BS: Canucks... Trudeau?

Subject: BS: Canucks... Trudeau in 13?
From: gnu
Date: 28 Sep 12 - 07:07 PM

Ya think?

LeBlanc won't run. Too smart. Unless they cook up a deal.

Ya see anyone else out there with a shot?

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Charmion
Date: 28 Sep 12 - 08:03 PM

The Liberal Party is doomed -- at least at the federal level. It will hang on for a while in provincial politics but, like the Progressive Conservatives, it's a dead party walking.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 28 Sep 12 - 08:06 PM

So, where are we going?

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: number 6
Date: 28 Sep 12 - 09:46 PM

so, where are we going you ask

we're going we're every other western nation's going.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 28 Sep 12 - 09:57 PM

Well that sucks. We didn't used to.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Beer
Date: 28 Sep 12 - 10:49 PM

I seldom give any opinion on politics. but in this case I want to say this. I am disappointed that Justin is running for the liberal leadership. I will not vote for him. I don't believe he is ready for the supreme position due to lack of experience.

However, if he had left the federal party and come to Quebec to run for the vacant spot with Charest's leaving, I would get out there and push for him 125%. After his 1st or 2nd. term as Provincial leader he would then be ready to take on the top post and I would truly support him. So, between now and the judjement day, someone will have to convince me that I should vote for him "if he gets that far".
Adrien

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 12:23 AM

What about after 5-10 years as leader of an opposition party?

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 12:32 AM

The Liberals figure he's saleable on the basis of his name, and they don't have anyone else who is. I'd rather see them and all the other political parties in the country disappear. Of course...that's not going to happen. He'll probably give them a bit of a lift for awhile, but I doubt that it'll be enough to return them to their former position as "Canada's natural governing party".

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: number 6
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 01:22 AM

It's a marketing facade .... trying to sell the populace that by having Trudeau in the 'in' it will be bring us all back to a time of glory and prosperity ... sorta like marketing Obama as the new Kennedy and it will be like the days of Camelot.

We are in desperate times, heading down a road of the unknown and uncertainty. People need to think we are heading back to a time that was somehow to our believe a warm and fuzzy time of security.

20th century politics will not work in a 21st century world ... and that's the bottom line.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: meself
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 02:09 AM

Marc Garneau anyone? A grown-up who's actually done something ....

The Liberals are trying for another 'easy fix' - they didn't learn their lesson with Ignatief. They need to figure out what they collectively stand for, and sell that to the voters.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 02:45 AM

I think the only thing they actually stand for, other than a vague sense of their own party identity based on the past history OF their party, is getting elected! And staying in power once they are. And therein lies the problem.

That is the essential problem with most political parties these days. They're in the game mostly just to WIN the game, not to serve the public or to govern according to a coherent and workable philosophy.

The neocons of Harper's ilk, of course, have a philosophy. It's just not a workable or useful one. ;-)

The primary thing that unites the Liberals is the keen sense that they are NOT the Conservatives. That's true...but it's not enough.

The NDP did once have a coherent and workable philosophy. I keep wondering if they'll manage to find it again someday.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 07:52 AM

When a government is disdainful of its citizens, when a government deals well internationally but poorly nationally, when a people cowtow to their own government: folks, therein lies the rot and therein is the problem.

A worst thing that's happened to Canada in the past sixty years is the influence of television, and that's led to another worst thing. I'm gonna rant for a second or two and if you wish to ignore it, simply go to the next paragraph. Thank you. These fucking iPhones and iPads--I'm not sure exactly what they are--but gawd dammit they are a hell of a public nuisance.

What we are witnessing internationally is class warfare on an unprecedented scale. In the UK, about 70% of the cabinet are millionaires. In the US, about 50% of congress are millionaires. I can't find figures for Canada, but bucks to doughnuts, the House of Commons has got lots. The Hair is worth 5 million. They are no longer speaking for their citizens; they are speaking for the general economic interests of their ilk, and that ain't the majority of us. So once again we'll buy into the sideshow, entranced by the shenanigans, and millionaires will empty our national coffers, banks and finally our wallets/purses.

