Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, seeker said:

The other 39 drivers are idiots and virtue-signalling frauds.  Anybody who jumps on a bandwagon - any bandwagon - before the facts are known is a fool and not to be trusted.  This is not a sign of higher moral or ethical standards but a sign of lower intelligence and cowardice.

I think it’s got a lot more to do with protecting a hard fought for multi million $/year job. NASCAR has proved they will act decisively when advertising $$$ are threatened.

Same goes with probably 99% of the Political/media/business related apologies we hear about. It has nothing / zero / nada to do with actual beliefs and everything to do with protecting their pay check.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 284
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Come on now Jaydee, be nice.  The worst thing of all is to surround yourself with people who think exactly the same as you - you're guaranteed to never grow.  Are you completely right in everything yo

Hey Mitch; I have to ask; what is your reason for posting this?  Do black lives matter?  Of course they do but the phrase/slogan "Black Lives Matter! is a political statement intended to either;

Yep. Black lives matter. That phrase is used (by me and, as I understand it, by most others) because it's black people who are being discriminated against, systemically, in such a manner that their ve

Posted Images

On 6/23/2020 at 5:35 PM, Fido said:

All Lives Matter

 

If the BLM movement was A  serious movement, they would publicly denounce violence and would rename themselves the ALM movement. The VAST majority of people and public opinion would support them. As it sits now, their cause does nothing but promote violence and division...a tactic of the Left. They get what they sow.

FE7EA127-B38B-4839-8FE2-191A68041FBE.jpeg

Edited by Jaydee
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

ok.....Thats Twice I have actually agreed with him... The world is turning upside down

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, boestar said:

ok.....Thats Twice I have actually agreed with him... The world is turning upside down

 

The most important statement he made was. ‘ THIS IS A DANGEROUS MOMENT”

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2020 at 6:00 PM, seeker said:

Hey Mitch;

I have to ask; what is your reason for posting this?  Do black lives matter?  Of course they do but the phrase/slogan "Black Lives Matter! is a political statement intended to either; show virtue, attempt to claim the moral high ground or entice a response which can then be derided.  I thought you were above this. 

If you want to state, and defend, your personal beliefs we need more from you than a bumper sticker statement. Tell us why you, personally, feel this is a movement worth supporting.  Before you do, visit the BLM Toronto website and read through their "demands"

https://blacklivesmatter.ca/demands/

https://blacklivesmatter.ca/defund-the-police/

After you read through these demands, come back and tell us about "Black Lives Matter!" and why/how you came to the decision that you can support this movement.

For me; some of their ideas have some merit but others are completely wacko and therefore I cannot support BLM and cannot accept the slogan  - "Black Lives Matter!" when it's shouted at me, either physically or in print.

Yep. Black lives matter. That phrase is used (by me and, as I understand it, by most others) because it's black people who are being discriminated against, systemically, in such a manner that their very lives are in danger. Yes of course ALL lives matter, but it's not ALL lives that are being, and have been, systemically disadvantaged to the point that black people have been.

Whites, like myself, have experienced, in comparison, a "privilege" all our lives. Cops don't treat us the same. ...Face it, most every situation we've ever been in with other white folks, we've been treated in a manner most black folks have never enjoyed... as if black lives don't matter. So, in this moment in time, there needs to be an intentional focus on those who have been given the short end of the stick. We're all cousins for goodness sakes! All of us are descended from the same Africans. .... and Black Lives Matter.

PS. I didn't look at anyone's demands.... I don't really care what some of them see as their goals, I know the bottom line goal is for all of us to recognize we're all the same race, get rid of the racist horsesh!t/supremecist nonsense, and start expecting police to treat everyone - NO MATTER THEIR COLOUR - appropriately. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mitch Cronin said:

Yep. Black lives matter. That phrase is used (by me and, as I understand it, by most others) because it's black people who are being discriminated against, systemically, in such a manner that their very lives are in danger. Yes of course ALL lives matter, but it's not ALL lives that are being, and have been, systemically disadvantaged to the point that black people have been.

Whites, like myself, have experienced, in comparison, a "privilege" all our lives. Cops don't treat us the same. ...Face it, most every situation we've ever been in with other white folks, we've been treated in a manner most black folks have never enjoyed... as if black lives don't matter. So, in this moment in time, there needs to be an intentional focus on those who have been given the short end of the stick. We're all cousins for goodness sakes! All of us are descended from the same Africans. .... and Black Lives Matter.

PS. I didn't look at anyone's demands.... I don't really care what some of them see as their goals, I know the bottom line goal is for all of us to recognize we're all the same race, get rid of the racist horsesh!t/supremecist nonsense, and start expecting police to treat everyone - NO MATTER THEIR COLOUR - appropriately. 

