Our Princeling’s High Spending Ways—Is Anyone Listening?

NEWS RELEASE—FraserInstitute

Prime Minister Trudeau now owns the two highest-spending years in Canadian history outside of war or recession

January 22, 2019

For Immediate Release

VANCOUVER—Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has now recorded two of the three years with the highest levels of per person government spending in Canadian history, which includes times of war and recession, finds a new study released today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“Wars and recessions clearly affect government spending, but to see this high level of peacetime spending when the economy is also growing could spell trouble for Canadian taxpayers in the future,” said Jason Clemens, executive vice-president of the Fraser Institute and co-author of Prime Ministers and Government Spending, 2019.

The study, which tracks annual per person program spending (adjusted for inflation) by prime ministers since Confederation, finds that spending this year ($8,639 per Canadian) is only $72 below the all-time record set by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in 2009 ($8,711 in 2018 dollars) during the global recession.

Consequently, two of the three highest-spending years on record—2017 and 2018 – are within Prime Minister Trudeau’s tenure.

In addition, Prime Minister Trudeau also presided over the fourth-largest average annual increase (3.1 per cent) in per person program spending since the Second World War, behind only Pierre Trudeau (4.5 per cent), Lester Pearson (5.3 per cent) and Louis St. Laurent (7.0 per cent).

Of the post-war prime ministers, only Joe Clark, Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien recorded average annual per person spending declines, though Clark was Prime Minister for less than a year. Notably, Prime Minister Chrétien reduced per person spending by 16.5 per cent between 1994 and 1996.
“The past few years have seen rapid and historic increases in deficit-financed government spending in Ottawa, at a time when the economy is growing,” Clemens said.

“Higher spending often leads to higher deficits and more debt that ultimately must be paid by taxpayers, which is why current spending levels represent a burden to curren and future taxpayers.”

Advertisements

Gillette Gets ‘Nicked” —Big Time!

Egard Watch Company video counters Gillette’s “Toxic Masculinity” ad
Comments

Legal Insurrection Website

Posted by Leslie Eastman

Egard Watch Company video counters Gillette’s “Toxic Masculinity” ad

Tuesday, January 22, 2019 at 9:00am

Due to overwhelmingly positive response, Egard must now back-order stock & is donating to charity for veterans.

It appears that one company’s executive was making notes on the response to the Gillette’s man-shaming video, “The Best a Man Can Be”.

He directed his firm, Egard Watch Company, to make a video that is an homage to what is good in men, entitled “What is a Man: A Response to Gillette”.

A watch company CEO said Monday he has created an online ad in response to the new Gillette ad combatting “toxic masculinity” that has sparked outrage.

The YouTube commercial from the Egard Watch Company features footage of men in various situations — from fighting fires to hugging children as the firm’s founder Ilan Srulovicz asks “What is a man?”

“There’s been a movement in society I feel that’s just been painting men with a broad brush,” Srulovicz told “Fox & Friends” Monday.

“You know, for a company like Gillette to open up a commercial with a term like ‘toxic masculinity,’ I just don’t feel like masculinity is toxic.”

“I think masculinity can be beautiful,” he said.

The Egard Watch ad does so much more than show images of men on the job or with their families. The scenes are superimposed with statistics that show masculinity can be quite toxic…to males. For example, the viewer is informed that men account for 93% of workplace deaths and 97% of war fatalities.

If you were unfortunate enough to view the Gillette ad then the Egard Watch Company video is a must-see palate cleanser.

What has the response been to Egard?

Based on the company’s website, and sudden need to back-order product, I would say that it is a winning message.

The positive response to our message has allowed us to start donating to charities! We will be donating $10,000 USD To the Bob Woodruff Foundation this week! We hope to continue making numerous donations year round. Thank you all for giving us an opportunity to give back.

Due to the unexpected overwhelming response we are back-ordered on many units. Please bear with us. We are accepting pre-orders as we are making new inventory. The response is beyond appreciated. Every order will be fulfilled. We want to be completely transparent about the wait.

Ladies: Egard also has women’s watches and bracelets. If you like to send a message to the virtue-signaling elites dominating traditional marketing venues, this would be a wonderful opportunity to use the power of your purse as well.

The social media response has been uplifting.

Karol Markowicz, a New York Post writer, notes one positive aspect related to the Gillette ad: It has turned the tide against the “Toxic Masculinity” trope.

…In 2015, a company called Protein World released an ad for a diet supplement featuring a fit model in a bikini and the words: “Are You Beach Body Ready?” The backlash was swift. The ad was defaced again and again in the NYC subways, and the city of London went so far as to ban “body-shaming” ads on the Underground.

If there was a moment in time when women collectively decided that they would no longer stand for being body-shamed, that was it.

Similarly, the response to the Gillette ad feels like a dam breaking. This might be the moment when men have finally had enough.

