Post: #351

(07-01-2016 07:02 PM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  Rebel and Faith Goldy's New Brunswick story made Breitbart:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...ts-sharia/

This story is getting noticed.

I'm counting down the days to when we start hearing of sharia patrols and taharrush gamea on the streets of Canadian cities.

I wonder what the feminist "anti-street harrassment" campaigners will do when their adversaries aren't leery old men or awkward daygamers, but packs of young migrant rapefugees and Salafists who give exactly zero fucks about notions of women's equality or religious tolerance.

Post: #352

(07-01-2016 07:48 PM)HighSpeed_LowDrag Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 07:02 PM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  Rebel and Faith Goldy's New Brunswick story made Breitbart:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...ts-sharia/

This story is getting noticed.

I'm counting down the days to when we hear of sharia patrols and taharrush gamea on the streets of Toronto.

I wonder what the feminist "anti-street harrassment" campaigners will do when their adversaries aren't leery old men or awkward daygamers, but packs of young migrant rapefugees and Salafists who give exactly zero fucks about notions of women's equality or religious tolerance.

They'll fall hopelessly in love with the little savages.

Remind these bitches to mind their business
Believe me, the pimp game is very religious

- Ja Rule

Post: #353

A smart fellow I talk with from time to time laid something epic on me recently.

I posed the same question. "What are these feministas going to do when Islam subjugates them?"

He replied, "you've got it all backward. These people are not driven by ideals. They are driven by hate, and they will gladly don the black sackcloth if it means they have a chance to stone another human being to death from time to time for whatever petty transgression against Islam they have committed."

Post: #354

(07-01-2016 09:56 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  A smart fellow I talk with from time to time laid something epic on me recently.

I posed the same question. "What are these feministas going to do when Islam subjugates them?"

He replied, "you've got it all backward. These people are not driven by ideals. They are driven by hate, and they will gladly don the black sackcloth if it means they have a chance to stone another human being to death from time to time for whatever petty transgression against Islam they have committed."

The core motivation of leftists is not the actual protection of those classes of people that they supposedly hold dear, but the complete destruction or subversion of those institutions that they despise and wish to destroy - Christianity, national identity, the traditional nuclear family, and traditional gender roles as the bedrock of our society. They will take any and every method they can by which to accelerate such destruction or subversion.

Once you understand this, the superficially absurd alliance of the Left and Islam actually makes perfect sense.

Post: #355

Most liberal minded women I know here don't like traditional muslim men, or traditional men in general.

They tend not to discriminate too much between where the men come from, if they're traditional they tend to keep them at arms length. That's my observation from living in a few major Canadian cities.

Most of these girls don't care about national, ethnic or religious identity either. The social groups they cluster around are more based more on career goals and university friendships. This is my real world experience. The alliance between socially liberal women, and Islamists is simply non existent. These women revile muslim men, and despise the traditionalism that they seek to bring here. They attempt to undermine and sabotage them at every corner. I know a couple of liberal minded women in education, and they've done quite a bit of work to get muslim women, especially immigrant muslim women, resources and help to make them independent from their husbands or male family members (scholarships, bursaries, women only funding groups, etc).

They also whisper in Muslim women's ears that they don't have to put up with domestic abuse, and that there are programs for battered or abused women that they can take advantage of. There's a big push by social services to get Muslim women to use these programs and make themselves independent. There's a growing number of socially liberal muslim women too. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in the next few decades here in Canada.

Post: #356

^ That's because post-wall lesbian feminists hate the idea of other women becoming successful wives/mothers, Muslim or otherwise, so they actively recruit all women into their cult of rabid feminism. It's a coven of disgusting spinster cat-women.

Post: #357

Jason Kenney will be leaving federal politics and run for Alberta PC leadership. This is very disappointing, I believe all of these cucks from the PC party should Fuck off and join the NDP where they belong, and if you are actually right wing, join Wildrose. Bullshit like this will just continue to fracture the right, and the last thing needed is another big name federal guy like Prentice or Redford coming in from Ottawa and fucking up the economic engine of the country.

Quote:It’s impossible to read any discussion of the post-Harper future of the Conservative Party without coming across the name Jason Kenney, largely because the ex-immigration minister has exerted so much effort marketing himself as the Tory party’s heir apparent.

