Sheila Gunrid and Adam Sos dissect Alberta’s CMOH Dina Hinshaw’s court revelations—her "no" responses to targeted enforcement claims—while critiquing the government’s adoption of extreme COVID-19 measures without accountability, citing 11% rises in opioid deaths and suicides. They contrast peaceful pro-life rallies with aggressive pro-abortion counter-protests, exposing media bias and church compliance during lockdowns, yet highlight Pastor Archer Pavlowski’s street ministry feeding marginalized groups like unhoused African-American men. The episode also slams $171M federal bonuses for failing performance targets, Trudeau-era housing inflation, and Ottawa’s "racist" Indigenous incarceration policies, ignoring poverty and clean water solutions. Gunrid and Sos conclude by advocating open civil discourse over "woke" dogma, emphasizing dialogue’s role in addressing climate change skepticism and gaming culture—while teasing their Ontario leaders debate live stream at 5:30 ET. [Automatically generated summary]
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the Rebel News daily live stream.
I'm your host today, Sheila Gunrid.
I host on Mondays with my friend based in Calgary, Adam Sos.
Adam, how's it going?
It's going wonderful.
How are you?
Oh, I'm doing great.
I'm not sure if it's just my monitor, but my makeup looks like I put it on with a curling broom.
So I'm just going to cover it up with my glasses.
There's a lot to talk about.
You had a very busy weekend.
I think everybody at the company had a very busy weekend because the news never stops.
News doesn't happen on bankers' hours.
But before we get to all of that, I'll tell everybody what we're doing and how they can interact with us.
And then we'll just cut straight to the news.
So this is the Rebel News daily live stream.
We are currently streaming on YouTube, but if you watched from the very beginning, and I think a lot of you do, you saw that we had that warning that things that we say may stray from the consensus medical viewpoint.
So if that happens, we will cut the YouTube feed because if we say certain things on YouTube, they might take our channel away from us.
And there are 1.6-ish sets of eyeballs over there that we don't want to abandon.
So what we will do is we'll cut that stream.
But we are also simultaneously broadcasting on Getter.
If you're watching us on Getter, hey, how's it going?
And if you'd like to interact with us, there are other streaming platforms, three of them, where you can interact with us and support the work that we do.
So there's Rumble.
If you send us a paid chat, it's called a Rumble Rant.
We'll do our best to answer your question or comment.
Odyssey is called a hyper chat.
There's a couple different ways that you can send us that.
There's the Odyssey's library cryptocurrency or just regular old fiat currency if you're old-fashioned like me.
That's our paid chat.
And on Super U, it's called the Super U shout.
So if you want to have your say, if you've got a question or a comment, even a story idea, that's the best way to do it.
And it helps us keep the lights on here at Rebel News.
Unlike the CBC, we don't take $1.5 billion from the Canadian taxpayer.
We would like a little bit of your money, but we're only going to ask for it.
We're not going to take it.
And we know that there are plenty of places where you can spend your dough and inflation is crunching everybody.
So for those of you who do pitch in, we definitely appreciate it because we know you've got a lot of other options and things that you have to pay for.
So we appreciate that.
And thank you very much.
Adam, what's the first thing we want to talk about?
Do we want to get into this Dina Hinshaw thing right off the bat?
I think that's a pretty big story.
I think it's a huge story.
So a little while back, I was actually live tweeting this court case.
Cabinet's Private Orders on Deaths00:15:53
Alberta's medical officer of health, chief medical officer of health, Dina Hinshaw.
She's our chief necromancer.
She uses the dead to control the living.
That's why I call them necromancers.
A while back, I was watching a court case.
It's the Ingram court case.
For those of you who always hear like, oh, we're not going to make a decision on this court case until the decision is made on the Ingram court case.
This is it.
So it was in a court case.
I'll just read this for you from CBC, unfortunately.
A Calgary judge has made public Alberta's chief medical officer of health, Dina Hinshaw's responses to three questions she answered in a private hearing about a confidential cabinet discussion.
So our questions are for a case started by a group of Albertans who launched a court challenge seeking to have COVID-19 public health orders ruled unconstitutional.
Court of Queens Bench Justice Barbara Romain issued a decision at the end of April stating the public interest in disclosing Dr. Hinshaw's answers to the questions posed by the court outweighs the public interest in keeping the evidence confidential.
So lawyers for the Alberta government had objected and produced a document from Sonia Savage, then the justice minister, stating discussions between Hinshaw and cabinet must be kept confidential.
Ultimately, it was decided that Hinshaw would answer three questions in a private hearing so the judge could decide whether to make the answers to those questions public and part of the hearing evidence.
So the lawyers posed the questions, then they argued about whether or not these things are captured under advice to cabinet, because these discussions are normally private.
And the judge said, okay, well, I'll take you to chambers.
We're going to ask you these questions and then I'll decide.
But let's get the answers from you.
So the questions were, did the premier and cabinet ever direct you to impose severe restrictions, more severe restrictions in your orders than you had recommended to them?
So basically, were the premier and cabinet members asking for harsher things than what were being ordered by Dr. Hinshaw?
Did cabinet ever direct you to impose more severe restrictions on particular groups, such as churches, gyms, schools, small businesses, than you had recommended to them?
Did you ever recommend to cabinet that restrictions should be lifted or loosened at any period of time?
And that recommendation was refused or ignored by cabinet.
On Friday, Romain confirmed that Hinshaw's answer to all three questions was no.
So at the end of the day, this doesn't really let the government off the hook because Hinshaw works for the government.
So basically, this says that the province didn't ask for harsher restrictions.
Fine, but they adopted the harsh restrictions that Hinshaw asked for.
So they can't really pass the buck here.
I think the idea is to try to pass the buck, but they didn't have to do anything that Hinshaw told them to do.
They could have said, yeah, we appreciate that, but we do have these things called charter rights that we can't do all these other things that you want us to do.
She gave them recommendations and they just adopted them.
And so while she didn't say be harder on the churches, I don't know how she could have been harsher on the churches, except if she had closed them completely altogether.
And we know she did that in some cases.
Yeah, well, the other thing that would have been incredibly interesting, I wish very much there would have been a fourth question about whether the government had in any way, shaped, or form sort of petitioned or engaged in dialogue the other way on behalf of small businesses, on behalf of what was that conversation like because very much I think the reason we're getting these questions publicly is they think that it makes it seem as though the government was just following orders while the government was implementing the orders, not following the orders.
And these are very much recommendations, but I think that is the core question.
That's very much at the crux of this.
This, it doesn't mean as much as it should.
I think there were more important questions to be asked.
It's unfortunate that those questions weren't asked.
Maybe they were and they weren't made public.
Or they will.
But yeah, or they will.
Yeah, now that after watching this, at least.
