Who'd have thought we'd see the day when a legislature would pass laws to reverse society's slide into immorality... or, worse, amorality. But it's going to happen! Not in the AABC countries (America, Australia, Britain, Canada), which are not Christian even in name these days, but in... wait for it... mostly Muslim Indonesia.
Although it's not officially an "Islamic republic" like, say, Iran, Indonesia is the world's biggest country, by population, in which Muslims are the majority, with Hindus and Christians tiny minorities. Reuters reports that Indonesia's government is introducing a new criminal code which, according to Edward Omar Sharif Hiariej, deputy justice minister, will be "in line with Indonesian values."
The new code will ban sex outside marriage. It also carries stiff penalties for abortion, “black magic” and insulting the president. The punishment for extramarital sex is up to one year in jail. And that's just the punishment in this world, never mind the next.
The usual suspects have long warned the new law, which has been decades in the making, would violate the rights of women, minorities, and the alphabet people, as well as undermine freedom of speech. And, they say, it will be bad for business too! The law applies to foreigners as well as Indonesians, so there'll be no more going to Indonesia for a dirty weekend!
Bali, in particular, has traditionally been a top holiday destination, attracting millions of tourists every year. A spokesthingy for Indonesia's Employers' Association told Reuters the morality clauses of the new criminal code would "do more harm than good," especially for businesses engaged in tourism and hospitality. "For the business sector," she said, "the implementation of this law will create legal uncertainty and make investors reconsider investing in Indonesia."
The legislation also bans expressing any views contrary to Indonesia's state ideology -- that would be Islam -- and criminalizes abortion, with the exception of rape victims. Insulting the president, a charge that can only be reported by the president, carries a maximum sentence of three years in prison. [Don't tell Brandon or Trudeau about this! Ed.]
The draft,which looks set to be passed into law next week, has the support of many conservative Islamic groups, whose influence is growing across the world's most populous Muslim-majority nation. Indonesians who feel that their right to be immoral is being infringed are advised to move to any of the aforementioned AABC countries, where that right is enshrined in law.
Tulsi Gabbard is an American politician, United States Army Reserve officer and political commentator who served as the Congressthingy for Hawaii's 2nd District from 2013 to 2021. Gabbard was the first Hindu member of Congress and also the first Samoan-American voting member of Congress.
In 2020, Ms Gabbard proved the danger of over-estimating yourself. She chose not to run for re-election to Congress -- a contest she could have won easily -- but to throw her had into the ring for the Democratic nomination for the presidensity. That March, seeing her folly, she ended her presidential candidacy and endorsed Demented Joe.
Since then, although still describing herself as a Democrat, Ms Gabbard has taken conservative positions on social issues, including abortion and transgender rights. She endorsed Florida's Parental Rights in Education Act, and was a featured speaker at this year's Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).
Yesterday, Tulsi Gabbard resigned from the so-called Democratic Party, officially rejecting all its pomps, works and empty promises. Here is the video of her auto-da-fé.
In case you're having trouble believing your ears, here's the transcript:
I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue and stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, are hostile to people of faith and spirituality, demonize the police and protect criminals at the expense of law-abiding Americans, believe in open borders, weaponize the national security state to go after political opponents, and above all, dragging us ever closer to nuclear war.
I believe in a government that is of, by, and for the people. Unfortunately, today’s Democratic Party does not. Instead, it stands for a government of, by, and for the powerful elite. I’m calling on my fellow common sense independent-minded Democrats to join me in leaving the Democratic Party. If you can no longer stomach the direction that so-called woke Democratic Party ideologues are taking our country, I invite you to join me.
We forgive you, Tulsi, and welcome you to the fight to Make America Great Again.
As reported here last Sunday, the self-styled Conservative Party of Canada, having failed under two "moderate" leaders -- Andrew Scheep and Erin O'Tool -- to distinguish itself from the ruling Liberals, has now chosen a new and (they hope) better leader, Pierre Poilievre.
The lickspittle media long ago labelled M Poilievre as a "right wing populist" and "the Canuck version of to Donald Trump". Hardly. Populist he may be, but, as I told you way back in April in "The problem with Poilievre", he is no social conservative, let alone a turn-back-the-clock right-winger. He reminds me not so much of The Donald as of a nasty, bilingual version of Ronald Reagan.
Earlier this week, the new Tory leader [Canadians have stopped using that word. Ed.] announced his new leadership team on Tuesday. Left on the outside looking in was Leslyn Lewis, MP, seen here at the Freedom Rally in Ottawa last February.
Dr Lewis, who has a perfect rating on issues pertaining to life and family. Despite presenting a strong pro-life, pro-faith message, she finished third in the CPC leadership race.
