civility

Saturday May 18, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday May 18, 2019

It’s time to dump cold water on backyard fireworks

This weekend, and again in a little more than a month, it will be firecracker season in our neighbourhoods.

Yes, there will be the community gatherings. But if you don’t choose to go to those events, you won’t hear the fireworks set off there.

You will, however, hear the ones you don’t choose to hear. The ones in your neighbour’s backyard. Or down the street. Or in community parks. Or anyplace where fireworks fans — often, but not always, young people — gather to make big noise.

Your pets, especially dogs, will hear them. In many cases, they’ll be traumatized.

If you’re in a dense urban neighbourhood, they’ll sound like they are right outside your window.

Why do we continue to put up with this? The traumatized pets? The interrupted sleep? The risk of personal injury or property damage?

Does setting off fireworks in residential neighbourhoods represent some greater value — like freedom and liberty? Is lighting off a cherry bomb some cherished human right?

How about this — just don’t. If you feel compelled to explode fireworks, take them to a place well removed from residential neighbourhoods. If loud noises and sparks are your thing, at least don’t impose them on neighbours and others — including little children and pets who have no choice in the matter.

Fireworks are not intrinsically bad at appropriate times and places, with adequate safety and supervision in place. But they don’t belong in residential neighbourhoods where we share air space and, hopefully, a sense of civility and mutual respect. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial) 

 

Thursday November 2, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday November 2, 2017

Ontario MPP proposes law to fine distracted pedestrians

A new private member’s bill that would see distracted pedestrians fined up to $50 for crossing the road while using their smartphones was unveiled at Ontario’s Legislature on Monday.

The “Phones Down, Heads Up Act” will be introduced by Toronto MPP Yvan Baker, with a debate set for next March. The representative for Etobicoke Centre, in the city’s west end, said he was prompted to draft the legislation after his constituents raised concerns about the number of pedestrian deaths in Toronto.

In 2016, 42 pedestrians were killed on the city’s streets, the most since 2002.

Baker’s bill would ban people from looking at their phones or electronic devices when crossing roads, with an initial $50 fine for the first offence, $75 for the second and up to $125 for the third. Exceptions would include pedestrians making an emergency call or if they began speaking on the phone before stepping into the crosswalk.

“These fines are modest and are meant to act as a deterrent,” Baker said during a news conference Monday morning. He was joined by Brian Patterson, chief executive of the Ontario Safety League, a group whose work includes pedestrian advocacy. The organization is endorsing the bill.

The legislation would also mandate a ministry of transportation-led annual distracting driving awareness campaign, with a focus on texting and driving.

“This bill is about raising awareness about risky behaviour because limiting that behaviour will save lives,” Baker said. (Source: CBC News) 

 

Friday June 9, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday June 9, 2017

James Comey says it’s ‘not up to him’ to decide if Trump’s ‘disturbing behaviour’ was obstruction of justice

Former FBI Director James Comey said it was not up to him to determine whether Donald Trump behaviour was obstruction of justice.

April 21, 2017

“I don’t think it’s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct,” Mr Comey said during his testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee, but added that Mr Trump’s behaviour was “concerning…and disturbing”.

Mr Comey, fired on 9 May, detailed in a written statement ahead of his ongoing testimony that Mr Trump said to him during a one-on-one White House dinner: “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.”

The former FBI Director said his “common sense” said that it made him feel as if Mr Trump was “looking for something in exchange for granting my request to stay in the job” of FBI Director.

June 24, 2016

Mr Comey, a prosecutor himself, said that the determination of obstruction of justice should be left up to the Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller, who was appointed as an independent counsel in the investigation into the alleged ties between Mr Trump’s campaign team and Russia and the country’s possible interference with the 2016 US election.

The former Director’s comment today, however, may mean that Mr Trump’s possible obstruction of justice or possible collusion with Russian officials is also under the purview of Mr Mueller’s investigation.

Obstruction of justice is an impeachable offence but is a tricky legal issue because it has to do with Mr Trump’s actions rather than his intent or how Mr Trump’s actions made Mr Comey feel.  As a lawyer, Mr Comey is aware of this and likely why he is leaving that determination up to Mr Mueller. (Source: The Independent)

 

SaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSave

Friday June 9, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday June 9, 2017

James Comey says it’s ‘not up to him’ to decide if Trump’s ‘disturbing behaviour’ was obstruction of justice

Former FBI Director James Comey said it was not up to him to determine whether Donald Trump behaviour was obstruction of justice.

May 11, 2017

“I don’t think it’s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct,” Mr Comey said during his testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee, but added that Mr Trump’s behaviour was “concerning…and disturbing”.

Mr Comey, fired on 9 May, detailed in a written statement ahead of his ongoing testimony that Mr Trump said to him during a one-on-one White House dinner: “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.”

The former FBI Director said his “common sense” said that it made him feel as if Mr Trump was “looking for something in exchange for granting my request to stay in the job” of FBI Director.

December 17, 2016

Mr Comey, a prosecutor himself, said that the determination of obstruction of justice should be left up to the Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller, who was appointed as an independent counsel in the investigation into the alleged ties between Mr Trump’s campaign team and Russia and the country’s possible interference with the 2016 US election.

The former Director’s comment today, however, may mean that Mr Trump’s possible obstruction of justice or possible collusion with Russian officials is also under the purview of Mr Mueller’s investigation.

