Ezra Levant critiques Doug Ford’s removal of Tanya Granick Allen, a socially conservative PC candidate, warning it risks alienating voters ahead of Ontario’s June 7 election. A Michigan study reveals vocal climate activists often live unsustainably, while skeptics adopt greener habits—a pattern Levant links to government-backed activism undermining personal responsibility. Ford’s elite appointments and Trudeau’s discriminatory summer jobs grants (denying 1,400 Christian groups) spark concerns over betraying conservative principles, with legal delays for affected groups like the Andersons. The episode urges leaders to stay true to grassroots values or risk losing credibility entirely. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, it was a bad weekend for conservatives as Doug Ford and Jason Kenney throw them under the bus to appease the CBC.
It's May 7th, and you're watching The Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
You come here once a year with a sign, and you feel morally superior.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
On Saturday, the Ontario Liberals published comments by Doug Ford's star candidate, Tanya Granick Allen.
They weren't comments made in private or secretly recorded that would surprise or shock anyone.
They're her public comments in the same vein that she's been talking for years.
Everyone who saw her high-energy performance during the Ontario PC leadership debates would know that's what she says.
That's what she sounds like.
I mean, the lady is the opposite of politically correct, and it's one of the reasons why Doug Ford himself seemed to like her.
Wind turbines.
I pledge that if I'm a leader, I'm going to take those wind turbines and I'm going to rip them right out of the ground.
Beautiful.
Ford and Granic Allen had a deal.
I think she knew she wouldn't win the leadership, but she'd bring in socially conservative party members, including Christians, who felt betrayed by Patrick Brown, the previous leader, who showed respect to truly conservative people, just until he abandoned them in a heartbeat when the Toronto Star was mean to him about it.
Granick Allen brought in thousands of Christian voters, homeschooling voters, socially conservative voters, and they backed Doug Ford after she fell off the ballot.
It was a close enough race that Ford almost surely would have lost to Christine Elliott without the alliance with Tanya Granick Allen.
It wasn't just a smart strategy in terms of votes.
It was smart in terms of making sure Ford wasn't the most right-wing person in the public debates.
To social conservatives and Christians, he could point to her and say, she's part of my coalition.
And while she won't always carry the day, she's part of the conversation.
And to the Red Tories and the left-wing media, he could say, she's part of my coalition.
And while she won't always carry the day, she's part of his coalition.
And to the media, it actually allowed Ford to position himself as a thoughtful moderate, someone who listens to all sides, the alternative being that Doug Ford himself would be the most right-wing controversial thing in the party.
It's always good to have someone to your right as well as to your left, but conservatives too often only have people to their left.
Patrick Brown, again, being the best example.
He was awful on conservative ideas such as fighting back against the insane child sex curriculum that Kathleen Wynne forced at Ontario schools.
It was a curriculum overseen by Ben Levin, who was later convicted of child pornography and trying to meet young children to molest them.
Ben Levin's curriculum is still being pushed on parents.
It's official school board policy.
Fighting against that has been one of Granick Allen's key issues and for her supporters too, called parents.
Well, Doug Ford took her support when he needed it to win.
He made her fight and win her own nomination in Mississauga and she did amazingly well, beating all of her opponents combined on the first ballot.
No special favors of a direct appointment for her as a candidate as Doug Ford gave to others.
She had to earn it.
That's fine.
But on the weekend, like I say, when some of her old video clips were published again by the Liberals, Ford panicked and sacked her within hours and appointed the second place candidate in her local writing.
She said she didn't like to see niqabs in Canada, the full face obscuring Muslim veil.
said they reminded her of ninjas.
That's a joke, I think, or it's not a joke, it's just what she says.
And yeah, that's what they look like.
It's un-Canadian for anyone to cover their face in public.
And it's sexist to have a subculture that demands only women do so.
Is that sufficient reason to sack a candidate who overwhelmingly won her riding?
Did Doug Ford think she supported McCabbs?
Does he?
She referred to abortion as a kind of Holocaust.
That's dramatic language.
And it's not rare in the abortion debates.
And there's a truth to it, too.
100,000 babies a year are aborted in Canada, probably more.
If Doug Ford doesn't like people talking bluntly about abortion, though, why did he invite them into the party?
Is any of this a surprise to him?
Other than to invite them in for their momentary use in his leadership campaign.
By the way, that quote about abortions was apparently said by Granny Allen 18 years ago.
If that's the worst they've got on her, that's pretty thin gruel.
She did talk about radical sex ed targeting very young kids in kindergarten.
Now, I think she's Croatian, and she talked about Croatia that used to be communist, and now they have social engineering of a different sort, teaching children of tender years about sexual ideas that are not appropriate for kindergartners.
Here, take a listen.
When I hear about how much about, you know, trying to push, you know, radical sexual education on the young or clean marriage, you know, I almost vomit in disbelief.
I'm like, are you kidding me?
How can this be happening?
Just 20 years ago, we were liberated from this communism, and now we're embracing these lack of values, lack of ideals that the Congress would have to integrate.