Hello Mitch. 

I spent a couple of hours this morning carefully composing and referencing a nice long PM to send you but have discarded it.  Then I worked on a carefully constructed response to post here and have discarded it.  This entire topic is too fraught with danger. 

Peace Out.

Edited by seeker
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, seeker said:

Hello Mitch. 

I spent a couple of hours this morning carefully composing and referencing a nice long PM to send you but have discarded it.  Then I worked on a carefully constructed response to post here and have discarded it.  This entire topic is too fraught with danger. 

Peace Out.

I think you just proved his point.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an article from WSJ;

Smiley Face Liberalism

The people in the streets— idealistic protesters, full-time activists, anarchists— are the young men and women of the current American left. The people running the country’s institutions— mayors, cultural leaders, media executives, business managers—are a generation older and cut from the cloth of traditional American liberalism. Give the left some credit: After tolerating their liberal betters for years, they knew when the opportunity had arrived to push them over the cliff. They have just taken it.

Events of the past four weeks have produced a lot of agog reactions, but among the most interesting have come from European friends who came to the U.S. years ago in search of what can only be called the American dream. Now they are asking: Why is there so little resistance to what is going on? How could cancel culture happen in a country with legally protected speech? Why has there been no defense of private property— which remains, believe it or not, a big idea in the minds of foreign- born citizens, from taxi drivers to builders of new companies?

The quick collapse of America’s elites under this left-wing offensive is striking and a historic event. Within a week of the left going after monuments to U.S. presidents—George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ulysses S. Grant—the head of the American Museum of Natural History in New York said she had no problem with dismantling history, and asked the city to take down its statue of Teddy Roosevelt on the grounds that it is offensive to blacks and Native Americans, which is absolutely disputable.

In Brooklyn, residents are in despair over nightly fireworks noise, shootings and killings as the police, under threat of prosecution or firing, have pulled back. On Monday evening, Borough President Eric Adams responded with a solution: “empower” community-groups to discuss with residents the dangers of shooting aerial bombs at each other.

How did the capitulation happen so fast? In fact, it was a long time coming. It is hardly an insight by now to blame this on the schools. But revisiting 30 years of educational irresponsibility seems necessary, insofar as the reality of the moment represents an erasure of history. If U.S. Grant, just toppled in San Francisco, was a racist, American history has indeed ceased to exist. History has a way of returning, and some day it will record how a generation of university presidents produced this result.

In the 1980s and early ’90s, when the notion of speech-codes emerged with formal restrictions on words and speech, the seeds of today’s cancel culture were planted with the acquiescence of university leaders.

When liberal professors embarked on tenure denials for conservative colleagues, who were important ballast to the growing groupthink, campus administrators caved.

Then when the students turned on some of these same liberal professors, with accusations of racism, they caved again.

These rocks rolled steadily downhill with barely a peep of public resistance from trustees. In the

The collapse of liberal elites under a leftist offensive has been in the making for years.

ei?u=http%3A%2F%2Fus7lb-cdn.newsmemory.com%2Feebrowser%2Fipad%2Fhtml5.check.20032416%2Fajax-request.php%3Fval%3DImage_1.jpg%26action%3DloadImage%26type%3DImage%26pSetup%3Dwallstreetjournal%26issue%3D20200625%26crc%3Dwsj_20200625_a015_p2jw177000_0_a01500_1________xa2020_w-or9.pdf.0%26edition%3DThe%20Wall%20Street%20Journal%26mtime%3D50D93805%26paperImage%3Dwallstreetjournal&d=2020-06-25T20%3A11%3A49.509Zei?u=http%3A%2F%2Fereader.wsj.net%2Feebrowser%2Fipad%2Fhtml5.check.20032416%2Fcode%2Ficons%2Fusa%2Fzoom_in.png&d=2020-06-25T20%3A11%3A49.509Z

JEFFREY GREENBERG/UNIVERSAL IMAGES GROUP

ei?u=http%3A%2F%2Fus7lb-cdn.newsmemory.com%2Feebrowser%2Fipad%2Fhtml5.check.20032416%2Fajax-request.php%3Fval%3DImage_2.jpg%26action%3DloadImage%26type%3DImage%26pSetup%3Dwallstreetjournal%26issue%3D20200625%26crc%3Dwsj_20200625_a015_p2jw177000_0_a01500_1________xa2020_w-or9.pdf.0%26edition%3DThe%20Wall%20Street%20Journal%26mtime%3D50D93805%26paperImage%3Dwallstreetjournal&d=2020-06-25T20%3A11%3A49.509Zei?u=http%3A%2F%2Fereader.wsj.net%2Feebrowser%2Fipad%2Fhtml5.check.20032416%2Fcode%2Ficons%2Fusa%2Fzoom_in.png&d=2020-06-25T20%3A11%3A49.509Z

1990s, Yale famously returned a $20 million donation from alumnus Lee Bass to create a curriculum in Western civilization, a k a history.

