Friday, July 19, 2019

The Yesterday Man



Those with undying affection for, and advocacy of, fossil fuels are indulging in a venal nostalgia for the way things were. They cling to past truths about price differentials that allegedly make green energy too costly. They continue to claim that green energy, if produced during the day via solar panels, cannot meet night-time demand, a problem rapidly being addressed by quickly-evolving storage systems, the very same systems utilized when there is no wind powering wind turbines.

Their arguments, designed to protect assets doomed to become stranded are, to put it succinctly, running out of steam.

Indeed, Toronto Star letter-writer Sheri Kimura, of Toronto, is of the view that the federal government's purchase of the Trans Mountain pipeline truly makes Justin Trudeau a yesterday man:
Since the Trudeau government purchased the Trans Mountain pipeline (meaning that we, as taxpayers, funded the purchase), it seems like good business to ensure that the Canadian public is educated about how much the project costs, what the expected profit might be and which markets we are serving. China plans to convert all it’s vehicles to clean energy in this generation, and Volkswagen — the single-largest car manufacturer in the world — is planning on making it’s entire fleet electric by 2025. Seems like a strange move to push a commodity that the largest available markets are phasing out. When Canada has so much money and potential for clean energy, why is anyone in our government, from any party, still pushing an antiquated commodity?

Even if we doubt the economic windfalls of clean energy, we cannot deny the weakening of the carbon-based industry and the decline in demand for oil. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has made a terrible business decision on behalf of Canada. Any politician who pursues increased oil development is not making an economically-sound decision — they are simply sentimental about Canada’s oil-rich past and aging identity. We need political leaders with the clarity of mind to embrace (and make profitable) the inevitable change in Canada’s natural resources sector. Only then will our country truly progress, and our country’s identity will finally be free to evolve as well.

Thursday, July 18, 2019

Closer Than You Think



In his latest series of racist tweets, Donald Trump urged four congresswomen of colour, all but one born in the U.S. to go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places [a.k.a. s**t-hole countries] from which they came. In the same tweet, he described the United States as the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth.

Many, for whom cogitation is not such a chore, beg to differ with that assessment:

Re Trump digs in against Democratic congresswomen, July 16
Toronto Star17 Jul 2019

U.S. President Donald Trump is quoted as saying that if lawmakers “hate our country,” they can go back to their “broken and crimeinfested” countries. Doesn’t he realize they are already living in one?

Mike Forster, Toronto

Is Donald Trump finally right about something?

The four congresswomen of colour he attacks as coming from “broken and crime-infested” countries unfortunately do come from such a country: the United States of America.

Can Canadians learn lessons from that degraded nation’s decline about setting limits on our own populist demagogues?

Douglas Buck, Toronto

I choked back tears as I read this compelling story about Donald Trump’s overt sexism and racism. How is it possible that the U.S. president could be saying to the world that “four Democratic congresswomen of colour … need to get out of the U.S. “right now”?

Trump has no qualms about exploiting racial divisions once again, and continues to alienate people of colour. If this latest folly is not enough to rid the U.S. of such poisonous words and ways, I don’t know what is. I beg U.S. senators and representatives to end this madness and return civility and intelligence to the White House.

Susan Kohlhepp, Toronto

Wednesday, July 17, 2019

The Epitome Of Moral Cowardice

They don't get much more craven than Mitch McConnell:


Meanwhile, Theo Moudakis graphically represents the pathetic state of the Republican Party:



Tuesday, July 16, 2019

This Is What John Lewis Speaks So Feelingly Against

John Lewis spoke from the heart about this:



And John Conway 111, husband of chief Trump defender Kelly Ann Conway, has this to say about her boss:
Naivete, resentment and outright racism, roiled in a toxic mix, have given us a racist president.

Telling four non-white members of Congress — American citizens all, three natural-born — to “go back” to the “countries” they “originally came from”? That’s racist to the core. It doesn’t matter what these representatives are for or against — and there’s plenty to criticize them for — it’s beyond the bounds of human decency. For anyone, not least a president.
One can only hope that America, despite all odds, finds its way to regurgitating up this president from the dark part of its psyche he has such a tenacious grip on.

From The Heart

In light of the rampant racism that seems to be engulfing Western nations, John Lewis utters words we all need to hear.


Friday, July 12, 2019

Whither Goest The NDP?



In his column today, Rick Salutin offers a withering assessment of the NDP that I fear is all too accurate. In a phrase, what most ails the party is what might be termed ideological abandonment:
You start noticing what they’re not, and haven’t been for a while. At their start, in the Depression of the ’30s, as the CCF, they knew they had the answer to the questions the country was asking: How did we get into this mess and how do we get out? The answer was something like socialism or co-operation.
The allure of power has corrupted that ethos:
They’re more like: “We’re a grown-up party too and dammit, we deserve our turn.”

That was the tone of Thomas Mulcair’s 2015 campaign. When candidates in the recent leadership race were asked what distinguishes their party from the Liberals, none said: We have the answer to what the country needs — as Elizabeth May surely would have. Their responses were pathetic. “We mean what we say … We follow through … We have principles … They just want power …” Pathetic, and laughable.

Then Mulcair, who vowed not to run deficits — at which point Liberals say they knew they’d won. It was crazy. The NDP’s main appeal had been their perceived fealty to principle — whether it was true or not. Leader Tommy Douglas even bucked many of his own members to oppose military rule in 1970.
On a personal note, when I attended an NDP rally leading up to the last election, what I noticed most about Mulcair was his use of a teleprompter (I know they all use one, but it does dampen any illusion of passion and spontaneity) and the way he worked the room - a rather plastic smile/grin on his face that didn't reach his eyes as he shook people's hands without looking them in the eye.

This is not to say that the party's ideological abandonment began with Mulcair. No, it was the revered Jack Layton who led the charge on that front:
He was serious about power, helping purge “socialism” from their constitution. His first three elections achieved little though the last, due to Quebec’s unique way of deciding to vote tout ensemble, made him opposition leader.
All of which amounts to a massively-missed opportunity:
The desertion of past principle is ironic since the “left” position has surged back, especially among the young. They aren’t prey to the mythos of private property for good reasons: they won’t have much. They don’t expect to own houses, cars or even bikes — and have decided it’s fine to share. Not just socialism but a “co-operative Commonwealth” — the CC in CCF — might make sense to them.
Mulcair's replacement, Jagmeet Singh, fails to impress. His late-stage advocacy for the environment, surely of vital concern to millenials, once again smacks of political opportunism. If the young are to be a force in the next election, my guess is they will go with the party that has been most consistent and has its eyes on the long-term, not just the next political cycle: The Green Party.

I know that's where my vote is going.

Wednesday, July 10, 2019

Air Travel And Climate Change

Having recently returned from Newfoundland to attend my son's wedding, I can claim no green virtue when it comes to flying. Indeed, I know there will be more flights in the future when we visit him and his wife in Edmonton. So I really am a hypocrite when it comes to this mode of transportation, the one with the highest carbon footprint, especially on short-haul flights.

Indisputably, we all need to be more aware of the impact of our choices, as the following short report makes abundantly clear:



You can read more about this issue here, and you can complete a questionaire that will help assess your carbon footprint here.