There is Hope

There is hope, not necessarily IN Jordan Peterson, but in the fact that he is so very famous and appreciated by young people (men especially) around the world.  I have been listening to him for a while now through Maggie’s Farm.  All while watching men around me weaken, year after year.

Just this weekend I’ve dealt with the heartache 2 of my friends have felt. Both dealt with flirty, loving words right up until the day that these “men” broke up with them.  (1 affianced and another married)  Who does that?  weenies

Were the relationships solid?  Apparently not, but also apparently the male side of these were too chicken to ever express it until it was over.  Blame the strong females if you’d like, but if this Jordan Peterson phenom is any good, then strong females will hopefully result in even stronger males.  Not weaker ones.

I like him.  I appreciate him.  I am happy to contribute so that he realizes in the midst of his public leftist skewering that he has support.  I am glad that young men find him interesting.  In some parts of the world, lost young men are joining ISIS.  People need to realize that they own their lives and it’s up to them to fix it.  And in the process fix the world.  Individuals can make a difference and Jordan Peterson is a quick example of that!

 

The “Sensitive” Canadian

We have idiotic lawsuits here by people who think they can get rich by suing, but generally it’s for actual physical/property damage vs hurt feelings.
(I think?)

In Canada where the Human Rights Commission just simultaneously dropped the case against Mark Steyn for hurting the feelings of Muslims, AND named him guilty there is another lawsuit going on.

Richard Warman used to work for the notorious Human Rights Commission, which runs the “kangaroo courts” who’ve charged Mark Steyn with “flagrant Islamophobia.”

Richard Warman has brought almost half these cases single-handledly, getting websites he doesn’t like shut down, and making tens of thousands of tax free dollars in “compensation” out of web site owners who can’t afford to fight back or don’t even realize they can.

The province of British Columbia had to pass a special law to stop Richard Warman from suing libraries because they carried books he didn’t approve of.

Richard Warman also wants to ban international websites he doesn’t like from being seen by Canadians.

Let’s see…what’s the word I’m looking for? Oh yeah, douchebag. Thanks Scott.

These damn lawsuits are costing the defendants thousands of dollars! Thousands for calling Richard Warman a douchebag! There is a link on this link to help out Five Feet of Fury, one of the ones getting sued. And Ezra Levant (another defendant) has further links and updates.

Charity

The other day the news came out about Obama’s tax returns and the amounts he had given to charity between 2000-2004 (heavily increased in 2007)

Today George Will notes that charity giving and religion seem to walk hand in hand. With conservatives being more religious, their charity giving is also greater. 3.5% of income vs 1.9% of income. I wouldn’t find this interesting except for the reasons given.

It seems liberals believe that the govt should be the helper for those in need and so they don’t bother. What this means of course is they believe the government should coerce charitable giving. In the meantime, those in need rely on those who actually give vs fantasy give.

While conservatives tend to regard giving as a personal rather than governmental responsibility, some liberals consider private charity a retrograde phenomenon — a poor palliative for an inadequate welfare state and a distraction from achieving adequacy by force, by increasing taxes. Ralph Nader, running for president in 2000, said: “A society that has more justice is a society that needs less charity.” Brooks, however, warns: “If support for a policy that does not exist . . . substitutes for private charity, the needy are left worse off than before. It is one of the bitterest ironies of liberal politics today that political opinions are apparently taking the place of help for others.”

In 2000, brows were furrowed in perplexity because Vice President Al Gore’s charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households. But Gore “gave at the office.” By using public office to give other people’s money to government programs, he was being charitable, as liberals increasingly, and conveniently, understand that word.