|
|
Post by franko on Apr 25, 2020 16:36:45 GMT -5
PS. Everyone should think critically about matters and what they read in the press or elsewhere. Some sources are more reputable than others, and some are just pathetic. Get different points of view but make up your own mind. critical thinking. unfortunately most people focus more on the critical and less on the thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 25, 2020 17:07:20 GMT -5
CTV news two nights ago.... "CONSERVATIVE MP made a racist remark about Dr Tam." It was criticism about Tam following the WHO talking points, which she is part of. The snippet showed the MP asking "is she is working for Canada or China". CTV news ignored the entire context of the remark and went straight for the RACIST attack. Showed nothing but that tiny clip as PROOF of racism. The very same criticism and context by Jason Kenney wasn't touched a few nights earlier. Two nights later, in an isolated clip, the race card was played out in full. I hate the media...with cause. It was a stupid criticim, put out there purely for the insatiable desire the Cons have to criticize EVERYTHING Trudeau does. I realize you don't like him either, but there has been enough dumb CPC criticism. Really? How abut this tidbit on masks. Pure doublespeak nonsense. She's saying masks are not necessary, but are necessary if you are asymptomatic. Stupid pet trick question for Tam the "expert", HOW does one know if one is asymptomatic? Or how the tidbit that people are too stupid to wear masks because they can infect themselves. Really? Masks as SOOOOO complicated. How does one figure out what part of ones anatomy to put it on is beyond the average Canadian IQ. Then she does a complete about face.... Then there is the issue of travel....go for it but be cautious....notice the date. WE already knew there was person to person transmission on on January 24. IN FACT, she is on the WHO advisory board and she is part and parcel of that declaration, yet a month later, advises that it's ok to travel. Everybody with room temperature IQ would see that this was going to be a disaster. Here is she on the WHO advisory board..... www.who.int/about/who_reform/emergency-capacities/oversight-committee/theresa-tam/en/She was on the committee on the WHO that spit out Chinese talking points on January 15 that there was no person to person transmission. How STUPID is it to declare that a virus doesn't have human to human spread...yet China was ready to wall off 11 million people a week later. Yet Tam went along with it. How stupid is it for Tam and WHO to "advise" Trudeau that stopping flights from highly infected places was "not advisable". We had weeks and weeks of flight from Iran and Italy with nothing more then "please read paper, sign here". Straight into the heart of our society. Travel and masks is what she is being criticized on, INCLUDING Kenny saying that he is not going to listen to her advise based on her criticizing him looking at other Western world handling of of patients. He dismiss her criticism and retorted that based on her well documented "advice" history, he is not taking her advice. Instantly, the left ignored her, to repeat, well documented major mistakes and lept into WOMAN...MISOGYNY....RACISM. Any spin that it's about she's a woman or on skin colour is pure bullcrap to shut down deserved criticism by playing the misogynist and race card. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 25, 2020 18:03:01 GMT -5
Dr. Tedros, who runs the WHO....(Tam is on his committees and getting blowback because of that).
From the bastion of far right media.....
Of course it's a well known fact that if you criticize Tedros as another corrupt, untrustworthy stooge, then it can't be anything other then racism. After all, quotes from those far right media going back 3 years is proof of racism.
Look...a squirrel.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 25, 2020 18:17:58 GMT -5
Here is ANOTHER shameful display from a WHO "official". Kind of a shame that he's is Canadian and still has "Dr" in front of his name.
And of course, Tam is linked to the WHO organization.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 25, 2020 18:24:39 GMT -5
Fun times at the WHO.....from China Uncensored.
It MUST be that evil orange guy who is a racist........