If the response to Egard Watch Company’s video is any indication, the dam has shattered completely.

Today’s Al Gore—Alexandria Ocasio Cortez

Today’s Al Gore—Alexandria Ocasio Cortez

Well , her words are very, very similar.

Catastrophe all round.

The World has twelve years if we don’t address climate change , she said at an event in Harlem yesterday to celebrate Martin Luther King Day.

I suspect Mr. King would have a thing or two to say about that.

Remember it was Al Gore’s fake science that said the Polar Ice Caps would be gone by 2014.

Now Cortez says its 2031 ! Or the world will be gone.

We see what Gore’s fake science has wrought —another purveyor of climate chaos.

The great philosopher David Hume said:

‘Nothing is more dangerous to reason than the flights of the imagination.’

‘Where men are the most sure and arrogant, they are commonly the most mistaken, and have there given reins to passion, without that proper deliberation and suspense, which can alone secure them from the grossest absurdities.’

The Ugliness Of The UN

The Ugliness Of The UN

No one with a scintilla of a democratic bent can find much to commend the United Nations when it comes to its Human Rights Council. To continue to allow it to exist is a blight on the UN and humanity. A disgrace , a disgrace.

How can a Human Rights Council have blatant human rights violators as members? There is no logical basis for this to happen !

Freedom House , an independent organization that assesses a country’s level of freedom , provides the data that condemns the UN .

Freedom House scores using 7 as the least free.

Here are members of the UN Human Rights Council

China——6.5–Not Free
Cuba—— 6.5-Not Free
Saudi Arabia-7–Not Free
Bangladesh—4.7-Partly Free
Pakistan——-4.5-Partly Free
Egypt————6-Not Free
Quatar———-5.5-Not Free
Cameroon——6-Not Free
Bahrain———6.5-Not Free
Angola———-6-Not Free

These members with others condemn Israel regularly for human rights?

What is Israel’s Freedom Score: 2—FREE

What is worse is that other free nations join in to condemn free Israel with no condemnation of all the non free nations .

Late last year , November 15, the UN Watch Organization commented of what was happening then :

“The UN’s planned assault on Israel with a torrent of one-sided resolutions is surreal,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, a Geneva-based non-governmental watchdog organization.

‘Days after the Hamas terrorist group assaulted Israeli civilians with a barage of 460 rockets — while the UN’s General Assembly and Human Rights Council stayed silent — the world body now adds insult to injury by adopting nine lopsided condemnations, whose only purpose is to demonize the Jewish state.”

‘While EU states are expected to support 15 out of a total of 20 resolutions to be adopted against Israel by December, the same EU states have failed to introduce a single UNGA resolution on the human rights situation in China, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Belarus, Cuba, Turkey, Pakistan, Vietnam, Algeria, or on 175 other countries,” said Neuer.’

Where is Canada on this?

The US has spoken out—one of a few .

When will the world stop this insanity?

The Great Davos Man Absent

Davos Man Absent

The coming together of the elites at Davos, Switzerland is in the doldrums this year.

You see its personification is not there.

Macron, the aloof, is absent.

The hero of last year’s confab is forced to stay home and deal with real people. Like the yellow vests . Those ordinary people whose ability to make ends meet has been severely compromised by unilateral moves to take more of their hard earned money.

Popular movements in developed nations across the globe are rebelling against what they see as as leaders bent on a global fantasy leaving them behind .

Writing in today’s Wall Street Journal Stacy Meichtry says:

‘Mr. Macron has since become a cautionary tale of what can happen when a globe-trotting leader takes a finger off the pulse of the street.’

From Brazil to Greece people are uneasy about what the elites have formulated on their behalf.

The Globalist, Climate doom agenda is not finding a ready audience among the ordinary folk who watch their leaders mouth climate doom as they fly their fossil guzzling jets and live in lavish palaces and cater to a terrorist driven Iran.

Oh, now Macron wants to talk —-have a ‘ grand debat national.’

Too bad he never thought of that Athenian idea a little sooner.

Proctor & Gamble’s Toxic Sanctimony.

Procter & Gamble’s toxic sanctimony

By Michelle Malkin • January 16, 2019

Procter & Gamble’s toxic sanctimony
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2019

One of the world’s most successful brands committed ideological hara-kiri this week. Recognized around the world as a symbol of manly civility for more than a century, Gillette will now be remembered as the company that did itself in by sacrificing a massive consumer base at the altar of progressivism.
To which I say: R.I.P.-C. (Rest In Political Correctness).

In case you hadn’t seen or heard, parent company Procter & Gamble launched a Gillette ad campaign blanket-demonizing men as ogres and bullies. Guilt-ridden actors gaze ruefully at their reflections in the mirror — not because they’ve neglected their hygiene, but simply because they’re men. Various scenarios of boys being boors and males being monsters flash across the screen before woke interlocutors show how “real” men behave in nonaggressive, conciliatory and apologetic ways.