Some pushback is long overdue. The conservative case against Kenney is clear.

He’s wrong on immigration

At a time when centre-right parties in other western democracies are defining themselves as a voice of cautious moderation on unrestricted third world immigration, Kenney has championed the precise opposite.

Under his tenure as minister, Canada’s immigration rate shot to its highest levels in half a century, giving Canada the highest per-capita immigrant intake of any country on earth. There is no economic justification for this — over 75% of those admitted have simply been relatives of other immigrants, while the supposedly economically-grounded programs that admit the rest have proven train wrecks of corruption and abuse. I once asked Kenney if his department had ever bothered to audit the net effect of immigration on the Canadian economy and he lazily linked me to a report from the Fraser Institute that claimed immigration was costing Canadians $23 billion a year.

The next Tory leader doesn’t have to be some Marie LePen-style xenophobe, but it would be nice for them to have an inclination of some restraint in utilizing one of government’s most serious and transformative powers — the power to change the population.

He’s not actually a strategic genius

Conservatives have traditionally given Kenney a pass on immigration because popular lore suggests his management of the portfolio has produced massive electoral gains for the Tory party. Alas, there is little hard evidence supporting this.

A thorough study on voter data for Policy Options magazine concluded facts “do not support the hypothesis that the Conservative success in 2011 was a product of making headway with immigrants,” noting most immigrant voters who abandoned the Liberals simply moved to the NDP. Ipsos exit polls agreed — the majority of immigrants (64%), particularly “new” immigrants (62%) and visible minorities (61%) claimed to vote for left-wing parties in 2011, and the Policy Options people observed “a tendency for immigrants to vote slightly less for Conservatives in 2011” (emphasis added).

The proof was even blunter in 2015. As the anti-Tory vote unified behind Justin Trudeau, immigrant-rich ridings that narrowly elected Conservatives four years ago due to vote splitting produced Liberal landslides this time. Kenney had simply taken credit for a short-lived fluke.

He’s gaffe-prone

Kenney is a deeply confident man — though often about things he shouldn’t be.

The supposed master of global cultures once sent outraged tweets of photos depicting Muslim women in chains not knowing they were participants in a religious play about slavery. As defense minister, he bragged Canada was the only country other than America with “smart bomb” technology, claimed a Canadian naval ship was “buzzed by Russian fighter jets,” and boasted about being the “only Canadian minister who’s been in Syria in four decades.” All these cocksure assertions were completely false.

Kenney speaks with a brisk self-assurance that no doubt easily impresses the ill-informed. I’d prefer a leader who actually knows what he’s talking about.

He’s an odd duck

The next Tory leader should be human and relatable. Without putting too fine a point on it, Kenney is a weird little man.

He has a strange obsession with the British empire and often seems to regret that Canada is not still a colony. He insists on calling Canada Day “Dominion Day” (the name was changed when Kenney was 14), he’s bragged that his redcoat ancestors fought on “the right side” of the American Revolution by opposing independence, and once mused that Canadian multiculturalism was “an inheritance of what was best about British liberal imperialism.” Beyond colonial nostalgia and Canadian politics, he does not appear to have any identifiably humanoid hobbies or interests.

Kenney has never married, and has no children. A staunch Catholic, he proudly claims to be a 47-year-old virgin. There has been predictable gossip about this over the years, and while we shouldn’t rush to dignify it, it is worth asking — as Warren Kinsella did in a 2013 column — if Canadians are going to easily warm to a nerdy, overweight bachelor when the other party has glamorous Justin Trudeau at the helm.

The media loves him

Kenney is unquestionably the media’s choice for next Tory leader, and his praises have been sung in endless fawning profiles over the decade. Much of this is due to his various “ethnic outreach” initiatives, which the liberal press loves because it allows them to reenforce a narrative that “normal” conservatives are racist bigots, and Kenney is an exceptional outlier.

The media pushes Kenney as hard as it does not because most reporters or pundits honestly think he’d be a good or successful party leader, but simply because they believe all politicians bear moral obligation to bow at the shrines of open-borders immigration and anything-goes multiculturalism. Kenney gets brownie points for grinding against his own party’s base, but Conservatives should know better than to take seriously an endorsement for party leader grounded in underlying contempt for the party itself.

