Democracy's Shortcomings*

“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

― Winston S. Churchill

The above is clearly not in accord with the thinking of our 'betters,' aka the corporate elite, who are now lamenting the terrible things that democracy can bring about.

Billionaire CEO Steve Schwarzman first sounded the alarm in January at the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

"I find the whole thing sort of astonishing, and what's remarkable is the amount of anger, whether it's on the Republican side or the Democratic side," he said, in a slow cadence that served to highlight his confusion. "Bernie Sanders, to me, is almost more stunning than some of the stuff going on on the Republican side. How is that happening? Why is that happening? What is the vein in America that is being tapped into, across parties, that's made people so unhappy?"

"Now," he concluded, smiling, "that's something you should spend some time on."

Schwarzman's bewilderment gave way to introspection and analysis, leading some to conclude there is too much democracy, thereby paving the way for demagogues like Donald Trump, who 'prey' on the emotions of the masses.

James Traub, writing in Foreign Policy, goes further:

It is necessary to say that people are deluded and that the task of leadership is to un-delude them. Is that “elitist”?

Such an assertion provoked a strong response from Jake Johnson:

It is elites — including Traub himself — who have for decades cloaked devastating wars in the soaring rhetoric of "humanitarian intervention." It is elites who have forced upon crumbling economies austerity that has served to prolong and worsen already dire circumstances. It is elites who have peddled the fantasy of neoliberalism, which has created a system that lavishly rewards the wealthiest while leaving everyone else to compete for the rest. It is elites, political and corporate, who have devastated the environment in the name of profit. It is elites who have crashed the global economy.

The masses, for their part, are always there to pick up the costs.

And they're sick of it.

Writing in Rolling Stone, Matt Taibbi says,

"Voters in America not only aren't over-empowered, they've for decades now been almost totally disenfranchised, subjects of one of the more brilliant change-suppressing systems ever invented.

People have no other source of influence ... Unions have been crushed. Nobody has any job security. Main Street institutions that once allowed people to walk down the road to sort things out with other human beings have been phased out. In their place now rest distant, unfeeling global bureaucracies.

Elites, by forcefully eliminating avenues for democratic progress, have cultivated the environment in which anti-establishment sentiment now thrives.

And the major political parties of the wealthiest nations on earth, in order to curry favor from big business, have pushed aside the needs of the working class, often disregarding workers as racists unworthy of attention. And the punditry has dutifully followed suit.

And so the schism between the elites and the masses continues. What is left unspoken, however, is the role that all of us can play in counteracting this alleged debasement of democracy.

We have a choice. We can choose to go along our merry way, content and narcotized by the trivial diversions available to us, or we can speak forcefully whenever the occasion demands that we do, and we can refuse to cede authority to the uninformed and the ignorant by turning out in droves during elections, debates, etc.

There is nothing inherently wrong with our democratic institutions. It is its potential participants who need to be regularly reminded of their responsibilities in facilitating their effective discharge. To say that there is no real choice in our political leadership may be true to some extent. But to use that as a reason for withdrawal will only serve the interests of a minority at the expense of the majority.

Anger is justified, but it must be tempered with reason. Otherwise, all will indeed be lost.

*Thanks to Kev for bringing this to my attention.

UPDATED: Somedays I Feel Very, Very Old

This is one of the reasons:



UPDATE: If you would like to read about augmented reality and its imminent arrival in Canada, click here.

UPDATED: According To Wood Harrelson, It's Simple

Unfortunately, thanks to the intractable and self-indulgent nature of far too many 'ordinary' people, it isn't.



UPDATE: Marie, over at A Puff of Absurdity, has a very interesting exploration of this issue. Click here to read it.

We Can't Have It Both Ways

Despite Justin Trudeau's sunny assurances that meeting greenhouse gas emission reduction goals and pipeline expansion are not mutually exclusive, most people, if they think about it at all, will see such a position as both risible and impossible.

That is certainly the assessment of J. David Hughes, who writes that we can't have it both ways:

In 2014 (the most recent year for which we have data), Canada’s emissions were 28 per cent above the 2030 target. Meaning, even with existing levels of oil and gas production, we have our work cut out for us.

But Alberta’s new Climate Leadership Plan allows for a 47 per cent increase in oilsands emissions from 2014 levels (up to a maximum cap of 100 million tonnes per year). And B.C. plans to develop a liquefied natural gas (LNG) export industry, aiming for five large LNG terminals to export fracked gas from province’s northeast. This means a large ramp up of emissions from natural gas production as well.

Under a scenario where Alberta’s oilsands emissions grow to its cap, and B.C.’s LNG industry is developed to the level planned, economic sectors outside of oil and gas would have to shrink emissions by more than half (55 per cent) in order for Canada to meet the Paris commitment. This is simply not feasible, barring an economic collapse.

Hughes, an earth scientist who recently authored a report on the issue, says, in fact, that no new pipelines are needed, as the existing infrastructure is more than capable of moving our fossil fuels.

Detractors of rail should note that bitumen in its undiluted form is highly viscous and much less volatile than the light oil “Bakken bombs” that resulted in conflagrations at Lac Mégantic and in Oregon recently and therefore is unlikely to have such serious consequences in the event of an accident.

Furthermore, the economics of constructing more pipelines make no sense, despite the arguments that getting oil to tidewater will net a price premium on international markets:

Although oil is a globally priced commodity, between 2011 and 2014 the international price (“Brent”) was considerably higher than the North American price (“WTI”). In September 2011 the differential reached $25.26 per barrel. However, the average differential in the six months ending May 2016 was 88 cents per barrel and recently Brent has been trading below WTI.

