David Johnston: Canada's next Governer General
July 8, 2010 9:36 AM Subscribe
Canada's next Governor-General will be David Johnston, currently President of the University of Waterloo in Ontario, a tech-oriented school. Johnston is a legal scholar specializing in securities regulation, corporation law, public policy, and IT law. Here's his CV [pdf]. Why Johnston, instead of a journalist or public figure as has been the trend? For one, a legal scholar will be better able to navigate potential constitutional issues during minority governments. Johnston has pledged to be "a stalwart defender of our Canadian heritage, of Canadian institutions, and of the Canadian people".
Worthwhile Canadian Initiative.
posted by chavenet at 9:40 AM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by chavenet at 9:40 AM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
Aaaaaaa I made the mistake of scrolling down too far on the CBC article and I caught a glimpse of the comments section aaaaaaaaa my eyes it burns
posted by threetoed at 9:43 AM on July 8, 2010 [11 favorites]
posted by threetoed at 9:43 AM on July 8, 2010 [11 favorites]
Isn't his number one priority looking out for the interests of you-know-who across the pond?
posted by PenDevil at 9:45 AM on July 8, 2010
posted by PenDevil at 9:45 AM on July 8, 2010
For all the claims of non-partisanship in that article, he sure seems cozy with Harper.
posted by chococat at 9:46 AM on July 8, 2010
posted by chococat at 9:46 AM on July 8, 2010
I hereby call upon Michaëlle Jean to declare marshal law, dissolve parliament, and establish herself as Lady Protector.
posted by No Robots at 9:49 AM on July 8, 2010 [4 favorites]
posted by No Robots at 9:49 AM on July 8, 2010 [4 favorites]
Maybe as a 'tech' school person, he'll know enough to deep six the digital rights bill. Unless I misunderstand what's going on, I do not look forward to buying a 'license' for transferring my physical medium tunes to digital. By license, I mean a digital copy from itunes or the like.
Somehow, I suspect it'll be more like loading the senate.
posted by LD Feral at 10:02 AM on July 8, 2010
Somehow, I suspect it'll be more like loading the senate.
posted by LD Feral at 10:02 AM on July 8, 2010
Maybe as a 'tech' school person, he'll know enough to deep six the digital rights bill. Unless I misunderstand what's going on, I do not look forward to buying a 'license' for transferring my physical medium tunes to digital. By license, I mean a digital copy from itunes or the like.
You don't want the GG getting involved in anything close to policy debates like that.
posted by modernnomad at 10:06 AM on July 8, 2010 [5 favorites]
You don't want the GG getting involved in anything close to policy debates like that.
posted by modernnomad at 10:06 AM on July 8, 2010 [5 favorites]
You don't want the GG getting involved in anything close to policy debates like that.
Agreed. The moment the G-G gets involved in anything other than inspiring speeches and photo-ops, there's trouble.
posted by Adam_S at 10:11 AM on July 8, 2010
Agreed. The moment the G-G gets involved in anything other than inspiring speeches and photo-ops, there's trouble.
posted by Adam_S at 10:11 AM on July 8, 2010
Since Michaelle Jean was happy enough to prorogue parliament whenever Harper asked her to, I can't see how someone else is going to be much worse -- if the GG actually tried to use their power for anything much, there'd be a mutiny.
posted by jeather at 10:14 AM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by jeather at 10:14 AM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
So Shatner didn't make the cut. Good news. But will David Johnston help wreck a barn?
HURF DURF POUTINE AND ZED
posted by infinitewindow at 10:17 AM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
HURF DURF POUTINE AND ZED
posted by infinitewindow at 10:17 AM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
I was hoping for Shelagh Rogers.
posted by oulipian at 10:22 AM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by oulipian at 10:22 AM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
I'm not a big fan of this choice because I think there are too many rich white bourgeois male desk jockeys in government. And! I wouldn't dance with him. [Makes fluttery eyes at her Excellency.]
Seriously, though, Johnston is pretty well thought of in town and has done a lot of public service stuff in addition to being a fairly decent academic wonk. So we'll see how it goes.
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:22 AM on July 8, 2010
Seriously, though, Johnston is pretty well thought of in town and has done a lot of public service stuff in addition to being a fairly decent academic wonk. So we'll see how it goes.
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:22 AM on July 8, 2010
Okay, so Her Excellency hasn't held the same place in my heart since prorogation, but is this dweeb going to eat a raw seal heart, "sing a song of hope for Haiti," or toast le Québec libre? I think not.
