Canada Needs To Repeal Bill C-16

Bill C-16 is an abomination.

It's a direct attack to everything Canadians are supposed to hold true and dear to them on matters of free speech and liberty.

Innocent and law abiding citizens have suddenly become potential criminals if they misuse a gender pronoun under the utterly vague "extreme speech' tag.  I've read it claimed that the law doesn't do this but it absolutely can lead to it.

Here's an explanation. After reading it you ask yourself why in the world would you open this can of worms?

And it came from the hollow minds of the Liberal party engaged in a death embrace with identity politics.

Here are the list of Liberal Senators who have abdicated their duty to defend all CANADIANS  as Senators.

I for one will do my part to bring to light this disgrace that has been brought upon this country. The last thing I want happen here is what we see in the United Kingdom. A place that is in full free speech lock down mode.

The Liberals need to be kicked out. Decimated even for having tabled not only a law totalitarian at its roots (and for having lied about it. The Minister of Justice claimed it would not compel speech) but for its blatant anti-scientific stance.

The government's position of claiming to be on the side of 'settled science' with an unsettled issue like climate change is untenable with asserting there are not two genders but several thus defying basic and undeniable biology.

They criminalized speech for less than 1% of the population.

How are they, then, any different from, say, Creationists?

Hint: They're not. They're cut from the same cloth. Same, unscientific cloth.

It's madness and can come but from a Justin Trudeau led government.

In 2019 Canadians need to boot the bastards out AND repeal C-16 lest we begin to see a purge rooted in the rotted and despicable game of identity politics. 


Don't Let Social Justice Quackery Ruin STEM: The Case Of Alessandro Strumia

I don't possess a scientific or engineering mind but I do possess a strong ability to critically read and assess (sometimes) complex issues and convey them in simple terms.

The case of Alessandro Sturmia is a frightening one and not without chilling similarity to James Damore.

Both were condemned by a witch crew possessed by their own self-righteous gibberish. I get the sense there are academics who have succumbed to Stockholm Syndrome when it comes to feminist social justice in academia.

It all points and proves the point even very smart people can believe stupid things.

What more, they will also employ logical fallacies to defend their positions.

One doctor friend argued to me regarding free speech: You free speech ends at my offence.

I was stunned that a brilliant and well-read mind could be so superficial and flippant on matters of free speech and expression.

We take free speech so much for granted we treat it with lazy contempt.

Whenever a baseball player - pitcher or hitter - is struggling we usually hear them say, 'We need to get back to the fundamentals. Keep it simple.'

It sounds like we need to get back to the fundamentals with free speech.

We're not taking it serious enough and as we see in the case of the despicable and odious Bill C-16 (how this got passed is a black mark on the Canadian political conscience), we've already crossed the Rubicon where government is now in the business of regulating speech.

Worse, they took the most basic and irrefutable of biological scientific discovery - that there are two genders - and turned into a weapon for identity politics. Ironically, the party that screams 'settled science' and pimps out (often dubious) scientific facts about climate change has decided to ignore the science of biology where matters of gender is concerned.

This folks is how civilizations whither and Trudeau and Liberals have contributed their part.

Bill C-16 must be repealed. But it won't. Unfortunately, many good and free thinking people will call prey and victim to its evil tentacles.

We've criminalized speech (a cherished value we've fought for centuries to achieve) for less than 1% of the population in a cynical plot to gain votes.

It's grotesque on so many levels. Alas, this is not the point of this post.

The battle for truth is playing itself out in academia but it may soon spill over into the society at large. Indeed, we already see its corrosive effect in CEO's like Tim Cook of Apple and as well as at tech giants like Google.

Why is tech and science so vulnerable to such a thoroughly totalitarian movement?

CERN was the latest to throw itself into the realm of social justice madness.

I learned in the following video of a group called 'Particles for Justice.' At some point, I felt I was just reading some nonsense from The Guardian or Salon and some resident 'science' writer babbling on about gaps or some other oppressed injustice.

Reading through it I couldn't believe the utter lack of self-awareness and breaking of logical rules present. Of course, what's a good crack down without the reliable ad hominen attack? And boy do they do a job on Strumia. In fact, so silly and immature it was, it felt like projection to me.

The thing that really pissed me off, and this is always the case whenever professors or academics sign these stupid things, is they didn't even bother to mount a proper rebuttal. I think their calcified stagnant mind set is well exposed by their own words:

"As particle physicists, we are appalled by Strumia’s actions and his stated views on women in high energy physics.

