Leaderboard

Vive le Alberta libre

Two major TV shows have premiered in the past month. 1) House of the Dragon: HBO's prequel to the wildly popular popular Game of Thrones. And based on a 2018 Faux History text of the of the Targaryen family. 2) Rings of Power: Amazon's Series about the Second Age of Middle Earth. Based on some scant indexes from the Lord of the Rings Books. Both have been accused of "wokeness" by casting racialized minorities in prominent roles. https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2022/08/house-of-the-dragons-corlys-velaryon-speaks-out-about-racist-comments.html https://www.thewrap.com/lord-of-the-rings-amazon-racist-backlash-explained/ Medieval Fantasy "usually" revolves around feudalism the plight of Europeans in the middle ages, but with Magic inserted into it for lulz. In Game of Thrones lore, particularly the debates of feudal succession is the main narrative around all major storylines. But these aren't historic texts and HBO and Amazon are looking to reach a broad audience. So casting a Black dwarf, may initially seem weird, it allows for other groups to be represented in this wildly popular stories. It's kind of like adapting Romeo and Juliette into a tale of Italian and Puerto Rican gangs in the Westside Story. As Steve Toussaint points out in the first linked story. These are stories with Dragons, where is there a requirement for racial consistency? In the Lord of the Rings example. The whole premise of the story is to show groups of different "races" joining forces to defeat a common evil. But they all must be white because Tolkien grew up in the white-washed UK countryside which had very little racial diversity at the time? Tolkien was a staunch opponent of the racism of Hitler at the time. I circle back to how often white europeans are cast in roles that weren't historical made for them. They do this to appeal to the largely White North American crowd. If film-makers were being historically accurate, no depiction of Jesus would ever have him white, or speaking English.

Sure, I agree that it’s open to debate. It’s debated all the time. And it seems to be fine, currently, except for a few religious zealots. Acceptance of gay people is not “sex ed”. Agreed. But it’s very important that schools teach students to be accepting of kids who may not be like themselves, including kids with different skin colour, religions, gender or sexual preference.

Yep, that's his style alright. Wait until he tells you what you're thinking before you're even aware of it. WasteCanMan is pretty special that way.

If that happens, the Conservative party will not have a leader. What should Conservatives do if the CPC is taken over by the Reform/ Social Credit / Republican / Whigs. They represent the antithesis of Conservatism. Reform is the party of Lincoln, not MacDonald. I will always be a Conservative, but after next weekend, like millions of other Conservatives, we will not have a party to vote for if Mr. Poillieve wins. How soon Canadians have forgotten the record of W.A.C. Bennett and Bill Aberhart.

Make no mistake: the people who produce these things are motivated by return on investment, period. If it was profitable to have the heroes burning crosses, they would do so. As such, people who complain about "wokeness" are really just complaining that their worldview is ostracized and treated as abhorrent by the mushy middle. Which confuses me, because they usually LOVE to be shocking and edgy...

1. I don't actually have to have this discussion if you're going to call me a liar. Now I invested a good chunk of time reading that hysterical first link and couldn't find anything specific about "abnormal sexual practices .... be promoted and taught" If you want to have a grown-up conversation you have to be specific with your language and treat the other side with respect. I'll ask you again to give a specific example. If you want to post a page from an advocacy group that's fine but please point out the specific evidence to your claim. Thanks again.

all this hyperventilating about January 6th is beyond silly give it a rest already

This contest is a struggle between the Conservative party of Sir John A. and the Socialist Credit Party of Major Douglas and Bible Bill Aberhart. The Conservative party stands for Queen and Country and the Socreds stand for funny money and what is yours is theirs. When the Conservative party finally defeated the Liberal Government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, it was a minority with the socialist creditistes holding the balance. When the Conservative government tried to privatize the government owned Metro Canada and tried to pay off the deficit left by the grits with a gas tax of about 3.5 cents a litre, it was the Socreds that voted against it to put Trudeau back in power. The Socreds stabbed the Conservative party in the back to put Pierre Trudeau back in power to drive up the deficit to new heights. Now, Pierre Poillieve is carrrying the banner of Socialist Credit, complete with promises of funny money (now called crypto-currency). If the Socreds win this, it doesn't mean the end of conservatism in Canada, but it will mean we won't have a party to vote for for a few years, unless the CPC formally splits again.

