Toxicity Scores & Embeddings

He wants to have a slave class to serve the elites. 95% of maid is white people. Now fast tracking citizenship for Chinese mercanary soldiers and taking our guns for the 3rd time and spent billions and aren't getting guns but this time they will and Chinese mercenaries have no ties so they will have no problem turning their guns on us. I believe he is planning a genocide of older people to save money on Healthcare after all death cures everything. His orange man bad narrative is going to come true if he thinks trump will put up with massive immigration and ccp soldiers in our military. Carney has so many conflicts of interest he is tanking canada on purpose so he can sell his green scam tech which surprise is owned by Brookfield a Canadian company which he moved to New York to avoid paying our high taxes. He is the biggest security threat to canada ever he is a madman ,arrogant prick that needs to go to jail along with his gangster liberal buddies. I cant believe how lefties believe his b.s every word out of his mouth is a lie. He attacks Pierre and he is not the government and says its a global problem. No its liberal mismanagement and corruption. The election is over after ontario and quebec votes because its gerrymandered with not enough seats out west because they think we are children and we pay the bills and no immigrants are working i get taxed 1500 on my 1450 pension to pay for these parasites. Carney talks out of the side of his mouth id love to play poker with him he cant lie worth shit. There is no way these policies are put in for any reason other than to impoverish us they are ridiculous. How about the teacher in hope b.c who got a 750,000 fine for a perfectly reasonable post about trans insanity. They say they are going to give it to lgbq+ offended teachers. You disagree with the government narrative they freeze your bank account, cancel you and bankrupt you all in violation of the charter of rights and freedoms. There not even trying to hide their dictatorship with their new kings clause where a company thats in with pm can basically break Canadian laws if pm says so. I hope ee get invaded i will never go to a hospital to die . In ontario 65 people got maid in 24 hours without talking to family and without life threatening conditions. This guy is a co trol freak has to be stopped now

Pierre Poilievre’s Immigration Hypocrisy: A Study in Convenient Principles Disguised as Conviction Pierre Poilievre has never met a border he did not want to fortify, a refugee claim he did not want to scrutinize, or an irregular crossing he did not want to turn into a national morality play. For years, he has warned Canadians that the country is being overrun by “illegal border crossers,” “queue jumping asylum seekers,” and “abusers of the system.” He delivers these warnings with the solemnity of a man announcing a biblical plague, not a handful of exhausted families walking across a ditch in Quebec. In Poilievre’s political universe, Roxham Road is not a rural footpath. It is a symbol of national decline. It is chaos incarnate. It is the place where the rule of law goes to die. It is, in short, the perfect stage upon which he can perform his favorite role: the lone defender of order in a world gone soft. At least, that is the story he tells the public. The private story, as publicly reported, is considerably less heroic. The Public Record That Refuses to Behave: According to reporting from The Breach and the National Observer, someone described as the uncle of Poilievre’s spouse has an immigration history that reads like a greatest hits compilation of everything Poilievre claims to oppose. The reporting outlines that he entered Canada and made a refugee claim. That claim was refused. A deportation order was issued. He later re-entered Canada through Roxham Road. He then filed a humanitarian and compassionate application. Poilievre’s spouse reportedly helped prepare that application. This is not fringe gossip. This is what journalists documented through correspondence, interviews, and immigration records. In other words, the exact pathway Poilievre condemns as “abuse of the system” is the same pathway publicly reported to have been used by someone connected to him. And suddenly, the man who treats Roxham Road like a national security breach becomes quieter than a library at midnight. The slogans stop. The outrage evaporates. The border, once a sacred line, becomes a flexible suggestion. The Rhetoric: A Symphony of Outrage: Poilievre’s immigration rhetoric is a carefully orchestrated performance. He warns that irregular border crossings undermine the rule of law. He insists humanitarian and compassionate applications are loopholes. He claims the system is being gamed. He declares that Canada must “take back control.” He delivers these lines with the moral certainty of a man who believes compassion is a gateway drug. In his speeches, asylum seekers are not people. They are symbols. They are props. They are the raw material from which he fashions his political identity. He is the sheriff. They are the threat. The border is the battleground. And Canada is the damsel in distress. It is a compelling narrative. It is also a narrative that collapses the moment it becomes personally inconvenient. The Reality: A Study in Elastic Principles: When someone connected to Poilievre uses the very same system he condemns, the rules change with breathtaking speed. Irregular border crossings are no longer a crisis. They are a misunderstanding. A technicality. A regrettable but understandable choice. Humanitarian and compassionate applications are no longer loopholes. They are legitimate pathways. Necessary tools. Evidence of a compassionate system. The border is no longer a sacred line. It is a suggestion. A guideline. A flexible concept open to interpretation. It is a remarkable transformation, like watching a man insist that jaywalking is a crime against humanity until his friend does it, at which point it becomes a misunderstood act of civic expression. The Political Convenience of Shifting Standards: Poilievre’s political identity is built on the idea that he alone will restore order. He alone will enforce the rules. He alone will protect Canada from the chaos of irregular migration. But the moment the rules become inconvenient, they are no longer rules. They are preferences. They are vibes. They are whatever he needs them to be in the moment. This is not a minor contradiction. It is a fundamental collapse of the moral architecture he has built his political brand upon. If irregular crossings are a crisis, then they are a crisis for everyone. If humanitarian applications are loopholes, then they are loopholes for everyone. If the system is broken, then it is broken for everyone. But Poilievre’s version of justice is not universal. It is conditional. It is situational. It is deeply, profoundly personal. The Broader Pattern: Institutions Are Sacred Until They Are Not: This is not the first time Poilievre’s principles have proven to be more flexible than advertised. He has attacked the Supreme Court of Canada when its rulings do not align with his political needs. He has accused the justice system of being too lenient when it suits him and too harsh when it does not. He has framed himself as the defender of institutions while undermining them whenever they become inconvenient. It is a pattern. It is a habit. It is a worldview. And it reveals something essential about his politics. For Poilievre, institutions are not pillars of democracy. They are tools. They are props. They are instruments to be used when helpful and discarded when not. The Satirical Truth: A Philosophy in One Sentence: Pierre Poilievre’s immigration philosophy can now be summarized with clinical precision: Canada must crack down on irregular border crossings, except for the ones that are fine. And he will decide which ones are fine. It is a stance that bends so far backward it could qualify for a gymnastics medal. It is a stance that reveals more about political convenience than national security. It is a stance that exposes the gap between what Poilievre says and what Poilievre does. And it is a stance that makes one thing abundantly clear. Polievre's Hypocrisy

