around were still picking their jaws up off the floor, the party honchos, stung by speculation that the fix was in for Ms Elliott, relented and announced, very quietly, that the winner was... no drum roll... Doug Ford! They did not give any numbers, nor any explanation for the delay. Christine Elliott, who was rumored to have finished a close second, was nowhere in sight, and has refused -- just like Hellery Clinton -- to concede. An "investigation" is under way, and a court challenge is likely. Mr Ford made a short (and less than stirring) acceptance speech.



I've been following politics on both side of the World's Longest Undefended Border for decades and have never seen anything like this, north of that border. It was all so American! Here you had a sexagenarian woman, already a two-time loser running for the same position, who didn't get what she felt entitled to (in spite of the machinations of the party brass) and stormed off into the night. And the winner was a populist social conservative who campaigned openly against the party elites and the (((controlled media))), whom he accused (quite rightly, IMHO) of being out of touch with the needs and sentiments of the Real Ontario.

The lamestream media don't have their hair on fire over the Ford win. Being Canucks, their hair is just smouldering slightly. But already they're saying that Ford can't win, he's too right-wing, wants to turn back the clock, yada yada yada. Where have we heard that before! Doug Ford may not win Rosedale and Forest Hill -- posh parts of the Little Apple -- but Walt predicts he'll do well in "the 905" (the ring of exurbs around Toront) and sweep rural Ontario, just as President Trump swept America's "flyover country". Lifetime pct .989.

Final thought: I was pleased indeed to see Doug Ford give a special shout-out to Tanya Granic Allen, who was standing behind him and to his right (!), and stepped forward with a wave and a smile at about the half-way point of the video. Well done, that lady! Make her Minister of Education, Doug!

Further reading: "After a wild PC leadership race, don't rule out Premier Ford", an unusually unbiased account by (((Martin Regg Cohn))) in the Toronto (Red) Star, 10/3/18.

Rearranging the deck chairs

The good ship Liberal looks this week like a latter-day Titanic. The party's poll numbers keep going down, and the lifeboats are starting to fill up. All that's needed is a band to play "Nearer Dion to Thee".

So what does that fearless leader, Prince Michael Ignatieff, do? Why, get a new chief of staff of course! Or maybe not.

CBC's Power and Politics reported yesterday that Ian "Rainmaker Junior" Davey had either jumped or been pushed over the side, to be replaced by Peter Donolo, former communications director to prime minister Jean Chrétien. Then Jill Fairbrother, Iggy's current [for how long? ed.] director of communications, said no, Davey was not leaving, under a cloud or otherwise. Jill, by the way, happens to be Ian's "partner".

So who's in charge...really? If Donolo accepts the position of first mate, he will be the third in the last year. And he will doubtless bring with him a new director of communications, who can assure us that there's nothing wrong, the ship just stopped for ice!

I hate to say this, but the problem in the OLO [not LOL? ed.] is not one of communications. It is one of leadership! [You did say this, just a few days ago. ed.]

Mr. Ignatieff does not know where he wants to lead the Liberal Party, other than back into power. Thus there is simply nothing of substance to communicate. Until that is changed, Mr. Donolo or Mr. Davey or whoever is nominally in charge had better be sure their lifevest is securely fastened. Oh, and some armour plate across the back wouldn't hurt either.

The Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership

The Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership is a very good prize to win. It carries with it $5 million paid over 10 years and $200,000 annually for life thereafter. This year's winner is ... may I have the envelope please ... NOBODY!

That's right. AP reports from London that the he prize-giving committee could not select a winner this year, although it looked at “some credible candidates”.

He said the foundation “noted the progress made with governance in some African countries, while noticing with concern recent setbacks in other countries.” Committee members said they could not discuss their deliberations, nor would they name the countries in which either progress or setbacks had been observed.

The prize, created in 2007 by Sudan-born billionaire Mo Ibrahim, is awarded to a democratically elected former African head of state or government who has left office in the past three years. Mr. Ibrahim was asked about politicians who meet the award criteria but were not chosen, including former South African president Thabo Mbeki, former Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo and ex-Ghanaian president John Kufuor.

Mr. Ibrahim said the foundation had “full respect” for those leaders. It was unclear why the committee, which is independent of the foundation's board, was unable to chose one for the prize.

What is unclear to Walt is why they didn't give the prize to Barack Obama!

Wanted: a strong leader -- another take

Yesterday I wrote that the Liberals are in dire need of a strong leader. Since the other parties have such, it's a pity the Grits can't find someone with perceived strength and leadership ability to do battle with Mr. Harpoon. Iggy just doesn't cut the mustard.

Today's Globe and Mail has a fine column by Lawrence Martin, "How ‘Iffy' and the Liberals dropped the ball". You should read it.

"Iffy"... I wish I'd thought of that soubriquet. I love it!

Someone has asked who I think should lead the Liberals, if not the Iggster. Frankly I can't think of anyone. What a pity Gilles Duceppe isn't a Liberal.

Wanted: a strong leader

Major Canadian political party seeks leader, bilingual, able to take charge of faction-ridden caucus. Must have personality plus, strong and determined TV persona, and must have his own red tie...

Canadian readers may remember last year's federal election. (Was it only last year? ed.) The TV campaign -- the debates, the ads, the 24/7 analysis and punditry -- stick in my mind. We had five (5) parties contesting the election (being charitable to the Greens), led by four (4) strong personalities.

Who was the weakest link? Give you a hint...it wasn't the woman! Step forward, poor little put-upon Stéphane Dion. Yes, he of the red tie, pencil-neck and somewhat owlish visage...that's when he didn't appear more like a deer caught in the headlights.

I felt genuinely sorry for M. Dion. Being portrayed in a Tory attack ad with a puffin shitting on his head was just a small portion of the indignity and scorn heaped upon him every day. He was indeed shat upon from a great height, and by all and sundry including many within his own so-called united party.

I remember him as playing the 97-pound weakling to "Call me Steve" Harper's beach bully. It seemed he wore the glasses to protect his eyes from having sand kicked in them! And when he tried to go on the offensive himself, as in the debates, it was rather like watching a sheep trying to savage a wolf.

M. Dion must have been mightily relieved when it was all over and a bloodless coup put him out of his misery. But he was no more relieved than card-carrying Liberals who thought that now they could crown a new leader, a strong leader, one who would impose some order on the fractious party and stand up to the attacks of Mr. Harpoon and the barking of the dreaded square-jawed Baird.

Alas, the Liberals chose Michael Ignatieff, the latest in an increasingly long line of urban liberal intellectuals who have difficulty relating to Joe Sixpack from Otter Haunch SK.

How can one describe the Iggster? He is taller than his predecessor, more...saturnine, perhaps? He is thin, angular...another Abraham Lincoln, maybe? Except you can't picture him splitting rails or operating a jackhammer or anything vaguely physical like that.

Indeed, in the truly awful ads in which we see him standing in a copse near Cherry Beach, he manages to look quite uncomfortable, as if afraid that a squirrel or raccoon might jump on him. Maybe that's why he keeps his voice so low. And the vapid script... I keep waiting for him to say "Gosh, so these are trees, eh. We should do something with these...something better!"

Dear readers, Walt has seen this movie before. We've got yet another bemused and feckless dude (in the old sense of the word), a puppet in the hands of the Toronto Liberal establishment (hello, Senator Smith!), who's going to shoot it out against the Sundance Kid. Guess who's going to get killed?