Peterson interview with Poilievre reveals the dire condition of Canada and what PP will do about it.

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Listening to two of my least favourite people for two hours?

Listening to the person who is most likely to lead your country, set your taxes, address your benefits, and we'll play a huge role in what rental prices and inflation look like over the next 4 to 8 years. Yes, that is what a reasonable adult would do. 

4 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Jordan Peterson is not an easy listen for some of us.

He's not giving a lecture, he's asking questions. This is an interview

4 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

While he may condemn academe these days his speaking style still bears its leaden stamp. 

Absolutely. However again, interview.

I have listened to Justin Trudeau drone on an interviews with interviewers that I don't like many times. It is necessary to hear what they are putting forward as part of developing a picture of who's got the best vision for Canada. Even if they give non answers and bad answers or refuse to give any answers it still tells you a lot. And if they do give answers you can compare that against their skill set and their track record to see whether or not they are legitimate policies that they could actually achieve and would  likely do

Unfortunately it is the sad duty of those who wish to exercise democracy that sometimes it takes a little bit of work.

[taxme]

On 1/7/2025 at 2:36 PM, herbie said:

Beats trying to claim you will make gold out of shit.

You lefty liberals can make a lot of dumb ass buffoons out there to believe that gold can be made from shit. Look at all of the dummies out there, including you, that believed that covid was for real and there is a serious climate crisis in the making. 🤡

On 1/8/2025 at 3:03 PM, herbie said:

Commie Marxists ruined all his fun

 

You got that right, comrade. 🤪

[Legato]

5 minutes ago, taxme said:

You lefty liberals can make a lot of dumb ass buffoons out there to believe that gold can be made from shit. Look at all of the dummies out there, including you, that believed that covid was for real and there is a serious climate crisis in the making. 🤡

You got that right, comrade. 🤪

LoL I remember those days, Braces and Bovver Boots

[taxme]

On 1/8/2025 at 3:46 PM, I am Groot said:

Even on CNBC, which I rather doubt has a particularly high percentage of Black viewers, every second commercial features black people. The Black population of Canada is 4%, of Ottawa 8%, so why is the only morning show in the city anchored by two black people? Were they really the most talented who could be found? Or are the progressive station owners virtue signaling about how open-minded they are? It's ridiculous.

And if racism is as widespread as certain people insist, why are advertisers so prominently featuring black actors and actresses? Wouldn't that cause hostility towards their products? 

Those Black people were part of a group called people of color, and this is why they got the job, no doubt over more  talented and qualified white people. I have no problem with Blacks getting a job on TV or in commercials, but what is with the high numbers of Black people getting those jobs. Those station owners are all just a bunch of progressive sucks and nothing more. Even in sports, especially in the NFL, the progressive sports announcers cannot stop trying to praise Black players over white players. A Black player gets a touchdown, it's wow, what a player. A white guy gets a touchdown, well, so what, who cares. It is so blatantly obvious as to what is going on here. More anti-white racism stuff. Just saying. 

As of 2022, white people made up of approx. 70% of the population of Canada. Every year our white population begins to decline thanks in part to this massive non-white immigration into Canada. I have no problem with non-whites immigrating to Canada, it is the numbers that concern me. This anti-white hostility stuff that is going on these days in Canada and America may just start a real racial problem one day. Just my opinion of course. 😊

[Moonbox]

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Listening to the person who is most likely to lead your country, set your taxes, address your benefits, and we'll play a huge role in what rental prices and inflation look like over the next 4 to 8 years. Yes, that is what a reasonable adult would do. 

Listening to a charlatan who insists lobster brains work the same as human's and that Hitler *should have* used the Jews as slave labour *if he wanted to win the war* isn't high on most people's list of priorities.  Listening to him and Pierre Poilievre pump each others' tires in a mutually affirmative "interview" would be even less so. 

This is about as interesting as it would be to listen to Al Gore interview Greta Thunberg on climate change...🥱

[godzilla]

my favourite quote from PP:
"all socialist policies in practice redistributes from the working class to the super wealthy and i can prove it!"

hilarious. just another liar.

the whole conversation was a dog whistle word salad.

Edited January 10 by godzilla

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Listening to a charlatan who insists lobster brains work the same as human's and that Hitler *should have* used the Jews as slave labour *if he wanted to win the war* isn't high on most people's list of priorities.  Listening to him and Pierre Poilievre pump each others' tires in a mutually affirmative "interview" would be even less so. 

