Sign in to follow this  
Malcolm

Crap from the Left

Recommended Posts

He was fired, simply, for a poor choice of words to make his point.  Not the correct action.

He does have a rather lengthy history of off colour remarks against immigrants but usually in a totally different context.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His only mistake was saying out loud what millions are thinking....and the last thing we should ever do as fragile Canadians is speak what’s on our mind. Trudeau might cry and apologize to someone and we certainly have had our fill of “Sorries”

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don Cherry’s comments don’t meet the new Trudeau standard

In white-washing Trudeau’s blackface vocation, Liberals set a new bar for “gotcha” racial and sensitivity crimes justifying the termination of a career.

 

Liberal friends, I have terrible news for you. Your “everybody-I-disagree-with-is-a-racist” superpower doesn’t work anymore. Its power has been waining for some time now. It began when Hilary Clinton warned us all of the dangers of a racist cartoon frog nearly three years ago, but it finally lost the last of its magic when Justin Trudeau was discovered to be a serial black-face-wearer, and you did nothing. 

Most readers will be familiar with the saga that ensued when photos surfaced from Time magazine featuring the woke PM in the darkest hue possible in his impersonation of Aladdin. Soon afterward, two other cases emerged in which the social justice crusader had changed the colour of his skin -and other appendages – all in good fun. 

This was easily dismissed by the Toronto Star’s Heather Malick as no big deal. “The French are like that,” as she put it. 

trudeaublackface.jpg

 

The theatrics of an urbane, privileged, French Canadian Liberal might not be so easily dismissed if the same act was committed by a rough, working-class Anglo hockey commentator with an Ottawa Valley country twang. 

You don’t even need to know about the latest dust up to know that I’m talking about Don Cherry. 

On Saturday, he made some poorly constructed remarks about how he sees people in some areas (big city downtowns) and some people (new comers) wearing poppies less frequently than others. 

It’s hard to comment on the veracity of his observations as it relates to newcomers, but in my own anecdotal experience, folks in small communities by-and-large tend to wear the poppy more frequently and attend Remembrance Day ceremonies in greater numbers, than those in large metropolitan centres. I’m doubtful that Statistics Canada keeps any data on who wears poppies most enthusiastically, so it’s an anecdotal argument either way. 

Nonetheless, Cherry’s comments were less than careful and not respectful of newcomers and big-city dwellers that do don the poppy.

But the reaction of Liberals and Laurentians everywhere has been wildly out of proportion. The usual Twitter mob demanded his head on a pike and his contract in the shredder. No allowance for Cherry being a man known for speaking off the cuff and not caring about the PC rules of engagement. No consideration that he most likely was not taking a shot at settled immigrants, but at encouraging newcomers not yet steeped in Canadian tradition to adopt it. No benefit of the doubt.

But just a month ago when their wunderkind was exposed committing some of the most wildly racist acts on the books in modern North America? Well, “the French are like that.”

Longtime Liberal MP Judy Sgro was even better.

“Those in the Black community have told me how much more love they have for the prime minister that he wanted to have a black face.”

Trudeau’s blackface career was repeated, and deliberate, every time he did it. It was not an off-the-cuff, spur of the moment accident that he was in black face. Three times. He planned it. Executed it. And pranced about in it for the cameras. Three times. That we know of. 

 

Liberals accepted his crocodile apology, and promptly set about re-electing him to a second term. 

In white-washing Trudeau’s blackface vocation, Liberals set a new bar for “gotcha” racial and sensitivity crimes justifying the termination of a career. 

Unfortunately for them, Don Cherry’s comments are a very, very far ways away from the new standard they themselves have set. 

Until we can find photos of Don Cherry wearing blackface on four separate occasions, he isn’t just fit to be a hockey commentator. He’s more fit than the incumbent to be prime minister.

https://www.westernstandardonline.com/2019/11/fildebrandt-don-cherrys-comments-dont-meet-the-new-trudeau-standard/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a silly comment.

I am a long time Legion Member and I do not wear the poppy but I do donate in Money and time for the cause.

I am not a virtue signalling Pratt.

