Liberal Party of Canada

491 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport

Is he a Trudeau or a Sinclair, as the Sinclair family in well known in the right circles in BC. Wink 

 

Ever hear of the Sinclair Centre in downtown Vancouver?

Winston

NorthReport wrote:

Poor Lawrence. He obviously has bot the Liberal koo-aid. The Paul Martin-Bob Rae-Justin Trudeau flavour of Liberal kool-aid that is. These clueless Liberal zealots are very quick to forget that Jean Chretien was the only Liberal Prime Minister to lead a majority government in the past, get this, in the past 20 years. My how times flies when you are a wannabee winner.

The Turner government was defeated in 1984, so that makes Chrétien the only Liberal "to lead a majority government in the past, get this," nearly _30_ years.

NorthReport

THanks for helping me to make my point Winston.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

"....Surplus budgeting is a worthy goal; however, the means by which the Government gets there has to be transparent. Increasing El premiums beyond sustainment and reducing eligibility is not transparent. Sale of undisclosed assets is not transparent. Lapsing budgets by stealth is not transparent....", http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/john-mckay/conservative-budget_b_4481000.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-politics#comments. How can these Libs write C..P like this without choking on the irony? The G-d damn nerve. They are truly, truly, shameless, sociopathic, compartamentalized narcissists.

Policywonk

Winston wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

Poor Lawrence. He obviously has bot the Liberal koo-aid. The Paul Martin-Bob Rae-Justin Trudeau flavour of Liberal kool-aid that is. These clueless Liberal zealots are very quick to forget that Jean Chretien was the only Liberal Prime Minister to lead a majority government in the past, get this, in the past 20 years. My how times flies when you are a wannabee winner.

The Turner government was defeated in 1984, so that makes Chrétien the only Liberal "to lead a majority government in the past, get this," nearly _30_ years.

Martin took over a majority government in 2003, just like Turner in 1984.  Unlike Turner he did not lose the following election, but he was reduced to a minority and lost the next one.

janfromthebruce

Also Turner had his own problems within the Liberal caucas, with Chretien doing all sorts of "muck" to weaken his leadership.

TiradeFaction

janfromthebruce wrote:

Also Turner had his own problems within the Liberal caucas, with Chretien doing all sorts of "muck" to weaken his leadership.

What did Chretien do to muck up Turner's leadership?

janfromthebruce

underminded his leadership and authority in order to dethrone him.

Turner's leadership was frequently questioned, and in the lead up to the 1986 Liberal convention, a vote of confidence loomed large. The popular Chrétien resigned his seat, creating a stir in caucus. The ongoing and often open unpopularity of Turner within his own party led to many editorial cartoonists to draw him with a back stabbed full of knives. Keith Davey and other Liberals began a public campaign against Turner, coinciding with backroom struggles involving Chrétien's supporters. The public conflict is said to have influenced many Liberals to support Turner, and he ended up getting 75% of the delegate vote.

The Liberals faced more internal conflict in the next few years, but polls frequently had them in front of the Progressive Conservatives (however, with Turner last in preferred Prime Minister categories). The upcoming Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and Meech Lake Accord threatened to divide the party until Turner took the position of being pro-Meech Lake and against the FTA. Turner asked the Liberal Senators to hold off on passing the legislation to implement the agreement until an election was held. It was later revealed that Mulroney planned to call an election anyway.

John Turner

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

You want to know what LPC supporters think of ethnic voters, this gem from a Tamil commentator LPC supporter"

""Liberal Party is going to put a another prominent Tamil activist as their candidate in that riding and it was important for this woman to raise her profile. Her constituents should ask what she was doing in sunny and warm Sri Lanka when they were shivering with no power in Scarborough after the ice storm...."

Who was he talking about, Rathika. Yep, it isn't about whether people should decide for themselves what they think, its expecting to be requied to vote for whatever  candidate the LPC thinks they should vote. Nope, no discussion of issues, no discussion of why people should, simply, vote for this pereson because "he is one of you".

That is pathetic. Ironically, its almost racist.

It was on Huff Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/08/rathika-sitsabaiesan-sri-lanka_n_4563652.html?ref=topbar

Disgusting.

janfromthebruce

Rathika was in her riding until just before New Years and helped out in her local community by serving meals in a community centre for those without electricity. It was a smear.

felixr

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

I just read more from Trudeau.