We are beginning to see the weaponization of the most fundamental need people have: food. We need much more than platitudes or slogans to bring that shit into line.

I do not want as a leader the guy or gal who plays at the dog and pony show. I want brains coupled with compassion for all our citizens. I want big money and its pernicious influence out of the political arena, both at home and elsewhere. I want a party and a leader who embrace a sense of social justice within the reality of freedom, not the chimera of freedom within the walls of a prison.

I do not think Trudeau has what it takes. It's beginning to look like such a party and leader just ain't. It would take 5% of the population to change that, but if we can't be arsed, it just ain't gonna happen. The ugly thing about class warfare is that it eats its young. I hope there are future generations that look back and see how foolish we were to sacrifice a Garden of Eden for the right to have scraps from the table of the rich while we subjugate the poor among us and abroad.

Say goodnight, Chet.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 08:20 AM

The liberal leadership race does seem low on the current radar of many.

Personally, I see the benefits of a multi party government, versus a two party one (for example, as in the USA).

It makes it more interesting, and provides an opportunity for new ideas to hatch and sometimes grow. There are good examples of third parties having an influence on governing party policies, for example, Tommy Douglas' influence on the earlier Trudeau.

I am not eager to see Canada's political scene evolve into a two party scenario (I admit there are also minor parties, but most have had minimal influence, beyond local issues - Block and Green- and with some media).

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 12:05 PM

I think Dominic LeBlanc would be a better choice but, as I said, I think he'll sit in the bushes for some of the same negatives above regarding Trudeau.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 12:17 PM

Excellent post, 999. Class warfare is what it is, allright.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: number 6
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 01:04 PM

As in team sports, in class warfare one class wins, another is defeated ... the cycle will just continue on and on and on, and social justice will always be the victim.

I believe what we are witnessing today is a result of political ignorance (within the voters), empathy, apathy and arrogance (within all classes/teams). Democracy is alive and well within Canada. We have the governments we vote for. The only problem is we don't take notice probably because we don't really give a rat's ass. We don't excercise our democratic rights and speak up or take action. The class/team who is in power recognizes this and takes complete control, and why not.

Will humans ever see the light of humanity, will humans ever change?

biLL (who doesn't belong to any class/team)

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 01:36 PM

I am afraid I don't understand the class warfare point at all. Do you mean that wealthy people are, by virtue of being wealthy, to be excluded from the political process. As for intelligent leaders, it seems to me that when we put them forward they are usually accused of elitism. I think I am tired of the politics of resentment

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 01:51 PM

The warfare is that big money subverts the political process to do what it wants to whom it wants. I'll use a US example (more obvious than a Canuck example)... Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 01:52 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 01:54 PM

I am afraid I don't get your reference gnu. Are we talking about big money or wealthy people who happen to be politicians. I am confused by your comment.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 02:02 PM

Yes.

Re wealthy people... they are in on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 03:34 PM

You can't be serious. ;-) It's not an indictment of rich people for being rich that we're talking about here. It's the fact that the political process has been taken over by corporate lobbyists and big banks, and they are in control of the major political parties, Congress, the presidency, the whole shebang.

And it's been happening for a long time...but it's been getting a lot worse and more obvious since the Reagan years in the USA, when the banking and lending sector was de-regulated in such a way as to allow them to create unbelievable amounts of phony money through what amounted to a Ponzi scheme.

And it's still happening. The crooks who did it have been bailed out repeatedly. They didn't use the bailout money to create jobs for the ordinary public in North America, though. They used it to do more lending offshore, because they can earn big bucks on the interest they charge to countries like Brazil, for example.

It isn't class warfare on the basis that "all rich people are bad". It's class warfare on the basis that a few of the rich people, namely those who control the biggest banks and biggest corporations, are controlling the political process in order to benefit themselves, and themselves only.