These acts of denial as liberal traditions eroded were mostly petty self-interest. If you didn’t lose your job, you were OK. This is what “silence is compliance” really looks like.

Here is why this is relevant to what happened so quickly the past four weeks. Liberal tolerance (their one cardinal virtue) eventually degraded into rote acceptance. They claimed to be defending evolving standards but eventually there were none.

The activists’ steady descent into irrational and illogical claims was impossible to miss. It became obvious that wokeness had turned into a weapon, but liberal leadership blandly let it happen.

Even more important to understanding recent events is a recognition of how the left eliminated traditional liberalism’s moral leadership.

For decades, liberals have made claims of moral authority in the U.S.’s political life— through depressions, wars, the civil-rights movement. In recent years, the left has successfully established, at least among elites, that we live in a society with few constants of moral behavior. But if even the idea of a functioning consensus about morality has been erased, then no one has moral authority. About all that’s left is smiley face liberalism.

The organized, professional left has played its hand well, filling the void of a no-longer-relevant liberalism with an authoritative, reductionist assertion of “systemic” guilt— secular guilt being the most powerful political idea of our time—in matters of race and gender.

By now, displaced liberal elites have so little self-confidence that they fear even criticism from their children or teenage grandchildren for trespassing the new racial and gender orthodoxies.

Will it last? I think people across the political spectrum are shell-shocked by the events of these weeks, especially the Taliban-like smashing of monuments and the embrace of lawlessness as an official ideology, with no credible pushback from Joe Biden or other prominent Democrats. But if history teaches us anything, it’s that the American electorate won’t be pushed around permanently.

Write henninger@wsj.com.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Jaydee said:

Will be interesting to see if there is any fall out for NASCAR on this.

Unlikely.  Calling "Racisim!" and being proven wrong has no negative implications in today's climate.  For me personally, Nascar gets added to the list but it will be forgotten by next week by the public.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does the Toronto media never (or very rarely) publish video or pictures of white people involved in shooting incidents, is it because  they are racist?

This shouldn't be allowed and there should be a ban on this sort of racist media bias, it perpetuates the myth that most of Toronto's gun violence comes from black gangs.

https://torontosun.com/news/crime/two-charged-two-sought-after-shots-fired-into-401

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites

BLM, yes but where is the outrage over the uncessary deaths of elders in care homes?  Not 1 or 2 but thousands just in Canada and tens of thousands around the world.  Are there any marches.  The news about the seniors is not on the front pages or being given top coverage on the TV News.

FOUR-BED ROOMS AT HEART OF SPREAD

Deaths double in shared rooms at care homes

  • Calgary Herald
  • 26 Jun 2020
  • TOM BLACKWELL

img?regionKey=NSqKYDlUbHfjmUmOLesfdw%3d%3dPETER J THOMPSON/NATIONAL POST/FILES Crosses stand outside the Camilla Care Community, a long-term care facility in Mississauga, Ont., where 50 people died of COVID-19.

A new study points to a disturbingly simple explanation for some of the havoc wrought by COVID-19 in Canada’s nursing homes: keeping residents in ward-like shared accommodation can be lethal.

The deaths of close to 300 long-term care residents in just one province could have been prevented if those individuals were housed in two-bed instead of four-bed rooms, suggests the research.

The study by University of Toronto, Mcmaster University and Public Health Ontario scientists found a clear association between the degree of crowding in homes — how many people share a room and lavatory — and the virus’s spread.

Residents of the most tightly packed facilities were twice as likely to get infected and to die as those in the least-crowded homes, concluded their paper.

And yet, one in four longterm-care residents were in four-bed rooms when the pandemic hit, they say.

“Too often, the building and the physical infrastructure gets forgotten in this conversation,” said Dr. Nathan Stall, a geriatrician at Toronto’s Mt. Sinai hospital and one of the authors. “(But) public health experts … would know on face value that that’s sort of infection-prevention 101: crowded rooms are bad.”

He noted that Ontario standards introduced in 1999 said new facilities could have no more than two people per room. Older homes, most of them for-profit, were encouraged to retrofit to those standards but few have done so, said Stall.

