Heh. “Now it may be objected that discussing ideas with Justin Trudeau is like discussing music with someone who can’t hear: pointless and a bit cruel.”
Heh. “Now it may be objected that discussing ideas with Justin Trudeau is like discussing music with someone who can’t hear: pointless and a bit cruel.”
Come now, Beethoven was able to write brilliant music without being able to really hear it very well. I am sure JT is of the same intellectual stature as Beethoven. Cut the poor little boy some slack. The world needs more peace and love.
To think, this pony all started with the commie Pierre and the hippie Margaret.
Ah yes, Beethoven was deaf for all intents when he wrote the 9th symphany (arguably his greatest). However, he was born with the ability to hear and gradually lost his hearing most probably because of the physical abuse inflicted on him by an alcholic father. Contrast that with Trudeau’s lack of “hearing” the root causes of terrorism. He has never been able to hear anything that is audible outside of his leftwing sound bubble. He has been effectively deaf since birth. He is also really dumb.
I’m with Brian Mallard!!
JT is deaf as a post!
The way Justine runs on at the mouth one could easily wonder if Paul Martin was his father. Let’s wait to see if he comes up with his 1000 top priorities for the next election.
Even the LSM (Lame Stream Media) has made the connection here:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/04/19/john-ivison-despite-conservative-malaise-only-spectacular-collapse-could-keep-stephen-harper-from-winning-next-election/
“Mr. Trudeau gave Mr. Harper his opening by suggesting that the Boston Marathon bombing was perpetrated by “someone who feels completely excluded.”
The language was similar to that used by then-prime minister Paul Martin, in the immediate aftermath the Jane Creba shooting outside Toronto’s Eaton Centre in December, 2005, when he talked about “the consequences of exclusion.”
Is it possible that Maggie Turdeau was intimate with PM instead of PT?
nah….just more”progressive groupthink”.
Is it possible that Maggie Turdeau was intimate with PM instead of PT?
By her own admission, just about everyone else got a piece of her, at least later. Promiscuity and crazy are often twins.
I always thought that Justin was gay. My gaydar told me I wouldn’t ask him to grab a few Brewskis with me after work. Has anyone ever met a straight male drama teacher? I couldn’t care less if he is gay, but I do worry about dishonesty.
“Now it may be objected that discussing ideas with Justin Trudeau is like discussing music with someone who can’t hear: pointless and a bit cruel.”
I’m stealing this quote.
… the “root causes” of terrorism are important. Namely terrorists and the ideas they choose to adopt.
Touché, John Robson.
Robson’s a joy to read. He’s logical, he’s clear, he’s amusing, and he’s smart.
Then, there’s the Boston Globe:
Islam might have had secondary role in Boston attacks
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/04/the-globe-reports-islam-might-have-had-secondary-role-in-boston-attacks.php
Power Line then features some equally inane headlines:
“Booze Might Have Had Secondary Role in Hangover”
“Gravity Might Have Had Secondary Role in Fall”
“Fault Might Have Had Secondary Role in Quake”
“The Surgeon General Has Determined That Cigarette Smoking Might Have a Secondary Role in Lung Cancer”
The Tory way-in-over-his-head ads seem to have disappeared. Smart move, pulling them. Why waste money telling people what Justin himself will demonstrate on his own.
In addition to scoring a beauty shot on Justine Trudeau’s forehead, John Robson makes an extremely important point about Trudeau and all liberals: they don’t think like normal people do.
As Robson says, the “root causes” argument denies humanity the basic capability of moral choice by starting with the assumption that humans only do what they are “motivated” to do by circumstance. I use the word “motivated” because it carries the connotation of being moved from without, not moving from one’s own resources and by one’s own choice.
This is a distinction which liberals don’t make themselves. They really drank the Skinnerian bathwater and believe humans are nothing more than stimulus/response machinery. We don’t decide things, we react to environmental stimuli. Like ants. Not a conscious belief, its more the water they swim in.
Conservatives by contrast do not believe this, and contend that human beings act by their own choices. That’s the main reason its impossible to talk to a liberal. They aren’t speaking the same language you are.
I also suspect Robson is 100% correct, and you couldn’t have this discussion with Shiny Pony. His poor little tiny mind couldn’t follow the arguments.
“The language was similar to that used by then-prime minister Paul Martin, in the immediate aftermath the Jane Creba shooting outside Toronto’s Eaton Centre in December, 2005, when he talked about “the consequences of exclusion.” Is it possible that Maggie Turdeau was intimate with PM instead of PT?”
Well, as far as Shaggy Maggie goes, anything was possible. But here’s a quote from Trudeau the Elder made in a CBC interview at the height of the October crisis:
“The government has pledged that it will introduce legislation which deals not only with the symptoms but with the social causes which often underlie or serve as an excuse for crime and disorder.”
So, contrary to the claims of the left (and many on the right)that Trudeau the Elder was brilliant and a deep thinker, it looks as if Pierre’s Pup is nothing but a chip off the old (and very small and shallow)intellectual block.
At the risk of being a ‘evil tobacco (hoax) denier’ I must point out that people who smoke actually protect their lungs from harmful cancer causing nuclear radiation. The proof is in the facts but like the globull warm -up hoax anti tobacco fanaticism has reached hysterical hights and facts are not part of the fairy tale. Big pharma and guments are making big $ from the ‘fallout’ via tobacco taxes, criminalizing sales and distributation of tobacco products, by big pharma feeding stupid people mind numbing products like Chantex ‘enabling’ them to quit smoking without effort but addicting the tobacco quitters to Chantex and it’s spin offs. By bankrupting tobacco farmers and service businesses (bars and resturants do not flourish in the new anti tobac society), gument is better able to ‘control’ the economy: the anti smoking shriek has served to divide society into ‘smokers’ (filthy, evil, stupid, knuckle draggers) and non smokers (clean, self righteous, politically correct). Most people drank the zealous anti tobacco cool aid, they did not look at the facts and they are not interested in the facts. Progressive moments in medicine!
