Sheila Gunn Reid and Tamara Ugolini expose the Ontario College of Psychologists’ politically charged "witch hunt" against Jordan Peterson, targeting non-patient tweets like his criticism of overpopulation claims or media bias, while taxpayer-funded school surveys—including those for grade-four kids—ask invasive questions about gender identity and bullying, bypassing parental consent. Menzies frames this as part of a broader decline in Canadian values and education post-COVID, mocking Aaron O’Toole’s hypocrisy over "F-Trudeau" flags while Rebel Roundup concludes after five years, transitioning to Rebel Daily with Gunn Reid. The episode underscores systemic erosion of free speech and parental rights under progressive policies. [Automatically generated summary]
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, ladies and gentlemen, and the rest of you, in which we look back at some of the very best commentaries of the week by your favorite rebels.
I'm your host, David Menzies.
So the Ontario College of Psychologists wants to reprogram Dr. Jordan Peterson, his alleged crime.
Well, apparently, Dr. Peterson espouses the wrong political viewpoints.
Sheila Gunnread has all the disturbing details.
Remember when the Educrats running public schools were concerned with, oh, you know, kids learning stuff like reading, writing, and arithmetic?
So why is it that these uber woke educats are now seemingly obsessed with the sexual orientation and sexual identity of young children?
Tamara Ugolini will try to make sense of it all.
And letters, we get your letters, we get your letters every minute of every day.
And you had plenty to say about my monologue regarding Aaron O'Toole's recent essay denouncing those F Trudeau flags.
Yeah, that's right.
The former leader of the Conservative Party of Canada is more concerned about the hurt feelings of Prime Minister Blackface McGroper rather than those Canadians who are having their rights and freedoms trampled by the Justin Trudeau liberals, which kind of explains why O'Toole is the former rather than the current leader of the Conservatives, doesn't it?
Those are your rebels now.
Let's round them up.
The College of Psychologists job is to make sure that psychologists practice psychology in an ethical way.
For example, if a psychologist were to take advantage of a patient.
But they've been hijacked by activists, by people making complaints against Dr. Peterson, not for anything Peterson's done to them as patients, because none of them are patients.
The complaints are about Dr. Peterson's political comments on Twitter.
Seriously.
Let's go through some of the offending tweets.
When one Twitter user claimed that the planet was overpopulated by human beings, Jordan Peterson tweeted, you're free to leave at any point.
When the Ottawa police chief Steve Bell threatened parents participating in the Freedom Convoy with having their children removed from the area prior to the start of any police action, Dr. Peterson tweeted, children removed, how exactly, why exactly, by whom exactly, sent where exactly, and for how long exactly.
Think this through, Canadians.
This is a bad idea.
In response to a New York Post article about Sports Illustrated putting an arguably obese model on their cover, Jordan Peterson tweeted, sorry, not beautiful, and no amount of authoritarian tolerance is going to change that.
What on earth does the College of Psychologists have to do with Peterson debating public political issues of the day?
Now, you can agree or disagree with any of Peterson's political views, but where does a group of censors with the power to end someone's career get off telling them what they can and can't say about non-psychology things?
Of course, they would never dare to do this to a left-wing psychologist.
And of course, we wouldn't want them to do that either.
Not only are they censoring Dr. Peterson, or at least they're trying, they've demanded that he submit to a coaching, a re-education about what to say in public politically.
Some unknown censor now gets to tell a leading public intellectual what he can and can't say.
And if he doesn't comply, he'll be banned from treating patients.
That's just wrong.
So pick up the phone and call this group, the College of Psychologists of Ontario, at 416-961-8817.
Now, remember, please do not be mean.
The person who answers the phone is likely just the receptionist and not the people demanding Peterson be censored.
Be firm, but please be polite.
Let them know that this is a witch hunt against Canadian values like freedom of speech and the right for people to hold a variety of opinions, including opinions that the establishment doesn't like.
That's really the whole point of free speech, isn't it?
To be able to criticize power, not just obey it.
Tell these people to drop their case against Jordan Peterson.
That number again is 416-961-8817, or go to savepeterson.com where you can see it again.
