Juno News - December 04, 2021


CBC’s “Being Black in Canada” series is straight out of an Orwell novel


Episode Stats

Length

24 minutes

Words per Minute

196.58705

Word Count

4,873

Sentence Count

302


Summary


Transcript

00:00:00.240 The CBC creates an Orwellian list of words it would like banished from the English language,
00:00:05.600 all of Ottawa is in collusion to push a ridiculous bill, and the CBC celebrates working from home
00:00:11.840 because apparently it stops awful white people from being so racist.
00:00:16.160 It's Fake News Friday, I'm Candice Malcolm and this is The Candice Malcolm Show.
00:00:24.000 Hi everyone, thank you so much for tuning in to The Candice Malcolm Show. It is Friday,
00:00:27.600 happy Friday everyone, and as you know on the program on Fridays we devote the entire show to
00:00:33.440 debunking the ridiculous media narratives that exist out there. We talk about all of the problems
00:00:38.480 with the media in Canada stemming from the fact that they take money from the government so we
00:00:43.120 have no separation between journalism and state in this country. The major journalists, especially
00:00:48.640 the ones covering Justin Trudeau and the federal government in Ottawa, are paid by Justin Trudeau
00:00:53.600 and the federal government in Ottawa. It is such a conflict of interest and because of all of these
00:00:57.840 various problems we encounter so many stories that require us to do a deep dive into, pay closer
00:01:05.040 attention, dissect and help raise the issue and help everybody out there fully understand how corrupt
00:01:11.280 this system of Canadian media attached to Canadian government is in this country. But first, before we
00:01:16.960 get into the show today, if you're watching this video on YouTube right now, I'm going to ask you to
00:01:21.040 please like this video, don't forget to subscribe to Trenorth, and if you like what we do here on
00:01:24.800 The Candice Malcolm Show, hit the little notification bell so that you never miss an episode. If you're
00:01:28.720 watching over on Facebook, make sure to like the video, share it, and head on over and like the
00:01:33.120 Trenorth page. Finally, if you are listening to this podcast over on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts,
00:01:38.720 or wherever you enjoy listening to your podcasts, don't forget to subscribe to The Candice Malcolm Show,
00:01:43.040 and if you like it and you want to support the show, please consider leaving us a five-star review,
00:01:47.760 it really helps us out. Okay, so this is the big story of the week, and this is just the CBC being
00:01:52.800 the CBC. The CBC sees themselves as the arbiter of truth. They also apparently see themselves as the
00:01:58.400 arbiter of the English language. So here, CBC Ottawa has put together a list of words that you
00:02:04.720 should just stop using. They're not even hiding their hatred of free speech. They're putting it right
00:02:10.000 out there. They've come up with a ridiculous list that talks about the historical and cultural
00:02:15.760 problematic words that we should just all stop using. You know, the funny thing about this story,
00:02:21.120 when I first saw it, it just gave me the creeps. It gives me chills when I see CBC pushing this kind
00:02:26.880 of nonsense, because to some people out there, they'll see a story like this and they'll take
00:02:31.520 it seriously. They'll take it to heart. Nobody wants to be racist. Nobody wants to be out of date
00:02:35.360 and using terms that could accidentally offend somebody. But what this story does and the reason
00:02:41.280 it gave me chills is because the purpose of it isn't just to inform the reader or educate us.
00:02:47.520 No, the purpose is to instill fear in society, instill fear in the reader to say, if you use these
00:02:53.360 words, you are a racist. And the purpose is to play on that fear that people have. And therefore,
00:02:58.960 it does have a chilling effect on speech. It has a chilling effect on our freedom to think. Jordan
00:03:03.840 Peterson talks about this phenomenon that in order to be able to be free, you have to be able to think.
00:03:09.440 In order to be able to think, you have to be able to speak. And sometimes you say things that don't
00:03:13.200 come out right. And that is part of the process in a free society of coming to terms, of processing