|
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Apr 29, 2020 6:11:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 29, 2020 18:41:22 GMT -5
That's why I got really bent with Tam, the WHO, CDC (before) and any number of talking bubble head on tv who spat out that wearing masks was "not important for the public". All my production life because of the industries I was in, I had all kinds of sanding and/or grinding creating very fine dust. It hang around in the air and unless I changed the air every minute, people where breathing it in. That's when a did a LOT of work with 3M ENGINEERS, not gooberment "experts" or bubble head dolls, to solve the issue. Including ways to test the particle concentration in the air. Way harder then it appears because any small air current would buoy the very fine particles. Those particles were several times heavier then water droplets and yet they would linger in the air for 15 minutes before gravity go to them. Why wouldn't water droplet do the same when several times lighter? From day ONE, my argument is that you got two hole that are 99% of the pathway. Mask it on the way in, mask it on the way out. If you are infected, you don't spread it, if you are not, you wont pick it up while still viable in the air. It isn't complicated, yet, all our fn "experts" keep spitting out all kinds of garbage when in fact it's as simple as in an enclosed area..... cover the damn holes.But hey...what do I know compared the the latest talking bobble heads on CBC or CTV. .... BTW.....I'm developing a reusable, washable cloth mask that is going to be better then surgical masks. It's ALL about the right cloth so right now, I'm still waiting for MORE sample cloth material from India. I'm going to fly in enough materiel to make about 100 masks. I'm also debating making them there in high volume and them here. Maybe a big box store item. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 30, 2020 0:29:21 GMT -5
Derek Sloan's criticism of Dr. Tam was more about bringing attention to himself ... Sloan threw his hat into the Tory leadership race and the more attention he has on him the better ... but the criticism was directed at Tam's performance in handling the plague ... it was the PM who played the racist card and the networks went into a feeding frenzy ... that said, though, Sloan shouldn't have to apologize ... he said nothing wrong but I question his motives ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 30, 2020 1:25:02 GMT -5
... but the criticism was directed at Tam's performance in handling the plague ... it was the PM who played the racist card and the networks went into a feeding frenzy ... . that said, though, Sloan shouldn't have to apologize ... he said nothing wrongAll along our Checkbook Santa kept saying "on the advice of experts and WHO", which means if you question Tam on handling of the epidemic, you undermine Santas entire mishandling of the epidemic. So Santa ignited the well paid media to attack under the garbage accusation of racism, after all, $600,000,000 buys a LOT of friends that can carry the message. Including CBC "interview", which was nothing more then staged PR filled with kitten questions. Laughable... Have people forgotten the Liberals straight up boasting..."we can have friends in the media put out the right stories" in the Lavalin scandal? Welcome to 2020 and the ever decaying Canadian media turning into garbage propaganda parrots.... |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Apr 30, 2020 8:01:45 GMT -5
Dr. Tam should and will be subject to criticism for her handling of this crisis. As should Justin Trudeau, Doug Ford, Jason Kenny, Francois Legault, Andrew Scheer, etc, etc.. In a democracy no politician is immune to criticism or questioning. It's at the very base of our democracy, the need for an informed opposition to keep elected or selected government officials in check.
However, questioning her loyalty to Canada crosses a line. Especially given this country's history when it comes to treating Asian immigrants (WWII, the railroad, and so on). I do not doubt Dr. Tam's loyalty to Canada, nor do I think she is not trying, to the best of her abilities, to help get us through this. Whether she is succeeding or not will be and is open to discussion. But to think she is working for China, and thus deliberately enacting policies that result in the deaths of thousands of Canadians? Come on. That would require her to be a psychopath. A willing mass murderer.
She is not that. Incompetent? Perhaps. Misguided? Perhaps. In over head? Perhaps. I will let others and history judge her on that. But implying that she is a traitor to her country simply because she comes from Hong Kong?? THAT'S unacceptable and if not racist, certainly appeals to the racists in this country. Christ, she was born in British Hong Kong, grew up in the UK, educated in Canada. But oh yeah, she looks Asian, so I guess she's working for China, right?
She is not the first person to be accused of being a traitor. Trudeau gets it all the time from western conservatives who spout that he is "intentionally destroying the country". Again, come on. Criticize the the policies, not his loyalty. I'm sure there are examples of liberals doing the same thing in reverse. It all has to stop. Nobody in this country is actively trying to destroy it. The sooner politicians stop implying that, the better. Leaders, by definition, lead.
We are better than this.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Apr 30, 2020 10:50:34 GMT -5
