I've grown increasingly troubled by the behaviour of politicians in Canada attacking the press.
Specifically, we've seen the left-wing parties of the Liberals and NDP assaulting Rebel News by sending Elections Canada after them under extremely dubious allegations about Rebel authors writing books that run afoul of campaign laws.
Rebel has already one court battle allowing them to participate in covering the debates in October. Former Alberta NDP premier Rachel Notley has sent police investigators who chillingly, among other things, threatened and bullied Sheila Gunn-Reid to hand over her author's notes for merely writing a book against Notley.
What's interesting is I'm an avid reader and book purchaser and see plenty of books being published all the time so why is Rebel being targeted here? Are we not a free and open society? Since when is it illegal to criticize politicians?
Of course, it's not and people like Notley and Trudeau know this.
Hence, the new left-wing tactic of punishing people through the process. We see this in the United States gone to dizzying heights since 2016. The process is the punishment.
There's no question what's happening, in my view, they're simply cynically using the system to make Rebel pay be it through court and lawyers fees or even under the threat of fines.
Ezra Levant is the latest to be investigated for publishing 'Libranos'. I'm guessing a not to favourable book on Justin and the Boy PM doesn't like it one bit - and he's using tax payer dollars to fund his attack on the press.
I'm not surprised that a shallow, remedial, arrogant, incompetent, corrupted fool like Justin can't take the heat but when he uses the state to attack freedoms he traverse yet another Rubicon in what's turning out to be a most disgusting style of governance.
The question is why is Elections Canada playing a useful idiot role in all this foul behaviour?
Levant will win this but it's time Canadians start to lean on EC and politicians who act in a most despicable manner.
Yet, who covered this potentially important discovery?
Right. The idiots are busy chasing Greta around. I know someone - an adult - who said, 'Greta is a hero because she's doing something!'
No, she's not. She's using climate-change therapy to soothe her angst.
Vague is doing something.
****
How many times do we have to repeat how evil SJW are? They won't stop. Everything is the patriarchy. Boy Scouts, Salvation Army and now....Alcoholic Anonymous.
Already progressivism on its own is problematic, but there's a strain within it that is foul and anti-intellectual and anti-humanist.
Naturally, the NYT thinks this is fit to print.
I love the state of journalism. Print some pseudo-junk attacking a program that has helped if not saved millions without offering solutions in its place.
That my friends is why we should ignore modern media.
Speaking of which, I see Canadians are getting all riled up about Trump calling out Canada for meeting its financial obligations. The chorus of anger goes along the lines of 'we have until 2024 to catch up!'
But that's not the point.
This is my problem with Canada. We should never have been in this position to begin with. It's a source of embarrassment to not pay your share. Worse still, we're the worse offenders just above Iceland!
Nothing to be proud of here and quite frankly we left ourselves open to criticism.
It's years the Americans are asking everyone in NATO to stop feasting off their generosity. If Canada was a mature country, we would have stepped up but we didn't.
As for Justin, I can't understand how anyone could think his response was a good one. He skated and was caught in a damn lie. That's what happens when you squelch and get called out.
You try to make up lies.And in Justin's case, the added feature of talking behind someone's back like a teenager.
At all. "As impeachment hearings drag on in Washington, D.C., a different kind of impeachment is underway at the University of Florida in Gainesville, Florida. The student body president, Michael Murphy, is facing impeachment from student senators after he booked Donald Trump Jr. and his girlfriend, Kimberly Guilfoyle, for a book event and speech at the university." smh. **** Speaking of fools, over to you Rashida and Ilahn.
"Omar and Tlaib are members of a group of progressive women of color known as “the squad” that also includes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts. They have been subject to racist insults from Donald Trump." This is getting tedious constantly misrepresenting what this guy says. He didn't say anything racist when you consider the entire body of the comment. Once you do, the context becomes much clearer. They're progressive which means they're illiberal.
****
Dumbass Times editor says Pelosi reminds him of Jesus. Dumbass progressives ignorant of religion sure know how to cynically use Jesus for political purposes. Dumbass.
For years it's been well known anti-semitism is second nature to the progressive left.