00:03:18.240 new information, and having debates in civil society. So this sort of thing is just so creepy
00:03:22.480 and so wrong. But I think when CBC puts stuff like this out, it has the adverse effect. Because almost
00:03:27.920 everyone I saw commenting on this, almost anyone who shared it with me, people who I saw sharing on
00:03:33.200 social media, the unanimous response to it was to make fun of it, to laugh at it, not to take it
00:03:38.560 seriously. So that's good. That's a good sign that people aren't taking this seriously. But
00:03:42.560 regardless, it's still worth going through. Because this is the kind of thing that the CBC
00:03:46.000 thinks is news. This is the kind of thing that the CBC spends its resources, your resources,
00:03:50.160 taxpayer resources, on coming up with a list to accuse Canadians of being racist, to hector us,
00:03:55.440 and to shame us, and to try to get us to change our language. So here's the article. It says,
00:04:01.760 Have you ever casually used the term spirit animal, first word problems, or spooky?
00:04:06.400 It might be time to rethink your use of these phrases and remove them from your daily lingo.
00:04:12.000 CBC Ottawa compiled a small list of words submitted by readers and some of our journalists who are
00:04:16.880 black, indigenous, or people of color. We ran some of the words by anti-racism language experts who said
00:04:23.280 some of these phrases can be hurtful to various groups of people for their historical and cultural
00:04:28.720 context. And then it goes on to interview one such anti-racist language expert. And here that person
00:04:38.080 says, Being an English speaker doesn't entail you to necessarily know the racist etymology automatically,
00:04:44.480 said this linguist and associate language professor at the University of Toronto, Mississauga.
00:04:49.280 Etymology is a study of the origin of words and the way their meanings change over time. The fact that
00:04:54.960 you said it oblivious to the etymology doesn't automatically make you a bad person. So it's
00:05:00.480 interesting because they're talking about the etymology, which is sort of just like a niche
00:05:03.520 academic area for people that are really interested in the English language. They're saying that you
00:05:09.120 shouldn't be an expert on it, but maybe you should become aware. But then the interesting thing is so
00:05:13.040 many of the words that they list, the etymology isn't racist. It isn't racist. It just sounds like
00:05:18.080 something else that might have been racist. And so we'll go through some of these words and you can learn how
00:05:22.800 ridiculous they are. So they start off with the words blackmail, blacklist, and black sheep.
00:05:28.000 And we hear from another anti-racism expert. The issue here is that these are all negative terms.
00:05:33.600 It connotates evil, distrust, a lack of intelligence, ignorance, a lack of beauty, the absence of white.
00:05:39.600 Black became associated with a particular group of people and that group of people received all the
00:05:43.840 negative connotations. That's why we try to move away from these types of words. And then they come up
00:05:48.640 with a bunch of words that you should use instead. So instead of saying whitelist and blacklist when
00:05:53.520 you're talking about whether maybe you're going to hire someone, instead they want you to use blocklist,
00:05:57.920 denylist, and allowlist, which just doesn't really have the same ring to it at all. So again, remember
00:06:04.000 we were told that we're supposed to know the etymology of words to find out that they're racist.
00:06:08.160 Well, here's an example of something that has nothing to do with the etymology of these words. They're
00:06:12.400 just talking about the colors. And to be fair, it's sort of an interesting argument when it comes to myths and
00:06:17.440 stories in our society and the imagery associated with that. There typically is a dichotomy between
00:06:23.520 good and bad, evil and good. Black and white are used as sort of symbols for that. But to me,
00:06:30.000 it doesn't really have anything to do with race at all. It has more to do with just the nature.
00:06:34.800 Nighttime darkness, of course, there is symbolism there of something being dark and negative. And then
00:06:40.720 when it comes to light and daytime, that of course is going to have positive connotations and it helps with