Dr. Tam should and will be subject to criticism for her handling of this crisis. As should Justin Trudeau, Doug Ford, Jason Kenny, Francois Legault, Andrew Scheer, etc, etc.. In a democracy no politician is immune to criticism or questioning. It's at the very base of our democracy, the need for an informed opposition to keep elected or selected government officials in check. However, questioning her loyalty to Canada crosses a line. Especially given this country's history when it comes to treating Asian immigrants (WWII, the railroad, and so on). I do not doubt Dr. Tam's loyalty to Canada, nor do I think she is not trying, to the best of her abilities, to help get us through this. Whether she is succeeding or not will be and is open to discussion. But to think she is working for China, and thus deliberately enacting policies that result in the deaths of thousands of Canadians? Come on. That would require her to be a psychopath. A willing mass murderer. She is not that. Incompetent? Perhaps. Misguided? Perhaps. In over head? Perhaps. I will let others and history judge her on that. But implying that she is a traitor to her country simply because she comes from Hong Kong?? THAT'S unacceptable and if not racist, certainly appeals to the racists in this country. Christ, she was born in British Hong Kong, grew up in the UK, educated in Canada. But oh yeah, she looks Asian, so I guess she's working for China, right? She is not the first person to be accused of being a traitor. Trudeau gets it all the time from western conservatives who spout that he is "intentionally destroying the country". Again, come on. Criticize the the policies, not his loyalty. I'm sure there are examples of liberals doing the same thing in reverse. It all has to stop. Nobody in this country is actively trying to destroy it. The sooner politicians stop implying that, the better. Leaders, by definition, lead. We are better than this. Agreed on all points, though I think the (extreme) right wing is faster to pull on this particular trigger. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 30, 2020 14:26:28 GMT -5
Dr. Tam should and will be subject to criticism for her handling of this crisis. As should Justin Trudeau, Doug Ford, Jason Kenny, Francois Legault, Andrew Scheer, etc, etc.. In a democracy no politician is immune to criticism or questioning. It's at the very base of our democracy, the need for an informed opposition to keep elected or selected government officials in check. However, questioning her loyalty to Canada crosses a line. Especially given this country's history when it comes to treating Asian immigrants (WWII, the railroad, and so on). I do not doubt Dr. Tam's loyalty to Canada, nor do I think she is not trying, to the best of her abilities, to help get us through this. Whether she is succeeding or not will be and is open to discussion. But to think she is working for China, and thus deliberately enacting policies that result in the deaths of thousands of Canadians? Come on. That would require her to be a psychopath. A willing mass murderer. What is impressive is the way she, herself, is handling it ... she's bigger than the 'sideshow' ... The Tories would be wise to brief young Sloan on the implications of blurting ... what he may also be guilty of is racial profiling ... it's odd that I didn't think of it before because it's happened to me, as well ... I'm part of a very select group of "old white people holding the country back" and that's a direct quote ... That's been a Tory paradigm and it's been used on the Liberals about as often as the Republicans using the "socialist" card on the Democrats ... conversely, the Liberal paradigm has evolved into "if-you're-not-Liberal-you're-a-bigot" and that, as well ... Doug Ford stated publicly that he won't be discussing politics until the dust settles on the plague ... he then put his full support behind Trudeau ... this is Leadership 101, in my books, and I haven't seen this before in a Canadian politician ... regardless of what he's going be accused of in the future, he'll probably get my vote just based on those two initiatives ... I have to cite a reference from our boards, here, in that the whole planet was unprepared for this ... as such, I don't have a benchmark to rate Dr. Tam's performance and the same holds true for Trudeau and Ford ... she's been nothing but a professional through the whole process and the way she handled this issue earns her my respect ... if we miss her we'll get the highlights later in the evening ... it's the same for Trudeau and Ford ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 30, 2020 15:43:15 GMT -5
Dr. Tam should and will be subject to criticism for her handling of this crisis. As should Justin Trudeau, Doug Ford, Jason Kenny, Francois Legault, Andrew Scheer, etc, etc.. In a democracy no politician is immune to criticism or questioning. It's at the very base of our democracy, the need for an informed opposition to keep elected or selected government officials in check. Yes they are. Which means that every criticism is not "racism" or "misogyny" or any other dismissive excuse. However, questioning her loyalty to Canada crosses a line. Especially given this country's history when it comes to treating Asian immigrants (WWII, the railroad, and so on). I do not doubt Dr. Tam's loyalty to Canada, nor do I think she is not trying, to the best of her abilities, to help get us through this. Whether she is succeeding or not will be and is open to discussion. A bit of context here. The LEADERSHIP of the WHO, particularly Tedros is rightly accused of parroting the Chinese talking points. I already provided plenty of left wing media questioning him and his motives. Which of course have been conveniently forgotten by the very same media because Trump is now questioning his motives. IN FACT.....the very same media who previously question Tedros are also the very same media who spin any accusation that the Chinese government hid vital information as "Sinophobia". Victimhood garbage writ large. All of a sudden, "the enemy (CPC) of my enemy (Trump) is my friend". Really? Talking about ultra devise claptrap.... Her DIRECT involvement with the WHO, whose leadership motives CAN be questioned, has caused blowback. Was she the architect of the follower of the WHO? Does it matter? Trudeau followed her policies and the consequences that followed. No one with any hearing missed the constant "according to our experts and the WHO" by Trudeau. But to think she is working for China, and thus deliberately enacting policies that result in the deaths of thousands of Canadians? Come on. That would require her to be a psychopath. A willing mass murderer. Direct result in deaths of thousands? Psychopath? Who