At home and at work, in the boardroom, on the playground, and even while barbecuing in the backyard, Gillette sees nothing but testosterone-driven trouble. Message: Y chromosomes are toxic. The “best a man can get” can no longer be attained without first renouncing oppressive manliness.
Self-improvement must begin with self-flagellation.

A Gillette company statement explained that after “taking a hard look at our past” and “reflecting on the types of men and behaviors we want to celebrate,” officials decided to “actively challenge the stereotypes and expectations of what it means to be a man everywhere you see Gillette.”

But Proctor & Gamble, which bought Gillette in 2005 for $57 billion, doesn’t spell out which part exactly of the 118-year-old company’s past it now rejects. Was it founder King Gillette, the relentless entrepreneur who appealed to “red-blooded” young American soldiers? Was it the decades of multimillion-dollar promotional campaigns catering to physically superior athletes?

Or perhaps the mau-mauing marketers have adopted the radical feminist position that shaving itself is sexist. Is the ultimate goal to undermine the very raison d’etre of the $15 billion shave care industry?

I ask only half in jest. How else to explain this latest suicidal episode of collective consumer-shaming? Gillette’s two-minute, man-bashing missive may have racked up 7 million views on YouTube, but the “dislikes” outnumber “likes” by 4 to 1.

And the reviews are brutal:
“How to destroy your company in 1 minute 48 seconds.”
“Companies attempting to make profit should stick to that.”
“The single male is the most attacked maligned ridiculed and forgotten person in today’s society.”
“You can buy High Quality Razors that are NOT Gillette at the 99 Cents Store with NO lecturing on how to be a Man.”
“I’ll buy P&G products again when I see them release an equivalent ad targeting negative female traits: toxic femininity/paternity fraud/fake accusations… doubt that’s going to happen any time soon!”
“So now Gillette thinks that it is the arbiter of what all men should think, say, and watch. Screw Gillette, bought their products for almost 50 years, I will never buy another Gillette product. NEVER!!!”
“Thank you Gillette, I purchased your razors and chopped off my testicles with it. No more toxic masculinity!”
Ouch.

You may remember that P&G, which I un-fondly refer to Protest & Grumble, has dipped its sanctimonious toe into social justice waters before. In 2017, the company tackled identity politics with a video called “The Talk.” The preachy ad stoked fear and hatred of police and perpetuated racial stereotypes of officers lurking around every corner waiting to pounce on innocent black children and teenagers — alienating law enforcement families across the country and insulting every minority cop to boot.

The backlash against that ad apparently didn’t faze Protest & Grumble’s activist zealots. Once again, industry marketers are proving they’re not satisfied with selling useful products people want and need. No, they’re hell-bent on exploiting successful businesses to cram odious politics down consumers’ throats.

Like many Silicon Valley giants (hello, Facebook and Twitter) and SJW-hijacked sports enterprises (hello, NFL and ESPN), Gillette is now openly discriminating against its consumers-turned-critics to curry political favor with the #MeToo movement. Savvy social media observers caught the company throttling negative comments and dislikes on its YouTube video. They can manipulate likes and de-platform dissenters. But they won’t be able to disguise the bloodletting effect of toxic sanctimony on their bottom line.

Falling on your virtue-signaling blade may win you awards and headlines, but ultimately, it’s a fatal proposition.

BuzzFeed Trump Story Looks Like Others —Fake—Look At The List!

BUZZFEED’S TRUMP STORY LATEST IN LONG LIST OF RUSSIA BOMBSHELLS THAT WEREN’T

8:57 PM 01/18/2019 | MEDIA

Amber Athey | White House Correspondent , Daily Caller

BuzzFeed News’ latest disputed report about former Trump attorney Michael Cohen is just the latest in a long line of Russia “bombshells” that turned out to be anything but.

The Special Counsel’s office disputed a Thursday night report by BuzzFeed claiming that President Donald Trump directed his lawyer to lie about a potential business deal in Moscow during the 2016 presidential campaign.

The BuzzFeed report was used to float impeachment proceedings and obstruction of justice charges against the president, but Mueller’s team disputed the core premise of the reporting.

“BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate,” spokesman Peter Carr said in a statement to The Daily Caller News Foundation.

BuzzFeed is currently standing by the story, but unfortunately for the press, the obsession to prove collusion has dampened their journalistic abilities, leading to a seemingly endless list of corrections, retractions and apologies.

We’ve compiled a list of some of the worst media screwups when it comes to Russia.

1. CNN Accuses Don Jr. Of Wikileaks Collusion

Last December, CNN’s Manu Raju reported that Wikileaks emailed Donald Trump Jr. to give him access to stolen documents a full ten days before they were released to the public.