COVID-19’S disastrous toll on nursing homes has been the central story of the pandemic in Canada, accounting for about 80 per cent of the country’s 8,500 deaths. A new report by the Canadian Institute for Health Information underscores that fact.

Canada’s per-capita number of long-term-care deaths has been about average among similar industrialized countries, the institute found.

But as a percentage of a nation’s total COVID-19 mortality, Canada’s deaths far exceed those of other Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development members, the institute found. Deaths in long-termcare in OECD countries averaged 42 per cent, and ranged from less than 10 per cent in Slovenia and Hungary, to 66 per cent in Spain.

After getting an early preview of the Ontario researchers’ findings, the province has already acted, mandating that newly admitted residents have no more than one roommate.

The industry agrees such setups are one of the root causes of the devastating outbreaks, said Donna Duncan, CEO of the Ontario Long Term Care Association. But moving away from four-bed accommodation will have a major impact, she said.

Though the association says only about 10 per cent of residents, not 25, live in those rooms, converting them to two beds now would take 4,300 places out of the system, adding to a waiting list for nursing home places that already stands at 36,000, said Duncan.

“We saw the numbers … then shared that information with government and said, ‘We have a very large problem here,’” she said. “We need to prepare today to look at alternate accommodations and solutions … We have to move very quickly.”

With a second pandemic wave expected, Duncan said the province should consider converting existing, unused buildings, like vacant hospitals, hotels or arenas, into long-term care housing.

The study, by Stall and colleagues, published on an academic “preprint” site without having undergone peer review, ranked facilities based on the density of housing, ranging from those with mostly single rooms to homes with only four-person rooms.

That data was then correlated with COVID-19 infections and deaths.

The type of accommodation didn’t affect whether a facility had an outbreak. But its spread was higher in crowded homes — 9.7 per cent infected versus 4.5 per cent in the least crowded — while deaths were 2.7 per cent and 1.3 per cent respectively.

The researchers used their findings to create a simulation, which indicated that putting all the residents who were in four-bed rooms into two-bed rooms would have prevented 988 COVID-19 cases, and 271 deaths.

It’s what residents prefer, as well. Past surveys indicate that 80 per cent of residents would choose to have a private room over a shared one, noted the paper.

Most of the four-bed rooms that the study highlights are in older facilities, said Duncan. The higher occupancy rooms have curtains to separate the residents but “curtains are no match for this,” she said.

A previous paper by Stall and colleagues, also not yet peer-reviewed, found that outbreaks were significantly bigger in for-profit homes.

 

As for the world.  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/09/care-homes-across-globe-in-spotlight-over-covid-19-death-rates

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember, you heard it here first, the First "Charity" that will approved for student volunteers will be Black Lives Matter Toronto.

Yup, the taxpayers of Canada will be paying student activists to spend the next 4 months protesting the Government of Canada and the police.

From the NP:

Trudeau says charity with ties to him and his wife 'only one' that could run COVID-19 student volunteer grant program

The prime minister was referring to the announcement Thursday that the federal government had outsourced the administration of the new Canada Student Service Grant (CSSG) to WE charity.

The program, estimated to cost over $900 million, will send between $1,000 and $5,000 to eligible post-secondary students who complete volunteer work. Recipients will receive $1,000 per 100 hours of eligible volunteering hours done until October 31, 2020.

Here's a link in case anyone is inspired to donate directly to Justin's charity.  You know, in case you don't think the measly amount of taxes you pay is enough:  https://www.we.org/en-CA/get-doing/donate/

Edited by seeker
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so I saw this article in the National Post about systemic racism.  Had to read it.  I think I kinda/sorta know what "they" are talking about when they say, "systemic racism" but a little extra information doesn't hurt.  What is systemic racism

So it makes me think.

Part 1 - I work with this Chinese fellow.  I really enjoy working with him - he's smart, funny, witty, very capable, good hands and feet.  Good association.

Part 2 - Many of the Chinese FAs I work with seem really cool, good with the pax, helpful, friendly.  Good association.

Part 3 - Last year I saw this video about a restaurant in China where they serve, and the customers eat, live baby octopus (showed some woman eating a live octopus).  That's absolutely disgusting.  Bad association.

Part 4 - I really find the behavior of crowds of Chinese people (waiting for a bus, waiting for service in a store, etc) to be quite rude, by western standards.  They tend to push ahead, jump the queue.  I've been told this is a cultural thing.  Bad association.