Perhaps those aren't the most polished or nuanced comments.
They're obviously off the cuff.
It's a little bit ambiguous what she's saying was appalling to her, what was taught or that it was taught in kindergartens.
But seriously, you're sacking a star candidate over that?
That's Ontario.
Let's put that aside for a second, because over the weekend, Jason Kenney in Alberta had a huge convention for the UCP.
That's the United Conservative Party in Alberta.
More than 2,500 delegates, the largest party convention in Alberta history, reports say.
And lots of what you'd expect, anti-carbon tax votes, pro-pipeline speeches, lots of debates over issues.
And as Jason Kenney has been saying for months, he wasn't going to let the people, sorry, rather, he was going to let the people make the policy.
Very Democratic, very grassroots.
Here's a video he recorded on the subject last August, nine months ago, saying it's up to the party members to make key policy decisions.
Hey, everybody, I'm here at my favorite diner, the Blackfoot Truck Stop in Calgary.
And I just signed our grassroots policy guarantee.
You see, I think that our new United Conservative Party should ensure that you, the grassroots members, are in charge.
That you develop the policies of this new party and give the leadership its marching orders.
You know, one of the reasons we had this division in the Alberta Conservative movement in recent years was because of an arrogant style of top-down leadership where leaders were telling people what to think rather than listening to them.
I think we've got to turn that on its head and have a more like a servant leadership approach where we empower grassroots members to decide the basic policies of the new party.
I don't think it's my role as a leader to tell the membership what to think.
I don't think we should be running a presidential style leadership campaign.
It's time, as I say, for humility, for listening, for servant leadership.
It's time for less I and me and more us and we as we build this party together.
It sounds pretty grassrootsy, doesn't it?
And here's the page from Jason Kenney's own website, jasonkenney.ca, when he was running for leader, where he expands on that idea.
Here's a few passages from him.
Let me quote, today I signed a new grassroots guarantee that the policies of the UCP must be developed democratically by its grassroots members, not imposed by the leader.
And he also said, our conservative coalition fractured in recent years, partly because leaders began telling people what to think rather than listening to them.
We must not repeat that mistake.
We've had enough arrogant top-down leadership.
We need servant leadership that empowers grassroots Albertans.
Instead of dictating our new party's policies to them, all right, you get the point.
But here's what happened at Kenny's policy convention in Red Deer.
Here's a Calgary Herald headline.
Kenny drops hammer on UCP policy blow-up.
Here's the Edmonton Journal.
UCP founding convention hit socially conservative pothole.
And then I don't know if you can read underneath.
It says United Conservative Party delegates had one job at their founding convention this weekend.
Don't look extreme.
They didn't succeed.
So what did they do that was so extreme?
And you know the Edmonton Journal is the arbiter of extreme.
Well, 57% of the delegates, there were thousands of them there, they voted for this proposal.
Let me read it to you in full.
The United Conservative Party believes that the government of Alberta should reinstate parental opt-in consent for any subjects of a religious or sexual nature, including enrollment in extracurricular activities, clubs, or distribution of any instructional materials, resources related to these topics.
And then they had a rationale.
Respects and affirms parental primacy and authority regarding the educational material presented to their children.
That seems pretty standard.
I think that's pretty much how it's always been in school.
The only reason that it's a proposal at a policy convention is that the NDP has recently changed that and has now forbidden by law parents from being allowed to know.
They literally have changed the presumption, the NDP, and now they presume that by default that parents, I don't know, hate their own children instead of love their own children more than anything.
And the bureaucracies and teachers' union activists know better and care more about a child than does that child's own parents.
And the presumption, a bigotry really, that if a parent is conservative or religious, that they'll somehow be harmful or hurtful to their own beloved child, and that to give any information about this to parents is akin to outing them to strangers.
It's all looked through the lens of a gay, straight alliance that's a student club.
And for that, the NDP would ban, would ban it, the information going to parents about what club's religious of or faith-based nature.
The NDP, like all socialists, truly thinks that a child is the property of the state.
Normal parents disagree.
This is a pretty tame motion.
I mean, I read you every word, don't you think?
Pretty normal.
Wouldn't even raise an eyebrow at any parent-teacher association in North America.
It's how it is or should be, but it's necessary because governments are changing things.
Sex ed is extreme now, and it's not just being taught in sex ed classes, but in student clubs that are explicitly set up to talk about sex with teachers without parents in informal chit chats.
Yeah, so parents just want to stay in the loop.
And can you blame them?
I mean, it is bad enough when far-left teachers politicize regular classrooms and brainwash kids about regular public affairs.
Remember the story about the Edmonton school that was teaching its students that oil companies were evil.
There's not a school in Canada that doesn't promote global warming hysteria.
I mean, that's irritating.
That's politics.
But what about when those same politicized teachers' unions start pushing their political theories about extremely personal matters that have nothing to do with reading, writing, and arithmetic, but rather about Islam or about transgenderism, religious and sexual issues.
