Darcy Ulmer

🇨🇦

[Bruce Pardy @PardyBruce]

Because DEI is unconstitutional in the United States. But not in Canada. In Canada, the Supreme Court has made discrimination against white men into essentially a constitutional obligation.

[Darcy Ulmer @UlmerDarcy]

lol - things that never happened

[Concerned Canadian @Concern70732755]

Pure fabrication -or is he that delusional !

[Katewerk @katewerk]

In a thousand years, this time will be remembered as the Stupid Ages.

[Sean Speer @Sean_Speer]

Assuming that @IvisonJ’s reporting is right, the implications are pretty big.

Prime Minister Carney was prepared to accept the deal with the administration and only leaned into the explanation about “sovereignty” and French language protections after Premier Ford refused to restore U.S. alcohol to the shelves because of the auto tariffs.

If true, it means that we walked away from what the prime minister himself believed was a good deal because the premier insisted on zero tariffs for autos.

It probably reinforces the Conservatives’ call to recall Parliament to get to the bottom of this. Canadians should know whether a deal was lost because one province refused to accept its consequences for one industry.

[Conrad Black @ConradMBlack]

Regrettably, an exchange on social media between two former CBC journalists, Keith Boag and Travis Dhanraj, was inflicted upon me today and it perfectly captures the invasive rot afflicting and spreading forth from the CBC's newsroom and college campuses into the collective consciousness of our society.

For reference, Mr. Dhanraj was given the high jump from the CBC last year when he attempted to gently nudge that organization in the direction of diversity of opinion. Mr. Boag, on the other hand, was a CBC lifer, retiring after 35 years of blissful ignorance to any opinion outside the CBC's ideological monoculture. The exchange comes within the context of a recent revelation (by Warren Kinsella) that the CBC’s senior director of journalistic standards was demanding avoidance of the t-word in describing the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Mr. Boag seems to be defending this position by categorizing 9/11 as a run-of-the-mill "attack on civilians for political purposes,” giving several other examples to imply there is no clear distinction between any instance of civilians being killed in pursuit of some political purpose. By implication, Osama bin Laden and Nelson Mandela (an implication Boag made explicitly in a subsequent exchange with Ezra Levant) are morally equivalent; they are either both terrorists or neither are. It is not a serious position. It is moral illiteracy formatted into the CBC's perverse style guide. Sadly, the idea is not original, or unique. In fact, it is the pervasive view on campuses and among large swathes of the Canadian media landscape. It is also very dangerous, and it needs to be answered.

Mr. Boag's position is bunk. If the “political purpose” in question is to kill and terrorize civilians in the service of global jihad or the extermination of a people, it belongs in a distinct category. That was 9/11. That was October 7. That was the Holocaust. These acts were genocidally motivated and carried out by groups that would never accept any peaceful resolution.

On the other hand, using decisive force to destroy war criminals who will never make peace, belongs in a completely different category. It is not terrorism. Israel’s campaign to destroy Hamas is a righteous cause. Israel is not only within its rights, but morally obligated to uproot the terrorist apparatus that hides behind its own population. And Israel should be lauded for the strategically disadvantageous lengths it has gone to limit Palestinian casualties, even while Hamas has tried to maximize them. Accusing Israel of genocide is either credulous stupidity or intellectually flaccid anti-Semitism attempting to disguise itself in a threadbare cloak of righteousness.

The atomic bomb was developed by the Allies and used to save lives and compel a surrender that would not otherwise have come. One may argue, and I would agree, that a demonstration on a remote island, a sort of nuclear warning shot, might have been preferable. Likewise, using another of Boag's examples, one could argue the ANC should have continued with their Gandhi-inspired peaceful protest movement even after the Sharpeville massacre. The fact is, no act of violence toward civilians, whether in pursuit of a greater good or not, should be whitewashed. But nor should they all be grouped lazily together, as Boag attempts to do, as if genocide and global domination were indistinguishable from self-defense or peace-through-strength. As if they can all be neatly filed away as “political reasons.”

After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the United States did not proceed to conquer the world, though it could have with a four-year monopoly on nuclear weapons. It used it geostrategic leverage to rebuild Europe and Japan, establish the United Nations — which, believe it or not, was once a righteous and laudable organization — and strive for peace. Had the Nazis or Imperial Japan developed nuclear weapons first, no sane person believes they would have pursued the same strategy.