Unfortunately for CNN, it turns out their sources gave them the wrong date. Don Jr. actually received an email with access to the stolen docs on Sept. 14, 2016, after they had already been released publicly.

2. ABC Tanks Stock Market With Fake Flynn News

ABC was forced to suspend Brian Ross after he falsely reported that former national security adviser Michael Flynn was prepared to testify that then-candidate Donald Trump ordered him to make contact with the Russians.

The stock market dropped a few hundred points at the news — but it turned out to be fake.

ABC clarified that Flynn was actually prepared to testify that Trump asked him to contact Russia while the administration was transitioning into office. Pretty standard preparation for an incoming president.

3. The Mooch Is NOT Under Investigation

CNN earns another spot on this list for their shoddy reporting about former Trump adviser Anthony Scaramucci. In June, CNN relied on a single unnamed source to claim that Scaramucci was under investigation for a meeting he took with a Russian banker prior to Trump’s inauguration.

The Mooch denied the story and CNN later gave him a much-deserved apology. Oh… and three CNN employees resigned over the botched piece.

4. Bloomberg’s Dirty Deutsche Bank Scoop

Bloomberg initially reported in December that special counsel Robert Mueller had “zeroed in” on Trump by subpoenaing Deutsche Bank records for the incoming-president and his family.

Bloomberg later admitted that Mueller was looking for records relating to “people affiliated” with Trump.

5. Sessions Exonerated

Last May, CNN was sure that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had botched protocol when he didn’t list meetings he had with the Russian ambassador on his security clearance forms. To CNN and other establishment media outlets, this was proof that Sessions was hiding something related to Russia.

A little over six months later, CNN quietly walked back the scandal, explaining the FBI sent emails informing Sessions’ aide that he did not need to disclose the meetings on his forms because they were carried out in the course of his duties as a senator.

6. Russians Aren’t Just Hacking The Election — They’re Hacking Our Power Grid

The Washington Post claimed in January 2017 that Russians were hacking the U.S. power grid through a company in Vermont, only to change the story to say that only one laptop was infiltrated. It turns out that one laptop was never even connected to the power grid.

7. Republicans Funded The Dossier!

A number of news outlets have consistently claimed that Republicans initially paid for the anti-Trump Steele dossier, failing to note that Steele wasn’t even contracted by Fusion GPS until after the GOP donors pulled funding. The Republican donors say they paid Fusion for standard opposition research and that they have zero connection to the controversial dossier.

The media has perpetuated this falsehood so consistently that even former FBI director James Comey was confused, repeating the lie in an interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier.

8. CNN’s Gets Comey Prediction Wildly Wrong

Prior to former FBI director James Comey’s congressional testimony last June, CNN asserted that Comey was prepared to contradict a key claim by President Trump — that Comey told him he was not under investigation.

Sadly for them, Comey’s prepared testimony was released with the line, “During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower…I offered that assurance [that he was not under investigation].”

9. The ’17 Intel Agencies’ Lie

The media perpetuated a false claim from presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for months, insisting that all 17 intelligence agencies agree that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. The New York Times, for example, rated that claim as true only to later say the exact opposite.

Only four intelligence agencies ultimately deemed Russia responsible for meddling because the other 13 have no business making judgments on the claim. As NYT succinctly explained, “the rest were doing other work.”

10. Manafort Notes Are A Nothing Burger

NBC botched its big scoop claiming that Paul Manafort’s notes from a meeting with a Russian lawyer included the word “donations” near a reference to the Republican National Committee.

Turns out that not only did the word “donations” not appear in Manafort’s notes, but the word “donor” didn’t either. POLITICO had to correct the NBC report, leaving the legacy network looking awfully embarrassed.

11. NBC Issues Cohen Correction

NBC issued a major correction in May on a story about wiretaps and Michael Cohen.

NBC initially claimed that federal investigators were listening in on Cohen’s phone calls, but it turns out they had what’s called a “pen register warrant,” which means they could see who Cohen spoke to on the phone but could not hear what was said. (RELATED: MSNBC Issues HUGE Correction To Michael Cohen ‘Wiretap’ Story)

BONUS: Did Cohen Go To Prague?

Questions are being raised about a recent McClatchy report that states special counsel Robert Mueller has evidence Michael Cohen visited Prague in the summer of 2016. The story would be huge because it would seem to corroborate the portion of the Steele dossier claiming Cohen visited Prague at that time to meet with a Kremlin official.

However, no other outlets have confirmed the report and even anti-Trumpers are questioning its sourcing. (RELATED: Here’s Why You Should Be Skeptical Of That Michael Cohen Prague Story)

This story was originally published in May but has been updated with additional information regarding BuzzFeed’s Cohen report.