We write here first to state, in the strongest possible terms, that the humanity of any person, regardless of ascribed identities such as race, ethnicity, gender identity, religion, disability, gender presentation, or sexual identity is not up for debate."

Not. Up. For. Debate. As in 'settled science'?

Now that's appalling.

That and their faux-righteous outrage.

Progressives, I'm sure you've heard or observed, destroy things in its path.

Don't let this degenerate strain of progressivism into the STEM blood stream.

If you think quackery reigns in the areas infected (e.g. sports, politics, humanities and economics) by progressivism is bad, wait until virus spreads further into science and technology.

In short, and to the point if I may, Stumia (like Damore) is right:

It's all fucken lies and bull shit.

Whatever he does, he mustn't apologize. That's blood to them. See Roseanne and several other examples. Look at what they did to Norm MacDonald (who I hope one day gets his revenge). They see this, like communists, as weakness and they will exploit it. They will destroy a life and lift the carcass up like a trophy to claim a hollow victory.

As the blood drips from their lips.

Derp Plus

NPR being NPR.

I don't know why the left insist on treating Che Guevara with such careful respect.

They farthest they will go to describe this despicable human being is he was 'misunderstood', and that his actions were 'cruel' and that he was 'bloodthirsty.'

They forgot racist, degenerate, murderous, asshole.

He was a violent piece of shit. That would have been the extent I'd give him. But you can't maintain a romantic mythology that way with built-in narratives.

And he was from a  wealthy Argentine family which was not mentioned.


Two things I've never heard in the media about the caravan storming and causing trouble at the border (which they reluctantly had to acknowledge). One, how to Americans of Mexican heritage who came lawfully to America feel about migrants looking to to so illegally (hint: They don't like it) and two how do Mexicans in Mexico feel about them (hint: They don't like it).

Back to your anti-Tump tirades.

You never cared when the Obama administration employed the same tactics the border (that is, using tear gas) so why do you care now?

That was different! Obama did it with love, class and grace!

Don't storm the border like a bunch of Gaza Arabs and you won't get gassed. Americans don't do these for kicks.

Be glad it was tear gas. It's the most effective way to disperse a crowd without killing them.


Big Hockey at play.

"A college in Michigan thinks the best way for students and professors to defend themselves in the event of a mass shooting might be to throw hockey pucks at the gunman.
To that end, Oakland University's faculty union purchased 800 pucks for professors and 1,700 for students, according to NPR. Oakland Police Chief Mark Gordon described the hockey pucks as a "spur-of-the-moment idea that seemed to have some merit to it."
I swear these people.

The stupid.

It's horrific.

Derp Me Again!

"Mommy, what does corruption look like?"

"Here ya go. Now it your cauliflower:"

"...Any street furniture has to first be approved by the Los Angeles City Council. After that, a single bus bench travels through an extensive permitting process, requiring approval from the Department of Public Works, as well as eight — eight! — other city agencies including the Department of City Planning, the Bureau of Engineering, the Los Angeles Police Department and the Bureau of Street Lighting. Nearby property owners also have a say."


The best way to mock the insidious and absurd behaviour on the left is to mock them.

The Babylon Bee has some gems here (about Obama's hubris and utter lack of decorum), here (about Cortez's abject ignorance on civics. Congrats NYC. Good job), here (Twitter's preposterous position on kicking conservatives and other people who don't toe the progressive line off their totalitarian website. Did I mention Jack Dorsey is a illiterate punk with money and too much power to go along with his ignorance?) and here (about the economic migrants violently crashing the U.S. border).


From Prager U (as pointed here before in one of my posts I'm too lazy to link to (if I could even find it):

Did you know?

In 2006, then-Senator @HillaryClinton voted for a fence on the Mexican border. 

So did Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, and 23 Senate Democrats.

So what changed?

For Democrats, illegal immigration is now all about political power.

Oh, Prager U, you. Democrats evolve!


This is exactly how we decode Democrats and progressives when they say absurd and unprincipled things:

Benny Retweeted Harlan Z. Hill
Let me explain what is happening here: 

One of @HillaryClinton’s most trusted advisors and top staffer for decades - Philippe Reines - is wandering Fox News HQ with no pants on, screaming at Trump campaign spokespeople. 

2016 really broke people.