At savepeterson.com, we'll also have a one-click button that you can press to send an email to every single one of the 19 people on that censorship committee so you can put your disagreement to them in writing too.
Dr. Jordan Peterson has changed lives.
He's even saved lives.
His books and lectures and videos have inspired millions of people, especially young men looking for meaning in life.
That's why the left hates him.
And that's why they're trying to censor him now.
It has nothing to do with how he treats patients and everything to do with his politics.
Well, there you have it, folks, like something plucked right out of George Orwell's 1984.
Dr. Jordan Peterson is being called upon the carpet by the quacks who comprise the Ontario College of Psychologists.
And the crime has absolutely nothing to do with any misconduct allegations with current or former patients.
Rather, some snowflakes on social media took offense to Dr. Peterson's political viewpoints and the Uber woke docs who make up the Ontario College of Psychologists.
Well, they believe an investigation is warranted.
You can't make up this kind of craziness, folks.
And joining me now for more on this very disturbing issue, vis-a-vis freedom of speech, is our chief reporter, Sheila Gunread.
How are you doing there, Sheila?
I'm great, David.
Thanks for having me on the show.
It's always a pleasure.
Sheila, we're not even five days into 2023.
And here we are with Planet Earth still self-identifying as Clown World.
And really, this story takes the cake, doesn't it?
The very idea that the Ontario College of Psychologists is suggesting that one of its members must think in a particular political fashion or else.
Surely this can't be legal, even in Justin Trudeau's Canada, Sheila.
Well, it's even worse than that because these are based on complaints of people who are not patients of Dr. Jordan Peterson.
So the college is supposed to protect patients from bad doctors while they practice, but it's not designed to protect non-patients from the thoughts and musings of doctors they've never seen.
But this is where we're at.
We've got 19 people in this censorship panel, the re-education panel of Jordan Peterson, that are going to submit him to some sort of examination of his public statements that don't affect anybody that he was treating.
That's the very scary part here is that these are just intranet censorship busybodies.
And there are no complaints, as far as I can tell, from his own patients involved in any of this.
Yeah, and Sheila, I mean, it's deja vu all over again.
I mean, the way Jordan Peterson came to prominence, we go back, I believe it was some six years ago, University of Toronto, where he took a stand against compelled speech.
He was, they were trying to force him to call various trans people Z, Zer, here, higher, all those phony baloney pronouns.
And he said, no, I'm not putting up with this nonsense.
He didn't bend the knee then.
I don't see him bending the knee now.
No.
How did these censors think this was going to end?
This is, as you say, Jordan Peterson.
He's enormous.
And his platform, he rose to prominence.
I mean, he's always been a good author and a good speaker and a good professor and a good doctor for as best as I can tell.
But he rose to prominence both in Canada and internationally speaking out against compelled speech.
He spoke at Senate hearings in the House of Commons in 2017 against compelled speech legislation, forcing people to use pronouns of other people under threat of hate crimes charges, basically.
He spoke out against that.
How did these gulaggers think this was going to turn out for them if once they decided they were going to come for Jordan Peterson?
The man, I think, is the most preeminent speaker in the Anglosphere.
I know in some places and during some periods, his books are outsold only by the Bible.
So, you know, when you come for the big dog, you better have something better than hurt feelings.
But as best as I can tell, that's all these people have.
And Sheila, here's what the crux of the matter is, at least for me.
What does politics have to do with the practice of psychology?
What I'm getting at is that Jordan Peterson could be a Marxist.
Jordan Peterson could be a libertarian.
That's besides the point.
You judge him on his practice of psychology.
I don't know of any complaints that he's received pertaining to the practice of psychology.
So why does this body of psychologists, why do they find it so important to discipline this man for tweeting out Pierre Polyev quotes and criticizing Justin Trudeau?
To me, it has no relevance for the matter at hand.
Right.
And we wouldn't want this to happen to a Marxist doctor.
Now, I wouldn't go to a Marxist doctor for treatment, probably not.
But that's the choice of the patient, right?
And if I had complaints against a Marxist doctor, it probably wouldn't be for their Marxist ideology.
It would be for other things.
We don't want Marxist doctors subjected to re-education either.
This is like what happens here is between a doctor and a patient.