I bet homeboy doesn't even know how to wreck a barn. Take that. Stupid barn.
on preview: CURSES, infinitewindow
posted by wreckingball at 10:26 AM on July 8, 2010
I bet homeboy doesn't even know how to wreck a barn. Take that. Stupid barn.
on preview: CURSES, infinitewindow
posted by wreckingball at 10:26 AM on July 8, 2010
He's a great guy but this kind of sucks for U of W unless he already had plans to retire (which he didn't, to my knowledge).
posted by GuyZero at 10:43 AM on July 8, 2010
posted by GuyZero at 10:43 AM on July 8, 2010
I'm not a big fan of this choice because I think there are too many rich white bourgeois male desk jockeys in government.
Of the past 5 G's-G (excluding Johnston):
3 have been female.
2 were born outside of Canada (Clarkson and Jean in Hong Kong and Haiti, respectively)
3 were of ethnic backgrounds outside of Western European (Jean, Clarkson, and Hnatyshyn who's Ukranian-Canadian)
4 were journalists (Jean, Clarkson, Sauve, Leblanc) at the CBC, which I wouldn't call a desk jockey position.
If you want to play identity bingo, I'd say the governor-general position is the wrong place to be attacking.
(Mainly it's the wrong place because it's the Governor-general. It's better to criticize positions that actually have power.)
posted by Lemurrhea at 10:50 AM on July 8, 2010 [8 favorites]
Of the past 5 G's-G (excluding Johnston):
3 have been female.
2 were born outside of Canada (Clarkson and Jean in Hong Kong and Haiti, respectively)
3 were of ethnic backgrounds outside of Western European (Jean, Clarkson, and Hnatyshyn who's Ukranian-Canadian)
4 were journalists (Jean, Clarkson, Sauve, Leblanc) at the CBC, which I wouldn't call a desk jockey position.
If you want to play identity bingo, I'd say the governor-general position is the wrong place to be attacking.
(Mainly it's the wrong place because it's the Governor-general. It's better to criticize positions that actually have power.)
posted by Lemurrhea at 10:50 AM on July 8, 2010 [8 favorites]
Seems like a nice guy, it's a pity he's being wasted on a figurehead position, and not running the government.
posted by blue_beetle at 10:51 AM on July 8, 2010
posted by blue_beetle at 10:51 AM on July 8, 2010
I was hoping the World Cup predicting octopus would be named G-G.
posted by mazola at 10:54 AM on July 8, 2010
posted by mazola at 10:54 AM on July 8, 2010
If I can inject a little opinion into my own thread, I sat through many of his speeches while attending UW and he frankly didn't leave a very good impression. They tended to be pretty empty bullet lists of why UW was great; not much content. And, to quote someone on a friend's Facebook wall who put it better than me: "he always came across as a giant self-serving tool; focused exclusively on money and influence within his role at the University."
It's hard to impress as a university president, and I'll admit to having no familiarity with any of his actual scholarship. But I definitely caught a whiff of 'old boy' climbing the aristocratic ladder whenever I heard him speak. It seems he's pretty good at that given the news today.
posted by PercussivePaul at 10:55 AM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
It's hard to impress as a university president, and I'll admit to having no familiarity with any of his actual scholarship. But I definitely caught a whiff of 'old boy' climbing the aristocratic ladder whenever I heard him speak. It seems he's pretty good at that given the news today.
posted by PercussivePaul at 10:55 AM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
Lemurhhea: I'm referring there to "government in general." Not "governor general" only.
And, he was indeed planning to retire -- the selection committee was already looking for a replacement. Now there will be an interim president when he takes the GG office, which date is before his originally planned retirement.
posted by seanmpuckett at 11:08 AM on July 8, 2010
And, he was indeed planning to retire -- the selection committee was already looking for a replacement. Now there will be an interim president when he takes the GG office, which date is before his originally planned retirement.
posted by seanmpuckett at 11:08 AM on July 8, 2010
Seanmpuckett: I know, but I don't think you can lump the GG in with "government in general". It's like saying that British politics isn't diverse because it's had the same ruler for 50-whatever years. Where really the problem is that all the leaders of the parties are male white party insiders.
posted by Lemurrhea at 11:12 AM on July 8, 2010
posted by Lemurrhea at 11:12 AM on July 8, 2010
If the Liberals need to dump Iggy for Ken Dryden and pick Shatner for G.G.
