LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

When I was a kid at David G. Burnet Elementary School in Dallas, Texas, we would stand at our desks every morning and do the Declaration of Independence.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands," we'd say, our hands over our hearts.  "One nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all."

Some days, we'd practice hiding under our desks, for when a North Vietnamese fighter jet would somehow make its way across the ocean to suburban Dallas, and target David G. Burnet.  We were seven and eight and nine years old.  We'd do that.

We were taught, from the very first day in the very first grade, to respect and support America's armed forces.  It was as indelibly part of the culture as the flag found in every classroom, and flying atop every school.

Now, the notion that Canada and America are different is so true, so self-evident, it barely mentions saying.  We are different nations with different values.

And one of those values centers on men and women in uniform.  We Canadians of course respect and remember those in our armed forces, too.  But not in the way the Americans do. Not as much.

To the American people that's what they always say down there, "the American people," like it is a thing unto itself their armed forces are why they are a nation.  It is at the center of their identity.  And woe unto whomever speaks ill of military service.

The current significance of all this can be traced back to a single day, which was the day Donald J. Trump graduated from the Wharton School in Pennsylvania.  On that single day, the Tet Offensive and what followed had left 40 American men-boys dead.

Trump partied with his friends.

He had reached the age to be drafted, and he was in peak physical health, having played squash and tennis and golf throughout his school years.  He had received four deferments from military service because he was still in school.

But when he graduated, Donald Trump suddenly was fit no longer.  He had developed "bone spurs."

No one has seen the medical assessment that diagnosed "bone spurs."  Trump and his campaign have for years ignored requests for the paperwork that helped him avoid service in Vietnam.

So, we have to take his word for it.  Other politicians-to-be got deferments.  It wasn't unusual.  It wasn't rare.

What is unusual what is exceedingly rare, in a nation that venerates military service as much as the United States does is what Donald Trump is alleged to have said about those who gave life and limb to serve their country in Vietnam.

Those men and women were "suckers," Donald Trump has said.  They were "losers."

The news that Trump had said such things about America's military landed like a bomb on the presidential vote, now about 60 days away.  The Atlantic reported his words first.  Trump and his online fans of course dismissed The Atlantic  which has been publishing for nearly two hundred years, and has won innumerable awards as "fake news."

But then Fox News reported that The Atlantic had indeed told the truth.  Fox independently corroborated Trump's words with senior officials who had directly worked for him.

At that point, things perceptibly changed.  For Trump and his winged monkeys, it became a lot harder to deny what The Atlantic had said.  You know: that American military heroes were "losers" and "suckers."

In American politics, the October Surprise is something that typically happens in the month of October,  just before a presidential vote.  It is something that changes the outcome of the election like FBI Director James Comey's announcement of an re-investigation of Hillary Clinton's emails in 2016.

The investigation was abandoned the day before the vote.  But it installed Donald Trump in the White House.

Trump was already facing myriad challenges as he sought re-election in 2020: a virus that has killed nearly 200,000 Americans, an economy in shambles, a united Democratic Party.  But calling America's men and women in uniform the ones who literally gave their lives, while Donald Trump partied with models and escorts "suckers" and "losers" may well be the end for him.  That may well be the thing that rids us of the pestilence that is Donald Trump, once and for all.

Back at David G. Burnet in Dallas, we were taught to always, always respect the military.  That was one lesson we learned very well.

Donald Trump, perhaps, is about to be taught the same lesson.

Photo Credit: Stars & Stripes

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently prorogued Parliament (which sounds painful) so he could have the time needed to concoct a new economic agenda for Canada.

And not just any economic agenda, but one, we're told, that will be a bold and radical departure from anything seen in the past.

As the Toronto Star's David Olive gushingly put it, "the Trudeau government will design not just a proposed economic recovery plan for Canada, but a lasting economic renaissance only a notch or two shy of Sir John A. Macdonald's National Policy in its impact."

