Stick A Fork In Canada

 

Christine Gauthier is a retired Canadian Army Corporal and former Paralympian, who has been restricted to a wheelchair since surviving an accident when she was in the service. Gauthier recently testified that she has been waiting years for a wheelchair lift for her home. She also testified that, when she expressed her frustration to a Veteran Army of Canada (VAC) caseworker, she was promptly offered the option of being euthanized. According to a report in PJ Media, the caseworker allegedly said, “Madam, if you are really so desperate, we can give you medical assistance in dying now.” Gauthier was understandably stunned at the “offer.”

At least four other Canadian vets have come forward with similar allegations, and all dealt with the same caseworker.

“Thank you for your service and your sacrifice. Can we kill you now?” Wow. “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Sure. If anyone should be offered “medical assistance in dying,” it should be the caseworker.

Sadly, the erstwhile friendly, inoffensive, down-to-earth nation with its head screwed on straight is no more. Justin Trudeau and assorted other authoritarian leftist whackos are deep into the process of turning Canada into a far-less-populated version of China. Whether they are criminalizing dissent, threatening and freezing the assets of those with whom they disagree, or suggesting assisted suicide to, well, almost anyone who may not be useful to their pursuit of permanent rule, these existentially dangerous morons have proven to be anathema to what was once a relatively strong, free and prosperous society.

And that’s not all. Corus Entertainment, one of Canada’s largest media companies, is actively lobbying the True North’s federal government to grant it large sums of taxpayer money. This is the same media conglomerate whose numerous subsidiaries were hyper-active in pushing restrictive COVID measures-- and the anti-Freedom Convoy narrative. What a surprise. According to Blacklock’s Reporter, Canada’s House of Commons finance committee recently released details of a petition whereby Corus Entertainment asked Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s federal government to subsidize their payroll by 25 percent! Imagine Fox News pleading with the Biden administration for a 25% subsidy. Corus Entertainment bigwigs would go ballistic. In “defense” of Corus Entertainment, some Canadian news and broadcast content providers are already receiving direct, ongoing financial support from the federal government.

At which point, media companies become nothing more than state media outlets, mouthpieces of government, akin to Pravda or the Korean Central News Agency. They have abandoned all pretense of objectivity, neutrality and “journalistic ethics,” and simply voluntarily opted to be the propaganda arm of a political party. In Canada’s case, the Liberal Party-- in America’s, the Democratic Party. In days of yore, the Fourth Estate claimed its job was to “speak truth to power.” Today it is happy suckling on the government’s teat while hiding the truth from everyone still naive and/or dumb enough to believe it.

Incredibly, in 2019, Canuck Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made an election-year promise that the Liberals would give the nation’s legacy media $595 million in federal assistance over four years. (And he won, proving that far too many Canadians’ brains are permanently frozen.) So much for a “free press.” And this is a kind of “feedback loop,’ with a propagandizing press preventing people from accessing and processing unbiased, accurate information. Separation of church and state? How about separation of media outlets and state when “liberals” are in power?

After prevailing in the election, the Trudeau government promptly amended Canada’s Income Tax Act to allow for 25 percent payroll rebates to news companies, a measure subsequently approved by the Minister of Revenue. 

The beat rolls on.

And, tragically, the American mainstream media is no better, as it continually reminds us.

What should be the easiest lesson to learn in human history…seems somehow never to be truly learned by many. That lesson is: in all ages, in all places, leftists/Marxists/socialists destroy everything, especially freedom and dignity.  Period. That holds true for the Soviet Union, East Germany, Cuba, North Korea, China, Venezuela, and numerous other nations of lesser note.

It will also hold true for Canada. And the United States.

Assisted suicide writ large.

 

Democrats The New British

 

Today’s Democrats can be seen as the new British circa 1776. These new Red Coats (ironic) are tyrannical, big government, pro-king types. “Jan. 6,” seen in its true light, was-- or should have been-- a modern-day Lexington and Concord. Think about it. Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed civilian (and veteran), was shot dead by a jittery government officer for no defensible reason whatsoever while protesting governmental authorities’ casual, sneering, and ubiquitous dismissal of the concerns of those they are supposed to represent and protect.

