BS not BS

Today marks the anniversary of Canada's maple leaf flag being officially raised for the first time on Parliament Hill in Ottawa back in 1965 🇨🇦.

On this day in 2005: YouTube founded

I worked on this file. From one former spokesperson to another. With affection. And a red pen. Fact check time. Canada does not control what crosses the bridge. Customs and border enforcement are exercised by each country on its own side. Like every other border crossing on Earth. This is not a novelty. It is the border. Canada does not own the land on both sides. Canada owns the Canadian side. The State of Michigan owns the U.S. side. That is literally the definition of a border. The bridge was built with American labor. Thousands of American workers. Billions added to Michigan’s GDP. American steel was used. This is not a hypothetical. It is documented. Repeatedly. Ownership. There is no single owner of “the bridge” in the way this is being framed. Each country owns and controls its side. Again. Border. That was the deal. Signed. Ratified. Applauded. Economic benefits. The U.S. already gets them. Jobs. GDP. Trade flow. Regional growth. That is what a functioning border crossing does. And just for the record. The President himself praised the project in 2017 and called for its expeditious completion. On paper. In a joint statement. With Canada. You can change your mind. You can change your politics. You can even change your story. But you cannot polish a turd.

The White House could have plausibly claimed that Trump didn’t mean to post a stunningly racist video — which briefly shows Barack and Michelle Obama with their heads superimposed on monkeys — to Truth Social last night. Instead, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the video and slammed the “fake outrage.” Hours later, the post was quietly deleted. At first glance, the post in question doesn’t have anything to do with the Obamas. But near the end of the 62-second video, a shot of the Obama’s faces on primates flashes for about a second as the song “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” plays. “It’s entirely possible that Trump didn’t watch the video to the end, or click it at all,” writes Margaret Hartmann. “But rather than claiming the racist image was posted by accident or apologizing (lol) Karoline Leavitt argued there is absolutely nothing wrong with it in a statement provided to news organizations.” Read more: nymag.visitlink.me/rRbeUR

This video should unsettle anyone who takes the United States seriously as a nation. Because it exposes something dangerous: the trivialization of the world's most consequential office. It shows how carelessly the power, credibility, and accumulated moral authority of a superpower can be squandered for a few seconds of viral attention. In any other major democracy, this behavior from a head of state would trigger a constitutional crisis. Paris would burn. Berlin would convene emergency sessions. In the Nordic countries, resignation would follow within hours. Across functioning democracies, the public, institutions, and political class would recognize this for what it is: an assault on the dignity of the state itself. Leaders are not free to perform as entertainers without consequence. National honor is not personal property, it's held in trust. But the United States is not just another country with a provocateur in charge. It is the linchpin of global order. It maintains formal alliances and security guarantees with forty to fifty nations. It underwrites the financial architecture, trade systems, and diplomatic frameworks that billions of people depend on daily. When the American president speaks—or posts—it doesn't land as satire, meme, or personal whim. It reads as a signal about what the country is becoming. American power has never relied solely on carrier strike groups or economic output. It has rested on something more fragile and more valuable: trust. The belief that beneath domestic turbulence lies institutional seriousness, predictability, and a baseline commitment to dignity. That belief is now disintegrating in real time. Millions of American companies operate globally. They negotiate multibillion-dollar contracts in environments where reputation is currency. Boardrooms in Frankfurt, Singapore, and Dubai aren't debating whether a post was clever—they're asking whether the United States remains a reliable partner. Whether agreements signed today will be honored tomorrow. Whether American leadership has devolved from institutional to purely theatrical. Consider tourism, which sustains millions of American jobs—airlines, hotels, restaurants, museums, entire regional economies. Soft power isn't an abstraction. It materializes in flight bookings, conference locations, study-abroad programs, and decades of accumulated goodwill. A quiet, decentralized boycott doesn't require government action—only a collective sense that a nation no longer respects itself. Now picture this image being studied by foreign ministers, central bank governors, defense strategists, and sovereign wealth fund managers. Picture them asking a coldly rational question: How do we write binding thirty-year agreements with a country whose public face will be this, relentlessly, for years to come? How do we plan for the long term when the tone is impulsive, mocking, and unbound by the gravity of office? This is where the real calculus begins. Trillions in foreign capital depend on confidence that America is stable, credible, and rule-governed. That confidence is now being traded for what, exactly? Applause from an online mob? A dopamine rush from manufactured outrage? Content designed to dominate the news cycle rather than serve the national interest? Every serious nation eventually confronts this choice: burn long-term credibility for short-term spectacle, or safeguard the reputation previous generations bled to build. The United States spent eighty years constructing an image of reliability, restraint, and leadership under pressure. That image wasn't born from perfection—it came from a visible commitment to standards that transcended impulse. This isn't a partisan issue. Europeans who value democratic norms recognize something ominously familiar here. Americans—Democrat and Republican alike—who believe in responsibility and restraint should see it too. Power attracts scrutiny. Leadership demands discipline. A superpower cannot behave like a reality TV contestant without paying a price. The presidency is not a personal broadcast channel. It's a symbol carried on behalf of 330 million people and countless international partners who never voted but whose lives are shaped by American decisions anyway. Every post either reinforces or erodes the idea that America can be counted on when it matters most. So the question is no longer whether this is offensive. The question is whether this is who America chooses to be: a nation that trades a century of hard-won reputation for viral moments. A country that replaces statecraft with content creation. A republic governed like a season of reality television. History offers a harsh lesson here. Great powers don't fall because enemies mock them. They collapse when they begin mocking themselves—publicly, proudly, and without grasping the cost until it's far too late. Stay connected, Follow Gandalv @Microinteracti1

