Leaderboard

It's the general consensus of many regarding his policies and what he wants to accomplish in Canada. https://torontosun.com/2016/09/14/trudeau-says-canada-has-no-core-identity/wcm/60461a6d-7cb4-42a9-b242-05be9aaea46c

A core identity doesn't mean every single person feels the same way about everything. Some people feel okay with migrants crossing the border. But MOST want them deported. Some feel okay with women covering their faces at citizenship ceremonies. But MOST want them to stop. Some people feel immigrants have no need to assimilate, but MOST feel they need to do more to assimilate. Some people feel Sir John A Macdonald's statues and name should be disappeared, but MOST people feel they should not.

Hopefully most of these people can escape before South Africa's plans for genocide come to fruition. There's a certain point where the hatred in a country cannot be stopped or reasoned with and the only options are to flee or to die. For White South Africans, that point is now. We can only hope that some countries leave their doors open to fleeing South Africans, unlike what happened during the horrors of the early 20th century when people fleeing extermination were sent back to die.

Next Sunday it is very interesting to see if there is a lot of uproar by the the so-called good people at the inevitable success of the Swedish Democrats in the elections in Sweden. Namely, it is a cliffhanger. They may even become the largest party but no chance of being in the government as all the rest gang up on them. Sweden would be without a doubt the best place to live on this planet given their history and their wealth hadn't they ruined it all through a totally insane immigration policy which has almost destroyed the nation. This election is the last chance for Sweden to get back on its feet. The sverigedemokraterna, namely Swedish Democrats, are doing well in the polls. But they are also the most hated party in Sweden because of their alleged anti-immigration agenda. Most hated? Yes. But still possibly the most liked too. It will be interesting to see what happens on Sunday.

I do? Where have I ever suggested such a thing? If it's the right thing to do why do Canadians not think it's the right thing to do, and who are you to decide it is if they think it's not? Are these real rights or the imaginary new rights that the Left keeps coming up with? What 'rights' are you talking about being oppressed? Yes, that is how they work. Rights are what people support and believe should be rights. And if they people believed such and such should not be a right then they'd elect politicians to change it and take away that right. I don't have a problem with protest. I have a problem with violent protest. I have a problem with protest that is specifically designed to prevent someone from doing something they're legally entitled to do through violence or force. If that's the kind of protest you're willing to man the ramparts to defend then go ahead. But I would suggest Ford's response to 'bigger' such protests would be to order the cops to bust heads and make lots of arrests.

Culture is the shared values, history and experiences of a people who grew up together and who, by and large, shared so many, many cultural touchstones of childhood, youth, adolescence, of growing up here, of what we all experienced together or separately. What it felt like, what we did and thought and learned and were taught growing up in Canada. And no, it wasn't all identical, but anyone who grew up in Canada would recognize so many things that they had shared with others who had grown up, even a thousand miles away. It all produces a similar mentality, a similar sentimentality, and common customs and values and beliefs. No unanimity, of course, but a basic, core centre you'd find the great majority of people agreeing with.

Anyone who dares to stand up to it will be immediately and completely vilified. Only a person with great determination and a very thick skin could withstand the attack. Only someone who's a rude boor... who doesn't give a heck if what they say is offensive to anyone.

You're being slippery here - that's not really what he said. It would be better if you could actually provide the statement from your source. All I could find is this very rational, pragmatic reference - which is not an admission of being offensive - it's an example of the growing intolerance of this "University public" that you speak of.

You mean......... "let's speculate about it." Speculating is one thing. But that's just that: speculation. You can't peddle it for a fact. I understand you're hoping Kavanaugh is found guilty of perjury. That's the only thing the Dems can hope for, too. Out of desperation, they're trying to throw "perjury" at him to see if it will stick. But from what I can see (and how it was explained by lawyers given above) - he isn't guilty. here's the latest news about him: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-kavanaugh-supreme-court-confirmation-hearing-20180907-story.html No mention of perjury. Wait and see what happens next.