It’s no wonder Democrats disdain the Founders and the Gadsden Flag, etc., etc. Most of them would have favored the mandatory quartering of the king’s men in colonists’ homes, believing that would show the dangerously radical, limited government, infuriatingly independent, America First, backward rubes from the hinterlands that resistance was futile. They would have been for the Stamp Act. And the tax on tea. And all of the policies the soon-to-be Americans derisively labeled the “Intolerable Acts.” Taxation without representation? Democrats never met a tax they didn’t like and have no problem taxing people without representing them. This is true in so many ways, whether it be via part of workers’ mandatory union dues being given to only one party or in going against the majority of peoples’ wishes on border, energy, and crime policies, etc., etc. Democrats would have sided with the effete, elitist, tea-drinking fops from large English cities against the musket-armed semi-savages in tattered clothing who hailed from the backwoods of what would become America.

The difference between then and now is that the Founders—and the early “deplorables” they represented-- had the courage to stand up for what they believed no matter what, going so far as to pledge “their lives, fortunes and sacred honor” to achieve justice and freedom.

By contrast, most of today’s Republicans, as evidenced by the likes of Mitch McConnell, Mitt Romney, Adam Kinzinger-- and a vast array of other RINOs and invertebrates-- prefer preemptively surrendering, even when the odds favor them, to engaging in pitched political battle with their ideological foes. This is truly remarkable when one realizes that those on the left have no answers, no real solutions, and actually want to destroy the United States and everything it once stood for. Most Democrats still realize they have to sort of hide these facts. Therefore, they pre-emptively, proactively accuse Republicans of doing—or wishing to do—what they themselves are doing-- or planning to do. Like destroying “our democracy.”

Democratic-Socialists cannot win a serious, legitimate debate, so they point at Republicans, especially ‘MAGA’ ones, and scream “Bigot! Homophobe! Transphobe! RACIST! They are like worked-up monkeys screeching and flinging rhetorical feces at anyone who has the temerity to disagree, no matter how slightly, with any part of their anti-American, anti-Christian, hetero-phobic agenda, and their oddly binary, “Democrats good, Republicans bad” world view.

Tragically, the vast majority of those they slander and verbally assault essentially allow them to get away with it, which, to me, is mind-boggling. And, in the rare instances when non-woke non-Marxists defend themselves and fight back, Democrats and their wholly owned propagandists in the mainstream media immediately brand them as violent “far-right” hate-mongers who are constantly looking for any opportunity to unjustly assault their foes…and those in “marginalized and underserved” communities.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: the most important thing to know about Democrats like Adam Schiff, Peter Strzok, John Brennan, and Nancy Pelosi is that they are brilliant at being evil. This should be obvious. Anyone who repeatedly lies with gusto, glee and impunity to further their own twisted agenda, or who destroys a copy of a president’s speech on national television for the sheer perverse joy of it—everyone else and all decorum and traditions be damned—is worse than a scoundrel.

So, is there a viable way forward for conservatives to prevail…at offering less to their potential constituency? Yes, but, at a minimum, conservatives need to strive to be at least adequate at defending themselves and their easily defensible ideas. Moreover, they need to learn to go on offense, all of the time, and call out their opponents for what they are.

And even this is not enough. They need to clearly and proudly state what they are for and what they will do when in office. And then never break those promises. Ever. No matter what.

We need a revival of the Spirit of ’76, a commitment to self-determination and individual liberty. Because, as John Adams noted, “Liberty once lost is lost forever.”

 

The AP: Don't Say 'Late-Term Abortion'

 

The Associated Press (AP) recently updated the abortion topical guide in its AP Stylebook to urge that “late-term abortion” be scrapped in favor of “abortion later in pregnancy.”

In a Twitter post referencing the updated guidance, the AP stated: “Do not use the term ‘late-term abortion,’” citing a clinical definition from The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG]. Of course, the AP Stylebook also suggests using “pregnant people” instead of “mothers,” and encourages referring to pro-life pregnancy centers in a negative fashion.