There are no patients complaining in all of this.
But we've seen a lot of this happen during the course, especially of the pandemic.
And that's a hypocrisy I'll get to in a second.
These doctors' organizations, as I said, they were initially there to protect patients from bad doctors.
So there were sort of standards, but also to protect doctors from government overreach, right?
Like they were organizations where, you know, there were standards in place and it was kind of at some sometimes a restraining order from the government to protect the independence of the doctors.
But right now we've seen that these organizations, they have really no interest in what's good for the patients.
In fact, they are likely to censor doctors who are advocating for their patients.
And we've seen that over the course of the pandemic.
Doctors who thought differently about COVID were censored, had their license threatened.
And now doctors and psychologists who think differently about COVID, lockdowns, politics, now they're being censored.
These organizations, they have gone so far from their original intent where now they're just the enforcement, the medical enforcement arm of the Liberal Party of Canada.
Well, and that is truly the scary thing, Sheila.
How far does this rot start to spread?
Medical doctors, lawyers, engineers, you know, all those governing bodies, are they going to increasingly start to demand that politically you have to think a certain way or you're out or you have to agree to be re-educated?
This is the stuff of communist regimes, is it not, Sheila?
Censorship's Cost00:04:05
Yeah, of course it is.
And, you know, where are the complaints against the psychologists who disregarded the psychological effects of lockdown and were out on Twitter advocating for lockdowns, knowing the psychological harm it would cause to, you know, vulnerable people, children.
Where are the speech pathologists who advocated for lockdowns, even though they knew in their hearts that it was damaging to young children?
There are no real complaints against those people, are there?
It is just political complaints against doctors who think differently, not doctors who advocated for things that they probably knew full well would harm society.
Sheila, one last question.
How do you see this playing out?
I mean, the way I look at it, there is no way Dr. Jordan Peterson is going to acquiesce to this star chamber trying to re-educate him.
He can't, because if he did, he would lose his street cred, quite frankly.
And besides, there is absolutely no moral or ethical grounds for Peterson to be hauled before this cabal in the first place.
So what do you see?
A prolonged legal fight?
Or do you see the Ontario College of Psychologists going, yikes, look at the blowback?
Let's back down.
I don't know how this is going to end because I feel like the college is a little bit too invested in this at this point.
The wise thing would have been to say, this is not in our wheelhouse.
This is not a complaint from a patient.
He's not saying anything that's damaging to patients.
He's not, you know, advising things to his patients that would harm them.
But they proceeded with this.
So now how do they back out?
And they know that they're in, what do they call that?
Like a chicken fight, chicken race, whatever it is, where they're in a staring contest with Jordan Peterson.
And as I said, Jordan Peterson is one of the preeminent thinkers in the entire Anglosphere.
And he has, I don't want to, the wrong word is cult-like following, but he has changed the minds and hearts of a lot of people.
He's advocated for civil liberties.
He's even publicly changed his opinions on a lot of things, even the vaccination.
You know, he said, I took it because I wanted to be left alone, but I was never left alone.
And so I don't know how the college backs out from this, but I can tell you what's happening to them right now.
And it's not pretty.
So we launched a campaign at savepeterson.com wherein we provide the phone number to the college.
And you can call it.
And I'm going to tell you, if you're watching me right now, do not give the person who answers the phone the business.
That is the receptionist.
If you call and I would like you to call, so I'm not talking you out of it.
I'm encouraging you to call.
But if you call, do it during business hours.
Be polite, be firm, don't use profanity.
Express your discontent with them.
Lodge your discontent with them.
But do not be hateful.
Do not be threatening.
Do not be violent because that's what they're looking for.
They want to discredit anybody who supports Jordan Peterson.
Don't give them what they want.
So if you go to savepeterson.com, you'll get the phone number.
I've got it there for you that you can call these people during business hours.
But also on that very same website, before we go on, I've got one little click and you can send these people an email.
So you can also register your disgust with their behavior in an email that's pre-written.
You just have to click it and it'll go.
And we want to flood these people with more emails and more phone calls than they have ever had before.