Something that a few years ago, transgenderism was literally classified as a psychiatric illness by the American Psychiatric Association is now being force-fed to students as young as kindergarten.
Tanya Granick Allen was right, but more right than she knew.
It's not just in Croatia.
In Ontario, they teach kids about the six genders.
Can you name all six without Googling it?
Being gay, by the way, is not a gender, just to be clear.
In Ontario, they're teaching children of tender years that there are six genders, and which one are they?
They're teaching kindergarten kids this kind of stuff.
That's age five.
Trans, what are you doing?
Why are you even talking to five-year-old kids about sex at all?
Why are you talking about sexuality with children of tender years, gay, straight, trans, whatever?
Why are you taking away their innocence, their childhood?
Listen to these activists.
I think it's important to learn SOGI language to better support the youth.
At the beginning of class, I say to all my students, I say, okay, when we do names today, I'm still getting to know you.
Can you tell the rest of the class what pronouns you use?
Intersecting identities means that people don't move around the world with one singular identity.
The concept of intersecting identities is really beautiful.
Me being gay and immigrant and a person of color, and I can't choose one being more important than the other part of my identity.
A lot of these things intersect and really layer in terms of the discrimination that a youth may be facing.
It wasn't in that clip there, but they have classroom posters about RuPaul and drag.
What are you talking to kids about that for?
That school's in British Columbia.
Here's a Toronto kindergarten teacher.
When you think about it, really, bringing drag performers together with little kids is kind of a perfect relationship.
And it's kind of like drag performers are clowns, right?
Like they really sort of, they play things up.
They're over the top.
they're like a cartoon come to life.
Welcome to Faye and Fluffy's Storytime.
Listen, let me be clear, and I've said this before whenever we talk about the issue, I do not want to bother people who are trans.
I do not want to pick on them or be mean to them in any way.
I don't want the law or private citizens to discriminate against them.
I don't want harm to come to them.
I know the facts about transgenderism, for example, that people who undergo a transition from male to female have a suicide rate of about 50%.
There's deep psychological issues here.
And by the way, that suicide rate rises to 60% attempted suicides for those who actually undergo the surgery or go on hormones.
My point is, this was considered a mental illness until a few years ago for a reason.
I think the answer is compassion.
Deal with these folks with compassion.
But do you see why some parents might be upset about transgenderism and gender identity issues being brought into schools into kindergarten?
I'm sorry, that is not academics.
Disloyalty Reigns00:15:44
That is not scholarship.
That is propaganda.
And 57% of Alberta parents at the UCP meeting said they would just like to know what's going on.
They just want to know what's going on and be told if their child is being signed up for a club that does this, because that is how loving parents are about their kids.
Well, to the media, such parents are extreme and controversial.
Here's the CBC's Michelle Belfontaine.
She's a reporter, and she literally tweeted, yikes, when parents voted, just to have notice.
Yikes.
That's professional reporting from our state broadcaster, people.
Here's the Edmonton Journal's headline.
UCP passes controversial motion to reinstate parental choice in education.
Controversial?
To whom?
By what measure?
That's how it's always been.
Controversial to the mainstream media, sure, but to parents?
Well, Jason Kenney, like Doug Ford, is terrified of liberal media.
It's why he threw the Rebel under the bus a year and a half ago when a handful of unemployed oilmen at our anti-carbon tax rally at the legislature chanted the joke, taunt, lock her up.
He was so terrified of what the CBC would say, he demonized unemployed Alberto oilmen for not protesting their unemployment politely enough.
That's how scared he is in the CBC.
And now Jason Kenney, he who said he deeply believes in the grassroots policy process, he says he refuses to be bound by this resolution.
Here's some of his quote to the mainstream media from this weekend.
I'm quoting from the Calgary Herald here.
He said, I do say we don't believe, and we will not ever take the position that there should be mandatory notification.
They don't have to when joining the press club, so why should they do it joining a GSA that stands for a gay straight alliance?
Well, because a press club is not controversial or personal.
It is academic or scholarly.
It does not go to a child's faith or a family's customs or values or beliefs.
That's why.
But here's how Kenny ended it, and I'm quoting from Don Braid's article in the Herald here.
And that's okay, Kenney argued, because, quote, guess what?
I'm the leader, and I get to interpret the resolution and its relevance to party policy.
And he added, I hold the pen when it comes to the party platform.
Oh, I thought the party members did.
I thought that's specifically how Jason Kenney campaigned for leader.
I thought that's what that video we watched of him saying was about.
Oh, by the way, when you Google Jason Kenney's Grassroots Guarantee now, do you see it?
Do you see it right at the top there?
Number one result on Google when you type in Jason Kenney Grassroots Guarantee.
See it right at the top there?
Now click on it.
Click on that link there.
Huh.
This is what you get.
Page cannot be found.
Jason Kenney deleted that from his webpage.
The page I quoted to you before when I was reading from it is a Google cache of the version that he forgot to delete the Google Cash version or didn't know how.
Look, if you don't know, let me be clear, I want both Doug Ford and Jason Kenney to win.
