This Is What The Super-Adventure Club Actually Believes

Last month PragerU posted a poll to the far-left cesspool of Twitter asking if private property was moral. Since Twitter routinely censors and deplatforms conservatives, and leftists are susceptible to mob-inspired groupthink, the poll voted against the ownership of private property.

One of the defenses that was posted was this picture based on what should be easily discredited claptrap, if only actual economics was taught in high schools.

Martok thought it was a joke, some sort of parody, when he first shared me this link. Strangely enough, it's not. They actually think this is an argument.

For those who might not have learned this (again smallest amount of) economics, this is a failed Marxist-inspired theory: the toothbrush idea (since the device itself was unknown, as it happens, to Marx) comes from Carl Gustav Rosberg^†. Naturally, the problem is that Rosberg and other socialists seem to think that the state of the world as it is could be created equally capable by a non-capitalist system.

Let's look at Rosberg's toothbrush. Apparently under this ideal socialism I'm "allowed" to keep my toothbrush (how nice of you). But my toothbrush will eventually wear out. How do I get a replacement? Can I replace it with one of those nice Phillips Soniccare ones (that ironically Martok actually uses and was extolling its virtues to me at the bar a couple weeks ago)? Or maybe I'll settle for a regular one. But can I buy one with the "fruits of my labour"? From whom? Will a government run supply chain be able to figure out how many of both types of toothbrushes to make? Will a factory be able to run with workers who may not wish to work there when apparently they are guaranteed a home and an income and a toothbrush of their own?

^† The toothbrush has been popular enough that free market advocates have been routinely making fun of it by asking questions like "am I allowed to start a business cleaning toilets with my toothbrush?" and other basic questions about the extension of "personal" property to use it in a way the person sees fit that "the state" may not. In fact, Objectivists have ridiculed the toothbrush thing enough that less-read socialists themselves think it was advocates for capitalism that came up with it in the first place.

These are the basic questions that helped Marxism be completely obliterated in the field of economics. Who gets to decide where this line between "private" and "public" property is drawn? Can people choose to earn an income without doing their own "working" in the Marxist sense? If my skill is in coordinating a large number of factory workers can I earn the "fruits of my labour" by telling other workers in the toothbrush factory what to do? What if my skill is in figuring out that consumers in the next 16-30 months are going to prefer blue-handled toothbrushes instead of red-handled toothbrushes? How do I earn money from the fruits of this labour (which has real value to the world of toothbrush manufacturing) when there's no incentive for socialist-owned toothbrush manufacturers to hire me to provide it? After all, toothbrushes are used by almost everybody but only the government-run facilities are allowed to make them, so the government doesn't really care if the toothbrushes they make are red or blue. So if 75% of the toothbrush-buying public wants a blue toothbrush and the government makes a 50-50 red-blue split, which 25% of the population gets a toothbrush they don't want? Or do we overproduce and keep the split and double the number of toothbrushes, then have to warehouse half our red toothbrush output...but do we know not to make fewer red toothbrushes next year and not fall into this pattern?

So now we have people not getting the personal property they want, and there's no incentive to reward the people who could correct this. Don't you wish you could own a toothbrush factory and start showing these idiots how it could be done? Again there's a real-world value in that role: the private/personal property morons don't even see it. There's also a real value in places like Dollar Tree who purchase en masse those surplus toothbrushes and sell them at huge discounts: without them being allowed to open stores and make profits people don't get a chance to decide that those red toothbrushes they don't want are more attractive at huge discounts. In a world where government gives you a toothbrush you want the one you want: in a world of capitalism where there's no line between personal and private property the toothbrush you want isn't a fixed concept because it's balanced by the price you pay and the tradeoffs you make. "I'll give you a toothbrush do you want red or blue" is an easy question, each person makes their own decision. "Will you pay $0.25 more for a blue toothbrush" isn't a question red toothbrush fans would even answer: but a number of blue toothbrush fans will say yes and another number will say no. Complicating this further is that when you change the price to different numbers you'll get different proportions of yes and no answers. Complicating this even further is that when you ask the same "will you pay $0.25 more for a blue toothbrush" you might get different answers from the same people on different days.