00:06:47.120 cultural storytelling. It doesn't really have anything to do with race whatsoever. So again, they're
00:06:51.360 talking about the etymology and then the examples they give have nothing to do with that. Okay,
00:06:55.680 let's go to a few more. They say ghetto and inner city. So one of their anti-racist experts says
00:07:01.200 terms like ghetto and inner city grew out of the industrial revolution in North America. The word ghetto
00:07:07.600 also has a painful historical root in Europe during the Holocaust and was likely derived from Jewish
00:07:13.120 settlements in Italy centuries ago. Gettos and inner cities were typically seen as places where
00:07:18.240 less refined people lived. The people who weren't up to date culturally developmental wise, he said.
00:07:23.840 So we're not supposed to use terms like ghetto because it can apply negative connotation towards
00:07:29.840 racialized people. I mean, this is sort of an interesting argument as well. Most people don't
00:07:33.600 know that the word ghetto has its roots in Europe. It doesn't come from North America at all. And when
00:07:38.320 you're reading historical documents or reading about exactly what they say here in Jews and in Europe
00:07:45.600 where the Jews lived, they used to call them the ghettos. And so they don't really make a good case as
00:07:50.640 to why not to use this other than that what it might sound classist or something. I mean, most people
00:07:54.480 who use the term ghetto use it in jest anyways, and it's not really meant to be hurtful at all. Okay, okay,
00:07:59.920 let's move on. The next one here is spooky. So according to the dictionary, the term spooky means a
00:08:05.920 sinister or ghostly in a way that causes fear or unease, or it could be easily frightened and
00:08:11.440 nervous. So that's what the word means. But CBC has come up with some different meaning. It says
00:08:16.320 that the term spook has a history of being an anti-black slur when white soldiers began calling
00:08:21.920 fellow black soldiers spooks during World War II. It's offensive because of who and what it used to
00:08:27.840 apply to, said this anti-racist expert. So again, nothing to do with the term spooky. It just sort of
00:08:34.240 sounds like a different word that people use 100 years ago that nobody uses anymore. So I don't
00:08:40.400 really understand why we wouldn't be able to use the term spooky in a totally different context,
00:08:44.640 talking about something totally different. This is, again, nothing to do with etymology,
00:08:49.280 everything to do with the CBC hectoring people and accusing everyone of being racist. I mean,
00:08:53.920 I could go on another one here, grandfathered in. Phrases like grandfathered in date back to the 19th
00:08:58.400 century policy called the grandfather clause, which indirectly stopped black Americans from voting by
00:09:04.880 limiting their eligibility of who could vote based on their ancestors. I can't imagine anybody in the
00:09:10.800 world other than someone who gets paid to be an anti-racist expert who would hear the term
00:09:16.160 grandfathered in and think back to something that happened in the 19th century and say, yeah,
00:09:20.880 you know what, you're racist for using that term. So ridiculous. These people have way too much time on
00:09:25.040 their hands. They've created an entire profession here, anti-racist experts whose entire job is just
00:09:31.040 to come up with stuff to accuse people of being racist. And this is the best they can come up with.
00:09:35.120 This is the best that they found. We're not supposed to use terms like spirit animal, powwow,
00:09:39.440 or tribe because cultural appropriation, I guess. We're not supposed to do that. And this is one that
00:09:46.000 people were making fun of quite a bit. First world problem. We're not supposed to do that because
00:09:51.120 it shows our privilege. It's funny because usually people use the term first world problem in a
00:09:55.680 self-deprecating way to, to talk about how the things that are upsetting them aren't real problems
00:10:00.560 in the scale of things, the scope of things. So it actually does get people thinking about how silly
00:10:05.440 their problems may seem compared to real suffering out there. Like for instance, I'm ordering new
00:10:10.000 furniture for my house, but there were all kinds of supply chain issues with the ports and because of