I should not unfairly single out Mr. Boag, as his perspective is plagiarized from an intellectually and historically illiterate world view that has been building up steam for 30 years. It is a view that dispenses with the indispensable distinction between good and evil. It is not moral seriousness. It is relativism, and it is contemptible. This mass amnesia about who the forces of good in the world are, and who the forces of evil are, is a serious problem. That this worldview has captured the CBC and so many North American campuses is not surprising, but it is a genuine cause for concern. The West has ceded too much of, and must reclaim, the moral high ground.

[Tristin Hopper @TristinHopper]

Every day, Mark Carney goes to work and carefully tiptoes around a bunch of levers that would immediately improve the operation and functionality of the country, similar to how I tiptoe over discarded children's shoes upon entering my own home.

[Conrad Black @ConradMBlack]

This trade disagreement is bound to hurt Canadians, but it could ultimately catalyse Canada’s metamorphosis into one of the world’s most important countries.

If the Prime Minister asked for my advice (which he has not, almost certainly will not, and would be pretty unlikely to follow even if he did), I would strongly suggest the following program:

Assisting, rather than hindering, the private sector in unlocking Canada's treasure house of natural resources, shrinking the public service gradually from its present obscenely bloated size (over 10% of the population), slash our taxes to competitive levels so we can reverse negative capital flows and promote economic growth, use federal fiscal influence to strengthen the quality of education nationwide, incentivize investment in this country, make Canada a single market, get rid of supply management (the only legitimate American complaint against us), accept private medicine and assure an increase in the number of doctors, and build the tangible strength and distinction of the Canadian nationality.

In such a program, Prime Minister Carney would deserve and should receive all of our support.

[Canada Proud @WeAreCanProud]

Why would someone put graffiti on a provincial park?

[Konstantin Kisin @KonstantinKisin]

It was great to finally have someone admit the truth: climate doomerism is about one world government, ending democracy and impoverishing the world.

The idea that we must impoverish humanity to save it is not just absurd, it's a suicide pact. Sovereign nations will never accept it, and people will never vote for it.

I don't believe in suicide for token gestures towards not solving a problem you're claiming to solve.

[Ben Shapiro @benshapiro]

This is Statism in a nutshell: the belief that you know better for my kids than I do. You don't, and also go to hell.

[Handre @Handre]

Mises obliterated the entire socialist project in 1920 with one devastating insight: "Where there is no free market, there is no pricing mechanism; without a pricing mechanism, there is no economic calculation." The socialists spent the next century pretending this problem didn't exist while their economies collapsed around them.

And yet here we are, watching politicians promise they can "fix" healthcare, housing, and energy markets through central planning. They can't even calculate the cost of their own programs correctly — how exactly are they going to allocate resources across an entire economy?

Every Venezuelan breadline, every Soviet grain shortage, every Chinese famine was just Mises being proven right in the most brutal way possible. But sure, let's try democratic socialism this time. What could go wrong?

[Evan Menzies @Evan_Menzies]

Fellow Canadians, are you more familiear with the name Alexander Mackenzie or Lewis and Clark? Do you expect that kids by the time they’re in Grade 12 know a Scottish-Canadian was the first to cross the continent and it helped play a role in establishing Canadian sovereignty? Our country is filled with heroes and miraculous stories, we need to tell them.

[Dr Jordan B Peterson @jordanbpeterson]

This is the first long-form piece I've written in a year:

Why this topic? Because, for starters, 250,000 girls were raped. Unimaginable and appalling though that is—the reality is much worse:

[Chris Martz @ChrisMartzWX]

Thankfully I have numbers rather than opinions.

The average number of days per year in the U.S. reaching 95°F was ~18% lower during the 60-year period 1961 to 2020 compared to 1901 to 1960.

The number of days reaching 100°F and 105°F have also declined since 1895.

[Bishop Robert Barron @BishopBarron]

I’ve just finished reading Gad Saad’s book Suicidal Empathy.

It ranks, along with Chris Rufo’s America’s Cultural Revolution: How the Radical Left Conquered Everything and Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay’s Cynical Theories, as the best take-down of the lunacy at the heart of the wokeist philosophy.

For Saad, empathy—in itself a perfectly decent trait—has become so grossly exaggerated that it threatens truth, reality, and justice.