Martok pointed out another minor problem with this world they want us living in: the person who fucking invented the toothbrush doesn't get rewarded for his ingenuity either. You might scoff at this concept regarding a regular toothbrush but that Soniccare I mentioned earlier was relatively recently invention (David Giuliani, 1987). It has a real world value, but in a world of personal but not private property it probably wouldn't exist. How would Giuliani obtain the resources in this world to build a piezoelectric multimorph transducer? Why would he do so when those resources suddenly wouldn't belong to him: even if he was able to meek out that much "personal" property the moment he tries to sell the toothbrush it becomes "private" and is taken away from him? The standard Marxist claim is that government scientists would come up with this, but why would the government want a new more expensive toothbrush that might mean nobody wants those blue and red handled ones that are already causing them endless grief?

Incentives exist. They goes back to the invention of fire long before economics or "capitalism" or Marxism ever existed. Communism or socialism or Gustovism or whatever you decide to call this backwards thinking ultimately fails. Who built your personal domicile? You're apparently given one by the government whether you built it or not, which means that you aren't interested in building one: that's a lot of work and you don't get anything extra for doing so. Everybody else in the country does the same calculus though and suddenly nobody is building domiciles, or toothbrushes. You're supposedly allowed to keep the fruits of your labour but you're also "guaranteed" things: that's the whole point of the utopia nonsense they're selling. In the end the only part of the chart you actually get is the land you're on to cultivate: but even then nonrural people apparently still get food.

Which is how this system ends up working in practice: you still have to go to a job you don't like, only in this system you don't even get to pick the job. But then they have to force you to put in a hard day's work: without the promise of being able to do something productive with the so-called "fruits of your labour" the only motivation becomes fear of the gulag. They want me to trade my private property for this system?

No thanks.

Question of the Day

Did the far-left extremists at Progress Alberta have anything to say about the whistleblowers who courageously told us about Hunter Biden's laptop, Dominion Voting Machines, or fraudulent mail-in Biden ballots?

Fags (kinda) cause COVID

 

With the raging debate over whether Albertans should care about COVID (we shouldn't), it was worth noting how many online commenters seemed to think that (insert jurisdiction here) is having a lot of Wuhan Flu cases because the people there are "ignorant".

As you can see from the screenshot above, the easy enough retort (as such) to that is that New York City is so rampant with the Wuhan Flu that their exclusion plummets the United States in the international rankings, while some midwest states are relatively COVID-free. As a result, by Jenna Thomas' own metric above, New York City is by far the most ignorant place in North America (with Montreal being the runner up: at one point it was the 7th most ignorant city on the planet). Meanwhile places like Oklahoma or Missouri or Kentucky have much lower Wuhan Flu deaths (and therefore are much less ignorant, apparently). I suppose the national ranking would have to be (from most to least "ignorant" under this formula, with the number being the death rate per 100,000 people):

1. Queerbec (81)
2. Ontario (24)
3. Manitoba (17)
4. Alberta (11)
5. British Columbia (7)
   Nova Scotia (7)
6. Saskatchewan (3)
7. Yukon (2)
8. New Brunswick (1)
   Newfoundland and Labrador (1)
9. Northwest Territories (0)
   Nunavut (0)
   Prince Edward Island (0)

Who knew it could be this easy? Surely if you were an SJW doing a national "ignorance" index this is the ranking and the relative weights you'd throw behind them right? I jest of course: clearly this dumb girl on YouTube didn't come up with any sort of real metric: she just invented a quality after the fact.

I mean it is fun and easy to do. Let's try to think of one off the tops of our heads (without cheating by looking at the post title that you almost certainly have indeed looked at). Well I wouldn't rank Toronto's fag march ahead of Montreal's, surely, and Vancouver and Victoria probably should beat Edmonton and Calgary...but otherwise I would say there's a decent correlation here between the size of each provinces pro-faggot parades and their position on this list.

So let's go with this wacky contention: being pro-fag causes the Wuhan Flu.

It's obviously not entirely out of left field, I wrote about the shocking public policy divergence between AIDS and COVID just a couple days ago. In the early days of the pandemic when we were being assured that Trump was massively screwing up compared to the Shiny Pony, Martok got into it with somebody on Facebook (who thought Trump could take lessons from his counterpart up north) by pointing out that still meant Canada was one of the 15 worst countries in the world. He then asked her if her contention (much like what I did with Jenna's little rant above) was that Canada should be more like other countries who were doing even better than us: such as Saudi Arabia or Pakistan who execute sodomites in the public square. So this idea of "wait aren't there horrible countries doing 'better' than us?" is hardly a new one.

