Tag Archives: liberal

Justin Trudeau has nothing for which to apologize

Embed from Getty Images

Justin Trudeau has been the leader of Canada’s Liberal Party since 2013 and Prime Minister since 2015


Liberal PC culture is trying to decapitate yet another national head of state. This time the victim is the Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau.

Unless you have been living under a rock the past few days, you have likely seen the pictures of Trudeau which have surfaced after nearly two decades.

Those pictures show Trudeau attending an ‘Arabian Nights’ theme party at the private school at which he was teaching back in 2001.

In the photos, as part of an old-style sultan/genie-type costume, Trudeau is wearing a robe and turban. He is also sporting dark makeup which covers his entire face as well as his neck and hands.

When the photos surfaced they elicited outrage from the usual suspects who are offended these days by anything which they consider ‘cultural appropriation’, almost always directed at a white person costuming as someone from another race or ethnic background.

Trudeau, whose father, Pierre Trudeau, had been the Canadian Prime Minister during the early 1980’s, was a 29-year-old teacher at the West Point Grey Academy in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada at the time that the photos were taken.

The revelation of the first photo immediately resulted in Trudeau issuing a public apology. When a couple of subsequent photos and a video also emerged, Trudeau apologized yet again.

Trudeau at the 2001 ‘Arabian Nights’ theme party

The following is an excerpt from a Time magazine piece published on September 19, 2019 by Anna Purna Kambhampaty, Madeleine Carlisle and Melissa Chan:

“Speaking to reporters Wednesday night, following TIME’s publication of the photo, Trudeau apologized: “I shouldn’t have done that. I should have known better and I didn’t. I’m really sorry.” When asked if he thought the photograph was racist, he said, “Yes it was. I didn’t consider it racist at the time, but now we know better.””

The video which surfaced and was published by the Global News in Canada appeared unrelated to the theme party. However, it also offered no context, nor was it entirely clear as to exactly what the person shown was doing or why they were doing it, if in fact it even was Trudeau.

However, news outlets have exploded with statements such as “stunning” and “racially charged” in their description of the photos and video.

Here is the problem with that apology and the underlying supposition.

Racism is defined as “prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.

It can also be defined as “the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.”

Trudeau neither did or said, nor did he imply, anything back in 2001 which revealed any type of prejudice or discrimination or antagonism. He did not display any behavior indicating that he felt that his white race is superior to any other race.

Trudeau simply wore a theme-appropriate costume and makeup to a party at which many were attending in costume. Bottom line, Justin Trudeau has nothing for which to apologize.

I have seen a few of my fellow conservatives calling for Trudeau to resign in the wake of this revelation. That is nothing short of politically motivated idiocy.

There is no need for conservatives to jump on Trudeau, a publicly proclaimed and evidenced liberal where nearly every political and social position is concerned, simply as an attempt to exploit a “gotcha” moment.

The fact is that conservatives should be supporting Trudeau at this time, as incredible as that may seem. Why? Again, because Trudeau did nothing wrong back in 2001, and because this type of character assassination against anyone of any political persuasion needs to stop.

By apologizing, Trudeau actually did more wrong now than he ever did back then.

Most of us with common sense recognize that many folks these days, especially the snowflake contingent on the political left, are offended far too often and by far too much.

Here in Philadelphia, the local hockey team, the Philadelphia Flyers, completely overreacted back in the early spring when they first covered with a black tarp and then removed a statue of beloved franchise iconic singer Kate Smith.

Smith’s rendition of the song “God Bless America” had become a good luck charm for the team during their Stanley Cup-winning years in the mid-1970’s. It grew into a traditional staple, played before big Flyers games ever since.

In 1986, the Flyers erected a statue of Smith based on her performance of the song prior to the clinching game of the 1974 Stanley Cup Finals victory. The statue moved with the team from The Spectrum to its new home, and was sitting outside what is now the Wells Fargo Center.

But a story emerged that Smith had performed a few songs some 80 years ago which contained what were perceived by the snowflake crowd as racist lyrics and sentiments.

The NHL principle ‘Hockey is for Everyone’ is at the heart of everything the Flyers stand for,” Flyers President Paul Holmgren said in a statement at the time per a piece at CNN. “As a result, we cannot stand idle while material from another era gets in the way of who we are today.

Kate Smith, some 34 years after her death, as well as her song remains beloved by many Flyers fans. But she has been black-balled by the hockey organization.

It will be interesting to see how Justin Trudeau, a true liberal world leader and former media darling who is up for re-election next year, is ultimately treated by the press.

