I understand your revulsion of Ms. Anderson's views. That some Canadian groups were part of the sponsorship of her tour doesn't mean she endorses every crazy idea or every one of the wingnuts that are members. That's guilt by association. She has enough on her own record. I think that the voters or the CPC should deal with the three l…
I understand your revulsion of Ms. Anderson's views. That some Canadian groups were part of the sponsorship of her tour doesn't mean she endorses every crazy idea or every one of the wingnuts that are members. That's guilt by association. She has enough on her own record. I think that the voters or the CPC should deal with the three lunchers and it is fine that it was reported. But it is a nothingburger, perhaps to redirect from the CCP meddling?
On Refugees (I think she was talking about immigrants). I believe it is fair to expect a clear plan for immigration that balances our needs with our capacity to support new entrants. To read into what she said as
On Transgender people: Again, you read into what she said (in your quote) that she hates trans people. Confirmation Bias? Possibly based on other of her statements, but not this one.
On red pilling the masses. Have you ever listened to any politician asked any direct question? Catherine McKenna bragged about snowing the public. Her advice reads to me that "all you can do is give people the facts (or what you want to believe are the facts) and let them decide. If they are open you may have a discussion otherwise, there is no point in continuing the argument. What you call hiding your true intentions and stringing people along I call Politics 101.
On Climate change -- ok she's just nuts, but she can still say and believe whatever she wants.
Perhaps if instead of the world's top 1% dramatically increasing their wealth during Covid which overwhelmingly had a more deleterious effect on the less well-off and who have profited mightily from exploiting relatively low cost energy, the pain and gains were more equitable, conspiracy theories wouldn't spread so easily. It is ridiculous to say that the Davos set don't have more influence in lawmaking than the rest of us.
On Vaccines
Well, we were told it would protect 88-90% in preventing infections, then the story did change to fewer hospitalizations and deaths. OK, we were learning but when the expectation was set that it would prevent infection and didn't, people decided not to believe anything the authorities said. And our government did use coercion, ridicule and ostracism.
On democracy.
I fear we are becoming less democratic. I look at the internet bills, the EA, the lack of disclosure on SNC, We, the Chinese scientists in Winnipeg, the uselessness of the ATIA, the ruling on most matters by PMO and the diminution of the role of our MPs.
Her criticism of the pharmaceutical companies should be that they took publicly funded mrna breakthroughs and were paid by among other the US government billions to develop a vaccine and were guaranteed purchases with great profit margin and with accelerated trials and now have the balls to inflate their prices while preventing others from producing the vaccine.
You state:
Bull. Shit.
If there’s one thing I can’t stand in politics, is disingenuousness. If you believe something, say it. Do not treat the public as idiots to be tricked and prodded into supporting you. Don’t play dumb.
So we have Ahmed Hussen Laith Marouf affair, Marco Mendicino, who insisted that law enforcement requested enactment of the Emergencies Act, Bill Blair and Brenda Lucki who assured Canadians that there was no interference into an RCMP investigation, Harjitt Sajan denies info on the sex scandal at DND. And Trudeau, well, where to begin?
Anyway, I think we've both spent much too long on this Anderson shitbird but I think you should get back to important issues and shine a light on our domestic idiots :)
I understand your revulsion of Ms. Anderson's views. That some Canadian groups were part of the sponsorship of her tour doesn't mean she endorses every crazy idea or every one of the wingnuts that are members. That's guilt by association. She has enough on her own record. I think that the voters or the CPC should deal with the three lunchers and it is fine that it was reported. But it is a nothingburger, perhaps to redirect from the CCP meddling?
On Refugees (I think she was talking about immigrants). I believe it is fair to expect a clear plan for immigration that balances our needs with our capacity to support new entrants. To read into what she said as
On Transgender people: Again, you read into what she said (in your quote) that she hates trans people. Confirmation Bias? Possibly based on other of her statements, but not this one.
On red pilling the masses. Have you ever listened to any politician asked any direct question? Catherine McKenna bragged about snowing the public. Her advice reads to me that "all you can do is give people the facts (or what you want to believe are the facts) and let them decide. If they are open you may have a discussion otherwise, there is no point in continuing the argument. What you call hiding your true intentions and stringing people along I call Politics 101.
On Climate change -- ok she's just nuts, but she can still say and believe whatever she wants.
Perhaps if instead of the world's top 1% dramatically increasing their wealth during Covid which overwhelmingly had a more deleterious effect on the less well-off and who have profited mightily from exploiting relatively low cost energy, the pain and gains were more equitable, conspiracy theories wouldn't spread so easily. It is ridiculous to say that the Davos set don't have more influence in lawmaking than the rest of us.
On Vaccines
Well, we were told it would protect 88-90% in preventing infections, then the story did change to fewer hospitalizations and deaths. OK, we were learning but when the expectation was set that it would prevent infection and didn't, people decided not to believe anything the authorities said. And our government did use coercion, ridicule and ostracism.
On democracy.
I fear we are becoming less democratic. I look at the internet bills, the EA, the lack of disclosure on SNC, We, the Chinese scientists in Winnipeg, the uselessness of the ATIA, the ruling on most matters by PMO and the diminution of the role of our MPs.
Her criticism of the pharmaceutical companies should be that they took publicly funded mrna breakthroughs and were paid by among other the US government billions to develop a vaccine and were guaranteed purchases with great profit margin and with accelerated trials and now have the balls to inflate their prices while preventing others from producing the vaccine.
You state:
Bull. Shit.
If there’s one thing I can’t stand in politics, is disingenuousness. If you believe something, say it. Do not treat the public as idiots to be tricked and prodded into supporting you. Don’t play dumb.
So we have Ahmed Hussen Laith Marouf affair, Marco Mendicino, who insisted that law enforcement requested enactment of the Emergencies Act, Bill Blair and Brenda Lucki who assured Canadians that there was no interference into an RCMP investigation, Harjitt Sajan denies info on the sex scandal at DND. And Trudeau, well, where to begin?
Anyway, I think we've both spent much too long on this Anderson shitbird but I think you should get back to important issues and shine a light on our domestic idiots :)