From bitter Ruto critic to diehard defender; Hassan Joho's evolution

Global Social Networking Market Insights 2024: Key Trends, Market Size, And Growth Forecast

Ulta Beauty Announces Third Quarter Fiscal 2024 ResultsThe Left loves to play this little game with their pet cultural and political issues, and it goes something like this: 1. This thing the Right says is happening isn't happening. 2. Okay, it's happening, but not that much. 3. Okay, it's happening and happening a lot and you're a bigot for noticing. 4. Why do you care so much about this issue? We have other problems to deal with! Over the last couple of weeks, Rep. Nancy Mace as been on a mission to make sure the women's bathrooms on Capitol Hill remain single-sex spaces . Why? Because Representative-Elect Tim ('Sarah') McBride is the first trans member of Congress and he's got a history of going into women's bathrooms where he's not allowed: McBride told everyone it would be an issue when he took a selfie in a women’s bathroom in NC. pic.twitter.com/0j8a0wv6cw The Left chose to make this an issue. And the Right responded, as they should. But here's Sen. Tammy Duckworth living out Stage 4 of the process: US @SenDuckworth tells CNN, "We have a lot more to worry about than where somebody goes to pee." pic.twitter.com/aEzeTf8gAk Right. So the Left should stop trying to force women to accept men in their safe spaces. Problem solved. This is what they do. They do something completely absurd then get upset when you notice. 'Republicans pounce!' and all that. The senator on the left, no pun intended, doesn’t understand that it’s much more than where one person Pees. It’s where hundreds of thousands of men dress up like women because of a perversion and go into our spaces and harm us. This must stop and now. Remember when the Left said 'no means no'? Good times. Then why is a dude in a dress fighting so hard to pee with women if there is “a lot more to worry about”. Get back to work you lazy slobs. Exactly. Then get to worrying on those and stop wasting your time on this. Mike Johnson didn't worry about it. He just took action. You're the ones now doing all the worrying. Bingo. It's all on them. I'm always amazed by this messaging, which has remained unchanged across issues for decades: Step 1: It is absolutely an issue of existential importance to break to pieces and reform this centuries-old norm Step 2: Any attempt to reverse Step 1 is a dumb waste of time https://t.co/4W9UPlthur Wash, rinse, repeat. The feeling of a tiny minority are given priority over the valid feelings & concerns of a large majority https://t.co/j4pMxBzFoq But democracy! Or something. Then it shouldn’t matter either way, right? And if it doesn’t matter either way, then it doesn’t matter if McBride uses the men’s. https://t.co/OGY014JQ2M But it's just like Nazism if you stop a man from peeing in front of women. It’s a classic tactic of the cynic. First, you make a huge deal of something that you want to change, and then when people say “no, I’d like things to stay the same, actually,” you say, “why do you care so much about this?” As we said.

Skyhawks Sports Announces 2024 Coach of the Year Winner and FinalistsPhoto: The Canadian Press Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs Dominic LeBlanc speaks virtually at a press conference in Ottawa. Ottawa's plan to send prohibited firearms to Ukraine to fight the Russian incursion has some experts scratching their heads, while staunch Ukraine supporters worry it could unintentionally pit aggrieved gun owners against the war effort. The Liberal government announced last week it will work with Canadian businesses to donate select weapons banned in Canada to Ukraine, though details about the new plan remain sparse even days later. Richard Shimooka, a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and defence-procurement expert, said this isn't the sort of equipment Ukraine really needs to win the war and that it already suffers from a lack of standardized weapons. "In some ways it's symbolic and yet in other ways it's not helping at all," he said. "It's not going to move the needle." He points out the real problem is that shell-hungry Ukraine desperately needs 155 mm artillery ammunition, but Canada's munitions supply chain doesn't have the capacity to feed the country what it needs most. And when it comes to small arms, hundreds of one type of standardized assault rifle would be most useful. "They're all semi-automatic," he noted about the buyback guns. "If you want a true, military-style weapon being used in Ukraine, you want a fully automatic weapon." On Sunday, U.S. president-elect Donald Trump called for an immediate ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, raising questions about how long the war could last. The United States has been by far Ukraine's largest military backer throughout the war. Kelly Sundberg, a criminologist at Mount Royal University, said the move seems more like political theatre to bolster Ottawa's controversial program than a carefully considered policy, since it appears it could wind up being a small assortment of weapons and ammunition in the end. “It sounds like a political stunt and not very well thought out at that,“ he said. “It seems very hastily thought up and somewhat desperate, frankly." The Canadian government would also need to test and possibly repair the guns for safety before sending them over, he added. Yaroslav Baran, a consultant with the Pendulum Group, former president of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress and well-known conservative commentator in Ottawa, meanwhile, said he worries the plan could inadvertently wedge gun owners against Ukraine. "While I always appreciate any support for Ukraine from the government of Canada, the idea of linking these two completely unrelated issues is misguided and dangerous," he said. "If you're at the receiving end of that message -- the hunter or farmer being told to hand over your firearm -- you're going to get your back up. Then, the follow-up message is, 'By the way, we're going to ship it overseas to help Ukraine,' (so) your reaction is going to be 'Like hell you are.'" Denys Volkov, a community advocate in Winnipeg who was born in Ukraine and has long pushed for help for the country during its war with Russia, said he shares that sentiment and that the announcement caught many in the diaspora off guard. He said to talk about sending Ukraine "random guns taken from law-abiding gun owners" is "not a serious conversation of how to help" the country. "The type of help Ukraine needs is on a massive scale." Ottawa has insisted the move could help, even if only a little. Defence Minister Bill Blair said last week that Canada reached out to Ukraine in October asking if any of the firearms listed under the program could be useful, and Ukraine said yes. "Every bit of assistance that we can offer to the Ukrainians is one step towards their victory, and a worthwhile investment of our collective time and efforts," Blair said. A government official not authorized to speak on the record said it would be businesses, not individuals providing the guns in this case, and that Ukraine has identified some 20 different firearms that could prove useful, so it would not be a random mashup of weaponry. The source noted this comes in addition to Canada's contributions of 21,000 small arms to Ukraine, including assault rifles and machine guns. Blair said last week he does not yet know how many weapons Ottawa can supply to Ukraine through this program, and will not know until retailers provide Ottawa with information about what weapons they have in stock so the government can match that with the list Ukraine provided. When asked for comment and additional details following the announcement, neither the department nor Blair's office provided a public statement by deadline. The announcement came last week as Ottawa outlined another 324 firearms that it outlawed, contending they belong on the battlefield instead of in Canadian homes.