Writing here is easy because the views are such a stunning companion, the air is so clean, the wildlife so awesome. In the space of minutes one can see eagles, whales, bears. All wild. All unlocked from the way we treat them in captivity.
When I crossed the country at 34 plus thousand feet on Wednesday (for what it’s worth, I purchase carbon offsets), it didn’t all look that way. Especially over parts of Alberta and BC where the smoke from dozens and dozens of wildfires hangs over the country. The safety of altitude doesn’t allow you to escape from knowing the reality of what it must be like on the ground in and around those hotspots.
They are still assessing the damage, still counting the destroyed buildings, still determining how, or even if, life can return to some sense of normalcy in places like Jasper.
And while that’s going on there’s still the debate over “why?”
Why does this happen on an increasing scale year after year now? Most of us know the answer to at least part of the reason. Climate change.
Sure, some of this would happen anyway, it always has. But not on this scale. It’s got some, like freelance Calgary-based writer Gillian Steward challenging her province’s premier:
Do Banff and Canmore need to burn before Alberta acts on climate change? 🔒
Read >
Summers are supposed to be full of slow news days. Not so in 2024.
Even in our 24-7 world, these days are becoming those of legend. Prisoner swaps, Middle East assassinations, missile attacks. It seems non-stop, a blockbuster every day.
And then there’s Donald Trump. His opponents have been saying for months that he’s unhinged, but now even some of his allies are starting to wonder.
“Unhinged” looks almost kind compared to the new words – “repulsive” and “desperate”. His regular CNN panellist, defender and apologist Scott Jennings conceded the other day after a bizarre appearance with black journalists, that Trump had “crapped the bed.” Yikes.
Former Trump adviser Anthony Scaramucci even went so far as to tweet Wednesday night that Trump might drop out of the race.
Here’s a good piece from Politico by Natalie Allison and Alex Isenstadt:
Trump and his allies had a plan for how to hit Harris. Then he opened his mouth.
Read >
So, imagine you are Donald Trump.
Come on, play along for a minute.
Imagine you are Donald Trump: there you are sitting in your golf cart cheating your way around the course and you’re thinking of ways to get out of the mire you’ve created for yourself.
“How do I change the channel?”
“Maybe I should dump J.D.?”
I mean your vice-presidential pick has been a disaster. You listened, for some unknown reason, to your sons. They said J.D. was the man.
The other bright light in your orbit, Tucker Carlson, said the same thing. So, you did. Most everyone else is now saying it was a terrible pick and you’ve got to dump the rookie Ohio senator and start fresh.
Do you? Should you? Can you? Ed Kilgore of New York’s Intelligencer file has this assessment of those questions:
Would Trump Really Dump J.D. Vance? 🔒
Read >
Heard enough on that?
I haven’t. Give me more.
How about giving Trump a mulligan, says Bill Press in The Hill:
On VP pick, time for Trump to take a mulligan
Read >
In a couple of days, we will know who Kamala Harris picks for her vice-presidential nominee.
I gave my choice away last week and I’m sticking with him – Mark Kelly, the Senator from Arizona. But if it’s not him, it almost certainly will be Josh Shapiro, Governor of Pennsylvania. Here’s why:
Who’s Afraid of Josh Shapiro?
Read >
Bring it home Peter. Tell us something about Canadian politics.
Another week, another “will he or won’t he” story about the vacationing Prime Minister. I was looking for a different angle and I found it with the always reliable Susan Delacourt.
Susan has been around for a while. She’s seen movies like this before and she knows how they are fed and scripted by a certain “type” if you will. Here’s what she wrote this week:
Justin Trudeau’s anonymous Liberal critics can’t stay hidden forever 🔒
Read >
Remember in 2017, months after a certain network anchor retired from the CBC, the corporation announced a new news format?
It was a gamble going against decades of single anchor presentations in a new television landscape where viewers seemed to want something different. The CBC decided four anchors was the way to go. Within weeks it was clear the format wasn’t working with viewers, but as often happens with the public broadcaster it took months, no, actually years, before they tried to stabilize the ship and went back to the single anchor newscast.
Clearly, no one would try that again. Wrong.
CBS, in third place in the network news ratings in the United States since the legendary Walter Cronkite stepped down from his #1 perch in the early eighties, is about to unveil its multi-anchor format, or as they seem to want to call it, an ensemble cast of characters. Brian Steinberg has a preview in the current edition of Variety:
CBS Plans ‘Evening News’ Overhaul: John Dickerson, Maurice DuBois, Weather and Close Ties to ’60 Minutes’
Read >
