Discover Canada -

Discover Canada


The Globe confirms Jason Kenney’s plans to rewrite the educational booklet for new citizens. One assumes that in the months since Mr. Kenney first mused about this, he has taken the time to thoroughly familiarize himself with said booklet.


Discover Canada

  1. Do you mean "one assumes" and not "once assumes" ?

    Oh I know it was petty of me to point out a simple error. That's the point – its petty of you to take a slap at Kenney for doing the same.

    And I looked at the "paragraph" on confederation and it was horribly incomplete. It doesn't even mention PEI as the birthplace of confederation!

    It was a tiny blurb, no wonder Kenney missed it.

    • Typo vs. not knowing the facts.

      Had the Minister made a typo, that's one thing.
      That the minister didn't know the facts of what his own ministry is doing.. that's quite another.

      • And now the typo is gone, yet with no line through the initial error (common blogging practice to acknowledge your mistakes).

        Sorry but I won't take lectures on not knowing the facts from a Liberal party who's finance minister in waiting doesn't even know what car he drives!

        • Moving the goal posts and red-herring. We were discussing Wherry and Kenney, not the Liberal party
          Got any other bad debating tactics you'd like to use?

          • Criticizing someone's debate tactics is bad form in and of itself.

            Its like we were playing ping pong and I just hit the ball towards you and you threw down your paddle and said "you were being rude earlier! I win the ping pong game because of that!!"

            So how about instead of these meta style comments you get back in the game…

          • No, it's exactly correct form.
            To use your analogy, if we were trying to play ping-pong, your red-herring is essentially missing a return and then trying to declare that you were playing cribbage instead, so it doesn't matter.

            After all, if you're going to try to change the subject when the point is turned against you, you might as well talk to yourself and I might as well talk to a brick wall for all the chance this discussion has of educating anyone.

            ..although come to think of it, at this point I expect my time would be less wasted on the brick wall.

          • Wow. All of that was the intellectual equivalent of a monkey throwing his shhh around.

            I'm bothering to respond only because of the laughter you just caused and in hopes that you'll spew out some more enjoyable non answers.

            How do Liberals get around, carrying those big egos everywhere they go ?

  2. I wonder if there will be a Chapter on Socialists and Separatists.

    • Good Idea!

      • Maybe another on the King-Byng affair! er, maybe not.

        • The draft I've seen includes a section: "Proroguing Parliament and other Hallowed Cornerstones of Our Democracy"

          also: "Reading Between the Lines of the Constitution: How a Minority of MPs Constitute a Duly Elected Government"

          finally: "Threats to the Nation: Rebellions and Attempted Coups from 1837 to 2008"

          • "James II: The People's King"

          • excellent!!

            "Knowing Your Second Amendment Rights"

            "Why Being a Second Tier Socialistic Country Isn't Such a Bad Thing"

            "Our Fascinating Geologic History spanning 5,000 Years"

          • "Knowing Your Second Amendment Rights"

            That's classic.

            "Cicero, Locke, Forsey, Flanagan"

            "Joining the Culture of Defeat"

          • "Cicero, Locke, Forsey, Flanagan"

            Best yet!

          • "The Senate of Canada: Why What We Do Is Different From What We Decry"

            "Mike Duffy and An Introspective Look at the Canadian Media:

          • The crazier it gets, the more I'm liking our Senate. We should keep it just like it is, and it might take pressure off our MPs to behave like as*hats, knowing their colleagues in the sober second chamber have that file taken care of.

    • There better be… New Canadians need to be warned about those guys… Don't forget all those left wing fringe groups….

  3. Why do I get the feeling Kenney's revisions will end up looking similar to this.

    The first draft for proposed standards in United States History Studies Since Reconstruction says students should be expected “to identify significant conservative advocacy organizations and individuals, such as Newt Gingrich, Phyllis Schlafly and the Moral Majority.” […] Others have proposed adding talk show host Rush Limbaugh and the National Rifle Association.

    • Kenny should ask MI to proof read it !

    • You really inhabit a different reality, don't you. A reality where Conservative ministers are the exact same thing as rabid Texas Republicans.

      • So you're saying Conservative efforts to rebrand Canada in their image is just a figment of my imagination.

      • Yep. There's no ideological or logistical relationship whatsoever between the CPC and the GOP. And it's pretty annoying when irrelevant, so-called "evidence"–like Harper's hiring of former Bush flack Ari Fleischer as the CPC's American media liaison–is exploited to show some sort of arm-in-arm relationship. What tosh…

        • Didn't he hire former Clinton press secretary Mike McCurry at the same time as Ari? Perhaps Harper is actually in league with the Democrats!

          • Didn't he hire former Clinton press secretary Mike McCurry at the same time as Ari?

            I believe McCurry was retained only to secure Harper some airtime before the Summit of the Americas. Ari's the main man…

          • Lets get a request in for the summary of their billing — i hear McCurry's retainer has been barely used, while Ari's sent 3 bills to cover Fox work alone. And who's paying for this, dare I ask?

  4. The booklet really does have very little on Canadian history post-Confederation. I'd be happy to see more added.

    I'll reserve judgement until I see what the new booklet looks like.

    Current paragraph on Confederation:

    On July 1, 1867, the provinces we now know as Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia joined together to create the new country of Canada. This is known as Confederation. Confederation was made official by the British North America Act of 1867.

    As time passed, other provinces and territories joined Confederation and became part of Canada.

    That's pretty rudimentary.

    • Not entirely accurate, either. Ontario and Quebec didn't join anyone to create Canada. The colony of Canada joined the colonies of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia and upon Confederation two provinces were created out of the former Canada. They weren't provinces before Confederation and there was no such entity as Ontario or Quebec before July 1, 1867.

      The current pamphlet is both rudimentary and banal.

      • "The current pamphlet is both rudimentary and banal. "

        Then, Minister Kenney is basically on a fool's errand if he expects to improve on that.

      • …there was no such entity as Ontario or Quebec before July 1, 1867.

        There certainly was an entity called "Quebec" before July 1, 1867–as I'm sure you know. I think you mean that such an entity had not existed for generations by that point.

        • You are quite correct. There was a geographic entity, and, of course, a cultural one named Quebec, and there had been the colony of Quebec, prior to the foundation of Upper and Lower Canada, which were subsequently united as Canada. What I meant to say was that there was no political entity named "Quebec" (other than the city) at the time immediately prior to confederation. That, I suppose, illustrates the challenge of encapsulating a complicated political history in a sentence or two.

  5. Well, any pamphlet is bound to be a bit simplistic – but I think they can do better than they have. Banality pretty much goes with the territory. At least they can aspire to accuracy.

    • "At least they can aspire to accuracy."

      I suspect you may over-estimate Minister Kenney's abilities, agenda and objectives.

  6. I am assuming that the new pamphlet will have a cover of solid Conservative blue, with perhaps a tiny red maple leaf on it.

  7. Well past time. We need a new national mythology.

    Margaret Atwood's is wearing thin among our opinion makers.

  8. So Jason Kenney, of all people, one of the most right wing politician this country has ever seen, gets to define what it means to be Canadian?!?

    God help us all!