It'll be like having Trudeau back. I promise.
posted by bonobothegreat at 11:17 AM on July 8, 2010
It'll be like having Trudeau back. I promise.
posted by bonobothegreat at 11:17 AM on July 8, 2010
I thought you had to be on the Passionate Eye to become the governor general. Harper fucks up again?
posted by chunking express at 11:36 AM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by chunking express at 11:36 AM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
Not exactly an inspired or inspiring choice, which is pretty much how I feel about the Harper government in general. The last few have felt like the Liberals were just trying to see how far they could get from the typical white anglo male government insider type. I've been happily impressed with most of those choices (sans the proroguing stain), but I expect this one will be virtually invisible and silent, which is a shame.
What's more troubling is Harper's increase in the polls. I mean, I understand the rudderless Liberals are too pathetic to gain any ground, but I don't see what Harper's done AT ALL to warrant the gains he's making. How is this man appealing to anyone?
posted by GhostintheMachine at 12:00 PM on July 8, 2010
What's more troubling is Harper's increase in the polls. I mean, I understand the rudderless Liberals are too pathetic to gain any ground, but I don't see what Harper's done AT ALL to warrant the gains he's making. How is this man appealing to anyone?
posted by GhostintheMachine at 12:00 PM on July 8, 2010
Canadians don't pay attention to anything? That's my guess. I mean, the Conservative government looks to be churning out one fuck up after another since taking power.
posted by chunking express at 12:18 PM on July 8, 2010 [9 favorites]
posted by chunking express at 12:18 PM on July 8, 2010 [9 favorites]
What's more troubling is Harper's increase in the polls. I mean, I understand the rudderless Liberals are too pathetic to gain any ground, but I don't see what Harper's done AT ALL to warrant the gains he's making. How is this man appealing to anyone?
G20. People that aren't paying much attention see Harper, a hurf-durf Law n' Order Conservative, gallivanting with global leaders while those scary! liberal! fiends! burn police cars and smash store windows.
posted by Shepherd at 12:21 PM on July 8, 2010
G20. People that aren't paying much attention see Harper, a hurf-durf Law n' Order Conservative, gallivanting with global leaders while those scary! liberal! fiends! burn police cars and smash store windows.
posted by Shepherd at 12:21 PM on July 8, 2010
G20. People that aren't paying much attention see Harper, a hurf-durf Law n' Order Conservative, gallivanting with global leaders while those scary! liberal! fiends! burn police cars and smash store windows.
I don't think anyone with half a brain thinks that the people who were breaking windows of shops (ooh, subversive!) are involved in the electoral process in meaningful way.. which I guess is my round about way of saying I've not heard anyone ever refer to the Black Bloc and their ilk as 'liberal' (either big or small L).. even conservatives seem to consider them to be essentially a mix of fringe radicals and teenage hangers-on, rather than in someway representative of liberal politics.
Harper's boost comes from the continuing inability of Ignatieff to get behind a clear message of how precisely he would be different.
posted by modernnomad at 12:44 PM on July 8, 2010
I don't think anyone with half a brain thinks that the people who were breaking windows of shops (ooh, subversive!) are involved in the electoral process in meaningful way.. which I guess is my round about way of saying I've not heard anyone ever refer to the Black Bloc and their ilk as 'liberal' (either big or small L).. even conservatives seem to consider them to be essentially a mix of fringe radicals and teenage hangers-on, rather than in someway representative of liberal politics.
Harper's boost comes from the continuing inability of Ignatieff to get behind a clear message of how precisely he would be different.
posted by modernnomad at 12:44 PM on July 8, 2010
a journalist or public figure as has been the trend
Interesting; the last three G-G's of New Zealand have all been senior judges, though before that they tended to be political figures (or sent over from Britain). I definitely think it helps, having someone with a deep understanding of constitutional issues in the role. Though of course their advisers would be experts on the constitution anyway.
posted by Infinite Jest at 12:54 PM on July 8, 2010
Interesting; the last three G-G's of New Zealand have all been senior judges, though before that they tended to be political figures (or sent over from Britain). I definitely think it helps, having someone with a deep understanding of constitutional issues in the role. Though of course their advisers would be experts on the constitution anyway.
posted by Infinite Jest at 12:54 PM on July 8, 2010
It could have been much much worse...one of the names floated for potential GG was Preston Manning.
posted by rocket88 at 1:01 PM on July 8, 2010
posted by rocket88 at 1:01 PM on July 8, 2010
I was hoping for Shelagh Rogers.