I was listening to an expert on SM from the U of Waterloo. He says only 7% of world dairy is traded, meaning the market is very small. That market is dominated by New Zealand, the EU and thee US in that order. The idea that there are huge export opportunities out there is just wrong according to him and that is why the world market is swimming in milk, depressing prices and looking for some place to get rid of it. Guess where they are looking. Why do we want to become part of that? The US is also losing family farms but because they are no longer profitable due to low prices and dairies refusing to take their milk because there is too much of it. The fact quota is traded on an open market and priced according to demand is a problem. Getting rid of it would be an even bigger problem. Because it is a commodity on its own, banks accept it as collateral on loans. Just making it worthless and erasing 30 odd billion of equity would bankrupt thousands of farmers and hit financial institutions hard. So how do you do it? Most of the quota is in fact held by small farmers. The average Canadian dairy farm size is 85 cows, they are not mega corporations. I would say that getting rid of SM would make mega dairy more likely at the expense of family farms. You will see a lot more mega farms in the US than in Canada. Canadian prices reflect the cost of production without subsidies, they have nothing to do with efficiency. Say the gate price of milk is $1 a litre. The farmer that keeps his cost down to 80 cents is going to make twice as much as they guy who's cost is 90 cents and the guy who's cost is $1.05 will go broke. Under SM, the more efficient you are, the more money you make. I say the claim that lots of people are pushed into poverty by SM is total BS but if it is a hardship for some, there are other ways of helping them without destroying an industry and handing it to foreign farmers. Why do think the average consumer should have their dairy products subsidized? If you are not poor, why do you think your food should be subsidized?

It's too bad the UK doesn't have a conservative party which would put an end to such things. Instead it has, well, Theresa May.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/trump-warns-he-could-cause-the-‘ruination’-of-canada/ar-BBN1iZn?li=AAggNb9 Why is Trudeau holding out on the "cultural exemption"? He has repeatedly stated his belief that Canada has no culture and nothing worth preserving.

Are we headed for a 2 party system? " Were the federal New Democrats to conduct a leadership review this fall, Jagmeet Singh would likely be handed his walking papers. Over his first year as leader, he has presided over a steep decline in the party’s byelection fortunes. The New Democrat family is more divided today than it was on the day he won Thomas Mulcair’s succession." https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/09/07/as-the-ndps-fortunes-slide-singh-battles-to-stay-on-top.html

So when the ANC and their ilk sing "Kill The Boer"...they're just joshin' folks around...they are really just a bunch of sweethearts with peace and prosperity for all being their #1 goal. Yeah...not buying it.

Only you claim I give Saudi Arabia a "pass". You want me to say that Saudi dental students are terrorists...that's your claim. I won't say Saudi dental students are automatically terrorists simply because they come from your target country. Your hate is not what motivates me re: countering Islam in the West.

Trump is certainly doing a lot better on campaign promises kept than is Justin Trudeau.

1) THE most respected and renowned journalist just made a book full of anonymous sources. Not impressed. If a course is taught about Anderson Cooper or Rachel Maddow do you think that they will suddenly gain credibility? Courses were taught about the guy who writes a book full of quotes from anonymous sources.... Where? Berkeley? That bastion of free speech and open-mindedness? Do you think I am impressed with the useful idiots that the liberal colleges are belching out these days? People without the ability to see through the most basic deception or to question a single thing that their profs or Lib tells them? Yeah thanks for the shallow attempt at a backhanded compliment, or whatever that was, but I care nothing for the opinions of people who don't notice corruption in the FBI at this stage of the game and who still think that this whole "Russian Collusion" thing is about Russian collusion. You gotta be 4 suits and a joker shy of a full deck. That's good though, you have 1 good card. 2) Hannity's track record in this whole Russian collusion probe is impeccable compared to CNN. Can you name me one material fact about Russian collusion that Adam Schiff has been right about so far? How about Anderson Cooper or Rachel Maddow? How about all of CNN? Robert Mueller? Jim "boohoo woe is me why did I get fired for just a bit of lying, fake investigating and exonerating" Comey? Just one thing (aside from Van Jones's admission that Russian collusion is a big nothingburger because even though it was true, he didn't know there was a camera there). If you do I'll give some cred to Woodward, A Cooper et al. I'm part of history, I'm a guy who watched both channels and I quickly noticed which one constantly tells lies. I've named plenty of straight-up lies told by CNN et al in this thread. If you are so certain that Hannity and CNN are liars why don't you throw down some examples? Why don't you try to explain to me how my examples of CNN lying were really just misinterpretations or falsehoods? We both know where this is going right? You ignore this completely and change the topic. Got it. You're part of history too MH. One of CNN's useful *****s, barking up the Russian collusion tree, ignoring widespread corruption in the Democrat party/FBI/IRS. Honestly you can't even talk about some of the most newsworthy events of the 21st century because those subjects are taboo and you've got the audacity to lecture me about a liberal news icon and CNN flunky? Duly noted MH.