Because if they thought that they could come for Jordan Peterson and win, imagine what they're doing to other psychologists along the way who may have expressed some disagreement with lockdowns or the government or whatever.
And they don't have the platform and profile that Jordan Peterson has to fight back.
We need to save those doctors too.
Ministry's Perverse Irony00:16:20
Now, that's a very good point, Sheila.
And like you said, it's hard to see where this is going to go.
We don't have a crystal ball.
But for right now, my money is on Dr. Jordan Peterson because of his integrity, because of his moral compass, because he does not bend the knee to the woke cancel culture, which is what this cabal of psychologists are.
That's a real life representation of that.
They are in for the fight of their lives.
So I would suggest to the college, throw in the towel right now and try to leave with what little dignity you have on this file.
Sheila, a wonderful piece.
Thank you so much.
And you have a great weekend, my friend.
I will, David.
Thank you.
You too.
You got it.
And that was Sheila Gunn Reed, somewhere in the northern hinterland of Alberta.
Keep it here, folks.
More of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
Tamari Ugalini here with Rebel News, bringing you two different school surveys to be on the lookout for if you are a concerned Ontario parent with a child or children in the socialized school system.
One is referred to as a student census and the other is a school climate survey.
They don't mean climate as in global warming or this alarmist death narrative, but rather the general school environment and how everyone feels while in the classroom and at school.
All of this reporting came from a viewer TIP who shared with me that certain school boards were soliciting the gender identity and sexual orientation of children as young as grades four in a data collection initiative undertaken at school.
Originally, I had wanted to know just how much this kind of program was costing Ontario taxpayers.
And spoil alert, it was roughly $2.5 million.
So I had filed an access to information request, also called an ATIP, which you can support and find out more at rebelinvestigates.com.
But now this ATIP has turned into a campaign with a petition, an email blast that calls on Ontario's Education Minister, Stephen Lecce, to investigate this sexualization of children and end the inappropriate line of questioning and data collection of children in their classrooms.
You can support this work and follow along at stopclassroomgrooming.com because I've discovered through email communications within that previous ATIP response that the line of questioning about gender identity and sexual orientation was explicitly meant to be sent home for parents and guardians to complete on behalf of their children or the students.
But the school boards bypassed the parental protection in place.
They have instead implemented these ever so slightly differently worded surveys and conducted this massive information gathering exercise unbeknownst to parents and guardians in the classroom.
It's sneaky, it's inappropriate, and I've discovered all of this as my investigation continues.
So the first survey is called the student census, which is developed and implemented by the division of the Ministry of Education, referred to as the Education Equity Secretariat, that is responsible for overseeing at-risk students and ensuring that they reach their full potential.
Then there's the School Climate Survey, which is developed and implemented by the Indigenous Education and Well-Being Division that is dedicated to, you guessed it, equity.
That's what Equity Secretariat Patrick Case told me during our phone conversation, a separate report that you can check out.
I will link to it in the written component of this report.
One thing is ministry intention.
The other thing is how things get exercised at a local level.
So I can't swear to what each of the 72 boards might have done.
Do you understand what I'm saying?
But if it's the school climate survey that was speaking about, then that may be handled differently.
And that's in the Indigenous Education and Well-Being Division of the Ministry that handles that.
I see.
Okay, that's it's quite convoluted.
It all sounds incredibly complicated, but we're actually trying to, over the next couple of years or so, bring these things together to make it a whole lot more rational, right?
But the school climate survey started before the census, the student census, and they actually captured different things.
One of them is more focused on student anecdotal accounts of their experiences, and then the other one is more numeric.
The one that's administered by my office is more numeric.
Yet the two surveys appear to be mostly interchangeable.
But I've received tips that the student census survey, which again was supposed to go home to be completed by parents of students in grades 4 to 12, was instead completed in the classroom and in many instances, unbeknownst to parents.
Well, you know, folks, maybe I'm a bit of an old-fashioned square.
I thought that going to elementary school was all about learning the three Rs, yet our publicly funded EDUCRATS seem to be absolutely obsessed with the sexual orientation and the sexual identity of young children.
The question is, why?
Joining me now for more on this situation that is equal parts baffling and disturbing is Tamara Ugalini.
Hey, how are you doing there, Tamara?