But yeah, hopefully.
Like, maybe there are more questions to be asked now that we know these answers because these prompt now additional answers, additional questions.
Like you say, did the government push back when you recommended this?
Did the government just adopt it as a blanket or did they actually push back?
I think those are the next questions.
And the other question here is like, okay, sure.
So the cabinet ever direct you to impose more severe restrictions on particular groups.
So then that alleviates, it doesn't, but let's say it alleviates in their mindset the government's responsibility for hammering down pastors and leaving everyone on small businesses, leaving everyone else alone.
Well, then.
who in Alberta Health Services, is it just Dina Hinshaw who was selectively enforcing against these people?
Because ultimately, whether it was an overt instruction from the top down, or they're just underlying all of Alberta Health Services, they're underlying bigots against Christians and target them on some subconscious level.
What is the, there has to be some source for the fact that there's an overwhelming statistical anomaly here where only certain groups were targeted, only certain groups received enforcement.
Where is that coming from?
This doesn't alleviate that.
Maybe the government, the cabinet is breathing easy because they feel it alleviates them.
But then what's going on with Alberta Health Services?
Who within that structure is directing this?
I asked Tyler Chandra himself if he had directed this and he made clear.
Now I'm just repeating his words.
I'm not saying that I believe him necessarily, but he stipulated very clearly that at no point did he or the government direct targeted sort of enforcement against these communities.
So where did that come from?
Yeah.
And so what?
So the premier and the health minister can just sort of wash their hands of it the way Doug Ford says, well, I'm just a politician.
I'm listening to the doctors.
Well, no, you're just a politician.
You're supposed to listen to the people who elected you and sort of balance that against public safety.
Go ahead.
And just on the sort of competence spectrum on behalf of the necromancers, like Dina Hinshaw, her job was pretty much to, and I mean, I think she failed in considering the sort of mental health implications, which would fall under her purview, broadly speaking.
But her job to an extent was to suggest the most extensive measures by which we could reduce the risk of spread and save lives.
And then the government should take those considerations into account and say, oh, well, this thing is devastating to the economy and there's broader spending implications.
I think that's what was missed because I think in a fear of accountability and a fear of culpability, should this have been worse than it was, they just jumped on everything.
They didn't want to take other considerations into effect.
And we've seen the impacts of these other considerations, whether that be inflation, whether that be mental health, whether that be the laundry list goes on of the negative outcomes, even job shortages because of some of these things that were implemented.
All these companies are cutting services.
We're seeing like deliveries not being made and allegedly it's because of staff shortages.
All of these problems stemming from these sort of metrics that were brought in by the government.
Whether Dina Hinshaw recommended them or not, ultimately she's not the elected official.
They are.
So they're accountable.
Well, and sorry, I'm probably putting Olivia on the spot here, but I think you can find it in CTV Calgary.
I'm trying to cut and paste it, but my computer's not cooperating.
Alberta did see significant increases in excess deaths during the pandemic, especially amongst young people.
The report was published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases and compared the period of January 2020 to May 2021 to previous years to determine excess mortality.
And the report found that deaths in Alberta increased by 11% during the 17 months that were studied.
And it's significantly higher in the younger age group.
So these are not people who were dying of COVID or affected by COVID whatsoever.
These are opioid deaths.
These are suicides.
These are deaths of despair.
These are the lockdown deaths.
These are not the COVID deaths.
These are the response to the COVID deaths.
And that should have been a consideration for the Alberta government.
And I'm not sure it was, except insofar that they thought that watching The Bachelor would jeer us all up.
Yeah.
Yeah.
No.
There's that article as well.
There was another one.
So that article talked about their overall increased death rate.
And even within that, like a significant percentage was not COVID-19 related.
There was a COVID-19 contribution.
There was a slight uptick in the last year as a result of that compared to the norm.
But there was another article as well that just got into those additional causes beyond the excess rate caused by sort of additional factors.
But yeah, we've seen mental health problems.
We've seen this.
And there's like an unwillingness to acknowledge or address it.
And it's extremely unfortunate.
In order to make sort of evidence-based policy and evidence-based decision, you need to be willing to look at the facts, not just the facts that align with your lockdown decisions or whatever it may be.
So certainly, I think the ball was missed on that broader sort of consideration of people's well-being, the sort of holistic approach that a government should take in these times, not jumping to the most extreme measure without consideration for anything else.
The sad thing is, is very much there was almost a delayed response in addressing this in some of these extremely vulnerable communities, which would have saved far more lives.
And then there was a sort of over abundant or overbearing response as a consequence afterwards, based on the sort of shortcomings of the earlier incident.
So we're kind of tiptoeing around it here.
But yeah, very, very interesting.
One thing that is encouraging with this, though, and it goes along with some of the things that we've been seeing lately.
First off, I'd suggest lots of this started with Pastor Arthur Pavlowski being the appeal process on bail being granted bail and some sort of laxening on conditions for him.
And then the charges against Pastor Tim Stevens dropped.
Pastor Derek Reimer was arrested, immediately released.
And we're seeing judges now saying, in the interest of transparency, we need to reveal this to the public.
I think the courts are maybe like, oh, maybe we, because I think even within the courts, even talking to sort of mainstream lawyers, judges who are their acquaintances, there was sort of a sentiment broadly that these people really were the bad guys.
I think the courts are sort of having that sober second thought and slowing down and saying, oh, hold on a second.
Our job is actually to apply the law here.
And then obviously the injunction challenge victory that we had as well, protestlawsuit.com, check that out.
And then obviously most recently, and I'm going to be talking to an exceptional lawyer from the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms today.
We also saw that the important court ruling from the Alberta courts that the CMOH health order from December 2020 to January 2021 did not apply to protests.
That could be precedent setting for the broader conversation on whether these any tickets handed out underneath these orders for protests were valid.
So the courts seem to be flipping pretty significantly on a number of these issues.
Lots of this could be the optics of it takes a long time for courts to actually get out there.
But we did see some pretty egregious stuff with compelled speech mandates, ticketing, incarcerations.
Now it seems that hopefully the tide is turning anyways.
So happy to see some judges operating by the rule of law and in the name of transparency for a change.
Sorry, can you tell me what were the dates that that injunction applied to?
So that it was the health order issued.
I don't have the dates off the top of my head, but it was December 2020.
Don't have the date in December until January 2021.
So it's a two-month window.
And the language within that, it says, I believe the language, the point of contention, was private social gathering.
And the judge said, well, clearly a protest is not a private social gathering.
So this doesn't apply.
I'll confirm today with Hate.
I think it's Hateem from the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms the details.
But Sarah Miller was saying that potentially further interations of that order, so not necessarily the one within that window, but if they include those same terms, the private social gatherings.