The ACOG has also preposterously claimed on their website that unborn children do not feel pain until 24 weeks’ gestation, which is exceedingly odd given that most progressives claim that fish, ants, plants-- and most other living things—can feel pain and/or experience stress, worry and loneliness.

Even more bizarrely, the AP has also declared that late-term abortions “do not happen,” even though they are legal in states such as New Jersey, New Hampshire, Vermont, Oregon and Colorado. And Michigan, via the recent mid-term (not “late-term”) elections, enshrined the “right” to abortion in its state constitution.

When you control the language, you control the people…because you effectively control thought.

The Left loves few things more than taking control of language and redefining words and phrases to bolster its agenda. And bolster its agenda it does.

University researchers in Australia have cautioned the public to refrain from using the term “shark attack” to refer to…shark attacks. Because, they say, the ocean predators have been “unfairly stigmatized as a deliberate killer.” The researchers suggest the use of “interaction,” “negative encounter,” or “incident,”  in place of the “stigmatizing” term “attack,” according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

 

I would like to suggest we discontinue the problematic use of “murder,” as well. Why risk unfairly stigmatizing someone as a deliberate killer? Say instead, “life-affecting interaction.”    

 

“Stabbing?” No! “Cutlery-based insertion.” “Rape?” Hell no! “Unauthorized and potentially negative romantic encounter.”

 

Robbery, burglary, car-jacking, assault? Nope. “Incidents.”   

 

And what should we call this rape of unauthorized and potentially negative assault on our language?

 

A bold and sinister attempt to permanently change the narrative-- and our culture—so that evil prevails in the long run…and America as we knew it ceases to exist?

 

 Or simply a “socio-political interaction?”

 

 

"Shark Week" Too White, Professor Says

According to The College Fix, Allegheny College Biology Professor Lisa Whitenack recently told The Washington Post that growing up “she rarely saw any women she could look up to” on Discovery’s “Shark Week” show, and that made her question whether she herself could go on to study sharks. (Somehow, she managed to do just that.)

Whitenack, and several other researchers, published their findings on the preponderance of white males appearing on Shark Week in “A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries.” David Shiffman of Arizona State University, Whitenack’s co-author, believes there could be something nefarious at work here. He stated, “When there are hundreds of people of color interested who work in this field, [and] when my field is more than half women, maybe it’s not an accident anymore that they’re only featuring White men.” He added that there were a curiously high number of white guys named “Mike” on the show. Egads, too many Mikes! Sorry professors, but the last thing the show needs is an influx of “Karens.”

 

The study references a 2020 article which also bemoaned the dearth of women and minorities on shark-related programming, and cites the University of Miami’s Catharine Macdonald as saying, “the science is clear that representation matters in attracting and retaining members of historically excluded groups in STEM.” Macdonald added that many females and minorities watch and enjoy shows like “Shark Week,” but that seeing too many white guys might send them the message that “shark science might not be a very welcoming place.” Whenever an “expert” tells you “the science is clear” or “the science is settled,” you know they have an agenda.

 

Both the Discovery Channel and the famously conservative National Geographic are on record as saying, “it is impossible to include more diverse representations of shark scientists because available shark scientists are predominantly white men.”

A group called “Minorities in Shark Science” contests that claim. (“Minorities in Shark Science?”)

It is ironic that a woman named “Whitenack” is complaining about the lack of diversity in a show about sharks. What does she have to say about the fact the show often features “Great White” sharks? “Great” in front of “White?!” Horrifying!

I take serious issue with progressives claiming that if people don’t see someone with their exact same “intersectionality” doing something they will automatically think they can’t do it or aren’t welcome to try.

Alexander Graham Bell rarely saw anyone talking on the phone, so what would have made him think he could do it?