Obstruction of justice is an impeachable offence but is a tricky legal issue because it has to do with Mr Trump’s actions rather than his intent or how Mr Trump’s actions made Mr Comey feel.  As a lawyer, Mr Comey is aware of this and likely why he is leaving that determination up to Mr Mueller. (Source: The Independent)

 

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

Saturday May 21, 2016

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator Ð Saturday May 21, 2016 Trudeau apologizes over Commons scuffle as controversial motion withdrawn The morning after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau barged swearing into a knot of opposition MPs, grabbing one and elbowing aside another to hurry up a vote, he made very public displays of personal contrition.Ê Trudeau appeared at an MPs prayer breakfast to read aloud a scripture of his choice, Romans 12, that counsels: donÕt think you are better than you really are. Then the prime minister delivered an abject apology in the House of Commons. Rising in the Commons after a scathing rebuke by official Opposition leader Rona Ambrose, Trudeau said he was Òsorry,Ó Òapologized,Ó or ÒregrettedÓ his actions 16 times over the course of an hour. The prime minister said he would willingly accept a committeeÕs decision on his behaviour. But he was non-committal faced with opposition fury and calls for him to withdraw a controversial and provocative motion that was the backdrop of the Wednesday night scuffle. Known as Motion 6, it would have givenÊthe Liberal government unilateral control over the parliamentary agenda as it scrambles to push through its legislation, including Bill C-14 on medically assisted suicide, before a June 6 deadline. But by midday, TrudeauÕs entire government was in damage control mode. TrudeauÕs longtime friend and House leader Dominic Leblanc withdrew the motion heÕd insisted was necessary just the day before. Leblanc offered to co-operate with the opposition to extend debate time so all MPs could speak to Bill C-14, and said the government still wanted to try to meet the June 6 deadlineÊimposed by the Supreme Court of Canada. (Source: Toronto Star)Êhttps://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/05/19/justin-trudeau-to-address-house-of-commons-over-scuffle.html Canada, USA, election, manhandling, elbowgate, civility, decorum, Parliament, apology, Donald Trump, Justin Trudeau, leadershipÊ

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday May 21, 2016

Trudeau apologizes over Commons scuffle as controversial motion withdrawn

The morning after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau barged swearing into a knot of opposition MPs, grabbing one and elbowing aside another to hurry up a vote, he made very public displays of personal contrition.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator - Tuesday, March 29, 2016 Canadians, Donald Trump's candidacy is no reason to panic Since the 1990s, the U.S. political roller coaster has often confounded Canadians. Many scoffed when the largest country in the world seemed to be paralyzed for months by the oldest scandal in the world Ñ a married man, Bill Clinton, making time with a younger woman, Monica Lewinsky, who wasnÕt his wife. Many were dismayed when the eminently prime-ministerial Al Gore lost to the easily mockable George W. Bush in 2000 Ñ especially because Gore won more popular votes than Bush did. Still, nothing compares to the panic and horror Donald TrumpÕs candidacy has evoked. Canadian confusion about the American presidential campaign circus makes sense: most Americans are equally disturbed. This campaign has been one of the most surprising and upsetting clashes in decades, and it has only just begun. Remember the too-long Canadian campaign of 78 days? U.S. Election Day, Nov. 8, is still eight months away. The United States appears hopelessly divided, with the Republican surprise and the Democratic surprise suggesting the country is being pulled in opposite directions. Bernie Sanders may be the American Canadians most love to love: down-to-earth, earnest, substantive, unstylish, collectivist and socialist in a cuddly, non-Stalinist way. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is the type of American Canadians most love to hate: arrogant, flamboyant, egotistical, jingoistic and demagogic, playing personality politics. A president Donald Trump meeting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would be even more awkward than Ronald Reagan meeting Pierre Trudeau. When they met in 1981, Reagan wore a suitably statesmanlike dark suit with a conservative striped tie, while Trudeau, looking more Floridian than Washingtonian, wore an open-necked shirt with a tan sports jacket, while sporting a dandyish red rose. (Continued: Montreal Gazette) http://montrealgazette.com/o

March 29, 2016

Trudeau appeared at an MPs prayer breakfast to read aloud a scripture of his choice, Romans 12, that counsels: don’t think you are better than you really are. Then the prime minister delivered an abject apology in the House of Commons.

Rising in the Commons after a scathing rebuke by official Opposition leader Rona Ambrose, Trudeau said he was “sorry,” “apologized,” or “regretted” his actions 16 times over the course of an hour.

The prime minister said he would willingly accept a committee’s decision on his behaviour. But he was non-committal faced with opposition fury and calls for him to withdraw a controversial and provocative motion that was the backdrop of the Wednesday night scuffle. Known as Motion 6, it would have given the Liberal government unilateral control over the parliamentary agenda as it scrambles to push through its legislation, including Bill C-14 on medically assisted suicide, before a June 6 deadline.

But by midday, Trudeau’s entire government was in damage control mode.

Trudeau’s longtime friend and House leader Dominic Leblanc withdrew the motion he’d insisted was necessary just the day before. Leblanc offered to co-operate with the opposition to extend debate time so all MPs could speak to Bill C-14, and said the government still wanted to try to meet the June 6 deadline imposed by the Supreme Court of Canada. (Source: Toronto Star)