Still, let's run a few numbers. Okay, you got me: I already ran them. The OurWorldInData website posts a running .xlsx spreadsheet of COVID numbers, so that was easy enough to pull. University of California (UCLA)'s Williams Institute put out a global ranking of how sodomy-friendly each individual country is: a metric they hilariously call the "global acceptance index" (or GAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY). Looking at the top dozen countries we can see Spain, the UK, Belgium, Sweden...hmm the news seems to think those countries are heavy COVID sufferers. I don't see France or the USA until I scroll down a surprising degree (both are next to each other, in fact), and I know I'm not going to see Brazil at the top (though it isn't far behind France). So maybe we're onto something. The data is of course in PDF format so cleaning it up ends up taking WAY more time than it should have.

A small amount of data manipulation had to take place: many countries share a GAI, and I don't know if their internal data has more significant figures but to maintain the rankings I have added 0.001 to each subsequent GAI: Germany Finland Switzerland Puerto Rico all have 7.4 so I've changed them to 7.4, 7.4001, 7.4002, etc. Hong Kong and Nagorno-Karabakh are officially provinces within larger countries so I had to calculate their death per million manually based on Wikipedia's population figures.

More importantly, we know full well that there are discrepancies between how countries calculate COVID deaths. Unfortunately there is no single reliable metric: cases are dependent on the number of people getting tested: that can fluctuate wildly even within countries (Alberta's testing numbers have been very high for months; test the same proportion of the population in Ontario and watch the case numbers change drastically). Active cases are a joke. So death rate, with all the issues with that death rate, is the only thing we have. Obviously it needs to be analyzed per capita, otherwise Jamaica's anti-poofter society with only 239 deaths will make pro-uranist Canada's 11,571 deaths a slam dunk for my case: not to mention all those African countries. China of course is lying it's ass off about it's death-rate as somewhat of a counter-balance: that amazingly low death rate would balance with a GAI lower than Turkey or Swaziland.

So here's the graph:

This is a weak positive correlation and therefore isn't the whole story. Specifically there's a r-value of 0.46601860562348 and an R-squared value of 0.217173340787253, so it's relatively each to find values well outside the range.

Still, however, that correlation is indeed positive. That's more correlation, one notes, than reduction of COVID cases with compliance to facemask directives (a key element that this widely popularized study explicitly mentions it did not check). It certainly means that an SJW's definition of "ignorance" isn't a valid metric.

So we can't blame the faggots for this one (unlike AIDS, for example). Don't worry, it still looks like niggers are a big chunk of American (and presumably Canadian) death rates, which certainly explains Toronto and Montreal...

additional screenshot of data, click to view full-size:

@WPrivilage - everybody deserves lower taxes

It's a common leftist refrain these days:

LMAO lower taxes, you make over 400k? Didn't think so, law and order? When GOP Senators break the law on the daily and men hunt down people of color going for a simple jog? No thank you and oppose fraud? You're a damn joke if you didn't condemn Lady G. Look in the mirror

— Azure (@WPrivilage) November 19, 2020

As with most leftists who use leftist refrains, Azure hasn't put any thought actually into what he said.

Not the part about jogging niggers of course: men "hunted down" suspected criminals that the law hasn't been effectively dealing with. They may or may not have gotten it wrong. Sometimes police get it wrong. But then sometimes gangster-assed niggers open fire on the wrong house. Imperfect people don't always get their man.

The issue is the "LMAO lower taxes" stuff. Even if we took Azure's claim about only people earning over $400,000 annually affected by tax cuts seriously: so what? What's wrong with cutting the taxes of people who make over $400,000? Are they not human beings who earned their money the same as anybody else?

Leftists think they don't, of course. For them, people in mutually beneficial business relationships are stealing their money from somebody (who? they never really say), while governments imposing taxes aren't stealing anything from anybody even though there are massive lists of the citizens they are stealing that money from. (Of course, the "moral looting" crowd doesn't think actual violent theft is theft, but that's just how backwards left-wing thinking really is).

What Azure has done is identified a group of "evil" people he thinks it's okay that he and his gang of 50%+1 [with Biden stealing the election shouldn't that be "48%-1" now? -ed] can gang up on and steal from. That's sick, and it's important to attack this argument at its basic root: just because somebody is richer than you doesn't justify stealing from them. People making over $400,000 are human beings who deserve the fruits of their labours: at the very least if we insist on stealing 40% of their lives we should steal that from all lives equally #AllLivesMatter and all that jazz.