00:10:15.280 COVID and because of the holidays. And so because of it, a lot of the furniture that I ordered
00:10:19.040 isn't going to be here in time for us having guests at the, at the holidays, right? This,
00:10:23.760 this in a nutshell is a first world problem. You know, it's, it's, it's frustrating for me,
00:10:27.840 but you know, I, I have some context here and I know that there are real people suffering out there.
00:10:33.120 So again, saying that, that using this term is classes, no, it's the opposite. It's, it's being aware
00:10:39.040 that the problems you have, uh, pale in comparison to other problems in the world. So CBC just really being
00:10:46.160 out of touch. Okay. Next we're not supposed to say brainstorm, blind, decided or blind spot.
00:10:52.400 This is funny. Okay. Because the prefix blind is offensive to blind people. Okay. And using the term
00:10:58.000 brainstorm could be insensitive to those who have brain injuries or who aren't neuro diverse. Okay. So,
00:11:05.440 so basically you can't say anything about anything that could offend anyone. That's, that's basically
00:11:10.160 the gist of the CBC's story. And, and at the bottom here, we are reminded that this is part of their
00:11:15.680 being black in Canada series. So for more stories about the experiences of black Canadians from
00:11:21.040 anti-black racism to success stories in the black community, check out being black in Canada, a CBC
00:11:26.480 project, black Canadians can be proud of it. And you see a bunch of the Marxist revolutionary arms up
00:11:32.400 in the air. Again, the CBC created this idea that, that they're going to have an entire section on what
00:11:37.840 it's like to be black in Canada. And then they're kind of running out of ideas. So this is the kind of
00:11:41.680 stuff they come up with. It is completely ridiculous and deserving of all the mockery that it is
00:11:46.880 receiving online. Okay. Moving on. I want to talk about the story that completely preoccupied and
00:11:51.040 captivated Perman Hill this week. You know, last week we were told by the legacy media and the liberals
00:11:56.160 over and over and over again, that the biggest story in the country was the vaccine status and the
00:12:00.880 medical health exemptions of conservative MPs. Of course, it was a total distraction. Not the kind of
00:12:05.280 thing that people are sitting around the dinner table talking about. However, that's what the media
00:12:09.280 wanted you to care about. They wanted to distract you with that. This week, it was like that with
00:12:12.880 the conversion therapy bill. So from my understanding of this bill, the liberals devised a bill. The
00:12:18.080 entire purpose of it was to trap the Tories. So they deceptively named it the conversion therapy bill,
00:12:23.840 or that's what they started calling it, in the media. And they knew it was overstepping. They knew
00:12:28.880 that it was something that the conservatives would instinctively reject because it was an attack
00:12:33.600 on religious institutions and religious freedom. And there was a chilling effect on freedom of speech
00:12:38.640 as well because, as I'll explain what the bill does, it prevents fully consenting adults from engaging
00:12:45.040 into conversations when it comes to gender identity and sexual orientation. And so it was devised as a
00:12:52.400 wedge. It was devised as a trap by the liberals. The first two times the liberals brought this forward,
00:12:56.800 conservatives, many conservatives, opposed it. They had a vote on this on June 22nd and it resulted in
00:13:02.560 263 in favour of the bill, 63 opposed. So 62 Conservative MPs and one Independent voted against
00:13:10.480 what was then called Bill C-6. And so the bill failed to go through Parliament the first time
00:13:15.920 because Trudeau probed the Parliament, the second time because the 2021 election. So we've seen this
00:13:21.920 bill. This is the third time this week that it was sort of introduced. It's now called Bill C-4,
00:13:25.920 but it used to be called Bill C-6. And so before I talk about what happened this week,
00:13:31.360 let me just talk about the previous Conservative opposition to this. So one of the 62 MPs that
00:13:37.120 opposed it was Alberta MP Garnet Jenis. Garnet is a friend, friend of the show, and he was one of the
00:13:42.960 leading Conservative MPs who advocate against this bill. The tagline of his campaign was called