Yet, somehow 'right-wing conservatives' are now anti-semites? I don't consider neo-Nazis 'far right'. They don't fit on any regular political scale. They're just a hate group.
Really?
Corbyn's Labour and the rampant anti-semitism (increasingly indistinguishable between anti-Israel and anti-Semitism) is not an exception; it's the rule in Western politics.
The BDS movement is rooted in left-wing politics. Academia's anti-Israel stance stems from left-wing professors.
Where in their right minds do they even begin to lie about this in such an open and brazen way?
Find your way to Rubin's moronic article because I ain't linking to it.
Everyone's a Russian asset now to the clowns in the Democrat fold.
****
Speaking of The Washington Post - an organization we owe much to because if it weren't there democracy would die. At least that's what the commercials told us.
I would hold my breath. Morneau works for an arrogant ideologue and is all too willing to play lackey to him since he lacks conviction and principles himself. Ever notice how they never answer questions with any amount of poignancy or honesty? All they do is parrot the company line.
It's patronizing and sickening really. No balls of any kind.
"Members of Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government, which has worked to smooth visa applications for tech workers and has travelled to the Bay Area to seek out funding, have been quick to crow about these successes. “More proof that our innovation & skills plan is working,” tweeted Navdeep Bains, Canada’s minister of innovation, science, and economic development, in the wake of Microsoft’s announcement. “Our govt is creating the right economic conditions to attract investment in Canada.” By removing obstacles that shouldn't never have been put there in the first place. by...the government. How about just letting the market play itself out? We're always 'creating conditions' to attract talent. Here in Quebec, the province constantly does this. Always giving tax incentives to corporations to relocate here. Back in the 1990s and 2000s we attracted big pharma who set up shop all along the Trans-Canada Highway 40 in Montreal. It looked like we were moving and shaking but as I noted then, it was a facade. They weren't here because we were a great place to do business (Quebec's business model is antiquated) but because the government lured them in. What happens when those goodies dry up or market conditions change? That's how you know how a company really views you and guess what? They didn't think much about us as they packed up and left. And the language issue absolutely doesn't help.
Back to Waterloo. Everyone knows Canada needs to shift over to a more technological and knowledge based economy away from resources. However, the way the Liberals are doing it - through questionable environmental policies - is not making it a smooth transition. Arrogant single mindedness through a leader perceived to be unwise is going to cause friction.
We seem to be setting down the right conditions but do we have what it takes to really be pioneers and world leaders? We'll see.
But then we get:
From economic need to the allure of big-name players, there are plenty of signs to suggest that the conditions are in place to realistically make the Toronto-Waterloo corridor a legitimate Silicon Valley rival. But there is one big question to be answered: Is that what we actually want? After all, in San Francisco and San Jose, the highest earners make more than 10.5 times its lowest earners, making it one of the most unequal regions in the U.S. According to Citylab, rents are 227 per cent higher than the national average, while the California Association of Realtors reported in June that the median price of a house in San Francisco was USD$1.6 million.
Maybe. But what's the alternative? You're not going to move forward because of this? Who's to say it would be the same here? There are several other factors and forces at play in California that contribute to those conditions.
One of those being the massive problem of being a one-party state. Hence, all they get are ONE set of laws and ideas that may not actually be beneficial for them.
In Canada, Trudeau commits an actual crime (made crystal clear by the law and its application to what he did) in the SNC-Lavalin scandal (where parties were found guilty and the company fined $250 million) and Canadians, the RCMP and Parliament react by.....doing nothing.
In the United States, no hard evidence was found in the allegations made against Trump on two fronts - the Mueller investigation and the impeachment process), yet House Democrats in Congress nonetheless move to impeach the President based on faulty information, innuendo, hearsay and outright lies.
There seems to be a common thread here. I'll let you determine what that is.
Dunno 'bout you Willis, but Democracy is not well in either country.
Probably fed up of being accused of being a 'have not' province that takes more in equalization payments than it puts in, Quebec is looking to free itself of the Federal transfer payments scheme.
As it stands, Alberta and Ontario are net contributors to the plan.
All I can say is if Quebec wants to get out of it, they're gonna have to change their business model and their unproductive and constant concerns about the English language.
It's one thing to be protective of the native French tongue but quite another when that protection borders on trampling on civil liberties or just plain abuse.