You're spouting nonsense in an apparent attempt to defend your weak and generally circular and trivial critiques. If you really don't understand the problems associated with state-sponsored and enforced behavior modification in relation to political, cultural and ideological matters, perhaps there's a dictatorship somewhere where you'd be happier. If you don't understand the kind of ideological autocracy inherent in the attempts either by fiat or indirectly to limit free speech, including the risible M-103, which is an example of a mentality as I've clearly stated, perhaps you shouldn't live in a democracy. If you can't be more sophisticated than to glibly equate the American constitution's aspirational affirmation of the "pursuit of happiness" (while at the same time accommodating slavery, which presumably you're willing to discount) with some kind of institutional master plan that's directed the future of all Western democracies, perhaps you might consider the almost 250 years of subsequent history. Furthermore, if the U.S. constitution, which is grounded in Enlightenment ideals) does serve as an ideal or template for Westernism, if not an institutional master plan, it also contains the free-speech affirming First Amendment, which clearly implies that the effective pursuit of happiness isn't possible in the absence of unfettered free speech. Free speech is the oxygen of democracy. The enterprise can't succeed without it. Westernism, as I stated, is messy and contentious and confrontational and oppositional and even in many aspects intolerant and offensive in the view of some. And yet somehow it's spawned what are widely believed to be among the most open and attractive societies in human history. Why mess with a good thing in order to impose some sort of controlled utopia that in all likelihood would for many end up being or becoming a nightmare? The West's greatest achievement is democracy and I'll stick with Churchill's assessment that it's "the worst form of government, except for all the others.” Meanwhile, if you'd rather live in a society dedicated to behavior modification and thought control, surely you can find one somewhere. But it's a journey on which I and many others don't wish to embark.

And yet you are making the bad assumption that they have happened despite zero evidence. Which would seem to be considerably less logical than my assumption. You are assuming the Marxists at university now are 'fake' for some reason known only to you and your ideological preconceptions. https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=7678 And you are for freedom? Are you okay with Fascist university professors? Individual businesses rarely impact society, and they are not an arm of government. Uhm, mirror mirror. My beliefs are based on readings. Your beliefs are based on ... what exactly? I've seen many, many writeups on why women self-select out of the STEM professions, for example, as well as the higher levels of business. Have you seen even one that shows conservatives self-select out of academia? Would you call this conservatives self-selecting out of academia? https://www.dailywire.com/news/15483/study-heres-one-way-universities-are-weeding-out-james-barrett And your thinking is based on what, exactly? https://heterodoxacademy.org/professors-moved-left-but-country-did-not/ It is respected enough that university professors have no fear of openly describing themselves as Marxists. How many are going to dare describe themselves as Fascists?

It might be somewhat better than what they have to look forward to in South Africa now. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5534449/South-Africas-white-farmers-likely-killed-police.html White farmers in South Africa have the most dangerous job in the country, are twice as likely to be murdered than police and are killed at four times the rate of the wider community, a rights group claims. This week, as the government moves to seize all white-owned land without compensation, civil rights organisation AfriForum claimed there had been 109 attacks which left 15 white farm workers dead so far this year. This follows 82 killings and 423 attacks in 2016, though none of the figures can be verified because the South African government has refused to release farm murder statistics since 2007. Some of the killings are reported to have been barbaric, with farm owners tortured, raped, burned alive and slaughtered in front of their families.

What happens next? He gets confirmed. Even with evidence as obvious as what was provided. Kind of makes you sick, doesn't it?