But there's no room in Pierre Poilievre's coterie for such as she. The press release included an image of "My inflation-busting leadership team", standing together in front of those same Parliament buildings.
One of PP's team is Melissa Lantsman, a proud lesbian Member of Parliament. Another is Ontario MP Eric Duncan, an openly homosexual man, who was appointed to party-caucus liaison,
Another notable absent from the team was former party leader Erin O'Tool, who was ousted quickly after he took a squishy stance on February's Freedom Convoy. M Poilievre's choice of MPs with anti-life and pro-LGBT voting records are not surprising, considering he himself has been given a failing grade by Campaign Life Coalition due to his pro-abortion voting record.
Where will the Conservative Party's more traditionalist and libertarian members, like Andrew Scheer, go now? Will they sit on the back bench, behind PP (on the left, wearing the pink tie) or will they join Canada's only truly conservative party, the People's Party of Canada, led by Maxime Bernier, on the right. (Geddit?)
The choice will be difficult, if not impossible, even for Dr Lewis, for the simple reason that the PPC seems destined for the ashheap of Canadian political history. They have been languishing at 4-5 per cent in public opinion polls, which is remarkable for a party founded only recently.
But they have no seats in Parliament -- "Mad Max" failed for the second time to win his own riding of Beauce -- and are in grave danger of being crushed by the stampede of conservatives hurrying to get aboard the CPC bandwagon, since M Poilievre looks certain to beat the socks of Just In Trudeau whenever the latter dares to call an election.
Walt's headline question, then, might better be: Wither the People's Party of Canada? It's sad.
Further reading (added 17/9/22): "The Trudeau factor in Pierre Poilievre's big win", by good ole Rex Murphy in the National Post. Subhead: "Conservative chief's leadership campaign was greatly helped by the Liberals' increasingly embarrassing feats of incompetence"
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.
Walt has had some adverse comments (on Disqus) to "The problem with Poilievre", WWW 30/4/22. Seems like a lot of Canadian conservatives (with and without a big C) are jumping on the "Poilievre for Prime Minister" bandwagon. He's drawing huge crowds -- in the 1000s -- wherever he goes, in spite of the fact that the Conservative Party of Canada leadership vote is months away, and that it's only a contest to choose a new leader, with no election in the offing until 2025.
What seems to be surprising the lickspittle Canuck meeja is the large numbers of young people -- teens and twenty-somethings -- turning out to hear PP. Agent 3, who's closer to the action than I am, says Mr Poilievre is tapping into the massive, frustrated energies of a disillusioned electorate that has dismissed the idea that there is some duty to vote. For them, it's like being told you have a duty to buy a new car, and then offered a choice between a Chev and a Ford. [This should not be taken as a comment on the impending Ontario election. Ed.]
The secret of attracting and turning on a crowd is getting turned on by the crowd. Pierre Poilievre is the only candidate for the Tory leadership who seems to understand this. He's the only one who can connect with people on some kind of visceral, instinctive level that is both above and below "traditional politics" In this he resembles... wait for it... President Donald J. Trump.
That's great, but the nub of the Poilievre Problem, IMHO, is that in reality he's just another good, big-C Conservative, more interested in power than in principle. The Conservative Party of Canada is an atavistic entity, hopelessly old-fashioned, still trying to be all things to all people, the Natural Alternative to the Natural Governing (read: Liberal) Party. There is no hope of beating the Liberals, let alone accomplishing anythning genuinely new or different in Canadian politics, until the Conservative Party is put out of its self-inflicted misery.
Before I run out of space [again. Ed.] let's take a look at the leader wannabes trailing Mr Poilievre and his not-too-close competitor, Jean Charest.
With just over 3% support in recent polling, Patrick Brown, the mayor of Brampton ON, is in fourth place. For Mr Brown, this is a grudge match. He was elected as a Conservative Member of Parliament in 2006, and, seeing no future on the Harper back benches, jumped into Ontario provincial politics in 2014, and was elected leader of the oxymoronically named Progressie Conservative Party of Ontario in 2015.
Under Mr Brown's leadership the PCs won five by-elections, and seemed poised for success. But the shithammer struck early in 2018 when he was me-tooed by two women, dating back to the time he was a federal MP. Brown denied the allegations and initially refused to step down, but you know how it goes these days. Canada's CTV admitted, in March of this year, that there were "innacuracies" in its report, and, errr, the two women weren't under age after all.
But the damage had been done. Mr Brown was booted out of the PC caucus and quit provincial politics for the brownfields of Brampton where he landed with him bum in the butter, elected Mayor in October of 2018. To understand how that happened, just look at the picture at left.