Cases in point abound: so they won’t feel bad about themselves, we’ll allow biological men to compete in women’s sports and crush the dreams of thousands of young women; so as not to undermine the self-esteem of minorities, we will permit unqualified candidates to have positions in universities and the corporate world; so that everyone might feel included, we will characterize the meritocracy as “white privilege,” etc.

As I was making my way through Saad’s book, I kept remarking the sharp distinction between empathy and love.

To empathize is to enter profoundly into the experience of another and to endeavor not to hurt that person’s feelings. But to love is, as Thomas Aquinas taught, “to will the good of the other.”

As I said, in itself and all things being equal, empathy is a good thing. But it is not the same as love, which, depending on circumstances, can very much involve hurting someone’s feelings.

When a professor gives a student a “C” as an honest reflection of his work, he might well be insulting him, but he’s also telling him the truth and perhaps even urging him to try harder.

When, in the Confessional, a priest tells a murderer to turn himself in to the police, he’s undoubtedly making that person’s life more uncomfortable, but he’s also willing the man’s good.

Any decent parent knows that showing real love for her children means engendering all kinds of bad feelings in them.

In light of this distinction, we can understand why Jesus didn’t say, “have empathy for one another,” but rather “love one another.” And why St. John the Evangelist didn’t say, “God is empathy,” but rather “God is love.”

It occurred to me as I was reading Saad’s book that one reason Wokeism has seized the consciousness of so many in the West is that Christianity has faded as a cultural force and Christians themselves have forgotten what stands at the heart of their faith.

[Melissa 🇨🇦 @MelissaLMRogers]

CANADIANS - Carney is happily smiling as he travels to the United States for the FIFA World Cup in New Jersey 🇺🇸

This is your message that it’s okay, and actually quite FUN & amazing to travel to the United States. Even your PM is doing it 😅

[J.J. McCullough @JJ_McCullough]

It's just a fact that Carney's popularity is thoroughly detached from anything he's done in his first year in office. In no meaningful way is Canada's economic situation "improving," and yet he is being warmly rewarded by voters for... trying, I guess? It's an odd phenomenon.

[James E. Thorne @DrJStrategy]

Canada: Crying Over Spilt Milk in a Self‑Inflicted Stagnation

Canada’s elite have spent a quarter‑century turning a rich, opportunity‑dense economy into a slow‑growth, over‑levered cul‑de‑sac, and they still insist nothing is structurally wrong. There is no sense crying over spilt milk about past mistakes when the architects of this stagnation are still in charge and still in denial.

Canada did not just drift into secular stagnation; it embraced a kind of virtue socialism and an industrial policy anchored on climate change targets rather than productive capacity, competitiveness, or growth. An economy built on world‑class natural resources, strategic geography, and human capital has been deliberately downgraded into a housing‑addicted, low‑productivity balance sheet recession risk, and the people who did it still show up on panels calling this “resilience.”

For years, Canada’s comparative advantages in energy, resources, and industrial capacity were something to apologize for, regulate to death, or tax into oblivion, while policy and capital chased the illusion that you could mortgage and virtue‑signal your way to prosperity. The result is a country flirting with a liquidity trap, where even lower rates may barely move a real economy suffocated by over‑priced assets, under‑built productive capital, and households too damaged to borrow again.

The real scandal is not that Canada faces secular stagnation; it is that the elite engineered it, denied it, wrapped it in climate rhetoric, and now blame external shocks while the data scream that this is a made‑in‑Canada crisis.

To be clear, Canada’s problems are not the result of President Trump!

If Canada’s elite will not finally admit that decades of attacking its own strengths, worshipping its own bubbles, and treating industrial policy as a morality play have left the country one downturn away from a full balance sheet recession, then they are not guardians of the national interest, they are custodians of decline, and at this point, there really is no sense crying over spilt milk, only over the refusal to fix the mess they made.

[Simply AJ aka Tom Bombadil @SimplyAJ144]

All bc she packed her husbands big ass lunch 😂😂😂

[Darcy Ulmer @UlmerDarcy]

Refugee?

[Sitka Media @sitkamedia]

Premier Eby reacts to the “heartbreaking” story of a Somali World Cup referee who was refused entry into the United States:

“In British Columbia he’d be considered gold, not garbage.”