Not only has the international price advantage evaporated, but Canada’s primary oil export, Western Canada Select, sells at a discount to WTI. That’s because it is a lower grade heavy oil and will sell at a discount whether sold internationally or to North American markets.

There are some very compelling reasons to dampen enthusiasm for new pipelines. However, in the world of high-stakes politics, reason often has but a peripheral role to play in decision-making. Only very strong and principled leadership can promote wise choices.

To say the least, I am not especially optimistic that will play a role here.

Deny All You Want

But it will not alter the truth. Despite anthropogenic-climate-change denier Marco Rubio's publicly professed befuddlement over the causes of the toxic algae blooms in Florida and elsewhere, the answers are not difficult to find: agricultural runoff and climate change are two of the leading culprits.

Says Karl Haven, director of the Florida Sea Grant College Program:

Climate change is expected to result in increased temperatures of nearshore ocean water, and this could lead to increased growth of harmful microorganisms. These include algae that form noxious or toxic blooms, including red tides, and bacteria and other pathogens. This situation could have negative consequences in regard to human health and also Florida’s ocean-related economy.

And there is no reason for anyone to feel smug about this problem, as it can strike anywhere, including the Great Lakes. Especially hard hit over the years has been Lake Erie which, up to this point has suffered largely due to phosphorous runoff. The compounding effect of climate change will undoubtedly aggravate the problem there.

Climate Progress reports on the spreading scourge, which has now claimed even Alaska:

Last summer, one of the largest toxic algal blooms in recorded history hit the West Coast, shutting down fisheries from California to Washington. Scientists were seeing cells of the toxic bloom as far south as Mexico, and as far north as Homer, Alaska. At the time, Vera Trainer, manager of the Marine Biotoxin Program at NOAA’s Northwest Fisheries Science Center, told ThinkProgress that the bloom was uniquely widespread, “more so than we’ve seen in the past.”

But scientists now are saying that, with climate change, toxic algal blooms like the one seen last summer might become more common along the Pacific coastline, impacting marine communities as far north as Alaska with much more consistency than in the past.

In a new study published in the journal Harmful Algae, researchers from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) found the presence of domoic acid — the same toxic acid that shut down West Coast fisheries last summer — in marine mammals along the Alaskan coastline. This was a surprise, because Alaskan waters were previously thought to be too cold to encourage the growth of domic-producing algal blooms. [Emphasis added]

That’s because algae thrive in warmer waters, which both encourage growth in certain kinds of algae and discourage a mixing of ocean waters. Alaskan waters are some of the most rapidly warming waters in the world, having risen by three degrees Celsius in the past decade.

“The waters are warming, the sea ice is melting, and we are getting more light in those waters,” Lefebvre told the Washington Post. “Those conditions, without a doubt, are more favorable for algal growth. With that comes harmful algae.”

Given our seemingly endless capacity for denial, scenes like this are sure to become more common and widespread very, very soon:

Meanwhile, In Other Parts Of The World

.... things are hardly going swimmingly:

Torrential monsoon rains along a stalled frontal boundary near the Yangtze River in China have killed 186 people, left 45 people missing, and caused at least $7.6 billion in damage. In the Hubei Province, 1.5 million people have been evacuated or are in need of aid, almost 9,000 houses have collapsed or are seriously damaged and more than 710,000 hectares of crops have been affected, the provincial civil affairs department said. According to the May 2016 Catastrophe Report from insurance broker Aon Benfield, the $7.6 billion in damage from these floods would make them the world's most expensive and second deadliest weather-related disaster so far in 2016. The only deadlier weather disaster in 2016 was an April heat wave in India that claimed 300 lives.

H/t Mike Hudema

Counting My Blessings

No matter what our problems as a country may be, I couldn't help but feel blessed to be a Canadian as I watched this horrifying story:

More On Corporate Tax Evasion

The other day I posted some letters from The Star about corporate tax dodging and evasion as revealed by the Panama Papers, and included my doubts that Justin Trudeau will do anything to remediate the situation. An anonymous commentator took me to task:

You never miss a chance to attack Justin Trudeau do you? None of the people in the letters say anything about Trudeau so where are you getting that from?

I replied:

I am drawing that tentative conclusion from a couple of troubling indicators, Anon. One, there has been no government expression of opposition to the CRA's policy of shielding the identify of corporate tax dodgers (usually they are allowed to pay their back taxes in anonymity, as opposed to the small taxpayer being named and shamed on the CRA website) and two, Trudeau is a big enthusiast of free trade deals whose main benefits accrue to corporations, not ordinary Canadians. As well, during the campaign, he talked about tax fairness but not a word about increasing tax rates for corporations. Indeed, in May of 2015 he even opined about lowering those rates if Americans do so. All signs point to a man quite disposed to continuing the absurdly favourable treatment business currently enjoys.

Today's lead letter in The Star once more shows that I am hardly alone in being suspicious of our 'new' government's desire to rein in this egregious corporate theft:

Expose tax cheats, Editorial June 28

I’m finding your ongoing Panama Papers series on tax cheating most informative, as well as anger-provoking over the massive robbery of the public purse for decades, and — in one respect at least — puzzling.

My confusion arises from the fact that there seem to be two forms of theft involved: legal tax avoidance, made possible and encouraged — as you’ve reported — by government tax legislation, dating back decades, that leaves vast loopholes through which the very rich can drive truckloads of money into a series of tax havens around the world, thus avoiding their fair share of taxes at home; and then there is tax evasion, which has always been illegal.