No, I thought things were lining up for Barbara Budd.
posted by i_have_a_computer at 1:02 PM on July 8, 2010
No, I thought things were lining up for Barbara Budd.
posted by i_have_a_computer at 1:02 PM on July 8, 2010
Dude, Barbara Budd is dead.
Oh no wait, that's Barbara Frum. Yeah, Budd would've rocked. Punniest GG ever.
posted by Brodiggitty at 1:10 PM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
Oh no wait, that's Barbara Frum. Yeah, Budd would've rocked. Punniest GG ever.
posted by Brodiggitty at 1:10 PM on July 8, 2010 [2 favorites]
the Conservative government looks to be churning out one fuck up after another since taking power
I have never understood the appeal of the Harper Conservatives either, but hey, whatever, that's Canada. I mean the Leafs have been churning out one fuckup after another for years too and they're still the most popular team in the country. Maybe it's something about the color blue?
But yes, if the comments on the CBC site are any indication, at least some of the support for the Conservatives can be explained by tremendous ignorance and a complete lack of understanding of the Canadian political system. I think the Greens should rebrand themselves "The Conservationist Party" and see if they can get a whole bunch of accidental votes.
posted by Kirk Grim at 1:31 PM on July 8, 2010 [3 favorites]
I have never understood the appeal of the Harper Conservatives either, but hey, whatever, that's Canada. I mean the Leafs have been churning out one fuckup after another for years too and they're still the most popular team in the country. Maybe it's something about the color blue?
But yes, if the comments on the CBC site are any indication, at least some of the support for the Conservatives can be explained by tremendous ignorance and a complete lack of understanding of the Canadian political system. I think the Greens should rebrand themselves "The Conservationist Party" and see if they can get a whole bunch of accidental votes.
posted by Kirk Grim at 1:31 PM on July 8, 2010 [3 favorites]
If I can inject a little opinion into my own thread, I sat through many of his speeches while attending UW and he frankly didn't leave a very good impression.
Ha! I was his speechwriter for eight months, about five years ago. Generally, writing a speech for him followed a model that went like this:
"What makes Waterloo such a hotbed of innovation is that innovation is in our bloodstream, it's who we are. The innovation that we've innovated during the time that we have been innovating has been innovative itself. Our innovation has spurred new innovations so that the innovation of the past will lead to innovation in the future. Also: innovation. I would also like to thank Mike Lazaridis, because he probably did something superduperawesome today."
He was a nice enough guy, smart, but I couldn't stand churning that stuff out.
posted by antihostile at 1:33 PM on July 8, 2010 [14 favorites]
Ha! I was his speechwriter for eight months, about five years ago. Generally, writing a speech for him followed a model that went like this:
"What makes Waterloo such a hotbed of innovation is that innovation is in our bloodstream, it's who we are. The innovation that we've innovated during the time that we have been innovating has been innovative itself. Our innovation has spurred new innovations so that the innovation of the past will lead to innovation in the future. Also: innovation. I would also like to thank Mike Lazaridis, because he probably did something superduperawesome today."
He was a nice enough guy, smart, but I couldn't stand churning that stuff out.
posted by antihostile at 1:33 PM on July 8, 2010 [14 favorites]
Without knowing anything at all about the man, he certainly sounds qualified. Way over qualified, probably, for a job that's mostly public appearances and ceremony. But there's always a chance that the stars will align and for one agonizing moment the whole country will depend upon him to do the right thing. It happened to Michaëlle Jean, but it might never happen for David Johnston. Probably won't. But you never know.
I wonder if appointing someone who's actually an expert on the constitution will come back to bite Harper on the ass. Guess we'll see.
posted by Kevin Street at 1:48 PM on July 8, 2010
I wonder if appointing someone who's actually an expert on the constitution will come back to bite Harper on the ass. Guess we'll see.
posted by Kevin Street at 1:48 PM on July 8, 2010
Ha! antihostile, if it was five years ago, there's a good chance I heard one of your speeches. But hard to say as they're all the same...
posted by PercussivePaul at 2:13 PM on July 8, 2010
posted by PercussivePaul at 2:13 PM on July 8, 2010
PP: They sure are. Really just speaking points so he knows who to thank, he made a LOT of appearances, probably two or three a week. It's just "Hi howareya" at that point. But, I got to write stuff under his name for national media, about the importance of the nation's mental health and why it's important (esp. for places like UW) that highschools keep calculus in their curriculum. But, mostly, it was just a job.
posted by antihostile at 3:52 PM on July 8, 2010
posted by antihostile at 3:52 PM on July 8, 2010
Harper's boost comes from the continuing inability of Ignatieff to get behind a clear message of how precisely he would be different.
