|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 107,128
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 34 minutes, 49 seconds
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: The Ecstatic] 1
#26169051 - 09/04/19 04:09 PM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 34,046
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 1 hour, 38 minutes
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: koods]
#26169121 - 09/04/19 04:42 PM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Took them long enough lol
--------------------
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: The Ecstatic]
#26177089 - 09/09/19 05:06 AM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
The inconvenient truth about Quebec's secularism law Trudeau doesn't want to face: it's popular
Quebec's religious symbols ban should absolutely be an election issue, writes former PQ leader Jean-François Lisée · CBC News · Posted: Sep 09, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 2 hours ago
About the Author Jean-François Lisée
Jean-François Lisée is a journalist, author and former leader of the Parti Québecois. He hosts a podcast on Quebec current affairs and history at laboitealisee.com
The Parti Québécois (French for Quebec Party; PQ; pronounced [paʁ.ti ke.be.kwa]) is a sovereignist[9] and social democratic[1] provincial political party in Quebec, Canada. The PQ advocates national sovereignty for Quebec involving independence of the province of Quebec from Canada and establishing a sovereign state. The PQ has also promoted the possibility of maintaining a loose political and economic sovereignty-association between Quebec and Canada. The party traditionally has support from the labour movement, but unlike most other social democratic parties, its ties with organized labour are informal.[10] Members and supporters of the PQ are called "péquistes" (Quebec French pronunciation: [pekɪst] (About this soundlisten);[11]), a French word derived from the pronunciation of the party's initials.
In 2016, while running for leadership of the PQ, Lisée stated that, if elected Premier of Quebec, he would ban Muslim veils in public spaces claiming that Muslim women could hide machine guns underneath their burkas.
Quote:
"Unthinkable." That's how Prime Minister Justin Trudeau reacted when Quebec tabled a law that would ban religious symbols and clothing for its teachers, judges, police officers and other public sector workers.
He pledged to "defend the rights of Canadians" against the proposed ban. His minister of justice repeatedly called the bill "unacceptable" and alluded to "next steps" once it became law.
One should not doubt Trudeau's inherent repulsion for the Quebec law and everything it embodies. This is the man who heralded a woman's right to wear a niqab — the starkest symbol of oppression of women — to a citizenship ceremony at which she would pledge to adhere to a Constitution that specifically defends gender equality.
Trudeau the father only paid lip service to multiculturalism and the veneration of differences. Trudeau the son embodies it in his bones. It is certain that, if re-elected, he will act. How? More on this later.
But the bill became law in late June, and no action has been taken since. On the contrary, the Liberal government has evaded and procrastinated on the issue. Why?
There is an inconvenient bump on the road to squashing the Quebec law: public opinion. Quebec public opinion, certainly, but Canadian public opinion also. It can — and will — no doubt be disregarded the morning after the election, but not the mornings before.
Quote:
Ban has support outside Quebec
In April, Léger Marketing carried out a country-wide online poll asking if voters would support the ban of religious symbols for teachers, police officers and judges in their province. The poll also asked respondents who they would vote for in the federal election.
Outside Quebec, fully 40 per cent of Canadians approved of such a ban in their own province. Except in Alberta, 50 per cent or more of Conservative voters were in favour.
Case closed.
Problem is, a sizable chunk of Liberal voters also embraced the ban. Here are the numbers: Atlantic Canada, 28 per cent; Alberta, 31 per cent; Ontario, 32 per cent; B.C., 34 per cent; Prairies (Manitoba and Saskatchewan), 62 per cent. (Would you believe that the numbers are even higher for NDP voters!)
Liberal pollsters have seen these or similar numbers. And they know that 50 per cent of their Quebec voters support the ban, according to the Léger poll. Were they to make this one of the pivotal issues of the campaign, they would have to turn their backs on a third of their base — and give up any chance of forming a majority.