So, for example, someone who had a party at their house, they'd still be subject to their ticket or a gathering at their house or whatever.
But someone clearly having an organized protest, there is a potential that we see quite a few tickets being thrown out after the fact.
And for many of these gatherings for which some of these pastors were ticketed, it'll be interesting to see how that applies.
If the same argument for pro freedom to protest will apply to religious freedoms, because a church gathering is not a social gathering.
That's not a reasonable, it's not a private social gathering.
It's a faith or a worship gathering.
So a lot of sort of interesting conversations are going to be generated by that decision.
Certainly, maybe not binding precedent, but precedent that judges will be looking back to because it's kind of the first ruling that addresses that directly.
Very much looking forward to that conversation today and the exceptional work the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms is doing very much along lines with the Democracy Fund fighting these fights when many of the civil liberties organizations have simply taken a break.
Even they're getting on board though.
We know the Civil Liberties Association has actually got finally gotten on board on some of the Chris Scott pastor Arthur Pavlovsky compelled speech stuff.
So they're starting to get on board.
But lots of people I'm talking to are saying they're guarded after two years of what we've been through, but they're optimistic that hopefully there's some transparency and some justice being dished out by judges for a change.
Yeah, it's very curious because I'd like to see what this means for somebody like Chris Scott, who was arrested for having a protest, albeit in May of 2021, spent quite a few days in jail, three days in jail, and then serious sanctions after the fact.
Going back to that thing about the excess deaths, I was spoken down in the study and it says that drug poisoning deaths attributed to 18% of the increase in mortality with people between the ages of 25 and 60.
And they also say deferral of care is likely a significant factor in any increase in deaths beyond what has already been reported as visits to healthcare providers dropped sharply, especially during the pandemic, including family physicians and emergency departments.
This happened in my own family.
You couldn't get in to see a doctor, your minor surgery that got canceled because they wanted to keep the hospitals empty all of a sudden turns into a fatal complication.
March Life Clash00:15:12
And that, I mean, that's what happened.
That's Dina Hinshaw and Jason Kenney's lockdowns.
That's what happened to Albertans.
Okie doke, let's keep moving along.
What else is what's in the headline of the YouTube description here?
I would like to get those out of the way because I get emails.
A pro-life face-off.
Yes, this is once again.
You, I don't know.
Are we going to cover your pro-life video from the weekend?
Yeah, we, I mean, it's, it's, it's coming out soon, so I don't know what we've got from it, but we can talk about it.
So Thursday, I mean, we had people all across the country on different days for March for Life.
I think Kat and Nat were out.
Dave Menzies was out.
I don't know.
I think Didre go out as well.
Yes.
Had people at all the March for Lives.
I think they were on different days, right?
Some were Saturday, Friday, all over the place.
I was in Edmonton.
We were in Edmonton, obviously, for the leadership debates, which we've talked about at length, but a bit of a flop there, certainly.
But then on Thursday, I was out with Sid and Celine.
We were in Edmonton.
So we figured, heck, we'll swing by, check out the March for Life, speak to some people there, get the vibes, see if there's any counter protests.
Obviously, with the leaked document, the United States Supreme Court majority opinion, basically, that potentially was leaked and potentially would overturn Roe v. Wade.
And effectively, for those who don't know, that wouldn't ban or abolish abortion in the United States.
It would effectively allow legislation to return to elected representatives on a state-by-state level.
So if a state was overwhelmingly pro-life, you know, a democracy, the state could have pro-life laws, shocking that that may be.
So that sort of stirred up and riled up some conversation, even though it isn't binding here in Canada.
I think most people say Roe v. Wade, don't really know what it is.
We thought there might be a pretty significant turnout.
So on Thursday, we were at March for Life in Edmonton.
And I want to talk about the sort of pro-life, pro-abortion, whatever that conversation would be in a second.
But one thing that I noticed here, and just because we're talking about some of the implications of this COVID-19 thing, it was the smallest March for Life I've ever seen.
It was hundreds of people.
Normally, it is thousands.
It was the one little subsection up at the front in front of legislature.
Only one of the little sort of corridors was open.
Here we see some of the counter protesters.
But one thing that I find absolutely shocking, and I think this is probably the cause.
I was trying to muse over why is there so much small.
You and I have been to these things together, just both as journalists, but also as pro-life Albertans.
And I know why.
And it's really sad.
It's really sad.
So the majority of churches, Catholic, as we can attest to and otherwise, when COVID-19 rolled out, they pretty much completely went along with everything.
After that, people, when they needed their church the group most, when they needed their youth group the most, when they needed their community the most, the community said, well, this doesn't really matter.
We're shutting down.
We've seen the other churches, the church of Pastor Tim Stevens, Pastor Arta Pavlovsky, everything quadruple.
They're all getting new buildings.
They can't fit their people in because they're like, no, we believe in to cite Pastor Tim Stevens and the primacy of Christ.
So the churches, this event was massively Catholic traditionally.
People would come out in droves.
My original thought when I got there was, oh, people are protested out.
There's been a lot of protests going on.
I really don't think it's that.
I think it's that these people have not got back in the pews since COVID-19.
And I'm going to put my minister hat.
I'm going to put on my minister hat for a second here.
Not that I'm a minister, but this is what the globalists want.
Don't do it.
They literally shut down your churches and push the officials in charge of the churches to make you believe that church doesn't matter.
To make you believe that this is secondary or you can just pray at home or you don't actually have to gather.
They undermined what church was and church officials allowed it to happen.
People have not returned back.
And we saw that this was representative, like more than from what I'm hearing, it's like half the people never went back to church afterwards.
Pews are empty.
Places are cutting worship, cutting mass, cutting service, whatever it may be.
March for life on Thursday was a reflection of the successful campaign to sort of undermine.
And it's as much a successful campaign as it is a failing on the part of church leaders to advocate for their people, to be there for their people.
And in a time where we saw mental health crises, we saw loss to COVID-19 as well, but to other illnesses, whatever it may be, the church was not there for people.
They didn't fight for people to be able to have decent funerals while people were packed into airplanes like sardine cans.
They weren't there.
They weren't going to bat.
They kind of faded.
So the people that were there very much were those people who are going to be there, the advocates, the fighters, the people who are in this and here to stay.
Ratzinger sort of talked about the time where the church becomes very small and solidified.
Well, those people, whatever their sort of denominations, not necessarily to say they're Christian, but whatever their faith backgrounds, they were out.
There were still 300, 400 people, maybe something like that, somewhere in that range.
We kind of guessed.
It was kind of hectic.
But yeah, it was definitely sad to see because normally it's buses are showing up and there's thousands of people.
But we got a couple hundred people instead.
But still, the mood was very positive, very happy.
The footage we're seeing now is from the Calgary pro-abortion protest that happened on Sunday as well.