All ye need to know about Brampton is that Canadians of European descent account for about 25% of the population. Another 20% or so are black, but are to busy with other pursuits [word chosen carefully. Ed.] to bother with politics.
The majority of Bramptonians are from south Asia, and the majority of those are Sikhs. All you have to do get elected in Brampton (as a whitey) is get yourself declared an honorary Sikh, turn up for the Khalsa day parade, support an "independent Khalistan", etc, and you're in like Flynn Singh.
Works in Toronto too, and since Patrick Brown is the only leadership candidate from the GTA, he seems to be counting on the BIPOC vote to see him in the Leader's chair. Walt gives him two chances....
Slightly ahead of Mr Brown in the early polling is Leslyn Lewis, the only woman and the only person of colour in the field. I didn't go for the cheap "dark horse" joke, because Ms Lewis deserves to be taken seriously. She is the the favourite of the social conservative wing up the party, and -- unlike Messrs Charest and Brown -- is a Member of Parliament, representing the southwestern Ontario riding of Haldimand-Norfolk. Getting elected as a black woman in white-bread country is an achievement in itself.
Last week, Ms Lewis released two major platform updates. In "No Hidden Agenda", posted on her campaign website, she writes: "I am pro-life. I am not ashamed to say it.... These are issues that concern us all. When we are afraid of talking about important topics, we don't do anything to improve life for Canadian women. That’s why I put forward a 'no hidden agenda' platform on abortion in the 2020 race. I stand by those policies and would put forward the same four if elected leader now."
Her platform reads as follows: "I will fight for the value of every girl through banning the misogynistic practice of sex-selective abortions.
I will protect vulnerable women by criminalizing coerced abortions.
I will increase funding for pregnancy centres.
And I will end abortion funding overseas and focus Canadian funding on actually helping women and girls overseas thrive."
Leslyn Lewis stands on principle. Walt says, good for you and God bless you! Mind you, her chances of winning the CPC leadership are not much better than those of Patrick Brown. But if you call yourself a social conservative, and eligible to vote in the Conservative leadership, you should vote for her!
Here's why. Pierre Poilievre is the acknowledged front-runner in the race, and lots of people will vote for him because they think (mistakenly) that he's a true conservative. Patrick Brown is a liberal, a "progressive consesrvative", even more so than Jean Charest. Every vote for Leslyn Lewis will come off Mr Poilievre's pile. If Mr Brown fizzles, as seems likely, and if Ms Lewis runs a good third, Jean Charest might just squeak through.
But (Walt hears you say) hang on! Is that what you want? Do you want another pinko leading the alt-liberal party? Answer: YES, because this time real conservatives like Ms Lewis (and maybe even Mr Poilievre) should realize the truth of what I wrote above about the CPC, and quit the Party.
They might even join Max Bernier's People's Party of Canada, to offer a real choice to fed-up Canucks in 2025. That would be my strategy. If you have a better suggestion, do click on the headline to open the comments window, and let us hear about it!
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.
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!
Scheer joy reigned last night wherever Canadian conservatives -- true conservatives -- gathered to watch the Conservative Party of Canada elect a new leader. The winner... on the 13th ballot... by a margin of only 2% of over 141,000 votes cast... was... may I have the envelope please... the right envelope... ... the winner... and next prime minister of Canada (let us hope and pray fervently)... ANDREW SCHEER!
Andrew who? Mr Scheer is 38 years old, from Saskatchewan, the father of five children ("so far", he says), and was Speaker of the House of Commons for much of the Harper years. A rarity in today's Canada, he admits to being a Christian (practising Catholic), and is known to be opposed to gay "marriage", abortion and other social evils being foisted on Canadians by the Liberals in the name of progress, inclusivity, diversity, yada yada yada.
Agent 3 thinks it a pity that there was no parimutuel betting on the outcome, as he would have hit the Exactor, having voted (on a ranked ballot) for Mr Scheer and runner-up Maxime Bernier, in that order, out of a field of 14, one of whom (Kevin O'Leary, star of Dragon's Den) was scratched just before the starting bell.
Agent 3 says he's hopeful that Andrew Scheer will be able to pull the Conservative Party together to mount a strong challenge to Justin Trudeau's Liberals in the next federal election, due in two years. What worries him, though, is Mr Scheer's resemblance (especially in profile, he writes) to Joe Clark, another "nice guy" who became Tory leader and then prime minister in 1979. Sadly, he lacked the killer instinct to hold onto power; his government lasted only six months.
