Is political correctness destroying diversity of thought in the West?

Whether in Canada or the U.S., liberal politicians and their supporters, particularly those in the mainstream media, love to tell us what to think and how to feel about just about everything. Well, I for one, am sick and tired of it. Take for instance:

Kellie Leitch: In Canada, Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch is being criticized and ridiculed for a video her leadership campaign put out that suggests all refugees and immigrants entering our country, should be screened for Canadian values. In fact, by making this view part of her leadership campaign, she is seen by some of her colleagues and the media as an extremist. Yet, a Radio Canada poll showed that 74% of Canadians surveyed agreed with her.

Motion103: M103 is an Ottawa House of Commons Private Member’s motion that essentially says Canadians should never be allowed to publicly question or criticize Islam. Yet, as far as I know, an Imam at a Toronto mosque has not been condemned for calling for the killing of all Jews. There is also the fact that the Toronto Public School Board allows Muslim prayers in secular public schools even though Christians have not been allowed to do so for decades.

Feminism: Feminism as it is preached today covers only half of the female population — those who believe it is their reproductive right to destroy a fetus that is growing within their bodies. Yet, when I came of age in the 1960s, the fight for reproductive choice was about the right for women to have access to the “pill.” Yet, now, when any woman says she is pro-life, she is dismissed as extremist and certainly not a feminist.

Climate Change: When Barack Obama was still president in the U.S., he declared climate change as the most serious threat to humanity. Thankfully, President Trump is grounded in reality and that view is changing. However, in Canada, PM Justin Trudeau and Premiers Rachel Notley and Kathleen Wynne have instituted either a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system — which most of us know, that while those taxes will do nothing to reduce our emissions,  they will definitely destroy jobs and investment opportunities.

CINOs & RINOs: Unfortunately, it is not enough that conservatives are condemned by liberals and progressives. You also have to be a “real” conservative. Meaning, you cannot have any beliefs involving progressive policies — even though provincial conservatives are called “Progressive Conservatives.” If, however, you have the nerve to admit you are a progressive conservative, you will be called a CINO or RINO — a Conservative and/or Republican in name only.

The crux of the matter: Well, as I said at the start of this post, I am sick and tired of such political correctness and the lack of tolerance for a free exchange of ideas. In fact, as a former academic, I cringe at the notion that university students, like those at Berkeley and Middlebury College, no longer seem to know how to freely debate ideas, what Socrates called the dialectic. I mean, at Middlebury, a well liked Professor actually received a concussion when she tried to stop a student mob from attacking a sociology guest speaker — Charles Murray — who holds some controversial views.

In my opinion, then, the crux of the matter is that conservatives in the U.S. and Canada, be they considered “real” conservatives, moderate conservatives or libertarians, must fight against rigidity of thought and the intolerance of liberal political correctness. And, dare I challenge university faculty everywhere in the West — to teach their students how to debate a diversity of ideas.

ON PC Leader Patrick Brown ready to be Premier of Ontario!!!

Check out this video when Ontario Progressive Conservative (ONPC) Leader Patrick Brown spoke at the ROMA (Rural Ontario Municipal Association) Conference last month, in February 2017. I listened to the video this morning and was very impressed and encouraged because I realized that once a majority of Ontario voters had a chance to listen to him, really listen to him and what his PC party represents, they would vote for their PC candidate in June 2018.

In fact, I was so impressed, I set about deleting the negative posts I had previously written about him in relation to his wanting to implement a carbon tax. Why? Well, because frankly, a revenue neutral carbon tax, by itself, is not problematic when compared to the corruption and mismanagement we in Ontario are experiencing under the Kathleen Wynne Liberal Government.

Anyway, elected as Ontario Progressive Conservative (PC) leader in 2015, Patrick Brown has definitely grown into a potential premier. Yes, I know, some Ontario Conservatives will complain that Brown has some progressive tendencies. But, so what? The Ontario Liberals not only have some progressive tendencies, they are a complete and total progressive government — and, as such, have made us a have-not province. I mean, we now need equalization payments for heaven’s sake.

My point is that Brown’s having some progressive social views need not be a problem if he also has some strong conservative tendencies. Which, given what he says in this video, he does — in spades. In fact, to borrow from the new President to the south, the PC policies Brown discusses in this video prove the PCs can indeed make Ontario great again.

