CHP
Commentary

​On Monday, April 19, the federal Liberals unveiled a budget that showed no attempt to achieve balance or relief for taxpayers. What else could one expect?

Leonard Cohen famously sang “First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin.” The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) could re-write this as “First we take Hong Kong, then we take Taiwan.” The problem is, under today’s leadership, Canada would be singing along.

​When federal and provincial politicians and unelected bureaucrats tell you that “ . . . we’re all in this together,” you have to wonder what they mean by that.

​I remember as a child being told to “Do it or else.” I was never courageous enough to ask what the “or else” option was. As a matter of fact, I didn’t know anyone courageous enough to ask what the second option was. It was in our own best interest to just stay away from the dreaded “or else!’

​There is something wearying about a persistent drip. It gets on the nerves. It demands action. In politics, there can be a frequently recurring demand or a call for action on a particular issue that is like a constant dripping. It eventually wears down resistance and results in change . . . sometimes very dramatic change. Persistence can be seen as a virtue when the legislative objective appears to be tied to a human rights issue. But not every policy change is beneficial. The persistence of the demand does not prove the value of the result. It only proves that persistence is often rewarded.

​Why do humans fight so hard against reality? Why do we struggle for something that cannot be instead of learning to bear our burdens and disappointments? Philosophers have written and will continue to write on these matters; Dr. Jordan B. Peterson has certainly taken some stabs at the subject in recent years.

​There’s nothing new about the Liberals using the Senate, or the courts, or local city councils to do their dirty work. There are simply times when the process is more transparent. This is one of them.

​Here I sit in Ontario, where we’re told to “Stay Home” in many different languages. However it’s said though, the message from our government is the same. You may not move about freely. Most of us understand that we are dealing with a virus that goes wherever an infected person goes but a growing number of people also understand that over the past year, our “Fundamental Freedoms” have suffered increasingly severe restrictions.

​En tant qu’ancien chef du seul parti politique fédéral pro-vie du Canada de 1995 à 2008, je ne suis pas susceptible d’injures. Cependant, une décision récente de la plus haute cour du Canada m’a amené à verbaliser mon dégoût total face à la lâcheté que je vois être affichée par les juges actuels de la Cour suprême du Canada et - ce qui n’est pas si surprenant - notre Premier Ministre en exercice et son gouvernement. « Les lâches mous » leur va bien et c’est la description la plus gentille que je puisse trouver pour eux.

As a former Leader of Canada’s only pro-life federal political party from 1995 to 2008, I’m not prone to name-calling. However, a recent decision of Canada’s highest court has caused me to verbalize my utter disgust at the cowardice I see being displayed by the current justices of the Supreme Court of Canada and—not so surprisingly—our sitting Prime Minister and his government. ‘Spineless cowards’ fits them well and is the kindest description I can find for them.

When Justin Trudeau says, “Give me your guns,” he’s not addressing the common criminal. He’s talking to the hitherto law-abiding citizen who legally possesses firearms for hunting, sport, or self-defence. For criminals, the Prime Minister has a special deal: reduced sentences for those who use a firearm in the commission of a crime.

​Canada’s Parliament will be voting on a motion on whether to boycott the next winter Olympics, which are scheduled to be held in China in 2022. Why? Because the issue of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) repression of minorities, specifically the Uighur people, has become a more publicized issue recently.