FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Jul 27

Could Donald Trump Become President? Sure, Why Not!

by bcurry

Donald Trump wants to be President of the United States of America. Well, maybe he’s not all that crazy. After all, Ronald Reagan was once a former actor whose greatest role was playing the U.S. President for real. He was said to have slept through Cabinet meetings and insisted on having briefing notes of no longer than one page in length. Apparently, this was to accommodate his short span of attention by providing script-like documents. Bill Clinton was well known for failure to keep it in his pants during his entire political career. George W. Bush invented new words or mispronounced actual words, thus becoming the butt of numerous comedians’ jokes. President Bush was given 9/11 as his legacy, and messed it up by invading Iraq under false pretences. Barak Obama became the first African-American President, although many Americans including African-Americans, didn’t think of him as really being black.

So why couldn’t Donald Trump become President? Trump leads all other Republican candidates in the polls at this time. He shoots from the hip, much like Reagan and Bush. His mouth often outruns his brains, not unlike former Presidents. Yet, he has come to represent a significant part of the American electorate that is angry with the state of their politics, the economy and society in general. He represents that portion of the population where the American dream has become a nightmare. He talks about issues like immigration which other candidates have tended to avoid by employing the usual cautious platitudes. He doesn’t rely on carefully-worded positions developed through focus-groups and well paid politically-savvy advisors.

Many Americans, like many Canadians, are frustrated with the current political scene. They feel that the powers that be in Washington and Ottawa do not reflect their real interests. In all truth, can you blame them? When you struggle everyday to make ends meet and good paying jobs are becoming fewer and fewer, you tend to target those fat cats in government and in the corporate world. However, despite Trump himself being a fat cat, he seems to speak for this disgruntled portion of the population. You may not like the things he says or how he says them, but you have to admit that his straight talk is somewhat catchy and to the point. If anything, he once again has become a media darling, which may in the end be his downfall.

Federal Election US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jun 21

Why Bother Arguing With Gun Owners?

by bcurry

More mass shootings in the U.S. and the resulting silence is deafening.  While their President may continually question the fact that his society is the most violent among industrialized countries, the onslaught continues.  The arms industry and its lobbyists rule the day.

Even here is Canada, statistically far less violent but increasingly seeing the use of firearms in homicides, there has been little real outrage over the recent weakening of gun control measures.  Some Canadian gun owners even argue that more gun control is a first step in the government eventually confiscating their weapons.  Sounds like arguments by militant militia movements existing both in the U.S. and Canada.  Remember folks, it’s the God-given right to bear arms!

When the number of guns in the hands of people outnumbers the number of people in a society, it would seem only inevitable that they will be used in violent acts of domestic terror and crime.  Indeed, some would argue that we are now in a state of perpetual war.  Local police are equipped with high-powered rifles, machine guns, armoured-attack vehicles, etc., etc.  As more police are unfortunately gunned down, authorities are becoming more and more like paramilitary organizations.  Can’t really blame them.

Getting guns off the street is a lot harder then it sounds.  Pro-gun groups continue to argue that each individual has the right to defend themselves if attacked or provoked.  It used to be that guns were primarily needed for hunting, target practice and sporting events.  However, we’ve seem for whatever reason to have expanded the need.  Sorry folks, given the political and financial clout of gun advocates, there isn’t really any reason to bother arguing for increased gun control measures.  There are no more excuses, no more rational thinking and no more political will.

Gun Control

Leave a comment »
May 5

Low Birth Rates, But Who’s Going To Look After Me?

by bcurry

Seniors today are beginning to worry about the future of social security, health care and escaping the throws of poverty.  Birth rates in North America have been on the downturn for the last decade, and especially in the last five years since the Great Recession.  Studies have shown that the so-called millennial women are reproducing at the slowest pace of any generation in U.S. history.  The same is most likely true for Canadian millennials.  According to the Urban Institute in the States, birthrates among women in their 20s declined more than 15 percent between 2007 and 2012.