Azure didn't pick this number out of the air of course: that's the "high earners" that FakePresident Biden is proposing to increase taxes on to pay for his evil social programs. That link of course was before the election, when the #FakeNews media believed the pollster lies that the Democrats were on track to sweep the House and Senate: it concedes that if Biden doesn't control all three houses his tax plans will collapse quickly (I guess next time they need to take an extra few minutes on all the fraudulent mail-in ballots to fill in the down-ticket votes). This is, of course, another leftist refrain based on a lie: that if we just "taxed the rich" we could pay for everything they want government to force upon you.

I said earlier attacking this argument on its fundamental philosophical root was the most important, and it is: even if this plan worked, the rationale behind it is evil.

“In view of what they hear from the experts, the people cannot be blamed for their ignorance and their helpless confusion. If an average housewife struggles with her incomprehensibly shrinking budget and sees a tycoon in a resplendent limousine, she might well think that just one of his diamond cuff links would solve all her problems. She has no way of knowing that if all the personal luxuries of all the tycoons were expropriated, it would not feed her family — and millions of other, similar families — for one week; and that the entire country would starve on the first morning of the week to follow . . . . How would she know it, if all the voices she hears are telling her that we must soak the rich?

“No one tells her that higher taxes imposed on the rich (and the semi-rich) will not come out of their consumption expenditures, but out of their investment capital (i.e., their savings); that such taxes will mean less investment, i.e., less production, fewer jobs, higher prices for scarcer goods; and that by the time the rich have to lower their standard of living, hers will be gone, along with her savings and her husband’s job — and no power in the world (no economic power) will be able to revive the dead industries (there will be no such power left).”

- Ayn Rand, “The Inverted Moral Priorities,”

There's another aspect of this evil plan worth noting though: it won't work. Tax increases for one just don't raise the revenue leftists assume they will: they forget that people will make efforts to reduce their taxes. You'd think the party who's so popular with Hollywood celebrities would know about Hollywood Accounting, yet they have this massive blind spot in not understanding that other industries will use the same rationale as their studio bosses looking at royalty cheques. Secondly, as Ayn Rand has noted above and Mark Steyn confirmed with recent real-world data, you can confiscate all their wealth and it won't matter:

And that’s the problem. For what Obama’s spending, there aren’t enough of them, or us, or “the rich” – and there never will be. There is only one Warren Buffett. He is the third-wealthiest person on the planet. The first is a Mexican, and beyond the reach of the U.S. Treasury. Mr. Buffett is worth $44 billion. If he donated the entire lot to the Government of the United States, they would blow through it within four-and-a-half days. OK, so who’s the fourth-richest guy? He’s French. And the fifth guy’s a Spaniard. No. 6 six is Larry Ellison. He’s American, but that loser is only worth $36 billion. So he and Buffett between them could keep the United States Government going for a week. The next-richest American is Christy Walton of Wal-Mart, and she’s barely a semi-Buffett. So her $25 billion will see you through a couple of days of the second week. There aren’t a lot of other semi-Buffetts, but, if you scrounge around, you can rustle up some hemi-demi-semi-Buffetts: If you confiscate the total wealth of the Forbes 400 richest Americans it comes to $1.5 trillion, which is just a little less than the Obama budget deficit for year.

The United States current national debt is $27.248 trillion dollars. Before the Wuhan Flu hit the United States had 155.76 million people working, and yes that includes CEOs. In other words to pay off that national debt each worker would need to average $174,000 in payouts. The mean U.S. salary is $33,706, meaning each worker would need to have their salary fully confiscated for over five years: that means not eating, not paying rent, not going anywhere, anything.

Leftists like Azure will think that "the rich" just pay because their lot isn't very good at math. CEO salaries are included in the mean salary but it still doesn't make a difference in aggregate. Looking at it on a macroeconomics level, in 2018 the U.S. GDP was $20.54 trillion. That means if every U.S. citizen's financial output was totally confiscated (which includes nonpersonal wealth in everything from corporate profit to stock earnings) it still would take one year, 3 months, and 27 days to make up the debt. Of course soon after that every U.S. company would be instantly bought up by their international competition taking advantage of their cashflow situation, meaning no more nonpersonal wealth effectively being generated in the USA and therefore no way to do this a second time and pay for the Joe Biden social programs that presumably are still running. Nor the unfunded liabilities for existing programs: that's $137 trillion. So what does the U.S. economy look like when their GDP is confiscated entirely (remember that means no American can pay for food!) for 6 years 8 months and 2 days?