For example, bothering and forcing businesses to change their internal software operations from English into French is not a way to foster a friendly business - and social - environment.
This does little to protect the language and more to show who is the dominant language through coercion.
Think Leon's has to be 'Leon' here. I'm almost certain this has a negative unseen impact on our business climate here.
If Quebec's aim is to show its fiscal and business independence, it starts with loosening up on that front. It's the only jurisdiction on the continent that plays these games. In fact, even Europeans find this practice peculiar and unnecessary.
Indeed, if Leon's threatens a language, then there's something deeper at play here and doesn't say much about the inner-strength and fortitude of the language to survive.
I'm well into my 40s and this is all I've heard all my life and it has grown tiresome as it has irritating.
Change the model and mentality and this becomes a possibility.
It's a good idea. It's about time Quebec stands on its own two feet.
Just to add to my previous post on the Conservative party. Rona Ambrose is being pushed hard by the mainstream conservative press (including The National Post).
As far as being competent and capable goes, sure, why not? She's positioned as a strong conservative woman.
Not the worst candidate.
I mentioned in the post that most of the available candidates are 'RINO' politicians. RINOS are 'Republican in name only' to described 'liberal' conservatives in the GOP.
In Canada, I'm seeing the development of CINO: Conservative in name only.
They're pumping her feminist studies and the fact she marched in a gay pride parade.
Those are just empty actions that have little to do with conservative ideas, values and principles.
Good for her she marched.
But will she defend and promote conservatism?
Not too sure about that.
Conservatism has a home. It's just that it's with Maxime Bernier's People's Party. The Conservative party is clearly trying to desperately pander as a means to get elected as opposed to sticking to its conservative guns.
Other than that, the People's Party really should rebrand and change its name.
It's of little or no surprise to those sharpies who observe politics Andrew Scheer kicked the conservative bucket and resigned.
Fat, drunk and stupid isn't a way to go through life Dean Wormer barked at Flounder. In some twisted variation, one can interpret this in a political context to mean not sticking to your principles and pandering to polls isn't a way to win elections in this day and age.
Scheer is a red tory. Sure he has some social conservative values but he wasn't prepared to stand by them as conservative leader in a time people are starving for real conservative values. It's what I think anyway.
His last move to appoint a Liberal as Deputy Chief (I don't care she came to the conservative party. How can you be a Trudeau liberal and jump to the conservatives and expect voters to think or believe you have principles?) was a most cynical move calculated to pander to Toronto.
I felt at the time it should seal his fate and it did as proper.
Analysts now suggest the next leader should bring the party more to the 'centre' as if it was 'far right'. If anything, the set up at the moment in Canada is three center-left parties (with the the Liberals embracing ideological narratives under Trudeau) and one centre party that claimed to be conservative. You rarely hear such analysts in academia say, the 'liberals should move to the centre' despite their obvious left-wing bent.
As for the crop of candidates expected to take over, none are true conservatives. They're RINOS. Red Tories. Which makes them Liberals of the early 1990s.
There is no conservative party in Canada. The only one is the newly formed People's Party. If Bernier can hold the line, it will be an important party offering an alternative for the conservative diaspora.
Rashida Tlaib - a most despicable individual - idiotically, shamelessly and foolishly blamed white supremacists on Twitter and quickly deleted her Tweet when the facts came out.
I would ask people, when the time comes, to reconsider voting for her in the future. She's exactly what America doesn't need.
The Black Hebrew Israelites, recall, are the hate group who shouted vile and racist things at the Convington boys - white and Catholic is not a way to go through life among the progressive left-wing media and they made sure to spin the narrative accordingly.
The New York Times, the paper of record who never missed a chance to praise degenerates, as per Frontpage Mag called them"sidewalk ministers" who practice "tough love and who"quoted Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center (the racist hate group who Chick-fil-A inexplicably donated to thanks to their new fundraiser car) who described them as victims of racism and claimed that they were non-violent.
They all deserve one another in their all their inglorious anti-humanism.
Yet. Despite this heinous crime, my wife came home and hadn't heard about it. This was telling. After all, whenever there's a shooting the media doesn't miss its chance to sensationalize it. The bodies are barely covered before Democrats scream for gun control or mocking the Second Amendment.