Now, I understand that younger women were delaying having children in the past because more were into careers and self-employment.  With the current tough economic times, even more women are delaying child birth due to serious financial concerns.  This is completely understandable given the high cost of raising children in this day and age.  Baby boomers never had to face many of today’s harsh realties, including high levels of unemployment, underemployment, housing costs and education-related debt.

On the other hand, we have an aging population, with those over 65 heading to make up a quarter of our population in the not too distant future.  Indeed, extreme financial circumstances are forcing many seniors to continue working beyond the normal retirement years.  However, once retired and with the forecast decline in the future labour forces, who is going to support all those existing social programs?  Due to a lack of retirement savings for many seniors, they have come to rely on government assistance just to make ends meet.  Furthermore, don’t count on your kids to look after you!  As it stands now, they need your help more often than not.

As a society, it would appear that we have to do a lot more to encourage young people to have families, and right away.  This may mean greater financial incentives and government assistance to do so.  We need to introduce more paid maternity and parental leave programs, affordable child-care services, tax benefits for each child, improved post-secondary education grants and loans, affordable housing, etc., etc.  Seniors need to support such initiatives, for to do so will benefit them as well in the end run.  Wouldn’t they like to become grandparents while they’re still alive?  The old saying that children represent our future has never been truer.  It’s time that we recognize and support policies that would lead to an increase in the birth rate.  Families contribute to society in so many ways.  Such family-oriented policies will certainly enhance all our futures, including those of the millennials.

Canada US

Leave a comment »
Mar 26

Canada’s Expansion of Iraq Mission to Syria is a Huge Mistake

by bcurry

No matter what the reasons that the Canadian government gives, the proposed expansion of the current Iraq mission to Syria has all kinds of serious consequences.  Simply stating that Canada is following the American lead provides little in the way of justification.  Syria is a bigger mess than even Iraq.  Let’s recap for a moment.  The Syrian uprising, part of the so-called Arab Spring, originally involved opposition groups to the current Syrian government under its dictator Bashar al-Assad.  The Americans didn’t step into this internal war, preferring to wait and see.  However, things didn’t go well for Assad, making him commit even more atrocities against his own people, including the use of chemical weapons.  Still, the Americans didn’t step in.  Then along came ISIL or ISIS, a major radical group who began to make territorial gains in Syria and eventually into Iraq.  So now, the Americans, no longer knowing who to support militarily in Syria, decide to go after the most radical group — ISIL.

Subsequently, the Iraqi government and security forces couldn’t stop ISIL’s advances inside Iraq, threatening to bring down Iraq’s American-supported and primarily Shia-backed government.  ISIL found support among the Sunni population in Iraq who felt persecuted by the Shia regime, and have faced atrocities by Shia security forces and local militia.  Enter Iran, whose military guard began to support the Shia militias in Iraq, who in turn appeared better able to defend against ISIL than Iraq’s government forces.  Let’s not forget about the Kurdish forces fighting ISIL in northern Iraq, and who would still like to have more independence from Baghdad.  At this point, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi called on the U.S. to provide military support in the form of air strikes against ISIL and military advisors to Iraqi forces on the ground.

Six months ago, Canada entered the American-led campaign along with some other European and Arab countries.  Remember, this is not a NATO endorsed campaign.  Canada’s token contribution deployed several dozen special forces troops to northern Iraq, six fighter jets, two surveillance aircraft, a refuelling plane and around 600 support personnel based in Kuwait.  So far, Canada has had one casualty and three injured by Kurdish friendly fire.  Have air strikes really accomplished much?  ISIL’s advancements have to date been slowed, but most military experts believe that the war against ISIL can only be won on the ground.  In the case of the Syrian campaign, the results of air strikes are even less convincing.