said that? We went from "racism" to traitor" to what? WAY over the top there. One plus one isn't a thousand. She is not that. Incompetent? Perhaps. Misguided? Perhaps. In over head? Perhaps. I will let others and history judge her on that. But implying that she is a traitor to her country simply because she comes from Hong Kong?? THAT'S unacceptable and if not racist, certainly appeals to the racists in this country. Christ, she was born in British Hong Kong, grew up in the UK, educated in Canada. But oh yeah, she looks Asian, so I guess she's working for China, right? The actual quote was......"does she work for Canada or China". In context of her and WHO policies. I did not hear "go back to China" or 'You are a Chinese mole" or anything else that can be spun into Sinophobic or racist. Unless of course one sees criticism directly and only through the victimhood lens. So we go from questioning her polices because she WAS parroting the deadly Chinese line to racism and now implying she was a traitor? People are also accusing Aylward of the exact same thing yet you don't hear a peep. Certainly no race or traitor card to be played because he's a white man. No surprise there. She is not the first person to be accused of being a traitor. Trudeau gets it all the time from western conservatives who spout that he is "intentionally destroying the country". Again, come on. Criticize the the policies, not his loyalty. I'm sure there are examples of liberals doing the same thing in reverse. It all has to stop. Nobody in this country is actively trying to destroy it. The sooner politicians stop implying that, the better. Leaders, by definition, lead. Why is "he's working against the economic interests of Canada" traitorous talk? His policies aren't going to effect Lichtenstein one bit. I despise Trudeau for doing nothing when he could and enforcing nothing concrete (like mass testing) but playing Checkbook Santa that can have dire economic consequences. Does that mean I'm a reindeerphobic? GUARANTEED if he was anything but a white male, that would be spun as racist and misogynist from those who prefer to do so. We should be better then trying to look at every criticism through the racist, misogynist or traitorous lens. The very same accusation that racist will read any comments from a racist lens also applies to people who read any comments from the victimhood lens. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 30, 2020 16:42:57 GMT -5
The Tories would be wise to brief young Sloan on the implications of blurting ... what he may also be guilty of is racial profiling ... it's odd that I didn't think of it before because it's happened to me, as well ... I'm part of a very select group of "old white people holding the country back" and that's a direct quote ... That's not half as bad as being accused of "white privileged". I'm part of a very select group of "privileged rich white people". Unfortunately, every time I offer to share my "privileged" 80 hour work week or millions in taxes, I get rebuffed. That's been a Tory paradigm and it's been used on the Liberals about as often as the Republicans using the "socialist" card on the Democrats ... conversely, the Liberal paradigm has evolved into "if-you're-not-Liberal-you're-a-bigot" and that, as well ... I'm use to the phoney "holier then though" Liberal/Democrat garbage line, what I will not stand for is to try to crush any criticism by playing the uber hypocritical victimhood and race card. It's political correctness on steroids and leading to ever more divisiveness. Doug Ford stated publicly that he won't be discussing politics until the dust settles on the plague ... he then put his full support behind Trudeau ... this is Leadership 101, in my books, and I haven't seen this before in a Canadian politician ... regardless of what he's going be accused of in the future, he'll probably get my vote just based on those two initiatives ... I have to cite a reference from our boards, here, in that the whole planet was unprepared for this ... as such, I don't have a benchmark to rate Dr. Tam's performance and the same holds true for Trudeau and Ford ... she's been nothing but a professional through the whole process and the way she handled this issue earns her my respect ... if we miss her we'll get the highlights later in the evening ... it's the same for Trudeau and Ford ... I disagree on Leadership 101 and see it as Politics 101. Ford went from guaranteed loss in the next election to probable winner. Trudeau went from getting criticized and 35% approval for his policies to 76% approval for handling the virus. That's political gold right there. I can't see either being anywhere near the Leaders of Taiwan or Sweden who are actually putting some IQ behind their policies. The whole planet was unprepared only because the majority of the planet politicians were not willing to pull the plug on international travel and shutting down borders. One didn't need any particular high IQ to see that Chinese leadership, who will never be accused about excessive concerned about citizens, note their gulags if in doubt, if they were prepared to wall of 11 million people with dire economic consequences yet, most of the world morons leaders would not take that as an ax to the head message and did not seal their borders fast enough. Who was leading the bullcrap line that we shouldn't take action? The WHO. They parroted the Chinese government deceitful line that closing borders was Sinophobic (and parroting of that by the left). And here we are.....EVERYBODY has now closed their borders, destroyed their economies and millions of victims. Worse of all, if we ignore what everybody else did....who parroted the WHO line in Canada? |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Apr 30, 2020 16:49:37 GMT -5