Stop playing with words. When you say IMMIGRANTS, you really MEAN INDIANS.

I am Native American. At college, I took a welding course just to break the monotony of classes as I was raised using my hands. This immigrant male, asked the rest of the class "why is she here?". I asked if he had a problem with me and he looked at the class to tell me not to speak to him. No one said a word but looked between us in silence. I asked him again, "do you have an issue with me being here?". Again he told the rest of the Caucasian men to tell me to stop speaking to him. I said if you have a problem with me, let's step outside and one of us will walk back in. You can't accept that a Native female is in this class, pack your family up and go home. Don't think of the state's because that's mine too. The teacher walked in and he could see and sense the tension in the room. He removed the immigrant and they went out of the room. A few minutes later the instructor came in and looked at me and said he'll be taking a class with no females. His country doesn't allow females an education yet alone a trade. You're welcome to stay. I have no intention to leave, was my comment back. I'm here to learn. Decades later, I'm driving home from northeastern Quebec and on the 401 is a gas/food stop. My child and I were passed by 4 luxury sports cars. They pulled into this stop and parked across all the handicapped parking spots. Bumper to bumper across the spots. We went in and met them as we came out and met a truck driver of the same nationality. He asked "how is Canada treating you?". They smiled and said "look", motioning to their silk suits. Another pointed to their cars. And another said "they treat us like kings'!". The fourth said "Canadians are easy to play! Cowards!!" A few days later, I'm at Walmart and present my tax exempt (we pay 5% tax) but the cashier looks at it and states "you all think your so special!!" Your paying the tax like everyone else! A customer behind me yelled for management loudly. When management showed, I didn't say a word because it was the customers behind and on the side of me with complaints of the rudeness of the cashier. She was removed and manager took over transactions. Not just mine but those after me. There was another incident with my child. An immigrant (can tell by the long tunic) was trying to lure my daughter away from me. I put her in a cart and requested help from a young employee who wanted me to write a book before calling security. Another employee came over and called security immediately. By the time they found the man, he had exited the store and got into a taxi. A few weeks later at an arena where youth hockey practice was taking place, the same scenario was happening. A man in a tunic was trying to lure children away and when caught, jumped into a taxi and left the scene. To attack an adult who can defend themselves is one thing but to go after children is another. I say stricter policy on crimes are needed.