Tough luck.
An election is precisely the moment when truths must be told.
If Trudeau really thinks the ban is "unthinkable," and I'm sure he does, he must tell voters exactly what he plans to do about it if re-elected.
Quote:
Trudeau should reveal what he plans to do about the ban
Three options are available to him. The most extreme, let's call it the nuclear option, is to use the old disallowance clause of the Constitution to simply squash the legislation. This option, promoted by pundits such as columnist Andrew Coyne, was last used in 1943 against an Alberta law that restricted the property rights of Hutterite colonies.
There is a deadline on that option: it can only be used within 12 months of the law being sanctioned by the governor general, thus, no later than late June 2020.
The mid-range option is to refer the question of whether or not the law is constitutional directly to the Supreme Court. Constitutional scholars meeting in Toronto last April concluded that recent jurisprudence would lead the court to declare the law invalid — on its merits and despite the use of the notwithstanding clause. They said the court could also severely curtail the use of the notwithstanding clause itself and declare that Quebec really had no right to use it pre-emptively.
The milder option would be for Ottawa to join the ongoing legal challenge of the ban by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and National Council of Canadian Muslims and help bring it before the Supreme Court.
Are any of these options off the table for Trudeau? The election campaign should not end without a clear answer to that question.
Quote:
Look to Europe, not Ottawa
Those who think Canadian multiculturalism is the only possible answer to the challenges of diverse societies will keep pushing hard against the ban. As did CBC's Robyn Urback, who wrote recently that the Quebec law was a "national disgrace," nothing short of "state-sponsored, systemic oppression" and called on Trudeau to denounce it as he had other "policy wrongs of the past," such as the hanging of First Nations chiefs in the 19th century.
Proponents of this point of view are also present in the NDP — and to a lesser extent in the Conservative Party — and will want to know why their leaders seem indifferent in the face of Quebec's perceived assault on equality rights.
Quebecers, on the other hand, know that the cradle of rights and freedoms is not in Ottawa but Europe. And that European courts have ruled that states have legitimate grounds to demand a clear separation of Church and state — including when it comes to the attire of civil servants — and to promote the rights of women by prohibiting misogynist religious garb.
So the question is, really, about tolerance. Will the Liberals and other federal parties tolerate the existence within Canada of a nation that disagrees with their brand of multiculturalism?
Trudeau claims he accepts the existence of Quebec as a nation within Canada. Will he say that doesn't mean a thing when that nation veers from the Canadian norm?
He knows that no Quebec government to date has signed the current Constitution, and each one has rejected multiculturalism as a policy. Will he nonetheless use this unsigned Constitution as a hammer against a very popular Quebec law?
The Quebec government of François Legault played by the rules when it passed the law in June by invoking the notwithstanding clause to forestall any potential charter challenge. Will Ottawa now ask the Supreme Court to change the rules once the game is already underway?
Quebecers want to know; Canadians, too.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/secularism-law-opinion-jean-francis-lisee-1.5274015
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,471
Last seen: 52 minutes, 48 seconds
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: koods]
#26177182 - 09/09/19 07:14 AM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: https://www.thedailybeast.com/jacob-wohl-wanted-on-felony-arrest-warrant
Not surprised to see this news
Man, what a shithead that guy is.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,455
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 7 hours, 8 minutes
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: christopera]
#26177211 - 09/09/19 07:35 AM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
He's a real POS. Made up sexual assault allegations about Muellar and Mayor Pate and fabricated death threats against himself. The latter sounds a lot like Jesse Smollett. A noticeable absence of right wing indignation.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
DontFearThePeepr
Antichrist Jr.