For those who don’t have time to listen to the video, here are some examples of what Brown discusses:

  1. Brown says the PCs will make hydro affordable again. On this topic, Brown explained that when the Wynne Liberals defended the fire sale of Ontario Hydro to taxpayers, she claimed that a large portion of the money earned would be spent on infrastructure. Brown says not a dollar has been spent so far. Not only that, Ontario taxpayers have already lost over $6 billion dollars selling our hydro to the U.S.
  2. Brown confirmed that the Wynne Ontario Cap and Trade system is nothing more than a revenue tool for the Ontario Liberals, as any money earned will go into general revenue. Whereas, if the PCs implement a carbon tax, as in BC, they will give back every penny to Ontarians.  So, while I may not agree with the concept of a carbon tax, at least it is not more of our money going down a bottomless green hole.
  3. Brown explains that the PC Party really is in favour of natural gas expansion — unlike the Wynne Liberals who just keep making announcements about such an expansion but never follow through.
  4. Brown promised to get rid of the Green Energy Act and put the power of what municipalities do back in their planning jurisdictions. In other words, with a PC Government, no one would be able to force wind farms on municipalities that didn’t want them.

Anyway, if you are a Conservative living in Ontario, or an independent type voter who simply wants to get rid of the Ontario Liberals on June 7th , 2018, I would recommend putting aside 18 minutes to listen to the video. The crux of the matter is that it clearly shows that Patrick Brown is relaxed in his own skin and very positive and committed to what he says he will do if an ONPC Government is elected. And, remember, unlike Liberal governments, Conservative governments of all kinds do what they say they will do.

Democrats “doth protest too much” regarding Trump’s allegation re wiretapping

So President Trump alleged, in a Saturday morning Tweet on March 4th, 2017, that Obama and his Administration spied on him and his team during and after the November 8th, 2016 election while working at the Trump Tower in New York City.

Yet, after making those allegations, the U.S. liberal media (like CNN, the Washington Post and New York Times) and every Democrat or Democratic supporter who could get in front of a TV camera, ranted and raved all day Sunday and Monday that Trump was unhinged for making such an allegation.

That there was no proof. Yada yada yada.

The problem is that it has been some in the liberal media themselves who have written much of the proof that Trump and his team were recorded, obviously hoping they could delegitimize Mr. Trump’s win. However, it is obvious now they have been hoisted on their own petard because the proof is already out there for everyone to see if they do a Google search. And, I won’t give those sources any traffic by putting a link. Everyone knows which sources I am talking about.

Anyway, we all know that Mike Flynn, President Trump’s former National Security Advisor, was forced to resign. Why? Because he forgot he had discussed the sanctions when talking to the Russian Ambassador — and then misled the VP Mike Pence by saying he had not discussed that topic.

The key point is, how do we know what Mr. Flynn said if no one was electronically recording telephone conversations at the Trump tower? Because, remember, that is where Flynn made the call, was it not? Although, of course, the recording may have been at the Russian Ambassador’s end.

Either way, it is now public knowledge what Mr. Flynn said, word for word, in what was supposed to be a secure classified telephone call. Does that not point to someone in the Obama Administration? I mean, who else would have released that classified information?

And so, there’s the proof! No “what ifs” as one journalist said on CNN. Besides, releasing the content of the Flynn phone call to the Russian Ambassador was not an isolated incident. We also know what President Elect Trump said to such world leaders as the Prime Ministers of Australia and Taiwan. As with Flynn, how do we know that?

The crux of the matter is that there have been far too many classified leaks regarding President Elect and President Trump, and such advisors as Flynn, to deny the President’s allegation. As Shakespeare wrote in Hamlet, the Democrats and their media and pundit supporters “doth protest too much.

Published 1:13pm March 7, 2017.
Updated 9:10pm March 7, 2017 to add the sentence: “Although, of course, the recording may have been at the Russian Ambassador’s end.”
Further update March 17, 2017. Apparently the Flynn telephone call originated in the Dominican Republic — although the fact that his name and a transcript were released publicly doesn’t change the fact that the Trump transition team was under surveillance of some kind. In other words, someone in the U.S. justice or intelligence community wanted the public to know.

