Friday, September 24, 2021
PTBC is about normal
principled conservative viewpoints.

PTBC has over 12,000 articles written by several columnists, over 20+ years.

Reporter asks Scheer if he’d have gender-balanced cabinet: “Maybe more women,” he answers. Because “qualifications.”

Related Articles

Advice to GOP, which Canada’s CPC should heed: Just. Say. No.

Washington Post — From this surprising source  — the...

Lefty Mayor caught maskless but it’s ok: “I was feelin’ the spirit!”

National Review — Another article you won't read in 99% of the "news" media because, oh do I even have to say it?... she's a lefty mayor! (and we can well imagine the "news" media's faux outrage if she was a he and he was a Republican):

The mayor of San Francisco [London Breed] says that she shouldn’t be criticized for breaking her own COVID rules, because, and I quote, “I was feeling the spirit and I wasn’t thinking about a mask.” CBS reports:

“We don’t need the fun police to come in and micromanage and tell us what we should or shouldn’t be doing,” said Breed during an interview to address the controversy.

The city’s health order states attendees at live indoor performances must remain masked except when actively eating or drinking. Breed maintained that she was drinking at the time.

“My drink was sitting at the table,” said Breed. “I got up and started dancing because I was feeling the spirit and I wasn’t thinking about a mask.”
As Charles C.W. Cooke points out, the hideousness doesn't stop just at her hypocrisy, her failure to take responsibility for her own actions, or her elitist rule-breaking, it's the fact that she laments the notion of "the fun police," when, in fact, as mayor and as the perpetrator of these asinine rules, she IS "the fun police."

Best post-election headline so far

Wall Street Journal — They get the headline just about right: Their opener:

The late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher counseled that in politics “standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous. You get knocked down by the traffic from both sides.” That’s the lesson delivered to Canada’s Conservative Party leader Erin O’Toole in Monday’s national election.

I like that they added this because Canadian "news" media are loathed to mention it:

Yet while they again won the popular vote, they finished a distant second in seat count with about 119, two seats down from 2019. (By the way, the Tories have won the popular vote in five of the last six elections, which is a lesson for Americans who think this only happens because of the Electoral College.)

They see what I see. O'Toole: Speaking in pale pastels — largely pink — instead of bold colors. Lesson #596 for the Conservative Party of Canada. They'll learn someday. Maybe.
Read the WSJ take here. (Free link)

BC’s NDP gov and their “news” media divisions hiding stats and facts? Here’s one. For all the noise from the Canadian national "news" media, you'd think Ontario was the only province in the country, and that it's doing terribly with regard to the Wuhan Virus (which everybody still calls "COVID" on orders from the Communist Party of China). That's not news to anyone outside of Ontario. What might be news to people both outside and inside of Ontario is that BC's rate of death is nearly twice that of Ontario.
Don't worry lefties, even people in BC don't know that, because the "news" media in BC are actually cheerleaders for the NDP government of BC — much as the national news media is actually a division of the federal Liberal Party (well and the Ontario Liberal Party of course). Ontario is led by a party with the word "Conservative" in it, even though "Progressive" is the first and foremost word and concept in their party name and style of governance. But, you know, it's just deathn shit. Politics is way more important to the "news" media.
Facts. Get 'em anywhere you can, because you can't reliably get them from the "news" media.
See also:
And from liberalvision CTV: Secrecy over B.C.'s true number of hospitalized COVID-19 patients

“The government beat the citizens! Yay!” —an elitist Canadian socialist

The Liberal Party's very own state-owned CBC's "news" (hahahahaha)...

The objective left on the regressive left

Writing beautifully about the racist and discriminatory plight of...

Take a Hint, Canada.

Yahoo News — Dutch Foreign Minister Sigrid Kaag resigned on Thursday after parliament formally condemned her handling of the Afghanistan evacuation crisis.
Too bad Canada doesn't have a Parliament. Or a news media.

Canada Excluded From International China Security Pact

Globe and Mail Dismissed by Justin Trudeau as merely a crass American salesman's move to pawn off the latest high-tech US-built nuclear subs to what we have to therefore assume he thinks are the total idiot Aussies, the three-nation deal didn't even include Canada in the talks leading up to the historic pact. And after Trudeau's comments on the matter (and the aforementioned attitude toward the Aussies), you can understand why.
"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Thursday played down Canada’s exclusion from the Indo-Pacific security deal, saying it is merely a way for the U.S. to sell nuclear submarines to Australia ... “This is a deal for nuclear submarines, which Canada is not currently or any time soon in the market for. Australia is.”"
In a clear indication that even Trudeau's political bro Joe Biden doesn't actually take him or Canada seriously anymore (forcing one to wonder if his high-fivin' bro Barack Obama doesn't also come off as a bit two-faced after Obama gave Trudeau a campaign "endorsement" this week), even Canadian officials were left in the dark. Almost like Canada can't even be trusted anymore on any level.

"Three officials, representing Canada’s foreign affairs, intelligence and defence departments, told The Globe and Mail that Ottawa was not consulted about the pact, and had no idea the trilateral security announcement was coming until it was made on Wednesday by U.S. President Joe Biden, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison."