[quote]

http://looniepolitics.com/anyone-kenney/

Post: #358

I found this website and it's nice to know we're not the only ones out there who think piles of immigration to Canada is a bad idea.

Quote:Basics 1

Past and present corruption in all of Canada’s federal political parties is the reason why Canada’s Immigrant and Temporary Foreign Worker intake is so high. Measures have to be taken to end the corruption.

The graph above illustrates when the latest and most dramatic corruption occurred.

As the graph shows, there is a significant difference between immigration levels before and after 1990.

The difference is that before 1990, Canada never had a period of prolonged high immigrant intake like the one it has had since 1990. Since 1990, Canada has had an average yearly intake of close to 250,000 immigrants.

With the exception of two years around the year 2000, the post-1990 immigration period is the first time in Canada’s immigration history when immigration intake has remained high for such a long period.

As the graph shows, over all of Canada’s immigration history, immigration has risen and fallen. This was so particularly from the 1920’s to 1990. This policy was logical and sensible and it became a norm.

That policy has been described as a “TAP-ON and TAP-OFF” policy. This phrase meant that when Canada had labour shortages, it turned the immigration tap on to satisfy Canada’s needs. (The post World War 2 period is an example.) Similarly, when Canada had an excess of labour, it turned the immigration tap down or off to protect its unemployed. (The 1930’s are one of the best examples.)

After 1990, the “TAP-ON and TAP-OFF” policy was abandoned. As a result, Canada’s immigration levels became an abnormality in Canada’s immigration history.

The big questions are these : Why was the norm rejected? Why did Canada increase its immigrant intake to about 250,000 immigrants per year?

Here is the explanation. In 1984, when the Mulroney government was first elected, Canada was taking about 85,000 immigrants. Despite an ongoing recession, it began increasing immigration.

Incredible as it may sound, the Mulroney government went even further. In the fall of 1990, Canada’s immigration Minister Barbara MacDougall and her Progressive Conservative colleagues decided that they would increase immigration levels to 250,000. They did so in order to cast themselves in a good light with recent immigrants. A Globe and Mail article from October, 1990 testifies to that event. By increasing immigration, they hoped to compete with the Liberal Party for “the immigrant vote”. That historically important article is available in our ARCHIVE section. Click below :
McDougall Wins Battle To Increase Immigration

From that year to now, high immigrant intake has been virtually institutionalized and immigration policy has abandoned the needs of Canadian workers. All 5 of Canada’s main political parties support Canada’s current intake of about 250,000 immigrants per year. In addition, all support the policy of allowing hundreds of thousands of Temporary Foreign Workers to work in Canada every year. The latest estimate is that there are close to 500,000 TFW’s working in Canada. All 5 of the parties are afraid that if they speak up for Canada, they will lose their share of the immigrant vote.

In other words, this is not a case of a few apples being rotten in the barrel. This is a case of all the apples being rotten.

The major point is that the increase to 250,000 per year was introduced for a corrupt reason.

To summarize : Since 1990, Canada has had 24+ years of senseless high immigration.

This is why we state that Canada’s current immigration levels and Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker levels are complete madness. Canada has to return to a sane immigration intake.

http://www.immigrationwatchcanada.org

Post: #359

The CUPW (Canada Post union) is getting ready for a strike, they have been using the "because it's 2016" gender card to drum public support, claiming that female postal workers on a whole are paid less then males. This is only the case as most urban postal workers are male but both are paid equally. The rural workers get paid less and they are majority female.

My female postal worker and I had a small chat this morning and even she's calling out the bullshit. This could backfire.

The "wage gap" is the biggest myth being repeated in Canada.

Post: #360

(07-13-2016 01:37 AM)Emancipator Wrote:  The CUPW (Canada Post union) is getting ready for a strike, they have been using the "because it's 2016" gender card to drum public support, claiming that female postal workers on a whole are paid less then males. This is only the case as most urban postal workers are male but both are paid equally. The rural workers get paid less and they are majority female.

My female postal worker and I had a small chat this morning and even she's calling out the bullshit. This could backfire.

The "wage gap" is the biggest myth being repeated in Canada.

Do you think the strike will happen? I stand to go to work as a security consultant if it does and make some $$$$.