But there were quite a few actually counter protesters there as well.
Again, it's interesting.
We talked to a whole bunch of people and you'll see this in the video from the pro-life side.
And we actually said, well, do you think there's more effective ways that the pro-abortion people could engage in dialogue or conversation?
Do you think them playing lewd music is maybe not appropriate given that there's children around?
It was incredible just how freedom loving these people were.
They said, no, no, I think it's their right to do that.
Like literally, no one was even like they could be more respectful.
Like we were giving them an opportunity to say, I don't think that's very nice.
They're like, no, no, it's their right.
It's like the universal sentiment we got from people.
Very interesting as well to see some of the politicians present.
This extends to Calgary as well, but there was a little bit of a heated conflict and some a little bit of bumping here and there, but it dissipated pretty quickly.
They were chanting their slogans.
They were dancing, playing music really loud, trying to drown out the pro-life message.
The pro-lifers largely ignored them and sort of did their thing as well.
One thing that was incredibly interesting, other than one journalist from Western Standard and ourselves, there was virtually no media coverage that we saw whatsoever.
If there was another independent journalist there, I apologize.
We saw no one.
Conversely, jump to the pro-abortion, pro-choice, whatever you want to call it, rally in Calgary on Sunday.
We saw like every major mainstream media outlet there as well.
There's also a concerted effort by the organizers.
They were very polite, like everyone was being cordial.
But if anyone was willing to speak to us, they'd come over and tell them not to speak with us sort of thing.
So we tried speaking to about 15 people and then we're just like, okay, we're not going to be able to talk to anybody at all.
But very interesting to see the politicians who show up.
We saw in Edmonton, Janice Irwin, who we've weirdly run into quite a few times.
She attended.
Interestingly enough, though, and much to her credit, when some of the counter protesters kind of started getting shovey and a bit much, she immediately moved away from them and didn't want to be associated with that.
We tried to get an interview with her, obviously, to discuss Bill 17.
Wasn't willing to do that, but that's all right.
And then we did have a chance, though, which will be in the video to talk to Dan Williams, MLA for Peace River, and then Joseph Scow, MLA for Cardston Sixa.
So we did get those perspectives.
In Calgary, JOTI Gondek and Giancarlo showed up, of course.
And then we also saw Ganley, the NDP MLA for Rock Mountain View.
I think Kathleen, I don't know, sorry.
But Kathleen Ganley, okay, good.
So they were there.
They gave speeches as well.
So quite the scene, but so interesting to see all these media outlets for the maybe 100 people that showed up for this pro-abortion thing.
Even March for Life being small, it was three, four times the size.
There's action, there's counter protests, no media there to cover it whatsoever.
So yeah, something to see, certainly.
You know, Adam, I think I agree with your assessment of why the March for Life was so small.
And it is that so many people, they were told by the government and by their own churches, by the churches going along with the government, that church was unnecessary and that you can get everything you need on Facebook Live church.
And so, if I am told that I can receive communion on Facebook Live, which I can't, but if I'm told that, then why do I necessarily have to be out in the streets advocating for the rights of the unborn?
Why can't I just do it on Facebook Live?
Right?
Like, why can't I just share a meme?
That's as good as actually being present.
And yeah, people feel other, there are other people, maybe I'm one of them that feels betrayed by their church and how quickly the church capitulated to the government.
But I also remember that the church is populated by human beings and human beings are flawed.
And we have actually a built-in sacrament to deal with how just how flawed human beings are and how they get them wrong.
It's called reconciliation.
So I have that constant reminder that, yeah, people who are running the church are going to get it wrong, but it is God's church.
So I can't let the betrayal of the men get in between me and my relationship with God.
But yeah, when you go to mass these days, it's all just people who can't figure out how to use YouTube.
Like it's all, it's, it's not the same way it used to be there or the diehards.
Yeah, or yeah, exactly, the diehards.
But it's not a place where you can just pop into anymore.
Even it was difficult for me because sometimes I would be like, okay, well, I'm just going to pop into the church.
I'm going to say a quick decade of the rosary and then carry on my day.
I couldn't do that anymore.
There was no like spontaneity in I've got 10 minutes.
I'm just going to quickly run into church as I'm waiting on a kid to finish something.
I couldn't do that anymore.
I had to, you know, check in, contact Trace.
It was just a real pain to do it.
And it just drives people away and it changes how they their involvement in the church as a building.
It becomes weird and confrontational all the time and explanatory all the time.
It's not easy.
Now, you know, like we're Christians, it's not supposed to be easy, but it just, it just drove a wedge in between people and the church.
And I can see why that is hurting now the causes that flow from the church.
And we really, the church really only has itself to blame here.
And, you know, one of the interesting things, the juxtaposition for me from all of this, covering a pro-life event and then a pro-abortion, pro-choice event.
If I say one, people will be mad either way.
So I'll say both.
Was sort of the counter-protest effort.
So it was kind of lewd music and dancing and sort of trying to override the message.
It was really interesting at the pro-abortion rally in the distance, it kind of looked like a crowd was gathering and there was music starting, which was, of course, Larry Heather singing because Larry Heather always sings in the background, frequent Calgary mayoral candidates and politician and all that.
And so the people at this pro-abortion rally, they started sort of talking about them.
I think they thought they were counter protesters sort of gathering and making a fuss.
So that's where they were reacting.
So I don't begrudge them for reacting.
But in reality, what was happening was street church, Pastor Archer Pavlowski's street ministry was gathering.
And so we went over there to check it out.
And at a certain point towards the end, some of the people went over to hold their signs up and they left so quickly because like 100 roughly unhoused people were in line to be fed.
And this church was playing music and feeding them.
The message we heard all day from this pro-abortion rally was though they're saying those Christians over there they only care about stopping your rights, they don't care about you once you're born, they don't take care of you once you're born.
Yeah, and literally, they're saying that about an outdoor kitchen that's feeding hundreds of people.
One of my favorite conversations from the day, um, I was walking along, and something about this gentleman just struck me.
Um, I'm walking along, Celine's got the camera, I've got the microphone.
Um, and this uh, this unhappy, clearly unhoused man who was sort of waiting to go there says, Hey, he kind of gets my attention, and he's like, I'm not Donald Trump, but I'd like to do an interview, I'll answer any question that you have.
Um, so I sat down with this guy, um, African-American guy, black guy.
I think it's okay to say that these days, but uh, um, he so very much um, someone who they'd say the pro-abarts would say these people exclude and don't care about.
Very much, uh, meeting many of those, I don't put people in boxes, but marginalized categories, unhoused, a minority, all that.
Um, I said, What is your perspective on what's happening here at Street Church with this?
And he said, You know what?
I society here, everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I can tell you these people are going to feed me.