I've heard that, but again that's why Liberal support is falling. But why are those voters heading en masse to the Conservatives rather than swelling the undecideds or spreading around to Conservative, NDP, and Green? Ignatieff is the reason for eroding Liberal support. What's causing the attraction to the Conservatives?
posted by GhostintheMachine at 5:06 PM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
I've heard that, but again that's why Liberal support is falling. But why are those voters heading en masse to the Conservatives rather than swelling the undecideds or spreading around to Conservative, NDP, and Green? Ignatieff is the reason for eroding Liberal support. What's causing the attraction to the Conservatives?
posted by GhostintheMachine at 5:06 PM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
>Harper's boost comes from the continuing inability of Ignatieff to get behind a clear message of how precisely he would be different.
I've heard that, but again that's why Liberal support is falling. But why are those voters heading en masse to the Conservatives rather than swelling the undecideds or spreading around to Conservative, NDP, and Green? Ignatieff is the reason for eroding Liberal support. What's causing the attraction to the Conservatives?
Because neither the Greens nor the NDP are a plausibly electable party at the federal level. The environmental policies of the Greens can easily be co-opted by the Liberals, and the NDP will remain an essentially fringe party federally until they undergo a "New Labour"-esque reformation. When you live in a country that is largely socially progressive (whether Harper and his goons like it or not, the is a broad enough consensus in the country now, both legally and popularly, which means things like abortion rights and same-sex marriage are here to stay), elections are going to increasingly be on matters of economic policy.
A majority of Canadians can look at the Liberals or look at the Cons and say "ok, I agree or I disagree with what their ideas are about taxes/stimulus/regulation, but at least there is a coherent idea"... have you read the NDP's economic platform? It's nonsense. I used to vote NDP, but I can't imagine ever doing that again until they seriously clean house and get some people in there with modern ideas and real solutions.
posted by modernnomad at 5:53 PM on July 8, 2010
I've heard that, but again that's why Liberal support is falling. But why are those voters heading en masse to the Conservatives rather than swelling the undecideds or spreading around to Conservative, NDP, and Green? Ignatieff is the reason for eroding Liberal support. What's causing the attraction to the Conservatives?
Because neither the Greens nor the NDP are a plausibly electable party at the federal level. The environmental policies of the Greens can easily be co-opted by the Liberals, and the NDP will remain an essentially fringe party federally until they undergo a "New Labour"-esque reformation. When you live in a country that is largely socially progressive (whether Harper and his goons like it or not, the is a broad enough consensus in the country now, both legally and popularly, which means things like abortion rights and same-sex marriage are here to stay), elections are going to increasingly be on matters of economic policy.
A majority of Canadians can look at the Liberals or look at the Cons and say "ok, I agree or I disagree with what their ideas are about taxes/stimulus/regulation, but at least there is a coherent idea"... have you read the NDP's economic platform? It's nonsense. I used to vote NDP, but I can't imagine ever doing that again until they seriously clean house and get some people in there with modern ideas and real solutions.
posted by modernnomad at 5:53 PM on July 8, 2010
have you read the NDP's economic platform?
Err, no actually. I hate to say it after commenting on "tremendous ignorance", but economics has always been a bit over my head, and frankly the parts I think I get sound kinda like circular logic a lot of the time, with things taken for granted that I'm not sure are true. I gather Layton wants to raise corporate taxes and increase spending on childcare and healthcare, but beyond that--do you have an economics-for-dummies summary for us ignint economic types?
posted by Kirk Grim at 6:50 PM on July 8, 2010
Err, no actually. I hate to say it after commenting on "tremendous ignorance", but economics has always been a bit over my head, and frankly the parts I think I get sound kinda like circular logic a lot of the time, with things taken for granted that I'm not sure are true. I gather Layton wants to raise corporate taxes and increase spending on childcare and healthcare, but beyond that--do you have an economics-for-dummies summary for us ignint economic types?
posted by Kirk Grim at 6:50 PM on July 8, 2010
have you read the NDP's economic platform? It's nonsense.