The policies that result from this control do somewhat benefit all rich people in various ways, but they weren't put there by the will of all the rich people. These same policies have essentially turned the various national currencies into something a lot like Monopoly money. That's what happens when your run a pyramid scheme.

The politicians are so terrified by what might happen if the bubble finally burst that they keep bailing out the crooks who did it in order to keep it inflated just a little bit longer....

That's class warfare BY a very few rich people against the whole rest of society. That's what it amounts to. The rest of society just wants to be left alone...but this system is not leaving them alone, it's systemically robbing them and their children of their future security.

When something like this occurred in France in the late 1700s, it finally resulted in a bloody revolution...one in which ALL rich people got blamed and punished for the situation, although all of them were certainly not guilty of having had any wrongful intention...and some of them were undoubtedly quite innocent people.

(What happened in France that finally made the revolution inevitable was that the price of food (bread) doubled almost overnight. Poor people began starving because they could no longer afford to feed themselves. Mobs took to the streets in Paris, and the monarchy fell.) The kind of desperation that brought down the French government was, I think, somewhat comparable to the kind of desperation that is being seen in the Middle East at present. It's what happens when a huge and frustrated underclass simply cannot take an oppressive situation any longer.

What's different in the Middle East, though, is that foreign powers are deliberately helping to provoke social unrest there and are supplying arms and aid to various of the revolutionaries. That wasn't the case at all in the France of the 1700s. All of Europe feared and opposed the French Revolution.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 03:39 PM

That was addressed to Hilo, BTW.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 03:47 PM

"It's the fact that the political process has been taken over by corporate lobbyists and big banks,..."

The industrial-military complex MIGHT be added?

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 04:27 PM

Definitely. North America's number one business endeavour is producing military technology and waging war.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: number 6
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 04:30 PM

I still wouldn't call it class warfare ... I call this a totalitarian state ... controlled by the corporations .. using the military and police to keep the populace under control.

How did id the corporate machine take over ... we let them ... we were all 'asleep' ... and most people haven't woken up yet.

I somewhat cringe every time I hear people bemoaning and blaming the rich ... rich, or poor people are people and yes, some of the rich as the poor become victims in a totalitarian state.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: number 6
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 04:34 PM

BTW LH .... many of the rich were also victims (of injustice and violence) in the Russian Revolution and other revolutions that have happened in history ... and even the facsist takeovers in the 1930's.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: number 6
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 04:48 PM

oh ...and I'll add one thing more here ..

It's not the lust of $money$ that intices those to rule the world ... it's the lust for power ... what was that quote from Henry Kissinger, "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac" .... the corporate machine thirsts for power.

Hmmm ... good example, look at Henry ... wasn't really a wealthy man but did end up havig a lot of 'power'

Many of those dictators and corporate leaders who end up controlling vast empires come from very humble backgrounds ... they were not born into money, and many did not hold $wealthy positions.

there ... that's my 2 cents worth, unfortunately I have no more, as I am not from the wealthy class/team.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 04:51 PM

Yes, sIx, but we weren't asleep. People don't fight when their bellies are full. Now, it's far more complicated than that and my real fear is that their bellies are being kept "just full enough" to allow the rich to wage war employing the poorest to do so. The US has a standing army of well over 1M. Who the fuck signs up except misguided, poor and people who truly want to serve.

Yes, thank goodness they sign up but the rich send them where they should have to go. Yer a Canuck... what the fuck business have we in Afghanistan... ohhh... wow... thread drift EXTREME! My sincerest apologies... it's Saturday night and I am having brown pops. (Yes, it's still afternoon but I started early because today was a rough day.)

Sorry. This thread is about something else ALtogether.

Anyone wanna talk about the Liberal Party leadership race?

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 05:02 PM

I agree with what you said, Number 6. Yeah, sure, many of the rich have also become victims of violence and injustice during revolutions. Matter of fact, I already said that in my post about the French Revolution. I've always felt a good deal of sympathy for the King and Queen of France at the time, as well as for many other aristocrats who were executed. They just had the bad luck to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I would also call what we have now a totalitarian state...one that is masquerading as a democracy...and it still has the procedural apparatus of one, but it's been taken over by Big Money.