Kathleen Wynne and Rachel Notley are disasters for their provinces.
But I don't want Ford and Kenney to win for personal reasons, because I may like them or not.
I want them to win to stop awful things from being done in the government to our people.
And by the way, marginalizing parents who are concerned about their kids, who are concerned about the proliferation of Muslim extremism in the form of niqabs, as Tanya Granick Allen is, or who are concerned that radical sex ed is being taught to their littlest kids, five-year-olds.
You saw the videos.
Or who are concerned that activist teachers are talking to them about crazy things.
That is not controversial.
That's normal parental instinct.
Doug Ford and Jason Kenney are more afraid of the CBC than they are of real parents.
Now, I would never hold Jason Kenney's status as a non-parent against him ever.
I'd never even thought of it.
It's irrelevant in 99.999% of cases, but actually not in this one.
Unless and until you are a parent, you just don't know in your bones how terrifying and infuriating and frustrating and powerless it feels to have smug teachers union activists treat your child as their political project, as a guinea pig.
And now to be able to keep that a secret from you.
Jason Kenney is dead wrong on this, and 57% of his own party told him so despite clear instructions from him not to vote that way.
Doug Ford is dead wrong to fire Tanya Granick Allen for comments that perhaps could have been phrased better, but surely Doug Ford knew exactly what she stood for on this core issues when he made his bargain with her.
Both men are listening to their leftist critics, not their own consciences or their own parties.
It's our job at the Rebel to push back against this because no other media will.
We want Doug Ford to win.
We want Jason Kenney to win.
But we want them to win as conservatives and we want them to grow a backbone and to treat the media party with the disrespect they deserve rather than treating party members with the disrespect they don't deserve.
Stay with us for more on this with David Menzies.
Welcome back.
Well, look, Jason Kenney and Doug Ford are so close to becoming Premier.
They can taste it.
Both of them have double-digit leads over their far-left opponents who have tired out their respective electorates.
In Ontario, the election is a month away.
Exactly, I think.
My math is right.
Joining me now to talk about this.
Here's our friend David Menzies.
David, great to see you.
Is it a month today?
June 7th.
So today is what?
Yeah, you're right.
By my math.
So, I mean, you're Doug Ford, and you're Doug Ford's campaign team.
You got a double-digit lead, some polls showing that Kathleen Wynne is actually in third place.
And you're thinking, don't screw anything up.
Stay out of trouble.
And I think so they're hypersensitive.
But I think that you could be so hypersensitive, you could be too panicky, and you can start making some strategic errors.
I think they've made three.
And we'll talk about Alberta in a second, but you're the boss of Ford Nation.
You understand Ford Nation better than anyone.
First, making an appointment of 11 candidates, trumping any local democracy, including people who have been campaigning for years.
That was one of the reasons people didn't like Patrick Brown.
So that was a strange flip-flop from Doug Ford that seemed anti-democratic.
I should note, he didn't give that favor to Tanya Granick Allen.
She had to find it out on her.
You got it.
Number two, a flip-flop by saying we're going to develop the Greenbelt, ease housing prices, ease environmental extremism.
Flip-flop.
Yep.
And then now throwing out Tanya Granick Allen because, you know, in an 18-year review of all the words she's ever said, a few of her comments weren't as gentle as they could have been.
Three in a row.
Once is a mistake, twice is, you know, carelessness, but three is a trend.
I'm worried here.
Me too, Ezra.
And you mentioned Ford Nation.
What people have to understand, Ezra, there's nobody of Ford Nation that's behind this campaign, as far as I can tell.
These are not.
Doug is getting advice and marching orders from people that are not Ford Nation types.
That's becoming clear.
Secondly, in the department of Etu Brute and What Have You Done for Me Lately, let's not forget that without Tanya Granick Allen supporters, Doug Ford is not the leader of the PC party.
Tanya lost on the first ballot of the convention.
About, I think the figure was 83% of her supporters went and supported Doug Ford.
And you know, the margin was razor thin between Doug and Christine Elliott.
If those supporters didn't go there, or if Tanya Granick Allen hadn't been part of that convention, Ezra, he's not the leader.
But, you know, some heat from the liberal media, from certain Muslim organizations, and suddenly he collapses, you know, like a cheap lawn chair.
And I'm telling you, you know, Ezra, our friend Joe Warmington, he once said to me a while back, and it's becoming true with every passing week, he once said to me that Doug Ford is not Rob Ford.
And I'm bringing this up, Ezra, because Rob Ford would not be doing this.
Rob Ford would not be flip-flopping all over the place and throwing a loyal supporter and her supporters overboard.
It's despicable.
I think you're right.
I think one of the great strengths of Rob Ford's character, and he had great weaknesses too, but Rob Ford was all about loyalty.
Loyalty to others, including those who made mistakes and were in tough times, and people gave him loyalty in return.
And you don't want loyalty over everything, but loyalty should count for something.
Because if you're not loyal to the people who got you elected, and it's not just based on the people, it's based on the promises.
