It’s a good speech. He’d be a great prime minister if he weren’t so fond of fossil fuels, military spending (as opposed to actual defence,) and authoritarian bullshit in the name of security as exemplified in the infamous “border security” bill.
No, unfortunately they’ll probably learn from their mistake and find someone slightly less incompetent this time around. Which may be all they need to win
I think the border security bill was an initial attempt to placate the Orange Turd… I completely disagree with it anyway, but I am not sure it is part of what Carney would have done under different circumstances
So far I am not finding myself agreeing with Carney too much but this speech was solid and some of the deals and partnerships coming up in the news have been pretty positive (at least with the info available)… so there is hope?
Carney’s reliance on fossil fuels does stick out as somewhat against his own book, Values. This is all speculation, but my theory for the reliance on fossil fuels is that it has a history of econimcally strengthening nations (at least if we ignore pollution), and has historically proven to be a valuable and desired resource globally and domestically. Given he is navigating the biggest economic shift Canada has seen in decades, fossil fuels look like a safe, but not neccesarily the right choice.
Yes, exactly. Actions speak louder than words, of course, and his actions around fossil fuels feel very counter to his published words, but he has also said that we are at economic war now, and war time decisions need to be much more pragmatic than peace time ones.
He said it all today: Countries that cannot feed themselves, fuel themselves, or defend themselves are now supremely vulnerable. We can feed ourselves, and we can fuel ourselves, and we can fuel and feed others. We need to offer that so that they will defend us, as we build up the means to defend ourselves.
Shaking off being a US vassal state is going to get a little messy.
Okay, 100% with you on his love for fossil fuels and military spending, but what specifically has he done to be deserving of calling him out of “authoritarian bullshit”?
Read a few more words there and find out. He didn’t write that legislation, but he approved of it, has had the power to stop it all along, and has not renounced it.
I think I perceive that event as Trump appeasement more than authoritarian bullshit, but I at least get where you’re coming from, and I agree that it was a bullshit move. I liked Carney for being someone who I had believed would stand up to Trump, as opposed to our other option, who is still likely still trying to brush the flavour of boot leather out of his mouth. Doing shit to placate the orange turd is just going to empower him. We already saw this once with Hitler and the strategy of appeasement; we don’t need to see it again.
The bill itself was full of maximally authoritarian bullshit, causing all the civil society groups to oppose it as loudly as they did. It remains around in some form, last I heard, still theoretically in the legislative process somewhere, a continuing threat to us all should the Liberals feel confident enough to try and pass any of the worst parts of it into law.
It might’ve been an attempt to appease Trump, or it might’ve been pushed by some Trumpist infiltrator within the party, I don’t know. Optimistically, we can hope that Carney wasn’t really aware of what was in it, and on a topic outside his areas of expertise he was simply misled by people he mistakenly chose to trust. In any case I’m sure he will have learned from the experience.
It’s a good speech. He’d be a great prime minister if he weren’t so fond of fossil fuels, military spending (as opposed to actual defence,) and authoritarian bullshit in the name of security as exemplified in the infamous “border security” bill.
Can you imagine how it would be if PP had won?
Dont have to imagine, just wait till next election. Pretty sure it’s only gunna get worse from here and it was too close for comfort this time.
Yep
Doubt timbit trump will even be around next federal election.
No, unfortunately they’ll probably learn from their mistake and find someone slightly less incompetent this time around. Which may be all they need to win
At least they’re keeping this charisma void for now: https://sendvid.com/w057xycg
catbox kept breaking the file fml
I think the border security bill was an initial attempt to placate the Orange Turd… I completely disagree with it anyway, but I am not sure it is part of what Carney would have done under different circumstances
So far I am not finding myself agreeing with Carney too much but this speech was solid and some of the deals and partnerships coming up in the news have been pretty positive (at least with the info available)… so there is hope?
Carney’s reliance on fossil fuels does stick out as somewhat against his own book, Values. This is all speculation, but my theory for the reliance on fossil fuels is that it has a history of econimcally strengthening nations (at least if we ignore pollution), and has historically proven to be a valuable and desired resource globally and domestically. Given he is navigating the biggest economic shift Canada has seen in decades, fossil fuels look like a safe, but not neccesarily the right choice.
Yes, exactly. Actions speak louder than words, of course, and his actions around fossil fuels feel very counter to his published words, but he has also said that we are at economic war now, and war time decisions need to be much more pragmatic than peace time ones.
He said it all today: Countries that cannot feed themselves, fuel themselves, or defend themselves are now supremely vulnerable. We can feed ourselves, and we can fuel ourselves, and we can fuel and feed others. We need to offer that so that they will defend us, as we build up the means to defend ourselves.
Shaking off being a US vassal state is going to get a little messy.
Yes, unfortunately when push comes to shove, environmentalism will often be pushed aside to level the playing field.
Okay, 100% with you on his love for fossil fuels and military spending, but what specifically has he done to be deserving of calling him out of “authoritarian bullshit”?
Read a few more words there and find out. He didn’t write that legislation, but he approved of it, has had the power to stop it all along, and has not renounced it.
I think I perceive that event as Trump appeasement more than authoritarian bullshit, but I at least get where you’re coming from, and I agree that it was a bullshit move. I liked Carney for being someone who I had believed would stand up to Trump, as opposed to our other option, who is still likely still trying to brush the flavour of boot leather out of his mouth. Doing shit to placate the orange turd is just going to empower him. We already saw this once with Hitler and the strategy of appeasement; we don’t need to see it again.
The bill itself was full of maximally authoritarian bullshit, causing all the civil society groups to oppose it as loudly as they did. It remains around in some form, last I heard, still theoretically in the legislative process somewhere, a continuing threat to us all should the Liberals feel confident enough to try and pass any of the worst parts of it into law.
It might’ve been an attempt to appease Trump, or it might’ve been pushed by some Trumpist infiltrator within the party, I don’t know. Optimistically, we can hope that Carney wasn’t really aware of what was in it, and on a topic outside his areas of expertise he was simply misled by people he mistakenly chose to trust. In any case I’m sure he will have learned from the experience.
Genuinely appreciate the insight. Thanks for the fair response.
Tldr “if you don’t know, I’m not gonna tell you”
Him I took the time to answer. You I will block.
It’s a fair assessment of your approach, blocked or not.