Ricky Ravioli Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 2 minutes ago, King Heffy said: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/tory-mp-defends-use-of-term-tar-baby-1.837347 So you think this is ok? Context is pretty important here. Yea I am fine with the way he used it in this context. The dude he said it to is white? What are you even trying to argue here? Do you know what the word means? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Wiggums said: Uh yeah, look up the definition. Do you think kids going in for hormone pills without their parents knowing is okay? So you're ok with a candidate for PM using ethnic slurs and yet complain when I call him a racist. Got it. Edited January 12 by King Heffy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 4 minutes ago, Bob Long said: But that's not what he does in practice No that's the bs fear part. He's just going to hurt kids . Care to expand? Again, that's just your opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 For me the recent conservative Facebook post attacking JT over the rebel news reporters recent detainment tells.us everything we need to know now about PP... Police do NOT take orders from politicians on whom to arrest. The cons know this .... The decision was made by whom ever the lead officer was in that security detail and the politician being provided security had zero input.... Again PP and the cons know this So PP posts up about Trudeau being out of control with media censorship..... A total misinformation post designed to hate farm rage. The comments that the cons allow and don't moderate are extremely anti police and feed off the intentional misinformation to grow the hate Let's be real .... If PP is that incompetent that he has to rely on hate farming instead of debating actual facts .... He's really no better than JT and is seeking to replace one bad drama teacher with simply a new.bad drama actor Seriously JT is so bad that any competent person could fill volumes with actual debate over his policies without ever having to rely on tik tokky Trump style behavior 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 9 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Like that's just your opinion man? I don't believe for a second that anything he has said is bigoted at all. “If I were to create a political party from scratch, it would be called the ‘mind your own damn business party.’ People can make the decisions of who they marry, who they date, how they live their lives, but also how they raise their kids,” said Poilievre, who said that was roughly the Liberal party’s point of view 25 years ago. “That’s why my role as a prime minister, is not going to be to impose my values on other people. It’s to get out of their faces and run a competent government,” said Poilievre. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/poilievre-doubles-down-on-parental-rights-pitches-disaffected-ndpers-in-rex-murphys-year-end-national-post-interview Parents have a right to know what's going on in their child's classroom. That doesn't mean I agree with the extremists who think anything trans related needs to be gone. Just parents have a right to a say That all sounds good in theory. It's how it will be put into practice that troubles me. It won't be parents as much as parent groups. We could start discussing those groups, what they stand for, what their tactics are, and what side of the political fence they are on. It would be an interesting discussion and worthy of its' own thread. I've mentioned before that it's not so much a Conservative government that scares me as much as some of the bat shit crazies that side with it. I want to make it clear I'm not talking about Conservatives in general or anyone who posts in this thread. I'm just talking about the lunatic fringe. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 3 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Context is pretty important here. Yea I am fine with the way he used it in this context. The dude he said it to is white? What are you even trying to argue here? Do you know what the word means? There is no context where this is acceptable. This is the kind of garbage that civilized people have a problem with, and is why PP is being called out for his efforts to Nazify Canada and normalize his barbaric beliefs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggums Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 minute ago, King Heffy said: So you're ok with a candidate for PM using ethnic slurs and yet complain when I call him a racist. Got it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 minute ago, King Heffy said: There is no context where this is acceptable. This is the kind of garbage that civilized people have a problem with, and is why PP is being called out for his efforts to Nazify Canada and normalize his barbaric beliefs. Look if you are going to live your life constantly offended by everything around you, that's on you. This is such a poor attempt to paint Pierre Poilievre as a racist that it's actually hilarious. You are soooo blinded by hate that you can't even see how ridiculous your statements continue to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 2 minutes ago, Wiggums said: You missed a bit, as well as considering what the words still mean to most people. Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more tar ba·by /ˈtär ˌbābē/ noun noun: tarbaby 1. INFORMAL a difficult problem that is only aggravated by attempts to solve it. "disposal of nuclear waste was a problem whose solution was endlessly delayed, a tar baby no one wanted anything to do with" 2. OFFENSIVE•DATED Hide definition a derogatory term for a Black person. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 6 minutes ago, Satchmo said: That all sounds good in theory. It's how it will be put into practice that troubles me. It won't be parents as much as parent groups. We could start discussing those groups, what they stand for, what their tactics are, and what side of the political fence they are on. It would be an interesting discussion and worthy of its' own thread. I've mentioned before that it's not so much a Conservative government that scares me as much as some of the bat shit crazies that side with it. I want to make it clear I'm not talking about Conservatives in general or anyone who posts in this thread. I'm just talking about the lunatic fringe. Which is fair and I tend to agree with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggums Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Satchmo said: You missed a bit, as well as considering what the words still mean to most people. Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more tar ba·by /ˈtär ˌbābē/ noun noun: tarbaby 1. INFORMAL a difficult problem that is only aggravated by attempts to solve it. "disposal of nuclear waste was a problem whose solution was endlessly delayed, a tar baby no one wanted anything to do with" 2. OFFENSIVE•DATED Hide definition a derogatory term for a Black person. Okay... Context? He's actually so not racist he never even knew the second meaning of it. Actually helps his case if anything Edited January 12 by Wiggums Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) 1 minute ago, Satchmo said: You missed a bit, as well as considering what the words still mean to most people. Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more tar ba·by /ˈtär ˌbābē/ noun noun: tarbaby 1. INFORMAL a difficult problem that is only aggravated by attempts to solve it. "disposal of nuclear waste was a problem whose solution was endlessly delayed, a tar baby no one wanted anything to do with" 2. OFFENSIVE•DATED Hide definition a derogatory term for a Black person. Was he talking to a black person? AGAIN... Context... Edited January 12 by Ricky Ravioli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 2 hours ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Like that's just your opinion man? I don't believe for a second that anything he has said is bigoted at all. “If I were to create a political party from scratch, it would be called the ‘mind your own damn business party.’ People can make the decisions of who they marry, who they date, how they live their lives, but also how they raise their kids,” said Poilievre, who said that was roughly the Liberal party’s point of view 25 years ago. “That’s why my role as a prime minister, is not going to be to impose my values on other people. It’s to get out of their faces and run a competent government,” said Poilievre. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/poilievre-doubles-down-on-parental-rights-pitches-disaffected-ndpers-in-rex-murphys-year-end-national-post-interview Parents have a right to know what's going on in their child's classroom. That doesn't mean I agree with the extremists who think anything trans related needs to be gone. Just parents have a right to a say Parents definitively have a right. Should that ‘right’ always extend into the classroom? We’re trying to teach kids how to be individuals. That means, learning rules and following them, based on a fair and safe place to be and learn. Kids may not learn everything that parents like or agree with politically or religiously, but that’s how we as society prepare them for their lives. The world is always evolving. If we insulate our kids to some way of being from a bygone era, then they’re less capable of manoeuvring through life later on. We don’t need a PM who acts like the Lord of the Flies. We need a PM that leads based on progressing our country and collective society forward, with inclusivity and common sensibilities towards due process, democracy, humility, and beyond all, integrity. No Leader of any Party has those things. PP is NOT that person. Singh is perhaps somewhat that person. Trudeau is a halfway point of the aforementioned. Great? Hell no. Good? Debatable. Middle of the road good? I think so. Cons need to reshift away from far right drivel. That’s why the Libs keep winning. NDP need a new charismatic female leader imo. Libs are going to run JT as long as they can. If you live in Canada and hate the Leadership of your or any Party, then work to get better people noticed and work for them. My two cents. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Wiggums said: Okay... Context? Does it matter? A politician should just be smart enough to know that some words are to be avoided. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Just now, Satchmo said: Does it matter? A politician should just be smart enough to know that some words are to be avoided. Exactly. There's a word starting with F that can be used to describe a bundle of sticks, but I'm sure we all realize that it's not appropriate to use it in any context regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggums Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 2 minutes ago, Satchmo said: Does it matter? A politician should just be smart enough to know that some words are to be avoided. Okay but so he didn't know about the term, didn't use it in that sense whatsoever but he's still a racist? That's what this conversation is about 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4petesake Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 minute ago, King Heffy said: Exactly. There's a word starting with F that can be used to describe a bundle of sticks, but I'm sure we all realize that it's not appropriate to use it in any context regardless. Same argument as ‘blackface’ and nobody debates context with that anymore. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Wiggums said: Okay but so he didn't know about the term, didn't use it in that sense whatsoever but he's still a racist? That's what this conversation is about I'm not the one calling him racist. I'm the one calling him a fool. Edited January 12 by Satchmo typo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Wiggums said: Okay but so he didn't know about the term, didn't use it in that sense whatsoever but he's still a racist? That's what this conversation is about He doubled down after he said it instead of admitting a mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggums Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) 5 minutes ago, King Heffy said: He doubled down after he said it instead of admitting a mistake. Still clearly wasn't used as an ethnic slur which is all that matters. I've never heard a single person use that term anywhere anyways. Do you like hormone treatment for children and no more boys and girls? Weren't you always going of about certain people not acting like "real men"? You know, you can't say that anymore without being called a bigot Edited January 12 by Wiggums Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 hour ago, Bob Long said: Well, many people do see PPs support of things like so-called parents rights as quite bigoted. It's a pretty easy argument to back up, given that whole thing comes out of the US evangelism movement. It doesn't get much more bigoted than those folks. So a parent who wants to know what is going on with their minor child at school is now a bigot? Wow, the world has really changed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 minute ago, Wiggums said: Still clearly wasn't used as an ethnic slur which is all that matters. I've never heard a single person use that term anywhere anyways. Do you like hormone treatment for children and no more boys and girls? Weren't you always going of about certain people not acting like "real men"? You know, you can't do that anymore without being called a bigot I'm intrigued....just who is it that is calling for an end to boys and girls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 18 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said: Parents definitively have a right. Should that ‘right’ always extend into the classroom? We’re trying to teach kids how to be individuals. That means, learning rules and following them, based on a fair and safe place to be and learn. Kids may not learn everything that parents like or agree with politically or religiously, but that’s how we as society prepare them for their lives. The world is always evolving. If we insulate our kids to some way of being from a bygone era, then they’re less capable of manoeuvring through life later on. We don’t need a PM who acts like the Lord of the Flies. We need a PM that leads based on progressing our country and collective society forward, with inclusivity and common sensibilities towards due process, democracy, humility, and beyond all, integrity. No Leader of any Party has those things. PP is NOT that person. Singh is perhaps somewhat that person. Trudeau is a halfway point of the latter mentioned. Great? Hell no. Good? Debatable. Middle of the road good? I think so. Cons need to reshift away from far right drivel. That’s why the Libs keep winning. NDP need a new charismatic female leader imo. Libs are going to run JT as long as they can. If you live in Canada and hate the Leadership of your or any Party, then work to get better people noticed and work for them. My two cents. Minor children are under the control of their parents until they are 18. Until such time as they are adults the parents absolutely have the right to know what they are being taught at school. And the parents are the ones who will make the big decisions for their kids, not some teacher at school who may have some political agenda. Teachers need to teach. You know like math and science. Parents need to parent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 30 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Care to expand? Yep in a few mins 30 minutes ago, Ricky Ravioli said: Again, that's just your opinion Nope its not just me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Just now, Elias Pettersson said: Minor children are under the control of their parents until they are 18. Until such time as they are adults the parents absolutely have the right to know what they are being taught at school. And the parents are the ones who will make the big decisions for their kids, not some teacher at school who may have some political agenda. Teachers need to teach. You know like math and science. Parents need to parent. How principled of you. And what about kids that don't have a safe home? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.