Post: #361

Nice to see a national media piece that shits all over Toronto, what a stain on the nation that city is.

Quote:Toronto is now well established as the bastion of left-wing politics in Canada. Provincially, the six million people in the GTA elected only one Conservative in the last election, while federally, Conservatives were swept clean, their support in some downtown ridings in single digits. Toronto’s supply of left-wing ideas is so voluminous it exports lunacy such as the Leap manifesto, making Toronto an arms depot in the war against fossil fuels. Faith in the goodness and expertise of the public sector is being shipped wholesale from Queen’s Park to Parliament Hill as Kathleen Wynne’s ideological stormtroopers move to the frontlines of policy-making in Justin Trudeau’s new government.

A basic tenet of Toronto liberalism is that all problems can be addressed by the public sector with the proper mix of data, analysis and bureaucratic oversight. Problems are not given market solutions nor time to resolve themselves; they always require government intervention. Business is regarded as cynically greedy, while the saintly public service is above self-interest, despite conspicuously soaring salaries and benefits. Liberalism is relentlessly prescriptive in telling people how to think and behave, all in the name of freedom and justice. Individual actions are divorced from consequences; moral hazard does not exist for liberals.

The most obvious symptom of Toronto’s capture by left-wing ideology is how media elites and the intelligentsia (most of whom live off the public payroll) have come to believe that their perspective is no longer a point of view but an objective account of reality that will brook no discussion. One of their most central truths is that conservatives are ill-informed or borderline idiots in the vein of Rob Ford or Donald Trump. Ignoring their ideas is not therefore proof of an anti-conservative bias at the CBC or TV Ontario, but the justifiable sheltering of a puerile public from unsettling exposure to dangerously uninformed opinions. Questioning the factual basis of commonly repeated claims, such as that crime is falling, that fossil fuels are anachronistic, or that government spending stimulates growth proves your unfitness to participate in public debate. Never mind that Toronto is the only provincial capital whose unemployment rate consistently exceeds its province’s average, despite the large number of government jobs there.

What explains the ubiquity of left-wing ideology in Toronto? Start with an intolerance of dissenting ideas. William F. Buckley Jr. quipped that “a liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” The public is kept informed by the Toronto-centric CBC and its steady parade of counter-cultural, left-wing, radical-chic celebrities and academics. Toronto-centricity is hardly new; Donald Creighton, the University of Toronto’s famous historian, once noted the city’s “short horizon” that precluded it from seeing developments in Quebec or Western Canada.

The irony is that Toronto’s monolithic, suffocating liberal consensus negates a key raison d’être of any city, which is to host an invigorating culture of differing views. Closed-mindedness belongs in small towns. Yet Toronto, like the public sector it admires so much, embraces all types of diversity except ideological. The resulting conformism and groupthink reduces the vitalism and pluralism that generates innovative ideas, new companies and ultimately economic growth. John Howkins in his influential 2001 book, The Creative Economy, concluded that “Creativity thrives on differences.” Steven Pinker of Harvard notes that “It is only by bruiting ideas and seeing which ones withstand attempts to refute them that we acquire knowledge.”

Conservatives, especially in government or university, understand intuitively that constantly being challenged sharpens our arguments and their articulation. Steven Johnson, one of the world’s foremost thinkers on innovation, wrote that “encouragement does not necessarily lead to creativity. Collisions do — the collisions that happen when different fields of expertise converge in some shared physical or intellectual space.” Unfortunately, there are few collisions of ideas in Toronto’s elite. “Bore-onto,” once an apt description of Toronto’s insipid cultural life, now applies better to the city’s intellectual life.

Toronto’s smugness and complacency blind it to how it is seen by others. Toronto exaggerates its status as one of the leading cities in the world. Clotaire Rapaille’s The Global Code, released last year, documents where the global elite live and congregate without once mentioning Toronto (or indeed any Canadian city). Singapore leads with 20 references. What is so attractive about Singapore? Besides being a gateway to Asia, it is “extremely business-friendly” especially its low taxes. When was the last time someone called Toronto business-friendly? Probably roughly when it was last called car-friendly.