It it's this, it's not the greatest thing ever, but it looks somewhat viable.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 8:26 PM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
It it's this, it's not the greatest thing ever, but it looks somewhat viable.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 8:26 PM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
Now try and find the Liberal's economic platform.
I couldn't either.
posted by mazola at 8:44 PM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
I couldn't either.
posted by mazola at 8:44 PM on July 8, 2010 [1 favorite]
"a stalwart defender of our Canadian heritage, of Canadian institutions, and of the Canadian people"
Yuck. That reads just a bit too, um, Arizonan for my tastes.
posted by Sys Rq at 11:53 PM on July 8, 2010
Yuck. That reads just a bit too, um, Arizonan for my tastes.
posted by Sys Rq at 11:53 PM on July 8, 2010
I mean, the Conservative government looks to be churning out one fuck up after another since taking power.
I've been out of Canada for decades and don't pay much attention to politics back home, and god knows I loathe Harper and have nothing but contempt for the Conservatives, but I'm having trouble remembering any Canadian governemnt that didn't churn out one fuck up after another.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:30 AM on July 9, 2010
I've been out of Canada for decades and don't pay much attention to politics back home, and god knows I loathe Harper and have nothing but contempt for the Conservatives, but I'm having trouble remembering any Canadian governemnt that didn't churn out one fuck up after another.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:30 AM on July 9, 2010
But why are those voters heading en masse to the Conservatives rather than swelling the undecideds or spreading around to Conservative, NDP, and Green?
They aren't. Conservative support has been holding steady for years, which is why Harper is still stuck in minorityland despite the Liberals' steady collapse. They are not gaining any support, while the left is making marginal gains, but it all comes down to a split left and a united right. Meanwhile, the Liberals think for some bizarre reason they need to tilt further right, exacerbating the problem further.
posted by mek at 12:32 AM on July 9, 2010
They aren't. Conservative support has been holding steady for years, which is why Harper is still stuck in minorityland despite the Liberals' steady collapse. They are not gaining any support, while the left is making marginal gains, but it all comes down to a split left and a united right. Meanwhile, the Liberals think for some bizarre reason they need to tilt further right, exacerbating the problem further.
posted by mek at 12:32 AM on July 9, 2010
"I hate to say it after commenting on "tremendous ignorance", but economics has always been a bit over my head"
I've found that people on the right are just as likely to have a complete incomprehension of economics as people on the left. If Jack Layton became PM* it's pretty unlikely that the consequences of his governance would be any worse than that of Harper's rule (because Harper is running up a defeceit without any help from the left). The most probable economic catastrophe that would be caused by an NDP cabinet would be caused by speculative stock market trading resulting from their election (This happened in India in 2003/04. They elected a president that was endorsed by India's communist party and the Bombay Stock Exchange dropped 700 points and would not recover until she stepped down immediately after her election.)
*Let's just he achieved this by selling his soul to Mephistophelese or through some other fantastical method because it's never going to happen because the NDP's party constitution forbids them from forming governments... last time I checked anyway... Its not available on their website anymore.
posted by Pseudology at 12:43 AM on July 9, 2010
I've found that people on the right are just as likely to have a complete incomprehension of economics as people on the left. If Jack Layton became PM* it's pretty unlikely that the consequences of his governance would be any worse than that of Harper's rule (because Harper is running up a defeceit without any help from the left). The most probable economic catastrophe that would be caused by an NDP cabinet would be caused by speculative stock market trading resulting from their election (This happened in India in 2003/04. They elected a president that was endorsed by India's communist party and the Bombay Stock Exchange dropped 700 points and would not recover until she stepped down immediately after her election.)
*Let's just he achieved this by selling his soul to Mephistophelese or through some other fantastical method because it's never going to happen because the NDP's party constitution forbids them from forming governments... last time I checked anyway... Its not available on their website anymore.
posted by Pseudology at 12:43 AM on July 9, 2010
It's Harper, so something has to stink. Looks like this appointment is Johnston's reward for a job well done sweeping aside the Airbus affair.
posted by mek at 12:48 AM on July 9, 2010
posted by mek at 12:48 AM on July 9, 2010
Antihostile, you're a funny, funny man. I still get a twitch when I hear any variation of 'innovat*', and it's been a very long time since I graduated.
posted by Kreiger at 5:47 AM on July 9, 2010
posted by Kreiger at 5:47 AM on July 9, 2010
"Tough" on crime, on immigration, on the arts. You're kidding yourselves if you don't think those are popular moves.