Do you remember Paul Harvey? Paul Harvey Aurandt (his full name) was an American radio broadcaster who was heard for many years on the ABC radio network. He voiced News and Comment on weekday mornings and mid-days, and at noon on Saturdays, as well as his famous The Rest of the Story segments throughout the day, from the 1950s through the 1990s. Mr. Harvey was listened to by as many as 24 million people a week on 1200 radio stations and 400 AFN (Armed Forces Network) stations. His columns appeared in 300 newspapers.
Paul Harvey was a social conservative, who was clearly -- and rightly -- dismayed by the cultural revolution that engulfed the Excited States of America in the hippy-dippy 60s. With the folk-song army and leftist elites leading the great "civil rights" charade ["crusade", shurely! Ed.] and the likes of Abbie Hoffman urging Amerikan yoof to "tune in, turn on and drop out", the lamestream media proclaimed the dawn of a new and brighter tomorrow -- LBJ's "Great Society".
Very few commentators had the foresight or the guts to predict that it would all end in tears. Paul Harvey was one who foresaw a dark future (adjective chosen deliberately) for the USA and had the courage to say so. On 3 April 1965 he broadcast a piece called "If I Were the Devil" in which he described the sad state of the nation as we see it today, half a century later. Here is an updated version, recorded (audio only) in 1996. Running time 2:47.
Paul Harvey died on 28 February 2009, at the age of 90. Walt wonders how he was able to refrain from saying "I told you so!" Walt also wonders if, in his last days, Mr. Harvey consoled himself that he wouldn't be around to see things get even worse. Because they have!
Today, following Donald Trump's win in the Nevada Republican caucuses, the meeja have suddenly figured out that "Americans want change". That very headline appeared ina so-called "national newspaper" this morning. Well, DUH! But it may be too late for us to revert to the status quo ante. The Devil's forces rule the Western world. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to put the genie back in the bottle. Let us pray!
When Ed. told you on Sunday that I would be in Canada for the federal election on 19/10, he described two of the parties' leaders -- Justin Trudeau (Liberal) and Tom Mulcair (NDP) as "cafeteria Catholics". Some readers may think we (Ed. and I) are being judgmental. Others may have no idea what we're talking about. I will explain.
To be a practising Roman Catholic means more than just being baptized and calling yourself Catholic when the census-taker knocks at the door. [Do they still do that? Ed.] It means accepting and applying the teachings and commandments of Holy Mother Church in one's day-to-day life. Not just on Sunday, but every day.
When I say "the teachings and commandments", I mean all of them. You can't pick and choose, as you would in a cafeteria. That means you can't be a good Catholic and go along with the secular humanist orthodoxies of the modern age. Some ideas and acts which are now acceptable to society at large are simply wrong -- sinful -- for Catholics.
Abortion is wrong. Artificial birth control is wrong. Homosexual acts are wrong. Same-sex "marriages" are wrong. Receiving Holy Communion or other Sacraments is wrong for Catholics who have remarried after being divorced.
That means that faithful -- full of Faith -- Catholics are almost by definition social conservatives. All those wrong are more or less permissible for the majority of "Christians", as well as non-believers. But there is one wrong which is dear to the hearts of a lot of social conservatives. That's capital punishment, which is a sin, condemned by God in the Fifth Commandment.
M Trudeau is nothing if not "progressive". As such, he supports abortion on demand, LGBT rights, same-sex marriage, the whole lot. (He's against capital punishment though.) Yet he goes to church every now and then, and receives Holy Communion. Whether he commits a mortal sin by so doing is not for me to judge. But Most Rev. Christian Riesbeck, Auxillary Bishop of Ottawa, has suggested that M Trudeau could be denied communion for his public stance on abortion.
The Church’s Code of Canon Law states (Canon 915) that those who are "obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion." On May 23rd, Bishop Riesbeck told LifeSiteNews, "Out of concern for safeguarding the reverence that is due Our Lord in the Eucharist, and to avoid scandal, one could possibly apply this norm even in the case of a pro-abortion Catholic politician who is extremely vocal about his position."
Now that he is the Prime Minister-designate, M Trudeau says that he is hopes to speak soon with Bishop Riesbeck's boss, Archbishop Terrence Prendergast, to clarify the implications of his public stance in favour of legal abortion.
Bishop Riesbeck's remarks in May were prompted by M Trudeau's declaration that all Liberal candidates must support access to legal abortion, regardless of their own beliefs on the matter. A day or so later, Abp. Prendergast told the Catholic Register that he would not refuse Trudeau Holy Communion without first having met with him.
The CBC reports that a date for the PM's meeting with Abp. Prendergast has yet to be established. They do not say whether the meeting will take place in the prelate's office or in the confessional.
