Monthly Archives: September 2016

On Using ‘Zie’ and ‘Hir’ and More Shooting the Survivors

Does anyone care to place bets on when we will get the first politician in Canada to stand up and make a speech using “genderless pronouns”?  It may be sooner than you think – maybe as soon as next year…. maybe even this year.

The same way Kathleen Wynne obnoxiously pays homage in hir every speech to the Indigenous tribe on whose ancestral lands zie stands, we’re going to see Liberal and NDP politicians start referring to ‘zie’ instead of ‘he’ or ‘she’.

No?  Don’t think it can happen?  You are naïve then.

The federal Liberals are all set to pass Bill C-16 which will outlaw the discrimination and harassment of individuals based on their gender identity.  Not actual physically gender, but what that person identifies as.  Identity.

Don’t forget that it was Canada’s over-reaching human rights legislation that spawned provincial and federal Human Rights Commissions, where just being offended or insulted it seemed was grounds for being charged with human rights violations. In Quebec now a teacher cannot criticize Muslims without being brought before a Human Rights Commission. A comedian in BC cannot insult hecklers without being levied a $40,000 fine.  Mark Steyn and Maclean’s had an epic battle with the human rights courts for simply suggesting the “future belonged to Islam” which was interpreted to be anti-Muslim.  Thankfully the Conservatives (belatedly) repealed the law.

But here come the Liberals and their Hirster-in-Chief.

It would serve everyone well to become familiar then with the use of these new pronouns;

HE/SHE HIM/HER HIS/HER HIS/HERS HIMSELF/HERSELF
zie zim zir zis zieself
sie sie hir hirs hirself
ey em eir eirs eirself
ve ver vis vers verself
tey ter tem ters terself
e em eir eirs emself

See, while this legislation is intended to virtue signal what a kind and tolerant society we have what it does instead is give the SJW bullies another club to beat us with. Case in point – this brave University of Toronto professor who is pushing back against the university’s human resources directive, that all professors begin using gender-less pronouns. Zie will soon be a pariah.

“If Peterson fears the Trudeau government passing Bill C-16 into law, he should smarten up his act by upgrading his ethics circuits, not by trying to marshal opposition to basic human rights protections for people he refuses to even try to understand,” added Peet.”

Just examine the frightening power in that quote – zero acknowledgement of concerns or validity to the other side, rather the onus is on Professor Peterson to “upgrade his ethics circuits” because he’s clearly evil, zie has moral failings if zie‘s engaged in Wrong Think.

Wait a second – did Professor Peet check with Professor Peterson if zie wants to be called “he”?  Uh oh.

We wish zim good luck, but in all likelihood zis position at the university will become untenable because in the great hierarchy of evils in the eyes of the left, after racism and climate change denial, comes opposition to trans-gender rights.

The SJW’s envision a world where before you speak to someone you each, as a matter of courtesy, inform the other person of the pronouns you would like used. Seriously. This is not new and many universities across the US have already instructed their students to adopt this new protocol of human interaction.

So one can easily imagine a future of people, in all manners of private and public businesses being charged for failing to properly address a person by their self-identified gender or using genderless pronouns. It will be paralyzing. And you can laugh it off as paranoid fantasy, but these people will have the Law behind them. The most powerful person in any work place setting will now become that one employee that forces everyone to learn a new language and forces emails and memos to be rewritten to suit their sensibilities.

Justin Trudeau, early next year. That’s my bet for the first politician and when.

 

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

On the First Debate

Memo to the Donald J. Trump for President Campaign:

Well, that was disappointing.

First, raise the microphone up so Mr. Trump stops leaning forward to speak.  He is trying to appeal to married women, that’s your swing voter.  Leaning forward to blurt answers comes across as aggressive.  Aggressive = not good.  Mr. Trump needs to look stately; stand up tall, keep movement to a minimum, talk to the camera when you speak and not Hillary or the moderator.  Speak to the American people.

Second, get rid of the split screen.  Mr. Trump is a tall man with stature.  She is a dumpy old woman.  People subconsciously associate stature and presence with leadership.  The split screen not only erased that advantage you had, but also allowed the camera to show your every strange wince and expression.  Why did Mr. Trump find it so hard to sip water?  He needs to practice drinking.