It takes a bit more effort to grasp the import of the atrocious stuff that's been happening. To take a well-known example, the media had to explain what proroguing was before attempting to explain why it mattered at all. And that was something that received a lot of attention. Most of the time it's not like that. My faith in people's ability to keep their eye on the ball has never been lower.
This guy might be alright. I think Harper's gang correctly deduced that an ornamental position is the one place where they can afford a relatively non-partisan figure.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 8:17 AM on July 9, 2010
It takes a bit more effort to grasp the import of the atrocious stuff that's been happening. To take a well-known example, the media had to explain what proroguing was before attempting to explain why it mattered at all. And that was something that received a lot of attention. Most of the time it's not like that. My faith in people's ability to keep their eye on the ball has never been lower.
This guy might be alright. I think Harper's gang correctly deduced that an ornamental position is the one place where they can afford a relatively non-partisan figure.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 8:17 AM on July 9, 2010
"a stalwart defender of our Canadian heritage, of Canadian institutions, and of the Canadian people"
Yuck. That reads just a bit too, um, Arizonan for my tastes.
That's total bullshit. There are lots of complaints to be made about Johnston, mostly that he's boring and/or an old boy, but he's certainly no racist. Michaëlle Jean was certainly defending Canadian heritage and the Canadian people when she ate that live seal heart - why do you think that suddenly there's racist overtones when a white guys says it?
posted by GuyZero at 9:47 AM on July 9, 2010 [2 favorites]
Yuck. That reads just a bit too, um, Arizonan for my tastes.
That's total bullshit. There are lots of complaints to be made about Johnston, mostly that he's boring and/or an old boy, but he's certainly no racist. Michaëlle Jean was certainly defending Canadian heritage and the Canadian people when she ate that live seal heart - why do you think that suddenly there's racist overtones when a white guys says it?
posted by GuyZero at 9:47 AM on July 9, 2010 [2 favorites]
why do you think that suddenly there's racist overtones when a white guys says it?
Not racist; just overtly nationalist and xenophobic. I guess that's because he says it at all, basically. Somehow I don't see the previous two (foreign-born!) GGs ever saying anything remotely like that. And also, yes, the fact that he's a white guy chosen by a white guy who is leader of the Conservative party ain't helping matters.
posted by Sys Rq at 12:28 PM on July 9, 2010
Not racist; just overtly nationalist and xenophobic. I guess that's because he says it at all, basically. Somehow I don't see the previous two (foreign-born!) GGs ever saying anything remotely like that. And also, yes, the fact that he's a white guy chosen by a white guy who is leader of the Conservative party ain't helping matters.
posted by Sys Rq at 12:28 PM on July 9, 2010
Michaëlle Jean was the best. I went to Waterloo, and Johnston is a nice enough dude, but how's he going to top eating a live seal heart. That lady is bad ass. And she was on the Passionate Eye!
posted by chunking express at 12:50 PM on July 9, 2010
posted by chunking express at 12:50 PM on July 9, 2010
Not racist; just overtly nationalist and xenophobic. I guess that's because he says it at all, basically. Somehow I don't see the previous two (foreign-born!) GGs ever saying anything remotely like that. And also, yes, the fact that he's a white guy chosen by a white guy who is leader of the Conservative party ain't helping matters.
I sincerely hope that the days of these tired, TIRED identity politics are soon past us. What you said is no better than the clowns who say that the only reason Michaelle Jean was picked was because she was a "politically correct" choice. Your way of thinking and their of thinking are two sides of the same coin and are so unhelpful to meaningful progress and dialogue in this country. Overt nationalism is part and parcel of being the G-G -- take a gander at Michaelle Jean's installation speech -- if it were an American that had given a speech like this, we all know we'd be gagging on our own bile.
posted by modernnomad at 12:51 PM on July 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
I sincerely hope that the days of these tired, TIRED identity politics are soon past us. What you said is no better than the clowns who say that the only reason Michaelle Jean was picked was because she was a "politically correct" choice. Your way of thinking and their of thinking are two sides of the same coin and are so unhelpful to meaningful progress and dialogue in this country. Overt nationalism is part and parcel of being the G-G -- take a gander at Michaelle Jean's installation speech -- if it were an American that had given a speech like this, we all know we'd be gagging on our own bile.
posted by modernnomad at 12:51 PM on July 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
Overt nationalism is part and parcel of being the G-G
Yes, because what could be more inherently nationalistic than the job of representing a foreign monarch?
posted by Sys Rq at 12:58 PM on July 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
Yes, because what could be more inherently nationalistic than the job of representing a foreign monarch?
posted by Sys Rq at 12:58 PM on July 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
Yes, because what could be more inherently nationalistic than the job of representing a foreign monarch?