There hadn’t been a female British Prime Minister in the more than 250 years that the office had been in existence, so why did Margaret Thatcher (successfully) take a crack at it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oxford Research Fellow Says Let Meat-Eaters Drown

 

The College Fix recently reported on Michael Plant, a research fellow at Oxford University’s Wellbeing Research Centre. The Oxford University “philosopher” argued, in the aptly named Journal of Controversial Ideas, that it is “plausible” that there is a moral case for letting meat eaters drown. 

Not surprising given his last name is “plant,” and radical vegan Peter Singer is on the editorial board of the Journal of Controversial Ideas.

Plant avers that, in a given hypothetical situation, it could be justified to let people who eat meat drown, rather than attempt to save them, because they cause “suffering” to animals.

 

Huh?

 

Per The College Fix, Plant wrote that many people accept a duty to save strangers’ lives, such as a child drowning in a pond, while also accepting that it is wrong to cause the suffering of animals in factory farms. Ergo, according to Plant, this creates a major problem for those who accept and practice the vegan lifestyle. Why? Because both of these moral principles are actually in conflict with one another if the person in danger is a meat eater and therefore the cause of continued animal suffering.

You’ve gotta be kidding me.

It is okay to let a fellow human drown because of his or her diet? Really? So, Singer, is it similarly immoral to rescue a carnivorous or omnivorous animal?  Or to prevent it from suffering, Plant?

It seems the higher up one is in today’s educational system, the lower one’s IQ-- and the more one lacks in wisdom, rationality, morality…and sanity. It appears Oxford’s Wellbeing Research Centre has a lot more work to do when it comes to its research fellows.

Or maybe it’s part of the illness, not the cure.

If the Journal of Controversial Ideas was really brave, really wanted to push the envelope, especially amongst the academic community, it would publish ideas such as “is there a moral case for capitalism,” “is it plausible that there are two-- and only two-- genders,” or “could it be that people have inalienable rights granted to them by a Creator?” Maybe it could even purport to defend Christianity, federalism, the Electoral College, or Thomas Jefferson.

Nah. No academic journal could ever be that controversial, could it?

 

 

Hillary Clinton Compares Life Under Taliban, Rape By Russian Forces To Women's "Plight" In America

 

Hillary Clinton recently appeared on PBS’s Amanpour and Company to preview the Clinton Presidential Center’s upcoming summit on the status of women’s rights around the world. (Sometimes satire writes itself, as is the case with a Clinton talking about women’s rights.) Host Christiane Amanpour began the interview by asking Clinton what she thought about the “unfinished business” of women’s rights. Clinton allowed that some progress has been made, but stated, ”We are also in a period of time where there is a lot of pushback and much of the progress that has been, I think, taken for granted by too many people is under attack. Literally under attack in places like Iran or Afghanistan or Ukraine where rape is a tactic of war, or under attacks by political and cultural forces in a country like our own when it comes to women’s health care and bodily autonomy.”

Makes perfect sense to equate the state of women’s rights in Iran, where some are being beaten or killed for protesting the ruling regime-- and the mandate that they cover nearly every square inch of their bodies in clothing if they wish to go out in public-- with the “plight” of women in Arkansas, doesn’t it?! And to compare women’s rights under the Taliban in Afghanistan to that of those in the United States who, in some states, may not be able to off their potential offspring with ease and impunity up to the moment of birth. And to the Ukrainian women being raped by Russian invaders.

But, what the hell, go ahead and compare the pro-life folks who were elected to state government in Arkansas to Mullahs, the Taliban, and Russian rapists. (Or how about your husband Bill?)

Insane.

But not to Christiane Amanpour, who apparently thought this was a completely rational thing to say.

Which says a lot about these women, none of it good. All of it evil. So, we are to understand that “pro-choice” women are simply incapable of summoning the strength to avoid screwing someone, or even to use protection, but that it is their healthcare “right” to then kill the baby they created in their womb?

Ironically, many of these same “ladies” believe that hunting (and gun ownership) should be banned, and that we have no right to use or kill animals for our own convenience—or even sustenance.