Anti Trump & CPC leadership media bias in Canada & US

conservative-french-debate-20170117

Click for image.

The media and Left inspired nastiness regarding all things Trump and conservative politics these days is horrendous and non-stop.

Turn on the TV or your Twitter feed or pick up any newspaper, and the headlines say it all.

For example, on Twitter I read that a Liberal MP believes that Canada’s Conservative Party was responsible for the Quebec Mosque massacre. Politicizing the deaths is, of course, disgusting. Luckily former Conservative Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, corrected that faulty information.

As well, I have read and heard for months now,  that Conservative Leadership Candidate Kellie Leitch is anti-Canadian because she wants to vet newcomers from Muslim countries.

Of course, anything I hear or read about President Trump I take with a grain of sale — such as his latest behaviour at his most recent Press Conference. The media said he was unhinged whereas I thought the reverse.

Blah, blah, blah.

trumps-press-conference

Click for image.

In the US of course it is anti-Trump 24/7. In fact, I don’t think it is an exaggeration to say that the mainstream journalists there are the ones who are “unhinged.”

President Trump is simply a showman, always has been and always will be.

Trump is also not beholden to anyone for anything. As a result, the media need to get used to him “telling it like it is” because it is his authenticity that supporters like about him.

As to Kellie Leitch and the Canadian Conservative Leadership campaign, there is, unfortunately some nastiness going on within the campaign. As I wrote here, Leitch has been attacked by several of her fellow Conservative leadership candidates, including Lisa Raitt.

In any event, while I like Leitch, I am leaning towards Andrew Scheer. Why? Because he is a young family man, much like PM Trudeau. As a result, I believe the media’s comparison to the current PM will be more favourable.

Scheer is also not going to be controversial because he is a known personality, having been Speaker of the House of Commons. Besides, in my opinion, Scheer is most like a young Stephen Harper. Meaning, while he does not glow with charisma, he has experience and statesman-like dignity.

The crux of the matter is that I will leave this thread open to provide a space where regular readers can discuss and debate the CPC leadership contest in the weeks and days leading up to the May 2017 vote.

Page separator

Endnote: If readers want to find this site after early May, 2017, I would recommend they change your “favorites list” for CotM to http://www.cruxpolitics.wordpress.com soon as I don’t plan on renewing cotmblog.com in August, 2017. Similarly, the domain crux-of-the-matter.com will expire in the near future because it has not worked for some time now due to the “dashes” between words.

Greyhound beheader Vince Li, AKA “Will Baker” released without conditions

Remembering Tim McLean, killed on a Greyhound bus by Vince Li, AKA Will Baker. Click for NP.

Remembering Tim McLean, killed on a Greyhound bus by Vince Li, AKA Will Baker. Click for NP.

Remember the name Will Baker everyone because he is the Greyhound bus beheader, previously known as Vince Li, who has just been released from custody without any conditions whatsoever.

How could that happen? It could happen because Li/Baker was found “not criminally responsible“(NCR) for beheading Tim McLean on a Greyhound bus in July 2008 at Portage La Prairie, Manitoba. See McLean in photo to the left.

And, it is that “NCR” finding that is the problem because the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in 1999 that anyone found not criminally responsible could be released without conditions “if” they were not deemed dangerous by a Review Board.

Well, the Manitoba Criminal Code Review Board granted Li/Baker that release yesterday.

Why did that Review Board come to such a conclusion? Because, the Global News link indicates, his doctor, Jeffrey Waldman, “…told the board earlier this week that he is confident Baker will remain on his medication and will continue to work with his treatment team if released.”

Waldman also  “…testified that Baker knows it’s the medication that keeps his illness at bay.” Think about that. “It’s the medication that keeps his illness at bay.”

Yes, I have compassion for people with mental illness. In fact, I am a former special needs counsellor and therapist who helped many people with mental difficulties manage their symptoms and achieve success in life — but through learning and cognitive strategies, not medication.

Which causes me to wonder what Li/Baker will do with his time on his own. Will he stay in close touch with his health team? Will he have a job or meaningful activities? And, what will happen when and if he travels to China, which allegedly is his long term plan? Will he, for example, continue to have access to his medication in China? Or, once away from his team, will he start hearing voices again?