Azure and his ilk don't think about the reality of their evil desires. They don't even realize they're evil. And that's why their dangerous.

That, and the jogging.

Couldn't have said it better myself

Our elections in Canada aren't perfect: there isn't enough security around the voter identification process, the mail-in ballots so sought after by the Shiny Pony add additional insecurity, and there's a longstanding problem with Liberals using intimidation to make new immigrants think they have to vote "L" or face deportation. And of course the less said about the new "leaders debate commission" the better.

But over at Steyn's side Tal Bachman points out how Canada's method of running paper ballot elections works far better and would vastly improve the speed and security of America's election day.

I was actually thinking a couple weeks ago when Steyn guest-hosted for Rush Limbaugh of calling in talking about much of this same stuff, as well as a little anecdote about the 1997 election:

I was one of the Reform Party scrutineers in Edmonton West. It was a popular riding: along with the Liberal, Reform, Conservative, and NDP candidates, there was also a Marxist-Leninist, Green, and a Natural Law Party candidate. As Tal mentioned in the article, at 8pm the polling station closes down and nobody is allowed in or out until the votes are counted. Every party is allowed a scrutineer: we can rotate throughout the day, but the scrutineer who is supposed to be there for the count has to be there at 7pm. From later in the afternoon the Liberals scrutineer had left (probably had to pick kids up at a babysitter or whatever) and hadn't been replaced.

Around 7:20pm things started getting hectic: the division polling officer had left a voicemail to Anne McLellan's team (this was all before cellphones remember) but no replacement scrutineer had shown up. A flurry of calls were being performed: the riding returning officer had been forced to notify the federal Liberal campaign team of the incident as well as the higher ups at Election's Canada (who by this point, remember, were already into ballot counts in other parts of the country). There was a mad scramble to find a replacement scrutineer and get them to the polling station. By this point those of us in the major parties (Reform, NDP, Conservative) were assured that our own campaigns were already notified of the discrepancy. Finally it was revealed they had managed to get a scruntineer who could make it, but likely would be after 8pm when the polling station was supposed to be sealed.

Word came down that Elections Canada would agree to let him into the otherwise closed polling station at or before 8:15pm on the dot but if he was any later than that he would be refused entry and the count would be done without them. Even this ended up being a controversy of sorts, or at the very least a major outlier. The polling station results were flagged, and since McLellan won by only 12 votes in 1993 it was a concern: because their scrutineer caused a late start at the polling station (he arrived about 5 minutes after 8pm), there was going to be some special treatment (I can't recall what) in the event of a recount that the Liberals were not going to be happy with. In the end the incident ended up being flagged and reviewed by Elections Canada and all parties in the riding were notified of the incident right up at the federal level.

So yes, Canada's elections (at least the 1997 paper ballot method) is extremely secure. No Philadelphia shenanigans happening here!

Manitoba Goes Crazy

We have all gone mad 😳 https://t.co/67GBybzXm1

— HaveWeAllGoneMad (@HaveWeAllGoneM1) November 21, 2020

Fortunately Ezra is fighting back with facts:

(for those curious about why the title for this post sounds so familiar...)

@iamcelinacc - why do Red Indians always need help from whites to build a water well?

Why can't Beetabun Moonias build her own well?

If you watch anything this morning - watch this. This is heartbreaking. 💔 This is Canada. Beetabun Moonias from #Neskantanga First Nation is us and we are her.

She is currently in Thunder Bay due a water crisis in her community. Thank you @solmamakwa for sharing this. #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/4ez16EsDcl

— Celina Caesar-Chavannes (@iamcelinacc) November 14, 2020

I mean there are a lot of unanswered questions here. You could ask why Celina Caesar-Chavannes can't build this little girl a well either, or at least pay somebody to do it. You may note that instead she is implicitly insisting that the Canadian taxpayer (overwhelmingly white) pay somebody to build her well.

I don't know Beetabun Moonias, is she an orphan? If not, couldn't mommy or daddy (heh, that's funny) build a well for their family (and by extension the child)? Even if they work full time (heh, that's even funnier) they could work on the well evenings and weekends, maybe hold a work bee (rapidly becoming guffaws) where all the Red Indians on the Neskantanga Reserve (to be future stylized as Neskafe) band together and help out a needy member of their community?

