Moonbox

Do you have a good cite for that, or is from the trucker's protest website? I'm sure when you wrote this up you thought it was a really sharp analogy. It begs various questions, however, most notable among them being: 1. In what retarded fantasy are we lining up to be shot at with guns (live ammunition or not)? 2. What are we trying to accomplish here? 3. Why would my boss terminate my employment for not wanting to play along?"

So in your mind, the horror of being fined/penalized for not following public health guidelines and getting a needle that's been proven safe around the world is every bit as awful as being beat up or shot senselessly by police. Okay dude.

It's structurally the same garbage reasoning. If you could calm yourself down for a moment and break both statements down, you'd see they're based on the same faulty logic.

So he supports the cause of Black Lives mattering, and that means he supports vandalism...because there was some vandalism at some protests...in the USA. By that logic, I suppose that means that Pierre Polievre is a racist for supporting trucker's protest...because there was a swastika somewhere in there, and some of the members/leadership had been linked to far right extremism in the past. Both claims are moronic. Think it through.

Uh huh...This is the sort of completely reasonable insight that has garnered so much support for the trucker's protest.

Can you direct me to where I ever said that, or even implied it for that matter? This is what I'm talking about.

Because it's silly, frivolous criticism. You're taking one word and exaggerating/misconstruing its meaning and then waving it around like it's a declaration of the next pogrom. By focusing on silly stuff like this you cheapen any tangible arguments you'd otherwise be able to make and people tune you out because you don't appear reasonable to begin with. Trudeau's not popular right now but this loud sloganeering and the CPC's cozying up with the dumbest and least articulate among its base is THE path for Trudeau to get re-elected.

I agree with public health measures (to a point), which is hardly the same thing as protest blockades etc and what we were just talking about. That you don't respect my opinion couldn't be less important to me. Your childish all-or-nothing perspective and your inability to concede even the most minor point that doesn't fully support your politics makes that statement practically a compliment.

That's why I'm not singling you out as one of the circus clowns. The "you" was a general reference to all of the people going on about this. The argument about Trudeau should be about his cynicism, his double-standards, his lack of moral conviction and his worthless platitudes. The emergencies act is something actually tangible for which to criticize him and you'll get a lot more mileage out of that than raving about a word folks have chosen to inflate/conflate into some faux-outrage. It makes his critics look frivolous and reactionary.

I can't really disagree with you on the emergency powers, or on Trudeau's hypocrisy. At the same time I don't agree that the trucker's should be allowed to disrupt the economy and close off large parts of a city just because they're angry, just like I don't think Indigenous protestors in Ontario should be able to block rail lines to protest pipelines in BC. You can't cherry-pick who you apply your standards to. Trudeau's proven himself not to be a man of principle too many times for ignore, but when you champion the trucker's rights to protest you'd do well to remember your arguments next time we have an Occupy Wallstreet protest, or the next time Indigenous Canadians block a pipeline through Alberta.

but then the same people supporting this blockade were complete against the rail line protest. Have you considered the position that both were inappropriate and should have been broken up quickly? Your logic works just as well if you flip it. For the truckers, it's 100% okay to block border crossings and trade as long as you're white and waving a flag around and talking about freedom, but not okay when Indigenous people do it. Of course I don't actually think that, but that's the logic we're faced with with these sorts of comments. It's far to criticize Trudeau's hypocrisy, but not unless you can also recognize your own.

because you're going to make a big deal about anything Trudeau does. I can't stand the guy either but you've lost perspective, though you're far from the worst here in that regard. At least you can go 3-4 posts without calling someone a Nazi.

which is exactly what our conspiracy LARPers do here. There's hardly a thread on this board where we don't have one of our resident clowns calling another poster a nazi or fascist for not agreeing with them. The outrage over Trudeau talking about swastikas is therefore pretty hilarious irony.

He was using inflammatory, sweeping rhetoric and it's perfectly fair to criticize him for that. His attempt to characterize all the protestors all as racists was stupid and unscrupulous and you can see it for what it was - an attempt to capitalize politically on the presence of a handful of idiots. That's what this is about. Twisting your panties over the word tolerate just makes you look silly. The Speaker of the House had to scold Trudeau in Parliament the other day for spouting off his hyperbole, and that's what people are listening to and noticing, not the contrived outrage over one dumb word you've blown up to absurdity.

Just went outside and waved the Canadian Flag. Nobody did anything. I'm wondering if it had anything to do with where and how they were waving the Canadian Flag - perhaps something to do with occupying and obstructing important parts of the city in a protest which has been ordered shut down. Of course that's too rational an explanation for someone as "sharp" as you. The most cowardly part about the whole protest is how they bring children to hide behind, as if that somehow gives them credibility and makes the government look more like meanies. ?

The Charter says that, does it?

Or, "Do we tolerate white people?" or "Do we tolerate Albertans?" but this is not the same thing as, "Do we tolerate people doing ______ ". I think Trudeau's rhetoric has been over the top and inflammatory and I started this thread to criticize him, but this whole "tolerate" hang-up that you guys have is a silly reach and nobody's really listening.

Lots of people are unhappy with Trudeau right now, left, right or middle. I've never liked him but generally because I thought he was a ball of fluff who didn't do anything, say anything or stand for anything useful. He was the avatar of political entitlement and bullshit - a fool. Now? Now I think he's a dangerous fool but the intellectual race to the bottom on this forum is out of hand and every time someone brings up Hitler or accuses Trudeau or another poster of Fascism, the community gets a little stupider. Honestly, I agree with you. The problem is that his alternatives are terrible and potentially worse. Harper was the last real Conservative leader of merit but had outworn his welcome. His successors have been buffoons and if Pierre Poli gets elected Conservative leader that will pretty much ensure another Liberal government after the next election. The CPC needs rational pragmatists who can do more than shout and rile up the base.

You guys are gaslighting yourselves. Honestly.

You brought up old ladies donating for freedom. You can't even keep track of the stuff you're posting yourself. ?

You answered a question I wasn't asking for an argument I wasn't making, and then refused to answer the question I DID ask. Great!

Dumb questions get dumb answers. Never takes you long to fall back to the Nazi and Hitler references. I don't know why I thought there might be more to you than that.

Like I asked you before, how would you feel if it was an Indigenous protest blocking a pipeline or something, and the protestors were being funded by individual Chinese donors? I think this is my third time asking and you keep dodging the question.

I thought maybe there was hope that you were interested in actually having a debate, but you quickly fell back into your silly hyperbole so clearly that wasn't the case. If you actually qualify that as hate speech I don't really think there's much hope for you.

Where are people making any deal about old ladies doing anything in Texas?