When she heard about it through me, it finally hit her how the media operates. She will no longer do what people always did. Instinctually put the channel on mainstream broadcast news.
Because it's not news. It's narratives, lies and propaganda. They present a distorted view on reality.
To any astute person, at this point, it's obvious.
They present a story as if the nation is divided under Trump. It's not true at all.
It's not Trump the problem.
These people use him to hide their own hate.
They are, as Dante once said, sowers of discord.
It gives them pleasure.
*****
After the missed chance at taking out the vulnerable Liberal party under Justin in the last election, Scheer's leadership was rightly brought into question.
He didn't resign and promised to do better. No sooner he made this statement, his first order of business showed he lost the plot when he bafflingly named a former Liberal elected under Trudeau's banner and was essentially an outsider as Deputy Chief.
With that appointment he signalled he was not going to lead according to conservative principles but to pander to the Canadian version of 'RINO' in the party and to the voters in Toronto.
He learned nothing. Canadians want a principled alternative to the ideological arrogance and foolishness of the Liberals.
The Conservatives failed miserably when they didn't nominate Maxime Bernier.
Time announced their Person of the Year and it's Greta Thunberg.
A know-nothing with some mental disorders who seems to think scolding and scaring people is the way to get 'action' on climate.
My thoughts on climate change movement is one that has evolved into a belief that it's part of a wider and larger problematic issue in the progressive universe.
Climate change is really just population control (a real, coordinated genocide perpetuated mostly against poor women) and system change by other means.
No right minded, level headed and informed person could possibly think banning straws, instituting inefficient carbon taxes, electric cars, renewables and other dubious plans can ever effect climate.
It's preposterous and irrational.
But this isn't a rational movement at this point.
In a previous point on charity I noted the left are big on rhetoric. Greta is the same but for climate.
Now. Before I go on. A word on people who think criticizing Greta is an 'attack on a chid'.
By what intellectual framework ('she's a child trying to do well' doesn't immune someone from scrutiny and is therefore not a framework) compels one to conclude such folly?
Right. There isn't one.
It's just an appeal to emotion and authority. In this case the emotion is 'she's a child and 'how dare you' is the appeal to an authority figure.
In this case, a 16 year-old.
Hope I got you thinking a little here.
One can criticize and even mock Greta because she chose to enter the public realm. She's demanding all sorts of dubious policies that could have serious repercussions to the economies that in some cases can be permanent.
Based on unsound science.
Not settled science as there is no such thing (anymore there is 'hate speech).
Unsound science based on easily refutable data.
Never mind that the prognostication record (including tying population control to climate change) is abysmally and frighteningly incorrect and poor.
****
Moreover, notice the rhetoric. The 'time has come!' and 'there can be no debate!' and 'the time for actions is now!'' and 'how dare you!' and 'denier' and so on. These aren't arguments. Their empty platitudes meant to scare a population into place to buy propaganda.
In politics, Democrats have taken to 'civilization can't risk another Trump term!'
My advice is whenever you see such hysterics, be skeptical. And be concerned.
One could even extend proper criticism to Greta's parents. Personally, I see a frightened girl who could use some help with her conditions. Feeding and enabling her fears is just about the worst thing you can do to a person afflicted with her conditions.
So here we are. Having learned absolutely sweet fuck all from history. This is a publication that made Hitler 'Person of the Year' and I'm sure Greta's nod will age just as well. Just like how the Nobel committee gave Arafat a peace prize despite his use of kids as human shields in war and to even protect him and his calculated pay to nix the 1993 Oslo Accords. He didn't want peace but naive Swedes bought his ruse just like they swooned over Obama handing him a peace prize prematurely. He then proceeded to become one of the most military engaged Presidents ever.
I've read that Time's POY isn't necessarily meant to be anything more than someone who is noteworthy.
Maybe. But you can't tell me there aren't more noteworthy people. If we had our noggins and intellectual compass properly calibrated, a personalize Greta is ignored. People would conclude that using kids for political purposes is wrong and can even be argued to be psychological abuse of children.