00:13:48.000 Fix the Definition. This is all from Garnet Jenis. This is not from me. This is from him. So these are
00:13:52.800 quotes. This is what he said. All politicians oppose conversion therapy in principle, but Bill C-6 proposes
00:13:58.720 to use an overreaching definition of conversion therapy that would needlessly criminalize normal
00:14:04.160 conversations between children and their parents, teachers, counselors, and mentors about gender and
00:14:10.080 sexual behavior. Let's fix the definition. Bill C-6 could open the door for law enforcement to tap into
00:14:16.800 private family communication to investigate discussions that might fit the bill's broad definition
00:14:22.640 of conversion therapy. Further, while Bill C-6 expressly allows counseling, medical, and surgical
00:14:29.040 efforts to change a child's gender, it expressly prohibits any support for a child seeking to
00:14:34.800 detransition back to their birth gender. If passed, Bill C-6 could restrict the choices of LGBTQ2 Canadians
00:14:42.880 concerning sexuality and gender by prohibiting access to any professional or spiritual support freely
00:14:49.520 chosen to limit sexual behavior or detransition. So pretty compelling stuff here, right? What the
00:14:55.200 what the conservatives are saying is that the liberals have written this bill in a very clunky
00:14:58.960 way. The definition is too broad. It could criminalize regular conversation with people
00:15:04.400 that are confused, kids that are confused. Let's be honest. Part of what the left does, part of their
00:15:08.560 mo is to sort of create confusion, sexual confusion. They say just because you're born a boy doesn't mean
00:15:13.760 that you're a boy. You could be a girl in a boy's body. You could be a boy in a girl's body.
00:15:16.800 You know, you could you don't have to just be attracted to the other sex. You could be attracted
00:15:21.120 to multiple different sexes and look at the 72 different types of gender that we have. Look
00:15:26.000 at the 72 different types of sexual orientation you can be. I mean, they're creating confusion.
00:15:31.600 And then if a kid wants to go and talk to someone about it, their parents, a counselor, someone in
00:15:36.240 their church, that could be criminalized. I mean, again, this isn't really an important issue to me.
00:15:40.480 I know there's so many other important issues out there, but based on the conservatives own opposition
00:15:44.400 of this bill, it makes sense. And I found that Garnet Jennings' campaign that he ran and the
00:15:48.640 whole fix the definition thing was logical. It seemed like this is the kind of thing that
00:15:52.560 conservatives should oppose. So forgive my confusion this week when a conservative MP, Rob Moore,
00:15:59.600 made an announcement on the floor of the House of Commons saying that he would like to introduce a
00:16:03.600 motion to fast track this bill. He wants to fast track it straight to the Senate, holding no vote in
00:16:08.640 the House of Commons. And the MPs were given the opportunity to either say yes, let's just give it
00:16:14.000 to the Senate, or no, let's continue debating it and have a proper debate. And so I'll show you the
00:16:19.120 clip. This is what it looks like. This is the House of Commons. This is all of the MPs, Conservative,
00:16:24.960 Liberal, NDP, Green, Bloc, and Independent, all of them giving this motion unanimous consent, meaning,
00:16:31.040 no, we don't want to have a record. We don't want to have a vote. Let's just say yes to this bill,
00:16:36.320 all in accordance with each other, and allow it to go into the Senate. So here's what that looked
00:16:41.360 like. Mr. Speaker, I'm asking for unanimous consent to adopt the following motion, that notwithstanding
00:16:46.800 any standing order or usual practices of the House, Bill C-4, an act to amend the Criminal Code,
00:16:52.720 conversion therapy, be deemed to have been read a second time and referred to a Committee of the
00:16:57.520 Whole, deemed considered in Committee of the Whole, deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in
00:17:03.280 at the report stage and deemed read a third time and passed.
00:17:21.360 This being a hybrid sitting of the House for the sake of clarity, I will only ask those who are
00:17:26.240 opposed to the request to express their disagreement. Accordingly, all those opposed to the honourable
