Agree or Disagree: The Podcast-The Preview of the Calgary Flames Draft





Although the Tag Line for Agree or Disagree:The Podcast is religion, sex, and politics, we occasionally jump on to sports.

Besides, hockey is a religion in Canada anyway.

Cory Chapdelaine, myself, are joined by Dan Stephenson from Fireside Podcast. Dan hosts Fireside Podcast with Matt. They describe themselves as an alternative to the Fan 960. They have done some extensive research on the Flames draft.

If you get a chance, check out There is some cool stuff on how to look at the Flames.

Our Podcast topics include,

The state of the Flames and thoughts and expectations of new GM Brad Treleven.
Comparison with Oilers and Canucks
Preview of the Top 4 Picks of the NHL Draft.
Some sleepers and risers in the draft.
Who the Flames could pick in all their draft picks. And, how they got them.
A conversation Dan had with Brian Burke and a letter Brian wants him to write about Mike Cammarelli. Dan’s prepared letter to respond.
A look at the Flames prospects like Monahan, Gaudreau and more.
Strategy going into Free Agency.  to the listen to the Podcast.

Follow @FiresidePodcast

Follow @88Styles on Twitter.

Follow @kevole on Twitter.
Follow @AorDThePodcast on Twitter

Add Kevin Olenick on FB
Like Agree or Disagree: The Podcast on Facebook.

Update on #yyc petition-Petition starter says she received a threat.

Update on #yyc petition-Petition starter says she received a threat.

You might remember the above post regarding the petition to remove regarding the legislation to making it illegal to post graphic or disturbing images in view of motorists on city roadways.

You will also remember there was quite a discussion around the petition. And while there were some that wouldn’t sign it, but there were some of you that saw it and signed the petition.

One of the themes that came out of the discussion was the concept of free speech.While many expressed concerns about the sign, they felt that the group that is behind the signs the Canadian Centre for Bio Ethical Reform has the freedom to post the signs. People felt they were disturbing, but they had the right to do it.

And while I’m not a particular fan of the wording of the petition, I respect the right for this petition to be shared. I also understand the intent of the person responsible for the petition.She is being a concerned citizen, and from what I understand a concerned mother,

The fact of the matter is this. Based on the response of the petition, her concept has some support. Of the 5,000 signatures needed, she has over 4,100.

Now I happened to do a little bit of digging and I got in touch with the person behind the petition. Her name is Nicole. I’m not giving a last name and you will see why in a moment. Now I have a source that knew Nicole and I got a perspective on the petition. The explanation I got was that her and several others have had panic attacks upon seeing these. There has been other stories as well. I have heard myself and other people express a concern that children are seeing these signs.

It appears that some do not have the same concern.

I actually connected with Nicole and we discussed her coming on Agree or Disagree:The Podcast. She actually agreed and we were working out a time for her to come on.

That is until this morning.

I received a message from Nicole that she had been threatened.

Now,there are a couple of interesting things that the person behind the alleged threat.One,the person is either a) not smart or b) doesn’t understand modern technology. The other is he called himself an influential politician.

According to Nicole, the threat came from James Kohut. Kohut is a local politician who has ran federally and municipally. He ran in Ward 6 in 2007 municipally. In 2006, he ran for the Canadian Action Party in Calgary Centre-North federally.

It appears Kohut got Nicole’s contact information online. Apparently, Kohut also forgot that people have caller ID. He also forgot that the internet can also retrieve his own contact information.

According to Nicole, the threat was that she withdraws the petition or he will share her private contact information and “hundreds of people” will call her and complain.
She has filed a police report.She also gave me permission to share this.

Now a couple of important things. I don’t know James, or for that matter Nicole’s position on abortion. Quite frankly, that doesn’t matter. What does matter is that a person expressing her free speech, the same free speech we all share, feels her security is compromised. Apparently, from someone who feels powerful.

Obviously based on this, Nicole is angry, and a little hesitant to make any public comments on this. So, if you know her, give her and her family a big hug. If you don’t and this issue concerns you, then sign the petition or speak to your local politician.