Anyway, regardless of a person’s mental illness, we have to stop making excuses for taking the life of another. Killing someone has consequences, or should have consequences. In the past, before medications became available, anyone found “NCR” for murder had to be hospitalized for life. At the very least, should Li/Baker not have been given the condition that taking his medication had to be supervised.

What about the victim in this case? Has the justice system forgotten him? The horrible reality is that McLean, Li/Baker’s victim is never coming back to his family. Plus, the horror that young man must have experienced is unimaginable. Killed in cold blood. Decapitated as he sat quietly in his Greyhound bus seat.

The crux of the matter is that the Manitoba Criminal Review Board has allowed Vince Li/Will Baker, who was found “NCR” for killing McLean in cold blood, to be released without any conditions even though he requires medication to maintain equilibrium. They also allowed Vince Li to use the anonymous name Will Baker, presumably so he won’t be discriminated against.

Truly, we live in an upside down world when the rights of people like Li/Baker are prioritized over the safety and well being of the general public.

 

 

 

 

Violence at Berkeley re Milo Yiannopoulos & liberal fascism

Click for ABC video.

Click for ABC video.

What we are seeing in the U.S. regarding the protest and riot at the University of California at Berkeley (H/T newswatchcanada.ca) is an example of liberal fascism, a projection of the very criticism the Left screams at conservatives.

For example, Wikipedia describes fascism as the belief that “liberal democracy is obsolete” and that there must be a “complete mobilization of society under a totalitarian one-party state …”  In the current U.S. context then, I don’t think it is an exaggeration to suggest the Berkeley protests are an example of fascism — albeit in reverse — the preference for a totalitarian state governed only by the Democratic Party.

Scary stuff! But, yes, in reality progressives and liberals in the U.S. want to do whatever is necessary to take down the Trump government. And, no as I said above, I don’t think saying that is an exaggeration.

Think about it. Ever since Donald Trump won the Presidency on November 8th, 2016, the pro Hillary Clinton Democrats — including elected Democrats in the U.S. Congress and Senate — have screamed and yelled that, because Trump did not win the popular vote, the Republicans should not do what they promised to do.

Which begs the question: What if the election result had been reversed? What if Clinton won the Electoral College and not the popular vote? She would be President and there would like be few if any protests.

Well, Clinton did not win the Electoral College and Donald J.Trump is President!

Which brings me to the Berkeley fiasco. What set the students and administration off? It seems that the students got upset because Milo Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak. The problem? Is he a racist? Is he a homophobe? No, worse. He is a gay conservative who doesn’t like liberal political correctness. He also likes President Trump.

So much for free speech!

Yes, I can identify with what is going on in the U.S. I am a conservative Canadian who has been blogging for eleven years now and had to listen to the anti-Stephen Harper screaming and whining from the opposition parties in Ottawa, as well as the liberal media, for the entire ten years the Conservatives were in power.

And, like most conservatives in the West today, I am fed up with liberals and progressives constantly calling us evil simply because we don’t think like they do. I am also fed up with them constantly exalting their righteousness and demanding absolute conformity to their vision of the social good.

To put it bluntly, the crux of the matter is that protesting everything conservative is nothing more than liberal fascism.

Trump’s inauguration numbers prove conservatives must fight dishonest media

screenshot-inaugurationThe photo image to the left is of the actual crowd that viewed Donald J. Trump’s inauguration speech on Friday, January 20th at approximately 12 noon. In other words, the National Mall in Washington was packed.

Yet, right after the Trump inaugural address, tweets started coming out that claimed the Obama 2009 numbers were significantly higher than the Trump 2017 numbers.

The double image below is indicative of that early claim. While you can’t move my image, here is the CNN link to do so. How long that image remains online I don’t know but it was there when I wrote this.

Click for the actual CNN comparison.

Click for the actual CNN comparison.

Anyway, I retweeted repeatedly that the 2017 image was taken around 9 or 9:30am in the morning. I knew that because I had my TV on all day and personally saw that view at around that earlier time period.

That inaccurate image stayed on Twitter and the Internet for a couple of days — allowing thousands if not millions to call Trump a liar — until CNN released this gigapixel image which began to prove the truth about the actual numbers.