But if early reporting on the photos and the recent liberal track record are any indication, this may be the end of the 47-year-old’s political career.

While I hate to support any liberal politician, there is no other way to respond to this situation than with support for the Canadian P.M.

If liberals want to eat their own, that will usually be just fine with me. However, Justin Trudeau did nothing wrong in 2001. Lighten-up, snowflakes.

Where Do We Go From Here?

The state of modern American political discourse has deteriorated to such a wretched point that there are times where I will hear or read something and feel as if blood is actually going to begin shooting from my eyes.

Even in trying to sit down and type this piece, deciding where to begin, in what direction to take it, the problems are so many and deep that it almost makes me want to stop and just throw up my hands in surrender.

I have said it myself, and I heard it from someone else this morning: American partisan politics have deteriorated to a state of bitterness, rancor, and stalemate. Our nation has reached a point not seen since the Civil War era. We are angry as a people. Mad at the politicians, mad at the media, mad at each other.

There are many culprits, and we can blame those politicians and that media. We can blame lobbyists and special interest groups. We can blame whomever else we choose. But there is another guilty party in this situation. We have reached a point where all of us need to take a look in the mirror and realize that we ourselves have become a big part of the problem.

We all have basic moral, spiritual, and political values developed over the course of a lifetime based on personal experiences. Our internal compass leads us to make the important decisions in our lives, including decisions at the ballot box. We vote for candidates who we believe will best reflect our values. We choose those who we believe will support those values with specific programs and initiatives to further those values.

There is just one problem with our entire line of thinking: it is completely selfish.

Let’s get simplistic for a moment, because tremendously complex problems such as those we are now facing often require getting down to simple basics in order to find some solutions.

We live in a place called “The Village” and we enjoy eating apples. We believe that not only are apples good for us, but they are good for everyone. If more people ate apples, The Village would be a better, happier, more fair place.

Not only that, but we think that oranges are horrible. Furthermore, oranges are at the root of most problems. There seems to us a very simple solution: The Village will grow and eat only apples, and will not grow or consume oranges. All problems in The Village are thus fixed!

But, alas, there is a stumbling block. Some of the people in The Village actually believe to their very core (pun intended) that apples actually are the root of all evil. Apples should be minimized, or done away with.

These people believe that oranges are excellent. Oranges are the answer to a better, happier, more fair existence for The Village.

Huh, imagine that. We all live here in The Village. We’ve all grown up here, been educated here. How did this happen? How could we possibly think and believe so differently?

Well, in any event, we need to try to fix this problem. So we decide to get a couple of the brightest, fairest, nicest leaders in the “orangers” and “applers” camps here at The Village together at a main table and work it out.

So down the leaders sit at the main table. But problems begin to surface early in the talks. Orangers think apples cause all the problems. Applers think oranges cause all the problems. Orangers want no apples grown, or just a small amount. Applers want no oranges grown, or just a small amount.

Gridlock. Welcome to modern American political discourse.

Maybe we applers can just ignore those darned orangers. After all, there are more of us than them. We know that apples are good and oranges are bad. We know it! They are simply wrong. They are, in fact, crazy people for liking and wanting oranges over apples. We’ll simplyl ignore them, do what we want, what we know is right, and the hell with them!

But then someone in our little appler community points something important out: sure, there are more of us than there are of them. But it’s pretty darned close. Anything could tip the scales the other way in a hurry. A little disease outbreak on our side of the camp. Maybe a few applers move away. Maybe the orangers have more children than we do over the next few years. They begin to outnumber us. What do we do then?

It’s happened before in The Village’s past, after all. Those demographic shifts. So it likely will happen again. If we ignore them today, they will ignore us tomorrow, and we’ll be forced to live in an “orange” world. That would be unacceptable to us. We cannot let it happen. What to do? Where do we go from here?

The answer is as simple for the people of “The Village” as it is for we the people of the United States of America today. We need to stop being selfish.

We need to stop demonizing one another. We need to stop thinking of ourselves as simply “applers” and “orangers”, as “Democrats” and “Republicans”, as “Liberals and “Conservatives”, and begin to accept that we are all Americans.

You will not think like me at all times. You will not believe in all of the same ideals that I believe. I will not feel as you do on many issues. That does not make you evil. It does not make me crazy. It simply makes us different.

You must get some of the things that you want. I must get some of the things that I want. You will have to give up, or delay, some of the things you want. I will have to give up, or delay, some of the things that I want.