Howkins maintains that “A creative city needs private risk-taking and commercial success.” Recently, an editor of a major international magazine was in Ottawa to research a story on Canada. I challenged him and others around the table to name any world-class firms based in Toronto. They came up with only one example: Thompson-Reuters (whose main office is actually in New York). This list for London, New York or San Francisco would go on for pages.

Toronto’s unfamiliarity with conservatives also breeds contempt. The Toronto bourgeoisie’s complacency in presenting its liberal arguments ultimately undermines their persuasiveness. Meanwhile, the credibility of the arguments continues to erode as people can no longer square the lofty promises of liberalism with its increasingly obvious failure in practice.

http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/blog.h...eral-swamp

Post: #362

^^^^^^^^ I read that last night.

Mirrors most peoples experiences here accurately.

For the life of me, I just can't seem to figure Ontario out.

Post: #363

(07-20-2016 12:11 PM)Laner Wrote:  ^^^^^^^^ I read that last night.

Mirrors most peoples experiences here accurately.

For the life of me, I just can't seem to figure Ontario out.

Toronto is a strange place because, although it is Canada's largest city, it only has that distinction by accident. Historically, Montreal has been Canada's largest city and her cultural centre (and still the capital city of beautiful women!). Toronto was Canada's SECOND largest city until Rene Levesque and his Parti Quebecois won the provincial election in 1976. At that moment in Canadian history, most of the anglophones in Montreal packed up and moved to Toronto, boosting it to first city status.

What I am beginning to understand is that this was both bad for Montreal and bad for Toronto and bad for Canada in general. The types of anglophones that Toronto received in this migration were the cowardly liberal variety. The badass right-wing businessmen stood their ground and told Levesque and his PQ to BRING IT because nobody was getting in the way of them and all those gorgeous Montreal whores! But the cucky Ben Shapiro types left skid marks on their driveways as they spun their tires in haste to escape the mean nationalist Frenchies and head on down the highway to (((Toronto))). I'm beginning to realize that, although their economic policies were socialist, the nationalism of the PQ was actually more right-wing than the Liberal Party ever was, and since the Conservative Party is non-existent in Quebec, the PQ is actually the right-wing there, much like FN in France and AfD in Germany and UKIP in the UK are in Europe. So what I understand now is that, when Montreal sent Toronto their anglophones, they didn't send their best. They didn't send Loren Feldman's, they sent Ben Shapiro's.

Oy Vey.

Post: #364

Does all of Ontario share the same political problems found in the GTA?

I haven't travelled much outside the GTA, considering the size of the province and the amount of medium and large sized cities. I mean, you have big cities like London and Windsor in the south, and Ottawa and Kingston in the northeast.

I haven't even gone outside of Ontario yet, either. So while I'm sure that article doesn't reflect the country as a whole, it seems that way to me given my limited exposure at the moment to Canada.

Post: #365

^ You know a guy is from southern Ontario when he refers to Kingston as the north east of the province haha. Maybe Dr.Howard can chime in, I think he's spent a lot of time in the north, from what I hear its a different world up there.

Post: #366

Haha yeah, the furthest north I've been is North Bay and it's misleading. I know Ontario is huge but I keep underestimating it.

Post: #367

I've worked security contracts in North Bay, Sudbury, Timmins, Thunder Bay, and Fort Frances. Ontario outside of Toronto is very different, especially in the north. Toronto politicians know this and they fear the northerners. Northern Ontario residents get free transportation to hospitals in the south and they don't have to get their vehicles e-tested.

Toronto is the Eloi. Northern Ontario is the Morlocks.

Post: #368

(07-20-2016 01:03 PM)scotian Wrote:  ^ You know a guy is from southern Ontario when he refers to Kingston as the north east of the province haha. Maybe Dr.Howard can chime in, I think he's spent a lot of time in the north, from what I hear its a different world up there.

For northern ontario you can draw a line at north bay and separate the it from southern ontario. This difference has existed forever, even back to when it was "upper Canada" and "lower Canada".

There is further again a separation of the north into Northwestern Ontario and North eastern Ontario with the line of separation being drawn at St. Sault Marie.

Northern and Southern Ontario have different geography, ecology, population and industry. Its very siberian with small, resource based towns surviving on mining and timber harvesting.