I should let you know that although the details have not been finalized, I will be interviewing CCBR on their perspective on Agree or Disagree: The Podcast.

Stay tuned for updates and thank you for reading.

Agree or Disagree: There is a healthy way to deal with your partner’ s exes.

When it comes to partner’s exes, this can be a complex issue. Some relationships have a deeper and longer history than others. But, more and more, this is an issue that has to be contended with. As well as tough to handle.  Which can lead to more complications.

I’m sure some of you will have some experiences to share about this. Is there a healthy way to deal with your partner’ sexes?

What are your thoughts?


Agree or Disagree: The Podcast-Reflections of #yycflood Part 3-Recovery


This is part 3 of our reflections of the Anniversary of #yycflood.

Today we are talking about recovery. And we are talking with @WURSTCalgary about their recovery efforts. Terry Lo and I talk with them.

WURST was one of the hardest businesses hit by the flood. We all remember how hard the entire community of Mission was hurt.

We speak to Chris Rosamond, who is the Operations Manager at WURST about the following topics .
Where was Chris on June 20,2013?
What happened to WURST during the flood?
How the entire community of Mission during the flood?
The involvement of volunteers
The recovery process
Advice for those in recovery.
How has Calgary changed over the year?

Listen here.

Follow @calgarydreamer on Twitter

Follow @WURSTCalgary on Twitter


Follow @kevole on Twittet

Add Kevin Olenick on Facebook
Like Agree or Disagree: The Podcast on Facebook.

Agree or Disagree: You would sign this petition

Agree or Disagree: You would sign this petition

The above petition is addressed to Mayor Naheed Nenshi of Calgary.

It states this.

“We ask for legislation to be passed making it illegal to post or display graphic or disturbing images or messages within view of motorists on city roadways.”

The petition is started by Nicole Brass.They need 3,133 signatures and are a little over half way there! As of this writing,there was 1,867 signatures.

At the crutch of this issue appears to be the images displayed by the Canadian Centre for Bio Ethic Reform. Over Crowchild Trail SW, there is an image titled “Abortion Kills Children” and a picture of an aborted fetus. I’m sure you can respect the decision not to post it.

While I understand and respect the decision to bring this forward, I think there are some holes here. The biggest hole being who sets the standard on what is a graphic or disturbing image? What someone sees as graphic and disturbing might not be for someone else. I can, and to be fair, clearly the petition does too, think of other images that would be disturbing. It’s just who sets the standard,

The other part of this is “within view of motorists on city roadways”. There has been some concern that the CCBR signs are causing accidents. I haven’t seen an official report on this. If you have, feel free to share it.

But the question is would you sign the petition. If you have signed it, why did you?

Agree or Disagree-The Podcast Reflections #yycflood Part 1-Social Media

This is Part 1 of a series of reflections regarding the One Year Anniversary of the events of the Floods in Calgary and Southern Alberta.

Terry Lo ( @calgarydreamer) and I meet with Sean Stephenson from Calgary Police Service discuss the Social Media impact on the response to the flood.

Sean Stephenson is the Digital Communications, Team Lead Strategic Communications Section for the Calgary Police Service. They, along with many people were a positive influence on the Social Media. We discuss the following, we remember and where we were during the flood

-The time commitment involved
-What happened when they went to Twitter jail?

-Awards they won for their efforts
-The change of perception of the Police

-Lessons they learned about Social Media

-How has Calgary changed since the flood.


Follow Terry @calgarydreamer

(He mentions another one, but…)

Follow Sean @creative_sean

Follow me @kevole


Add on Facebook Kevin Olenick

Like Agree or Disagree:The Podcast on Facebook

Update on the post earlier today regarding the March for Jesus and Ric McIver

If you missed earlier today, I posted this blog/podcast on what happened with the March for Jesus.

You can listen to that here.

Since this post, lots has happened.

Ric Mciver posted this on his Facebook.

Now to be honest, McIver’s statement didn’t help him. It hindered him.