Your candidate is a horrible debater.  He tends to overuse words like “tremendous”, and “beautiful” when he’s trying to think of things to say.  His ramblings border on incoherent and he seems incapable of finishing an answer.  Besides prescribing him some Ritalin before the next debate to help focus his mind, perhaps he would do well to memorize some stock answers to expected questions like Hillary did.  For example;

On the issue of cyber-security:

“Your asking Secretary Clinton about cyber-security?  That’s rich.  The FBI report on Secretary Clinton’s emails and private server said that her server had been hacked by foreign agents.  Multiple times.  How much classified material was lifted by hackers Secretary Clinton?  What happened to the multiple cell phones that you lost but never reported?  The FBI report says that you clicked on a phishing email… for real?  Which one?  The one about the Nigerian prince with millions in a bank account?  Or the one about a free time-share in Costa Rica?  Why would anyone listen to you on cyber-security?  Unless it’s maybe advice on how to delete 33,000 emails.”

On the issue of not revealing his tax returns:

“You know why I haven’t revealed my tax returns?  Because I have done what every other smart rich person does; hire the best accountants and lawyers and instruct them find ways for me to pay as little tax as possible.  Does that make me unpatriotic?  No, it makes me smart.  And it makes me no different than your friends in Hollywood, the George Clooneys of the world throwing $10 million dollar fundraising dinners for you and Obama, but have homes in Switzerland because that’s where they hide their money away from US taxes.  I want to cut taxes on the wealthy because I don’t want rich people to have to hide their money or take it overseas, I want them to repatriate it.  Contrast that with your plan Secretary Clinton, to raise taxes even more on the wealthy.  It’s a fraud.  You won’t raise money for free tuition and all the other wonderful things  you want to spend money on… all you’re going to do is drive more money and investment out of the country.”

On his apparent support for the Iraq war in 2002:

“I wasn’t a politician in 2003.  I was a business man.  I am allowed to muse in public on whether or not the war was a good thing.  Perhaps I may have said that it sounded like a good idea to me at the time.  But you know what?  I rely on my elected representative to lead on those types of issues.  And you know who was my senator for the state of New York in 2003?   It was you, Secretary, or should I say, Senator Clinton, and you voted for the Iraq war.”

After Hillary speaks to the US allies to reassure them:

“That, Secretary Clinton, is an example of why you don’t get it.  You are more worried about talking to, and reassuring people in other countries than you are about reassuring the American people that we aren’t going to be asked to police the world while other countries, our supposed allies, freeload and fail to pay their fair share or honour their military commitments to our alliances.”

These are some examples.  Please feel free to contact us for help with more stock responses with regards to Black Lives Matter, race riots, accusations of sexism etc.

Yours sincerely,

RA

 

 

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

On Voting for the Trump

If I were American, I would vote for Donald Trump.

Yes, he’s scumbag.  I’ve written plenty here about how he’s not a conservative, he’s not a decent or humble person, he’s a rich narcissist and unlikely to solve any of the problems the US has at the moment.  I think his ideas of building a wall, deporting 11 million people, banning all Muslim immigration; canceling free trade deals… they’re all crap ideas.

And no, it’s not a lesser of two evils thing, even though Hillary Clinton is a pretty deplorable character as far as that goes… she’s the very definition of a political “insider”, guilty of corruption and treasonous behavior, enabler to her husband’s many sins and a chronic liar.

No, the reason I would vote for Donald Trump is that this is clearly not an ideological election.  This is not a contest of the ideas of the right vs. the ideas of the left.  Trump is not ideological, nor is Clinton.  They speak to elements of their parties, but they don’t represent either party’s predominant ideology.  Thus, when choosing between the two you need a different reason to pick one or the other.  Character is a wash and neither truly represents a “side” in the political or cultural wars.

So, what I like about Trump is that his enemies are for the most part, people I despise.  That’s pretty much the summation of my reason for voting for him.  An “enemy of my enemy is my friend”, sort of deal.  I don’t really want to see him as POTUS.  I’m not a nihilist that wants to burn it all down and rebuild from the bottom up.  But there is a group of people out there who if Trump wins, their heads would quite literally explode – and I would LOVE to see that.  I would vote for him quite simply because I like the enemies he’s made.  Well done.

Take for example this stupid twat, Jill Soloway, who wins an Emmy award and promptly uses the opportunity to compare Donald Trump to Hitler:

“He’s a complete dangerous monster, and any moment I have to call Trump out to being an inheritor to Hitler, I will,” she said, to applause.

Or how about when Donald Trump has the temerity to call the Chelsea bombing a “bombing” before it was actually declared a bombing.  Horrors, he got it right.  It’s well reported now that CNN and MSNBC edited Hillary Clinton calling it a “bombing” before the police said that was what it was.    That’s the other part of the equation – most people HATE the media.

Then there’s the outrage – OUTRAGE!  That Jimmy Fallon would dare to have Trump on his show and make small talk with the man.  He ruffled his hair!?!  Oh my God, man… would you ask to ruffle the mustache of Hitler?

