Andrew Coyne, during the At Issue portion of The National:
“…to spend such a proportion of (the time in the federal leaders’ debate) talking about this question of whether a few dozen women should have to wear a mas…a veil, or not be allowed to wear a veil, in a private citizenship ceremony, or whether they should do it in a private room beforehand, it’s ridiculous.”
A visibly miffed Chantal Hebert proceeded to box his ears:
“It is an issue that is of interest to the voters in this province and to most of the Canadians who have answered that question. Now, as far as I can tell, there is not a list of ‘this is an issue you can debate, and this is of no interest to us in Toronto, so why should you care about it in Montreal (or) ever have a discussion about it?’ An election is about more than whatever is set in the editorial boardrooms of Toronto as what matters to the country.”
h/t
(Euro)Related: The Telegraph’s Janet Daley on democracy vs. the enlightened class.
Yeah, saw the put down on the Rebel and I smiled for the rest of the day.
Having read Chantel’s column many times I was a little taken back that she obviously uses an early picture for her byline in syndicated print. It looks like she has been battling politicians for a long time although her words still cut sharp for those who step in the way.
The Author or producer of the film clip has obviously not tried to move from the Toronto Train Arrival in Union Station to the Commuter GO service.
Andrew Coyne- all-star Progressive fart catcher. What a dink!
Used to think he hadn’t caught the MSM affliction. Alas, inhabiting that cesspool of leftist credo has bought his soul!
I won’t weep for him.
Atta Gal – Chantel! Coyne’s bias is psychotic!
It’s not a private ceremony. It’s a public oath meant to show your loyalty and, IMHO, is a de facto court where you shouldn’t be allowed to wear a disguise.
Saw it and it was great. Coyne was in full patronizing professor mode schooling the unwashed masses on what and what not they are permitted to discuss.
Coyne’s trip to the woodshed was long overdue. Kudos to Chantal Hebert.
Coyne is very foolish. Since when is a citizenship ceremony “private”? Also, I do not think the numbers are particularly relevant — ten this year, 20 next year, 50 the year after that. The point is that wearing a face covering is not consistent with Canadian culture. I would not make a fuss about the face covering in day-to-day activities, but the Citizenship ceremony says something about Canada and Canadian values. That someone should cling to their “old world” practices while presumably joining the Canadian family is very, very insulting. If someone has so little respect for our values, they should not be seeking citizenship. Wear your veil — we are tolerant — but do not seek citizenship while militantly insisting on hiding your face. Canadian citizenship requires some level of understanding of our culture and our traditions. I am incensed about this and I hope other Canadians are as well.
Good point, andycanuck: citizenship oath ceremonies are pretty much the opposite of “private”.
The decision about what Canadians can and cannot debate, on the other hand, is very much a private decision, one that can only be made in the editorial boardrooms of Toronto.
Chantal is responding like she got into this Cabbie’s Taxi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_A72TEC_AQ
Chantal is responding like she got into this Cabbie’s Taxi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_A72TEC_AQ
It appears the liberal civil war went from a battle between the radical left and blu-libs, to a battle between CBC Toronto and Radio Canada Montreal.
Stand back, don’t interfere and watch the fireworks
Coyne is a smart man and a good writer, but, like David Frum, he looks down his nose at the wood-hewing classes. They would rather rub shoulders with the tower trash.
I have a friend who has appeared on At Issue and prefers other commentary jobs because At Issue is so heavily scripted.
Not this week!
I’ve watched it twice on Friday because it was so much fun. Haven’t completely read Coyne’s article since his trip to the woodshed to see if he’s properly contrite. Did scan it quickly to pick up this quote: ” the French debate traditionally concerns itself neither with the issues and interests of the country at large, nor with those of French-speaking Canadians in particular, but almost entirely with those of francophone Quebec.” Therefore I’m thinking he needs another trip. The G&M is accepting comments on this opinion piece so should one or more of you wish to, have at him until they shut down comments.
What is missed is that Chantal was only arguing that montreals media set have more say in setting the agenda – she, like coyne has no interest in letting the rest of Canada outside those two enclaves have and say (or power).
I regard Herbert as a leading member of the Quebec ruling class so I was a bit astonished to see this. Good for her on this one though.
Coyne has never even registered on my radar as a competent journalist or informed commenter. He is of course a “true insider” with direct connections in the LPC and elsewhere (other wise he would not have been invited to the Bilderberg meeting this year).
I have found Coyne to give lame or fallible insight on most everything he writes about – which seems odd for someone so well connected to the superclass and political class. Maybe his scribbling is purposefully abstract and misdirecting.
Why is a foreigner telling Canadians how to live and who is paying her legal fees?
On Coyne’s point here – again I see him misdirecting the issue. Hebert is correct, this IS of concern to Canadians because this small but seemingly insignificant thing (trifling to Coyne at least) speaks to the larger issue of how our government and our political leaders are willing to accommodate radical Islam. The head covering issue pits the dogmas of an intolerant theocratic tradition against the openness of a free pluralistic liberal democracy and its civil traditions.
It IS important because by the federal government demanding civil protocol in our free nation take precedent over superstitious intolerant tyrannical theocratic dogmas, they signal to Islamists that fundamentalist dogmas in conflict with our way of life and constitutional civility will not be undermined under the false presumption of religious freedom. Demanding they remove a head bag during personal civil franchise functions (swearing in, Photo ID, giving testimony, voting) where positive physical identification is required is not an imposition, it is a duty of citizenship – these protesting applicants are telling us they do not respect or accept our civil tradition and responsibilities.
That IS important and if Coyne thinks not maybe it’s because he has been influenced by his Builderberg cronies who are running the EU to ruin with their accommodation of incompatible immigration.
Coyne epitomizes that sect of the Canadian Media responsible for using a lot of words to say nothing of consequence.
A veritable journalistic Zzzquil for the hoi polloi.
Like tenure, a subverted and useless distraction.
Liberal news its about always the same propeganda as it always is no diffrent then what we here in the states get
Can’t wait for the next blue-eyed, blonde-haired Swede wearing a bandana to try this at his citizenship swearing-in ceremony.
He used that elitist Terminology “appealing to the Lowest common denominator”. Meaning the Lower Class of Canadians of lesser intelligence. YES! Canada is a Class System on par with England’s Tie culture…Coyne considers himself ultra intelligent that must consistently “talk down” to those not of his class. Asshole
OCCAM..Once again you nailed it.
It is NOT a “little” issue of wearing a face covering at citizenship. In light of the INVASION of Europe among other events concerning Islam, Coynes snotty Elitist arrogance shines through. Andrew, You DO NOT speak for me…capiche.??
It is IN FACT what this means to the whole country in as far as ISLAM is concerned and the apparent appetite of Academia, the media party and every slack jawed Social Justice Warrior to kiss its murderous (_i_). As for Moderate/Radical…I don’t really differentiate: The Moderate will carry the sword and video the event….
ON another note, I just read that the Ground Zero Mosque application has been defeated. Thanx to Pam Geller, Robert Spencer, Geert Wilders and others…Namely the American People.!! Good On you folks..!!!!
Wearing the niqab during a citizenship ceremony signals that the Muslim woman does NOT adhere to our Canadian values, but is standing up for Islam, which in her worldview trumps Canadian values and our legal system.
Ban the niqab. It has no place in Western society.