Dr. Tam should and will be subject to criticism for her handling of this crisis. As should Justin Trudeau, Doug Ford, Jason Kenny, Francois Legault, Andrew Scheer, etc, etc.. In a democracy no politician is immune to criticism or questioning. It's at the very base of our democracy, the need for an informed opposition to keep elected or selected government officials in check. Yes they are. Which means that every criticism is not "racism" or "misogyny" or any other dismissive excuse. Nor did I say it was. In fact, I said criticism is a vital part of any democracy. However, questioning her loyalty to Canada crosses a line. Especially given this country's history when it comes to treating Asian immigrants (WWII, the railroad, and so on). I do not doubt Dr. Tam's loyalty to Canada, nor do I think she is not trying, to the best of her abilities, to help get us through this. Whether she is succeeding or not will be and is open to discussion. I agree. But we also shouldn't ignore blatant wink-wink-I'm-not-being-racist dog whistles either. A bit of context here. The LEADERSHIP of the WHO, particularly Tedros is rightly accused of parroting the Chinese talking points. I already provided plenty of left wing media questioning him and his motives. Which of course have been conveniently forgotten by the very same media because Trump is now questioning his motives. IN FACT.....the very same media who previously question Tedros are also the very same media who spin any accusation that the Chinese government hid vital information as "Sinophobia". Victimhood garbage writ large. Her DIRECT involvement with the WHO, whose leadership motives CAN be questioned, has caused blowback. Was she the architect of the follower of the WHO? Does it matter? Trudeau followed her policies and the consequences that followed. No one with any hearing missed the constant "according to our experts and the WHO" by Trudeau. Again, no argument. She, and the WHO, are legitimate targets for criticism. But to think she is working for China, and thus deliberately enacting policies that result in the deaths of thousands of Canadians? Come on. That would require her to be a psychopath. A willing mass murderer. Direct result in deaths of thousands? Psychopath? Who said that? We went from "racism" to traitor" to what? WAY over the top there. One plus one isn't a thousand. Come on man. It was a dog whistle, and you know it. You need only read the comments below any article about her. As I said, it might not have been racist, but it certainly appeals to racists. If you don't think that was deliberate on his part then I don't know what to tell you. He was appealing to "that" segment of the population, no doubt in my mind. She is not that. Incompetent? Perhaps. Misguided? Perhaps. In over head? Perhaps. I will let others and history judge her on that. But implying that she is a traitor to her country simply because she comes from Hong Kong?? THAT'S unacceptable and if not racist, certainly appeals to the racists in this country. Christ, she was born in British Hong Kong, grew up in the UK, educated in Canada. But oh yeah, she looks Asian, so I guess she's working for China, right? The actual quote was......"does she work for Canada or China". In context of her and WHO policies. I did not hear "go back to China" or 'You are a Chinese mole" or anything else that can be spun into Sinophobic or racist. Unless of course one sees that comment directly through the victimhood lens. He asked if she was working for China. Which is pretty much the same thing as "you are a Chinese mole" is it not? Hmmm... a Canadian government employee citizen working for the Chinese... is that not the very definition of a mole? "Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?"Lives are ruined by insinuations. You know that. So we go from questioning her polices because she WAS parroting the deadly Chinese line to racism and now implying she was a traitor? People are also accusing Aylward of the exact same thing yet you don't hear a peep. Certainly no race or traitor card to be played because he's a white man. No surprise there. Where is Aylward being accused of working for China? He is being questioned, and rightly so, for the WHO policies that he went along with. But nobody is asking him if he is working for China. And there are certainly no comments from lunatic fringes saying he should go back to China. She is not the first person to be accused of being a traitor. Trudeau gets it all the time from western conservatives who spout that he is "intentionally destroying the country". Again, come on. Criticize the the policies, not his loyalty. I'm sure there are examples of liberals doing the same thing in reverse. It all has to stop. Nobody in this country is actively trying to destroy it. The sooner politicians stop implying that, the better. Leaders, by definition, lead. Why is "he's working against the interests of Canada" traitorous talk? His policies aren't going to effect Lichtenstein one bit. He's not "working against the interests of Canada". That's an "active voice", meaning "he is doing it". Again, read any comment section. You say something like "he's working against the interests of Canada" and I GUARANTEE you that a certain portion of the population will call him a traitor, that he should be locked up, that he hates Canada. Which leads to the other side calling your guy a traitor, which leads to... well, we're seeing that now, are we not? Trudeau is doing what HE thinks is best for Canada. You, and I, we are free to disagree with what he is doing. It's why we have elections. But to say he is actively working against Canada, actively trying to destroy it? No. And the sooner we get rid of that notion, the sooner we get rid of that kind of baiting talk - from both sides of the aisles - the better. I despise Trudeau and think he's doing nothing concrete, enforcing nothing concrete (like mass testing) but playing a Checkbook Santa that can have dire economic consequences. Does that mean I'm a reindeerphobic? GUARANTEED if he was anything but a white male, that would be spun as racist and misogynist. I disagree. If you criticize his policies, then its fair game. Just like its fair to criticize Singh or May for their policies. What's racist or misogynist would be to say "Is Singh working for Canada or Pakistan?" Over 200 Canadian soldiers died following a disastrous US military policy in that Afghanistan. When Stephen Harper extended our tours of duty there was he working for Canada, or the US? It's a tried - and tired - trope to question the loyalty of an immigrant, and to suggest that their loyalties are with their "home" country. Usually followed by "why don't you go back there?" Sloan knew damn well that Dr. Tam is not "working for China". We should be better then trying to look at every criticism through the racist, misogynist or traitorous lens. The very same accusation that racist will read any comments from a racist lens also applies to people who read any comments from the victimhood lens. I agree. But we also shouldn't ignore blatant wink-wink-I'm-not-being-racist dog whistles either. Sloan went from criticizing her actions in the context of the WHO, to questioning who she was really working for. Are you cheering for the Leafs or the Habs? To even pose the question is to raise suspicion. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 30, 2020 17:26:47 GMT -5
Come on man. It was a dog whistle, and you know it. You need only read the comments below any article about her. As I said, it might not have been racist, but it certainly appeals to racists. If you don't think that was deliberate on his part then I don't know what to tell you. He was appealing to "that" segment of the population, no doubt in my mind. If there is no doubt in your mind, is it because you want to see it that way? Actually, in your case, argue it that way? Which would also be the same and equal "argue it that way" in my mind that it was in context of her actions. The very same argument that it's "that" segment of the population can also apply "that" segment of the population want to dismiss it is as victimhood. I agree. But we also shouldn't ignore blatant wink-wink-I'm-not-being-racist dog whistles either. Sloan went from criticizing her actions in the context of the WHO, to questioning who she was really working for. Are you cheering for the Leafs or the Habs? To even pose the question is to raise suspicion. This is were we disagree because you are implying that it's only one side getting "dog whistled". What you don't want to discuss (and I know you too well for you not to see every conceivable angle), is that as much as the racist will see it as a "dog whistle"......the victimhood card played crowd will also see it as a "dog whistle" to leap into attacking ANY criticism as race/gender based attack. Worse thing of all..... The biggest victim in this stupid episode is that now......instead of discussing what have we failed in and what we have to do, we are debating who said what and how it should be seen or perceived. As for cheering....I'm cheering that SOMEBODY in power get enough fn brains and organize the country through this misery and into return to some kind of normal before we have economic destruction to go along with the misery. To assume some kind of self healing arc to normalcy and looking really, really sad and concerned is NOT deliberate, methodical, thought out action. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 30, 2020 18:03:05 GMT -5
I love a hair trigger game mouse that works great for CAD work trying to pick out lines for quoting. Particularly on this site.  If you are going to quote me...and I don't know why anyone would want to do such a thing  ......give my post some time to "rest". I tend to edit it a lot to correct spelzing/grammmar and not be too cranky self. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on May 1, 2020 9:01:36 GMT -5
What you don't want to discuss (and I know you too well for you not to see every conceivable angle), is that as much as the racist will see it as a "dog whistle"......the victimhood card played crowd will also see it as a "dog whistle" to leap into attacking ANY criticism as race/gender based attack. Well... * Nor did I say it was ( that every criticism is "racism" or "misogyny"). In fact, I said criticism is a vital part of any democracy. * Whether she is succeeding or not will be and is open to discussion. * She, and the WHO, are legitimate targets for criticism. * I'm sure there are examples of liberals doing the same thing in reverse. It all has to stop. * Which leads to the other side calling your guy a traitor, which leads to... well, we're seeing that now, are we not? * And the sooner we get rid of that notion, the sooner we get rid of that kind of baiting talk - from both sides of the aisles - the better. * If you criticize his policies, then its fair game. Just like its fair to criticize Singh or May for their policies. * (The very same accusation that racist will read any comments from a racist lens also applies to people who read any comments from the victimhood lens.) ]I agree. The biggest victim in this stupid episode is that now......instead of discussing what have we failed in and what we have to do, we are debating who said what and how it should be seen or perceived. Yep. And that's why I'm running out of faith in our democracy. It's getting too damn easy to subvert. Deflect, distract, deny. Nobody cares about policies anymore, most people don't even know what policies are being enacted. Throw some bread and circuses at the slobbering mobs and nobody will even notice that you burned down their farms in the background. We aren't as bad as the States are in that regard... yet. But it is here, and it will get worse. Much quicker than smug Canadians will ever admit or notice. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 1, 2020 9:36:28 GMT -5
Yep. And that's why I'm running out of faith in our democracy. It's getting too damn easy to subvert. Deflect, distract, deny. Nobody cares about policies anymore, most people don't even know what policies are being enacted. Throw some bread and circuses at the slobbering mobs and nobody will even notice that you burned down their farms in the background. We aren't as bad as the States are in that regard... yet. But it is here, and it will get worse. Much quicker than smug Canadians will ever admit or notice. a lot of people opposed to government handouts . . . unless it's them. down on "lazy welfare recipients" but as soon as they are in trouble they come running with their hands out ( not a blanket statement!). gonna be interesting in the days ahead. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 1, 2020 12:10:30 GMT -5
The Tories would be wise to brief young Sloan on the implications of blurting ... what he may also be guilty of is racial profiling ... it's odd that I didn't think of it before because it's happened to me, as well ... I'm part of a very select group of "old white people holding the country back" and that's a direct quote ... That's not half as bad as being accused of "white privileged". I'm part of a very select group of "privileged rich white people". Unfortunately, every time I offer to share my "privileged" 80 hour work week or millions in taxes, I get rebuffed. The journalist who tagged me, as such, represents the new wave of progressive liberalism, which what I've noticed, is a Liberal who focuses on the 'threats' of conservatism rather than the merits of liberalism (that's only my opinion) ... this is a tactic that I traditionally associate with the Conservatives but, to be fair, it seems to be the way politics is evolving worldwide ... right/left has never been this polarized and ne'er the plains shall meet ... by the way, that particular journalist announced that he is (temporarily?) stepping back from Twitter ... by his own admission it's not a health-related issue and by his comments, I got the impression that he's tired of 'fighting' with people over the threat of conservatism politics ... That's been a Tory paradigm and it's been used on the Liberals about as often as the Republicans using the "socialist" card on the Democrats ... conversely, the Liberal paradigm has evolved into "if-you're-not-Liberal-you're-a-bigot" and that, as well ... I'm use to the phoney "holier then though" Liberal/Democrat garbage line, what I will not stand for is to try to crush any criticism by playing the uber hypocritical victimhood and race card. It's political correctness on steroids and leading to ever more divisiveness. [/quote] Yes, there is a self-righteousness to progressive liberalism which is what distances me from it yet, I live a liberal lifestyle ... what distanced me from the Tories was the way they conducted their campaign and their lack of leadership ... as with Progressive Liberals attacking 'anything-right', the Tory campaign strategy was more about discrediting the Liberals, more specifically, Trudeau, and less on the issues ... as for leadership, and just my opinion, but Andrew Scheer did not project the kind of leadership required to lead a country ... enter Peter MacKay, right ... wrong ... with portfolios in Foreign Affairs, National Defence, and Attorney General, MacKay has more qualifications than Trudeau has ... I was all set to give MacKay my vote then he steps on his pitou ... I don't know what he was thinking when he tried pushing the Tory leadership convention during a pandemic ... like, frig man ... people have different priorities right now ... talk to Doug Ford, man ... Doug Ford stated publicly that he won't be discussing politics until the dust settles on the plague ... he then put his full support behind Trudeau ... this is Leadership 101, in my books, and I haven't seen this before in a Canadian politician ... regardless of what he's going be accused of in the future, he'll probably get my vote just based on those two initiatives ... I have to cite a reference from our boards, here, in that the whole planet was unprepared for this ... as such, I don't have a benchmark to rate Dr. Tam's performance and the same holds true for Trudeau and Ford ... she's been nothing but a professional through the whole process and the way she handled this issue earns her my respect ... if we miss her we'll get the highlights later in the evening ... it's the same for Trudeau and Ford ... I disagree on Leadership 101 and see it as Politics 101. Ford went from guaranteed loss in the next election to probable winner. Trudeau went from getting criticized and 35% approval for his policies to 76% approval for handling the virus. That's political gold right there. I can't see either being anywhere near the Leaders of Taiwan or Sweden who are actually putting some IQ behind their policies.]/quote] I can buy that ... you're right in that Ford was doomed regardless of what mess he's trying to clean up ... but the last election wasn't about getting Ford elected, it was about getting Kathleen Wynne kicked to the curb ... even some of the most ardent liberals I know (neighbours) were on-line with that ... Ford's endorsement of Trudeau may have been a political ploy, but this is what I expect from a politician who not once ever came across as being bigger than the people who voted for him ... Trudeau, Scheer, and MacKay could all learn from that kind of humility ... I read yesterday that the early cases to hit Canada came from the US and not China ... We saw quite a few people wearing masks at Pearson when we were returning from Cuba and that was way before the WHO declared a pandemic ... that said, if people were wearing masks in Pearson I suspect other international airports looked the same ... the signs were everywhere ... I read about the WHO and China being in cahoots but I'll have to find it again ... when Trump publicly called out the WHO I initially thought he was trying to deflect blame off himself, but I want to see where it goes nonetheless ... that said, the US has committed itself and they'll need to find something ... it might be the last lifeline Trump has left ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 1, 2020 13:21:49 GMT -5
the US has committed itself and they'll need to find something ... it might be the last lifeline Trump has left ... will Biden win or will the virus be the watermelon that beats Trump? |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 1, 2020 13:29:19 GMT -5
What you don't want to discuss (and I know you too well for you not to see every conceivable angle), is that as much as the racist will see it as a "dog whistle"......the victimhood card played crowd will also see it as a "dog whistle" to leap into attacking ANY criticism as race/gender based attack. Well... * Nor did I say it was ( that every criticism is "racism" or "misogyny"). In fact, I said criticism is a vital part of any democracy. * Whether she is succeeding or not will be and is open to discussion. * She, and the WHO, are legitimate targets for criticism. * I'm sure there are examples of liberals doing the same thing in reverse. It all has to stop. * Which leads to the other side calling your guy a traitor, which leads to... well, we're seeing that now, are we not? * And the sooner we get rid of that notion, the sooner we get rid of that kind of baiting talk - from both sides of the aisles - the better. * If you criticize his policies, then its fair game. Just like its fair to criticize Singh or May for their policies. * (The very same accusation that racist will read any comments from a racist lens also applies to people who read any comments from the victimhood lens.) ]I agree. The biggest victim in this stupid episode is that now......instead of discussing what have we failed in and what we have to do, we are debating who said what and how it should be seen or perceived. Yep. And that's why I'm running out of faith in our democracy. It's getting too damn easy to subvert. Deflect, distract, deny. Nobody cares about policies anymore, most people don't even know what policies are being enacted. Throw some bread and circuses at the slobbering mobs and nobody will even notice that you burned down their farms in the background. We aren't as bad as the States are in that regard... yet. But it is here, and it will get worse. Much quicker than smug Canadians will ever admit or notice. So here we are again, after chopping down a small forest of cyber trees, back to agreeing. The kind of agreeing that requires DNA testing....  We're not heading in the right direction in Canada. For that, I'm pointing directly at the media. In order to survive, needs to fuel more devisivness and anger. Bonus points if they can spit out their bias and make a buck. Then there are the politicians who barely have any ideas outside pandering to their base. Smug Canadians indeed.... |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 1, 2020 13:41:58 GMT -5
a lot of people opposed to government handouts . . . unless it's them. down on "lazy welfare recipients" but as soon as they are in trouble they come running with their hands out ( not a blanket statement!). gonna be interesting in the days ahead. This is Greece all over again. Everybody lined up for the early pension and every benefit they can get their hands on...because the government owed them a living and hell if they whined loud enough, a lifestyle. The politicians were all too eager to hand them out because it bought them votes. The politicians never actually did anything substantive or risked their necks with any policies or actions. Always, always reactive, always there to be Checkbook Santa to as many votes as possible. It really paid off for them..... |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 1, 2020 13:45:48 GMT -5
the US has committed itself and they'll need to find something ... it might be the last lifeline Trump has left ... will Biden win or will the virus be the watermelon that beats Trump? 330 million and the best the US can do is Biden? Chances are....the media is grooming Cuomo because they see another Hillarious outcome. Those softball questions and camera face time is not by accident.... |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 2, 2020 11:42:45 GMT -5
... image made it around Twitter earlier in the week ... |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 2, 2020 13:54:00 GMT -5
Dis....
I'm nursing a sore body from pulling and cutting down 60 years of overgrowth.....so I haven't responded.
Here's a tidbit....what organization do we have in Canada, across Canada, whose purpose is to defend Canadians against it's enemies? As Prime Minister (I'm the only one voting for myself and nobody else in their right mind should ever do), I'm taking that highly structured and disciplined organization, including retired vets (YOU!!!) and check point TESTING this ****** virus into submission.
To fight an enemy, you need intelligence!
Since the only thing that will be invading us into the foreseeable future is Canada Geese, we might as well ask our dedicated men and woman to step in and defend us...
Or I can be Checkbook Santa....
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on May 11, 2020 7:30:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on May 11, 2020 11:00:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 11, 2020 12:14:47 GMT -5
We were 6th in the world in deaths yesterday at 177. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of us getting control of the virus.
Takes the smug out of smug Canadians who think "we have better health system and leadership".
We need better and massive, massive testing to get this under control in Ontario, Quebec and federally. Not superior sad faces and checkbook solution.
Another thing.....one of the most massive death hot spots have occurred in an old peoples home near me. I didn't know about it until my wife pointed it out. Interestingly, it's literally right besides a major hospital. So there could be no excuses about "medical access".
EDIT...we just passed by that area and the have crosses in the front lawn. So fn sad and this fn virus..
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 11, 2020 12:30:57 GMT -5
Let me put mg "surprised face" on.... Tedros is dirty and the WHO needs to be cleaned out, not more money poured into it. Chinese government is dirty and we need to isolate and pull away from it ASAP. (Of course, none of this will happen with our current regime and Chinese big shots donating money to our dear leader causes.) This is based from a German Der Spiegal report. www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3931126BTW.....I'm sure you will hear about this in our evening news....lol |
|
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/6F6VF25GCFF2HFJCOITRJSGNPE.jpg)
......give my post some time to "rest". I tend to edit it a lot to correct spelzing/grammmar and not be too cranky self.