I do not need to be reminded to "support the troops"  I am well aware of their sacrifice.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Fans outraged after CTV's Jess Allen calls hockey fans, “white boys”, “not very nice” and “bullies”

And yet Grapes is the one who gets fired!? Talk about a double standard!

 

 

https://www.hockeyfeed.com/nhl-news/fans-outraged-after-ctv-s-jess-allen-calls-hockey-fans-white-boys-not-very-nice-and-bullies?ref=trevor

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that I have found about Lefties: When they yell at you and then you yell back they say 'Don't yell at me'.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where was this guy during the FlyPast60 discrimination?  Ray Hall??  You out there ??

 

If 50 is the new 40, should we be allowed to change our birth certificates?

A University of Oslo scholar says a moral case could be made for allowing people to legally change their age if their biological and emotional age doesn't match their chronological age

Last December, 69-year-old Emile Ratelband lost his court battle to make himself legally 20 years younger, partly to make his Tinder profile more appealing. A Dutch court ruled that while the motivational speaker and self-described “young god” was entirely at liberty to feel, and act, 20 years younger than the years he has actually existed, there was no valid argument for recalibrating his birth certificate.

Now, however, a new paper argues there is nothing morally wrong or logically implausible about allowing legal age changes in cases in which a person’s biological age (the condition and health of his or her body) doesn’t square with their chronological, or literal age in years.

“For most people, chronological age corresponds well with emotional and biological age and thus it is often unproblematic that legal age equals chronological age,” Joona Räsänen, a Finnish bioethicist and doctoral research fellow at the University of Oslo, writes in the Journal of Medical Ethics.

“But this is not always the case.”

Räsänen believes compelling moral arguments could be made for allowing people to rewind their legal clocks, at least in cases where three conditions are met: When the person genuinely feels that his or her “felt” age differs meaningfully from his or her chronological age; the person’s biological or physiological age (“the age one’s body and mind appear to others by objective measures”) differs from the age on his or her legal documents; and the person is at risk of ageism, particularly workplace age discrimination.

 

Age change should never be undertaken lightly, Räsänen stresses. Rather, “psychologists and medical doctors should be consulted to find out how serious an age change candidate is,” as well as his motivations for wanting his birth date amended.

The philosopher argues that legal age shouldn’t be forced to match chronological age. In a recent related blog post, he uses a whisky analogy: Ten years ago someone gave him a bottle of 21-year-old scotch. The scotch is still 21 years old, not 31.

“While we can stop whisky from aging by bottling it, we cannot stop humans from aging,” Räsänen acknowledges. However, diet, exercise, decent genes and epigenetic changes that happen within our bodies all influence how quickly our arteries stiffen, our bones crumble and our cells and organs deteriorate.

“So, why should legal age match how long a person has existed for?,” asks Räsänen in his blog. “Why not match legal age with how able and functioning the person actually is?”

In an email interview, Räsänen said his aim is not to defend Ratelband, the Dutchman who sought to legally delete 20 years from his passport. (“We live in a time when you can change your name and change your gender,” Ratelband said, to the outrage of the trans community. “Why can’t I decide my own age?”)

Räsänen isn’t arguing from the analogy that because sex change is permissible, so, too, should age change. He has not seen Ratelband’s medical records, nor does he know how serious the Dutchman is, although Ratelband did tell Business Insider he was willing to forgo his $1,500 Euro monthly pension in exchange for a new birth date. (According to his website,Ratelband has also taken turns as a fashion retailer, tour guide, pancake baker, real estate developer and politician. “My feeling about my body and about my mind is that I’m about 40 or 45,” he shared with the Washington Post

But ageism is an undeniable phenomenon, Räsänen argues. Employees at Google, Intel, IMB as well as a slew of other companies have recently sued for age discrimination. Facebook CEO (and Harvard drop out) Mark Zuckerberg once famously blurted that “young people are just smarter.” A 2017 investigation by ProPublica and the New York Times alleged Facebook itself, as well as dozens of leading U.S. employers, placed targeted recruitment ads on Facebook that could only be seen by younger users.