John Candy and Catherine O'Hara both Canadian legends 🕊️🇨🇦❤️

@CP24 *Who gets it

GST credit explained: Who get its, how much and what’s new under the credit boost cp24.com/news/canada/20…

FCOJ

Diiiiiddd yoouuuu knnnoowww

In the same week as his humiliating climb down on Greenland, he confused Iceland and Greenland multiple times, and now his staff is confusing Antarctica with Greenland (penguins inhabit the former, not the latter.) The most powerful nation on Earth being run like a clown show.

For anyone who would like to hear Mark Carney’s outstanding Davos speech in full here it is. This is what true global leadership looks like. Canada should be immensely proud today, because they are leading the fight back when others dare not. 🎥 TikTok - vm.tiktok.com/ZNRBDT4mB/

"You and I" or "You and me"? Which one is right? Both…depending on whether ‘I/me’ is the subject or the object. -"You and I are going to the store." (subject) -"This is for you and me." (object)

On this day in 2007: iPhone unveiled

I wish the Prime commentators did every Leafs game. They do a great job.

After reading The Wealthy Barber, I started my Christmas shopping by getting copies for some family and friends! A must-read for those in their 20s and 30s. ⁦@wealthy_barber⁩ #PersonalFinance

Nov 18, 1985: 40 years ago, the comic strip Calving and Hobbes by Bill Watterson debuted in 35 newspapers. #80s

Buffett’s Berkshire buys shares of Google parent Alphabet, sells more Apple theglobeandmail.com/investing/arti…

Watch Scott Galloway eviscerate Trump, Scott Bessent, and their fucked-up tariff policy that has alienated our allies, bankrupted working class families, and destroyed the "envy of the world" economy President Biden handed to Dirty Donald. 😳👇

@StanWongWealth Surely, none of the 39% are former Economics students of Mowat CI! #invest #FinancialPlanning

While 65% of Canadians have a TFSA, 39% of them are using it to hold cash rather than investing inside the registered account. ow.ly/jEZo50Xr7Ac #TheStanWongGroup #SecondOpinion #TFSA #WealthBuilding #FinancialPlanning #Investing