Justin Trudeau apologizes for wearing brownface during 2001 event at school

[Toyotasfan]

 

[Baer.]

18 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

yeah I think you're very correct in this. Maybe the inability to look inward and take criticism makes you more prone to snap judgments of others too.

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, Baer. said:

Peak boomer moment

but I'm not a boomer 

[Baer.]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

but I'm not a boomer 

I'm shocked

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, Baer. said:

I'm shocked

do you have an actual point to make ?

[Baer.]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

do you have an actual point to make ?

Beyond that? No. It's too early to post anything but memes and reacts 

[Ryan Strome]

13 hours ago, kurtis said:

Whats the big deal?? We have all done stupid shat in our past. Why did they wait until now to release all this crap. I hate the guy and won't vote for him, but I think this is really silly. 

I'm not a Carlson fan but this is interesting and is today's left ie the people that upvoted your post. 3:20 to 5:40 is bang on.

 

 

[5Fivehole0]

11 hours ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

Saying anti abortionists can't run is discrimination. There's an argument to be made on behalf of anti abortions.

 

Also Scheer is a devout Christian and is entitlted to his beliefs of same sex marriage and abortion laws. He has already openly stated he won't outlaw either.

 

Picking a cabinet based on race and gender is a fools game, and look how many have resigned under him. I want the best leading Canada, not the most diverse. I could give a rats tail what colour you are, just do your job properly. Something Trudeau failed to do here.

 

He's more interested in pandering to a radical minority in a parade than going to the waterless areas of Canada. It's a side show.

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, Baer. said:

Beyond that? No. It's too early to post anything but memes and reacts 

is this where I'm supposed to call someone 'snowflake'? 

[Alflives]

On 9/20/2019 at 8:35 AM, 5Fivehole0 said:

Because gen Z and the millennials aren't just going to let the past generations who were ignorant and oppressive gaslight an entire generation and put the sole responsibility of fixing the world the baby boomers and gen x ignorantly and willingly destroyed.

 

I am not to blame for the past transgressions of ignorant old money hungry men who gave white males a bad name at the cost of our economy and minorities.

I think I sort of agree.  I’m born in 1950 so that makes me a “boomer” right?  Regardless, my generation (and the generations prior to yours) are responsible for a lot of nasty stuff.  I totally agree.  However, the comfortable (top of the friggin’ world heap) life this generation lives is because of all the bad stuff previous generations did.  It’s a double edged sword.  Yes, we did crappy and terrible things.  Without us doing those terrible things we don’t currently have such incredibly comfortable lives.  It’s one or the other.  I want your generation to be even more ruthless than ours.  I want to stay at the friggin’ top!  

 

[JM_]

Just now, 5Fivehole0 said:

Saying anti abortionists can't run is discrimination. There's an argument to be made on behalf of anti abortions.

 

Also Scheer is a devout Christian and is entitlted to his beliefs of same sex marriage and abortion laws. He has already openly stated he won't outlaw either.

 

Picking a cabinet based on race and gender is a fools game, and look how many have resigned under him. I want the best leading Canada, not the most diverse. I could give a rats tail what colour you are, just do your job properly. Something Trudeau failed to do here.

 

He's more interested in pandering to a radical minority in a parade than going to the waterless areas of Canada. It's a side show.

Scheer is entitled to his beliefs, of course. But most people don't want a person who just tolerates the law vs. actually respects a woman's right to choose.

 

Choosing a gender balanced cabinet is just fine. Ministry jobs are designed so that any number of qualified people can be in that position. There is no 'best person" for most of those jobs, other than finance or defence. 

 

Women are 50% of the population if you hadn't noticed. Theo only thing radical is that our political system drastically under-represents them. 

[189lb enforcers?]

Tucker nails virtue signalling down, hard. 

 

The CNN segment showcases why CNN sucks.

 

[5Fivehole0]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Scheer is entitled to his beliefs, of course. But most people don't want a person who just tolerates the law vs. actually respects a woman's right to choose.

 

Choosing a gender balanced cabinet is just fine. Ministry jobs are designed so that any number of qualified people can be in that position. There is no 'best person" for most of those jobs, other than finance or defence. 

 

Women are 50% of the population if you hadn't noticed. Theo only thing radical is that our political system drastically under-represents them. 

Women are actually 51% of the population and there a lot more reasons than simply crying "patriarchy" as to why women were misrepresented. How about the way Trudeau handled Jody Wilson? He clearly lacks a level of respect. He just knows how to conduct himself in public, very well.

 

And just because someone is possibly misrepresented doesn't mean you should just make the cabinet 50 50 for that reason. Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome and you can't have both, and to strive for both is dangerous.

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I think I sort of agree.  I’m born in 1950 so that makes me a “boomer” right?  Regardless, my generation (and the generations prior to yours) are responsible for a lot of nasty stuff.  I totally agree.  However, the comfortable (top of the friggin’ world heap) life this generation lives is because of all the bad stuff previous generations did.  It’s a double edged sword.  Yes, we did crappy and terrible things.  Without us doing those terrible things we don’t currently have such incredibly comfortable lives.  It’s one or the other.  I want your generation to be even more ruthless than ours.  I want to stay at the friggin’ top!  