Yes, ISIL has made some vague propaganda threats against Canadians, has committed atrocities, and a few Canadians have even gone to join ISIL in Syria, along with other foreign combatants.  However, is there really a serious threat to the homeland from ISIL?  Or is this just political maneuvering on the part of the Canadian and American governments to justify their military actions in the region?  What are the governments’ exit strategies?  Indications are that the Iraqis and Syrians could be at war for years.  Neither the current Iraqi nor the Syrian regime appears to be able to deal with this mess.  Do the Canadian and American governments really believe that they can resolve the disputes without further bloodshed and atrocities?  These are real questions and consequences that need to be further explored before both countries begin to witness ever-growing “mission creep”.  Unfortunately, the majority of Canadians and Americans don’t really understand the complexities of the situation to adequately address these questions.  Sorry, but it’s the truth.

Iraq Iraq and ISIS Syria and ISIL

Leave a comment »
Dec 11

Whatever Happened to the American and Canadian Dreams?

by bcurry

Well, the holidays are here. However, there doesn’t appear to be much to cheer about. Both the U.S. and Canada are involved in another war in the Middle East. Their two governments appear to be floundering about, trying to figure out where to slash costs and how to balance budgets. Our economies are still fairly flat, wages are stagnating and unemployment remains high. Generally, people appear to have lost faith in governments and financial institutions.

The middle class is again feeling the crunch, with personal debt levels climbing to record highs. All the while a recent poll by the New York Times exclaims that the American dream is out of reach. About two-thirds of those Americans polled said they still believed in the American dream, apparently the lowest result in roughly two decades. Similar evidence would no doubt support the same middle class belief in Canada. The same poll showed that a slim 52 percent majority of Americans think the country’s economic system is fair, giving everyone an equal opportunity to succeed, while 45 percent think it is unfair. The majority see their household financial situation as remaining the same or worst, and cannot save enough for a decent retirement.

O.K., I guess that we’re all going to have to begin tightening our belts. After all, luxury goods are for the rich. Once you’ve put food on the table, paid for shelter, faced medical bills, put aside monies for the kids’ education, given governments their pound of flesh — there’s not much left in the kitty for a little entertainment. Oh yeah, the cost of fuel has temporarily gone down, but for how long? On the other hand, the cost of other essentials has gone up — little things like food, clothing and day care. No wonder the average American and Canadian are becoming increasingly sceptical about the so-called “dream”. The dream appears to be turning into a “nightmare”.

Yet, despite all the doom, gloom and naysayers, hope remains eternal. Maybe the dream isn’t dead yet. Maybe it’s just languishing somewhere. After all, happiness is a frivolous and elusive state of mind. Perhaps, at this time of the year we should put aside all of our materialistic desires. Instead, we should count our small blessings like close family, friends, good health and everyday freedoms. Be charitable, for there are always those far less fortunate. Pursuing the spiritual side of our existence is what the dream should be all about. Let us share holidays with others and wish for a good New Year for our two countries!

The American Dream

Leave a comment »
Nov 16

Letters to the Editor Tell Us a Lot About Ordinary Folk and Ourselves

by bcurry

Every morning like so many North Americans, I read the local newspaper while sipping my favourite blend of coffee. However, I must confess that the regular news has become rather distressing. Stories abound about war, diseases, crime, racism, acts of intolerance, natural disasters, etc., etc. For sure, there are good feel stories, but they are few and far between. It’s not that we should ignore unpleasant realities, for they are what helps to sell newspapers and other news media. It’s not that politicians say one thing and then do the opposite when governing. It’s not that journalists and editorialists are far from being as objective as they claim. It’s simply that at times all this negativism can be bad for the soul.

More recently, I’ve been paying more attention to the paper’s letters to the editor. These are written by people who feel compassionate enough to express their views on a variety of topics. In most cases, they are ordinary folk just like you and me. I have come to see that their views are more often than not upbeat, insightful and to the point. Since editors limit the number of words allowable, their views on everyday issues are usually expressed concisely and clearly. Contrary to news articles and columns which can ramble on — often causing the reader to get lost halfway through the piece — while the composition of letters are far easier to follow.