Chalk this one up to 'duh. It's okay when we do it!'

Tim Young:

Tear gas usage at the border by year (because border patrol keeps records):
2012: 26 times
2013: 27 times
2014: 15 times 
2015: 8 times 
2016: 3 times
2017: 18 times

Why is 2018 the only time the media has freaked out about it? 

Remember folks. The Washington Post is ours intellectual betters making sure Pinocchios are out there - whatever. It makes no sense but you get the drift.

Medieval Times has a queen for the first time, but the show is still stuck in the Dark Ages https://wapo.st/2E1pVnz

I got nothing.

No more movies about the Roman empire stuck in Ancient Rome!


The latest climate assessment?


All bull shit.



It is claimed the Republican party has become more extreme over the years. But I've seen little evidence of this. What I do point out here is the Democrats (and the Liberals in Canada) have been pulling more and more to the left.

So, it's another case of projection at play here.

Conservatives (and Libertarians) have been pretty much consistent with their message in the last 25 years - if not more.

From The Economist:


Delicious, Exquisite Derp

Let's play false equivalence with ThinkProgress!

Romaine lettuce is too dangerous to be in stores, but guns are still available 24 hours per day bit.ly/2PPZE1z


They did say this.

ThinkProgress is considered 'intellectual' on the left folks.


Which reminded me of the wonderful Spurious Correlations site.


Ok. So now Democrats are saying exactly what normal sane people have saying all along?

We've just been warning mass economic migration was a major problem for Europe for a couple of years. And how did the media and the left react? By chastising and belittling the people who said it.

By constantly badgering and calling them racists and 'extremists'.

They all did it. Democrats, progressives, Liberals, Labour - you name it. They all held a despicable contempt for the people and their concerns. The swatted down their worries, dismissed their calls for action. Worse, they began to crack down on people venting on social media with censorship.

Populism must be crushed because it's scary, m'kay?! Every second article, speech and comment was to that effect.

You even had Merkel say countries must cede their sovereignty in order to embrace mass immigration. That's how derelict their obsession over it became.

That's all John Kerry's side. Trudeau. Freeland, Hillary.

They made clear they have no love for the masses.

And now they switch?

Gee, I wonder fucken why.

What we know of the left is they have no principles. They're governed by the need for pure power.

So they probably see their stance on immigration is a loser one (and that's just one of many) and decided 'we change our mind! But we're different about it!'

What a bunch of disingenuous clowns.

Now they're gonna claim they were 'always for' it.


That's how shameless they are.

And Kerry. Lose the shirt.


Where does all this ignorance come from?

ThinkProgress, Yglesias, Ocasio-Cortez...all sell ideas that are beyond belief in their ignorance. Here's one I came across.

How self-assured can an ill-informed and illiterate be? Social media sure gives them a platform to scream their ignorance.

What is the source of this intellectual degeneracy?

Don't look to the professors either (go look up Copelovitchs bio). Recall one guy who looked at the popular vote for the Senate and was outraged it calculated into more seats for the GOP despite not having won the popular vote (picture the popular vote as runs scored in a seven game series and seats as actual wins)...

Yet, when the reverse happened when their guy was in power in 2010....no outrage.

Like I said. They're not driven by principles.

They're driven by ideological nonsense.


Remember when that jerk off Jim Acosta challenged the President about the caravan not being an invasion?

What amazes me about this is, if he's a journalist (and I use the term lightly) he had to have know the caravan was an actual thing. So him saying it wasn't an invasion (invasions don't have to be armed) was remarkable in its disingenuousness.

Now the caravan arrived, and as correctly and constantly reported on 'right-wing' sites, it was filled with male economic migrants and they did indeed resort to violence.

Yeh. America totes needs those losers.

Send them back.


Background checks don't work in California. 


The Governor-General in Canada pretty much concluded these things don't work.

But they sure cost a lot of money and give people an illusion of irrational security.

Money well spent!


And before you get all excited about what border agents with their security threatened did to protect the border, consider what Obama (correctly) did.

You must be wondering whaaaa? Back to back links to Breitbart and The American Thinker?


Because conservative publications have been on the ball and correct every step of the way on immigration and even trade.

While the other side just reacts with hysteria because Trump.

It makes for boring reading and not very informative.


Vogue's Ridiculous Hatred Of Melania

Trust me, if Melania Trump were married to a Democrat - especially the last guy in power - they'd be gushing all googly eyed over her.

