List them.
...because I can only track those (on less than one hand) that have been sent this aid.
THREAD.
What I love most about @DrFullertonMPP & her team (⤵️) is that they won't respond to me but instead they go around me to those in my circle in the hopes those people aren't tracking their failures IRL time like I've been (in order to combat their nonsense).
As recently as Dec, ON requested further support from Red Cross through the feds. Deployment requests come from local health partners. We\u2019re proud of our men & women in uniform who answered the call for help when there was a staffing collapse in some homes at the start of COVID. https://t.co/KmtfcAtRVP
— Justine Teplycky (@JustineLewkowic) January 13, 2021
List them.
...because I can only track those (on less than one hand) that have been sent this aid.
You only called in Red Cross (release posted Dec 23).
Homes like #TendercareLTC, Sunnycrest or St. George, Craiglee didn't even receive this support that YOU HAVE AT YOUR DISPOSAL.
You are aware these bad actors DON'T WANT ATTENTION DRAWN TO THEM RIGHT?
They WON'T make the call 9 times out of 10.
I have 7000+ eyes telling me everything you all do.
Do you know that at one of these LTC homes actually had to turn the @RedCrossOntario away because they apparently refused to help feed residents?
Did you bother to follow up on the success of those RC teams? NAH.
Did you know that the CAF teams are skilled healthcare teams made up of: 2 Registered Nurses + 12 Medical Technicians + general duties personnel?
Did you even bother to read the military reports?
Because I have @JustineLewkowic.
"Ontario continues to call on the federal government to increase the Canada Health Transfer to provide the support our long-term care residents and staff deserve"
Oh yes...you want to TAKE TAKE TAKE.
I heard how you have received BILLIONS FOR LTC and failed to properly use that money to implement the safeguards THAT OTHER PROVINCES IMPLEMENTED.
But I've long pointed this out.
I see you.
You know....you all are like those terrible ex's I broke up with long ago...who just TAKE TAKE TAKE & NEVER GIVE.
I wish I could break up with you all formally, forever.
That said, I will continue to WATCH EVERY MOVE YOU MAKE (cue: The police) and I will continue to highlight your ineptitude. You will not bamboozle people on my watch....certainly not those in my circle.
ANY DAY, ANY TIME.
But we all know why you skate around me.....I know too much right? Can't fool me, right?
I thought you said the homes had to ask for the help? WHY THEN, WERE THESE HOMES CAUGHT BY SURPRISE??
⤵️
https://t.co/0jsErjaWYK
And I'll await the day that @DrFullertonMPP has the courage to face me.
More from Society
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