You might think of my suggestions as cold-hearted or ridiculous, which instantly says something very bad about you: are you unaware that for millions^† of Canadians (again, overwhelmingly white) digging a well was a prerequisite of living in their rural home? Why can these white people do it, but Red Indians like the Moonias family are left running away to a (white) settlement like Thunder Bay where the white taxpayers have already paid for infrastructure for their own fresh water?

^† According to StatsCan, 6.3 million Canadians lived in rural areas in 2011, and while they didn't all have to build their own wells, some proportion of the roughly 2.2 million Canadians who lived in rural areas in 1861 did have to provide their own fresh drinking water, and so on and so forth in the years in between. Strangely enough, these millions of white people got themselves fresh water even without authors crying on Twitter for more welfare

It's right in the tweet by the way: the Neskafe Indians claim to be a "first nation": so why don't they raise money by taxing the economic activity (haha!) on their reserve and use that money to fund fresh water? Or fund their own welfare program where their "nation" pays for Beetabun's family to get a free well?

Predictably, just like the Loon Lake Indians who apparently can't put water on a fire without white man's help, the Neskafe Indians can't put water in a drinking glass without whitey paying in the sweat and/or coinage in order to make it happen. What's with these guys, are they allergic to water or something?

Now I know what you're thinking: if she's in Thunder Bay then the Neskafe Indians must be that band just outside of the city where you can buy cheap gas (since Red Indians despite their endless lies on the subject are tax-exempt in many avenues), which means she lives right by Lake Freaking Superior. You would be wrong though: it's actually right by our good lazy friends in Attawapiskat (previously seen demonstrating the difference between a failed government audit and merely an observation for improvement in accounting practices). 

However since we're in the neighbourhood and on the subject, how did Neskafe Indians do in their mandatory audit? Take it away, Conservative MP for Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo Cathy McLeod:

There's one band, Neskantaga, where the auditor said he was unable to satisfy himself over the completeness, existence, and valuation of capital assets. This has been for a couple of years now. Are they in third party management? What is the plan for that particular band?

So by March 2017 the Moonias live in a band which has for several years failed their government audit: all evidence speaks to misappropriated funds and (mostly white) tax dollars being wasted. If you go back on that link from my blog about the variance of $3.1B in federal government spending, both the Right Honourable Stephen Harper (pbuh) and I note that the auditor was satisfied with the audit: for those who have been involved in financial audits before the Harper incident was a "OI" or "opportunity for improvement". Much different from an "NC" (nonconformity) and certainly different from the auditor flat out refusing to sign off on the audit which apparently is what had happened in Neskafe in 2015 (and possibly 2014 and possibly 2016 and possibly ever since, it's hard to know if the 2016 audit was complete for the House of Commons at the time of McLeod's questions.

Did Celina Caesar-Chavannes know about the auditor discovering that Beetabun Moonias lives in band who has been failing audits and presumably also mismanaging the money taxpayers have already been sending her (in part) to provide clean drinking water? Probably not: like all brainless SJW activists she just uses this girl as a bludgeon to imply that hateful whitey isn't doing enough and is responsible for killing her. However the fact that you need to dig a well or treatment facility or something to obtain potable water wasn't invented by the white man or "capitalism" or any other leftist boogeyman: it's a fundamental fact of the world we live in, an inescapable fact (which is in a way a boogeyman to the left anyways).

Actually going back to last month's talk about Columbus Day, let's imagine a world just like the SJWs wanted: no Europeans ever set foot on Canadian soil. The Red Indians of Neskafe and Attawapiskat continue to live their nomadic lifestyle around the thousands of unnamed freshwater lakes in their corner of Northern Ontario (roughly same latitude as Saskatoon). No let's ask a crazy question.

How would Beetabun Moonias be receiving their fresh water?

After all, there wouldn't be any whiteman government in Ottawa to petition to. Red Indians are highly unlikely to have invented copper pipes or pumps or radios to even receive boil water advisories on. Wouldn't Moonias be just as screwed, in fact moreso, in this magical world where we left her savage culture intact? Instead of boiling water from the taps to make it safe, she'd have to go scoop it out of the lake "as-is", which anybody who goes camping knows you're warned not to do. Maybe there are some faster moving streams where she and her family could have gone in this scenario to get more-or-less potable water.

So why can't they do this now? And stop blaming whitey for their apparent allergy to water (and/or hard work).

Bonus hilarity: The Shiny Pony helps deliver water bottles to an Indian Reserve during a photo-op, yet another example of white people apparently being required intermediaries in order for Red Indians to get fresh water. Hey wait, isn't he also banning water bottles? Awkward!