And nothing that Tanya Granic Allen was shown to have said, in one case, 18 years ago, was a surprise.
I mean, maybe she could have used more nuanced language, more poetic language, but being skeptical of the full face obscuring niqab, calling it a ninja mask, yeah, that's what it looks like.
Being against the promotion of sex ed in kindergarten, that is something that would make a parent gag, or she used the word vomit.
It's not an anti-gay comment.
It's what are you talking to my children of tender years about sex about?
So I guess what I'm saying is these weren't revelations.
Doug Ford knew that Tanya Granick Allen stood for all these things.
He just jumped because the liberals and the media told him to jump, and in so doing, encouraged his enemies, discouraged his allies, and now the media knows, oh, just throw another thing at Doug and he'll panic again.
And we can dominate Doug by telling him what he's going to talk about for a day instead of having his own narrative.
Well, that's what it looks like to me, Ezra.
And, you know, Kathleen Wynne a couple of weeks ago compared Doug Ford to Donald Trump.
And I say, if only, because Donald Trump wouldn't get some heat from a left-wing media and fold, Donald Trump would double down and go to Twitter and say, here's what I say.
Here's what I believe in plain language.
And also, I have to bring this up, Ezra, because on this whole topic of morality and inappropriate remarks, we have a candidate who seems to be completely protected.
She goes by the alias the Persian Cat.
She represents Carlton, Goldie Gumeri.
She has written, right, Christianity is gay.
Jesus is worm food.
Stephen Harper was a national embarrassment to Canada.
And she has tweeted out images that seem to convey an aura of pro-terrorism.
We ran this story last July here.
We broke this story.
Not a word is uttered about this.
When Tanya Granik Allen ran in Mississauga Center, we had a candidate, Kadir Shah, whose campaign manager, according to the Quiggin report, has family links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
That's okay.
Yeah, we should have put on the record that he denies that.
Well, you know, it was the shortest interview ever.
Well, actually, the campaign manager, if you look at the interview, Ezra, he didn't say anything.
That's right.
I just want to put it out there that there is some dispute, but the Quiggin report did say it was a fact.
Anyway, keep going.
Yeah, you're right.
And here's the thing.
You mentioned that there's no one from Ford Nation around Doug Ford.
Now, Michael Diamond, who was director of operations for Rob Ford, is with Doug Ford.
But other than that, you're right.
And one of the things, and this is what worries me, and I don't want to put too much credence into it.
Right now, I would call it a hypothesis.
I'm not even going to call it a theory.
It's just a hypothesis, maybe a speculation.
When Doug Ford trounced all the establishment candidates with the help of Tanya Granick Allen, in the interest of healing and unifying the party, Doug Ford hired his enemies' staff.
He hired the communications director from Caroline Mulroney.
He hired other staff who were loyal to the Doug Ford haters, people who were publicly mocking Doug Ford, calling him a drug dealer, etc.
Now, these are amongst the decision makers against Tanya Granny-Gallen.
For example, Ian Todd.
I remember Ian from years ago when I worked with him with Preston Manning of Stockwell Day.
He helped lead the rebellion against Stockwell Day.
Is he a loyal Doug Ford man?
How about Melissa Lansman, old friend of mine from Parliament Hill?
She was for Caroline Mulroney.
Are these people making the decision based on Doug Ford and Ford Nation, or are they making a Caroline Mulroney-style decision?
And frankly, do they really want Doug Ford to succeed?
Or do they want maybe Caroline Mulroney to have a crack at things again in four years?
Well, Ezra, once again, you're looking at the big picture, and I think you're onto something.
I think this might, you know, critics of mine might say, oh, you're venturing into conspiracyville with this.
But with all those people, and clearly Ford Nation, they reject.
Doug Ford, come on, that's not their guy.
You know, they're Christine Elliott people.
They're, you know, Princess Caroline people.
We've already seen one palace coup going back to late January with Patrick Brown.
Who's to say we won't see another one?
And in fact, if I might double down on the conspiracy, why not use Doug Ford as a convenient pawn right now?
Have Ford Nation propel him into the premiership.
And then once he gets there, then come up with some kind of cockamany reason to do another palace coup.
You know, this is Ontario politics in 2018, Ezra.
I think anything can happen.
You know what?
You're speculating, I'm speculating, we don't know, but it is not a conspiracy theory.
It is a conspiracy fact.
The people who two months ago or a month ago were doing their very best and were paid large sums of money to defeat Doug Ford are now Doug Ford's advisors.
And the person who actually helped Doug Ford become leader was just thrown out the window on a pretty meagre excuse.
You know, and Ezra, can I just interject one other thing?
I'm getting deja vu all over again of 1990.
And as you know, that's when the NDP formed the government.
Nobody saw that coming.
Nobody.
And where I'm tying this into the shenanigans, you adroitly noted all the flip-flops.
If Doug Ford goes down the path of Patrick Brown and keeps alienating conservative bases to the point that I'm either going to do a protest vote or not vote or just stay at home, who's to say that Andrea Horath and the NDP might come up the middle and grab a minority?