So where do we go from here? It’s up to us. It’s completely up to the people. Who do you like and support in the political world? Who don’t you like in politics today? Barack Obama? John Boehner? Harry Reid? Eric Cantor? Nancy Pelosi? Pat Toomey? Bob Casey?

Who cares? They are not nearly as important as you are! Those politicians only have the power that you give them. Pick up the phone, pick up a pen, tap on your keyboard. Tell all of them, including those on “your side” that you demand compromise for America.

American politics cannot be allowed to continue on as a ‘zero sum game’, a competition with winners and losers. If we are not all winners in some substantive way, then America is not working properly.

That doesn’t mean our government should give to everyone every single thing that they want. It means that all of us need to be concerned for, and substantively work to ensure, the rights of every single American citizen, regardless of political backgrounds.

Where do we go from here? Every society in the history of the world has been forced to answer that question at one point or another. Every democracy or monarchy, every socialist or communist or religious state.

Most of those societies reacted to those points in their history, including right here in America, with civil war or some other bloodshed as the catalyst for movement or change. I pray that our nation can avoid that most inhumane, illogical, deadly of choices this time.

The great American writer and thinker Walter Lippmann believed, and I happen to agree, that a major problem with people’s participation in political issues is that they make up their minds before they define the facts.

They do so rather than gathering information and analyzing those facts before reaching their conclusions. We need to be more educated as individuals. That is one area that we certainly need to go: inside ourselves, to our own education, and our own moderation of expression until we are so educated.

If we fail to become more educated, fail to embrace the humanity of our fellow Americans, and continue to allow ourselves to be played as puppets, then we will end up as Lippmann warned:

The private citizen, beset by partisan appeals for the loan of his public opinion, will soon see, perhaps, that these appeals are not a compliment to his intelligence, but an imposition on his good nature and an insult to his sense of evidence.” 

We are being insulted, and we are insulting one another. Let’s begin here, by stopping those things.

Liberals Must Stand Up to Obama

The cries have been going out far and wide regarding President Barack Obama from the very beginning.

He is a Chicago-machine politician with a strong lean towards Socialism, and he will plunge the country deeper into debt while dismantling capitalism and further dividing the nation ideologically.

It turns out that all of this is true. Everything that was cried out has either come to pass, is in the process of coming to be, or has been actively and publicly discussed by the Obama administration as a goal and/or actual plan being drawn up.

The debt and the size of federal government has grown, jobs and the economy remain stagnant, the people’s political ideological gulf has widened.

There is one big problem here: the only people doing anything about it are Republicans.

The Democrats of the nation, especially the most liberal, are sitting on their hands, not only watching as all of the promises made to them go down the tubes along with their families futures, but having actively participated in the process by aggressively re-electing a man they knew was selling them out.

Within a short time of Obama’s first election in 2008, many liberals saw his actions, heard his words, and realized they had been duped. This was within weeks and months of the euphoria of that election. But they let him go awhile, waiting to see what would happen, knowing it had to be better than the eight years of George W. Bush they had just suffered under.

Bush himself became their bogeyman. Whenever any criticism was leveled at the bad economic numbers, at the difficulty in disengaging from the Middle East conflicts, at any issue that Obama seemed to be able to do little about, the liberals gave him a pass with the simple phrase: “this is all Bush’s fault!”

Problem? Nothing got better, and in fact, things kept getting worse.

As the 2012 election cycle rolled around, the Democratic Party knew that it was tremendously disappointed in the actions and the results of their “Change” President. In fact, the only changes were for the worse.

Oh, they griped and complained and moaned on talk shows and in newspaper articles. But no one called for any change of any substance. Absolutely no viable candidates either stepped forward or were put forth in the media as alternatives to a President in whom they were allegedly disappointed.

So 2012 came around, and they all got on board again. They talked about the “first African-American President” and how he was “better than Bush” (there was that bogeyman again). The media put on all the feel-good shots of him playing basketball, waving with his family, and talking tough about Republicans. There was little or no criticism of the President during the election cycle, and especially once it was time for the actual Presidential battle with Mitt Romney.

So now the Democrats are stuck with a guy whose hand they have seen, whose plans have been fully exposed, little of which they like, but all of which they fully endorsed by their election cycle actions. The question is, what do they do now? The answer is, they can do a lot.

Mid-term elections are coming up in 2014. Let’s see how many of those politicians distance themselves from the President and his policies. For those who do not, let’s see if voters overwhelmingly put them into office, or back into office, thus blessing the President once again.