ESKIMOS (and only Eskimos)

The Edmonton Eskimos are asking for suggestions for a new team name, having already decided based entirely on the outcry that one nigger died in Minnesota that they needed a new name change.

They don't, of course. This is your chance to tell them, often and with as many fake names and public IP addresses that you can muster, that you will never -- ever -- cheer for the team under any other name and that unless they return to the Edmonton Eskimos^† you'll never support them again. This isn't an idle threat either, as you may note. The great thing about being a CFL fan was there were no hipsters treating it ironically (which is beginning to be an NFL issue), the woke social justice crowd never was a fan (which has killed the NHL), and as a result the fandom was a pretty calm and safe place to be. I received nothing but high fives and free beers when I wore my MAGA hat to an Eskimos game in 2017, for example. In the wake of the name change hundreds of social media posts from reported season ticket holders renounced the team forever. To paraphrase Jack Nicholson, the "Edmonton Football Team" will discover that their "queer party friends" don't attend many games or go out to Boston Pizza Canadian Brewhouse in their green and gold.

^† This is going to be the Klondike Days debacle all over again. After a minor outcry that nobody in the real world took seriously they changed the name of our beloved Klondike Days to the anodyne and ridiculous "Capital Ex" which tanked so badly they again rebranded it as "TheEx" for a year only to ultimately (after insisting "Klondike Days" was never a permitted option) settle on calling it "K-Days" which was the unofficial name for it in the first place, which half the population just resumed the "Klondike Days" moniker. This team will be the "Edmonton Esks" in half a decade, assuming their loss of viewership doesn't kill the CFL outright.

If you really want to have fun with them, of course, seeing how they are so gung-ho to change a perfectly good name (that only brain-dead activists are stupid enough to believe in the first place), I strongly recommend giving them the following alternatives:

1. The Edmonton Redskins
   For one thing, I hear this name is recently available, so unlike other suggestions like "Edmonton Eagles" or "Edmonton Roughriders" this name isn't already also being used by another team. Plus the Redskins have a long happy storied history, just like the Eskimos.
2. The Edmonton Engines
   A friend suggested this one and I'm sorry I didn't think of it. Edmonton Engines. Now say it 5 times really fast. Edmonton Engines Edmonton Engines Edmonton Eingines Edmonton Injuns Edmonton Injuns oh wait I get it. A few "lets go injuns!" chants will get the woke SJWs a little upset, sure. But when the visiting Saskatchewan fans, all fuming over how poor Gerald Stanley was treated for deservedly putting lead in Coulton Boushie, can get a little of their own stress relief by replying to that chant with "Injuns suck!" and "Fuck Injuns!" don't be surprised if their empty SJW brains just explode. Hours of fun for all...
3. The Edmonton Whites Because Whites are Superior
   This one probably goes without saying, no? Apparently calling sports teams full of dedicated professionals at the top of their physical skill putting in superhuman levels of effort for economic impact names like Eskimo or Redskin or Chiefs of Indians or Blackhawks is somehow demeaning to the sad members of the child-race who become tax sponges. I'm not sure how exactly that works. If I were a member of the Cleveland Indians I'd want a name change: no I'm not at all connected to the people who sniff gas from paper bags and can't figure out how to dig a well for myself. As I noted during the 2015 Grey Cup, I'm not sure why Mike Reilly being compared to guys who embezzle tax money and kill toddlers in a fire is offensive to anybody other than Mike Reilly. Yet here we are. So be it: let the team be named after a group of white people, who will appreciate it like the honour it truly is. The Montreal Canadiens or New York Yankees or Dallas Cowboys or New England Patriots are implicitly named after white people, while the Notre Dame Fighting Irish is explicitly so. The whites don't think it a problem: after all, the Denver Broncos are so named because the eponymous horse is a symbol of power and grace and virulity. The Blue Bombers (also named implicitly after whites) were national heros who inspired all with their courage and skill in defeating the Axis powers in WWII, and it's an honour to be named after them. Teams like the Bruins and Cubs are named after the predator who has for years impressed people with his prowess and makes up six of the ten largest land predators (including top two spots). So naming a team after whites imply that being a white person is awesome: as my proposed name explicitly states it's because white people are better than everybody else...if it wasn't true, why name a sports team after them. If this name catches on, don't be surprised that the actual Eskimos or Inuit or whatever throat gurgling sound they've decided is their name start demanding their names be put into a similar place on honour.