Doug Ford's Fall?00:03:53
And Caroline Mulroney wouldn't mind that.
So Doug Ford's taken out of the running.
Christine Elliott, I don't know if she would run again, but people would say, oh, well, for sure, we're going to vote for the Conservatives after that.
And that's the thing.
It reminds me a little bit of Australian politics where regicide is now the normal and disloyalty reigns and there's this habit of throwing leaders overboard and you can't trust anyone.
The way that, I mean, I was no fan of Patrick Brown and I think he was defamed by CTV.
I'm glad he's gone.
Are you going?
But the way he was thrown out was so devious and was so clearly orchestrated.
And the fact that the very next day his senior staff show up working for Caroline Mulroney.
Isn't that amazing?
And my point is, if the reputation of the PC party is that they keep on knifing leaders and aren't loyal to their own leader and everyone's leaking and everyone's undermining, people are going to say, if you can't even govern your own house, there's no way you're going to govern this province.
100%.
And the one thing I'll give the liberals, they understand the value of loyalty in politics.
You know what, we've taken up a lot of time and some of it's been speculation, but the reason I think I'm speculative and you are too is because the Doug Ford that we thought we knew, Ford Nation, Rob Ford's brother, was someone who didn't care what the media said, mocked the media, set his own agenda, and was proudly conservative.
And the only analogy with Trump is he didn't let other people conquer his mind.
Whoever got him to throw Tanya Granick Allen out, if that is the real Doug Ford, it's a disappointment.
If that's people around Doug Ford, I think he needs to be careful in the next 30 days because I think your possibility of Andrew Horwath and the NDP coming up the middle is not as far-fetched as it sounds.
I think so, and I fear for this.
And Ezra, just to put an asterisk on those appointments, we talked about this on a previous show of yours, of course.
Some of them are hardcore liberals, right?
So not only did Doug Ford break his promise of the grassroots, he's putting in the elites he's always fought against.
Mike Harris Jr. could be a great guy, might be a fantastic government like his father, but still, he lost the nomination meeting in another writing, and he's appointed.
That to me is nepotism.
Meredith Cartwright, candidate in Toronto Center, hard left-wing legal activist.
Human rights lawyer.
Ran for the liberal nomination to the left of Bob Ray.
Now she's suddenly a Ford Nation Tory.
I don't buy it.
We've gone on too long.
We've got to wrap it up here, but there's going to be a lot for us to cover in the month ahead.
Let me close with something that I think I ought to put on the record.
I want Doug Ford to be the next Premier, if that's in any doubt.
I want Jason Kenny to be the next Premier of Alberta.
We didn't talk about that.
We don't have time.
But I don't want half a Doug Ford or a watered-down Doug Ford.
I don't want a liberal light Doug Ford.
I don't want a politically correct Jason Kenney.
I want real conservatives there.
You can have a conservative Kenny and a conservative Doug Ford.
Bizarrely, these guys are being so hyper-cautious that they might actually blow their double-digit lead because they're being too cautious.
Last word to you.
I too want Doug Ford Classic.
I don't want Patrick Brown version 2.0.
Yeah, it's like Co-Classic or New Coke.
I don't like this New Coke business.
All right, great to see you.
Thank you.
Well, there's our friend David Menzies.
No one knows Ford Nation like he does.
He lives and breathes it.
He's a bit of a celebrity when he shows up at a Ford Nation event.
Everyone loves his coverage.
He truly understands the pulse of that place, I dare say, better than the Caroline Mulroney staff that now surround Doug Ford.
Stay with us.
more ahead on The Rebel.
Welcome back.
Well, wouldn't you know it?
I knew it.
People Who Support Government Action Least Environmentally Friendly00:07:41
People who say they support government intervention in the environment, global warming, carbon taxes, regulations, shutting down coal or cars, in their private lives, they're the least environmentally sensitive, according to a new study.
Joining us now via Skype, the man who has read this study and published it on his website, climatepot.com.
Our friend Mark Morano.
Mark, great to see you again.
Hi, guys.
We're happy to be here.
Tell me who did the study.
What are their credentials?
What was the institution?
And what were their findings?
I mean, I just know this in my bones, but it's good to have an academic confirmation of it.
Yeah, this was from the University of Michigan.
And these were done by your typical, you know, modern researchers who accept all the classic environmental premises, the climate change premises.
And I think they were actually surprised by their own research, which showed that the climate activists, the environmental activists, most committed and the most vocal, were the least likely to walk that talk in their private lives.
So University of Michigan, typical academics are actually surprised by their own study, and of course they're putting all kinds of spin on it now.
Well, I'm slightly amazed that a study that has those results contrary to the official narrative even sees the light of day.
This doesn't come as a surprise to me.
I mean, I watched the movie An Inconvenient Truth, and Al Gore is flying first-class jetting around the world, and he doesn't even see the irony of it.