It may surprise you to learn that the role of the G-G is somewhat more nuanced than that. The G-G performs numerous functions in addition to her narrow constitutional role. Allow me to pull one random quote from her own website, though you will find many others:
"The governor general plays a key role in promoting national identity by supporting and promoting Canadian values, diversity, inclusion, culture and heritage."
posted by modernnomad at 1:03 PM on July 9, 2010
It may surprise you to learn that the role of the G-G is somewhat more nuanced than that. The G-G performs numerous functions in addition to her narrow constitutional role. Allow me to pull one random quote from her own website, though you will find many others:
"The governor general plays a key role in promoting national identity by supporting and promoting Canadian values, diversity, inclusion, culture and heritage."
posted by modernnomad at 1:03 PM on July 9, 2010
There's a big difference between "supporting and promoting diversity and inclusion" and defending Canadian heritage. Defending it against what, exactly?
posted by Sys Rq at 1:07 PM on July 9, 2010
posted by Sys Rq at 1:07 PM on July 9, 2010
American television?
posted by chunking express at 1:12 PM on July 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by chunking express at 1:12 PM on July 9, 2010 [1 favorite]
Corporatization/privatization? Exploitation via NAFTA? Militarization?
Not that Harper would be against any of those things, but it wouldn't be hard to imagine some legitimate uses of the phrase "defending Canadian heritage". If, you know, it didn't come out of the mouth of an "old, white guy".
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 1:22 PM on July 9, 2010
Not that Harper would be against any of those things, but it wouldn't be hard to imagine some legitimate uses of the phrase "defending Canadian heritage". If, you know, it didn't come out of the mouth of an "old, white guy".
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 1:22 PM on July 9, 2010
Defending it against what, exactly?
Modernity.
If you're Innu or Cree or Inuit (or a lot of other indigenous cultures) then you need a lot of help simply holding back the tide of modernity that wants to wash your culture into the great faceless sea of everything south of 60. Again, Jean didn't eat that raw seal just because she likes northern sea mammal sashimi or because she's always wanted to be on Fear Factor.
posted by GuyZero at 1:31 PM on July 9, 2010
Modernity.
If you're Innu or Cree or Inuit (or a lot of other indigenous cultures) then you need a lot of help simply holding back the tide of modernity that wants to wash your culture into the great faceless sea of everything south of 60. Again, Jean didn't eat that raw seal just because she likes northern sea mammal sashimi or because she's always wanted to be on Fear Factor.
posted by GuyZero at 1:31 PM on July 9, 2010
Now, to be clear, Johnston isn't exactly an expert on Aboriginal affairs but there are legitimate uses for the phrase is all I'm saying. Given his track record Johnston is more likely to spend time courting foreign venture capitalists than touring Iqaluit but then again, who knows. It is part of the job.
posted by GuyZero at 1:33 PM on July 9, 2010
posted by GuyZero at 1:33 PM on July 9, 2010
Yes, because what could be more inherently nationalistic than the job of representing a foreign monarch?
Her official designation as it pertains to Canada is "Queen of Canada". She's not a 'foreign' monarch just because she also happens to be recognized as queen in other countries.
posted by rocket88 at 1:50 PM on July 9, 2010
Her official designation as it pertains to Canada is "Queen of Canada". She's not a 'foreign' monarch just because she also happens to be recognized as queen in other countries.
posted by rocket88 at 1:50 PM on July 9, 2010
She's not a 'foreign' monarch just because she also happens to be recognized as queen in other countries.
Well, she was born, and does live, in a foreign nation. That sort of counts, I think.
posted by Sys Rq at 1:55 PM on July 9, 2010
Well, she was born, and does live, in a foreign nation. That sort of counts, I think.
posted by Sys Rq at 1:55 PM on July 9, 2010
« Older Larry Rivers' Archives | Olive Oil in the U.S. - A Smeared Reputation Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by tapesonthefloor at 9:38 AM on July 8, 2010 [3 favorites]