This is about as interesting as it would be to listen to Al Gore interview Greta Thunberg on climate change...🥱

Yeah yeah except of course he never said any of that. And he's the one asking the questions, the person you're listening to is the one answering.

And as I noted you are welcome to remain as ignorant as you like. There's no law that says you have to get involved in politics at all or educate yourself in the slightest.  In fact i always kind of assumed that WAS the case with you. Some people just don't feel compelled to participate in democracy. 

But i believe that it's the responsibility of citizens and voters to listen and educate themselves and not rely on echo chambers or bias confirming news stories when picking a leader and exercising their democracy so that they can make informed and intelligent choices based on their own observations as well as the facts available. 

But it's just a belief, you're free to continue to believe that educating yourself is counter productive. 

[Moonbox]

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Yeah yeah except of course he never said any of that.

Yeah yeah, except he absolutely did:

Transcript:

🤡🤡🤡

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And as I noted you are welcome to remain as ignorant as you like.

He says, plugging for a charlatan and outrage farmer.  

Can't wait to see how you contort yourself trying to rationalize this now. 

[Venandi]

17 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Listening to a charlatan who insists lobster brains work the same as human's

Guess I'm just not accustomed to dealing with deliberately generated nonsense in support of narratives that can't be defended without it. That's a good thing though as  I no longer feel inclined to fact check ridiculous assertions... it appears that you and some of your colleagues here deliberately misrepresent what is actually being said and the very point that is trying to be made in the telling.

As I recall he was talking about neuro-structures, biological continuity, social structures, social hierarchies, PTSD and the like... suggesting that there were examples of such things in the animal kingdom that were analogous to humans and that by observing them in a rational manner lessons could be learned.

He did use lobsters as example, I remember listening to that video. I would also have remembered if he said that lobster brains and human brains worked exactly the same way, he was merely pointing out biological continuity between diverse species.

That said, I'm beginning to think your characterization of it has demonstrable merit in some cases here,

So OK... I looked it up for ya, this is actually what he said:
 

 

 

Edited January 11 by Venandi

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

Yeah yeah, except he absolutely did:

Transcript:

🤡🤡🤡

He says, plugging for a charlatan and outrage farmer.  

Can't wait to see how you contort yourself trying to rationalize this now. 

ROFLMAO!!! Oh look, you're back to your old tricks of posting things which proved you lied  

You cut a clip out of context, and you KNOW that because you already are trying to make excuses for the fact people are going to point that out. 

What he said is that if you're being entirely logical THAT is the logical thing to do if all you want to do is win the war BUT that obviously hitler didn't do that which tells us.... and goes on.  He's not saying 'that's how you win a war', he's saying if hitler's ONLY goal was to win the war instead of killing the jews you put them to work as slaves and kill them afterwards. So o

So your suggestion that he was saying that this is what hitler SHOULD have done was a complete lie. 

Just like your 'lobster' thing, he did not say our brains work the same as lobsters. He said that both  are 'sarotonistic' and there's similarities.  And he didn't say hitler should have enslaved the jews he said "if all hitler wanted to do was win the war that's what he'd do. "  In order to make the point that he didn't do that so therefore there's more to it. 

As always you have to lie and distort the truth. But thanks for posting the proof you were full of shit to save me the time   

[CdnFox]

39 minutes ago, Venandi said:

Guess I'm just not accustomed to dealing with deliberately generated nonsense in support of narratives that can't be defended without it. That's a good thing though as  I no longer feel inclined to fact check ridiculous assertions... it appears that you and some of your colleagues here deliberately misrepresent what is actually being said and the very point that is trying to be made in the telling.

As I recall he was talking about neuro-structures, biological continuity, social structures, social hierarchies, PTSD and the like... suggesting that there were examples of such things in the animal kingdom that were analogous to humans and that by observing them in a rational manner lessons could be learned.

He did use lobsters as example, I remember listening to that video. I would also have remembered if he said that lobster brains and human brains worked exactly the same way, he was merely pointing out biological continuity between diverse species.