00:17:32.400 member moving the motion will please say nay. Agreed. The House has heard the terms of the motion.
00:17:40.480 All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.
00:17:45.040 There being no dissenting voice, I declare the motion carried.
00:17:50.640 And here you can see all of the members of Parliament standing up, cheering, and look at these
00:17:55.120 people. It looks like they've just solved world peace or like they've just ended world hunger or
00:17:59.600 something. They're all so excited. They're jumping up and down. They're hugging each other. They're
00:18:03.520 clad-handing. Like, we did it. We all came together to pass this super liberal progressive
00:18:09.040 bill that may have a chilling impact on free speech. It may criminalize normal conversations
00:18:14.480 between little kids and their parents, teenagers and their counsellors, or if someone wants to go
00:18:19.760 talk to someone in their church about gender or sexuality. It could all be illegal, according to
00:18:25.440 Garnet Jennings' previous campaign. And yet, for some reason, they're all just so ecstatic that
00:18:30.880 they're on the same team. You can see dancing. There's Michelle Rumpel in a red blazer. She's
00:18:35.440 dancing around, you know, jumping up and down. Look at them. They're still clapping. They're giving
00:18:40.560 themselves a two-minute standing ovation for all being so progressive and liberal. This is not what you
00:18:47.600 want from your government. This is not what you want from conservatives. This is not what you want from
00:18:52.400 the official opposition. The reason in Canada that we have an official opposition is to oppose bills.
00:18:59.200 There are very few times where you want unanimous consent in the House of Commons. Maybe when we're
00:19:03.040 talking about going to war against an enemy, or maybe when we're talking about a grand national
00:19:08.640 project going together. Those may be the one or two exceptions. Otherwise, the reason they're called
00:19:14.240 the official opposition, the reason we have an official opposition in our parliamentary system, is to
00:19:19.600 oppose bills. Exactly what the conservatives did the first two times this bill was presented. But this
00:19:25.680 time around, maybe because Erin O'Toole demanded that they all vote this way. Maybe because they
00:19:30.720 lost the will to fight. Maybe because they just wanted to give up. Maybe because they wanted a feel
00:19:34.720 good moment. As you can see, they're all jumping around and congratulating themselves. Regardless,
00:19:39.760 this is not what you want to see from conservatives. And I know this isn't really fake news. When fringe
00:19:44.400 activist left-wing journalists like Justin Ling are congratulating you, you know you've done something
00:19:49.360 wrong. So here's Justin Ling. He says, just a positive, nice thing from the conservatives quelling
00:19:54.640 their internal skeptics to do the right thing. To the liberals prioritizing getting the thing passed
00:20:00.480 over dragging it out and the general unanimity of it all. And the conservatives were the ones that
00:20:06.720 sought unanimous consent. Just makes your heart warm a bit, doesn't it? No, this is not what you want
00:20:11.600 as conservatives. This is not what you want. You want them to oppose. You want them to fight to
00:20:16.240 protect free speech, to protect the religious freedom, to protect little kids from being able
00:20:21.280 to talk it out and talk to people before going ahead with whatever it is they're going ahead with.
00:20:28.080 And here's more of the legacy media congratulating the conservatives for being more like liberals.
00:20:32.880 Liberals thank conservatives who champion conversion therapy bill as it passes the house. So they're all
00:20:37.840 celebrating. They're all feeling warm and fuzzy together. But let me just say, when conservatives
00:20:42.080 seek strange new respect like this, when they bow to the liberals, when they bow to the legacy media,
00:20:46.560 this sort of positivity, this good press, it lasts for about a minute. And then the media will go back
00:20:52.720 to bashing conservatives and the liberals will go back to coming up with new wedge issues to trap
00:20:57.280 the conservatives. This is the name of the game. The conservatives failed this week. They fell into the