I have read and saved every article in your series and, if there is a clear dividing line between legal avoidance and illegal evasion, I have seen nothing to explain that difference. In fact you’ve even lumped the two together as “tax dodging,” which further muddies the waters.

At this point it’s not clear to me whether the federal government intends to pursue avoiders or evaders — or both. Clearly, they can’t go after the former unless they change our laws to make “avoidance” illegal. But, as Marco Chown Oved reported on June 17, after eight months in office the Trudeau government, despite election campaign promises, “has done nothing to staunch the bleeding” that its predecessors made legally possible.

I’ve seen estimates as high as $31 trillion for the world-wide total stashed in tax havens by corporations and the 1 per cent (I’m betting that’s a conservative estimate). But, as your editorial notes, the only people Ottawa continues to “name and shame” to date are “dozens of small-time offenders . . . who have merely fallen behind on their tax payments.” The really big cheaters, even if caught, can apparently cut themselves a deal and stay anonymous under our laws.

We need tough new laws to ensure that everybody pays their fair share toward the building and maintenance of the strong public sector without which no democracy can survive. I’ll believe the Trudeau government is serious about this when I see that at least some of the very rich corporations and individuals, who have for years defrauded the country that made them wealthy, have been: named; required to pay it all back; heavily fined in addition; and deposited in their rightful onshore residence — behind bars.

In the meantime, talk is just talk and our health, education and infrastructure needs, among other essentials, continue to be woefully underfunded.

Terry O‘Connor, Toronto

Tax Fairness: A Doubtful Prospect

Recently I wrote a post expressing doubt that the tax treaties signed by Stephen Harper at the urging of big business will not in any way be amended by Justin Trudeau. Tax Information Exchange Agreements (TIEAs), as manipulated by Harper, allow for the legalized theft of countless billions of corporate tax dollars from the public treasury, thereby limiting what government can do to alleviate social and economic woes here at home.

Judging by some letters in today's Star, I see I am not alone in my suspicion that relief will not be forthcoming from our 'new' government:

Re: Why not outlaw use of tax havens? Letter June 22

Re: Loopholes costing Canada billions in lost revenue page, June 17

Sadly, Robert Bahlieda is a prophet crying in the wilderness. The criminalization of corporate tax avoidance is next to impossible when, as he rightly argues, it is ingrained in our culture and politicians routinely coddle business interests.

While it took great courage for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to reject austerity and embrace infrastructure spending, it will take even more political chutzpah to entertain radical tax reform when Canadians are unwilling to pay even for the programs and services they need.

In the end it is we the citizens who must object to the privatization of our democracy. We need to care enough about it to insist that our representatives uphold the importance of taxation in a civilized society – the principled starting point of any true reform.

Salvatore (Sal) Amenta, Stouffville

This article should leave no doubt in anyone’s mind about who Western governments, and in particular the Canadian government, represent. It sure as hell isn’t the average voter in Canada.

I resent my hard earned tax dollars being spent on giveaways to multinational corporations like Bombardier, GM, and many others to ostensibly “create” new jobs, or “preserve” current employment, when these wealthy corporations pay next to no Canadian taxes. They then use their profits to buy back shares to better reward their executives, while at the same time cutting employees.

As the article points out, Canadian government policy has been to encourage the offshoring of profits.

The most effective way to stop this corporate gravy train is to eliminate income taxes on profits and replace them with a turnover tax of 1 to 3 per cent on all sales in Canada. Taxes on profits are easily subverted as we have seen with the shifting of taxes between Ireland and other jurisdictions.

A tax on corporate sales for the privilege of selling in Canada would at one fell swoop eliminate all the fancy accounting practices and legal manoeuvres to avoid taxes. Sales are the easiest thing to monitor and the most difficult to obscure.

Don Buchanan, Etobicoke

When discussing corporate tax avoidance the argument is made that Canadian multinationals need these “tools” to give them the “best ability to compete on international and global scale.” We’ve heard this kind of argument in another sphere – doping and steroid use in professional and amateur athletics.

Perhaps it’s time the multinationals were also barred from competition and stripped of their hardware so that the ethical ones can thrive.

Sid Potma, Toronto

The integrity of Canada’s tax system, as it’s currently written, looks disproportionately to its citizens for the tax base to maintain our country. I would appreciate it if some one would publish a list of the Canadian companies/corporations blatently avoiding billions in corporate taxes, thus placing an unfair burden on all of us to maintain the basic lifestyle we have become accustomed to.

Richard Kadziewicz, Scarborough

Anyone Who Refuses To Connect The Dots Here

... will never accept the fact of climate change:



Want more information on the dangers posed by algae blooms? Click here.

And just remember, sports fans, these are only the preliminary rounds.

Oh, and by the way, Happy Canada Day.

UPDATED:The News Keeps Gettting Worse

In a column on Tuesday, environmental blogger Robert Scribbler noted that the Northern Hemisphere Jet Stream had merged with the Southern Hemisphere Jet Stream.

“It’s the very picture of weather weirding due to climate change. Something that would absolutely not happen in a normal world,” he wrote. “Something, that if it continues, basically threatens seasonal integrity.”