Obviously. She's beautiful

This much is truth.

And we all know it.

She'd be on Ellen. And The View. She'd be the darling of the vapid talk show circuit. And gracing covers of Cosmopolitan and other superficial magazines.

After all, she's a natural beauty. A true model in every sense of the word.


Poor woman is married to Donald Trump.

So they hate her.

They hate her enough to treat her like a whore.

Where they vastly over rated and over hyped Michell Obama, they project their own inner ugliness onto hating on Melania.

It's so obvious.

Think of it. Here's a swim wear model of natural beauty, and she hasn't graced the cover of these magazines.

Hate and envy eats you up inside.

It's not that she has the looks. She's rather classy and holds herself well. She also has a brain to go with it. She's thoughtful. Insightful. Intelligent.

She doesn't pretend to be something she isn't (Michelle as dietician for example) or exude any hatred for the country her husband presides over (I'm sure she's not "proud for the first time" of her country as Michelle once said).

Alas, the media has decided they hate Trump they're going to abandon any sense of decency and just stick it to the wife to.

And here we see they may be good at talking about exterior beauty.


On the inside they're ugly. That's not something you'll see behind the sycophancy and superficiality of their ways.


Caravan Arrives And Attempts Illegal Invasion Of The United States

"What problem? Do you see a problem? I don't see a problem. Let them in!" Open borders proponent.


Well, one thing we now know as fact.

One, the caravan of migrants from Central America is real, and two they did attempt to enter illegally - violently if necessary.

Remember when CNN, that punk Jim Acosta, and other broadcasters either downplayed this coming problem, mocked Trump for understanding what was about to happen when he mobilized the National Guard at the borders, or flat out claimed it was all a myth created by the right-wing media?

And when they did, it was all the 'but they're helpless women and children' narrative. Like they did in Europe.

The problem with that angle is, to me, it's immoral and irresponsible. Immoral because you're egging on people to break laws damn the consequences. Irresponsible to the citizens of countries.

I don't know what it will take for people to stop watching such media outlets.

Investigative journalists have reported the caravan. The truth was out there. You know CNN is complete and utter garbage when The Daily Mail is able to report with such in-depth coverage what transpired. 

They lie to your face. Not only did they never once speak of the illegal aspect of all this threatening the sanctity of American immigration laws (which is a straight out insult to immigrants who arrived illegally and respecting the rules and laws of the land) are willing to sacrifice a nation's national security in order to 'resist' Donald Trump.

The clashes at the American border are stuff we see in third-world shit holes. Guess what? Come from a third world shit hole, don't act like you're from a third world shit hole. And these people are acting like they want to maintain their shitty, third-world shit hole mentality.

It's horrible how these parents put their children in harm's way. The sad thing is they were probably lied to by whoever organized the caravan (and I'll keep my personal conspiracy thoughts to myself) that all they needed to do was hit the American border and cross over illegally and America (because they're so rich and nice) would shout, 'Come on in!"

But once border agents showed force, they had to back off and some chose not to. Don't be emotionally manipulated. Border agents are protecting the United States. It was the responsibility of those among the migrants to attempt a peaceful and lawful entry into America. They would have had their time to speak.

Instead, they chose a most ridiculous way to do so.

There's even footage of it as well as pictures of young men with stones in their hands at the ready! I suppose they haven't heard the Gaza Arabs style of engagement isn't exactly productive.

What goes through the mind of such a person that a nation needs to let a person ready to use violence before being a citizen?

The cold hard fact is North America doesn't need cheap labor. And it certainly doesn't need people who use violence to try and get into a country. Becoming a citizen of a nation is not a right. It's a privilege.

Trump and the GOP must not lose their nerve here. They must hold the line. If they don't, they've just encouraged more of this in the future.

Oshawa GM Closing

Another example that Canada doesn't control its own destiny.

That's all. 


And So It Begins

Where are all those staunch defenders of democracy when Harper was Prime Minister? Remember he was an authoritarian who was acting undemocratic and all that hyper-jazz?

Now? Crickets as the Liberals under Trudeau make anything Harper might have done to ruffle up all our self-anointed protectors of democracy.

I remember when the system tried to prevent Elizabeth May from taking part in the political debates. I took the staunch stance she be allowed to participate.

The right decision was made then to allow her and now fair-minded Canadians should also voice their  opinion in permitting Maxime Bernier participate in the debates for the 2019 election.