Then there’s Bono claiming that Donald Trump is possibly America’s “worst idea” ever.  Idiot, stick to your music.   The US has had slavery, civil war, McCarthy-ism, Jim Crowe and so many other bad ideas that nominating Donald Trump for President doesn’t even make the top 20.

It’s to the point where I am reminded of this interview several years back Michael Coren (before he went traitor to the cause) and the wonderful Melanie Phillips. She starts at the 2:00 mark discussing how conservative thinking is demonized, but what he says at 4:40ish is also what Ross Douthat is getting at in this column; approximately 35-40% of the population sit at home and are beaten over the head, day after day, and told that what they believe is wrong. What they believe is not just wrong – it’s evil. They are mocked as being racist, bigoted and stupid. So, one of two things can be the outcome when a large chunk of the population is dismissed as “deplorables”; either these people surrender and “convert” or they go underground but find different ways to vent when the opportunity comes. Like the Brexit vote. Like Donald Trump. These are not votes for something. Rather these are votes to stick it to the elites that have been belittling them.

I don’t know if Donald Trump can win.  It doesn’t look likely.  Conceivably he could get more of the popular vote than Hillary Clinton and still lose because she’s got the black and suburban soccer mom votes sewed up in the key states.  But imagine if he did.  No, no – don’t imagine the nukes on North Korea or billions spent on a ridiculous second coming of the Great Wall.  Worry about that later.  Instead, just imagine John Oliver, Samantha Bee, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah, 99% of Hollywood and the mainstream press… imagine them staring aghast at the TV screen as the results roll in.   That might be reason enough for me.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On “Montreal Sucks”, “Make America Great Again” Hats and Free Speech

Free speech is a sticky subject. I’m not an absolutist in the mold of Mark Steyn or Ezra Levant or others – I think there is a balance to be struck between maximizing what can (and often should) be said and what crosses the line.

Where might I draw the line? Well, for example, some clowns brought a poster to a recent Toronto FC game against the Montreal Impact, depicting a blue-thong wearing female Montreal fan performing fellatio on a supposed red hoodie wearing Toronto fan with the headline “Montreal Sucks” in French. It’s vulgar, but could you defend it as free speech? Sure, some might and I would see the theoretical libertarian argument. But where I would draw the line is that, if I have to explain it to my children then it is wrong. You’ve now imposed a burden on me that I neither asked for nor should reasonably expect to be responsible for as participating adult member of society. No thanks. That poster should not be allowed because it’s a fairly straightforward depiction of a sexual act, there’s no subjective interpretation of it required. Only extremists would argue otherwise that it’s my obligation to explain to my young daughter what that sign means and not the clowns’ obligation to exercise some basic human decency.

But then there’s the story today about a Calgary student being told to take his “Make America Great Again” hat off because it represents “hate speech”. “Make America Great Again” is one of Donald Trump’s campaign slogans. In the video of the incident the young lady objecting to the hat (who is surprisingly attractive and not an obese ugly troll like so many SJW’s) cites her incorrect understanding of what Trump wants with regards to immigration and as such because it’s a Trump hat, regardless of what is actually written on the hat, it represents something hateful. In SJW parlance then she’s “triggered” by the sight of the hat and wants it removed because it offends her.

Now we’re into subjective interpretation as opposed to the Toronto FC sign. If we go down this route almost anything anyone says or writes may be construed by some person somewhere as “offensive”. It’s a never ending rabbit hole to fall into.  But this is what the vast majority of SJW’s want; the carte blanche power to essentially bully anyone and everyone that they disagree with into shutting up because they’re being offensive, they’re triggering people, they’re infringing on “safe spaces”.

Here’s a prime example of the psychopathic bullying of an SJW in full flight. Watch the video and tell me that if you were not the Lyft driver you wouldn’t have not only kicked this bitch out of the car way sooner, but also backed the car up and tried to run her over to do the world a favour. Thankfully there’s been some justice since this became public and this abusive woman with obvious mental problems has been driven underground and off social media. The driver has a right to display the bobble head of a Hawaiian person because there’s no obligation imposed on the persons seeing it to interpret it any other way that how it’s presented. Had the presentation been of a Hawaiian person being cut in half by a white navy captain? OK… that would cross the line and you’d be within bounds to ask to have that removed from sight.