I hardly care who the Liberals decide to make their next leader. If it's Justin Trudeau they choose, I think he may live to regret it.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Beer
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 05:06 PM

I was thinking the same thing Gnu. But then again most threads go drifting off for awhile. It's up to the poster to bring it back in my opinion.
ad.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 05:25 PM

Agreed, LH. Trudeau is wealthy and, we hope, has a big heart because we hope that his old man's sense of fair play, commitment to what is right and sheer toughness was instilled in him by PET but he doesn't have the wealth it takes to tell big money to fuck off and be backed up by the current bunch of lackies in Parliament so it'sa crap shoot with him. Add the above posts and Pierre's yer uncle.

Maybe the social networking he may may be able to accomplish could make a dent in the armour but it seems unlikely. Same with LeBlanc but I would trust LeBlanc far moreso to that effect. He's got the network and, after all, if Dominic fucks up, he will have to answer to Beauséjour and he could end up as lobster bait... them Kent County boys don't fuck around... we are talkin Irish and French good ol boys. I dunno about yer big city types what might give Trudeau the finger er write a goddamn letter but these lads will burn yer shit down. He has the social network AND the comeuppance to do/have to do a good job.

Sigh... I really don't think he will run unless there is a deal cooked up.

As far as Marc? This ain't rocket science, this is politics. He could... if a deal is cooked up.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: ollaimh
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 05:42 PM

the liberals should hve stuck with dion, he actually had a platform and the attack ads only work for one election. iggu had no reason to be in politics.

however canadians c\annot say they never had a choice to elect an enviornmentally concerned government. they went for the destroy the earth tar sands tories when they had a clear option.

is justin ready? well you don't need to know much to be prime minister if you know how to delegate. chretien used to say his job was to win elections , his monisters jobs were to run departments and govern. delegation delegation.

of course that's why chretien was ousted by martin, he didn't keep a tight enough grip on power in the party and martin used that to control the riding associations and get himself into the pms job.

so if justin surrounded himself with a good group he could be a great prime minister. nobody could be worse than harper. he's made us pupets of the american military industrial complex without a peep.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 06:34 PM

Just wondering

Besides getting elected, and having a papa known in the Libral party (some may suggest a degree of nepotism), where does Trudeau, the relatively unknown LeBlanc (or even Gerald Regan, who indicates he is considering a run at it) stand on anything regarding the Liberal Party nation?

Should one believe that having a notable father means "a fella" also has "what it takes" to lead a country, as their fathers may have had? I know a lot of kids that in "no way" size up to their dads. And I have seen quite a few fine offsprings from bad genetic roots.

Where is the vision? I suspect some folks are now unsure what this party now represents, beacuse of changing leadership in past couple of elections?

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 07:12 PM

"chretien was ousted by martin"?

I just can't see it.

"Should one believe that having a notable father means "a fella" also has "what it takes" to lead a country, as their fathers may have had?"

No. But they have contacts and they have clout and we respected (?) what their father's did for this country which means more than electing The Hair who doesn't give two shits from Tuesday about my father and my mother and all the others who built this fuckin country and and paved the way for his sorry ass to posper. Ask anyone over retirement age... yeah... retirement age. I assume you are "golden"? And don't care about the kids?

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Ed T
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 08:22 PM

I am over retirement age gnu "fella" so I can ask me'self, thank you.

Like most, I care for Libral folks kids just as much as any other Canadian kid. But, I realize putting trust in anyone to run a nation means more than bowing to a previous politicians kid with merely a bit name recognition.