Even though he was just elected last November to his 2nd term, time is fast running out on Barack Obama to fully install his Socialist ideas. Once that calendar turns to 2014 and we really get into that new year, attention will be turned to those mid-terms, by both his fellow politicians and by the public and media. And by 2015, candidates will begin emerging for the next Presidential elections, undoubtedly some of whom will be espousing ideas much different than his.

Barack Obama has about another six months to get his major Socialist initiatives really rolling. Republicans have not only been talking the talk in trying to stop him from derailing the American train, they have been walking the walk by actively fighting him every step of the way.

You can see and hear the frustration in Obama at times. But the people who can really make a difference, who can totally stop a potential national disaster? Those would be his fellow Democrats.

Let’s see if the liberals have the spine to actually stand up to him this time, and begin to take America back from the Socialist precipice to which their Democratic Party leader has led them all. If they do, we may be able to save traditional American exceptionalism yet.

If they do not, our grandchildren are in danger of growing up in a weakened, demoralized, economically stagnant, government-dependent Socialist state with little hope of recovery beyond the extreme of a revolution that we’ll be too old and they’ll be too uninspired to fight.

Disagreement does not equal hate

Traditional, conservative, and Christian, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee used his popularity in those circles and publicly called for Americans who support traditional marriage to get out to their local Chick-fil-A restaurant this past Wednesday.

On his Facebook page, Huckabee posted the following statement: “Let’s affirm a business that operates on Christian principles and whose executives are willing to take a stand for the Godly values we espouse.”

This led to an uprising of support among those, such as myself and my wife, who agree with Huckabee’s position on marriage as intended by God to be between one man and one woman. We ate dinner on Wednesday late afternoon at the Chick-fil-a restaurant at 2301 E. Butler Street, just off Aramingo Avenue in the Port Richmond section of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The place was packed, and had to bring extra help on to serve all those who, like us, heeded Huckabee’s call and came out in support.

The controversy began when leaders within the LGBT community (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) had discovered that Chick-fil-a takes public stances on behalf of, and supports charitable organizations that benefit, traditional marriage as Biblically defined. As the company’s President, Dan Cathy, said when confronted on the issues this week: “Guilty as charged!”

The leaders within LGBT then did what the overwhelming majority of liberals begin to do when they realize that not only does someone disagree with them, but is willing to do so publicly, including putting their money where their mouths are – they began to express hatred. They did so in the usual fashion, by accusing those towards whom they felt hatred of hating them.

It is the oldest trick in the liberal book. If you do not support gay marriage, then you are not only against it, but you hate us. The old “either you are with us, or you are against us” mentality is put into play with aggression.

The immediate use of this type of accusation can be found on page one in the liberal handbook. Immediately following on page two comes demonization of the person, company or group that is against your position.

No consideration was paid to a company statement that read “The Chick-fil-a culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect – regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender.”

The company went on to explain that it has a history of applying biblically-based principles to its business practices, such as remaining closed on Sundays, and that it intends to “leave any policy debates over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.”

In an interview with the Baptist Press, Cathy stated that “We are a family-owned business, family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.

The most recent Gallup Poll on this issue shows that a full 74% of Republicans say that same-sex marriage should not be legal, and 67% of all Americans who attend weekly religious services feel the same way.

In an October 2011 poll by the Pew Forum, 74% of white Evangelicals and 62% of black Protestants are opposed to allowing gays and lesbians to marry.

But what will not be revealed in poll figures are the feelings behind those religious, moral, cultural and political opinions.

The fact of the matter which I can reveal from my own personal feelings, those of people close to me who feel the same as I do, and every single person that I have ever spoken to on this issue who shares my values is that “hate” is nowhere in the equation.

We don’t hate gays. We don’t wish anyone damned to eternal hell. We don’t want anyone served differently in restaurants. We don’t want anyone treated differently by the police or fire departments. We don’t want anyone beaten or killed or even completely shunned.

What we do want is the hatred to stop – towards us, from the liberal side.

If you find that some business supports your social, political, moral position on some issue, then by all means, support that business. In fact, the Starbucks coffee company has apparently come out in support of gay marriage. Perfect opportunity to show your support by frequenting their business with your dollars. Just don’t tell us how to spend ours when we disagree with you.

On this past Wednesday, August 1st, 2012 the Chick-fil-A company set a one-day sales record. This record was set thanks to the support of the huge number of people in this country who believe as they do, that traditional marriage is the way to go. There were no signs demanding death to gays, there were no feelings of hatred towards gays.

Fundamental disagreement on this or any other issue does not equate to hate. I have known a number of gay individuals in my lifetime, none of whom I hated even though I completely disagreed with the choices they were making and/or the ways in which they were choosing to publicly express themselves sexually.