North Eastern Ontario and North Western Ontario are culturally distinct based on heritage and population growth. North Eastern Ontario has a very large population that immigrated from quebec, the ottawa valley, italy and england years ago. North Western Ontario is made up of french, italian and finnish immigrants. However, those populations are becoming eclipsed by first nation/indian population growth.

Northern Ontario, almost always voted NDP because of the very large labor unions that covered just about everyone working in the woods, mines and mills. They also all hated toronto and its residents.

That is where I would have stopped in 2008. However, northern Ontario has changed. The amount of unionized mine, mill and woods workers has been decimated by the economic crash while service delivery to an exploding indian population and tourism have taken their place (opinion only, not fact).

The populace that was first generation immigrant has retired and their blue collar children left for the oil fields. The ones that remained behind and got good jobs are employed by the government in health, education or natural resource oversight. The ones that got into tourism are tree huggers running canoe rentals or hipsters that opened over priced breweries or restaurants.

Today, northern ontario seems to vote like Toronto except instead of flaccid white people feeling guilty about not being diverse enough, they feel guilty about the centuries old abuse of indians. There are still resistors, who organize votes to join manitoba, but they are small now.

So, culturally different in 2016, but sadly it does not seem politically different anymore.

Post: #369

Mike Harris came out of North Bay. The conservatives need to retake the north if they're ever going to be competitive again.

Post: #370

(07-20-2016 01:03 PM)scotian Wrote:  ^ You know a guy is from southern Ontario when he refers to Kingston as the north east of the province haha. Maybe Dr.Howard can chime in, I think he's spent a lot of time in the north, from what I hear its a different world up there.

My hometown is London and I never knew what a Canadian winter truly was until work took me away and I got to experience seasons in other parts of the country. Damn, anything north of Oshawa can get harsh. Living in the most southern part of the country will spoil you for weather.

Politically, the rural areas of the south are or at least were quite conservative. The Dutch and German bible belts were strong 20 years ago and even the cities still had a fair amount of people voting blue. I haven't lived down there in over a decade so I can't speak of how the demographics are now.

Post: #371

The GTA has the most ridings in the country per square sq mile. Ontario outside of the GTA is not liberal in the traditional sense. It's actually more traditionalist and conservative than even Alberta or Saskatchewan. Northern Ontario has a population of around 1 million. Southern Ontario has a population of 12 million. They are more or less two different provinces. Different ways of generating revenue, different cultural norms, and different viewpoints of what liberalism and conservatism even stand for.

Even in southern Ontario there are sharp contrasts; Conservatives who hate Toronto's liberalism moved out long ago, and liberals from other parts of the province moved in, thus consolidating Toronto as one of the major liberal epicentres on the continent.

This is happening nationally. Big cities are solidifying as liberal, the suburbs, exurbs, and the rural districts are becoming even more conservative.

In parliamentary system, cities will always be vote rich, and suburbs/rural areas will generally be more conservative but a slight bit shy on the seats.

On the topic of immigration, it's where things get interesting:

In relation to immigration this is even more straight forward. People in Toronto who hate immigrants moved out long ago. The people more tolerant of immigration stayed, and thus the political consolidation was calcified.

Conservatives have never really been the anti immigration, pro-European cultural party the are painted as. This is uniform more or less across the whole western world.

In the Americas Conservatives going back to the days of colonization have been pro mass migration, whether European or not. That hasn't really changed, and the anti immigration forces tend to shift around party allegiances. It wasn't liberals who opened the immigration doors in Canada. It was Brian Mulroney's conservatives. It wasn't liberals who signed the large illegal migrant amnesty in the US im 1986, it was Reagan's republicans.

I've had a slight epiphany over the last few years after observing the political movements across the west and reading some literature on the topic. Liberals pretend to like immigration and pay lip service to it, but in reality liberals don't really care about immigrants. They're rather indifferent. They're basically conservatives who like debauchery and bureaucracy to help their friends get jobs in high office. On the other hand conservatives will bash immigration, but will actually use the back door to let more immigrants in (think TFWs). They have no qualms about immigration. The ethnic nationalist parties are the only ones who will outright oppose immigration, usually on the basis of race or culture, but they can barely muster enough votes to get into power, and this is generally how it always has been for hundreds of years.

