olddanbook.bsky.social
Former journalist, author/editor. Caretaker of old dogs and horses. A fool for hopeless causes, e.g., saving toothless horses and Scottish Gaelic. Vote ABC. đ¨đŚđ´ó §ó ˘ó łó Łó ´ó ż
212 posts
771 followers
2,147 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Very glad you and Ian Hanomansing werenât doing this in the 1980s.
âShould HIV-positive people be tattooed and put in camps? Weâre talking with US Representative Pat Buchanan! Then, a trip to Sun City â weâll hear from white land owners about the pros and cons of apartheidâŚâ
comment in response to
post
You're not listening.
Isn't that key to your vocation?
You're doubling down instead of paying attention to what is offensive to Cdns. This doesn't deserve a platform on CBC.
Don't even get me started on Kevin O'Learyâthe guy who wants to open up & gift our natural resources to the US.
comment in response to
post
Iâd rather listen to that discussion than the program asking how we feel about the destruction of our country.
comment in response to
post
"your long time friend has suddenly started regularly threatening to violently attack you. I've decided to have a public conversation about the threats against you and invited people who live with the guy who made the threats to join. Feel free to dial in!"
Here's my question: what the fuck
comment in response to
post
our nation's autonomy. The false equivalence created by presenting both sides of this issue echoes to the problematic approach taken during the COVID-19 pandemi, where giving equal weight to fringe opinions alongside scientific consensus led to public confusion and mistrust. 4/
comment in response to
post
where figures like Kevin O'Leary have already publicly come out in support of this dangerous notion. Furthermore, this programming violates CBC's mandate to reflect Canadian values. Our national broadcaster should be a bastion of Canadian identity, not a platform for ideas that undermine 3/
comment in response to
post
The very real threat of annexation cannot be treated as a mere proposal worthy of debate. By framing it as such, CBC is lending credence to an idea that fundamentally threatens Canadian sovereignty and values. This approach is particularly alarming given the current political climate, 2/
comment in response to
post
âWhile the giant ants from space have destroyed all of Canadian infrastructure as we know it, CBC took to the streets and found one man who was glad he didnât have to go to work tomorrowâŚleading to the question: is it really all that bad? Iâm Ian Hanomansing with very neutral journalismâ
comment in response to
post
Why not invite a fierce defender of our sovereignty, like Charlie Angus? Never mind, I doubt he'd accept the premise of the show.
comment in response to
post
OâLeary!!! Itâs even worse than I thought.
comment in response to
post
The ratios on these posts is hilarious. Read the room buddy. Or maybe read some of the comments.
We are being threatened with annexation and occupation by a foreign enemy, and you want to give that enemy airtime.
comment in response to
post
Maybe donât do dumb shit like this and we wonât get mad.
Like hell Canada needs anymore recycling of this dangerous rhetoric.
Itâs not a game. Itâs not funny. Trump isnât joking. Stop fucking around.
comment in response to
post
You should be meeting about this because you & your team have got this all wrong. You say that the gap between what's posted and what you are planning is enormous. That is on you. Say what you mean. Trump is threatening Canada and you want to have a cross-border conversation? Fuck that.
comment in response to
post
Prioritizing your need to never change course has consequences. Youâre participating in the normalization of rhetoric that could bring real pain and suffering to Canadians. This is not a game. But youâre acting like it is. Thatâs not journalism. Thatâs not lifting up Canada. Itâs shameful
comment in response to
post
How about scrapping the whole idea of 51st state garbage? Meeting done! This is not a question that should be entertained or given airtime. Grow up.
comment in response to
post
It's not that we don't understand what is planned. The premise is just plain wrong. Don't treat Trump's idiocy as something that deserves discussion and his proposal as something to be looked at. Recast the question. Ask about the ways we will resist? Get angry like the rest of us. No milquetoast.
comment in response to
post
This is rubbish. If you had sense you wouldn't be so flippant about a subject of such importance. This really looks bad and more importantly stupid. You're basically sane washing this process. I'm embarrassed for you because you obviously don't have the wherewithal to be embarrassed for yourself.
comment in response to
post
You should not be doing this. There arenât two sides and you should not have an American co host for cross country check up - on this subject or any other.
comment in response to
post
You have vastly underestimated the anger and anxiety Canadians are experiencing. Youâve completely misread the room. Not a great look for our national broadcaster.
comment in response to
post
You're missing the point. There shouldn't be a conversation about Canada becoming part of the US. Canada is a separate country, end of story.
comment in response to
post
#Fuckno
Donât normalize this!
Never been angrier.
comment in response to
post
The threat to #Canadaâs sovereignty is SERIOUS and very real.
This isnât a cheeky âis apple pie or butter tarts the better dessertâ discussion.
Their President speaks of Canada using the language of Putin towards Ukraine. He delegitimizes our sovereignty and creates a fictional safety âcrisisâ
comment in response to
post
Trump and his minions have threatened Canada directly, planning tariffs and other measures to try and force our capitulation. It is not accurate or remotely appropriate to refer to his actions as âcommentsâ. Please restate or cancel the show, you are undermining the credibility of the CBC.
comment in response to
post
âBut CBC thinks it would be fun to have an American DJ co-host whether we should exist as a nation.â
Even entertaining the thought is infuriating! I canât express how much just the question pisses me off. This is not ok. The question should be âwhat do we do with the threatâ not what would happen
comment in response to
post
Amen!
comment in response to
post
I am a physician. I felt your coverage of COVID-19 tended to minimize its risks. When the medical community criticized you for it, you behaved the same way you are here.
Canada has many talented journalists. You are replaceable. Stop minimizing the valid concerns of your listeners. Read the room.
comment in response to
post
Your critics are hammering you for how your show has marketed the next episode. It's not for some hypothetical, it's for what is already done.
Your response has been a mix of attacking your critics and of digging your head in the sand.
comment in response to
post
Yep, he will permit 'traitors' to have a platform to spew propaganda on an international forum.
Any Canadian supporting the enemy is treasonous.
Even if 95% of callers are supporting Canada, the other 5% will be cherry picked as validation from a CBC program. And used against us.
comment in response to
post
Going forward with this program will allow the convoy-type people a platform to further spread their hate and divisiveness. This clearly isn't an issue for debate; you're either on Canada's side or your not.
comment in response to
post
Wtf is wrong with you? What you are doing is dangerous and not well thought out. I support the CBC but not this
comment in response to
post
This combined CBC/NPR show exploring feelings about Canada as the 51st state moves the Overton Window:
The initially unthinkable idea of Canada giving up its sovereignty gradually becomes a possibility to seriously consider.
Stop it now
(CBC listener for 55 yrs)
conceptually.org/concepts/ove...
comment in response to
post
Iâm a regular listener. I wonât be listening. Ever again.
This isnât like your previous shows. This is unprecedented times we are in. It doesnât deserve the both sides treatment youâre giving it.
Using Trumps hurtful catchphrases in your ads? Complete insult to Canadians and fans of the CBC
comment in response to
post
The threat of annexation is illegal & you're co-hosting with the country that's doing the threatening? Good god man. Soft-languaging a clear threat with words like proposal? Fix this. The threat is to destroy Canada. The "gap" is created by you. This is an existential threat to Canada. Frame that.
comment in response to
post
The question should be: âWhy shouldnât we replace Ian and the Cross Country Checkup producers for this travesty?â