I pray that as we move forward both as a nation and as a species, that we can all find a way here on God’s beautiful creation of a planet to live together in peace. That we can all find love and compassion for one another. And that those who accuse others of hate perhaps take the time to listen to their own words, and into the feelings in their own hearts. It is there that they are more likely to find any true hate.

Rallying ‘Round Romney

I’ve been a fan of Newt Gingrich for a long time. At the same time that Gingrich was leading the Republicans to victory in the 1994 congressional elections with his “Contract With America“, I was making my own shift from lifelong liberal Democrat to social conservative Republican.

Gingrich is a brilliant man, a superb debater, and perhaps the single most informed individual in the entire Party on the entire range of issues.

His performances in the early candidate debates were outstanding. So it was with hope that I began to support his candidacy for the Presidency last year, and with excitement that I watched him bolt to the polling lead a month or so ago.

But as the weeks pass, the first states begin to cast their primary and caucus ballots, and the candidates are exposed to one another in more focused debates and to the press and public at campaign stops that now matter more than ever, Mitt Romney has taken a commanding lead.

The former Massachusetts Governor became the first Republican in modern primary history to capture both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.

Romney’s doubleheader sweep in the Heartland and in New England show that he has a wide range of appeal. That has always been one of Mitt Romney’s strengths.

He has never been considered an ideologue, never been considered a part of the ‘Vast Right Wing Conspiracy’, never been beholden to the ‘Tea Party’ or any other particular group. He appeals to many people on many issues, and makes almost as many wary on almost as many issues.

The problem for Republicans like myself who label ourselves as true Conservatives, and who have been searching for a candidate to face off against Barack Obama in the fall, is that we have been looking for “Super Conservative” – a candidate who fits that label on both social and fiscal policy issues. We want a candidate who paints a stark contrast to Obama’s near-socialist liberalism.

But in our haste to find the perfect candidate, we need to remember two very important things. First, that candidate does not seem to exist. No one is perfect.  When viewed from the standpoint of true Conservatives, all of the contenders who actually want the position as the Republican nominee have weaknesses ranging from personal to experiential to their past legislative and governing records.

The second thing that we need to remember then becomes the single most important – we need to get rid of Obama. As the single most liberal President in American history, Obama has blown the deficit through the roof, stagnated the economy, threatened taxation increases on the very people and businesses that drive that economy, bailed out large corporations with our tax dollars and on the backs of our grandchildren.

God help us all if he actually gets to appoint a Supreme Court Justice this year. The damage that individual is likely to do over the next few decades, for many of us covering the rest of our lives, would be unimaginable.

The most important thing that every Republican across the country, especially every Conservative currently backing Gingrich, or Rick Santorum, or Rick Perry, or Ron Paul needs to remember is that we simply cannot allow ourselves to be pulled apart by our differences. We have far too many more similarities to let that happen. More importantly, we have far too many differences with Obama and his socialist-style cronies to allow our nation to suffer through another four years.

I have backed off my support of Newt Gingrich and thrown my hat fully into the camp of Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination and for the Presidency of the United States because I believe that he legitimately offers the Party the best chance to defeat Obama and socialism. I also believe that, with a Republican congress supporting him, Romney will produce a far more truly Conservative administration than any in the last twenty years.

From his own website comes the Romney vision: Mitt Romney will rebuild the foundations of the American economy on the principles of free enterprise, hard work, and innovation. His plan seeks to reduce taxes, spending, regulation, and government programs. It seeks to increase trade, energy production, human capital, and labor flexibility. It relinquishes power to the states instead of claiming to have the solution to every problem.

Romney is also born again hard on a number of social issues, including continually emphasizing of late that he has become staunchly “pro-life” in his view on abortion. On military matters, Romney has stated publicly that he wants to grow the defense budget to allow for modernization of the aging Navy and Air Force fleets. He has attacked Obama for not doing enough to counter the greatest military threat to ourselves and our allies, a nuclear Iran.

Mitt Romney has earned a record as a ‘moderate’ Republican. However, he is leaning towards more Conservative positions now. I believe that is not simply due to wishing to earn the nomination, but also because he has genuinely grown or been pushed towards those positions. Either way is fine with me, all that matters is where he is now, and where he will take the nation.

I am asking any one of my fellow American Republicans currently supporting another candidate, or currently holding back their support for anyone, to strongly consider throwing your full, outward, vocal, strong support to the campaign of Mitt Romney for President of the United States.