Well, in spite of all the woke madness plaguing our province, I'm doing well.
What about you, David?
Yeah, I'm waiting.
I'm hanging on until the inevitable backlash comes, Tamara.
And it can't come soon enough for the pendulum to reset itself.
But Tamara, let's get to the crux of the matter on this story.
What is the ostensible policy reason for these surveys in the first place?
Why is it that the Ministry of Education and several school boards are so concerned about the sexual identity and the sexual orientation of elementary age children?
You know, it falls under this umbrella of equity, inclusion, and tolerance.
And it actually comes out.
I'm going to be doing updated reports on this, but I'll give you a little bit of a teaser because this came in part through some legislation introduced by the Doug Ford Conservatives, progressive conservatives, I might add, in 2018.
And so it was a policy or slash program memorandum.
It's titled number 145.
And it's all about promoting positive student behavior.
And so they developed all these divisions within and under the Ministry of Education in terms of, you know, the Indigenous and equity equity secretariat.
And it was these sort of divisions underneath the Ministry of Education or within their umbrella that went ahead and implemented this student climate survey and the student census survey.
So there's actually two different surveys at play here.
And so the muddy, the waters are pretty muddy when you're trying to decipher and discern between the two because they are so similar, but they're slightly different in the way that they're conducted.
So one is explicitly directed to be sent home to be completed on behalf of the parents in those younger grades.
And then the other one, the student climate survey, can be done in the classroom and largely unbeknownst or without the consent of the parents and or the guardians.
So it's really concerning that for some reason, one survey is explicitly to be sent home, yet the other one, which has very similar and in some instances, even more overreaching questions, can be done in the classroom under hopefully the guidance, but maybe not of a teacher and unbeknownst to the parents.
Well, this is a very important point, I think, Tamara.
If this is so good and this is all about advancing equity and everything else that the left stands for, why the secrecy?
Why aren't parents being informed?
Why aren't these surveys going home with the kids?
What's the unspoken strategy here?
Yeah, well, and as you can see from my latest report on the subject, when I called the Ministry of Education themselves and I spoke to someone there who clarified some of the language around what I received personally as a parent home, which was that this school climate survey was being alleged to be a requirement of the Ministry of Education, what I discovered through my investigation is that in fact it was just encouraged and voluntary.
So when or if students attempted to be exempt or expressed, you know, being uncomfortable filling it out, they weren't supposed to be forced to engage in this survey.
And also the fact here is that in my discussion with the school board itself, they intentionally conduct these surveys in the classroom to garner a high response rate.
So they know that if they send this home or they try to give it to be completed at home with parents, that they aren't going to garner the raw data, which is what they point blank told me they were looking to solicit and garner.
They won't get that response rate that they're looking for.
And so they sneakily implement it into the classroom, again, unbeknownst to parents or the caregivers and guardians.
I think you're right, Tamara, to which I have to say, how dare they?
They are funded entirely, 100%, by we the people, the taxpayers of this province, the parents who have children in their schools, for them to go on this, you know, ideological jihad for whatever the ostensible policy reason really is.
It's absolutely shameful.
But what's even more shameful, I think, is the lack of transparency, given, again, we are the ones paying the salaries of these Educrats.
Absolutely.
And that was something that I brought up also just as a parent myself, because this is kind of, you know, I'm trying to navigate this both as a journalist, investigating instances that happened at other school boards that were way more aggressive and egregious than whatever happened at my school board, but still concerning enough for me as a parent.
And so in trying to navigate this, both as a parent myself experiencing this and as a journalist, getting even more feedback from people, school boards who went above and beyond like the some of the lines of questioning.
And please do stay tuned for my reports because I plan to continue following this beat and featuring some of the most disgusting lines of questionings put out by certain school boards across Ontario.
But what I'm finding here is that parents are really left in the dark that any of this is happening.
And unless they're playing a very active role in what's going on in the school and in the classroom and also pushing back.
Like, for instance, my school board hadn't heard from anyone else that had concerns over A, the way that the survey was conducted or B, the line of questioning involved in it.
And so if parents aren't making their voices heard, then the school board's just left to their own vices.
