Cat Schrodinger

[Tomas Sanchez 🇦🇷 @TomasSanchezAR]

Perdónenme por mi opinión de extrema derecha... pero estoy convencido de que quien trabaja merece vivir mejor que quien no hace nada

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@EricDLombardi You gotta toe the line to be considered a ‘liberal’. Oh the irony.

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@TristinHopper Either ways, the fault lies completely with the liberals.

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@lesliechurch Do you need any of us to work or not ?

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@TristinHopper Correct. Looks just the same capsule from every socialists across the west.

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@avilewis Parroting the same socialist talking points won’t make it any less nonsensical.

[hamsters🌐🐹 @sigmahamster2]

The moral case for capitalism is that your life belongs to you. Your work, your savings and your plans don’t become somebody else’s property because they have a moving speech about how they’d use them.

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@acoyne You’re the example of a bad faith partisan. S

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@dhh if liberals won't enforce borders, fascists will

~ David Frum

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@olifaye The problem is that any word that takes its place will end up being offensive in due course.

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@CTVNews @PierrePoilievre please resign as PM.. oh wait.

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@terrynewman The coverage of this and convoy protest is an eye opener in extreme media partisanship

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@EricDLombardi Through progressive lens, all criminals are victims of some injustice which is far greater than the crimes they commit and so they deserve clemency. You’re right in pointing out that in all this hyper focus on victimhood, the real victims become martyrs for the greater good.

[Eric Lombardi 🇨🇦🚀 @EricDLombardi]

I’ve increasingly come to worry about the rise of “judicial nihilism” (for lack of a better term) in Canada.

We have a justice system that spends enormous energy considering the personal circumstances of offenders, their rights, identities, mental health, and prospects for rehabilitation. Yet it seems unconcerned with the victims whose lives have been destroyed, or the public that must live with the consequences when dangerous individuals repeatedly reoffend.

I think we need to take judicial reform more seriously, rather than dismissing concerns about overreach and malfeasance as conservative fearmongering.

The more I look at recent cases (many highlighted by @sarkonakj) the more concerned I become that our institutions are losing sight of some basic moral values in justice.

I’ve been thinking about the
principles that should guide us to a more liberal, rules-based approach to criminal justice (I’ll admit that this is hardly new thinking, but I can’t remember the last time I’ve seen them laid out):

1. Justice should begin with victims, whose suffering should never become secondary to the circumstances of offenders.

2. Protecting the public from dangerous individuals must be a central responsibility of sentencing, and we should lean towards caution.

3. Punishment must be a meaningful deterrent and reflect the gravity of crimes. Some crimes warrant permanent imprisonment (if not capital punishment). Some crimes are so heinous that the mere prospect of rehabilitation should not be considered.

4. Repeat offenders should face dramatically greater consequences, including long-term incarceration or asylum to protect society. Nobody with dozens of separate criminal convictions should be roaming freely.

5. Mental illness should determine treatment and facility type, not reduce punishment. The bar for criminal non-responsibility should also be much higher than it is today.

6. Sentencing must apply to those convicted equally, based on actions and responsibility, not race, religion, cultural identity, immigration status etc. The rule of law should be non-discriminatory, the right time to address the “root causes” of crime and pursue social justice is before crime is committed.

7. Parliament needs to figure out how to reclaim its authority, with courts exercising much greater restraint in constitutional interpretations.

8. Judicial “independence” must be balanced with meaningful accountability for serious failures and overreach. The judiciary is not supreme to legislature.

I worry that too many political leaders have become uncomfortable defending the very concepts of order, punishment and personal responsibility, as though doing so is somehow incompatible with liberal moral values.

They aren’t.

A liberal democracy has two fundamental obligations. To protect people from the arbitrary exercise of government power, and to protect them from the violence and predation of others.

We cannot fulfill one by neglecting the other. They are together the necessary preconditions for liberty.

When the public sees rulings that seem fundamentally disconnected from shared expectations of right and wrong, it erodes trust in the system.

Order and public safety are necessary conditions for freedom.

The freedom to walk down the street, take public transit, operate a business or simply live peacefully in your own home means little if the government cannot protect you from disorder, violence and criminality. It’s often those with the fewest resources who suffer most when that protection fails.

If we want Canadians to have faith in the rule of law, they need to believe that it applies equally, that serious wrongdoing carries serious consequences, that dangerous people will not repeatedly be allowed to victimize others, and that the system will not be careless with the lives and suffering of victims.

[Susie₿dds @SusieBdds]

For 26 years, my husband and I owned and operated a dental practice, and we NEVER discussed politics or religion with our patients. It was simply taught to us as good business sense. We had plenty of patients whose political beliefs were wildly different from ours and occasionally one would launch into a political rant right there in our chair. We’d politely listen, nod, and say nothing.

When did business owners lose sight of this basic principle? Your customers don’t need to know your political beliefs, and you certainly don’t need to alienate half of them by broadcasting yours. You’re free to express your opinions of course, but why are so many business owners genuinely shocked when their customers exercise that same freedom by taking their business elsewhere?

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

At this point anyone who doesn’t support a violent ‘revolution’ is far right.

[Tomas Sanchez 🇦🇷 @TomasSanchezAR]

Yo antes era de derecha pero creces, te haces autónomo, estudias, lees, entiendes cómo funciona el mundo y ahora soy de extrema derecha

[Katharine Birbalsingh @Miss_Snuffy]

Ah. So they DO have a line you can’t cross.

Same thing in any classroom or school.

There is always a line.

The question is where you draw it.

The Louvre is where France chose to draw the line.

[Kanwar Sierah, RCIC @KanwarSierah]

🚨🧵 𝗖𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗱𝗮’𝘀 𝗡𝗘𝗪 “𝗟𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻” is NOT Just 𝗔𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗜𝗺𝗺𝗶𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗦𝗰𝗮𝗺 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴? 🇨🇦💰

How could the proposed 150 CRS “Labour Market Integration” system become 𝗮𝗻 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗯𝗶𝗴𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗿𝗮𝘂𝗱 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 than the infamous 50-point LMIA scandal?

This could prove to be 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗱𝗮𝗺𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻 𝗶𝗺𝗺𝗶𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗵𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆.

🇨🇦 Immigration Minister @LenaMetlegeDiab risks undoing years of efforts to restore integrity and public confidence in Canada’s immigration system.

𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝘆. 1/5👇

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@atBenSmith Ignore that guy.

[Cat Schrodinger @schrodingo]

@RichardDias_CFA But but we’re standing up against fascism 🤦‍♂️