If we really did care about such things (in this case the environment), we'd hear more about Boyan Slat. A man who at 23 invented a system to rid the oceans of plastic - without scolding or calling for the destruction of Western economies like AOC's maniacal GND that could erase as much as $2.3 trillion in companies value.
Makes you wonder what exactly is the end game no?
In any event, he's actually contributing to humanity. Slat is a net benefit to humans and earth.
Al Gore and Greta, despite their fame and notoriety, have done little but profit of a fear mongering cottage industry.
Another strength of the left is to make use of pawns so long as the ends are justified.
Ironies and hypocrisy abounds. The story of humanity. The only thing that differs is how we process it.
I'm of the opinion the modern progressive left is really a manic compulsion to control ruled by narcissist nihilists.
Time and again just when I think they can't find more demons to slay on their path of pointless destruction they take dead aim at The Salvation Army.
Of course they do. The base root of TSA is Protestant and that's part of Christianity.
Imagine being so broken inside that you call for the boycott of TSA because they don't share your personal ideological views.
Imagine being so breathtakingly arrogant and overdosed on self-esteem you fail to see the big picture of the good works TSA does.
“”We serve more than 23 million individuals a year, including those in the LGBTQ+ community,” The Salvation Army said. “In fact, we believe we are the largest provider of poverty relief to the LGBTQ+ population. When misinformation is perpetuated without fact, our ability to serve those in need, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or any other factor, is at risk.””
In Christian thought, action is what matters. To progressives, rhetoric and virtue-signalling prevails over action. Which is why the people doing the complaining probably never lifted a single finger to help people in need. It's much easier to off load that responsibility onto the State. But it's no enough for them.
They have to go for the jugular and go after Christian organizations.
These people are awful.
To that end, TSA is not a shitty social activist. They're not into law fare nor do they engage in political advocacy like so many faux-virtuous left-wing organizations.
Their sole existence is to serve people under the authority of God.
This is a natural part of their defunct intellectual outlook on humanism. Charity is firmly entrenched in personal fortitude and Christian ideals. Free people give freely to those in need and Christian organizations and Churches have always been leaders in this capacity. Progressivism (including communism and socialism) have a viscera hate of Christianity so it's natural they will attack it as 'charity' ought only come from the coercive benevolence of the state.
Christian charity challenges their understanding of how to help their fellow man.
To me, nothing reveals how sinister the Progressive cult is more than its disdain for the Salvation Army and Christianity.
Ironically, it's naked religious zealotry. How's that for projection on their part?
Above all, I'm most troubled by the lack of concern over this. It's hardly news in the fake media and quite frankly I'm not even certain people are paying close enough attention about the wider issue at play here. For example, Chick-fil-A (a staunch Christian organization has slowly been falling prey to the progressive virus) shocked people when it decided it was no longer giving to the Salvation Army and other Christian groups. As if this wasn't bad enough, it's been discovered the person making these decisions (Rodney Bullard) not only was a Hilary and Obama supporter (not exactly defenders of Christian ideals) turned around and then handed money to the loathsome, race-hustling, smearing outfit called the Southern Poverty Law Center.
SPLC divides people. A true hate group who lists pro-life organizations as 'hate groups' is a hate group in my opinion. The Salvation Army HELPS them regardless of race, creed, gender and so on.
Look at it this way, would people be more pissed about such actions if it were Christians boycotting a non-profit that served the poor, because they supported gay marriage. I think we know the answer to that.
We'll never know because no good Christian would likely boycott a non-profit that provides salvation to the poor and if they did they would be rightly scolded and scorned by their fellow Christians.
As a friend once said to me:
"As I have said for years, the left destroys everything it touches: music, art, Christianity, Judaism, economies, universities, high schools, late-night comedy, pro football, women's likelihood of finding happiness, men's likelihood of maturing, the Boy Scouts and the innocence of children (think "Drag Queen Story Hour" for 5-year-olds at libraries), to cite some of the more obvious examples."
This is a country the WokeNBA does business with. Every day we're reminded about how much of a faux-virtuous racket that league is. Gee, wonder what Kerr, Popovich, Harden and Lebron think about this. After all, they feed it with their consent.