A judge actually said it. If you wanna split hairs and be angry that I paraphrased, so be it, but you still have to acknowledge that a judge said words TO THAT EXACT EFFECT. Bottom line is that my accusation against the FBI was 100% bang on. And you're trying to call out my integrity because I perfectly paraphrased someone but used quotation marks? FYI here's the conventional usage of quotation marks: So, if I used some of the judges original text in my quote, then quotation marks were necessary. The quote is almost 2 years old and I didn't remember the exact wording. I used quotes. Big deal. You could have taken umbrage if my quote didn't match hers in form and character but it did. What I did was more than just "fine" by internet forum standards because the content of my post was 100% accurate. There's not a leftist on this site that can hold a candle to my integrity.

Why would I be boasting? I didn't vote Liberal. I figured we had agreed the surplus was due to world economic conditions, just as Harper's repeated deficits were caused by global conditions. The sort of surplus just before he lost was the result of creative accounting. Much of the money spent over that last 2 years was the response to the ongoing deadly pandemic. Soon, hopefully, the government will finally begin spending money of trying to mitigate the climate catastrophe the world is facing. We can look forward to start making serious sacrifices to save future generations. Fasten your seat belts, it is going to be a bumpy and scorching ride.

Very loaded question by an obviously right wing group. Certainly not designed to elicit an objective response.

Marriage is extremely ancient, probably as old as Homo sapiens if not Hominids and Neanderthal.

Is your memory so short that you forget when Alberta was a have not province, or a few years ago when we had nothing to feed our cattle, Quebec farmers loaded up boxcars of donated hay to feed Saskatchewan and Alberta cattle. We are one country. We live in the most wonderful nation in the world and nobody should put money ahead of that.

Apparently, cops being attacked with flagpoles.and.people being beaten isn't violent enough for you.

Oh...OK.

Your positions are consistent with all of those outcomes. Pretty horrific. Go back and read Huxley’s Brave New World. He didn’t know about the possibilities brought by our current data collection and surveillance tech. He’d have a field day if he saw our society.

Tommy Douglas, Saskatchewan NDP brought medicare to Saskatchewan in 1962.

Perhaps he’s a lying dog faced pony soldier.(one of his favourite phrases)

Really. To my mind the battle was over and they won...

Not at all. Every party should pay equally. Outright rape and pillage is a whole other matter.

So, out of cogent arguments, just going on emotion now. Feelings are not facts.

You’re just an anything goes libertine to the extent of abortion up to the expected delivery date, euthanizing the mentally ill if a “medical expert” thinks it’s fine, and lifestyle choices that don’t support natural reproduction. I consider your views abhorrent.

I’m supposed to believe this cause you say so?

1. There already has been back-and-forth on this... not sure if it constitues a battle or not. 2. I was asking for specifics from Nationalist but we weren't able to get there. Do you have specifics around what "sexualize young kids" in terms of what is being taught. I mean something specific that is taught in the school - very specific please - that sexualizes them ? Keeping in mind from your post Sunday 10:14, you yourself allow for: " how females become pregnant and learn about the risks of STD’s, the responsibilities of raising a child, etc. They need to learn about consent and the level of responsibility required to manage sexual behaviour, " Which is already more liberal than those who withdraw their kids from class would allow for.

the FBI needed clearance from the DOJ the DOJ did that at Biden's behest not only was Biden aware of the raid before it happened even though he claimed he didn't turns out he ordered it

Perfect. Then you have no issue with returning the money.

@Nationalist’s argument, framed differently. Conservative: “what is so great about Trudeau’s policies?” Liberal: “What are your intentions, you lying Conservative sack of shit”? You seem obsessed with making everything personal. I think it’s to try and hide the fact that you can’t come up with a coherent argument about what is problematic that is being taught.

Prog logic. Doesn't make sense. Speaking of hilarious...

And explosives can do more. And cars do, do more.

FYI the knock on Joe/Hunter isn't that Hunter's a crackhead. The fact that Hunter's a crackhead is just more proof that when he was receiving millions of dollars from the Chinese and from the criminals at Burisma, it wasn't for services rendered as much as it was for access to his father's influence.

They babble and spew forth insane lies...and hide when call on their lies. For libbies it's all about sound-bytes now. They have no reasonable platform. They've destroyed the US economy and security. So now the bumbling fools can only attack and try to scare the electorate with seething lies.