Registered: 11/21/05
Posts: 730
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: Brian Jones]
#26177591 - 09/09/19 11:45 AM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
What a fucking scammer, it's like they don't care as long as these dbags can still make assloads of money. So dumb that they always refuse to notice the most horrible things people do are motivated by making exorbitant amounts of cash
-------------------- I am an extremist
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ



Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,487
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 2 hours, 54 minutes
|
|
Drinking a steak stuffed with incandescent light bulbs through a plastic straw to trigger the left
--------------------
|
twighead
mͯó



Registered: 08/27/08
Posts: 30,491
Loc: Glenn Gould's Fuck Windmill
Last seen: 8 days, 16 hours
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26177971 - 09/09/19 03:45 PM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Pettiness knows no bounds
|
XUL
OTD Janitor



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 28,261
Loc: America
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: twighead]
#26184156 - 09/12/19 02:20 PM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
TRUMP 2020
|
relic
of a bygone era


Registered: 10/14/14
Posts: 5,624
Loc: the right coast
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: XUL]
#26184192 - 09/12/19 02:33 PM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Wrong thread. That belongs in the humans of the left whatever thread.
|
XUL
OTD Janitor



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 28,261
Loc: America
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: relic]
#26184208 - 09/12/19 02:40 PM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Conservatives treat the Dems better than her own party.
Lol
--------------------
TRUMP 2020
|
relic
of a bygone era


Registered: 10/14/14
Posts: 5,624
Loc: the right coast
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: XUL] 1
#26184255 - 09/12/19 03:01 PM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Cool. Who is she again?
|
XUL
OTD Janitor



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 28,261
Loc: America
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: relic]
#26184259 - 09/12/19 03:02 PM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
relic said: Cool. Who is she again?
Watch dem debates 1 and 2.
She is there for both. Also lots of press time.
I guess you don't keep up with the debates then?
--------------------
TRUMP 2020
|
relic
of a bygone era


Registered: 10/14/14
Posts: 5,624
Loc: the right coast
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: XUL]
#26184367 - 09/12/19 03:51 PM (4 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Not the earliest of rounds, a year and a half before the election, no.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ



Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,487
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 2 hours, 54 minutes
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: relic]
#26200073 - 09/20/19 07:53 PM (4 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
|
waves

Registered: 04/03/10
Posts: 2,213
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26200248 - 09/20/19 09:40 PM (4 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I actually had to go see that on Instagram because I didn't believe it could be real at first.
 