Being over retirement age doesn't make anyone "golden" or mean "fuck all" when it comes to being right wrong, or caring. And, I suspect a good number of "retired folks may see things differently than you, and possibly even voted and willvote differently? Get used to it. And that doesn't make 'en any less or more patriotic or "golden" than you-or me- they just see things differently.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: number 6
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 08:35 PM

I'm retired and I now collect my CPP (whoopee !) .... I'm certainly not golden or whatever, at least I don't think I am ... now, in keeping in toone with the subject of this thread (my apologies btw about getting offtrack earlier) I have to agree with ED in regards to the young (well, not so young) Trudeau ... sorry, but there is no way this guy can save the liberal party ... the liberal party as we have known it is long gone ... Justy Trudeau should stick to boxing, that is about as good as he gets ... he is not his father, and never will be.

Only the young who are thinking out of the old political box and that means out of the old political party system can make a worthwhile effort in change that we need ... but the electorate will have to wake up to help make that change possible.

biLL   hey,has anyone around here have 2 cents they can loan an old pensioner that I am... I'm in debt for posting this thread ... ;)

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 29 Sep 12 - 08:53 PM

Not the retired folks I know... they are pissed with Harper screwing them and their children over. Maybe you didn't get my "golen" reference?

BTW... for ye ferriners, Harper has just told "young" Canadians they will have to work until they are two years older than 65 to collect the Old Age Pension. I wonder when he will announce changes to the Canada Pension Plan. Of course, that will only apply to people under 30. Can't piss of toooo many people at the same time. AFTER ALL, THERE'S ANOTHER ELECTION COMING. My guess is he will fuck over people on the CPP about three years after the next election if he's gonna win. If he feels he isn't gonna win, it will be in late spring.

*I* am "golden". I get my Old Age at 65 and, so far, I can get my CPP at 60.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: ragdall
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 02:55 AM

I think that Justin could become a good leader, but the party isn't ready for a comeback yet. It's lack of success will equate to his lack of success.

rags

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 07:35 AM

""Not the retired folks I know... they are pissed with Harper screwing them and their children over"".

I am not sure that everyone across Canada, retired or not, has the same opinion as you say your circle of retired friends seem to?

With fewer people putting in and more taking out, I suspect some change is inevitable (as with private retirement plans), regardless who is in power. It seems logical that a party with a majority takes more agressive actions earlier than one in a minority.

Many may recall that Martin was popular for getting us out of some financial trouble by cutting programs - but did so by passing many problems on the provinces- and many provinces still live with some of the resulting financial issues to today. Problem is if you have to bring the books in shape (over the long term) there are fewer areas to focus on, that don't impact someone.

What governments and parents in many countries are telling kids is, unlike with the BB'ers, it is not wise to rely solely on government pensions (CPP and OAP) for your retirement - put some $ away early, so it can grow for you to enjoy as you age. Seems like good advice to me. It is exactly what I told my kids.Of course, some kids are hoping their BB parents will leave them a few of their $, if they have it, to help. BTW, recent reports indicate Canadian retired folks are much better off financially than any previous generation. (I suspect they may be among the best off in the world, for their age group).

As to Trudeau: I have not seen any vision yet. IMO, vision is what is needed to stimulate the party. All I see is a young guy that kinda looks like his father and alot of people wishing that he is like his father. I have not seen any indication of any of Pierre's abilities yet?

While it is good to have inside party contacts to help you, and I realize he is only running for the Leadership of a party- but if he wins he will have to face the elcorate. Remember, first impressions are only made once and I suspect there are already people poised to do to him what was done to folks like Dion - so any candidiate has to be quick on their feet, as it is harder to come back from first impressions made by you or others.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: bobad
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 08:05 AM

All you vision seekers, don't you think it's a bit early for that? After all the guy hasn't even declared his candidacy yet. Don't you think it would be a little presumptuous for a member of a third party in the House to be going about promoting his vision for the country? If he was you'd probably all be clucking about his arrogance. I, for one, will wait to hear what he has to offer as a potential future leader before I form my opinion on his ability.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: number 6
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 08:39 AM

I don't think there is one current party leader in Ottawa who is prepared to deal with the current economic crisis, let alone the possible collapse of the Euro and the possible oncoming war in the mideast (which will make the past conflicts over there look like a weekend militia training exercise) ... these 2 events will push Canada over a threshold into a situation which will require a new economic and political approach to governing. Looking back at the past for a remedy and hoping we can return is ridiculousness and pathetic.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 08:42 AM

Justin Trudeau will run for the leadership. Why else would he have been out in the sticks preaching to the faithful in a currently PC riding? He's getting the feel of support and reminding them that he's the one. I heard him speak last Thursday. He sounded a lot like Jack Layton in style and substance, not that I would trust him. Nonetheless he'll likely make a better PM than we've had in a long time.