Interestingly, today CNN released (H/T Gateway Pundit) another set of images which, once and for all, shows that as many people heard the Trump inauguration speech in 2017 as those who heard Obama in 2009. In fact, it could be argued that even more heard Mr. Trump.

Unfortunately, such anti-conservative bias is not new to conservative Canadians. For ten years, the entire time the Stephen Harper Conservatives were in power, I wrote about what we called the Harper Derangement Syndrome. It now seems obvious that the US is experiencing a similar Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Which means that whether you live in the U.S. or Canada, conservatives are believed to be bigoted, racist and intolerant.

On Saturday, for example, a Conservative Rebel Media journalist was roughed up at a women’s rally in Edmonton — by a so-called male feminist who was then hustled away by so-called female feminists. Watching the speeches and mayhem in Washington also showed just who is truly intolerant.

In other words, the very hateful words screamed at conservative women, particularly pro-life women, is a reflection of the hateful intolerance of any point of view that is not the one held by progressives and liberals.

The odd thing is today’s feminists are not really feminists. In the 1960s many of us now of retirement age, fought for equality and choice for both men and women. Real choice. Not one point of view.

  • Women could choose to work in the home full time.
  • Women could choose to get a job.
  • Women could choose to go back to school.
  • Women could choose to have children and work.
  • Men could choose to be the one to stay at home if they wanted.
  • And, women could choose to take birth control pills because they were then accessible.

In the early days of feminism, we also didn’t call abortion a right to “reproductive choice” because that is what birth control was. Remember, prior to the “pill,” women did not have much control over whether they got pregnant, something young women today forget or don’t know.

Anyway, this is all connected in that progressives and liberals hate anyone who doesn’t think like they do and that includes the similarly minded mainstream media.

So, what can conservative thinkers do? They can:

  • Read conservative oriented news sites,
  • Write on or start a conservative blog,
  • Comment regularly on Twitter and conservative blogs,
  • Get involved in the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) Leadership contest,
  • Join and volunteer in a CPC riding association, and
  • Donate money to the CPC directly or a leadership candidate.

In other words, the crux of the matter is that the best way to fight the dishonest liberal media is to ignore them as Mr. Trump does and get involved in conservative politics — whether you are a former reform conservative, a progressive conservative or a conservative leaning libertarian.

Canada’s Conservative leadership race a crowded field

conservative-french-debate-20170117

Click for CBC column.

The current Conservative Party of Canada’s (CPC) leadership race is quickly becoming a crowded field. For starters, at 13, there are too many candidates, many of whom have no chance of winning.  As well, as Tuesday’s French debate showed, many of the candidates don’t speak even passable French, which is an essential skill in order to lead Canada.

Worst of all though, is the infighting. For example, as I wrote recently, it was completely unnecessary for Lisa Raitt to lash out at Kellie Leitch just because Leitch wants to screen  for Canadian values refugees and immigrants coming from countries where there is terrorism.

Still others, like Kevin O’Leary are, in my opinion, just trying to get attention and latch on to Donald Trump’s popularity to the south. Believe me, O’Leary is not like Trump, who praises all veterans and the military. O’Leary says that while peacekeeping is an honour, being a warrior is not.  Meaning, that to actually fight is not an honour. Well, excuse me. Try telling that to the thousands of men and women who fought, were maimed or gave their lives in World Wars I, II and Korea.

Anyway, at the moment, given all the factors, including passable French, I am leaning towards Andrew Scheer. I also like Leitch, Chong and O’Toole and hope that their French improves. In fact, I have joined the CPC so that I can vote in May when the leadership vote is held. However, that said, I am still willing to look at other candidates.

To me, the key to who has the best chance of running against Justin Trudeau and winning is the candidate who can match Trudeau’s “sunny ways.” Scheer would definitely be equal in that regard as he is young, experienced, personable and has a young family as well. Similarly, O’Toole has presence. Yes, I know they don’t have the charisma of Trudeau but if Canadians get fed up enough with the direction the Liberals are taking the country, I believe that, by 2019, a majority would look carefully at the CPC leader.

The crux of the matter however, is that, for the good the party and country, some of the current candidates need to get out of the race and those who are left need to criticize the Liberals rather than each other.