I have one question: Is Trudeau half full or half empty?

The better question is full of what?

NorthReport

We are seeing what politics has now become in Canada.

This is more sad, than anything else.

I guess though we know how the rich stay rich in Canada, don't we!

The Conservatives probably knew about this, and were probably going to release the details during the election campaign, and then the Liberals probably found out about the Con plan, so this is proably just Liberal preventive damage control.

Trudeau reimburses government for speaking-tour expenses

While Mr. Trudeau blamed “human error” in his case, the mistake fuelled questions about his decision to remain active on the speakers’ circuit after he was first elected to the House. Between 2008 and 2012, Mr. Trudeau collected fees between $10,000 and $20,000 to give 17 speeches to a variety of groups, including unions, charities and school boards, according to his office.

In a statement on Thursday, the Leader of the Liberal Party said he has paid back three expense claims dating back to 2009 that were initially charged to the House of Commons. Mr. Trudeau said the main mistake – a $672 invoice for transportation to a speech to Queen’s University in 2012 – had initially been paid by Speaker’s Spotlight, which had booked his speech.

However, another invoice for the same service was also sent to his office and reimbursed by the House, as he used the same firm for his regular travel between Ottawa and Montreal. In his statement, Mr. Trudeau said that he “did not detect this error when signing the claim.”

Speaking in Thornhill, Ont., the Liberal Leader insisted on his ability to acknowledge errors and correct them, saying it was an essential part of restoring the trust of Canadians in their political system.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-reimburses-governme...

 

Brachina

Error my ass.

janfromthebruce

the real point is that JT missed key votes on EI and pension reform to do a fee paying (high) gig, instead of fulfilling his role in the house. No surprise he missed it when signing his expense claims when he saw he was working, well for himself rather than in the HoCs.

DLivings

janfromthebruce wrote:

the real point is that JT missed key votes on EI and pension reform to do a fee paying (high) gig, instead of fulfilling his role in the house. No surprise he missed it when signing his expense claims when he saw he was working, well for himself rather than in the HoCs.

Exactly...  working for whom?   Himself while on the public dime.  Maybe he should reimburse Canadians his public salary while he was receiving private speaker's fees.  That's what the rest of us would be expected to do!

Brachina

 JT's greed and corruption knows no end.

Pogo Pogo's picture

The other question is why the receipts went to his taxpayer paid staff to deal with.  What role do they play in his side job.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pogo wrote:

The other question is why the receipts went to his taxpayer paid staff to deal with.  What role do they play in his side job.

There is a good chance people don't care "Liberals' Fundraising Haul Smashed 10-Year Record, Party Says", huff post today.

If there is enough hatred of Harper, people may buy the line that anyone is better then Harper. I say it again, if we end up with Le Dauphin as PM, I will admit Canadians are NO smarter then Americans.

mark_alfred

Indeed.

Winston

Am I the only one who finds THIS offensive and ridiculous?

Scott Reid wrote:

From canoeing to boxing, he presents a picture of himself that is classically masculine. Almost Hemmingway-esque.

Good grief! What's next? "Helloooo, Ladies, bet you wish it was you carrying this Royal Baby!"

Unionist

I was offended. Reid misspelled Hemingway.

cco

He should take some lessons from Putin before he applies for the position of Most Interesting Man in the World.

brian1966

Article asking whether or not MPs should have side businesses or collect speaking fees.  The journalist says it is okay, I would tend to disagree.

http://looniepolitics.com/problem-rejecting-speaking-fees/

mark_alfred

Star article on Chretien's 80th birthday and what Walkom sees as the paradox of the Liberal Party.

Quote:
He was lauded for being part of the Liberal government that, 50 years ago, worked to build and expand the great social programs of the 20th century.

[..]

Then he was lauded for decimating these same social programs when, as prime minister during the 1990s, he slashed spending in order to eliminate the federal deficit.

[..]

In effect, the money saved by skimping on the poor and unemployed was spent on tax cuts for higher-income earners.

[..]

In an effort to hew to what he believed was the middle way, he ended up destroying much that his own party had built.

mark_alfred

Alternative, sensitive, yet masculine.  Devoid of ideas or policies yet what a charmer.  A formula to win an election in Canada?  We'll see.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Winston wrote:

Am I the only one who finds THIS offensive and ridiculous?