00:21:01.520 trap. And Canadians deserve so much more from the party that we call the official opposition. Okay, final
00:21:07.200 story I want to talk about. I know we don't have much time left on the program, so I'll go through
00:21:10.960 it pretty quickly here. But here is another story from the CBC from their series called Being Black
00:21:17.440 in Canada. Here it says for BIPOC employees, remote work meant a welcome break from office microaggressions.
00:21:25.120 So BIPOC for people who aren't hip on the leftist lingo and all of their obsession with weird acronyms.
00:21:33.440 BIPOC means Black, Indigenous, and people of colour. And I know you might be confused because wouldn't a
00:21:38.400 person of colour include someone who's Black and Indigenous? Well, of course, these things are never logical.
00:21:43.600 So yes, they called this group of people BIPOC. Again, going with the left's obsession of separating us,
00:21:49.200 putting us into little categories and trying to pit us against each other. So here we have an entire article
00:21:54.960 written about an angry person who says that working in an office is filled with discrimination and she
00:22:01.200 was just so happy to get to work from home because she didn't have to deal with all of the microaggressions,
00:22:05.840 all of the racism from all of the people around her. She could just sit at home and she didn't have
00:22:10.480 to be worried about it. So here it says, as a Black woman in the corporate world, Mila, age 35, knows what
00:22:16.720 it's like to experience microaggressions at work. And if you don't know, microaggression is just simply
00:22:22.640 when someone says something with no racist intent, no bad intent, but the person misconstrues that or
00:22:29.520 digs in a meaning that isn't there to determine that the person must be racist. It's just like anyone who
00:22:34.960 used those words and phrases from the first segment there, that you might not even know it,
00:22:39.200 you might not even feel it, but by saying something, it's a social faux pas and it means that deep down
00:22:45.280 you're racist. So that in a nutshell is what a microaggression is. And so she says,
00:22:49.840 I cannot tell you how many times someone has come up to me and touched my hair.
00:22:55.120 So touching someone's hair is microaggression. Usually microaggressions are much more subtle
00:22:59.200 forms of discrimination, such as confusing one person for another person or one racialized co-worker
00:23:05.600 for another by a white manager or being scrutinized by security or having your name constantly mispronounced.
00:23:13.440 Working from home throughout the pandemic made it easier to avoid such behavior. I would say that on
00:23:18.800 zoom, I didn't really have the thought like, Oh, I'm the only woman of color here. And maybe that's
00:23:23.440 because I felt safer in my own space. Okay. Here's a person who is so, so sheltered, so unprepared to
00:23:29.920 deal with the real world that they can't handle day-to-day things that happen, things that happen to
00:23:35.040 everyone, by the way. Yes. Sometimes people mispronounce my name. Maybe it doesn't happen as much to
00:23:39.200 someone who has a more challenging name, but, but these kinds of things are very minor in, in the scale of
00:23:44.320 things. I might even say that they are first world problems. And yet here we have an entire CBC story
00:23:49.920 telling us about how awful it is to not be white and how racism is so awful. And working from home
00:23:55.840 just gave these individuals a reprieve from all the terrible racists around them in Canada. And that's
00:24:02.800 CBC in a nutshell. They live for this kind of thing. They love identity politics. They love to divide us.
00:24:07.600 Hence why they have an entire series called Being Black in Canada. The entire purpose of it is just to go out
00:24:13.280 there and try to find examples of how horrible and racist Canadians are. If this is the worst that
00:24:18.400 they can come up with, this is the worst stuff that they can find, I think we're in pretty good shape
00:24:22.160 as a country, regardless of what the CBC is trying to do, which is pit us all against each other.
00:24:26.240 The reality is that things aren't that bad. Things are pretty good in Canada. Thank you so much for
00:24:30.560 tuning in. I hope you have a wonderful weekend. This has been Fake News Friday. I'm Candace Malcolm,
00:24:34.320 and this is The Ken Smolkham Show.