So, am I racist?  If someone didn't know anything about me and asked for my opinion of/experience with Chinese people and I told 1 and 2 - I guess I get counted as "not-racist" but if I told 3 and 4 then I'm one of the bad ones.  But I'm the same person.  I've had positive and negative experiences everywhere and positive and negative associations everywhere too; treated poorly in a store in Paris (don't speak French) but French guy on the street went out of his way to help me,  yelled at for walking too slowly on a New York sidewalk but another New Yorker was quite generous with his time in making the subway a little more comprehensible.

Every article I read, or video I watch, about racism seems to be trying to take the "human" out of all our interactions and make racism the only cause/explanation for anything/everything.  Any negative opinion, no matter how legitimate it might be is called racism, systemic racism, latent racism, unconscious racism. It is possible to hold a negative opinion about eating live octopus or queue jumping and at the same time look forward to working with my Chinese co-workers.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, seeker said:

OK, so I saw this article in the National Post about systemic racism.  Had to read it.  I think I kinda/sorta know what "they" are talking about when they say, "systemic racism" but a little extra information doesn't hurt.  What is systemic racism

So it makes me think.

Part 1 - I work with this Chinese fellow.  I really enjoy working with him - he's smart, funny, witty, very capable, good hands and feet.  Good association.

Part 2 - Many of the Chinese FAs I work with seem really cool, good with the pax, helpful, friendly.  Good association.

Part 3 - Last year I saw this video about a restaurant in China where they serve, and the customers eat, live baby octopus (showed some woman eating a live octopus).  That's absolutely disgusting.  Bad association.

Part 4 - I really find the behavior of crowds of Chinese people (waiting for a bus, waiting for service in a store, etc) to be quite rude, by western standards.  They tend to push ahead, jump the queue.  I've been told this is a cultural thing.  Bad association.

So, am I racist?  If someone didn't know anything about me and asked for my opinion of/experience with Chinese people and I told 1 and 2 - I guess I get counted as "not-racist" but if I told 3 and 4 then I'm one of the bad ones.  But I'm the same person.  I've had positive and negative experiences everywhere and positive and negative associations everywhere too; treated poorly in a store in Paris (don't speak French) but French guy on the street went out of his way to help me,  yelled at for walking too slowly on a New York sidewalk but another New Yorker was quite generous with his time in making the subway a little more comprehensible.

Every article I read, or video I watch, about racism seems to be trying to take the "human" out of all our interactions and make racism the only cause/explanation for anything/everything.  Any negative opinion, no matter how legitimate it might be is called racism, systemic racism, latent racism, unconscious racism. It is possible to hold a negative opinion about eating live octopus or queue jumping and at the same time look forward to working with my Chinese co-workers.

I think you can rest easy. The vast majority of people would consider you a normal human being, displaying clear, concise, diversity of thought and action......We need the normal 90% to stop giving then”woke” 10% their vaulted 15 minutes of fame and their causes will soon die a rightly death and be piled high on the stinking heap of human stupidity.

Edited by Jaydee
Link to post
Share on other sites

1277431713338216450

 

Interesting twitter thread , if you can bear to read through it.  About a white couple in an historic neighbourhood of St. Louis that gets invaded by marching protestors and feel the need to come out on their front lawn with an AR and a handgun to defend their property.  They don't actually use the firearms - just show the mob they have them and suggest the mob moves along - surprisingly effective.

1. Protestors claim they were on public property, just passing through on their way to the Mayor's house.  Wrong, they were on private property and had, in fact, broken down a gate to get access to the area.

2. Twitter morons insist "brandishing" a weapon-of-war is criminal.  Wrong, Missouri has castle doctrine.  

3. Twitter morons insist it was simply a peaceful, lawful demonstration opposed by a lunatic with a weapon-of-war.  I guess just like the hundreds of other peaceful protests that oddly ended up with businesses and homes looted and destroyed, massive raging fires, murder and mayhem.

4.  Twitter morons laughing, "why didn't they call the police? - guess they don't trust the police either."  Actually the couple, who were trying to protect their property and street which is an historically designated site, did call both the police and private security neither of which arrived before the mob.  If you watch the short video (30 seconds) you will see that neither the husband or wife look comfortable with the firearms and yet, there was no accidental shooting and the deterrent worked - no looting or property destruction.  All this benefit for less than the cost of the insurance deductible on the property.  "Buying that AR and handgun was good value Mitzy!"

It's the last point which I find significant - expect more and more confrontations between protestors and property owners and citizens with their backs to the wall - some, no doubt, will be planned for maximum confrontation potential - after all, it's good for business.  With just a little more anger, a little more fuel, maybe one of the protestors lunges for the woman's handgun and get shot by the white dude with an AR on livestream - can't even imagine the fallout and it's not at all unlikely.

 

Edited by seeker
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.