Some age limits exist for valid reasons, Räsänen writes in the Journal of Medical Ethics. A 90-year-old pilot arguably might pose a safety hazard. However, “not all old people pose safety risks and not all jobs are of the sort where people’s lives might be in danger.”

Räsänen says every age change candidate would need to be tested and evaluated, though he can’t offer definite answers as to exactly, how. “These are questions that I think biologists and medical doctors should consider together with philosophers and bioethicists.”

Still, his support for legal age change dovetails nicely with the narrative coming out of Silicon Valley, where immortalists are sinking millions into human life extension, from young-blood transfusions and “rejuvenation” tune-ups that would return us to the biological fitness (inside and out) of a 20- or 30-year old, to cryonics — the freezing of human corpses in the hope of being able to defrost and resurrect them in the future. As a thought experiment, Räsänen asks, “What if sometime in the future the technology makes it possible to freeze living people so that their aging process is reduced significantly?”

Suppose that a 30-year-old woman is frozen for 100 years with technology that reduces her aging to 10 per cent of normal. “When she wakes up after 100 years, her body has only aged by 10 years. Should she be treated under the law as a 40-year-old, or a 130-year-old?”

Frozen corpses aside, Räsänen believes that, should legal age change be permitted, it shouldn’t be fluid — people shouldn’t necessarily be allowed to go older. Some might want to “age” in order to drink or drive sooner, collect retirement benefits earlier or get a decade or two of people telling them how fabulous they look for their age. None of those reasons would satisfy his “criterion.”

In addition, people seeking to change their age to younger “have been younger before,” he says, “therefore they know what it feels like.” It would not be a huge leap into the unknown.

NYU bioethicist Arthur Caplan agrees that the calendar in terms of lifespan is less important than biology. He is also convinced science will one day come up with an objective, holistic measure of aging “that says your biological age is X.”

He gets why the law is different in terms of why it cares about age. The law likes “bright lines and ease of application,” Caplan says. Legal age is also less an individual measure and more a social or cultural one, he adds. “It’s why we decide that most people, roughly speaking, are mature enough at 18 to do things like get married. It’s also fine to call you 70, because it triggers privileges to social programs and ticket discounts, some of it awarded just because you’ve been on the globe for a certain period of time, not because of your biology.”

If those chasing eternal life do ultimately find ways to reverse aging — ‘if you went from 62 to 25, literally, in all aspects of biology” — that would require more than a fudged birth certificate, Caplan says. “It might even require the creation of a new person, meaning a new identity.”

He explains it this way: “If I reversed myself to 25 years old, it’s not like it’s me anymore. I have a history, but most of that is irrelevant. I may want to start again and declare myself Arthur Caplan, part two, or Arthur Caplan, beta.”

More practically, it’s not clear how letting people hit “reset” would reduce ageism at a societal level. But Räsänen says he has yet to hear a convincing argument against the case for age change. “Chronological age does not always matter. So why are we so obsessed with it,” he asks.

Räsänen is 30.

National Post

 

 

 

 

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/if-50-is-the-new-40-should-we-be-allowed-to-change-our-birth-certificates?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Postmedia_organic&utm_campaign=300_evergreen_boosting&utm_content=300_onnetwork#Echobox=1573839684

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2019 at 11:43 AM, Jaydee said:

 

Fans outraged after CTV's Jess Allen calls hockey fans, “white boys”, “not very nice” and “bullies”

And yet Grapes is the one who gets fired!? Talk about a double standard

 

 