Scott Reid wrote:

From canoeing to boxing, he presents a picture of himself that is classically masculine. Almost Hemmingway-esque.

Good grief! What's next? "Helloooo, Ladies, bet you wish it was you carrying this Royal Baby!"

Why would any Canadian political party(or its media acolytes) describe their leader as "Hemingway-esque"?

"He's like an old, reclusive Yank who's gonna blow his brains out.  Just what the country needs!"?

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

This is so moronic. Anytime I post over at Huff Post and attack the Libs I get called a Conservative. These yahoos can't get it through their minds that someone cannot be a Liberal, and still hate Harper and them. Its stupid. I get called a Conservative all the time. I am pretty much convinced there are now New Dems posting there any more. Its really a LPC and Trudeau shilling site now for the most part. Bleah!

bloodied

I hear you. In various discussions, about Trudeau, or Chretien...or Obama....I have been termed "cosnervative"; in every case, probbaly without exception, the accuser tends more towards conservatism than I do....

bloodied

I hear you, but it's not just HuffPost by a long shot. In various discussions, about Trudeau, or Chretien...or Obama....I have been termed "conservative"; in every case, probably without exception, the accuser tends more towards conservatism than I do....

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

bloodied wrote:

I hear you, but it's not just HuffPost by a long shot. In various discussions, about Trudeau, or Chretien...or Obama....I have been termed "conservative"; in every case, probably without exception, the accuser tends more towards conservatism than I do....

That's true exactly. They really think anyone who doesn't vote Liberal is a voter who is a threat to Canada. Its unbelieveable.

mark_alfred

Liberals are striving to define the race in terms of style rather than substance.  Lots of stuff about how the NDP and Conservatives are similar in style, characterized as gruff angry and controlling, as opposed to open minded, smiling, and cooperative, as embodied by Trudeau.  Having actual policy is rebranded by Liberals as "ideology".  The Liberals tried this similarity in style argument on Layton, via the 2 sides of the same coin ad, but it didn't work then.  They're getting a bit more traction with it now.  Here's a couple of samples of this Liberal strategy:  1 2.  Liberals, both on Babble and at the Huffington Post, parrot this argument, ignoring that in substance (policy) the Liberals are really quite similar to the Conservatives. 

It's an interesting strategy in that the NDP are trying to appeal to those who worry that the NDP may be too different and thus too much of a risk.  The Liberals, instead of capitalizing upon this fear, have taken the opposite tact and have argued that the NDP are too similar to the Conservatives (in style).  So, this boxes in the NDP.  So responding to this attack by arguing that they're very different from the Conservatives and Liberals then potentially leads to scaring off voters who may then see the NDP as too much of a risk (IE, good as the conscience of parliament, but not as the government).  Conversely, the NDP arguing that they're similar in a competent ready to govern sort of sense feeds this Liberal theme of them being similar to the Conservatives in style.

I think the NDP are wise to ignore these Liberal attacks, and set themselves up as the competent and progressive alternative to the Conservatives and the Liberals.  The empty package incompetence (and similarity to the Cons) of the Trudeau Liberals will become more apparent during the election campaign.  Mulcair for the first time has been viewed as the public's choice for best PM in recent polling, so this bodes well.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Pogo wrote:

The other question is why the receipts went to his taxpayer paid staff to deal with.  What role do they play in his side job.

There is a good chance people don't care "Liberals' Fundraising Haul Smashed 10-Year Record, Party Says", huff post today.

If there is enough hatred of Harper, people may buy the line that anyone is better then Harper. I say it again, if we end up with Le Dauphin as PM, I will admit Canadians are NO smarter then Americans.

 

And how smart would Canadians be if Herr Harper is re-elected?

mark_alfred

Given that Conservatives are quite similar to the Liberals in terms of policy, the answer on how smartness would be perceived if Harper's Conservative Party are re-elected would be the same (that being "Canadians are NO smarter then Americans").

quizzical

Quote:
Justin Trudeau is sweeping Liberal senators out of his party's caucus in a bid to show he's serious about cleaning up the scandal-plagued upper house.

The surprise move -- announced today after he informed the 32 Liberal senators -- is aimed at reducing partisanship in the Senate and restoring its intended role as an independent chamber of sober second thought.