Notice how Justin has no qualms about going after Trump like a coward all the while cozying up with China and Saudi Arabia. To be perfectly honest, I'm increasingly growing uncomfortable just writing about my dislike and disdain for the Liberal party under Justin. That's how much I don't trust him or his minions.
He's a bad leader. Full stop.
I fear he's putting this country on a terrible path where freedom of speech is concerned.
A history buff, I naturally have an interest in going to visit China.
But know what?
I'm good. I can just read about it. Where I can I will avoid giving that communist state money.
I sure as hell will never pay attention to the NBA again.
Anyone who has read history and the history of science in particular, knows how preposterously absurd the phrase 'settled science' and '97% consensus' are.
It's not settled. Never was. It's an age old bit of anti-human propaganda this climate system change cult.
The day they started using Salem witch hunt language - Denier! - and called for the imprisonment of 'skeptics', was the day they let their eco-obsessed totalitarian masks slip.
It's worth noting that whenever a new cause emerges (plastic bans including straws - I'm noticing eggs are no longer sold in clean plastic anymore but back to the old style card board paper we used to see when I was a kid. They didn't even bother to try and offer an innovative alternative. They just went back to a material we moved away from), non-Western countries are usually the culprit and form the basis of policy here in the West.
How is this logical? How does our initiatives remotely solve anything if it won't affect the areas that commit most of the environmental damage?
How does preventing us from using plastic straws solve the issue in China or India?
It doesn't.
It's a feel good measure backed up by specious science. Nothing more, nothing less.
So much intellectual energy is being spent imprudent and inefficiently.
Now I'm seeing TedTalks from environmental idealists who have had epiphanies on how renewable aren't the answer and that nuclear energy is severely misunderstood. Basically, we had to wait for people like him to come around and realize what has been said all along. People and animals have died in the meant time.
If we're serious about the environment, then nuclear is the best option. Solar and wind turbines come with way too many unreliable complications and unintended consequences.
Soon, as the push for electric cars potentially leads to government mandating how we get around, we'll be getting 'are EV's good for the environment' articles.
I was told the technology is there but don't have the will to see it through. This is simply not true. We still don't have the technology and haven't considered at all the environmental impact of producing an EV on the front end and what to do with dead batteries on the back end.
The EU, foolishly, is forcing unrealistic emission targets on manufactures by 2030 in what can only be a way to force everyone onto EVs. Where is all this electricity going to come from?
There are more questions about EVs than answers and forcing it 'because we must do something' is not an answer.
Quick word on Tesla's unveiling of an electric truck. I must say, aside from it being a bit of a joke since it's not even on a real truck frame, the arrogance of this company is quite palpable. They've not mastered the art of producing a car but are now entering the realm of trucks which demands its own set of engineering completely different from cars?
It has also brought angst to children as one appeal to authority to an appeal to emotion further angers them. It's almost as if elevating anxiety levels in kids is by design in order to propagate an agenda.
Don't take it from us. Listen to the children!
Greta is a little more shrewd though having amended this to 'don't listen to me, I want you to listen to the science'.
In short, we're forming public policy around bad science.
*****
Man saves woman: Should he have asked for consent?
Man saves woman: Rampant toxic masculinity.
Man saves woman: Who says she couldn't save herself?
Man saves woman: The problem with presumptuous men.
Man saves woman: Example of the patriarchy. It must end.
Man saves woman: Noble act or sexual harassment?
Man saves woman: Time to fix the 'Gender Save' gap.
Man saves woman: Inequality by other means.
Man saves woman: Quaint residue of a time long gone. Keep it that way.
Man saves woman: The 1950s called. They want their male arrogance back.
Man saves woman: Why venerate? It's payback for thousands of years of oppression.
Man saves woman: Vomit.
Man saves woman: The problem with praising men who save.
Man saves woman: Exception rather than the rule.
Man saves woman.: One man's heroic act can't eliminate decades of misogyny.
Man saves woman: Would he save a transgender?
Ok. Enough of that.
****
Follow @BernieSanders
More
Don't let anyone tell you that we "can't afford" to make colleges tuition-free or cancel all student debt.
You think they're not serious about 'abolishing billionaires'? They (communists - and that's exactly what Grandpa Gulag is) already did it when they starved the Kulaks to death in Ukraine under Stalin.