Alas, the Liberals - those noted champions of democracy. They fucking love democracy so much they'd just as soon crush it to save it - are playing nit-picking games in attempting to thwart that from happening.

We have a Minister for Democratic Institutions.

Think about that for a second. How the potential for all sorts of creepy and nefarious policy to come out of that in the name of 'democracy'.

Bernier should be allowed to get is message out.

And if Trudeau is the real leader he claims to be, he takes it on.


Ben Shapiro Interviews Stephen Harper

*Unedited, one draft post.

Now let's take a look at a leader Canadians chose to not elect to give Trudeau a majority government.

Ben Shapiro interviews Stephen Harper. It's an interesting dialogue. Harper does a good job crystallizing the issue of immigration where he argues it's ludicrous to accept illegal immigration while entertaining the notion that cheap, low-skilled workers - that put a downward economic pressure - are needed in North America, and trade where Trump's assertion China is a closed economy blocking access to its market while the West is open for them and that new trade deals are necessary is a correct one. In each of these cases, the current set up hurts the working poor and middle classes of all races.

I do want to take a brief second to address his perception of libertarianism on both of those subjects.

At around the 12 minute mark he mentions the "libertarian delusion" where they want immigrants (illegal or not) to come in but will not have access to social services. While it's true there are 'open borders' libertarians, the ranks are far from united on this front. After all, they're libertarians. Reason magazine has especially been somewhat perplexing with their stance on illegal immigration which strikes me more as 'anti-Trump' than a logical and realistic stance on immigration. They just claim immigration is good all the time. Period. Which is unfortunate because they are no different than mainstream media outlets who fail to distinguish between legal and illegal immigration. No one is against the former. Not even Trump. The focus is on the LEGAL entry into a country and this has not been addressed enough.

As for the second part of the argument, I've not read this anywhere and the closest to it comes by way again from Reason magazine who posit immigrants use less welfare and social services and allege pay taxes. I find this to be specious myself. 

Same on trade. Reason exhibits the same "zero-sum" posture here as they do with immigration. All trade and immigration is good. True. But there are times where trade and immigration are bad. They completely fail or choose to ignore the possibility of this. In the process, give the impression the grievances against poor trade deals and illegal immigrations are without merit. I feel there's more than enough merit to them. It's neither protectionist or xenophobic to thinks so either.

He also claims libertarian thinking runs contrary to data. Here, he is wrong. I find of conservatives, liberals, socialists/progressives, and libertarians/anarchists, libertarians are not only hyper-aware of data but they digest and interpret them better than most as well maintaining a level of consistency and dedication to their core principles. 

This is what distinguishes libertarians from the others and has kept me involved in their ranks. Problem is, the no compromise on principles tends to not be a good match for politics at large.

Hence, why they either form a enclave within the conservative ranks in Canada and the United States or stand on their own on the fringes of political life.

But their influence and ideas do often make their way into public life and policy making. Where they were probably once more closer akin to liberalism, the libertarian diaspora finds more allies and sympathies from conservatives.

I think Harper under shoots their respect for data and commitment to core principles.

In any event, a great interview. 

What The Hell Are The Liberals Thinking?

I think I've made clear at how much I loathe the Liberals especially under Justin Trudeau.

They're an impossibly arrogant, insufferable bunch with a mean anti-liberty, authoritarian streak in them with a splash of hard core contempt for the people.

I can't stress this enough.

Imagine now what I think with this:

Media sector gets $595-million aid package in Ottawa’s fiscal update; it also proposes a 15% tax credit for those who subscribe to some online media, by … via

In other words, Trudeau is buying/bribing the media in order to control the message.
When this clown said he admired China he not only meant it but wishes to emulate parts of that insular-communist country.
And he has the unmitigated balls to stand and lecture Canadians about democracy?
This is absolutely preposterous and must be blocked. If Canadians allow this to pass the flood gates to true tyranny are now open.
The Liberals aren't liberals in any classical or moderate sense any more. They're just plain authoritarian progressives.
Boot the bastards out in 2019. And I mean, we need to send a message by reducing them to a party of nothing. Force them to reinvent themselves like the Conservatives did.
And give Bernier's The People's Party a shot if you must.
The Liberals absolutely do not deserve a second mandate.