That said, I'm beginning to think your characterization of it has demonstrable merit in some cases here,

So OK... I looked it up for ya, this is actually what he said:
 

 

 

Exactly. This poster specifically but leftists in general take what happened and try and twist it out of context. Trump says he'll be a dictator on the first day when it comes to two things. They say he promised to be a dictator starting day one. And so on.

It is extremely clear from these clips he is not advising Hitler what to do nor is he saying that lobsters are people. But that is precisely how moonbox chose to frame it.

And the reason he's doing that is because he wants to deflect from the point I made earlier that an intelligent reasonable voter will always listen to what all of the candidates have to say, not just the ones they like. He knows I'm right but he doesn't want to admit that people should be listening to the Jordan Peterson interview because of his tribalism.

People should be listening to the interview, lobsters are not people, nobody is telling Hitler what he should have done.

[Moonbox]

39 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

ROFLMAO!!! Oh look, you're back to your old tricks of posting things which proved you lied  

You cut a clip out of context, and you KNOW that because you already are trying to make excuses for the fact people are going to point that out. 

No, I didn't cut anything, smooth-brain.  I posted the video and it literally starts with him saying EXACTLY what you said he did not say.  So....you're LYING!!  🤡🤡🤡

If you continue watching the video, he doubles down and continues to say it, and then expands on it.

The mental gymnastics a no-life like you has to do to cope with your ineptitude is most interesting part of interacting with you.  You're such an unbelievable clown it's too entertaining to put you on ignore.  🤣

 

Edited January 11 by Moonbox

[Legato]

18 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Listening to a charlatan who insists lobster brains work the same as human's and that Hitler *should have* used the Jews as slave labour *if he wanted to win the war* isn't high on most people's list of priorities.  Listening to him and Pierre Poilievre pump each others' tires in a mutually affirmative "interview" would be even less so. 

This is about as interesting as it would be to listen to Al Gore interview Greta Thunberg on climate change...🥱

So are you saying because of Peterson, 129 Red Lobsters have shut down.

[Moonbox]

2 hours ago, Venandi said:

I would also have remembered if he said that lobster brains and human brains worked exactly the same way, he was merely pointing out biological continuity between diverse species.

No, that's really not what he was doing.  He was trying to prove how "natural" hierarchies were, by absurdly comparing lobster brains and human brains.  He was trying to draw comparisons between serotonin responses, and how it's the same (in his words) "circuitry" for both species.  The fact that one can barely be called the brain, and that the other has 1,000,000x more neurons didn't matter to Mr. Peterson.  He was telling a good story, and he knew most of his audience didn't know any better.  The fact that serotonin generally has the OPPOSITE effect in lobsters as it does in humans was also irrelevant to Mr. Peterson, because that didn't follow his story either.  

It's the same for most of the stuff he says.  He's a bloviating charlatan relying on an incurious audience that comes specifically to hear him affirm their worldviews.  The Nazis "should" enslaved the Jews and the Gypsies, and forced them to work...🤣

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

No, I didn't cut anything, smooth-brain.

That's not the whole video at all.  What, you think he walked out and those were his first words?  That's a clip.  

 

Quote

  I posted the video and it literally starts with him saying EXACTLY what you said he did not say

You posted a clip and it doesn't say what you said he said. You have to twist and distort its meaning to get that. What he said was that if you're Hitler The Logical thing to do if all you cared about was winning would be to do this but he didn't therefore he cared for more than just winning.

You tried to claim he's telling Hitler how to win the war    he doesn't even say it would result in a win, just that if you're hitler and you are focused on winning this is what  you do. 

 

You lied. You always do.  I don't know why. I see you've also been called out on your lobster lie

And all of this to avoid the fact that a rational adult voter would watch this interview to see what Poilievre has to say.

If you could stop being a liberal fanboy for 2 seconds you'd realize that was true. 

[CdnFox]

17 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

No, that's really not what he was doing

It really was what he was doing and now you're getting called out by lots of people on your lies.

Here's the deal kid. If you have to lie to make your point you don't have a very good point. And this whole way along you've had to lie and distort and twist what he said to try and fit a narrative.

There's nothing wrong with Peterson.  You may disagree with him but he's quite intelligent and makes valid points which is more than we can say for you, and if that weren't true you wouldn't have to lie to attack him. 

But the point again was you should be watching what PP says. We're only about 2 and a half months from an election. Might be a good idea to pay attention. 

 

[Moonbox]

21 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You posted a clip and it doesn't say what you said he said.