These people look me in the eye.
This is the best meal I'm going to get this week.
Those people are entitled to their opinion.
But if anyone says anything bad about these people, I don't really care because they're feeding me.
Um, so it was really interesting.
Just this guy sort of pulled me aside and wanted to have that conversation.
But it was just such a staunch sort of juxtaposition.
Um, the counter-protesters against March for Life weren't there with like information pamphlets and advocating for like, oh, well, three-month limits or whatever.
No, it was very much a spectacle with rude music and crude music, and we'll do whatever we want.
Um, it wasn't a sort of calm-formulated thing.
Meanwhile, the perceived counter-protest, which wasn't a pro counter-protest at all, was actually a kitchen feeding people on the streets.
Um, judge a tree by its fruits.
Well, and you know, I having part of my job is to watch all these videos before they go to broadcast.
I can tell you that it is consistent across all the March for Life Marches for Life, March for Lives, March for Life.
Yeah, Kat and Nat had the same experience.
They are literally talking to students on the street who are saying, like pro-life students saying we're just here for peaceful discourse.
Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice Woes00:02:48
And the other side is like, F you, nuns.
Um, and it's consistent.
Dave, David Menzie, same experience.
You had the same experience.
Um, I could not find the old white men that keep they keep telling me have handcuffs for my fallopian tubes.
I can't find them.
All I see are young people, families, uh, nuns, women, minorities.
I'm having a real tough time finding.
I mean, there's Larry Heather, but other than that, all the old white men trying to control everybody's life.
And it's right that you point out, you know, like they say, oh, you know, like they only care about you while you're carrying the baby, they don't care about you after that.
You know, like there's all these things where the pro-lifers take care of you after the fact, too.
I'm not seeing a lot of that on the other side, though.
No, yeah, certainly not.
And I mean, there is this whole like, you're free to make your choice and we're pro-choice, but I mean, realistically, there's one thing they're sort of campaigning, advocating for there's one thing that all the signs reference.
The other thing that's so interesting is just how caught up this sort of movement, the pro-abortion movement has become in the very sort of woke conversational ideology.
Yeah, like I'm pretty with it.
I mean, you'll see the footage for yourself when you review it on Sunday.
I am.
I'm and there was times where I was like, is this English?
Like, and I mean, don't give me some sometimes it wasn't because sometimes it was indigenous communities speaking or whatever.
But I mean, parts where they were speaking in English, you legitimately couldn't sort of keep up because they were so not wanting to say anything.
We heard all of the one of the speakers was saying that she knows that it's a soul and a life, and she's had six abortions and she's going to meet them in the afterlife, but it wasn't their time now.
And then people screaming about you guys might be in different spots afterwards.
Yeah.
And then people screaming about men can get pregnant and that whole conversation about if you don't have ovaries, but you identify as a woman, can you have a conversation?
We always talk about this, but there's this Orbros, the self-sort of consuming snake where they're contradicting themselves.
They talked about how terrible it was in some of the residential schools that women would become pregnant.
And sometimes there are cases where they were pregnant by priests or religious people and they would abort the baby and how terrible that was and the forced sterilization, but then how good abortion is not.
It's just sort of like this, there's not really like a coherent grounding.
It's kind of grounded in whatever the woman wants at any given time, which isn't like a solid metric from which to run one's life or to gauge a society.
Costs vs. Bonuses00:15:01
Yeah, it hardly seems like science, you know, that your feelings can change at a moment's notice and change whether or not this is valuable and a human being or not at all, just something else.
But as we know, feelings are the main dictator now with regard to biological sex.
So why would this really be any different?
We should move on because we have other things that we should talk about.
Although I could talk about this all day because I've actually been there, the other side of this worst case scenario.
So we should talk about the federal public servants.
Yeah, we should.
Because, you know, your family's getting hammered with inflation.
Carbon tax has gone up, gas price at the pump out of control.
If you want to buy a house in one of the major housing markets like Vancouver and Toronto, forget it.
You're going to have to win the lottery.
However, insulated from reality, our friends in the public sector.
Federal public servants were paid $171 million in bonuses from 2019 and 2020, despite departments meeting less than half of performance objectives.
89% of executives got bonuses paid on them failing over 50% of the time to reach their targets.
Conservative MP Kelly McCauley said.
Imagine, imagine being that good, that good at being bad at your job and getting a bonus.
Like if that happened in our company, like if we had someone on the management team who was that bad, we would just shuffle them out of the company.
But if you are in the federal government, you're getting a raise, like a big, huge fat raise.
Yeah, like imagine.
I don't know if we've ever, maybe we've scrapped one out of the hundreds and hundreds of reports I've done.
I don't even know if that.
Imagine if like half of every story I did, we couldn't use.
And then you're like, we're going to give you a million dollar bonus.
Like this is not how the world operates.
This is just how the government operates.
And it's so, and we're going to talk about John Horgan in a second too here, but there's this promise perpetually from politicians that we're going to bring in these cost-saving measures.
You're the ones driving up the costs.
This is the problem.
When you spend money and you get nothing, you devalue the money.
So when you're handing out bonuses to politicians who are doing nothing and failing metrics, and when you're spending fortunes on carbon taxes, which accomplish nothing, when you just dump money into nothing projects, when you have billions of dollars going missing on infrastructure projects, not to mention billions of dollars going missing in this in the CBC, and by missing, I mean the content they produce, but billions of dollars just evaporating that devalues money.
CERB devalued money.
Just printing money and producing money on a fundamental level devalues money.
And that's why the average house price in Canada has doubled since Justin Trudeau has been in because they spend money on nothing, which makes money worthless.
The $10 that you had in your pocket, if you're trying to buy a house 10 years ago, 12 years ago is worth five bucks now.
This is what these people are doing to society.
And they're getting so rich printing this money and spending it that they don't care because they don't care if they go from having $10 million to $5 million.
But you or I, if we're trying to put fuel in our car and we go from $10 to $5, that's a different story altogether.
That means we're getting half as far.
Maybe we can't get to work.
This is a sort of elitism from this ruling class that is so out of touch.
And John Horgan, we're going to talk about him soon.
But this unbelievable dump of funds into nothing and this sort of, it's literally on the level of like sort of Che Guevara, Castro, and buddies.
Just they're all living in castles and paying themselves out the wazoo like unbelievable sums of money while everyone else suffers.
And that's the sunny ways that they've promised us.
It's unreal.
And not to mention, this is another thing we're going to talk about soon, but what we're seeing among some indigenous communities, like this money could be providing clean drinking water.
And instead, it's going to bonuses for people who are failing to provide clean drinking water.
Yeah.
I'll just say one thing about this and we'll move on because we've got a lot of stuff to talk about.
Kelly McCauley, who's really good, actually.