And again, as I say in my most recent report, and I feature the recording of the school board employee, where they say, well, well, this is your opinion.
And we're of the opinion that this is appropriate.
And we need to have this data and this information to deliver school services, which is another issue in and of itself.
But why is the opinions of the senior level or senior staff on a school board superseding the opinion of a parent?
And how do they know the opinion of the parent if they were never asked whether or not this was appropriate or they were never surveyed themselves to determine whether this line of questioning was something that they agreed should be instituted in a classroom?
And so there's that issue there that parents are just being left in the dark.
No one asked parents if they thought this was appropriate for their children to be subjected to.
And also the fact that they are just prying on these young children to garner raw data and a response rate for things that, in my opinion, are not at all relevant to delivering educational services to a student population.
Like why does a school need this information to adequately educate students?
And the funny thing about many of these surveys is none of it asks, you know, whether or not pupils and students are feeling stimulated by their education, whether or not they're feeling that their answers and their questions in terms of the curriculum is being met, whether or not they're being pushed to think critically or nothing about the three hours, as you mentioned, your reading, writing,
and your arithmetic are garnered in these surveys.
It's all just woke ideological jargon.
I agree with you, Tamara.
I think there is no relevance.
I think the entitlement by the school boards and the ministry people behind this, it's beyond the pale.
But one of the biggest issues, of course, is the whole issue of age appropriateness.
You have, as you said in your report, kids as young as grade four being surveyed on very adult material.
Now, Tamara, whether you're buying liquor, tobacco, fireworks, lottery tickets, getting a driver's license, voting even, we have ages, age benchmarks in which you're allowed to do everything that I just listed.
How is it all of a sudden that age appropriateness goes out of the window when it comes to sexual identity and sexual orientation?
Yeah, well, this is all under the, again, the Doug Ford, allegedly progressive conservatives who instituted this curriculum.
They campaigned on removing this new revamped sex ed curriculum.
And then they received so much backlash from these far left ideologues that they reinstituted it just very quietly and under the radar.
And so in this curriculum, It's determined that grade fours, and these are children, you know, depending on when your birthday is, these could be kids as young as eight years old.
It's determined that it is appropriate and grade level for them to learn about and know their gender identity and sexual orientation.
And for me, I say that if a child at that age is aware of what they prefer and like sexually, then there should be phone calls made to child protective services because that is a red flag for abuse.
And this line of questioning is grooming 101, to be quite frank.
And in my opinion, anyone under the age of 18 should be proceeding with caution when filling out a survey without their parental guidance.
I mean, now that I've started to see what some of these school boards are soliciting from very young demographics, and some of them do go down to kindergarten, like some of these school boards are acting very far out of their jurisdiction and out of what the ministry has actually put forward to them.
And going and targeting those younger demographics, it's absolutely grotesque and disgusting.
And again, it just has nothing to do with delivering education.
And I'm of the firm belief now that I'm starting to see more and more that parents should opt their children out of any and all surveys that ask personal questions across the board, not even just within school, but anywhere that your child is being surveyed for their raw data.
I think that parents should take a proactive role and exempt them completely.
Well, you know, Tamara, I'd love to go to some Ontario PC event and ask Ontario Premier Doug Ford what the hell he's thinking.
Parents Should Opt Out00:03:10
But as you know, he'll call the police and have me charged with trespassing.
You're not allowed to ask impolite questions anymore.
What a disgrace.
What a flip-flopper of a cosmic degree.
I guess the final question I have for you, Tamara, is that there is some real perverse irony here because, well, this ministry, while so many school boards are obsessed with the sexuality of children, meanwhile, as we see year after year, the student achievement scores for students, especially in math, is going into the sewer.
So what children are supposed to be learning, the important things children should be learning, that's going by the wayside.
But my goodness, we're going to spend millions of dollars to find out what sexual orientation and sexual identity little Johnny and little Janie subscribe to.
Unbelievable.
Tamara, last word goes to you, my friend.
Well, I want to go back there for a minute when you said that, you know, you'd be arrested for asking impolite questions.
And in my these, this, this survey, the nature of these questions is impolite.
This is grotesque.
It's disgusting.
It's unnecessary.