So yeah, the guy now mainly known now for his selfie skills, costume changes and socks, will apparently re-invent himself as a genius economic innovator the Karl Marx of the 21st century.

Sounds pretty exciting, but I wonder if Trudeau really has it in him to engage in anything that's too radical or revolutionary or groundbreaking.

After all, a revolution usually involves ruthlessly dismantling the status quo and replacing it with some sort of untried and untested social experiment.

My guess is, such an action would be a real problem for Trudeau, since he's very much a pro-status quo kind of guy, as are his supporters in the mainstream media and in corporate Canada and amongst the "Laurentian elites."

Please note, up until now the prime minister has done next to nothing that could actually be construed as radical (unless you count his recent decision to cover up his cherubic face with a beard); certainly, he's taken no actions during his time in government that would in any way upset the Lords of Bay Street.

In fact, the entire ideology of the Liberal Party under Trudeau is basically to keep things the way they are for people who are content with the here and now.

Indeed, it's his affection for the present which distinguishes Trudeau from the ideological left and right.

People on the right, for instance, typically don't like present modern times; they pine for a romanticized or glorified past.

Consider former Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper who tried mightily to stir up national excitement about Canada's past glories, most especially our involvement in the War of 1812.

Or consider U.S. President Donald Trump's "Make American Great Again" slogan, or Conservative Party Leader Erin O'Toole's mantra of "Take Canada Back."

It's all about restoration.

Trudeau, on the other hand, seems to hate the past.

He sees it as a dark time filled with slave owners, racists, residential schools and religious bigotry.

This is why he and O'Toole had such a different take when vandals decapitated Sir John A. Macdonald's statue.

O'Toole's response was quick and forceful, tweeting, "Canada wouldn't exist without Sir John A. Macdonald.  Canada is a great county, and one we should be proud of.  We will not build a better future by defacing our past.  It's time politicians grow a backbone and stand up for our country."

Trudeau, by contrast, waited a few days before commenting on the incident and then he issued a half-hearted statement, saying he was "deeply disappointed."

Anyway, my suspicion is that Trudeau secretly agreed with the vandals, who view Macdonald as "racist, colonial, white nationalist".  (What's more, I bet Macdonald didn't march in Gay Pride Parades.)

Meanwhile, the ideological left like Trudeau also hates the past, but unlike Trudeau they aren't too crazy about the present.

As matter of fact, Marxism preaches that our current imperialistic, bourgeois, capitalist world must inevitably be wiped away, so that, just as inevitably, it can be replaced in the future with a utopian communist society.

Mind you, the establishment of a communist utopian future requires making lots of sacrifices.

As Lenin allegedly put it, "You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs."

And this is why Trudeau isn't a left-wing revolutionary; asking citizens to make serious sacrifices for some distant goal isn't exactly part of his skill set.

He's the fun guy!

If anything, Trudeau's political messaging focuses on the upbeat idea that he offers all gain and no pain.

For example, he's promising to dramatically shift Canada into a "green economy" painlessly and easily, with zero costs.  (OK maybe his environmental plan will destroy Alberta, but unfortunately for that province it's located outside of Ontario and Quebec, so nobody cares.)

With all this in mind, what can we expect from Trudeau's new economic agenda?

Well, it's possible the COVID pandemic will have made the prime minister more willing to take risks, more willing to abandon the status quo and more willing to be a revolutionary.

Yet, I still think at the end of the day Trudeau will still be Trudeau.

Sure, he'll spend a lot of money and explode the deficit to massive proportions, yes, he will boost "green" subsidies and build more solar panels, yes, he will expand social programs and maybe invent new ones.

However, I also suspect his plan won't take into account what's worked or hasn't worked in the past, nor will it consider what it might do to this country in the future.

In short, Trudeau's "economic renaissance" will focus on one thing and one thing only: making us all content with the present.

Photo Credit: CBC News

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.