I really like Kelly.
I'm going to talk to him about this, actually.
You should.
He said it's pay for failure.
And he said, in the documents, the Treasury Board noted that bonuses were doled out to 89% of the public secular's public sector's executives or 7,232 people in 2020, 2021.
This only prompts one question from me.
How awful were those other 11?
Like, how bad do you have to be to not get a bonus at this point in the federal government?
Yeah.
Because they're not going to fire you.
But how bad do you have to be when you can actually fail 50% of the time and still get a substantial bonus, a bonus for your good work?
How bad are those other 11?
They had to find like even one good thing.
It was like a lot, even one good thing.
And they couldn't find the one good thing.
So instead of being scorched, they got no bonus.
Now, moving on to people who are completely out of touch, John Horgan, BC's terrible, terrible premier.
He's just awful.
But again, because they have all their population base in Toronto or in Vancouver, where everybody votes green or NDP, this is what you get, right?
This idiocy controls the rest of the province.
John Horgan is encouraging people to think before you hop in the car amid record-breaking gas prices.
This joins like the, why don't you just get a Tesla?
Yeah.
What are you thought before hopping into politics?
He should think before he opens his yap.
Does he think that people are just going out for a Sunday drive these days?
That I'm just, you know what?
I thought before I jumped on the live stream here, I would fire up the Jeep and just let it idle for an hour and 15 minutes.
I got nothing better to do.
I should have thought before I did it, but you know what?
While I'm here wasting gas and burning up cash, I just thought, you know what?
Just let her run.
What does he think that people are like driving unnecessarily?
It's too expensive to drive unnecessarily.
You're cutting into their family's savings, their grocery bills, their future because of these ridiculous gas taxes, carbon tax that he's a big fan of.
He doesn't want supply increase down there because he doesn't want the Trans Mountain Pipeline built.
So I guess you just have to think.
I hope they do think.
I hope they think that's the last time we elect an NDP government every time they put the nozzle in their gas tank.
That's what they should be thinking.
Well, and the thing that absolutely drives me nuts about this, and it's the same junk with Justin Trudeau.
It's this, oh, well, we're going to have sort of incentives and breaks to bring down costs.
So we're going to hire new people and make these new departments.
The cost is because of your carbon tax.
The cost is your tax.
Don't tax me and then create a department to give me a break on my bills elsewhere because Canada is just spending billions of dollars making a carbon tax that the government isn't using to really help the environment, but to take more money in, and then creating departments to give me a break on taxes because I can't afford just cut our taxes.
Like he's like, well, we're not going to interject at the pump.
We're not going to cut taxes at the pump.
We're not going to help people actually do their jobs and get to work.
But we're going to come up with something else once it's too late.
We'll create a new department of cost cutting and then we'll tax you for that too.
We'll add that.
We'll have a cost cutting tax on your taxes.
We'll add that so that we can cut costs.
It is so the level of Mary Antoinette, let them eat cake-ness of politicians on the progressive left.
They're the elite of the elite.
They're out of touch with normal people.
They don't care about the working class.
Very often they don't care about sort of working class immigrants, maybe not the very posh immigrants who come over and they're in very good financial shape, but the working class immigrants who are trying to make them make something of themselves, all the people that these radical elite liberal leftists preach about or they pretend to care about, they don't do anything for them.
They're just concentrating more money and then giving themselves $171 million in bonuses.
It's repugnant.
Like it's there used to be this notion of getting into politics out of a sense of service.
I think it's hard for us to argue that.
Maybe among the very best politicians, sure, but overall, the whole institution, it's almost like what you've seen with police with this, with the arrests of pastors, like the institutions of society that we're supposed to trust, like our politicians, which I mean, I don't know how much you trust them, the police, all these service departments, our healthcare system.
They've been the paramount examples of corruption, entitlement, and what's gone wrong in society under Justin Trudeau.
I just don't know how these people don't understand how this affects their own life.
Like, I think politicians buy groceries.
I think maybe they put fuel in their car, right?
Like, they, but maybe they make so much more money than everybody else.
And the taxpayer picks up a lot of those expenses too.
So they really don't understand how the everything comes together.
For example, he says he's more worried about the inflationary impacts on things like food prices than he is about the cost of gas at the pump.
The same thing.
They're all there, exactly.
It's all interconnected.
You're paying more for groceries because fuel costs more and fuel costs more because you're taxing the daylights out of it.
So if you're worried about food prices, well, then you have to worry about the tax that you're putting on the thing that gets the food to the grocery store, but also all the inputs for the farmer for natural gas and inputs on fertilizers because it's all the same, right?
This is the crazy thing, though.
But right now, I encourage people to think before you hop in the car.
Do you need to make that trip?
Again, the laptop class is telling the makers that you maybe you don't need to go to work today.
And he says, Can you do it with a neighbor or someone just going by?
Just run up, knock on the neighbor's door and say, Can you give me a lift to work?
Because the government made driving my car too expensive.
And that's the government solution.
We're not going to cut the carbon tax.
But would you mind just asking, bumming a ride off your neighbor?
Good job, problem solver government.
Good job.
And I think to your point, I think it is.
They make so much money.
They're getting these bonuses.
An apple going from whatever, 80 cents to $1.20, whatever.
I don't know what it is in Vancouver, but it's ridiculous.
That to them is kind of whatever.
But I literally think they're of the mentality: well, if gas is expensive, I'll just have the chauffeur come get me.
Like they're that dissociated from the fact that the chauffeur has to pay for gas too.
Or, hey, just get a Tesla.
Everyone can afford an 80, $120,000 vehicle, whatever it may be.
They're completely disconnected with the reality that the vast majority of Canadians live in.
And you see that with the popularity of Justin Trudeau.
He's on the decline.
Some of these ideas are in the decline.
Unfortunately, there are still people who are just like, I'm never going to vote for conservatives or I'm never going to vote for PPC or whoever it may be.
But at a certain point, you have to realize that what's happening in this country, when there's massive recessions, like Harper or not, he had good fiscal policy in place and Canada was able to ride it out far more smoothly.
We're sort of in one of the most extreme bumps and it's because of this bad government flat out.
And hopefully people realize that.
Yep.
Maybe we'll talk about this one last thing while Olivia rounds up the chats for us, if we have any.
Hopefully we do.
Talk about disconnected and out of touch.
They are going to, I don't know, fix the problem without actually fixing the root causes.
And I hate to use that phrase because that's such a liberal lefty phrase.
But in this case, I think it might actually apply.
Ottawa is going to implement legislation to decrease Indigenous incarceration, says Canada's justice minister.
And as I was poking around on this story, nearly half of all federally incarcerated women are Indigenous.