Good, Loyal Workers Victims Of Poor Decisions By Corporations Because Of Social Media

I don't know how often it happens but we've seem a few examples on the Internet of employees immediately losing their jobs (usually without an investigation or due process) because of an incident posted on social media.

On a few occasions, the employees weren't necessarily wrong in the first place and thanks to the very same social media hunting down the facts, the truth prevailed.

It's understandable businesses are sensitive whenever their business attracts bad press but their handling of these incidences are not only over-reactions but unfair on a basic, decent human level.

The irony is in their rush to 'do the right thing' they're hurting good, loyal workers. The first high profile firing happened with the CEO of Mozilla Brendan Eich. There the problem was he had the audacity to donate funds to a group against gay marriage.  So much for freedom.

For a period, his life lay in ruined for merely having an opinion (the wrong with in the eyes of illiberal minds) but has since recovered.

Another dimension is race. Everyone is walking on egg shells in fear of being called a 'racist'. The more the idea 'whypippo' are all racists is pushed the more any incident is immediately perceived to be a racial one, and the more hucksters (hello Al Sharpton!) will take advantage as the latest case with Chipotle showed.

Two things worth considering. Stop apologizing for things you nothing to apologize for. At this point, the apology is a form of fetish for the alleged victim; it's a kind of pleasure-torture watching decent individual grovel for forgiveness. I think they call this 'power dynamics' first brought up by Michel Foucault. A notion left-wing progressives basted in critical theory took and ran with.

The other is stop rushing to judgment and sacrificing employees to the wolves.

It's cowardly and unprofessional.

Companies demand loyalty from their employees but don't seem to stand by them when an incident happens. They're all too willing to cut them out. All is replaceable is the message.

While this is true to some extent, you don't do it for the wrong reasons. Nonetheless, it's not a perception you want for your company.

This is how you lose the 'loyalty' part. It's not a good thing when employees don't feel you don't have their back.

Alas, this isn't exclusive to the social media era. Finding scapegoats that it is. But where people were forced to accept being wronged in the past, today it's not so easy in the age of technology and cameras in one face.

Companies seem confused and challenged as to how to handle the social justice angle to all this. Personally, I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole.

We're witnessing mature companies with established clientele transcending pretty much all class, political and demographic lines to go after a youthful segment to boost sales. Why take action on something that could potentially alienate and lose customers you have? Never mind those like me who shift between brands and need an excuse to not buy your product.

Again, why test loyalty?

The most recent example was Nike and their Kaepernick campaign. This just came off as disingenuous because Nike is an already mature and established brand who just wanted to capitalize on a social justice trend. But was Kap the guy to stake their reputation on?

I don't think he was.

The stock was around $80 at the time. It pulled back from $82 to $79-80 if memory serves me right. Now as I post this, it's down to $72. Sure there are reasons for this, it wouldn't surprise me the Kap campaign is among the reasons why it lost so much ground.

Corprorations are highly protective of their image and for good reason. However, in the age of social media, this protectiveness is giving into paranoia. And when paranoia sets in, sales get hurt.

And the paranoia is seeping into mistreating employees.

It's not the employees who need retraining.

It's companies. Particularly those who seem to be sensitive to SJW causes.


Speaking of social justice fools, Apple CEO Tim Cook chimed in with this gem:

"Exclusive: In an interview with "Axios on HBO," Apple CEO Tim Cook says big tech regulation is "inevitable." "[W]e have to admit when the free market is not working. And it hasn't worked here."

This is the CEO of a major company folks.

No, the free markets are fine.

It's just that you figure it doesn't fit into your narrative.

Funny how Apple benefited from the marvels of the free market all these years and now suddenly a woke CEO comes in and decides na-ah!


What is it with these giant companies almost begging for the government to bust them up?

Cook should step down if he feels this way.


CBC Interviews Mad Max Again; This Time It Was Better

Good overall interview. Much better than with Wendy Mesley who was out for blood (she behaved a little better with the head of Ontario Proud). In fact, full props to Bernier for giving the CBC another shot. They definitely won't be doing him any favours but the CBC does have a large audience. Ditto to the interviewer for not sabotaging it. She kept herself and her views in check (ie on the topics of feminism and climate change) allow to maintain and conduct a professional interaction.

Those are all too rare these days. Wow. Two decent interviews with Peterson and Bernier with two progressive women! There's hope after all! Kidding aside, it's all we white guys who cherish logic and reason ask.

My thoughts.