And as I already mentioned, it's grooming 101.
And yes, we have seen just repeatedly over the years the constant degradation, degradation of the schooling in Ontario and, you know, arguably Canada as a whole, but especially post-COVID, where we saw unprecedented school closures and children missing school for government-sanctioned lockdowns.
And the priority here doesn't seem to be on getting those children caught up or getting them to excel or exceed in the school system with revamps to curriculum or a targeted approach in that way, or surveying them to see how they're doing at school and if they need more assistance or if they are not being, as I already mentioned, adequately stimulated and have work that's garnered and geared toward their actual grade level.
No, no, instead, they're going to find out whether or not you identify as a two-spirited, bisexual, transgender, disabled person, and if you're being bullied on the schoolyard, because somehow that matters for the delivery of your education.
The other thing about these survey questions, and I kind of rolled a couple of buzzwords into one there, is that these children, these young, young grade-level children can identify as anything that they want.
They can select as many as they feel might apply or none at all.
It's the fact that this is being done and is being put out to, let's say, 10-year-old boys.
How accurately do we really think 10-year-old boys are going to answer a school survey that has all of these funny words on it, that they're just going to make a joke out of it?
And so the fact that the school board thinks that this is like a serious data collection survey, they're going to garner real, real data to make, I don't know, informed choices on how to deliver education.
Children's Identity Selection00:08:59
It's so out to lunch and surreal.
Textbook bizarre world.
I can't even believe that we're living in the state of affairs that we are currently.
No, you're so right.
And I'll tell you, Tamara, in the almost 40 years I've been practicing journalism, and I'm not making an exaggeration here.
I find the people associated with education, school board people, trustees, the Educrats, as I call them, I find them to be amongst the most stupid people I have ever met.
They really need to go back to school.
And it's not to learn this rubbish.
It's to learn actual common decency and common sense.
Tamara, thank you so much.
It was an excellent report.
Keep your eye on this because we know nobody else in the mainstream media is doing it.
You have a great weekend, my friend.
Thank you, David.
Likewise.
Got it.
And that was Tamara Ugalini in Coburg, Ontario.
Keep it here, folks.
More of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
But that was then and this is now.
So let's get back to that mystifying essay.
O'Toole's opening line is this, quote, one of the hopes I have for 2023 is to see fewer profanity-laden Trudeau flags across Canada, end quote.
And then to double down on this most curious New Year's wish, he rehashed this very statement on Twitter.
WTF indeed.
For starters, when one produces content, one must understand who comprises the target audience.
So it is that when a former conservative leader comes across as an apologist for Prime Minister Blackface McGroper, who is this essay hoping to curry favor with?
The mainstream media?
The rank and file of the Liberal Party of Canada?
Perhaps Jugmeet Singh?
Or maybe Ontario Premier Doug Ford?
Or perhaps it's all of the above, because really, can you tell the difference?
I can't see the difference.
Can you see the difference?
No, I can't see the difference.
Can you see the difference?
Let's continue, shall we?
Quote, I say this as the person who ran against Justin Trudeau in the last general election and someone who remains very critical of his record in government, end quote.
Ooh, very critical of Justin's record, you say.
Good golly, Miss Molly, you don't think that's a little bit harsh, do you, Erin?
Ooh, critical.
It dithers on, quote, but as I told my kids during the national campaign, Mr. Trudeau was my political opponent, not my enemy.
These flags and the hyper-aggressive rhetoric that often accompanies them are slowly normalizing rage and damaging our democracy.
Since so many people that display the flags claim to be conservative, this might also be an appropriate time to tell them that these flags are the very antithesis of what it means to be conservative, end quote.
No, Mr. Aaron O'Toole, you are the very antithesis of what it means to be conservative.
Tell your kids that life lesson.
Full disclosure here, folks, I'm not a big fan of profanity.
You will rarely witness me dropping an F-bomb.
If you have a good point to be made, it can be done so without vulgarity.
Although I'll tell you, I was indeed on the cusp of uttering an F-bomber three while reading O'Toole's gibberish.
But unlike O'Toole, I do not condemn those individuals who brandish F-Trudeau flags.