Just listen to Elizabeth May in the UK back-pedalling on the Brexit immigration targets (even though it's the UK, it has similarities to the Americas).

Jason Kenney is a rank and file conservative through and through. His stance on immigration is more or less aligned with conservative principles dating back 400 years in the Americas. He's a small government conservative, who doesn't mind the extra manpower to increase the ranks of available labour pool.

Every once in a while an ethnic nationalist will get into power, but the power of the balance sheet and will sooner or later overwhelm their principles and they'll fall back in line and re-open the tap.

The next election in Alberta will see big business conservatives, vs big business Wildrose, vs big government NDP vs the big irrelevant liberals. Who will you guys vote for?

Post: #372

delete

Post: #373

^Dr. Howard is right about the whole white guilt issue up north. However there is notable backlash. About a year ago, a Facebook page called "Thunder Bay Dirty" gained notoriety. People sent in pictures of bums passed out, stashes of heroin needles, people having sex behind dumpsters, etc.

As anyone from the area could surmise, the majority of those pictured were natives. Local politicians successfully lobbied for Facebook to remove the group on grounds of racism, but there was significant backlash towards the mayor for trying to hide the plagues of the community. Thunder Bay is the 2nd shittiest city in Canada behind Winnipeg.

My riding went red last election federally, but I severely doubt that will be the case provincially next election. Northern Ontarians are PISSED at the Wynne government due to the Toronto-centric attitude discussed in the article above

Post: #374

(07-20-2016 11:30 PM)younggun Wrote:  ^Dr. Howard is right about the whole white guilt issue up north. However there is notable backlash. About a year ago, a Facebook page called "Thunder Bay Dirty" gained notoriety. People sent in pictures of bums passed out, stashes of heroin needles, people having sex behind dumpsters, etc.

As anyone from the area could surmise, the majority of those pictured were natives. Local politicians successfully lobbied for Facebook to remove the group on grounds of racism, but there was significant backlash towards the mayor for trying to hide the plagues of the community. Thunder Bay is the 2nd shittiest city in Canada behind Winnipeg.

My riding went red last election federally, but I severely doubt that will be the case provincially next election. Northern Ontarians are PISSED at the Wynne government due to the Toronto-centric attitude discussed in the article above

I lived in Thunder bay for about 10 years, drop me a PM if you are a current or former resident.

The "Thunder Bay Dirty" site/group was amazing. I used to like sending it to americans to explain succinctly what the sights of urban northern ontario were. I don't think it was a political undercurrent though. It was just a new version of "Brockett 99"

I do agree that there are nothern ontario residents who are conservative, and are disgusted by Wynne but I don't think that they have the numbers to make a change. That and I think Mike Gravelle has done an excellent job of providing service for northern ontario business and infrastructure, despite Wynne, he's been around longer than he has and will be around after she leaves. Northern Ontario's final political defeat came when Howard Hampton lost to Bob Nault in 2015. He was the last of the heavyweights that represented northern ontario, with Joe Commuzzi retiring.

Commuzzi is actually a good political portrait of "old" northern ontario. Born Canadian but very loyal to his italian roots he served a ridiculous amount of consecutive terms as a federal liberal. In 2007 he left, went to the conservatives, and retired because northern ontario was getting screwed. The "old" liberals, federally and somewhat provincially were more like old style american southern democrats. Eventually as the old liberals retired and died off the party drifted more left..which is why ontario has an ugly rug muncher for a premier and a drama teacher for a prime minister.

@Germanicus, the southwestern dutch/german bible belt still exists but its been dwarfed by Toronto growth.

@Djemba thanks for adding the population perspective. The sheer size of the GTA has made northern ontario less relevant than ever. It only used to be 4x the population of northern ontario...now 12x game over. Northern Ontario residents only real hope at representation is to separate or join manitoba.

Post: #375

...and as an added bonus, here is some news from today about how stunningly ignorant Southern Ontario politicians are about Northern Ontario. In order to add more women to her cabinet, lesbi-wynne removed the MPP from northern ontario serving as the minister of natural resources and replaced it with a woman from cambridge (south, farming area, not forests) who has no real plans for the position and has a background in nursing http://www.tbnewswatch.com/News/391710/L...t_forestry stellar work.