Feminism and climate change are the two elephants in the room by which the media uses as standards to determine how woke a person or political candidate are. While the population at large probably doesn't put too much emphasis into them (particularly feminism. Especially the extreme version of it. You know, the ones who are always out there screaming about pay equity, the patriarchy and looking to ban or change the use of words or phrases. For example, in Britain someone wants to end the word 'gentleman'. It's all so absurd and I reckon most sane and sober minds conclude the same), the reality is they take up a lot of space in shaping and forming perception and public opinion.

So one has to learn to handle and dance with the inevitable loaded questions about to be hurtled at them.

He's gonna have to figure out how to answer the 'body of science' (aka "the science is settled!") claim that argues a) climate change (duh) is real which renders the proclamation 'I believe in climate change' meaningless without value and b) it's man-made. 

If anything, the 'body of evidence' shows, as endless articles and videos tirelessly show it's quite the politicized and manipulated cottage industry. 

Also. Follow the lingo and jargon. They've been shifting it from global warming to climate change (which really means system change and its massive wealth redistribution scheme. The Americans were correct to pull out of the Paris Accords because they would have been the ones to subsidize it) and now, if you notice, the Gaian Religious Order are saying heat is being trapped in...the oceans...leading to cooling temps. Which I remember specifically scientists saying years ago at the height of the hysteria (assuming there's Peak Climate Change Hysteria) only to be, well, you can imagine.

So....in other words Mother Nature is doing its thing but they want us 'to do something' or else we will all perish. Talk about man-mad hubris, eh? 

Essentially, Bernier and those who support this position will have to convey the message theirs is less a religious experience and more a reasoned one 

They have to show, for instance, the appeal to authority - ie "but 97% consensus!" is not a form of debate. As we know, there's no darn such thing as "settled science" or "consensus" any more there's "hate speech" to be used as justification for further regulations that will confuse and not achieve targets - and make criminal of free and law-abiding citizens. 

Furthermore, climate change and hate speech are two terms that are hopelessly vague to the point of nothingness. Which makes the notion of them being on the 'right side of history' preposterous. No kidding the climate changes and people say hurtful things. The point is should we using the coercive power of the state to "control" it? I reckon Mad Max thinks not and if so, he would be correct.

He answered the feminist questioned reasonably well. I find it odd how interviewers like her presume men should be feminists and give a confused look when told they aren't.

It's a really stupid thing to assume to begin with. Trudeau doesn't speak for men on this issue but there seems to be an attitude in the media that if you're not on board with their nonsense you're a misogynist or ignoramus.

Or something.

All I ask of Mad Max is to not engage in anti-American bull shit.


Deep Derp Spaces

When I tell you I've been backed up with stories I wanted to get to, believe me. It's backed up.

Alas, too many of them demand through and reflection and in order to do so, one needs time to devote to it.

I wish I could channel my inner Marcus Aurelius and break down every story to the extent I would like but time doesn't accord me the honour.

Plus I'm a tad lazy.

It's been quite over whelming the confluence of stories bombarding us which is why, in part, I created my 'Derp Spaces' segment. Of course, I was working on one and took for granted the 'save' option was automatic and subsequently lost all those links because of a software upgrade. Pissed me off enough to not proceed with a new one.

But enough of me and my sad songs and stories.

We see plenty of this sort of narcissism enough on social media.

Here are some quick hits.


We were all going to die because warming and oceans and Algore the Mighty....and then they forgot to carry the one. Or move a decimal. Whatever. We're all gonna die. By January, 2019. It's true. I saw a cult (paid protestors who need real jobs) on TV storm a buffoon's Democrat office (Pelosi) screaming something be done in the name of Gaia and then an illiterate socialist loon (Ocasio-Cortez) showed up to support them. And then left just before the cops arrived. So brave.


I know it's easy to ignore when it's happening to the 'other guy' but what companies like PayPal are doing is preposterous and plain wrong.

Why they feel the need to virtue signal over matters way beyond their pay grade is beyond me.

I can but protest by mocking them....and stopping to use their service.

The latest platform to be attacked by corporations is BitChute. As if it wasn't already ridiculous places like Gab were kicked off, BitChute just bring us into Orwellian territory.

There's literally - like literally - nothing wrong with BitChute.

I visit it. Largely because there's been a migration from YouTube - who themselves have accosted the creative process through their own mindless crackdowns - to these places. People always say 'if you don't like it then start your own'. And people have. But apparently this wasn't true. They don't want you to start your own. They want you to stop. Period.