“Historically, the Tropics — which produce the tallest and thickest air mass in the world — have served as a mostly impenetrable barrier to upper level winds moving from one Hemisphere to another. But as the Poles have warmed due to human-forced climate change, the Hemispherical Jet Streams have moved out of the Middle Latitudes more and more. ”

“That’s bad news for seasonality,” he continued. “You get this weather-destabilizing and extreme weather generating mixing of seasons that is all part of a very difficult to deal with ‘Death of Winter’ type scenario.”

If you watch the accompanying video, you will be struck by the interconnectedness of climate systems. Changes in those system thanks to climate change threaten to become catastrophic.

In the following YouTube video, Beckwith says

that the jet stream behavior signaled “massive hits to the food supply” and “massive geopolitical unrest.”

UPDATE: Thanks to the dogged determination of The Mound to find out more about the above-described situation, I am happy (though a bit chastened) to report that the dire news presented above is based on poor science. The Washington Post offers this rebuttal:

The claims are unsupported and unscientific, and they demonstrate the danger of wild assertions made by non-experts reaching and misleading the masses.

The Post reporter

reached out to several atmospheric scientists, who have graduate degrees and are trusted sources in the profession, for their reaction to these claims. Without exception, they said air flow between the hemispheres is not at all uncommon.

“This is total nonsense,” said Cliff Mass, a professor of meteorology at the University of Washington. “Flow often crosses the equator.”

Mass added that the cross-equator flow identified by Scribbler and Beckwith is not between mid-latitude jet streams, as claimed. “The analysis is making mistakes that even one of my junior undergrads would not make,” Mass said.

Ryan Maue, a senior meteorologist with a doctoral degree who works at WeatherBell Analytics, agreed with Mass that the cross-equator flow is totally normal and not evidence of a joint hemispheric jet stream. “Cross-equatorial flow at both upper and lower levels is part of the seasonal transition of the Western Pacific monsoon through boreal summer,” he said.

“Sometimes the flows connect up with each other and make it look like a larger flow structure is causing the jet stream to flow from one hemisphere to the other, but it’s in no way unprecedented,” Roy Spencer, a professor of atmospheric science at University of Alabama-Huntsville, explained on his blog.

My apologies for so readily accepting Beckworth's claims. It was an obvious failure in critical thinking.

A Post Fact-Checking World?

That seems to be the opinion of Donald Trump supporter Jeffrey Lord, who offers this view: I honestly don’t think this ‘fact-checking’ business ... is anything more than one more out of touch, elitist media-type thing.

I'm sure the rabble would agree:

Sustainability Needs To Be More Than Just A Word

A Star letter-writer has an insight on sustainability well-worth sharing:

Re: Canada a model for sustainable forestry, Letter June 19

Reading the response to Thomas Walkom’s editorial from Forest Products Association of Canada and Ontario Forest Industries Association, I was once again encouraged by how much progress has been made reducing, reusing and recycling the language of environmental activism for corporate messaging.

Terms like green, environmentally friendly, and eco-everything were always so vague it is not surprising how easily they were co-opted by advertisers to hawk products that are nothing of the sort. But sustainability has a simple, clear, specific definition. Sustainability is the capacity to endure.

What apologists such as letter writers Derek Nighbor and Jamie Lim are peddling should properly be referred to as Sustainability(TM) as this term is also becoming nothing more than happy-sounding marketing for demonstrably unsustainable activities.

By the end of today, there will be fewer trees and less forest wilderness in Canada and on Earth. What remains of these complex ecosystems will be more fractured, less diverse, less resilient, less healthy.

Even if that were the whole of it, the destruction of these ecosystems – and, ultimately, the resources and services they provide – is simply not sustainable. And, of course, that is nowhere near the whole of it.

Among other impacts, the replanting that Nighbor and Lim laud, when it happens at all, is usually a genetic monoculture of non-native species, all at the same stage of growth. These are not regenerating forests. These are plantations; deserts of wood compared to the vital forest ecosystems they have supplanted.

By the end of today, there also will be fewer species, less water, less soil, more carbon in the atmosphere and oceans, and more persistent toxic pollution in everything – including our bodies. Nothing about our presence on Earth is currently sustainable.

I am often at a loss for words to describe the scale and pace of our pathological destruction of the natural world. I am compelled to fight against losing the meaning of the very word that describes the crisis.

What cannot endure, will not endure. Unsustainable activities will come to an end whether we like it or not. We should get actual sustainability before it gets us.

Kevin Farmer, Toronto

If you need further evidence of the havoc being wrought thanks to our collective heedlessness, look no further than this:

Kool-Aid, Anyone?

Unless you have taken a strong slug of a particular Kool-Aid, I suspect you will be suitably appalled by the following. Indeed, the responses of the folks who were asked what it would take for Donald Trump to lose their vote reminds me of an old tune sung by Tammy Wynette.

And Now, Another Word From The Truly Insane

Stephen Anderson, I see, is back at it. You may remember the hate-filled screed that this truly insane evangelical launched into following the Orlando massacre, one that was subsequently taken down from YouTube for violating its policy on hate speech.

Not to be silenced, Raw Story reports that this unhinged pastor launched into a new tirade after businesses began severing their relationships with his and other like-minded churches. As I mentioned in my previous post on this obscene parody of God's love, he is difficult to listen to.




The sickest part is that this ding-dong truly feels he is a persecuted Christian.