The problem here is that Aaron O'Toole seems to be oblivious when it comes to the concept that is known as cause and effect.
Which is to say, if this stately gentleman were to put down his mint julep for a second and get off his Ricota cheese candy ass and, you know, venture out to where the protests are happening in which those F Trudeau flags are being displayed, then maybe he would get an understanding for the lack of decorum in the public square these days.
Maybe then the ever-effeminate Aaron would discover the justified cause for the collective anger, such as people losing their businesses thanks to nonsensical COVID-19 rules,
or people losing their houses, or people being fired for not agreeing to being jabbed by an experimental vaccine, or people having their democratic rights eclipsed thanks to the federal government employing the Emergencies Act to shut down a peaceful protest.
But no, O'Toole has no empathy for these people.
Rather, he's more concerned that Justin Trudeau might suffer from hurt feelings when gazing upon those flags.
Holy ghost of Christmas Past.
Yes, over the Christmas time break, Erino, what's his name, published an essay that was absolutely guaranteed to enrage grassroots conservatives?
Why?
Well, I guess you can't teach an old dog new tricks.
How sad O'Toole could have won the 2021 federal election.
During the first two weeks of the campaign, Justin Trudeau endured two very, very bad weeks, whereas O'Toole was quite stellar.
But then, inexplicably, O'Toole began flip-flopping on everything from carbon taxes and the gun grab to vaccine mandates.
End results, so many disgruntled conservative voters simply stayed home and another victory for the Justin Trudeau liberals emerged.
Absolutely pathetic.
In any event, we received a metric ton of feedback regarding O'Toole's astonishing essay urging conservatives to, you know, play nice with a scandal-plagued prime minister who admires the basic dictatorship of communist China.
Unbelievable.
RMB Unicorn writes, maybe he's preparing to cross the floor.
Well, you know, if that's the case, RMB Unicorn, very well then.
Good riddance.
That's where he belongs.
And after all, we can't have a functional conservative party with members who are conservative in name only.
Robert Periso writes, now does anyone else here understand exactly why the establishment adores this dude so much?
Good point, Robert, but that's another reason why O'Toole is such a loser.
He constantly seeks the approval of the establishment, but when he was the leader of the Conservative Party, he should have been seeking the approval of Conservative voters.
And the last, thanks to O'Toole being so wishy-washy and thanks to him being a closet liberal, so many conservative voters simply stayed home on Election Day 2021.
That was a tragedy.
Ron A. writes, O'Toole, have you forgotten so quickly what Trudeau and his little band of liars did to legal protest and the Canadian patriots from across the country?
Vilified, criminalized, jailed for daring to stand up to Trudeau, the absolute ruler.
There is a reason you are not leader.
Well said, Ron, but again, O'Toole is more concerned with F. Trudeau flags.
I wonder if O'Toole shops at French Connection United Kingdom.
That's the store that goes by the abbreviation of FCUK.
Ooh, probably a little too risque for Lady Erin, I would imagine.
And finally, Dan Adam writes, this is the same guy who made the Parliament Hill port-a-potty video.
Bad taste.
Now he doesn't like it?
You know, brilliant point, Dan.
I had completely forgotten all about this absolute embarrassment.
You know what?
Let's roll that video right here to remind one and all what Aaron O'Toole considers to be a class act.
We're going to move Justin Trudeau out of this office into a more appropriate office.
We've got something lined up already.
Brilliant toilet humor.
Even the audio was crap, no pun intended.
Well, then again, I guess it's only fitting.
How embarrassing.
Yet O'Toole thinks this was appropriate.
What a hypocrite.
Well, folks, that wraps up our final edition of Rebel Roundup.
Yes, beginning on Monday, I will be co-hosting the Rebel Daily with Sheila Gunread.
It will be basically a combination of the Rebel live stream and this show, Rebel Roundup.
It will air from 1 until 2 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
Final Edition of Rebel Roundup00:00:20
So as the late, great Billy Red Lions used to say, don't you dare miss it.
And so it is that I'd like to thank everyone who has tuned into this show for the past five years.
It has been a blast.
In the meantime, have yourselves an awesome weekend.
And hey, folks, never forget, without risk, there can be no glory.