Seems 'democracy' and 'freedom' has a different meaning with these corporations invested in the idiotic social justice narrative.

So by me visiting these places, will PayPal cut my account?


THINK a little for once.

No. You're not thinking. You're emoting and reacting.


Calgarians vote overwhelmingly against 2026 Olympic bid. I reckon this was the right call. What, with all the grifting and the grafting and the greasing and the grassing (I don't know what that means but it popped into my head).

Seems the struggling Alberta economy was a concern for citizens.

Those damn alt-right populists. How dare they ruin a good scam?

You can just smell politicians seething in anger as they reluctantly accepted the vote.

They'll have to figure out another way to get people to not vote against their interests. Mind you, these same Albertans inexplicably voted for the NDP.

Simple ideological axiom: Where there's a pot of gold, don't vote for socialists.

They'll kill the Leprechaun colony to keep it for themselves.


Oof. Another one of these stupid studies.

"...Anyone who’s wanted to dismiss Republican politics as straightforwardly mean now has some data to back them up. A psychology paper published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences in September found that Republicans surveyed had a small but statistically significant higher level of psychopathic traits than Democrats.
Researchers from the University of Southern Mississippi surveyed 304 American adults using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk; 85 identified as Republican, 164 as Democrat, and 55 as “other.” All those surveyed also completed TriPM, a self-report measure that uses 58 questions to evaluate the three traits that, according to the “triarchic model of psychopathy” make up the disorder: boldness, meanness, and disinhibition.
Test-takers rank how much they related to various statements like “I’ve injured people to see them in pain” and “I have conned people to get money from them” on a four-point scale of true, somewhat true, somewhat false, and false. The results score test-takers on all three traits of the triarchic model.
The researchers found that the TriPM questions evaluating boldness and meanness showed that both traits were higher in Republicans and Democrats, though there was no difference between the two groups on disinhibition. The study showed that boldness, which is evaluated by such questions as “I’m a born leader” and “I have a knack for influencing people,” had a particular high correlation with conservative economic policies, like lower taxes and decreased government spending. Meanwhile, meanness, which is evaluated by such questions as, “I don’t care much if what I do hurts others,” and “I enjoy a good physical fight,” correlated with conservative social policies, such as lack of support for social welfare, universal healthcare, and equal pay for women."

You know.

A couple of things.

The Democrats are the party of slavery, mandated segregation, internment camps, oppressive labor laws that hurt the working poor, and droning of American citizens (Hello Barry!). 

But that's not psychopathy. Nope. So let's project! Ta-dah!

Let's ignore these little 'factoids' as they would put it.

The other more troubling angle is the game of demonizing your opponent (and yes - sigh - it's the left who are masters of it) is exactly how the Communists operated. It's straight out of the Red Commie play book. Don't challenge and argue the ideas; just purge the person. Let's lock 'em up! In a way, what do you think PayPal, Facebook, Twitter (and still further the faux outrage machine that claims victims by the day ie Roseanne etc.) are doing? They're not fighting a good fight, they're destroying the concept of freedom of speech and expression.

I'm also of the opinion now this is all by design.

/Lights Dale Gribble cigarette.


Speaking of high ranking Democrats who clearly got there for reasons other than being geniuses:

"This is an inflection moment, I believe, in the history of our country. This is a moment where there are powerful voices trying to sow hate and division among us. And if we’re going to deal with where we are at this inflection moment, we must speak all these truths, and one of the most significant and important truths right now is also that the vast majority of us have so much more in common than what separates us and let’s speak and own that truth, in particular, in the face of those who are trying to have us point fingers at each other and divide us. Let’s speak these truths."

Yes, the party that has members telling its cultists to go to where Republicans eat and sleep to protest them are doing about division. Again. Projection. All the time.

Other than that....inflection?

Forget it. She's on a roll.

a change in the form of a word (typically the ending) to express a grammatical function or attribute such as tense, mood, person, number, case, and gender.


Speaking of being in good hands with Democrats....

These are the folks who never accept election results. Notice the shenanigans in Georgia and Florida.

Gotta give it to them. They want it more.

If the GOP sit by and do nothing, what are they good for exactly?


Of good liberal consciences....and lol:

Hope to bring more links shortly.

Until then.

Find your own DERP SPACE!