Those photos are not evidence of a crime. He may appear to have a crack pipe in his mouth, but we do not know what is actually inside that pipe. He also appears to be asleep, and so the photographer could have put that in his mouth. Without corroborating evidence, we have no evidence of a crime in those photos. Beyond that? He’s admitted that he had a substance abuse problem and got treatment.

If woke means trying to target a larger audience to make more money, then I guess the answer is yes?

1. Uh huh. Right... 2. My intention was to investigate your claims. If you get something specific, do reach out.

Thanks. I spent good time looking, as I said. Couldn't find anything specific, just general concerns...

We will see...won't we.

It was a riot that included breaking into the Capital building. There was an explicit goal of preventing the "peaceful" transfer of power. It's a little beyond expressing doubt, and to downplay it as such is to be divorced from reality. It was Trump supporters who initiated violence on the government on Jan 6. It's Trump supporters who create militias in backwoods to fight against government. It was Trump supporters who carried Nazi flags in Charlottesville. Who is prepping for civil war? Trump supporters, not the right, not the left.

your own sources point out just how free Florida is they do not show that Florida is as free as all other states they show that is clearly more free than the vast majority of states as for that insipid politico article claiming California had one of the best covid responses in the nation shows how their analysis should be totally disregarded as the joke that it is

It's like these objectors are surprised by the fact of POC in the world. They deny systemic racism, then complain when their expected all-white cast has a few POC included.

Of course. They choose to stay in the public system though, for the most part. I am pointing out that you said you would withdraw your kids, so I am affirming that you can do that as an option, just as you can stay in the system and keep your kids home.

Alberta does not pay the bills for everyone. That's a myth.

Of course you can always withdraw from the public system. As I have pointed out, that system accommodates parents who want to withdraw from sex education. I also believe that if people are participating in reviews and shaping the public curriculum, they must agree to participate responsibility and in good faith.

No, they’re talking about sexuality to kids at a young age and making the edge of the bell curve appear to be in the centre. Also, not everyone thinks homosexual acts are fine. I’m of the mind, Live and let live, on the most part, but I don’t think the variety of sexual preferences needs to be discussed in elementary schools, certainly not in primary classes. It raises the question, What kind of education should we expect from our tax dollars, especially when it’s delivered by people we don’t know whose values we may not share? Outside of math, literacy, science, the arts, phys ed, and health, how deep should publicly funded education delve into sexual lifestyle choices and when? Some might say never. Others might say they can be factually described in a brief way to older students. I certainly don’t think these topics should be discussed with young children and I’m not sure it’s worthwhile giving much attention to them with older students. Not what I value about child education. If the state is going to insist that enough people support teaching these themes to young children, I can see new divisions emerging between the permissive schools and the ones that don’t get into discussing these lifestyle choices. I think many parents would choose the latter. I certainly would.

Which is what they're doing. But some people object that they're teaching that those are 'people' too, and that the appropriate age should be like 21....

How about we just ban criminals?

You can pretend that she didn't do it all you like. She still held up a blood & soil banner of the Ukraine Nazis. She can claim ignorance...but she claims also to be an expert in the Ukraine & its history. You can pretend that nobody noticed the black & red if you like, as well.

I agree that is how it should be, but instead there’s a push towards affirming whatever possibly transitory gender identity feeling a student has and a quasi-promotion of non-traditional sexual lifestyles. I don’t think most parents signed off on this.

No, No, No. You put those words in quotes. You said that a judge stated those words. Not true. Stop with the lies. When you put words in quotation marks, by definition of the word “quote,” it means word-for-word, verbatim. Dude, you have no integrity at all. You’re just spouting lies. You have no concept of honesty or truth or facts. Telling me a judge said something similar doesn’t matter, ok? You put the words in quotes and nobody ever said such a thing. I gave you the option to back out and apologize for making a mistake, but you’re too MAGA for that. I get it: If you post something, we can all assume it’s lies and BS that you made up. That’s what you’re about. I’m just letting everybody know that’s who we’re dealing with. Zero integrity, zero honesty.

the folly is trying to run everything centrally from Ottawa this only causes the Confederation to tear itself apart Ontario robbing Alberta to bribe Quebec