It’s nuanced, but not that difficult for ordinary people to exercise common sense. But we do need to actively tell the triggered little babies of the world to stuff it because free speech is a continuum; at one end is the vulgar, indecent, truly offensive that is hard to accept but at the other end is honest scientific inquiry – if you give the SJW’s an inch they will take a mile and soon they won’t just be shutting down offensive speech, they’ll be shutting down research and analysis that just happens to uncover truths they find uncomfortable.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

On Spin and the Lesser of Two Evils

If I were ever to be elected to provincial office, I would shut down TVO my first day in office.  I’m so glad that basically no one watches this tax-payer funded network for Liberal propaganda… except for me obviously.

Note the “balance” on this episode – if you include the host, the conservative is outnumbered 5:1, and the conservative is a poor feeble minded old man who acts as a Wynne apologist to boot.  That’s the Left’s idea of “balance”.

Once upon a time, I thought Steve Paikin was a reasonable, professional journalist who hid his leftist bias. But on this episode he opens with talking points straight from the Premier’s office and actually wonders aloud why, oh why, is Kathleen Wynne’s personal approval rating at 16%.

Unemployment is down under Wynne?  The manufacturing sector in this province is absolutely and totally gutted.  Take a drive through the wasteland of southwestern Ontario. As a result there are literally thousands upon thousands of men and women who have given up looking for work – once you stop looking for work you stop being counted as one of the “unemployed”.  Add to that the literally thousands upon thousands of young men and women, recently graduated from school with zero job prospects and are either sitting at home playing video games or padding their resumes with volunteer and intern positions. That accounts for a large drop in the unemployment figures. Private sector employment has fallen, government sector increased. On whose backs are those jobs being paid for?

Oh, but the budget will be balanced… firstly, says who?  The Liberals?  3% growth is THEIR projection.  They keep projecting tax revenues to go up.  Intuitively we know that is bullshit in this economy.

And they claim the budget will be balanced next year… but only after McGuinty/Wynne have DOUBLED the provincial debt.  We are the most indebted sub-national government IN THE WORLD.  And how have they balanced the budget?  But levying all sorts of bullshit taxes, health premiums and selling our stakes in Hydro One a one-time balance sheet mark-up.

Paikin totally blows past the idea that the Liberals are the subject of five ongoing OPP investigations, have blown billions on eHealth, ORNG, cancelled gas plants, cancelled ORPP, MARS and we pay the highest hydro rates in the western world.  Our hydro rates have doubled in the past two years and now they want to levy a carbon tax on our gas because they, the wonderful Liberals, are combatting climate change single handedly.  Now they promise to help us with our hydro costs by removing the HST on our hydro, a move that will cost the Ontario government $1 billion.  NO – wrong.  It won’t COST the government shit – BECAUSE THAT’S OUR MONEY, NOT THE GOVERNMENTS.  We make the money and government taxes us, but if you follow typical Leftist logic it’s all their money first and they allow us to keep some to live on.  Every tax cut or rebate is portrayed as COSTING the government, but taxes and charges never seem to cost the taxpayers jack squat.

All this and yet I have zero faith that Wynne will be defeated in the next Ontario provincial election. We have entered the era of “lesser of two evils” when it comes to our politics and as Ben Shapiro so accurately writes about the US election;

We’ve been told since the end of the primaries that we must choose one candidate or the other. It’s a binary decision: pick Hillary, or pick Trump. Now, aside from the fact that a vote for neither is not a vote for either, the underlying logic seems to be that in any one-on-one electoral competition, the obligation to choose a candidate trumps any moral obligation to eschew bad candidates entirely. This leads to a lowest-common-denominator politics that can excuse any and all bad behavior by any and all candidates. If Matthew 7:3 enjoins people not to “look at the speck in your brother’s eye but fail to notice the beam in your own eye,” lesser-of-two-evils politics tells us that we ought to ignore both the motes and beams in our own eyes, because after all, our opponents have motes and beams in their eyes.

So the problem becomes that Wynne and the Ontario Families Coalition only have to paint the Ontario PCs as some unpalatable collection of evil bigots/deniers/anti-union rural rednecks and make it a contest of lesser evils – wouldn’t you feel BAD about yourself voting for those people? You may not feel all that good voting for us, but hey! We’re not close-minded right wingers. And boom… 40% of the population buys the idea that, despite your corruption and incompetence, you represent the lesser evil and you’re back in.

I hope I’m wrong.

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On the Coming Apocalypse

Quickly, some sure signs that the apocalypse is imminent.

Colin Kaepernick jersey sales are now the third highest of all NFL jerseys this year. A hero is born. Funny how, at the beginning of the pre-season this guy was on the verge of being cut from the San Francisco 49ers, a very average quarterback commanding a very above average salary that the team might want to be freed of. If one were cynical you might suspect he engineered this bit of Black Lives Matters controversy to basically make him un-cut-able.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,” Kaepernick told NFL.com last week. “To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”

It is ironic that he was a child abandoned by his black father, put up for adoption and raised by a white family and makes millions of dollars a year playing football in a league where 65% of the players are black. But he’s being oppressed.