And instead of dealing with the root causes that forces people to feel as though they have no other choice except criminality or the social decay problems that are happening on Indigenous reserves because of generational poverty,
quit blocking energy development so that people can actually have jobs in their own communities, because I cannot think of a more Indigenous job in Indigenous communities than resource development.
But, you know, instead of dealing with the issues that cause the problem where Indigenous people end up often in a life of crime and all just the things that are caused by social decay, instead of dealing with that where it starts, we're just going to cut everyone a pass after the fact.
And I don't think that's right.
Well, and I think it is actually actively racist.
It literally implies that Indigenous people are somehow lesser and somehow can't adhere to reasonable standards sort of set out by society, which is ridiculous.
And unfortunately, once you set up that standard, well, there's not going to be consequences and the laws don't apply to you.
That is sort of viewed as a tacit endorsement.
I worked in social work personally, and you saw very often different categories, like criteria where certain behaviors, say in an indigenous community, would see you never have access to your kids again in Calgary.
So, certain sort of conduct that was just abhorrent, that would see you permanently removed from your children.
They would not really enforce or implement any sort of restrictions or measures.
And that feeds to that social decay.
There's just like an acceptance of things that are unacceptable, which is fundamentally racist and it implies that they're not capable of maintaining certain standards, of maintaining laws, which is just so fundamentally racist.
But I think what this is on a fundamental level is just more vapid virtue signaling about how we're not going to oppress these people and we're not going to, you know what, I all of that, sure, whatever.
Turn Tap into Care00:07:59
Let's give them clean drinking water.
Let's take care of some of these freaking, excuse my French basics to help these people out instead of just posturing and doing this.
There's like this massive glaring elephant in the room.
I think it's one of the most critical issues facing Canada, period, that some Canadians can't turn on their tap and drink the water.
Some Canadians can't give their kids baths.
That fundamentally destroys the purity of the water is certainly reflected within society.
That destroys the community.
It destroys the culture.
A mom not being able to give her kid a bath destroys the family in a way.
They want to provide that care.
They want to nurture.
It's so just fundamentally undermining to their society.
And it's the same thing that you see in like communist countries where people are suffering.
Criminality is rampant.
You can't turn on the tap and trust the water.
There's no basic standards.
There's no enforcement or quality of life.
There's arbitrary structures within those communities implemented very often through illicit means and corruption, where most of the money going in ends up getting caught in government contracts or going to bonuses or whatever else it may be.
But we can brush all of that aside.
There's complications, there's nuance.
You have to deal with cultural sensitivities.
All that stuff, sure.
We can actually put that aside for a minute and just let them turn their taps on and use the water.
Let's get that done.
All the truth and reconciliation stuff, some of it very important, some of it I don't agree with.
But whatever those things are, sure, keep working on those.
But we can put all that aside.
We can steer clear of the politics.
We can steer clear of anything else and we can just get them clean drinking water.
Now, you make a really great point because I say, you know what?
The problems facing Indigenous communities are so much the same as problems facing everybody.
You need jobs.
You need drug treatment, not harm reduction, as they call when the government just keeps people in active addiction instead of getting treatment for substance abuse.
Clean water, pro-family policies, because one of the number one things that contributes to criminality later on down the road is whether or not you come from an intact family.
And those are things that everybody needs.
These are, but for some reason, the paternalistic nature of the Canadian government says, you know what, we'll get around to you eventually.
Instead of empowering people, this is one of the things Pierre Polyev talks about all the time: saying we got to get the gatekeepers of Ottawa out of the way.
We have to unlock the human potential here, just like every other community.
And, you know, it's fun.
You know, people say, you know, like clean drinking water, what has that got to do with criminality?
If you feel like the world doesn't care enough about you to give you the thing that everybody else has when they turn on the tap, then why do you care about yourself and why do you care about the other people?
If you approach the world with that attitude, it's a recipe for disaster.
And the thing for me is people out there who might think they're on the absolute opposite end of the spectrum, they may say terrible things to us when they see us in public, whatever it may be.
I mean, I think this is something we can agree on.
Why are being so caught up in like a few people, despite 20 bands along the Wetzawetan sort of coast, all agreeing to a pipeline, protesting that and being so caught up on that is because of global sort of interest groups.
It's not because of concern for the Indigenous communities when there's these other massive, glaring issues that we should be working together on to address.
There's so much sort of whether it be, and it's so funny because it's, I mean, to use another term of the left, how colonial is it that they just use the indigenous space as a sort of risk table playplace for contracts and getting each other rich and attacking Canadian oil under the guise of this being the interest of the indigenous communities when the majority of bands, for example, 20 voted for the trans or coastal and gas pipeline.
Why are we focused on that?
It's because activists and lobbyists are directing our attention towards that.
What we should all, I don't care where you are on the spectrum, what you and I, if you're on the extreme left, extreme right, whatever, what you and I should be concerned about if we care about human people and care about human decency in any way, shape, or form, we shouldn't be focused on that.
We should be focused on these massive contracts going to people who just year after year refuse to provide clean drinking water.
We have the technology.
Jocelyn Berzik and a number of other people have confirmed the funds are there.
We have the technology.
Basically, it's greed and corruption keeping us from resolving this issue within the decade.
This is completely doable.
So if someone is out there, by all means, we would love to be involved in bringing more attention to this story.
If you're someone maybe interested in providing water for Indigenous communities, you haven't had a chance to get your story out.
You don't think in a million years you'd ever talk to Rebel News, send me an email.
Let's do something because this is one of the sort of, I think, the critical crux points in Canadian society that we sort of have to be judged as a society on.
I think there are others, pro-life issues being one of them.
We talked about that earlier.
But this is an issue that universally we can agree on, and we should all be working together.
And sadly, we should all be working against the government to get this done.
Yeah, you know, my friend Robbie Picard, he's Métis oil sands advocate up in Fort McMurray.
And, you know, I share his sentiment when he says he's got such disdain for the environmental movement because they don't care who they leave in poverty and poverty destroys culture.
It just destroys it.
They don't care what sort of poverty they damn these Indigenous communities to, as long as they block that pipeline because they were paid to block that pipeline.
And as you say, it's always these foreign globalist interests.
And the people are just pawns along the way.
And they really don't care what happens to them as long as their mission is accomplished.
Yeah.
Okay, let's, we've got a few chats here.
We're almost at the top of the hour.
So we've got five libraries from Cuba bound.
Why are people listening to people who won't be held accountable?
Well, because sometimes they'll put you in jail.
Like that's what happened with Dina Hinshaw.
You know, the lock of your church will put you in jail.
That's a big fear factor there.
This was not a pandemic case in point changing definitions to fit their narratives.
They've also, you know, they've changed the definition of vaccine.
I'm just sort of dancing around this, but I think that's a fact that they've changed how they define a vaccine these days as opposed to what we used to think of as a vaccine.