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: The Ecstatic] 1
#26232969 - 10/06/19 06:09 AM (4 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Andrew Scheer was not well known to Canadians when this election campaign began. For him, that wasn't necessarily an insurmountable problem.
But now he has spent nearly four weeks of the campaign struggling to explain to Canadians who he is, and muddling through a series of identity crises in public.
When he ran for the Conservative leadership, Scheer happily accepted the "Stephen Harper with a smile" label. With that as his political identity, the Conservatives sought to further define their leader as an average guy who grew up in a middle-class household.
Scheer (we were told) is a guy like you, or least like someone you might know. In other words, he's not Justin Trudeau.
In political terms, that persona has its merits. But this is Scheer's first election as party leader and, before winning the leadership, he was not a particularly prominent public figure. As a result, his character and personal history had not been poked and prodded in any serious way by journalists and political rivals before this fall.
Too often over the last seven weeks, he has seemed to crumble on contact.
Quote:
Fast attacks, slow response
The Liberals took the first poke on Aug. 22, when they posted video of a speech Scheer gave in 2005 opposing same-sex marriage. Scheer didn't immediately step forward to address what he'd said 14 years ago. By the time he did talk about it with reporters, the Liberals had posted another video — this one raising questions about what Scheer had told anti-abortion activists during his campaign for Conservative leader.
When Scheer faced the television cameras on Aug. 30, he accused the Liberals of "dredging up divisive issues." But he didn't do much to account for what he'd said in 2005, and he struggled to clarify how he would handle matters related to abortion if he were prime minister now. A Scheer government, he said, would neither introduce nor support legislation related to abortion — but he stopped short of saying that Conservative backbenchers would be prevented from moving forward with abortion-related measures.
While questions about those issues were left to linger, others emerged.
First, there were the questions about whether he had misrepresented himself when he said he'd worked as an insurance broker. As it turned out, he had not been licensed as a broker, and he'd only worked in an insurance company's office for "six or seven months."
Asked by the CBC's Rosemary Barton this week whether he should just admit to being a "career politician," Scheer still insisted on the value of his apparently limited experience in the private sector.
During that same interview (part of CBC's Face to Face sessions with the major party leaders), Scheer again declined to elaborate or reflect on his opinion of same-sex marriage, or explain why he declines to march in Pride parades. (The parade-related questions for Scheer extended to the climate change strikes, which he also avoided last Friday.)
Early in Wednesday's TVA televised leaders debate, Trudeau went directly after Scheer, calling on the Conservative leader to account for his personal beliefs on abortion. Scheer has in the past described himself as "pro-life" but at that moment, in front of the cameras, he was unwilling to explain himself.
By the next morning, Scheer apparently had decided that he should be more forthcoming.
"My personal position has always been open and consistent. I am personally pro-life," he said at an event in Kingston, Ont.
Hours later, talk of Scheer and abortion was swept away by the news that the Conservative leader is a dual citizen of Canada and the United States. That detail wouldn't have been much more than a footnote in the campaign if not for the fact that several Conservatives — including Scheer himself — had questioned the dual citizenships of Stéphane Dion, Tom Mulcair and Michaëlle Jean.
"I have a few quick questions for anyone who thinks that Michaëlle Jean is a good choice to be our next GG," Scheer wrote in a 2005 blog post. "Does it bother you that she is a dual citizen (France and Canada)? Would it bother you if instead of French citizenship, she held U.S. citizenship?"
Quote:
Missed opportunity?
That might've been a good moment to disclose his own American citizenship. On Thursday, Scheer said he never mentioned it because no one ever asked. When he wrote about Jean, he said, he was "just asking questions" about what his constituents thought.
Scheer has said he decided to renounce his U.S. citizenship after he became leader of the Conservative party in May 2017. But he then apparently waited until this past August to start the actual process.
And so, Scheer spent a good part of Friday morning — as he was trying to publicize his party's crime platform — fielding questions about how much he had paid in taxes to the U.S. government and whether he'd registered for the U.S. military's draft. Today, the party confirmed that Scheer is registered with the U.S. Selective Service System, the federal agency that administers the draft.
"Everyone who knows me, or knows my family, knows that my father was born in the United States, and I've been open with that," Scheer said.
Thing is, everyone doesn't know him.
It might frustrate Conservatives that it's their guy being chased by questions about his personal convictions and history, when it's the other guy — the leader of the Liberal Party — who dressed up in blackface before entering politics.
The comparison is instructive, though.
If Trudeau has (mostly) managed to get past the blackface photos without losing a significant amount of support, it likely has something to do with how familiar voters are with him — not only as someone who has lived much of his life in public, but as a prime minister who now has a four-year record of governing. While blackface photos might have fixed the label of racism on another candidate permanently, Trudeau can point to contrary evidence, and voters can fall back on their familiarity with him.
Scheer has no such history to fall back on.
And what the candidate says in such situations does matter. Trudeau made a deliberate effort to explain his behaviour — first with an apology, then with a news conference. Even this week, in his own Face to Face appearance, Trudeau was still expanding on that explanation.
"I genuinely thought that intent mattered," Trudeau said. "I thought that because I wasn't a racist, I could do this and it wouldn't be a bad thing and I didn't understand back then — and I'm fully up front about it — that it actually really hurt people."
Whether you accept that explanation or not, it at least suggests some amount of self-reflection. And the more a politician explains, the less there is for reporters and opponents to keep asking about.
If Scheer had used his appearance on Aug. 30 to explain his personal convictions on abortion, how he reconciles those beliefs with the responsibilities he would have as prime minister and how, if at all, his thinking had evolved on same-sex marriage since 2005, he might not have been facing the same questions in October. (He also might have headed off some of those questions if he'd appeared in a Pride parade.)
Scheer could have used the moment on Aug. 30 to deliver a remarkable speech. And he probably wouldn't be using up precious campaign time now trying to explain himself if he'd disclosed his dual citizenship two years ago. Instead, he's ended up looking evasive.
No politician should expect to become prime minister without telling voters who they are. Running for high office always invites an intense degree of unfamiliar scrutiny.
Ideally, a new leader might arrive with as little unflattering history as possible. But when that scrutiny does bring things to light, politicians can only hope to do a decent job of explaining themselves.
If Scheer fails to emerge victorious from this fall's campaign, one of the first questions he'll have to ask himself is whether he should have done that better, and sooner.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-american-citizenship-2019-election-1.5308174
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 34,046
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 1 hour, 38 minutes
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: Tantrika]
#26234965 - 10/07/19 09:24 AM (4 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Candace Owens says democrats are trying to stave a “coop” against trump:
https://twitter.com/alexkotch/status/1181035490813894657?s=21
--------------------
|
JHOVA
Post whore


Registered: 02/17/17
Posts: 4,727
Loc:
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: The Ecstatic]
#26235621 - 10/07/19 02:09 PM (4 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Low hanging fruit.
-------------------- 🅃 🄴 🄰 🄼 🄲 🄻 🄸 🄽 🄶 🅆 🅁 🄰 🄿
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 34,046
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 1 hour, 38 minutes
|
Re: Humans of the Right Wing: A Compendium [Re: JHOVA] 2
#26235656 - 10/07/19 02:23 PM (4 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
XUL thinks she’s an intellectual shepherding blacks into the GOP.
--------------------
|
|