I posted a clip that said exactly what I said it did, and I posted the transcript showing it as well, so all you're doing here is making yourself look exceptionally stupid.  Your obligatory flopping and flailing, and you're useless mewling about context is especially funny considering this is coming from a Jordan Peterson fan channel with over 500,000 subscribers.  

"Nonono, that's not what he meant, even though he reinforces and doubles down on what he's saying as he continues throughout the video!"  🤡🤡🤡

 

 

[eyeball]

On 1/9/2025 at 10:15 PM, CdnFox said:

I have listened to Justin Trudeau drone on an interviews with interviewers that I don't like many times. It is necessary to hear what they are putting forward as part of developing a picture of who's got the best vision for Canada.

Bullshit, as evidenced by the fact you habitually maintain no party says what they're going to do because the opposition would just steal their platform.

[I am Groot]

Came across this Daily Show clip where the substitute host Desi Lydic talks about Trump's threat to annex Canada and then mentions Pierre Poilievre in pretty impressed tones (3 minute mark). Kind of funny.

 

 

[CdnFox]

39 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Bullshit, as evidenced by the fact you habitually maintain no party says what they're going to do because the opposition would just steal their platform.

What i say is that no party releases it's platform before an election.  Justin has been through 3 elections, there's been plenty of time to listen to him talk about his platforms over the years  

Further leaders can and do talk about priorities even if they dont' share the details of their platform.  They also share their views on Current events which can tell you a great deal about their style of leadership and competence. 

Which is why a wise person who's a good citizen and competent voter will tend to listen to what they have to say especially as we draw closer to an expected election. It's pretty basic. 

Why do i always wind up having to explain the basics of politics to you as if you were a 7 year old?  Did you learn NOTHING from school or your parents?

[NAME REMOVED]

 

It's incredible to realise this piece was done in 2010. In fairness, PP did have one job. He was Paperboy for the Calgary Sun.

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said:

 

It's incredible to realise this piece was done in 2010. In fairness, PP did have one job. He was Paperboy for the Calgary Sun.

Incredible to realize? Why? He's been doing the job as long as anyone else that got a pension, and he's made running the country and holding the government to account to be a career

So I take it you are adamant that other professionals that your life depends upon like doctors must not have experience in medicine but rather should have been plumbers or something before they operate on you? The argument that he only has experience in the job that he's applying or and some how this is bad is utterly baffling, NO where else would we think that made sense. 

Carney on the other hand has zero experience in politics and this would be an entry level job for him.  That went well last time didn't it?

Freeland has experience i guess... but it's all been bad 

[NAME REMOVED]

4 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Carney on the other hand has zero experience in politics and this would be an entry level job for him.  That went well last time didn't it?

You make a good point.

Trump had zero experience in politics, and he is the worst leader the United States has ever had,

Edited January 19 by DUI_Offender

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said:

You make a good point.

Trump had zero experience in politics, and he is the worst leader the United States has ever had,

Well he certainly wasn't the best. For that matter a lack of political experience was also one of the criticisms of Obama and honestly he didn't do that great either.

Different countries are a little different, but in Canada being a career politician means you're qualified for the job and you know how to get things done. You understand how things work you understand how to make things happen and you understand the consequences of actions. And given that he has a further specialty in economics of the country and that he studied under harper who was comfortably the best economic leader we've ever had even if people didn't like other elements about him, I think most Canadians will see it as a bit of a no-brainer

If carney wanted to be prime minister what he would have done is run for a seat in the upcoming election, serve for at least 4 years and then considered making a run. But he's an opportunist, I do not believe for a moment that if he doesn't win that he'll stick it out with the party and rebuild. Just like Ignatief promised that he would stay And rebuild the liberals because he was so dedicated to being a liberal and then fled the country 3 seconds after he lost.

The man is an international banker and investment advisor which means he gets paid for introducing people to other important people and opening the door to contracts and money which is exactly what he will do as a liberal leader and he will not give a flying crap about canada. We would literally be better off with Freeland and we know what her skill set is

[NAME REMOVED]

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well he certainly wasn't the best. For that matter a lack of political experience was also one of the criticisms of Obama and honestly he didn't do that great either.

Obama had 12 years of political experience in the Illinois and US Senate, when he was sworn in, as US President.

Edited January 19 by DUI_Offender