top of page
  • Writer's pictureKevin Lamport

Baffling zealous support - a blog, in 1000 Words or Less

Years before November 2015, when Canada took its ruinous left turn, I heard Shelagh Rogers interview a mostly unknown (at the time) Justin Trudeau on CBC radio.

Before I go on, I’ll apologize and beg for forgiveness. Everything about that previous statement embarrasses me. All I can say in my defense is that at the time, I didn't know anything about Justin and I hadn't yet grown annoyed with CBC’s biases and reporting style...although Rogers’ saccharine interviewing technique helped push me in that direction. I clearly remember her simpering with almost worshipful admiration throughout the conversation, culminating in the following question:

“What does it mean to be Canadian?”

Justin launched into the inconsequential babble we've become used to from him, a speech filled with catch phrases that cumulatively sound good but mean nothing. When he finally wrapped up, Rogers’ gushed on about how she’d never heard the Canadian experience expressed so perfectly. My reaction was different: spouting a long list of clichés makes a person sound witless not informed, Justin wasn’t prepared to answer an obvious question (given who his father was), and he loved the effusive attention Rogers bestowed upon him.

I vowed to minimize my exposure to CBC and to avoid Shelagh Rogers interviews in particular. I optimistically hoped I’d never hear Justin’s self-satisfied rambling again.

Fast forward to 2015 and one of the televised leadership debates. After it ended, I spoke with a die-hard Liberal friend and political junkie. He said among other things, that he was “…proud of Justin’s performance.”


An odd word-choice.

At the time the Conservative slogan was, “He’s just not ready.” Based on everything I’d seen through the campaign, I thought the slogan seemed apt. However, I respect my friend and several years had passed since the Rogers interview. Although I would never vote for the kind of socialist rubbish he proposed, I was willing to give the man the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he wasn’t as shallow as he presented. Maybe he exhibited more substance in the debate than he had in the interview. Maybe, if he had some of his father’s fabled intelligence, he wouldn’t end up becoming the worst possible leader at the worst possible time, although the elder Trudeau’s leadership was something of which I had little knowledge. Old ladies seemed to like him because he wore a rose in his lapel, but other than being a well-known fiscal disaster who blew up Canadian debt to never seen before levels, I don’t know now (and I didn’t know then), how well he ran the country.

Anyway, since I flat out refuse to engage in discussions with people who don’t share the same political opinions as me, I simply asked why my friend felt pride at Justin’s performance. The answer I received was less than satisfying and had something to do with “…he isn’t Stephen Harper.”

That refrain became a common theme with Justin supporters. With every new scandal, as his disdain toward average Canadians became more obvious, as his contempt for those who don’t blindly agree with his policies became more apparent, the answer often given when asked how someone could continue supporting such a blatantly bad leader, was frequently a second or two of incomprehensible stammering and then, “Well, when Harper was in charge…”

Eight years later, even die-hard Justin devotees can no longer logically blame Harper for the poor state of the country. They’ve moved on. Today they deflect in Pierre Poilievre’s direction, predicting all kinds of fire and brimstone, should he become leader. They’re fond of saying of crazy gibberish like, “Canada doesn’t need Trump style politics,” as if that’s what Poilievre brings to the table, as if our country and the USA are remotely similar politically.

That’s politics of course, discredit the other guy, but I wonder how much longer blaming and deflecting can continue before Justin defenders acknowledge how disastrous his personal priorities are for the country. Last month he refused to sell LNG to Japan, as he did with Germany in the fall of 2022. He went as far lecturing the Japanese Prime Minister on the green economy, saying he’s not interested in exporting LNG and that Canada should be ready to meet green energy transition because the world is trying to decarbonize. Hopefully he didn't embarrass the Japanese Prime Minister too badly. If he did, all future trade deals will be in jeopardy...not that he cares if it provides an opportunity to preach his woke dogma.

How much more of the man-child can Canada take…the wasted potential, the loss of respect on the world stage, the economic damage that prevents every citizen from attaining something more than lower middle-class?