There's never been an environmental protest I've ever seen in person or in the media that hasn't left a mountain of trash behind it, as opposed to the odd time conservatives ever rally.
They typically clean up after themselves.
What is it about environmentalists that lets them mouth off how righteous they are, but then live an anti-environmental lifestyle?
Well, you know, a lot of the, I would say, the warmest sympathizing researchers, they've come up with the, when it's a valid concept, the concept of moral licensing.
And this would be the equivalent if you were trying to lose weight and exercise.
You go out for a long run or you do the bike, and then you come in and you think you're entitled to eat an entire cream pie or have a dozen donuts because you put in the time and you feel it's owed to you.
Well, they've extended that now in order to explain these studies' results from the University of Michigan.
They're saying that these researchers, because they give to environmental groups, because they're vocal on the climate issue, because they use bumper stickers, because they have signs, because they go to pro-science marches and quotes, that they're doing more than the average person.
Therefore, they're entitled to use that plastic bag.
They're entitled to that SUV.
They're entitled to keep their air conditioner core because they've already done more than their neighbor who doesn't express the same concern.
That's how they're explaining this hypothesis.
And this U of Michigan study actually shows that people who are skeptical of government environmentalism live more environmentally sustainable lives.
You know, this reminds me a little bit of, I mean, you tell me if this is a stretch, but this is what just popped into my mind, how so many of the male feminists throughout the years, from Bill Clinton to Teddy Kennedy to Harvey Weinstein in our country,
Gianne Gameshi, so many of the male feminists who talk about feminism and respecting women, they were the ones who the Me Too movement shows were the biggest sexual predators and had the most sexual misconduct.
And I think it's because they said, well, on TV, I'm so feminist, I'm allowed to the world in the abstract.
So in my real life, I'm allowed to engage in sexual misconduct because I've done more than most.
So grant me this indulgence.
It's like a reverse indulgence from the medieval Catholic Church.
They've done a bad thing so they can, they're so good in public so they can get away with a private indiscretion.
What do you think of my Me Too analogy?
I think it's exactly right.
I mean, because they feel, it's kind of the old expression, I've given at the office.
Leave me, go away from my door.
I don't need to give anymore.
People feel they've already done their part.
So therefore, they're entitled.
And in the case of Harvey Weinstein, they may have joined all those groups because they wanted better access to women, which may or may not be related.
But what's happened with this climate, but you mentioned the other thing, the other part of the study is that the people who were most skeptical were the most environmentally friendly.
And what that tells you is climate skeptics don't fall behind the curtain of, oh, you know what, I already gave money, so therefore, no, they actually care about the earth.
They're just not buying the idea that a trace of essential gas in the atmosphere is driving a climate catastrophe or is the control knob of climate.
So this is one of those things where you can see it in all their leadership.
You mentioned Al Gore, but even the head of the UN panel, Regina Pachari, admitted he lived at 30,000 feet.
The UN has conferences in developing world countries in exotic locations from Cancun to Bali to beaches in South America, all over the world annually, not just annually, but sometimes three, four times a year in odd locations.
They feel that they don't have to follow their own rules.
I've heard this with Leonardo DiCaprio.
People say it doesn't matter because he's doing so much good.
It doesn't matter what he does in his personal life.
It's that license to do.
It's a free pass.
Get out of jail for it.
You know, I want to give one more analogy, and I know I'm just throwing analogies in the air, but it just makes me think about it.
You know, when I think of people who take their own time to do voluntary charity in the community, to actually work at a soup kitchen, to actually help people get their hands dirty at a food bank or whatever, often they're conservative, often they're Christian conservative, and they reject big government, and they might reject big government welfare, but they're doing a lot in their personal life with their own personal funds.
And again, the mirror image of that is the guy who doesn't do anything of himself because he says, oh, I paid my taxes.
That's for the government to do.
It's almost like when you outsource your civic duty to the government, it takes away your own personal responsibility.
And frankly, the less government we would have in the social safety net, the more each of us would feel incumbent to do something real life.
I think it's the same moral hazard.
If the government is doing it and you pay the government, you've already given your bit.
So I think there's a lot of analogies here.
And every single environmentalist protest I've ever seen leaves behind overflowing garbage cans.
Last word to you, Mark.
No, you're absolutely right.
When people who are activists vote for politicians, who say they're going to take care of whether it's the environment, whether it's poor people, and you expand all these programs, then the people themselves think, well, I've already voted for someone and the taxes are taking care of that.
But if you don't have that mindset and you're actually saying, well, I don't trust government to do it, you're more likely to volunteer.
You're more likely to care.
And I think that's the case.
I'm going to call the skeptics of climate change the conservationists.
They're the ones who actually care about the earth and care about our environment, whereas the climate activists actually believe that they're working on passing legislation, so therefore the government is going to solve this through treaties, regulations, EPA rules, and all kinds of nonsense.
So therefore, they can do what they need to because they've already done their part.
So this is one of those things where it cuts all the way across, but the more you appeal to government, the less you're going to do in your own life.