I don't think these systems are all that compassionate.
****
Face of evil: Reinert T. Ravenholt.
If you're a climate change believe, then you like think population control is needed which in turn means you think abortion is not only a 'woman's right to choose' but an effective tool in combatting population control not just in the West but in developing countries.
Congrats. You're anti-human and support men who commit real acts of genocide.
Elizabeth 'Meme Pum' Warren is gonna fuck shit up in America real good.
Oh. And she's full of shit. Funny how her lies get glossed over by the DNC flock.
Elizabeth Warren pretending to be Native to further her career: Not cultural appropriation.
Poor sucker dresses up in a Chinese dress for prom: Totes cultural appropriation and marked for attack by the left-wing outrage mob.
****
You may have noticed the 'Epstein didn't kill himself' meme going around.
And you may have heard a ABC (or was it CBS? Who cares? All the same Democrat network anyway) reporter express frustration with how his death has been handled by the press. Which, in case you haven't noticed, very tepidly.
"In their telling of the story, they are brave souls, the lone purveyors of truth, and the only things standing between ORANGE MAN BAD and the utter demise of the Republic.
In reality, it turns out that they're just a bunch of depraved sexual predator and pervert protectors."
They are the enemy of the people. I haven't been impressed at all since 2016.
****
I also noticed whenever Project Veritas gets people to admit in their owns words whatever it's investigating (ie Planned Parenthood moving baby parts like moonshine on Copperhead Road), the left screams 'out of context!' and 'not real journalism!'
It's quite a claim since, you know, the entire inquisitions on Trump and Kavanaugh are but a gigantic clusterfuck of hearsay, lies and facts pulled completely out of context. Their whole shtick is 'out of context'.
'Sure honey. Read up on Oberlin's President Twillie Anbar."
"Oh."
"Daddy, I'm doing a project on how people should shut the fuck up after they lose a case lest they beclown themselves leaving the impression they're deceptive racial hustling cynics with a bad case of cognitive dissonance."
"Sure honey. Read up on...."
"...Olberlin's President Twillie Anbar."
****
Two reasons to hate the NBA.
1) The insufferable wokeness and hypocrisy. Duh.
2) Players taking ''me' days off.
****
Those fundamentalist Americans killed in Mexico had it coming.
Could you imagine this happening to Michelle Obama? People would scream leave her alone! What does she have to do with Barry's policies! No guilt by association!
But totes ok with Melania that whore.
****
But Trump is soooo unpresidential and says mean things.
Truth is, the only difference between leaders is those who hide it better and those who couldn't care less.
****
Watch for: A) How the media manipulates, misrepresents and lies outright. Enemies of the people and B) What kind of a low character, manipulative, liar Debbie Wasserman Schultz is. She makes my skin crawl she's such a liar. And she knows it.
How anyone can accept Democrats engaging in defamatory rhetoric calling people 'white supremacists' with no evidence is beyond me.
Isn't it cute who these cunts engage in racist rhetoric and then when called out on it always cower like cowards?
It's always worth pushing back on: Left-wing parties house and harbour racists better than anyone. And in order to deflect from this, they just project onto conservatives about their alleged racism.
It's really not that hard to see the game here.
Let's play another variant of it.
'Bernie Sanders is not a communist!"
Bernie Sanders literally praised communism and literally was a member of communist parties.
'Yeh but he's a Democratic Socialist. Nyeh, nyeh! Shows you!"
Bernie Sanders literally calls for collectivizing of the U.S. economy and society.
Another year, another bad rendition of 'Baby it's cold outside'.
It's kinda interesting that in the entire catalogue of classic standards this is the one the woke-left have a bone to pick with.
Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Jr....be afraid. Be very afraid the woke-warriors may be coming for your songs.
Why they feel the need to rework beloved and cherished songs that have stood the test of time is strange. It reveals more about their own narcissism than it does any 'bad' messages sent from any one song.
If someone has a problem with the Sistine Chapel (and I'm sure that's coming at this point), do they get to repaint it?
If they don't like a particular piece of pop art, they can just write their response to it.
When the political High Noon was made, John Wayne wanted to rebut the film's message and responded not by reworking the script but making his own movie outright called Rio Bravo.