(Disclamer: My fiddle/guitar duo was booked to play the wine and cheese party prior to JT's speech. Liberal money ia as good as anyone else's.)

I'm waiting for Olivia Chow to run.

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 07:29 PM

Everyone can always use a bit more Chow, I say. ;-D Ook! Ook! With that in mind, I am goin' to the local hash house in a few minutes from now.

Regardin' this young Trudeau character...he done a pretty good job boxin' the other guy who was a blowhard anyway, but it's a damn good thing he is not runnin' for the top job in the USA or he would have to have boxed ME. It woulda been a short fight! I'd have massacred him. I figger just 2 hits. 1 - I nail him a good one right in the jaw. 2 - He hits the canvas for a 10-count. End of match.

I'm not sure I would want to run for office in Canada, though. They're too polite up there. I would hafta restrain myself too much to really enjoy the campaign. Down in the USA, fortunately, it ain't like that at all.

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 07:55 PM

Ed T... "I am not sure that everyone across Canada, retired or not, has the same opinion as you say your circle of retired friends seem to?"

Not everyone. I know this one guy in Nova Scotia who seems to think it's okay for The Hair to tell all the people who built this country over the past hundred years or so to back the fuck up so he can spend MILLIONS AND MILLIONS on a civil and religious war 8000 fuckin miles away. And, BTW, I would tell you what else they say but that would be WAY too controversial.

Sooo... lets centralize this discussion about who is least quailfied to sort out this bullshit we have allowed to happen by not listening to our elders and allowing thieves to rob them (us?) of what they worked and sacrificed DEARLY for.

Or... we could go golfing. (Canuck joke... not so funny.)

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 07:57 PM

""Don't you think it would be a little presumptuous for a member of a third party in the House to be going about promoting his vision for the country?""

A vision for the party, and what it stands for differs alot from vision for the country. And no, I do not feel it is anywhere too early for potential candidates to begin such a discussion before the party dissapears from the public memory, or is absorbed by "the Borg".

A few days ago:

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 08:03 PM

Few surprises that PM Trudeau was seen as less cooperative than PM Mulrooney down south.

Few surprises

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 08:20 PM

I post this in full, as it seems hard to link. While some of it may be unfair and biased, there is a point that previous Liberal leaders did not give Justin significant posts. Does that say anything about his inside standing? I dunno?

Is Justin Trudeau really taken seriously by his own party? Add to ...
Gerald Caplan

Special to The Globe and Mail

Published Friday, Sep. 28 2012, 3:26 PM EDT

Last updated Friday, Sep. 28 2012, 3:30 PM EDT

388 comments Print AA   Justin Trudeau was first elected to Parliament in 2008. When his first leader, Stéphane Dion, chose his shadow cabinet, Justin's name was MIA. (It does seem unnatural to call him anything but "Justin," doesn't it?) If you search back, you can find the MPs he named to be critics of finance, environment, foreign affairs, defence, treasury board, fisheries – the entire kit and caboodle. But even the most complete list of critics that Google turns up finds no listing for Justin.

More Related to this Story
•Potential opponents to Trudeau leadership bid scarce

•John Ibbitson If Trudeau leads, will Liberals follow?

•Globe Editorial Judge Justin Trudeau on record and policy positions — not family lineage
   
Photos
The life of Justin Trudeau in pictures

When Justin's second leader, Michael Ignatieff, named his shadow cabinet, he first made Justin critic for youth and multiculturalism, later elevating him to Citizenship and Immigration. If Justin proved a formidable critic to Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, I've had trouble finding any evidence of it.