May This Day Never Come

I pray we never get to the day when scenes like the following become so commonplace that we regard them with only the passing interest we might today express in a rocket launch, and not the shock, awe and humbling that they undoubtedly merit:

Our Unfathomable Equanimity

While the world convulses and gyrates over the results of the Brexit vote, I can't help but wonder why not even a scintilla of that passion can be brought to a much greater threat to our collective well-being: climate change. Star reader Judith Deutsch of Toronto ponders our unfathomable equanimity:

Re: Atmosphere hits grim milestone, June 14

Startling is the news and the lack of reaction about atmospheric CO2 concentration reaching 400 parts per million and the fact that “it will never fall below 400 ppm this year, nor the next, nor the next.” That means the inevitable commitment to an ice-free planet.

The climate record indicates that in the past sea level increased 3 to 5 metres in one century. It means that coastal cities and major agricultural areas will be inundated, much occurring this century.

There is oppressive and dangerous silence so that the public remains ignorant about the danger to human life. The human impacts are already daunting and profoundly unjust: 350 million people in India displaced by drought, 50 million people in Africa threatened by starvation this year because of drought.

There are other interacting factors, such as biofuels and speculation increasing the price of food, the World Bank subsidizing large dams that displace millions of farmers. Research and development of weapons receives 10 times the amount of subsidies as fighting climate change, with horrific new weapons threatening the world’s civilians, the real casualty of wars.

The proffered solutions are risible and serve more distraction, delay and deception: no timetables for emission reductions, no enforcement mechanisms, flawed market mechanisms that have proven to be grossly unjust and ineffectual in other regions, green subsidies only serving the affluent. There is studied avoidance of confronting the imperative to cut back: the biggest emitters are the military, the agro-industrial complex, international aviation and shipping.

The current political trajectory is beyond wonderland: at least Alice was able to observe the absurdity and wonder about it.

I've Seen Fire, And I've Seen Rain

I readily admit that I am transfixed, awed and horrified by these now-regular reports of unfolding climatic disaster. Yet our hubristic selfishness continues unabated. Why? Is this humanity's fatal flaw?

The Perspective Of Age

I suspect that much of the wisdom attributed to old age is the perspective that the years bestow. Having lived a certain length of time, it seems inevitable that people will more easily see through rhetoric and facades, much of them perpetrated by democratic governments who claim to represent the interests of the people. One example would surely be Tax Information Exchange Agreements (TIEAs) involving what many would say are a massive fraud perpetrated on Canadian taxpayers.

Under the guise of combating tax evasion, the federal government opened up dozens of tax loopholes that have allowed Canadian corporations to avoid paying tax on $55 billion in international profits over the last five years.

The money is funnelled into offshore tax havens and can be brought back to Canada tax free by multinationals based in Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary.

These offshore manoeuvres translate into billions of dollars in lost tax revenue for Canada, not because companies are cheating, but because they are encouraged to avoid taxes by government policies.

Not surprisingly, the abuses the treaties allow were engineered by the Harper government at the behest of corporations.

In 2010, Canada joined an initiative launched by the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development to make tax havens more transparent and started signing Tax Information Exchange Agreements (TIEAs) with notorious tax havens like the Cayman Islands, Jersey, the Isle of Man and the British Virgin Islands.

At the same time, the tax code was altered to allow any Canadian multinational corporation doing business in a TIEA partner country to bring profits home tax free.

Says Arthur Cockfield, a professor of tax law at Queen’s University,

“The corporate lobby is alive and well...“Why did (the government) do it? They were persuaded by industry that it was necessary to be globally competitive.”

Yielding to the corporate lobby has proven quite costly.

A joint investigation by the Star and the CBC has found that, since the first TIEAs were signed in 2011, the deals have allowed corporations working in low- or no-tax zones like Bermuda, the Bahamas and Panama to avoid paying taxes on some $55 billion in profits. If earned in Ontario, that money would have yielded more than $14 billion in tax revenue. That’s the equivalent of nearly half of this year’s projected federal deficit.

It is, of course, quite easy to demonize the Harper government that engineered these loopholes, starving much-needed programs and placing an even heavier burden on us, Leona Helmsley's 'little people.' Moreover, the true test of whether our new government is any better will be whether or not it revokes these obscene deals.

As one who has come to the conclusion that government is not really there to represent our interests, its rhetoric notwithstanding, I'm betting that Mr. Trudeau will opt for the status quo.

Donald Trump: A Searing Assessment By A Legendary Journalist

Appearing on CNN’s Reliable Sources, legendary journalist Carl Bernstein ripped into presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, calling him America’s first major party “neofascist.”

The former Washington Post reporter who was part of the team that uncovered the Watergate scandal in the 70’s, offered a very harsh assessment of Trump, saying “very little truth that comes out of his mouth.”

Trump has “shown himself throughout this campaign to be a pathological liar,” Bernstein stated.”There’s very little truth that comes out of his mouth, so let’s start there.”

A pity not all of the press is prepared to make such an uncompromising and accurate assessment of a very, very dangerous man.

"They're Coming": A Paranoid NRA Interpretation of The Orlando Massacre

A little something to disturb your Father's Day celebrations:

In the wake of the massacre at Pulse night club in Orlando, National Rifle Association (NRA) Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre argued on Sunday that American families should arm themselves because terrorists were “on the verge of overwhelming us.”

LaPierre told CBS host John Dickerson that “we all mourn” for victims of the Orlando shooting, “but we face a terrorist challenge where they are on the verge of overwhelming us.”

On Gun Control

Before it degenerates near the end with Bill Mahar expressing his usual prejudices about Islam, this clip from his show is well-worth watching. Guests discuss gun control.