While he said he was a respecter of diversity, and he reminded people he had supported Sikhs, Muslims, and Jews, there is still questions by many how he can be involved with a group with a history and perception of hate.

Many are convinced his leadership aspirations for the PC Party are over. Some have also called for the PC Party to discipline McIver.

Both Thomas Lukaszak and Jim Prentice quickly distanced themselves from the group and expressed their support for equality.

Jonathan Denis MLA, who has been a supporter of Pawlowski, has demanded the March for Jesus apologize for their behaviour and words towards the LGBT community.

Now what is interesting is a conversation I have been having with a March for Jesus supporter named @CalgarySenate . You might know him as Larry Heather. He ran for Mayor in the last Civic Election.

He has been responding to every single tweet about the March for Jesus. I decided to ask him a question.

Who is Street Church and March for Jesus accountable too? Do they have a denomination they are affiliated too?

Turns out…..No!

The Reason. Well here are some Tweets from @CalgarySenate

In other words, because the church lacks courage and are “evangelical cowards” , they don’t need to be accountable?

Most churches, even para churches, have an accountability structure in place. It would be disconcerting there isn’t.

Just like this is.




Agree or Disagree-The Podcast-What concerns me about the March for Jesus

Agree or Disagree-The Podcast-What concerns me about the March for Jesus

Instead of writing my opinion, I thought I would share my opinion via the Podcast. I discuss yesterday’s event of the March for Jesus. 

Topics include,

My experience covering the event from 2011

What exactly IS the March for Jesus? 

Ric McIver’s involvement with it. Why people are very concerned about his attendance.

The organizers of the March for Jesus history of legal issues with the City of Calgary.

My reaction to a paragraph that has caught the attention.

Who holds these people accountable?

You can read the March for Jesus

You can read my Open Letter to the March for Jesus I wrote last year.


Follow @kevole on Twitter

@AorDThePodcast on Twitter

Add Kevin Olenick on Facebook

Like Agree or Disagree: The Podcast on Facebook.

Agree or Disagree: The News Coverage over the incident in Moncton was sensationalized.


If the title of this video from CTV News bothered you, you are not the only one.

Many of you were.

This was not the title of a blockbuster movie with a Hollywood star coming to save the day and kiss the love interest at the end. This was a real live incident involving the loss of loved ones whose spouses will never feel their embrace again.

Yet, if you watched CTV News, this was the title they went with.

Now, it is not just CTV News that should feel some brunt here.  The news coverage on this also included the following.

Videos of the actual shooting of one RCMP officer. These were shared and re shared on Social Media.

The use of the hashtag #monctonshooting

Rumours and conjecture of the actual suspect Justin Bourque.

When I say news coverage, I’m going to include the Social Media presence on this. After all, many of you followed the coverage on Social Media. So, there is responsibility there too.

For the most part, and I know some of you won’t like to give them credit, but CBC news handled this the best. They attempted to stick to the facts, and tell the story.

However, it doesn’t dismiss the feeling many have. That the incident in Moncton was sensationalized.

Would you agree or disagree with that?

Agree or Disagree: Suspects involved in Mass Shootings should not be identified.





Yesterday on my Facebook and Twitter, I asked for some feedback. I asked about some of the topics people felt should be discussed after the incident last week in Moncton. This is the first of a few we will discuss. This one has come up in a few threads.

This picture above is Justin Bourque.

He is of course, the suspect behind the tragic shootings last week in Moncton that killed 3 RCMP officers and wounded 2 more.

Now, some of you, as a matter of fact, I might go so far as it say many of you do not think we should be using the suspects name. Some of you think that using his name will give him more power and attention that he doesn’t need.

It also for some ignoring the actual victims of the incidents.

There are other of you that think we should identify the suspect. We should name them, and give a face to the person suspected of being responsible. That it’s not giving any glory, but stating a fact.

It gives a face to the person who is suspected of attacking the victims.

It’s certainly gives an interesting dynamic to the conversation. Whether or not we should be using the suspects name. And if that gives an impact to the story and where we turn our focus too.

What do you think? Should we use the suspects name? Or, not?