News coverage is often about so-called “extraordinary” individuals and their exploits. Yet, it is ordinary people that really understand the realities of everyday life. When they reflect on issues, it is from a personal and down-to-earth perspective. Extraordinary people are primarily concerned about maintaining images and politically-motivated causes. For this reason, they say and interpret what they think we want to hear. Their ramblings have been cleansed and sanitized for public consumption several times over. Politicians and bureaucrats are normally the worst offenders when it comes to “public-speak”. In the end, it can be difficult to comprehend actually what it is that they are saying on any given topic.

Ordinary people on the other hand are not appealing to any particular constituency. They tend to call it like they see it. Whether one agrees or not with their viewpoints, the straightforward honesty is both refreshing and revealing. Indeed, this demonstrates why we need more forums through which ordinary citizens can speak out. In a truly democratic society it’s critical that citizens can express their hopes, concerns and viewpoints without fear of censorship or retribution. I trust that good editors fully understand and support this forum. For these and other reasons, I will continue to dutifully read letters to the editor. I hope that you will too.

Canada US

Leave a comment »
Nov 10

Why Should Canada’s Small Air Force Help Bomb ISIS in Iraq?

by bcurry

In case you weren’t aware, the Canadian government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper has sent half a dozen CF-18s to help bomb targets in Iraq held by the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS or ISEL). As Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau noted, the government whipped out our CF-18s to show them how big they are. He rightfully asked why Canadians aren’t talking more about the kind of humanitarian aid that Canada can and must be engaged in. Besides thousands of civilian deaths, the previous Iraq war also created hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing that country’s on-going civil war. With the onset of ISIS, thousands more Iraqis have fled to neighbouring countries and safe havens within Iraq. They are desperate for food, shelter, clothing, medical supplies and other essentials to survive the coming winter conditions.

Let’s take a step back to clarify Canada’s historical position vis-a-vis the first American incursion into Iraq to dispose of Saddam Hussein. The Iraq War began with the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The government of Canada did not at any time formally declare war against Iraq. The then Prime Minister Jean Chrétien said in 2002 that Canada would, in fact, be part of a military coalition to invade Iraq if it were sanctioned by the United Nations. However, when the United States and the United Kingdom subsequently withdrew their diplomatic efforts to gain that UN sanction, Jean Chrétien announced in March 2003 that Canada would not participate in the pending invasion. As it turned out, this was one of the best decisions that Prime Minister Chrétien ever made during his government’s term of office.

Recently, former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien defended Justin Trudeau’s controversial decision to oppose Canada’s air combat mission in Iraq. He believes that the fighter planes deployed by the Harper government are a “very marginal” response to the crisis caused by ISIS militants. He concluded that the best ‎contribution Canada can make is by engaging in massive, not token, humanitarian assistance. The leader of the official opposition, Thomas Mulcair of the New Democrats, has also stated that Canada’s first contribution should be to use every diplomatic, humanitarian, and financial resource at our disposal to respond to the overwhelming human tragedy unfolding on the ground. We should also help to strengthen political institutions in both Iraq and Syria.

Let’s face it, the U.S. has been in this conflict for well over 10 years and has been fighting ISIS under one name or another. While ISIS has renamed itself several times since 2004—al Qaeda in Iraq, the Mujahideen Shura Council and the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham in Syria—it is literally the same insurgent group that U.S. forces have been battling for over a decade. The Americans propped up a corrupt Iraqi regime under Maliki, which favoured the Shiite population at the expense of the Kurds and Sunni. With the evident inability of the Iraqi security forces to fend off ISIS militants, the Americans once again have had to step in militarily to defend the Iraqi government through air strikes and provision of thousands of military advisors.