Sometimes I wonder how much more can I take.

Japan LNG Supply

As a brief aside, I use LNG as today’s example of the man-child’s deficiencies (over any of his other acts of incompetence), because I’m absolutely baffled at his continued refusal to capitalize on our country’s resources, to the tune of multi-billions of dollars. He does realize the electric cars he wants people to drive arrive from Korea and Japan on container ships that burn fossil fuel as they cross thousands of miles of ocean, right? He knows eighteen wheelers that transport groceries to our supermarkets don’t run on star-dust and virtuous smiles, right? I assume he’s aware that no matter how efficient every new home build is, there isn’t a single location in Canada that can get away without some kind of heating source, right?

Moving on…

The difficulty with the question, “How much more can I take?” is that the answer demands an immediate decision. If you say, “Enough. I’m done. I can’t take anymore,” then you have to leave the country. I can’t think of another option. Justin is the man-child in charge. He and his personal priorities are here to stay until the next federal election. If you positively can’t tolerate them, you have to leave because he isn’t going anywhere.

Of course, leaving is not a realistic choice. Although people routinely leave for employment opportunities, educational purposes and personal relationships, the grass is most definitely not greener. Despite Canada’s declining standard of living, our lives are far better here than they would be in any number of countries. North Korea, China, Ukraine and Syria come immediately to mind. Also, in purely practical terms, it’s financially impossible for most people to leave the country, a fact I find ironic because the man-child’s policies have exacerbated the cost of living for every single one of us.

So, if a person can’t leave, the only remaining choice is to suck up the man-child’s virtue signalling governance and don a second sweater, instead of turning up the heat during our ridiculously cold Canadian winters. Maybe a person can save a few bucks on energy costs.

Instead of buying healthy, high quality groceries, you purchase cheaper, less healthy options that will last longer and go farther.

If you have children, you lie and tell your colleagues the fasting diet advertised on Instagram is an excellent way to lose a few pounds…you’re not doing it as a way to cut out several meals a week so your wee ones get three squares a day.

Instead of keeping your vehicle in good repair, you let the maintenance slide, which is also ironic because a poorly maintained vehicle is often a worse polluter than a well-maintained vehicle.

Options such as these are not only reasonable in the man-child’s mind, he sees them as preferred alternatives. He has to. There’s no other rational explanation. Why else would he continue to refuse multi-billions of foreign dollars that would mitigate those hard choices, in favour of undeveloped technology that can’t replace oil and gas? But, as we gleaned in the Shelagh Rogers interview, and as he’s proven over the past eight years, he’s a narcissist and if his personal agenda makes living in Canada more expensive and more difficult, that’s a sacrifice we’ll all have to make. After all, we serve him and his beliefs, not the other way around and if you don’t like it, if you deign to criticize, he’ll label you a racist, a misogynist, or a cynic and move on.

Since it’s unreasonable to assume that most of the population are actual racists, misogynists, or cynics, perhaps it’s time the Justin zealots stopped giving him a free pass. Even the ethics commissioner has grown fed up with the Liberal's poor behaviour, going as far as to suggest mandatory ethics training. When it comes to Justin's numerous "mistakes," how about we stop blaming the past, deflecting the present and foreshadowing the future?

Errors are piling up as Liberals stumble their way through the winter

We don’t know what kind of leader Poilievre will make, should he be elected Prime Minister in the next election. It’s doubtful he’ll be the panacea the country needs—after the last eight years nobody could adequately fill that role—but I can’t imagine him being as horrendously bad as the man-child. And, if Poilievre is that bad, assuming he’s not as desperate as Justin and Singh to keep their grip on power, we only have to put up with him for a maximum of four years. That’s the way our parliamentary system is supposed to work. It’s supposed to serve us, not the PM.

Whichever way it goes, it’s bound to better four years than the previous eight.


Please consider forwarding the following link to a friend who might also enjoy the blog:

For those of you aren't aware, please take a look at my fictional work:

Return Home Here

Unsubscribe at any time

bottom of page