Trudeau, in contrast, delayed Canada's Wuhan Virus immunization program by signing a deal not with the Americans or Brits, but with... CHINA, for vaccines, in what turned out to be a total failure with countless Canadian lives lost as a result. What is going on here?

And the science SAYSSS…

National Post —Move over Donald Trump. In their NP Platformed email available to subscribers, columnist Sabrina Maddeaux calmly explains that Justin Trudeau's recent uncontrolled angry outbursts — one at a citizen who was rude, and one at a reporter who dared challenge him with actual reporter-like questions — provides a clue as to his baser instincts. And if you saw these outbursts, you'd agree, it isn't a good look for him or any normal human. But moreover, it's a terrible look for anyone claiming the title of Prime Minister. But it's this new line of anti-science, pure crass political campaign bullshit that has me riled:
"...At a weekend rally in Oakville, Ont., Trudeau revealed his hand when he claimed that, “If you want this pandemic to end, go out and vote Liberal.” He repeated the message again, even turning it up a notch, in Surrey, B.C., on Monday, saying, “If you want this pandemic to end for good, go out and vote Liberal!”
"This is the ultimate false promise by a politician who’s become infamous for making false promises. No one can guarantee he will be able to end the pandemic. In fact, the expert consensus seems to be that there will be no real end to it: the virus will become endemic and we will be forced to live with it, albeit hopefully more normally. ..."
So it's "follow the science," and "the science says... to vote Liberal”? Many, especially the media, would dismiss "bible belt" politicians who insinuated that "God wants you to vote [whatever way].  This blowhard — and his disciples — should be treated no differently.

The Article

Nothing clarifies the difference between leftist progressives and conservatives more than questions and answers like this one; nor more clearly identifies and distinguishes the phonies and virtue-signallers from the truly equality-minded, reasonable, and logical.

After preambling it with the glories of Justin Trudeau’s alleged gender equality prowess, literally listing off the things he supposedly did for women’s equality, entirely gratuitously, a reporter finally asked if as prime minister, Andrew Scheer would have “a gender-balanced cabinet.”

Scheer replied (exact quote), “You know what? We will have a cabinet made up of highly qualified candidates. We will put the best people in the best jobs. We might even end up with more women in our cabinet, depending on the results of Monday’s election.” 

A question I believe was set up to boost Trudeau ended up backfiring and being a winner for Scheer. So that reporter has some butthurt, I have no doubt. As do any other liberals who were listening to that live broadcast.

The notion of women competing and succeeding is based not on sex (nor “the color of their skin,” as MLK would say) or quotas, or virtue-signalling, but rather on their credentials and ability (or “the content of their character”), and the need to put the best qualified person in the right job — which may in fact result in more women than men in the cabinet — is obvious. It’s also Conservative policy. Obviously. Apparently the left is against that.

It should be uncontroversial. And unquestioned. It’s only questioned when you think it could be used as a weapon to corner what you perceive to be a rat.

This question also leads to a confusion. I’m confused as to the existence of “women” and “men” and whatnots. Liberals and progressives on the one hand want these gender names eliminated (as in the ever so woke Air Canada eliminating “ladies and gentlemen” greetings); and on the other, they want an entire national government based on certain numbers of these specific two (just two) sexes — and only based on sex. So there’s that.

Anyway, Stephanie Levitz, of the liberals’ Canadian Press division, was the woman (OK?) who asked what I think she thought might have been be another delightful gotcha question of the Conservative leader. In Levitz’s initial setup question, she seems confused as to her role — is she on the Trudeau campaign team? Or is she a reporter asking an honest question in good faith? Maybe it’s just a matter of how she self-identifies? I don’t know.

“The Trudeau government made a number of strides in the area of gender equity. They placed a priority on insuring the diversity of government appointments, a gender-balanced cabinet, the G-7 women’s cabinet, I’m wondering which among those you’ll continue, and which among those you’d roll back.” 

Do you often hear a question of Justin Trudeau in which the reporter glorified a Conservative stance on anything, listing accomplishments before finally asking a question of Justin Trudeau? There’s your chuckle for the day.

But all of this was par for the course. This was typical of what reporters do when confronting Scheer (“confronting” being the operative word here): they badger, argue, repeat already-answered questions on topics they think, hope, or wish make him unpopular amongst people in the reporter’s own ideological bubble — like the hideously repeated questions on his stance on abortion and gay marriage, etc., which literally no Canadians are asking about. And they set up questions designed not for answers, but to trip-up the Conservative and glorify the Liberals or even further Leftists.

Nothing new has been exposed here. Conservative women already know what Conservative policy is. As do other honest people. It’s just not often that it’s allowed to leak out like this in quite so public a manner — right on live TV when the media couldn’t prevent it from getting out or even filtering it. And being live, no anchors were able to roll their eyes, or visibly sneer… it was a wonderful moment in a sea of crap.

P.S. I have my own recording of this exchange, but in light of lawsuits by news media companies against conservatives, I’m not anxious to post it publicly. Here’s a video set up to the right spot:

Joel Johannesen
Follow Joel
Latest posts by Joel Johannesen (see all)

    Your Name (required)

    Your Email (required)

    Your Message

    Do you Have a File to Send?
    If so, choose it below

    This is just a question to make sure you're not a robot:

    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

    — Normally this would be an ad. It's a doggy. —spot_img