The Liberal leader said extreme patronage and partisanship are at the root of the Senate expenses scandal, which has engulfed the red chamber for more than a year.

Read more: http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/trudeau-kicks-all-senators-out-of-liberal-party-1.1660977#ixzz2qzZYRo1x

Brachina

 My instincts say he knows a Liberal Senate scandal is coming and he's trying to get ahead of it. Why else reverse his position on Lib Senates in his cacus?

quizzical

when i heard it first thing upon opening my eyes this morning, i thought "ya, it'll last until about 2 mins after Libs get power".

2nd one was "didn't justin just have his own expenses issues"?

mark_alfred

Yeah, I have all sorts of cynical thoughts about it.  Regardless, it is a good move on his part.  It lessens the impact of NDP criticism that they "simply want to appoint more Liberals to the Senate". 

mark_alfred

I just read about it on CBC.  Good move on his part.  It's consistent with wanting to make the Senate a house of sober 2nd thought, which seems to be the Liberals' theme on the Senate. 

Still, my cynical side also feels that he's hoping to isolate the Liberal Party from potential embarrassment that the current RCMP investigation or AG report may uncover (IE, cut out the tumours now before they become truly malignant).  It will be interesting to see how this unfolds for the Liberals -- it could produce some bad blood within the ranks.

mark_alfred

Interesting that Trudeau voted against the NDP motion in Oct to “end Sens partisan activities & remove Sens from party caucuses."  And now this today.  Does make me think that he may simply be worried about the upcoming AG report on Senate expenses.

Charles

It's actually a brilliant public relations move. It shifts the "reform of the Senate" discussion away from the NDP, gets The Hair a big media hit (nothing else will come close in the next one or two media cycles), and continues his narrative of "young breath of fresh air." It's cynical, out of the blue and a more than a little hypcritical given their recent attacks on our similar proposals, plus I don't believe for a second they're going to honour this except semantically (like these Senators won't "informally caucus" along party lines). Nonetheless, this is a major win for The Hair, one that's going resonate, especially with low information voters.

mark_alfred

Agreed.  Mulcair to give a scrum on it and the veterin issue in a few minutes. 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

please move this discussion to the new thread. For big stories like these, please start new threads. 

NorthReport

Well said.

Longer term though could be a big win for Mulcair.

Charles wrote:

It's actually a brilliant public relations move. It shifts the "reform of the Senate" discussion away from the NDP, gets The Hair a big media hit (nothing else will come close in the next one or two media cycles), and continues his narrative of "young breath of fresh air." It's cynical, out of the blue and a more than a little hypcritical given their recent attacks on our similar proposals, plus I don't believe for a second they're going to honour this except semantically (like these Senators won't "informally caucus" along party lines). Nonetheless, this is a major win for The Hair, one that's going resonate, especially with low information voters.

mark_alfred

It will be interesting to see what this does to the Liberal Party.  Will it cause more infighting?  Some Senators have been there as part of the Liberal caucus for over twenty years, now JT gives 'em the boot and declares them all as independents.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

So, please continue this discussion in the other thread.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Liberal Party votes with Harper to vote down NDP motion to adjourn the House. What is Trudeau afraid of?

Aristotleded24

I just listened to the budget speech from Jim Flaherty, as well as comments from Opposition politicians, on CBC. I want to give full credit to Liberal Finance Critic Scott Brison for being the only one to point out that the shell games that Flaherty is playing to make it look as if Canada is close to surplus are the exact same shell games that he played as Finance Minister of Ontario in the dying days of the Harris/Eves administration.

Brachina

 Has anyone heard the radio ads from the Tories attacking Justin Trudeau on weed. Sigh. Why does Harper need to help Trudeau become the next PM. Serious does Harper realize there is no real hatred of weed in society. Justin is a putz.

NorthReport

This confirms that Paul Martin's entourage must be running things for the latest Liberal coronation. What a mistake Justin is making, as those clowns like Scott Reid, are a bunch of losers.

 

The federal implications of two provincial byelections 

 

 

http://warrenkinsella.com/2014/02/the-federal-implications-of-two-provin...

Brachina

http://ww2.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/2014/...

 

$ 72,000 in moving expenses, holy crap on a cracker.

Pages

Topic locked