Megan Rapinoe is a lesbian who plays on the US National women’s soccer team. Nothing unusual about that; the higher the level of women’s competition in a large number of sports, it seems the higher the proportion of lesbians. No big deal though, it’s doubtful that despite the huge popularity of the US Women’s team in recent years that anyone beyond a small minority of people knew or cared that she was lesbian. It’s fair to say that practically nobody cared about her sexuality. But she was also being oppressed.

“Being a gay American, I know what it means to look at the flag and not have it protect all of your liberties.”

I’m curious what country other than the US, Canada or England, could you be an out-of-closet lesbian representing your nation and no one really batting an eye?

But oppression? You don’t know oppression until you are confronted by a man wearing a beard. Yes, beards and mustaches are symbols of the oppressive patriarchy. Men should be forced to shave. From the wonderful mind of the author:

Participating in #Movember is basically an action that screams “Look at me, I am a man, I accept the current patriarchal gender roles and I basically hate women“. It is a tool used by sexist men to keep women and transfolk down and make anyone who doesn’t agree with male supremacy and the Patriarchy shut up and just take being oppressed and hated on the chin. Every single hair on your chin is like a knife in every woman’s heart.

Trying to raise awareness for “men’s health” is frankly, pretty ridiculous. I mean, come on, it’s 2015, I thought we had gotten further than giving already privileged men an ENTIRE month when they already get the entire YEAR. Talking and “raising awareness” about prostate cancer and growing a frickin’ beard to get that conversation going, is incredibly sexist because it literally takes attention away from all the brave women who are dying every day from cancers such as ovarian cancer and breast cancer. We’re supposed to be living in an equal society and yet it’s accepted that men, who have been privileged for thousands of years, get so much attention for being poor “victims” of cancer. It’s so twisted that I can’t even begin to explain it.

We shouldn’t feel sorry for men and we shouldn’t prioritize men’s health. Men rape, men kill and men catcall and in today’s equal society, do we really have time to run around creating campaigns for men with cancer? Would you really care about Hitler if he got cancer? Would you grow a Hitler moustache as a campaign to raise awareness about Hitler’s cancer? No, I guessed not, so why are you doing the same for men?

I can’t tell if this is serious or satire.  If satire, then congratulations to the author, well done.

But assuming it’s legitimate, then yes, women should not do anything for men. Most of all, do not wear bras!

This change in consumer demand is happening against the backdrop of France’s burkini ban and ongoing hurdles facing mothers trying to breastfeed in public. And it’s creating a striking contrast: While many women around the world are policed for their clothing choices, others have the comparative freedom to go bra-free and, in the case of celebrities like Kendall Jenner, flaunt nipple piercings publicly.

That’s raising eyebrows among some feminists. Jean Golden, a professor of sociology at Ryerson University, says the bra-free trend isn’t a substantive feminist issue, or a political movement.

“It is a personal choice, especially for young women, framed by the hyper-sexualized media portrayal of young women’s bodies, including their breasts and nipples,” she says. “It does not address systemic sexism. It could be argued it feeds into it.”

Ah ha! Your bluff is called feminists. Of course next will be a big(ger) push for hairy armpits and unshaven legs.  Kim Kardashian will soon do a spread where we see that an ethnic Armenian woman’s natural state sans Brazilian wax is hair, front to back, full side to side.  Everyone will applaud her naturalism and copy. Did I wake up in 1969?

Nope. It’s 2016 in full bloom because here we have incredulously anger over a movie about a trans-gendered person not having an actual trans-gendered actor cast in the part.  Mark Ruffalo is as leftist a virtue-signaling Hollywood star can get. And yet he’s getting ripped to shreds for not following the social justice warrior playbook where only trans-people can play trans-people. Only gays can play gays. Only visible minorities can understand racism. Only women can understand sexism and straight white men understand nothing except how to inflict violence, colonialism and the patriarchy on the world at large.

Lastly I leave you with this bit of “art”.

The feminist then presents and interesting suggestion: “Go sit down with your blood during one of the first days of bleeding. Meditate on it. Smell it. Feel it. Why is it gross or scary? Look at me. Look me in the eyes and tell me why,” she demands.

Ah jeez.

The apocalypse cometh. Prepare yourself. Learn some survival skills, take some self defence classes and hope that the zombie virus hits before the social justice warriors take over.

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,
%d bloggers like this: