1. Two videos on fashionable energy production. Which one makes the most sense? Which one can be fact checked? Which one is by a person in a position to make major decisions that effect all of us based on their vision, or at least statements on the nature of energy production?
And the other one:
The BS on the one below is so enormous it is in fact a major contributor of Global stinking. The BS emanating from these claims at multiple levels have increased the measurable amount of agitprop in the world, possibly even the solar system by far more than a few parts per billion.
It is way worse than Ryan Gerritson has said here of course. The fires were set by leftist arsonists for one thing. For another, government polices were changed a few years ago in Australia, California and other places preventing people from cutting back underbrush which is where fires generally start that become major fires, and, predictably, major fires happened. The fact that CO2 just isn’t a problem is another major tell that this is commie nonsense of course, and if fires in Canada were caused by Global Warming, why is there a single tree left standing ANYWHERE in Central or South America, or Africa?
But again, I fall into the trap myself here. The fact that he/they are wrong, is secondary to the fact that they know they are lying, and using the lie to achieve destructive collectivist and destructive policies. They are paving over the best farm land in Canada as fast as they can to make brutalist beehives for mass immigration from Africa and the Muslim Middle East, which means more people to feed and less food. On top of that, each immigrant to Canada from a hot country increases their carbon footprint by TEN TIMES.
An extra note about Carney’s curious statements above:
“We actually drop the adjectives, sustainable because it’s just what financial professionals do” -Mark Carney
Feels a lot like…
“The word FREE still existed in Newspeak, but it could only be used in such statements as ‘This dog is free from lice’ or ‘This field is free from weeds’. It could not be used in its old sense of ‘politically free’ or ‘intellectually free’ since political and intellectual freedom no longer existed even as concepts,” -George Orwell, 1984
2. Health care for illegals. Yes, illegal in the defacto sense. Giving a dog a certificate that says it is a cat, does not make it a cat.
3. JD Vance has made a direct statement about Canada which is close enough to be true to not need comment. But we will anyway.
Assuming that elections in Canada are more honest than the 2020 election in the USA, the fault also lies (zeugma intended) with CBC, CTV and Global, which have subjected the Canadian public to Maoist mass line narrative attacks for over 17 years now, continuously on all issues.
President Trump has been made into Orwell’s Goldstein, and does mandatory 2 minutes of hate.
Actually much more than 2 minutes, and more than once a day.
Further, the phrase, “Diversity is our strength” is a stellar example of a dialectic mass line narrative attack. it was created as an intersectional line of attack against the axiomatic, “United we Stand, Divided we Fall”.
Here is one example from March 12. but I have friends who torture themselves by listening to CBC radio and the mass lines and jingoism against the US in some ways and Trump in all ways is pretty much continuous.
4. Read this tweet, and then think on what New York will be like in a couple of years after Mamdani cuts funding to police and makes judges all fall onside.
5. I didn’t think this was real at first:
Screenshot
I guess we can ask Salamon Rushdie if this is an effective way to get to people. Actually we could ask a lot of people the IRI have done this to.
Thank you all for checking out this site.
With what JD Vance is saying, while on one hand is correct, it’s missing important context because that context would make his boss look like a s-bag. IF JD, Trump and MAGA was so concerned about how Canada is doing, they would have kept their big mouths shut during the election and not interfered in their very active part in getting the Liberals back in power (of course, we could dissect for years how it worked out that idiot liberals, boomers and normies, terrified of Trump’s words, decided to turn around and elect the candidate Trump said he favored, as supposedly the one who would could “handle” Trump. I haven’t heard shaky logic like that since Brear Rabbit begged not to be thrown in the briarpatch).
Also I doubt many at 1600 Penn. Ave. are studied on issues like the Seven years War, The Revolution, War of 1812, and the Fenian raids (the last two giving birth to “The Star Spangled Banner” and “The Maple Leaf Forever”) as to how they impacted our forming as a nation (ya know, that IMAGINARY line…) and our desire, sometimes at the mouth of our cannons, to not be American, but they did know they could scatter the nervous clucking chickens of the voting public with talk of annexation (while it shows an abundance of ignorance for the US ambassador to not understand how talk of annexation is an issue here, due to said previous mentioned conflicts, at the same time, we Canadians are ignorant of how Americans feel about adding new states, and that ignorance was used against us). If Canadians understood how reluctant conservatives there are to add the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico as states, due to their debt levels, political makeup and control of the senate handed over to the Democrats, they’d have known that even someone like Trump would not add what would amount to a second California to their electoral map, forever dooming them to left wing rule in perpetuity.
But Trump did want Carney in to work whatever corporate deals they and Brookfield have in store for both nations. It’s clearly a case of money uber alles, as the normally Israelphile Trump, shunned the self declared “shabbas goy from the prairies” Pierre P, who would have been much closer aligned to Trump on foreign policy, the middle east, trade and fiscal policies, but we are to be led to believe that because he said some “hurtful things” supposedly in the past about trump, he had to go.
I mean, one could claim trump is that thin skinned and impulsive to do that, but I would have thought his donor class would have made him overlook that. Trump was mad about Canada recognizing Palestine, but that would never have happened had he not pushed Carney into the lead spot, so that’s all on him. To borrow from Colin Powell, Pottery Barn rules, you break it, you bought it….
While JD and MAGA may feel their “dunking on the Libs” with this, all they’re doing is dunking on the conservative/PPC people that he claimed to support during the convoy, that may have wanted to leave Canada for the US, or worst case situation, we’d have actually voted the Libs out in 24 (course with PP’s costume wearing like JT, and going along with the bulk of Lib/WEF motions anyway, it might have not been much better, aside for maybe some more energy projects and lower taxes).
That’s really the crux, every time they think they’re dunking on “stupid lib Canucks” they’re forgetting they cut out the legs of the very people that would have got rid of them for them….but that might have derailed Carney’s fire sale of Canada, wouldn’t it?
First of all, thank you. excellent comment. And I hope that it does start some kind of discussion on why Trump did push for Carney.
Secondly I like this bit a lot: “To borrow from Colin Powell, Pottery Barn rules, you break it, you bought it….”
But it seems like the Trump admin in this case is actually using the Clay pot fallacy: “You never loaned me your clay pot and it was broken when I got it”.
steve jackson:
If President Trump “pushed for Carney,” it’s only because President Trump saw Carney as someone who he would enjoy pushing around. President Trump is personality-focused, not country-focused. He enjoys hanging out with “tough guy” leaders but also enjoys toying with political stuffed shirts, hypocrites and poseurs, i.e., people like Carney.