And I think we're seeing that exact dynamic that you mentioned there.
Bruce's Critique of Trudeau00:03:46
Yeah, well, there you go, Mark.
Great to talk to you about this very interesting study.
I recommend people go to climatepot.com.
I know you've linked to it there.
Great to see you.
Keep in touch, my friend.
Thanks a lot, Ezekiel.
I appreciate it.
All right, there you have it.
Mark Morano.
He's the boss of climate.com.
We've been talking about a study from the University of Michigan.
You can see it at his website.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Hey, welcome back on my monologue Friday about Trudeau's summer jobs grant, denying over 1,400 applications for Christian groups, but not to controversial Islamic groups, Joe Rule.
Joel writes, the attestation was added so the Trudeau government could drive another wedge between Canadians.
It's true, but I think it's to drive a wedge between a person and themselves.
You know, if you read enough about the Soviet Union, about the secret police, about communism, about Stalin, Even if you read George Rowell's 1984, the great tactic of the state to destroy a dissident is to manage to get the dissident to betray himself.
Because once a dissident betrays himself and betrays his own values, he never has that fire burning inside himself anymore because he knows he's a fraud, an imposter.
If he sells out a friend for a moment of comfort, if he signs a jailhouse confession or something, he'll never burn with the same brightness again because he'll have the guilt of knowing that he put something ahead of his so-called values.
That is the ultimate tactic of the authoritarian left.
Don't take it from me, take it from every scholar, every novelist, every philosopher about Soviet totalitarianism.
That is what the attestation is.
To make people break their own conscience in return for a few thousand bucks.
Bruce writes, thanks for exposing the wastefulness of the Trudeau family.
I'll have to remember this in the event that CPP cuts me off of my disability pension.
I'll have to remind my senior friends that while they're struggling to heat their homes, the Trudeaus are squandering more than half a million dollars just on their chef and food deliveries.
I'll also remind veterans how this family lives so lavishly.
Well, they can't be given more help because they're asking for more than the government can afford.
Next year, let's remind all of our friends how this family scolded us while living the high life.
Yeah, you know, an example I use, I mean, I've done some events around Canada, and sometimes we book them in Legions.
I love going to the Legion.
It's always affordable.
Everyone knows where it is.
Cheap eats and drinks and a pretty friendly crowd.
And it's always good to be reminded of our military history.
And just take a moment and look at the plaques and the photos and the stories.
Every single Legion hall I've been to in Canada is a little bit, I don't know if dilapidated is too strong a word.
Some of them are dilapidated.
All of them could use a little bit of a refresh, you know.
And I remember the one I went to in, I think it was Port Credit near Mississauga.
And boy, that place needs a Reno.
It needs a fixer-upper.
And I thought, Justin Trudeau gave $10.5 million to Omar Cotter.
I bet that Legion Hall has not had $10.5 million put into it in 40 years combined.
So yeah, you can come up with your own example of what we could or should do with money rather than the way the Trudeau's burn it.
Just burn it.
Damn Trudeau Burns Money00:02:22
On my interview with Jaron Carpet and the Andersons, Tammy writes, thank you for interviewing the Andersons when the government pushed this unlawful attestation.
It was evident to me it would not stand a court challenge.
Very happy to hear John Carpe is representing the Andersons.
Yeah, me too.
And Carpe's the best.
I say again, he is Canada's leading civil libertarian.
What is frustrating to me, and I think I mentioned this at the interview, was that a lawsuit like this takes time.
It grinds very slowly through the wheels of justice.
And it is most likely that the 2019 summer jobs application will also have this attestation because it probably, this probably won't see a court before then.
It's also frustrating to me all the damage that's being done in the meantime.
The 1,400 Christian groups that were denied, the stress on the Anderson family and others, the fact that they have to go to the courts.
And I suppose the most frustrating thing of all is the silence of the lands in the media party.
They don't give a damn.
They don't give a damn, do they?
Well, that's the show for today.
By the way, at least for last week and this week while we're figuring it out, every day I do a chit-chat talk show at 12 noon Eastern Time.
It's live on our YouTube page.
So we flip on the camera and I pre-record this show, the interview show and the main show, but from 12 noon to 1 p.m. Eastern Time, that's 10 a.m. to 11 a.m. Mountain Time.
Flip the camera on.
It's lightly produced.
I have a few video clips, but I don't script a whole monologue or anything.
And I take questions that people type in the comments section.
And it's sort of fun.
And we've been doing it all last week, and today we did it again.
So we'll be doing that this week.
We're trying to figure out.
I think that the time zone might be a bit of a problem because most of our folks work during the day.
And even 12 noon Toronto time, well, that's still the middle of the work morning in Calgary time.
So we're figuring it out.
But if you have a chance, check it out.
And by the way, even after it's done live, that video is saved so you can watch it later on on YouTube.
You just won't be able to do the interactive stuff, which was live.
So check that out if you haven't already.
Anyways, until tomorrow at noon, for those of you who can make it, and 8 p.m. Eastern for those of you who can't.