 

really it was the go-go 80s that made a mess of it all. That coke fuelled decade brought us all kinds of dumb ideas like massive personal debt and handing control of government over to lobbyists. 

[JM_]

Just now, 5Fivehole0 said:

Women are actually 51% of the population and there a lot more reasons than simply crying "patriarchy" as to why women were misrepresented. How about the way Trudeau handled Jody Wilson? He clearly lacks a level of respect. He just knows how to conduct himself in public, very well.

 

And just because someone is possibly misrepresented doesn't mean you should just make the cabinet 50 50 for that reason. Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome and you can't have both, and to strive for both is dangerous.

He handled her like he would have any other cabinet member that acted that way. What did he do that was specifically related to her gender?

 

So what reason would you accept for a gender balanced cabinet? 

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Tucker nails virtue signalling down, hard. 

 

The CNN segment showcases why CNN sucks.

 

I totally agree with the Tucker comment.  Love CNN though.  

[5Fivehole0]

11 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

He handled her like he would have any other cabinet member that acted that way. What did he do that was specifically related to her gender?

 

So what reason would you accept for a gender balanced cabinet? 

Acted that way? She was being muzzled when she wanted to oust corruption. Trudeau was even found of wrong doing by the ethics commissioner over the whole matter with SnC.

 

As for the diversity in parliament, if it ended up that way fo non bias reasons, cool. But to pick a diverse cabinet for the sake of diversity is just silly, and it leads to more gender politics.

Edited September 22, 2019 by 5Fivehole0

[bishopshodan]

27 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

I'm not a Carlson fan but this is interesting and is today's left ie the people that upvoted your post. 3:20 to 5:40 is bang on.

Ugh, you made me listen to Carlson. But I like you so I choked it down.

 

Lemon's hypocrisy shouldn't represent all the 'left'.

That said, I didn't hear him excusing Trudeau for the brown face thingy, I heard him praising the idea of a world leader actually apologising. 

I wish Fox hadn't edited out the response from the guests when Don asked "what do you think about that?"

 

I'm a huge fan of people that honestly say sorry. I always have been. An unconditional apology is very strong trait imo.

I don't know if JT is completely honest in his. I have to admit, my gut and his record of trying to do what he thinks is right tells me that his is not a racist. 

[189lb enforcers?]

19 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Scheer is entitled to his beliefs, of course. But most people don't want a person who just tolerates the law vs. actually respects a woman's right to choose.

 

Choosing a gender balanced cabinet is just fine. Ministry jobs are designed so that any number of qualified people can be in that position. There is no 'best person" for most of those jobs, other than finance or defence. 

 

Women are 50% of the population if you hadn't noticed. Theo only thing radical is that our political system drastically under-represents them. 

Women are 50% of the population, but that doesn’t make them the best choice for politics, nor does it represent their interests any better than a JT, as demonstrated by the Feminist man.

 

I’d go so far as to say the ladies of Canada have been very, very well represented in politics, with one big issue remaining as being weather or not they have the right to cut a baby-mistake from their guts. I know, the rape and medical outliers must be empathetically included, but those dates with Edward Scissor Hands are not the average abortion, are they, so let’s just skip the pretence of the abortion demand’s entire premise as being a women’s health issue.

 

I add this in only to underscore the very few remaining political issues the poor women of the West, especially oppressive Canada, suffer. We treat our ladies very well, as our fathers taught us, most of them married men in our homes. 

 

On the surface, it appears you are a supporter of the modern Liberal mandate to administer a fixed equality of outcome. A gender balancing act will be exactly that if the candidate Pool isn’t 50% women because you’d have to fix the game to ensure the outcome you’ve suggested. 

 

I’d rather support the equality of opportunity method instead of fixing the game, so-to-speak. 

 

 

 

Open question:

 

When will there be enough “diversity” here that will see an end to identity politics and the insurance provided by equality of outcome political practices, even by our employers? 

 

 

 

 

Is it when there are less white men in whichever group dynamic is being established? Is that when we are sufficiently diverse? Interesting. 

 

Will there be a Liberal party once that happens; a need for one? 

 

(I ask on on behalf of my own ignorance. As I understand things, and not to use too much space up crafting a carefully articulated question either, the West and Canada are too while male, according to the Left, which is associated with Liberal beliefs, correct? 

 

Once we have a majority non-white man everything in the West, what interests will the Liberal ideals serve? I don’t see a Liberal idealism in Japan, China, Saudi Arabia, etc, just in the oppressive white mans’ privileged lands, as said by our fearless leader, JT.

 

Once the Liberal party dismantles the evil empire of the glorious West, who would they then represent?) 

 

[JM_]

17 minutes ago, 5Fivehole0 said:

Acted that way? She was being muzzled when she wanted to oust corruption. Trudeau was even found of wrong doing by the ethics commissioner over the whole matter with SnC.

 

As for the diversity in parliament, if it ended up that way to to non bias reasons, cool. But to pick a diverse cabinet for the sake of diversity is just silly, and it leads to more gender politics.

on the 1st part - and? how would that be different if it was a dude as justice minister?

 

"is just silly" - is that the best argument you have against it?