And the whole “Our bodies, our rights” thing is so preposterous as to be laughable. Neither men nor women have the right to use their bodies to club a baby seal to death or hunt or fish out of season. We can’t even press our foot down too far on our cars’ gas pedals if that results in our driving over the speed limit. Nor can we drive that car at all after we’ve had a few cocktails.

But they claim we do have an inherent right to kill our babies if we so desire?

That Hillary Clinton, a former lawyer, senator, Secretary of State, First Lady, and serial enabler, would unfavorably compare the status of women in her native U.S. to that of those under the thumb of the Taliban or being raped by Russian soldiers, is equally despicable and insane.

 

 

 

 

 

 

"DFL" And "GOP" Acronyms Need Updating

 

Today, “DFL” should stand for “Democratic-Fascist-Lunatic” Party,” and “GOP” for “Grand Old Panickers.” Democrats are typically the aggressors, attacking, accusing, badgering and bludgeoning (usually figuratively) their ideological foes. Republicans, worried sick about how they might be perceived by certain groups, almost always acquiesce, compromise, or back away from a fight. Despite the fact they typically have demonstrably better policy prescriptions. The whole show is revolting.

This is all the more depressing—and perplexing—because today’s Democrats have no new ideas, no track record of success to tout. Historically, all their policy prescriptions end with countries thrust into privation, despair—and tyranny. And often a great many deaths.

 

Headlines You Wouldn't Have Seen Just A Few Short Years Ago

 

Headlines You Would Never Have Seen Just A Few Short Years Ago:

 

*The People Cheering for Humanity’s End - The Atlantic

They think the planet would be better off without us. Who would know? These people must be super fun at parties. (God did instruct us to go forth and multiply, but these people think the cosmos is better off without Him, too.)

*Canada has a shortage of Grim Reapers to meet demand for assisted suicide - LifeSite (lifesitenews.com)    

A big demand for assisted suicide in Canada? I guess that shouldn’t be too surprising given Trudeau’s policies.

*In too deep: John Fetterman's wife claims that swimming is 'very racist' (msn.com)      

That’s correct. Every time I go for a swim, I’m really trying to stick it BIPOCs! You’ve gotta be kidding me. Mrs. Fetterman can go jump in the lake! (Except that would be racist.)

*Campus Reform | University library asks transgender students to journal about their bathroom experiences

Why is it that educators at all levels want to talk about their students’ most intimate body parts and bodily functions?

*Former UCSD professor gave all students As and no homework to ‘decolonize’ classroom | The College Fix

 Let’s “decolonize” everything! And never judge, critique or grade anything! What a fantastic world that would create! Except that nothing would exist, possibly including us. (Which might make “the people cheering for humanity’s end” happy.) With no more testing, verifying, pushback, etc., no one’s feelings would get hurt. Of course, eventually no buildings would stand, no planes would fly, and no surgeries or medical diagnoses would be performed correctly. But at least we wouldn’t be so “colonized!”

*Federal court systems to establish mentorship program that promotes a 'psychologically safe space' for 'staff who self-identify within any minoritized group' - TheBlaze

Say what?

*California city will send all adult residents, including non-US citizens, $100 in taxpayer funds to donate to political candidates - TheBlaze

Translation: We in the government want to send you other people’s money so you will be sure to vote…for the candidates that will keep sending you other people’s money! Perfectly ethical!

 

*Trans woman jailed for sex with 14-year-old girl - BBC News 

And “she” impregnated the 14-year-old girl. Are we tired of “women” raping and impregnating other women yet? How much longer will we keep playing this sick game?

*WI Children's Hospital Stacks Chaplain Roster With Trans Activists (thefederalist.com)

How many of them are “women?” What could go wrong?

*Republican senator claims 'survival' of US depends on codifying same-sex 'marriage' - LifeSite (lifesitenews.com)

Beam me up, Scotty. There’s no intelligent life here.

*Trudeau threatens the province of Alberta over its ‘Sovereignty Act,' says ‘all’ options on the table - LifeSite (lifesitenews.com)

Including, perhaps, the nuclear option? Or will the formerly Black-faced monster just invade? Freeze its accounts and seize its assets? Take its NHL teams away?