I post this because I view the tobacco banning creep as the template for all the progressive fanaticism that followed. I go where smokers are welcomed and I avoid places where they (we) are marginalized and not considered because I am a person who enjoys a smoke and I will not subject myself to the dismissive ridicule that my legal habit incites in uninhibited forms of condemnation and viciousness vocal outbursts.
For those who are interested here is a link to a different point of view, using facts instead of fear mongering fiction:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050214135605/http://vialls.net/transpositions/smoking.html
BTW, batb I respect your opinions and agree with almost everything you say but IMO, smoking does not cause lung cancer.
Margaret Trudeau is giving a talk at a forum on mental health here in Kelowna, on May 4th, along with several other speakers.
Quote: “Trudeau currently sits on the executive advisory board of the UBC Mental Health Institute and actively advocates for mental health issues”.
I believe tickets are $50, way cheaper than her Son’s speaking fee.
John Robson, literally studies G. K. Chesterton, and quotes him continually. Can’t think of why anyone wouldn’t.
Jema54 said: “IMO, smoking does not cause lung cancer.”
The actual -cause- of lung cancer is at this time still unknown, so it is true that one cannot technically claim that smoking causes lung cancer. Additionally the science supporting “second hand smoke” is in large part very bad and very politicized, so there’s that.
However. Smoking is strongly correlated with lung cancer. And emphysema. And a few more really heinous lung diseases. Correlation does not equal causation, but at sufficiently high levels it might as well. Those are the levels we see in smoking.
Additionally, smoking has been -proven- to cause high blood pressure and a couple more things you really don’t want wrong with you when you’re old. It also slows wound healing measurably.
Plus they tax the hell out of you.
I think of it like TV. Something I don’t want in my life, that I can quit at no cost to myself. Your mileage may vary.
I’m no anti-smoking Nazi, people can do what they want. But lets not pretend smoking doesn’t come with a cost, yes?
Beyond the John Ivison column, Michael Bliss and Jeffrey Simpson said effectively the same thing a couple of days ago in the G&M, although Simpson’s column was quite laughable, what with him claiming that Mr. Harper’s reduction in the GST had taken $12 billion per year out of the federal treasury, as if it was money to which the federal government was entitled in the first place. Oh, those Laurentian elites!
“there is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded”
Just how and why Mr. Trudeau, Jr. felt qualified to speak on this particular area of socio-psychological research and analysis, whatever its merits or lack thereof, is quite beyond my understanding — he’s a drama teacher; I am unaware of any efforts, academic or otherwise, that he has made to equip himself to make the statements he did.
Nevertheless, I’m wondering about Mr. Martin’s comments in the wake of Jane Creba’s tragic death in Toronto and Mr. Chretien’s “root causes” remark in the wake of 9/11. Both were Quebec-based Liberal prime ministers, just as Mr. Trudeau, Jr. is a Quebec-based Liberal leader. Coincidence, or pattern? Perhaps Mr. Trudeau, Jr.’s comments, quoted in the Conservative Party advertisement, about what values were imparted to him by his father about the relative merits of Quebec in comparison to the whole country, are demonstrative: do these folks really believe that English-speaking societies are inferior and “at fault” due their inherently exclusionary nature?
I’d say that Mr. Trudeau, Jr. owes us an explanation on that score as well.
David Southam: ” … do these folks really believe that English-speaking societies are inferior and ‘at fault’ due [to] their inherently exclusionary nature?”
Yes, I’m afraid they do. The French always feel superior to anyone else in the room/world, though, aside from French wine and cuisine, I’d like to know how they can feel superior to anyone, seeing as corruption seems to be their preferred modus operandi. “Exlusionary nature” applies to the French in spades.
Jema54, I don’t exclude or marginalize smokers! They’re allowed to smoke in my house, although we often — at their insistence — repair to the deck! My grandmother was a 2-packer a day and died of lung cancer at the age of 60 when I was still very young. I’ve always made the connection between smoking and lung cancer but have not turned into an anti-smoking fanatic. I really dislike the holier-than-thou attitude of non-smokers who stigmatize smokers. They might not smoke but they often have other, often worse, habits.
Smoking? Cancer?
I’m scared $**tless to quit smoking…..why then I would be exposed to “second hand smoke”…..that’s stuff is so lethal it’ll rip the chrome off a chevy bumper 100m upwind………
(sarc\)
The root cause argument supposes some magic bullet, like compassion and inclusion for all, that will end terrorism. Even so the intelligensia assume the role of wise philosophe to guide us through the proper way to act and, of course, well funded government studies to prove to the bigotted bourgeois how badly they are in need of top down Rousseauian guidance.
IOW it’s a make work project for wannabe philosopher king types and their legions of papperasse ensuring we offend, and thus exclude, nobody.
Unless it’s Israel of course. In that case any hateful screed and violent act is completely understood because, of course, of root causes.
“Is it possible that Maggie Turdeau was intimate with PM instead of PT?”
No. Her virtue is a byword.
Black Mamba, congratulations on the most acidic, most cutting remark in this thread. I bow toward Halifax. [bowing]
Actually I’m in Montreal right now, but thanks 🙂
My condolences on your location problem. Unless you’re shopping, of course. Then its: “score!”