“ For me this is so much deeper then Don Cherry getting fired. To me this is a regression of the country that I was once completely proud to be a part of. Growing up we were taught morals, respect, and patriotism. We went to school and we sang not only Oh Canada every morning but also God save the Queen, and said the Lords Prayer. We didn't have to believe any of it was "right" we did it because it was to show gratitude and honor. There was a clock with pictures of the King and Queen at the front of every classroom and we were not offended by any of it. We were taught stick and stones could break our bones but words could never hurt us. ( Not if we didn't let them) It taught us to get up after falls dust ourselves off and carry on. We played rough at recess, we used imaginary swords and lasers and dashed through trees and played on metal slides. We didn't get punished for being creative. We got hurt sometimes but it taught us we were resilient, and to test the waters before we jumped in head first, because we weren't raised with safety nets EVERYWHERE. There were first place ribbons rewarded and we could be held back in school because it was OKAY to not always be the best and it gave those of us who didn't come in first motivation to work harder if we wanted to be. I grew up in a small hockey town where the games were where we all gathered and spent our time, eating rink burgers and being kids and our teams were who we cheered for, and made our towns the most proud of. We celebrated holidays, we proudly made our Moms and Dads gifts and prepared for months for Christmas festivals that we could be proud of. We were taught about November 11th and how much it meant to our country and what Flanders Fields and the poppy meant to the survivors and the ones who never come home, it was and IS disrespectful to not wear a poppy and we were even each given one by the veterans who lived in our town to wear proud. We were shown videos that were hard to stomach watching about war and the holocaust so we understood how lucky we had it, and what they fought to give us. Now kids are not taught any of this because its to violent and harsh for them to learn about. I ask how are they then going to be prepared for if it does, and does anyone believe the children living in war zones now are sheltered from violence or more traumatized by it happening after they are taught it simply does not exist. We thinks it is acceptable to send a child of 18 to war but it is not okay to teach one of 16 that it is not a game. We are teaching kids that everything is rainbows and unicorns and participation ribbons, until they turn 18 and are forced to wake up to a world that is harsh and cruel and opinionated. It isn't all fun, social media, filters and likes... One by one including the ability to communicate and agree to disagree, I watch fade, become obsolete and offensive as my own children went through school. Prayer was wrong, singing the anthem was wrong, celebrating what not everyone believed in was wrong. (I grew up with kids who didn't celebrate, they were never offended we did, as we weren't they didn't). We were taught sometimes things just weren't fair and that was okay. Now getting first place is wrong, having a different opinion then someone else is wrong, being educated in areas that aren't necessarily nice, is wrong, violence is wrong even when warranted, defending yourself is wrong, speaking your mind is wrong if it is not politically correct or phrased just so. Everything that made this country a place I felt safe in and was proud of is now wrong. Now "you people" who are so far out of touch with reality that you think softening actual reality with a bubble wrap of fantasy is helping anyone I think you are sorely wrong. As well, NO you people doesn't mean immigrants because we all come from cultures from all over the planet. You people means if the shoe fits to what someone is talking about. WEAR IT. Stand up for what you think is right. Stand up for what you believe in, and STAND UP for THIS COUNTRY. Quit falling for believing this is just the way it has to be, and SAVE OUR COUNTRY. Not very long ago it was a place I was proud to call my home. Allowing a man who has been a part of most of our lives as long as we can remember for saying something patriotic that NEEDED to be said, makes me feel shame and sadness to see how truly far we have all let our home fall. Canada means "our home" and I think people need to start protecting it for what always made it great. So as much as this is about Don Cherry. He is but a small tree in a much larger painting, one we all need to stop letting you people edit because you didn't like the way it was, because a vast majority of us LOVED it exactly the way it was. “

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wolfhunter said:

From the "what did you think was going to happen?" file. 

BTW, that file is located in a drawer marked "no other outcome possible"

https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/cops-no-longer-enforcing-traffic-rules-police-board-hears

Rah-Rah-Zis-Boom-Bah  Vote Liberal !!!!! Reap the rewards of what you voted for! 

 

“ We’ve got a council and a mayor who can’t say no to any trendy, virtue signalling, social engineering concept and have greatly helped create the mess on our streets.

Our police officers are now expected to be social workers and deliverers of Naloxone to the drug-addicted who come out of the city’s nine safe injection sites high as kites.”

 

 

 

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Ronald Reagan famously said that liberals followed this policy.  
 

     If it moves, TAX it, if it keeps moving REGULATE it and if it stops moving SUBSIDIZE it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something our education system could learn from.

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before,
but had recently failed an entire class.

That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on this plan".
All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A....
(substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
 
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.
The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.
As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that Socialism / Leftism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. 
 

These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
 
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
 
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
 
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
 
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going
to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because
somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

Edited by Jaydee
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this