*Priest Advocates Porn for Overstressed Clergy | Frontpage Mag

It seems the priesthood isn’t what it used to be.

 

All but two of these headlines were gleaned from one day’s worth of perusing the news. That’s correct, ten of the twelve were from reports of December 1. Any one of them illustrates a profound change in society from not so long ago and portends potentially dire consequences.

Taken together they are quite a snapshot of America (and the West in general) circa 2022. None of these would have been thinkable in 1972. Or 1982. Probably not in 2012, either.

So-called progressives are winning the culture wars in a rout. 

But this doesn’t look like “progress” to me.

It looks like a harbinger of chaos and disaster.

 

 

Correct Pronouns Used For Victims Of Colorado Shooting!

 

Five people were recently shot to death (and 18 others injured) inside Club Q, an LGBTQ nightclub in Colorado Springs. This prompted authorities to verify the names and the pronouns of the victims by working with their families, instead of merely relying on what the coroner’s office provided them, a Colorado Springs city spokeswoman told the USA TODAY. 

During a November 21st news conference, Colorado Springs Police Chief Adrian Vasquez identified those fatally shot by stating their names – and their pronouns.

Vasquez said, "We respect all of our community members, including our LGBTQ community. Therefore, we will be identifying the victims by how they identified themselves and how their families have loved and identified them."

He continued: “Kelly Loving; pronouns are ‘she/her;’ Daniel Aston; pronouns are ‘he/him;’ Derrick Rump; pronouns are ‘he/him;’ Ashley Paugh; pronouns are ‘she/her;’ Raymond Green Vance; pronouns are ‘he/him.’”

It is ironic that all five, identified as cisgender, “Loving” and “Rump” included, while the shooter claimed to be non-binary.

But the important thing-- the key takeaway from this heinous act of violence and terror-- is that, though all five may be dead, by God the correct pronouns were used when referring to them! Right? I bet somewhere, even now, they are so proud! So proud!

By-the-way, what are the correct pronouns for dead people? And do they still get to choose them?

In any case, let’s not concern ourselves with the root causes of depression, insanity and the rising rates of violent crime. Do not mention the defund the police movement, cashless bail, or the skyrocketing rate of recidivism! Don’t say a word about the shocking lack of punishment for repeat offenders!

Lockdowns? Pshaw! Social distancing for a couple of years? No big whoop.

And never bring up the war on Christianity, traditional values, patriotism, standards, and the family! So what if our young ones are not encouraged to believe in God, family, or nation, but are urged to disdain them all in favor of a virtually religious belief in big government and “experts?”

Is it so wrong to effectively cede our free will, morals, and spirituality to what President Trump deemed “The Swamp?” Is it so wrong to baselessly despise “MAGA” types to the depth of one’s soul? Or might it possibly be detrimental to countless millions to mock them…and the Bible’s promised gift of “faith, hope, and love?”

But who cares?

Victims may be piling up, but at least we are using their “correct” pronouns.

 

 

Russian Troops Dying Of Hypothermia Due To Inadequate Clothing?

 

According to some recent reports, Russian soldiers are facing a new enemy during the country's continued invasion of Ukraine: their own inadequate gear and clothing that has led some troops to die from hypothermia.

 

Rebekah Koffler, a former DIA intelligence officer, told Fox News Digital: "This is what happens when you have a fashion designer, such as Valentin Yudashkin, develop Russian military uniforms.”

What? How could this possibly be? Russia? Russia would have been East Germany if not for the brutal Russian winter that finally slowed, stopped and then killed the Germans—who were wearing inadequate clothing. And they haven’t learned from that?! They’re worried about fashion? During wartime? The Russians? After the Battle of Moscow and the Battle of Stalingrad, I can’t picture Russian soldiers flouncing around showing off their light but stylish field jackets and how they have perfectly accessorized their uniforms.

Either Ms. Koffler is crazy, or the Russians are.

Come to think of it, looking closely at current events around the globe, it might be more accurate to state that everyone is {crazy}.