@mur1701 - why didn't Canadian governments deny pillow biters treatment in 1983?

So using Murray McNeely logic, when faggots started getting and spreading AIDS in the late 70s/early 80s, the "courageous individuals" who continued to act on their perversions should have been publicly identified and banned from wasting hospital resources on their care.

It would be nice if those courageous individuals would give their real names so we could applaud them. Also, we could make sure they're free to NOT go to the hospital. Also, we can make sure their relatives are free from the oppression of breathing tubes.

— Murray McNeely (@mur1701) November 24, 2020

Remember folks, one of the joys of public healthcare is that "my body my choice" long ago was given up: if government decrees only they can "care for" your body only two unpleasant choices are available. There's the Murray McNeely system where they can decide if you're "social credit" score justifies your care, in which case health department busibodies own your body. The only alternative is one we can call the HSARB system: just like the "death panels" that Sarah Palin (accurately) warned about, eventually to save money the (unsustainable) public healthcare system has to use cold hard cash as the deciding factor in who does and does not get medical care. Currently used to deny out-of-province cases, as the cost of healthcare increases eventually their mandate will have to expand, in which case your body and the decision to cure it belongs to whoever holds the scrips for public debt (ie. the same Chinese Politburo who gifted us with the Wuhan Flu in the first place).

Calling Bullshit

Hayden Panettiere has never ever ever ever ever had to deal with a guy cheating on her with another woman.

It's almost as bad as Taylor Swift singing about the guy who dumped her.

Mother Jones get Ryan Jerperson'd

From Reclaim the Net, Mother Jones, which cheered Big Tech's censorship against conservatives, is in a cash crunch as they have suddenly been (partially) unlisted from Facebook. It's the feel-good story of the week.

It brings to mind the recent affair of Ryan Jesperson, the far-left 630 CHED radio host who was fired after a bizarre "racist" rant in which he referred to black staffers of an Edmonton City Councilor as chimpanzees.

The word "racist" of course has to go in scare quotes because nobody on the right seriously believes that Jesperson's comments were racist: he referred to the right-wing councilor's staff as chimps in a ridiculously crass and unprofessional manner for a radio host. But as longtime readers know, there's nothing "racist" about making chimp jokes that would be equally valid for a white staffer. Indeed, Jesperson claimed (and probably correctly) that he had no idea what the ethnic makeup of the staff was.

In a sane world, of course, that would matter. But this isn't a sane world and so it doesn't. I said nobody on the right thinks he's racist, but if you're on the left you either have to accept that Ryan Jesperson is the most racist man in the history of Edmonton and should be banished forever or accept that not every comment that could be about race is about race. Since the latter isn't an option for the eternally offended, then they must choose the former.

They aren't, of course. Already his far-left allies have bounded with him and vow to help him move on with his life, a gracious sentiment they don't offer Ted Morton or those EPCOR employees (blogpost of which coming soon).

In fact, they are anxiously sharing this missive from Jesperson online:

You might have just spit out your coffee reading this (but seriously, it's almost midnight, why are you drinking coffee?).

The only people who "don't get the platform they deserve" are the conservatives who are superior to the savage Indians or BurnLootMurder thugs or faggot child molesters Jesperson always gave a free ride to. Indeed if you remember his "roundtable on cancel culture" the wide range of allowed opinions on the subject were the "cancel culture isn't real you paranoid losers lol" side, debating the "cancel culture is real but everybody we cancel is evil because they disagree with us and disagreement equals hatey hate hate" side. Jesperson was mostly on the first team with a few sympathetic nods towards the second. At no point during his discussions of Residential Schools, Sodomites, or #NiggerLivesMoreImportantThanSocietyMotherFucker was there any dissenting conservative voice allowed on to speak the truth (ie. that there is no systemic racism in Canada and no evidence of it can be demonstrated, that Red Indians needed education and Residential Schools were the way to do it, and that the sick ass pirate agenda is evil and Conversion Therapy was banned because it successfully cured them of their mental diseases).

So with that, seeing Jesperson the victim of the cancel culture he denied was a little just desserts. As Kurt Schlichter says (endlessly), make them play by their own rules.

Jesperson enjoyed telling his leftist lies in his safe media bubble, never realizing that just outside that thin membrane was Mike Nicols, who cleverly used the purported racial makeup of his staff (I'm unsure if any were actually negroes) to force out a leftist "journalist" who made sure only his side of the story was ever allowed.