Justin's final leader, Bob Rae, made him critic for post-secondary education, youth and amateur sport.

Is it unfair to conclude that this record indicates a fairly serious vote of non-confidence in Justin by his leaders over four years. Do they know something the rest of Canada needs to know?

Of course I am biased. I come to Justin with some pretty strong reservations, based first on his father. No doubt that's completely unfair but it's surely unavoidable. I've never forgiven Papa Pierre for the imposition of the draconian War Measures Act against a non-existent insurrectionary threat, one of the most egregious violations of civil liberties in Canadian history.

And I can't seem to forget that while Pierre Trudeau was Prime Minister for 15 years, virtually his entire legacy was forged in his final few years in office, which he came perilously close to not having. Let's not forget that the mighty Trudeau was defeated in 1979 by Joe Clark – Joe Who, for heaven's sake! If anyone in Mr. Clark's minority government knew Grade 3 arithmetic, they wouldn't have blown a non-confidence vote, Mr. Clark would have remained PM and Mr. Trudeau would have been gone forever. The patriation of the Canadian constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms came after his resurrection. What thin gruel would the legacy have been if his tenure had ended five years earlier?

Okay, none of this is his son's responsibility. But since much of his reputation depends on being Pierre's son, he must wear the burdens as well as the magic. And of course there will be passionate disagreements even about Justin's ostensible assets. I happen not to be among those who swooned at his eulogy for his father, really his big public debut, in a way comparable to Barack Obama's landmark speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention. It made Mr. Obama a national figure to conjure with, just as Justin's eulogy made him the heir apparent to his father. Eulogies aren't easy, especially when they're deeply personal. But I was among many who found his to be maudlin and sappy, contrived, almost embarrassing, the opposite of those who felt it soared to the heavens.

And while I'm at it, let me add that I found last March's boxing match between Justin and a Conservative Senator to have been an embarrassing descent into adolescent machismo. There are no doubt worse ways to raise money for fighting cancer than having two apparently grown men beating the hell out of each other, but I'm not sure what they are.

Nothing riles Liberals more than the accusation that Justin's nothing more than an empty suit – or whatever you call his often curious attire. Then you wait for them to explain why the statement is grossly inaccurate. Sometimes you wait forever. Sometimes they point to something truly miraculous, like the fact that he won a tough seat in Montreal. Imagine that! But it's surely fair to say that, unlike his father even before Pierre entered politics, Justin has made no mark whatever for any policies or ideas or accomplishments that he's associated with. Is it possible to believe he'd be treated like the Second Coming if he had a different surname?

So the question to be determined is whether he's running because he couldn't resist the relentless pressure – and the awesome ego satisfaction it surely brought – or because he has something important to say to his fellow citizens.

Maybe he does. I can hardly keep track of the Liberal loyalists who have assured me that there's far more to Justin than meets the public eye, and who am I to begrudge this dying breed their faint hopes and fantasies? But I don't mean to be wholly snarky here. I actually hope his admirers are right. Canada needs all the thoughtful liberal politicians it can get and if Justin comes to the country with new, exciting progressive approaches for a more just society, that would be a major plus for Canadian democracy, a very fragile flower after six years of the Harper government. I suppose by the April convention – yes, only six-and-a-half electrifying months to go – we'll have some idea.

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: gnu
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 09:12 PM

Wellll... "Is it unfair to conclude that this record indicates a fairly serious vote of non-confidence in Justin by his leaders over four years. Do they know something the rest of Canada needs to know?" ... no.

It means they want to keep his nose squeaky clean... is that not obvious?

Subject: RE: BS: Canucks... Trudeau?
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 30 Sep 12 - 09:24 PM

If Justin Trudeau will challenge Harper to a boxing match and wail the shit out of him he'll get my vote. If he gets elected Prime and tells the Pentagon where to stick their F-35 fighters I'll even let him put a sign on my lawn! If he re-nationalizes Petro Canada and kicks the nuts of the big oil companie's crooked executives I will declare him a diety!