President Obama has already warned that American military and financial support will be needed for a long time in this new campaign. The Canadian contribution is but a mere token of some sort of support. The danger is always that such policies can go quickly from mission creep to mission leap. As in the case of Canada’s contribution to the Afghan mission which started out with only a few dozen soldiers and ended up with many casualties, when will this mission end? Canada’s international credibility as a country with an extensive history of humanitarian achievements is in jeopardy. Unfortunately, ISIS is not going away anytime soon. In a year’s time, there is little doubt that the Canadian government will have to seriously rethink its policies!

Iraq Iraq and ISIS Iraq Today

Leave a comment »
Oct 1

Iraq – America’s Biggest Blunder Could Become Canada’s

by bcurry

Well, why don’t they just bomb Iraq once again! The U.S. is flying armed missions across Iraq, only this time bombing sites occupied by the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). All under the pretext that somehow ISIS represents a direct threat to the West. However, as far as we know, ISIS has no weapons of mass destruction (like Saddam Hussein), but only tactics of mass terrorism. Once again, the U.S. has assembled a “coalition of the willing”, including Canada this time, to fight the perceived menace of some estimated 3,000 ISIS fighters in Iraq. A menace that the heavily armed Iraqi government security forces couldn’t stop, but instead fled from battle. Only the Kurds appear willing to stand up to this foe with appeals for heavier weapons from the West and further humanitarian aid.

President Obama has promised that no American boots will be on the ground in this latest struggle. A new Iraqi government has replaced Maliki’s corrupt Shiite-backed government which had carried out its own form of terrorism against the Sunni population. Otherwise, we continue to have one big political mess in Iraq, creating instability and insecurity. The Americans overestimated the capabilities of Iraqi security forces and underestimated the resolve of ISIS. Thus, conditions ripe for the effective entry of a terrorist bunch like ISIS.

All the so-called Middle Eastern experts forecast that defeating the likes of ISIS is no short-term deal, air strikes or no air strikes. The battles can only be won through winning the hearts and minds of all Iraqis, and by Iraqi successes on the ground. Otherwise, you just have another stalemate and one more human disaster, in terms of Iraqi refugees and civilian casualties.

So why is the Canadian government even contemplating providing fighter jets to participate in a decade-old war that it had never been involved with from the outset? Does this small bunch of fanatics represent a real threat to Canadians, or is the Government’s hype just a ploy to gain support for more military action? Just as the senior Bush had warned his son, there’s appears to be no clear cut exit plan for this Iraqi campaign.  Canada is not in a position to fight in another long-term war after a decade of fighting in Afghanistan at tremendous costs in both human and monetary terms.  ISIS is largely a result of disastrous long-standing U.S. involvement in the Middle East, Iraq being the worst case scenario. Needless-to-say, Prime Minister Harper will have to shoulder full accountability for any further Canadian military involvement in Iraq.

Foreign Policy Iraq Today

Leave a comment »
Sep 9

Something Went Very Wrong Happened in Iraq!

by bcurry

Over a year ago, I begged the question as to why the American media had almost completely abandoned its coverage of Iraq after the withdrawal of U.S. troops. Most coverage was focused on events in Syria and Afghanistan. At the time, fighting among insurgent groups had increased in Iraq and the Iraqi government and security forces appeared unable to contain their activities. As the army faltered, Shiite militias were playing a growing role in the conflict, nudged toward the fight by the corrupt government of Mr. Maliki. As the militiamen faced radical Sunni jihadists, the threat of a wider sectarian conflagration grew. Then entered the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Too radical even for Al Qaeda, ISIS proceeded to take over numerous key towns and infrastructure in Iraq as Iraqi security forces abandoned their positions and American-supplied equipment. 

All of a sudden, Iraq once again has become the main center of attention, notably in the fight against the brand of Islamic terrorism practiced by ISIS. Without the opposition of such groups as the Kurds and the use of American air power to target ISIS initiatives, Maliki’s government would probably have floundered even more. Even with a new more inclusive government in place, there is no assurance that Iraq’s situation will improve anytime soon. A longer-term internal political solution is definitely required. The West can’t provide this. 