In comics, SJW have attempted to insert identity politics into the genre by aiming to appropriate iconic superheroes demanding they be (insert victim group of choice here). If their message is so important, why not invent their own characters? That way they can weave their narrative into the story lines. I know it's been done and the results have been flat out flops, which I suppose, is why they need to not make Bruce Wayne a male billionaire or to try and turn Peter Parker gay.
This year John Legend and Kelly Clarkson decided to leave their mark on the song. And it's, well, a forgettable and charmless one.
Dare I say, I prefer the version sung by Buddy and Jovie in Elf.
In this version, as with any version 'updating for social norms' (could you imagine these people rewriting the First Amendment?), removes all sense of romanticism and places it squarely on a contractual deal of concrete consent. It takes the an un-literal song and makes it literal. Literally boring.
To wit:
'Baby, it's cold outside'. 'Oh, ok. I''ll call you an Uber.'
Way to go there Rudolph Valentino.
**********
Marked for SJW reworking!
**********
That was a good listen, no? Anyway. Back the nonsense.
All they did was take the composition and added their own incoherent lyrics completely destroying the entire premise. That is, a couple who are in love but constrained by social norms of their time. The charge it's cold outside is really just a timeless and playful flirtatious and coy game of cat and mouse. The woman clearly wants to stay and is hoping the man convinces her to stay; to comfort her no matter what others think.
It's complex and simple at the same time and one millions of people can instantly connect to.
This reworked version completely removes romantic nuance and transfers into sexualized singing.
They have to sing it this way because they erased any hint of subtle romance in the lyrics. It's like in the movies. Where once sex was left to the imagination of the viewer. There was no need to see Barbara Stanwyck in the sack naked doing a soft porn scene. Her nuanced movements and mannerisms were all what was needed. The rest was left to the viewer to contemplate.
I won't even bother getting into the mixing of a nice gesture with really amounts to an emasculated man letting a woman down. 'I'm not sure I should stay'. 'OK! I'll call your mother and tell her you're on your way!'
Dude doesn't even offer to drive her home?!?
I remember when I used to watch American Idol - where Clarkson was discovered to a grateful musical industry since she really is a splendid singer - and coaches or invited guests would tell contestants 'you have to make the original better; you have to make it your own'.
Legend and Clarkson broke this axiom when covering landmark; let alone popular songs. They didn't make it better and they didn't make it their own because they let the zeitgeist dictate its spirit.
Someone in the comments pointed out the rise of socialist Bolivia. Yeah well, when you so poor and GDP is that low, there's only one way to go and that's up. Wait until it reaches a point where there's actual wealth and get back to us. Only then will the rapaciousness of socialism rear its ugly head.
What do I mean when I keep saying "Communism by other means"?
Well, what's going on in education in New York is a great example. Nothing short of breathtaking in its stupidity. These folks operate from a single premise. White people and capitalism are the source of all that's wrong. Math is, for some reason, seen as 'white' and so they design an entire curriculum from that conclusion.
This is the ideals of Rousseau mixed in with Marx and Lenin.
You must believe.
Like I say many times are on this blog: We're in a dark age.
It's not only bound to fail; but fail spectacularly.
And no one will care one shit about the kids who will be harmed by this gross miseducation of students. ****
I'd take these people at face value. If they know where the guns are.
Watch out.
**** Mastercard: Inclusion through exclusion. Got it.
30%? Yeh. Hm. Sounds like a lot....until "of individuals whose name on their...cards doesn’t correspond to their true gender identity. " This is a good example of how numbers and percentages are manipulated to form a narrative. That's 30% of the transgender population which already stands around half a percent to begin with. And then factor in how many own a Mastercard. So what we're confronted with here is not '30%' of the population (c. 330 million) of the United States - which the way they framed it makes it sound like 10 million people - is actually thousands of people if you're lucky and even less than that because not everyone has a MC. So maybe we have, what, 100 or so people?
Bah. Maybe MC is simply cynically scoring cheap woke points here. No security or financial risk with so few people perhaps?
Problem is, the can of words they may open is much larger. The number of 'Jessica Yaniv' types ready to pounce and exploit this is larger than transgenders allegedly discriminated against.