The HBO Real Time panel, along with host Bill Maher, jumped all over a conservative commentator who refused to budge an inch on high-capacity weapons Friday night, with host Maher saying the Orlando shooting “was brought to you by guns and religion.”

Guest Lawrence Wilkerson, the former chief of staff to Colin Powell, took the lead in battling with conservative commentator Emily Miller over guns in America, saying, “We need some kind of control on the weapons in this country,” to the applause of the audience.

Admitting that he owns fourteen weapons, with some of them passed down from his father for hunting, Wilkerson went off on military grade weapons available to the public.

“We do not need large capacity magazines, semi-automatic weapons in the hands of anybody in this country, other than possible law enforcement,” Wilkerson said.

I Know You Are Probably Tired Of This

.... but I suspect that our earth is growing even more weary:

An Impressive Debut

I don't feel much like writing lengthy posts these days. In the final analysis, as my literary friend Hamlet would say, they are just "words, words words." However, every so often I come across a video that seems more than worth sharing, as in the following.

Now is the season of commencements, and Grade 8 graduate from Arlington Heights Jack Aiello sets a new standard that will likely be hard to match for years to come. Showing a real capacity for mimicry and a surprisingly
mature understanding of U.S. politics, Jack uses the current presidential race to full advantage, as you will see. His Trump is priceless, and if you watch to the end, you will be stunned by his Bernie Sanders.

The Christian Wrong

That, I humbly submit, should be the new name for the Christian right. They are wrong and depraved morally, ethically, theologically and humanly. It should be a source of collective shame that they are part of our species, as the following clip from Rachel Maddow's show makes clear:

Glad I'm Not An American

Fellow Canadian Samantha Bee articulates the reasons for my gratitude:

There Is So Much Truth Here

Unfortunately, few seem to want to hear it:

In Memory Of ...

H/t The Toronto Star

UPDATED: Unfiltered Hatred

I don't feel completely right posting this video in which a hatred-spewing 'Christian' pastor, Stephen L. Anderson of the Faithful Word Baptist Church, offers his evaluation of the Orlando massacre. However, we cannot turn away from such evil ranters; their malignity only grows if left unchallenged and not held to account.

I will warn you, though. It is not easy listening to such obscenity:



UPDATE: Anderson's hateful screed, I see, has been taken down by for violating YouTube's policy on hate speech. If you want to read some of what this despicable pastor said, you can do so here.

Unspeakable

If there is any good to come from this terrible massacre, let it be the realization that the things that may set us apart are small indeed compared to the bonds that unite us.

An Unsettling Experience

At a time when CEOs are comparing Donald Trump to fascists like Hitler and Mussolini, the experience I had yesterday must surely qualify as deeply disturbing.

I entered a local grocery store to meet my wife, who had been shopping there. She told me that she had seen a man wearing a Trump t-shirt like this one:



It was when she told me who was wearing the repugnant apparel that I reacted with both shock and outrage: a judge who sits the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Toni Skarica.



The former Ontario Progressive Conservative MPP and Crown prosecutor was appointed to the bench in 2012 by former Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.

Later on in the store, he passed by us, so I took the opportunity to opine in a rather loud voice: "What a disgrace. What kind of person wears a t-shirt like that?"

He ignored my comment, probably seeing it as a badge of honour for so bravely promoting his 'hero.' However, a young woman who heard me said, "It hurts my eyes to look at it."

And the point here is not that someone is promoting a racist and a demagogue - in our open society, that is permitted. What is not permitted, however, is for judges, who are required to be impartial and refrain from politics, among other restriction, to openly trumpet their support. Here is what the Canadian Superior Court Judges' Association has to say about judicial impartiality:

It is not enough for the judiciary, as an institution, to be independent - individual judges must be seen to be objective and impartial. In their personal lives, judges must avoid words, actions or situations that might make them appear to be biased or disrespectful of the laws they are sworn to uphold. They must treat lawyers, clients and witnesses with respect and must refrain from comments that suggest they have made up their minds in advance. Outside the courtroom, judges do not socialize or associate with lawyers or other persons connected with the cases they hear, or they may be accused of favouritism. Judges typically declare a conflict and withdraw from a case that involves relatives or friends. The same is true if the case involves a former client, a member of the judge's former law firm, law partners or a former business associate, at least until a year or two has passed since the judge was appointed and those ties were severed.

Judges often choose to avoid most forms of community involvement. A judge may undertake community or charitable work but cannot offer legal or investment advice. Judges cannot take part in politics, either as a party member, fundraiser or donor, and many choose to relinquish their right to vote. While judges have been more willing in recent years to make public speeches or agree to media interviews, they refrain from expressing opinions on legal issues that could come before them in a future case. Judges are forbidden from being paid to do anything other than their judicial duties, but can accept appointments to serve on royal commissions, inquiries and other official investigations.

Although I am not sure whether that ban on political involvement includes advocating for politicians in other countries, I am certain of the following:

Justice Skarica, through his support of a candidate who has been shown to be a pathological liar, racist and demagogue, has raised very legitimate concerns about his judgement, his character, his values and, ultimately, his fitness to sit on the judiciary. I will be sending a letter of complaint about him tomorrow to the Canadian Judicial Council.

The Limits Of Technology

Conditioned as we are to be in the thrall of our machines, we find it hard to imagine there are some things they cannot fix. Humanity's hubris is such that I suspect there are still many among us who are awaiting a technological fix to climate change, never for a moment imagining that no such deus ex machina will ever come along.