In the meantime, the U.S. has invited its allies to provide military assistance to the Iraqi forces. Low and behold, Stephen Harper, the Canadian Prime Minister, has agreed to send a hundred or so “military advisors” to Iraq. Now, for a brief historical note. Canada did not join the original U.S.-led coalition of willing countries when Iraq was first invaded to oust then dictator Saddam Hussein — under the pretense of destroying his non-existent “weapons of mass destruction”. Subsequently, Canada had very little to do with the resulting Iraq governments and American military actions over the following ten-year period against the insurgents. So why now? What about finishing what we did to help the Afghans? What can military advisors do without becoming involved in actual military actions? Remember, Vietnam was never declared by Congress as a war, but was done through executive action by the U.S. President. Originally, Americans were only supposed to be military advisors to the South Vietnamese armed forces. Over 70,000 young Americans were killed in that tragic war, and for what? Yet, President Obama reiterated that there will be “no boots on the ground” in Iraq. 

I’m not saying that Iraq could turn out to be another Vietnam. Obviously the circumstances are different. Yet, history should have taught us something by now. External interventions into the internal affairs of other countries can lead not to political solutions and stability, but can have serious consequences for both the interveners and the affected countries. After all is said and done, something very wrong happened in Iraq. Let’s not pursue never-ending bandage solutions!

Iraq Today

Leave a comment »
Aug 26

Don’t Point Finger at U.S. for Poor Race Relations – Just Look in Your Own Backyard

by bcurry

The recent tragic shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri has once again raised the spectre of race relations in the U.S. However, there is little reason for Canadians to point holier-than-thou fingers at the Americans. If anything, it should encourage Canadians to really examine the state of our own race relations. 

Case in point, take the situation of our aboriginal populations and the fact that rates of violence are so much higher than in the rest of the population. Aboriginal women now make up more than 20 per cent of all female murder victims, twice the proportion of 30 years ago, and five times their share of the female population. The murder rate among aboriginal men is more than twice as high as it is for aboriginal women. Last year’s Idle No More movement provided a valuable lesson in why so many aboriginal Canadians remain so chronically destitute — why progress has been so frustratingly elusive, and why it is likely to remain so. Native children are the least likely of Canadian children to complete a high school education, and even less likely to go on to post secondary schooling. When aboriginal persons move to larger Canadian urban centres, they often find themselves unable to find affordable housing, good paying jobs and applicable community services. Instead, substance abuse and prostitution become the only means of escape and survival. As a result, our prisons have an inordinate number of incarcerated aboriginals compared to the population as a whole. 

Canada prides itself on being a diverse, tolerant and multicultural society. How tolerant white, middle-class Canadians really are is up for debate. More and more are sending their kids to private schools, sometimes to avoid the influx of new immigrant children into the public school systems. Listen to some local radio talk shows and one gets a pretty good idea of how older white Canadians view our current liberal immigration and refugee policies. Like the U.S., Canada opened its doors to welcome families and individuals for a whole slew of reasons, some being primarily economic in nature. All fine and dandy. However once here, are they being treated fairly and without bias? Many arrive with post-secondary degrees, but still find it difficult to obtain approval to work in their professions. These persons are often treated like second-class citizens. Many temporary workers are brought in to work in agriculture, retail and domestic services sectors due to a lack of interest on the part of Canadian workers. Temporary workers do not have the same benefits under our laws, including labour and health and safety laws, as do other workers. Don’t even address the longstanding English and French relationship in this country — or the “two solitudes” as Hugh MacLennan once wrote. 

When it comes to race — sorry Canada — poverty, unemployment and underemployment, violence, and lack of access to education and professional opportunities remain significant issues. Call it systemic discrimination or whatever, but it still exists. We can’t afford to be too smug!

Canada Race Relations US

Leave a comment »
«Older Entries
Newer Entries »
Blog at WordPress.com.