You know, the Marxists knew the value in changing the language and how we communicate with each other.
You know, well, even looking at that term, and I'm not talking about COVID-19, I'm talking about broadly.
I was having a conversation with someone about vaccines and they were saying vaccines work.
And it's like, well, actually, the vast majority, this is how it works.
Like you test drugs, you try and see if they're effective.
The majority of medications don't work and they don't become popularized and they don't become used broadly by society.
And the rare, successful ones, it's the same with vaccines, medicines, whatever it is.
It's actually the rare ones that do work very successfully and become sort of widespread in success stories.
That's why there's probably tons of vaccines developed throughout history.
And we know polio or MMR, there's certain ones that are extremely successful and become widespread and used.
So that even that sentiment around the language of that vaccines work, period.
Well, approved sort of tested vaccines work, but the sentiment that every vaccine that's ever been developed worked works.
Vaccines: Fact vs. Fiction00:06:04
That's not scientific.
No.
Hollywood gives us two bucks.
Paying a carbon tax to fight warming in a country where the biggest complaint is it's too damn cold out should be left to Monty Python.
Yeah, I mean, a longer growing season doesn't seem like a bad idea here.
I mean, we had to develop canola in Canada to deal with a short growing season and that it, you know, it ripens after it's swathed, exposed to the cold because that was the way to deal with the shorter growing seasons here.
And, you know, if they threaten me with a warmer weather, I don't know.
Am I supposed to be mad about that?
Am I?
Am I supposed to pay taxes for that?
By the way, there's no, Adam, think about this.
And I talk about this all the time, but it's once you start thinking about it, you're like, yeah, of course.
How do you measure the global temperature?
First of all, how do you measure that?
And how do you measure the increase globally?
You can't even accurately measure the temperature in your backyard.
You cannot.
The only time you get a temperature reading is at that point, at that minute, where that thermometer is.
There's no actual way.
If you even put a thermometer in your backyard in three different spots, you're going to get three different readings.
So, how do you, how do they tell me that a tax is going to stop us from achieving going over 1.5 degrees Celsius or whatever it is?
How is that possible?
It's not.
Yeah, no, I think it's Dennis Miller or something.
He has a stand-up bit about this.
He talks about climate change at length.
He's like, ah, there's something to it, but I don't know if I believe all of it.
And he references some of the numbers back in the day from like, you literally had like these like pioneer farmers digging like a hole and measuring core temperatures in a hole.
Like, I don't know.
Yeah.
Yeah.
There's certainly questions.
And this is the thing: whether you believe it or not, I mean, it becomes religious once you're not willing to have a conversation about it or not willing to discuss or engage in it.
And I think that that's important because I think if you have that conversation about how does giving tax to the government alleviate climate change.
Yep.
I think we have one last chat left before we go.
And wow, we're keeping the show pretty tight today.
But I want to let everybody know that tonight we have a live stream with, I think it's myself and Ezra.
And it is the Ontario leaders debate.
It's happening tonight in Toronto.
It sounds as though we've got two journalists, Tamara Ugolini and Lincoln Jay, accredited to be inside the building with the cabal.
They call it the consortium, but it's the cabal of mainstream media journalists.
And we're going to be hosting the live stream and we'll be Skyping in some special guests and answering your questions and giving your reactions, which I'm sure I'm going to have so many.
Even though I'm in Alberta, you know, Ontario fancies itself to be the center of the universe and the country is run that way.
So we have to pay very close attention to these people.
So that's tonight.
Olivia, what time is that starting?
So 5.30 Eastern time, which is 3.30 Mountain for me.
So it's going to be a long night for me.
So that is later on today.
Hopefully, you'll tune in.
And yes, we are going live at 5:30 Eastern and 3:30 my time.
I got to get some snacks in here because that seems like it's going to be right across the dinner hour for me.
So let's just get to this one last one and then we'll sign off.
So world worst gamer.
I don't think you're that.
Could you be that terrible?
I'm not great, although I'm good at Mario Kart.
Gives us a bucket, says, Don't agree with all you say, but appreciate you better than mainstream media.
Hey, that's all.
Open civil discourse.
That's all we want.
You know, form your own opinion.
Exactly.
You get to hear two people share a conversation, and you guys can have a conversation going in the comments on the live stream or wherever.
That's all we want.
You know, this idea that people can look at an issue and have a different viewpoint, and that's fine.
It's not harmful.
It's actually better.
It's better.
It's a more lively, vibrant society with the ability to solve problems.
To that point, it's so interesting this weekend.
They kept talking about intersectionality.
And I was just thinking there used to be a word for this.
It was called discourse and dialogue.
People coming together, different perspectives, sharing that without all the overbearing sort of political tones and political correctness.
It's wherever you're coming from, wherever I'm coming from, we can have a conversation, come to some common ground.
And I think that's what so much of the stream is about: share some news, get a different perspective out there, and share the other side of the story.
Yeah, no, and that's why we have different hosts throughout the week, too, besides the fact that we're all kind of busy, but we all have a different viewpoint.
I am a boring old marm out of touch with pop culture.
And some of the younger people here take a sort of a conservative view of pop culture.
Adam, you're somewhere in the middle.
You're a dad, but you're a social conservative.
You're far more hip than me.
David Menzies, he's, well, he's a boomer.
So, so, you know, there's different viewpoints.
We all approach things differently and we different styles, but that's what I love about Rebel News: there's a conservative for you in amongst the mix.
You'll find your favorite if you just keep watching.
I should sign off.
Everybody, thank you so much for watching.
Adam, thanks so much for being my co-host.
Olivia and the gang in the office, including the web team and the people who provide the links so that you can click on them so that you can see us.
Thank you for all the work that you guys do behind the scenes to put the show together.
Thank you to everybody who pitched in.
Like I said off the top of the show, I know there are plenty of places where you could spend your money.
You don't have to give it to us, but you make a choice to support us and we do appreciate that.
And as David Menzies always says, stay sane.
Boosted Shots Every Six Months00:01:01
So you would have what your two, you would add two, you'd add two vaccinations and then two booster shots.
Is that right?
That's right.
And, you know, for people over, you know, 50 or 60, they'll probably have to be boosted every six months until we get even better vaccines.
So I've been trying to figure this out for myself.
I assume you know the answer to this.
So I'll just ask you: when do you get boosted again?
I mean, now that you've had it, you know, I've had it around the same time.
I've only gotten three shots total, only been boosted once.
I guess we have immunity for a little while, but when do you decide to get boosted again?
But yeah, so an infection where you'll get a high viral load would be like vaccination.
But you know, to be safe, every six months you're probably going to be vaccinated.
As we get more data, they might even make that shorter for people who are say 60 or over 70, where the duration seems to be a bit lower.