Sometimes we need a potent reminder of this fact, like the one the British Royal Navy is experiencing:

Six British warships stationed in the Persian Gulf are breaking down because the water is too hot. This week, members of the British Navy testified to the UK’s Defence Committee that their Type 45 destroyers keep losing power because of high ocean temperatures. When the ships’ turbines get overheated, they can’t generate as much energy, resulting in electrical failures.

The makers of the billion-dollar warships, including Rolls-Royce and BAE Systems Maritime, claim that the ships were not designed to be used in that kind of environment for an extended amount of time, although they are supposedly engineered for a wide range of temperatures from sub-Arctic to tropic. The Persian Gulf is a very shallow body of water that absorbs more heat than the open ocean, and it’s situated in one of the hottest places on Earth. Water temperatures regularly range from 75 to 90 degrees Fahrenheit.

Is this breakdown an anomaly, a design fault, or something more sinister?

... in an exceptionally hot year on an exceptionally hot planet, the Gulf States have recorded many of their most extreme heat waves in recent months. A “heat dome” stretching from Dubai to Beirut resulted in the second-highest heat index ever recorded on Earth; the air in the Iranian city of Bandar Mahshahr felt like 165 degrees Fahrenheit. Due to climate change, this is likely to become the norm: A recent study noted that the Persian Gulf region will not be fit for human habitation by the end of the century because of regular, relentless heatwaves.

Back to the drawing board, I guess. Or, perhaps more relevantly, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the Gulf.

A Satirical Indictment

Last night I had dinner with some of my retired teacher friends, two of whom used to make my lunch hours at school the highlight of my day, given our discussions on a wide array of topics. Indeed, my eyes glazed over and I repaired to my classroom only when they talked about golf or hockey, which was mercifully infrequently.

Last night was no different, as we tried to understand the allure of Donald Trump and the propensity of our species to plunge headlong towards climate doom. I won't bore you with the details, but this morning I fortuitously came upon the following satire that perhaps cuts too close to the bone:

Scientists: Earth Endangered by New Strain of Fact-Resistant Humans

Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.

“These humans appear to have all the faculties necessary to receive and process information,” Davis Logsdon, one of the scientists who contributed to the study, said. “And yet, somehow, they have developed defenses that, for all intents and purposes, have rendered those faculties totally inactive.”

More worryingly, Logsdon said, “As facts have multiplied, their defenses against those facts have only grown more powerful.”

While scientists have no clear understanding of the mechanisms that prevent the fact-resistant humans from absorbing data, they theorize that the strain may have developed the ability to intercept and discard information en route from the auditory nerve to the brain. “The normal functions of human consciousness have been completely nullified,” Logsdon said.

While reaffirming the gloomy assessments of the study, Logsdon held out hope that the threat of fact-resistant humans could be mitigated in the future. “Our research is very preliminary, but it’s possible that they will become more receptive to facts once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen,” he said.

Now Might Be A Good Time To Sell

If you own property in Florida, that is. A harbinger of much worse to come?



Meanwhile, rising tides have given a St. Petersburg couple new neighbours:



No word yet on whether the mammals have asked to borrow a cup of sugar or a fillet of fish from the Smiths.

Bhutan - A Country That Has Its Priorities Straight

Sure, you may say that Bhutan is a small country, yet it seems to be punching well above its weight. It is the world's first carbon-neutral country. Pity that, given our addiction to technology and bloated lifestyles, we likely think we have nothing to learn from them.





A BRIEF PROGRAMMING NOTE:

Taking a break to visit our son in Alberta. See you soon.

Things Are Bad

But they are going to get much, much worse.

The first study to integrate all prior scientific research in order to project approximately when climate change will produce permanent catastrophic consequences has been accepted and will soon be published in the scientific journal Nature, and it finds that things will start going haywire in the tropics at around the year 2020, and in our part of the world at around 2047.

Nature shares with Science and PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) the distinction of being tied as the world’s three most prestigious scientific journals, and an article is not published in these journals unless it has undergone extremely rigorous scientific peer-revue; so, climate-change deniers will have no professional credibility in attacking this study, as the Koch brothers and their friends can reasonably be expected to do, since they profit so much from what causes global warming - the burning of carbon-based fuels.

According to this study, the tropics, which are the near-equatorial region of this planet that’s almost 100% impoverished, and that has thus contributed virtually nothing to global warming, will begin the period of permanent catastrophe starting in approximately 2020; but the (cooler) moderate-latitude countries, such as in North America and Europe, will begin this catastrophic period in or around 2047.

As if things weren't already bad enough. Consider the plight of the Great Barrier Reef:

Corals, which are animals, have a symbiotic relationship with algae that give them their colour and help provide them with food. During stressful conditions such as heat waves, the algae disappear from the corals, leading to coral bleaching. If the stressful conditions last more than eight weeks, the corals can die of starvation.

Meanwhile, on our own continent, scenes like the following are becoming increasingly, distressingly common:



Clearly, the days of willful ignorance, selfishness and heedlessness are now exacting a massive price.

A Pill For The Times

Our American cousins and the Conservative Party of Canada (especially Kellie Leitch and Chris Alexander) could benefit from this prescription, but I suspect their response would be, "Just say no to drugs."

Some Fascinating Speculation

I readily admit to not following U.S. politics too closely; my emotional resilience has limits. However, given the American media saturation coverage of Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton, it has been hard to ignore the run-up to their respective parties' presidential nominations. Never, it seems, has either party offered such unpopular and unpalatable mainstream candidates.

In his column today, Tony Burman says there is ultimately little cause for concern if, as many are suggesting, Hillary Clinton will be forced to withdraw from the race should she be indicted for her unauthorized use of a private email server while serving as Barack Obama's Secretary of State.

Dismissing Bernie Sanders as unacceptable to the party establishment, Burman points out that unlike the Republicans, delegates to the Democratic convention are free to vote for any candidate, regardless of primary results, and he suggests that candidate may very well be Vice-President Joe Biden:

He originally declined to run due to the death of his son, but has told friends that he regrets that decision.

In early May, a story appeared on the Politico website that created considerable buzz. It quoted sources close to Biden indicating that, had he decided to run, Biden would have chosen Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren as his running mate. Warren is a widely respected financial authority who supports breaking up the big banks to prevent another global crisis. On Tuesday, she enthralled a Washington audience by tearing into Trump, calling him a “small, insecure money-grubber.” It was a devastating performance — a real carving up of Trump — that gave some indication of how effective she would be on the campaign trail.

Whether any of this comes to fruition is anyone's guess. I suspect, however, that given the impressiveness and integrity of Elizabeth Warren, she will be a force to be reckoned with in the years to come.

A Reminder Of What We Have Done To Our Planet

Tornadoes may be nothing new, but their increasing intensity is. This is where our heedlessness has brought us:

It's A Strange World, Isn't It?

The above title, taken from the 1986 film Blue Velvet, seems particularly appropriate for the subject of today's post, one that has nothing directly to do with politics but perhaps epitomizes the sorry state of humanity.

In Norway, there is a young woman named Nano who believes she is a cat.

Nano claims to possess many feline characteristics including a hatred of water and the ability to communicate simply by meowing.

The young woman shows off her cat characteristics by wearing fake ears and an artificial tail. She communicates by meowing.
"I realised I was a cat when I was 16 when doctors and psychologists found out what was "the thing" with me. Under my birth there was a genetic defect".

This 'genetic defect,' she claims, has given her cat-like powers far beyond the limits of ordinary mortals. She can, for example, hear things others can't:

"Suitcases rolling on the ground," she says, "Keys clinking in pockets. People with ice under their shoes."

"I can see better in the dark than in daylight. That's no problem," she says. "I have been running a lot after animals that can be seen in the shadows."

But wait. There's more!

Nano prefers to crawl around on her hands and knees, and paws at windows when she wants to go outside.

She also said, despite their size, she can sleep in the sink and on windowsills.

"It's also obvious that I'm a cat when I start purring and meowing," she explains. "And walking around on four legs and stuff like that."

For those inquiring minds out there, the delicate subject of kitty litter boxes was not brought up.



And for the dog people who might feel left out, there is this:



And this:



As Johnny Carson used to say, "I do not make these things up, folks, I merely report them."

Your Morning Smile

Enjoy.


H/t Toronto Star

The Police State Edges Closer

Perpetually down in the mouth because they are expected to be accountable whenever they beat, shoot or kill a member of the public, police officers in the United States will undoubtedly be buoyed up by legislation that has been passed in Louisiana. The bill, clearly serving to minimize and marginalize the "Black Lives Matter" movement, is entitled "Blue Lives Matter" and would classify any violent attack on police officers, firefighters, and EMS personnel a hate crime.

Louisiana State representative Lance harris had this to say about the bill:

“I certainly do think there is a need for it. If you’re going to have an extensive hate crime statute then we need to protect those that are out there protecting us on a daily basis,” Harris said. “There is a concerted effort in some areas to terrorize and attack police and I think this will go forward and stop that.”

Not everyone agrees:

Anti-Defamation League Regional Director Allison Padilla-Goodman pointed out that crimes against police officers are already aggressively prosecuted under Louisiana law: “The bill confuses the purpose of the Hate Crimes Act and weakens its impact by adding more categories of people, who are already better protected under other laws.”

In fact, the notion of a hate law for an occupational category weakens real hate laws, which were enacted for a particular purpose:

“Hate Crimes are designed to protect people’s most precious identity categories,” Padilla-Goodman said, “like race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, ethnicity, and gender identity. Proving the bias intent is very different for these categories than it is for the bias intent of a crime against a law enforcement officer.”

As you will see in the following news report, something very similar to Louisiana's bill is now before Congress:



Just one more step, some would argue, in bringing the police state to full fruition.

The Elbowgate Kerfuffle

While I think elbowgate is much ado about little (will Ruth-Ellen Brosseau now claim to be a 'survivor' of workplace violence?), the episode does raise some unsettling concerns that the old Liberal arroagance is quickly reasserting itself, doesn't it?



H/t Globe and Mail

No Encouraging News Here

For those of us who follow such matters, this news is not really surprising: 2015 was the hottest year on record:

Very Encouraging News

While this is not, strictly speaking, a political story, it does involve former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, who seems to have escaped the death sentence that advanced melanoma traditionally has been, thanks to what many are calling a breakthrough drug:

To All Would-Be Bloggers

I'm feeling a bit stale these days in my blogging, and so would like to step back a little bit from daily posts. For those of you who do not have your own blog but like writing informed commentary, such as I often receive from some regular contributors, please feel free to submit guest posts to me. You can use the blogger contact form seen at the left side of this site or the comment form that appears at the bottom of each post. You may choose to remain anonymous, or use your full name or a pseudonym. The only thing I ask is that you respect the tone that I try to adhere to in this blog. And, of course, I do reserve the right to edit material submitted.

I look forward to hearing from you.