Trudeau taking money for speaking engagements while MP.
It is not what is allowed - it is what is ethical, just like Mansbridge a supposed neutral news broadcaster taking money from the oil industry for speaking engagements.
The usual Liberal 'entitled to their entitlements' I suppose.
And speaking of Trudeau, Liberals, etc:
Turfed MP Scott Andrews claims Justin Trudeau’s report unprofessional.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/jen-gerson-turfed-mp-scott-and...
This is ridiculous and is a personal attack. Cut it out please.NR,come out of the closet already.Not only are you a Conservative but you admire Stephen Harper.
I take huge offense to your insinuation that the anti-Harper crowd hate him for imaginary reasons.
You're either delusional or a Tory. Which one is it,NR?
He started it with his comment that the anti-Harper movement is blinded by hate...That we hate Harper for imaginary reasons which to me was very OFFENSIVE and a huge load of BS.
Maybe you should also have a word with NR.
Trudeau taking money for speaking engagements while MP.
It is not what is allowed - it is what is ethical, just like Mansbridge a supposed neutral news broadcaster taking money from the oil industry for speaking engagements.
The usual Liberal 'entitled to their entitlements' I suppose.
There was nothing unethical about Trudeau accepting commissions from the Speaker's Bureau. If Charities wanted to engage an MP they could have called their local representatives. They didn't want an MP. They wanted Trudeau, the son of a famous and popular former PM.
He had no power over how the government would deal with particular charities.
There was no ethical breach.
Hatred will not defeat Harper, brains will.
Liberal Party’s decline can be traced to one cause: Stephen Harper
The Conservative leader studied the Liberal Party, he learned its weaknesses, and he exploited them.
http://www.hilltimes.com/the-war-room/2015/06/29/liberal-partys-decline-...
This is ridiculous and is a personal attack. Cut it out please.NR,come out of the closet already.Not only are you a Conservative but you admire Stephen Harper.
I take huge offense to your insinuation that the anti-Harper crowd hate him for imaginary reasons.
You're either delusional or a Tory. Which one is it,NR?
He started it with his comment that the anti-Harper movement is blinded by hate...That we hate Harper for imaginary reasons which to me was very OFFENSIVE and a huge load of BS.
Maybe you should also have a word with NR.
NR,come out of the closet already.Not only are you a Conservative but you admire Stephen Harper.
I take huge offense to your insinuation that the anti-Harper crowd hate him for imaginary reasons.
You're either delusional or a Tory. Which one is it,NR?
Maybe you think you're giving to him what he's had coming but these posts of yours are just as weak as his old posts calling you a Liberal shill. Surely you can do better.
Try reading my other comments and go check NR's dismissive attitude to the anti-Harper voters like myself. That's what pissed me off and for good reason.
It was a comment I'd expect from a right wing pundit.
As I tried to point out to NR. My hatred for Harper is real. I have a lot to lose if that bastard gets re-elected and that's not even scratching the surface of why ALL progressives should hate him.
I take offense to his comment and I';m vocal about it and what do I get? Warnings from fuckin' moderators.
Keep that in mind the next time you find youyrself taking offense of someone's comment.
BTW,where was HIS warning when he took a shot at me?
alan,
You are just repeating Debater's old shtick
alan,
You are just repeating Debater's old shtick
Another Liberal seat in play?
http://www.cbncompass.ca/News/Local/2015-06-29/article-4198396/Union-lea...
Alberta vaults from one of lowest minimum-wage payers to one of highest
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/alberta-to-raise-minimum-wag...
Lots of good reading here
http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.ca/2015/06/monday-morning-links_...
Trudeau, CPC and the ISIS footage
Bottom line: most of the job in politics, now, is simply getting people to pay attention. My hunch is that the hue and cry about that CPC/ISIS/JT ad has helped to achieve the mission’s key objective: i.e., to get the electorate to pay attention in the sleepy Summer months and agree, yet again, that Justin Trudeau “just isn’t ready” to deal with the horrors that seemingly occur daily in this world.
That may make you mad. But it’s unlikely you were ever part of the audience the CPC had in mind when they did the thing up on some staffer’s computer, for about ten bucks.
http://warrenkinsella.com/2015/06/trudeau-cpc-and-the-isis-footage/
Don't forget how novel the NDP's power base in Quebec really is
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/jamey-heath-dont-forget-how-no...
Rachel Notley forging new role for Alberta on national stage
There are encouraging signs that Alberta’s new NDP government wants to create a more open relationship with other provinces and the rest of Canada.
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2015/06/29/rachel-notley-forgi...
Staged police raid not part of Musical Ride, RCMP reassures
Come for the horses, stay for the emergency response demonstration at Ottawa’s Sunset Ceremonies.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/06/29/staged-police-raid-not-par...
You are doing one hell of a job Justin! 
CPC ad will likely never see court challenge under C-51: experts
https://ipolitics.ca/2015/06/29/cpc-ad-will-likely-never-see-court-chall...
Justin Trudeau, man of substance
You can dislike what the Liberal leader is proposing, but he sure is proposing stuff. Paul Wells on Justin Trudeau’s carbon proposal
“Make no mistake,” Justin Trudeau said today at Jericho Beach, west of Kitsilano, B.C., with the usual brochette of Liberal MPs and candidates behind him. (I assume that, by now, they are inflatable and can be moved into position in less than three minutes.) “The Liberal party will be putting a price on carbon.”
It took the Conservative party all of 15 minutes to design a Twitter card incorporating the quote, and we’re pretty sure that’s the line from Trudeau’s speech that you’ll be hearing most between now and election day. Actually, there weren’t a lot more lines than that; here’s the text of the speech, perhaps the shortest since Trudeau kicked off his “Real Change” series of announcements in early May. (Previous announcements focused on family taxation,democratic reform and relations with the United States.) But, as before, today’s speech came with a background document that corresponds roughly to a chapter of the Liberals’ fall election platform.
Trudeau’s environment-and-economy chapter is thinner and contains fewer specific pledges than his democratic-reform chapter. That’s not necessarily a bad thing; the democratic-reform package was hard to digest, will be hard for any government to implement, and presents a lot of targets for criticism or simple curiosity. Trudeau’s green package is more streamlined—although, as the Conservative war room was characteristically quick to notice, not devoid of KICK ME signs facing Trudeau’s opponents.
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/justin-trudeau-man-of-substance/
Conservative war room moves fast - they had this out in 15 minutes:
https://twitter.com/CPC_HQ/status/615602887914299392/photo/1
Instread of making corporations pay their fair share of taxes. Too bad.
Trudeau promises we’ll pay more
http://www.torontosun.com/2015/06/29/trudeau-promises-well-pay-more
Liberals' idea for a gender quota in Cabinet leaves out the principle of merit
Andrew Coyne: In the end, what the Liberals will have achieved is not ‘merit through diversity.’ A cabinet based on a single fixed quota will be committed to neither
Thomas Mulcair's NDP leads in national polls as climactic summer begins
With Conservatives and Liberals focused on each other, NDP moves into first place
An NDP or Conservative minority?
With these levels of support, it would be a toss-up as to whether the NDP or Conservatives would claim the most seats. The seat projection model awards the New Democrats between 113 and 140 seats, with the Tories taking between 99 and 141. While both parties overlap to a significant degree, the average projection gives the edge to the NDP by about a dozen seats.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/thomas-mulcair-s-ndp-leads-in-national-p...
Liberals' idea for a gender quota in Cabinet leaves out the principle of merit
Andrew Coyne: In the end, what the Liberals will have achieved is not ‘merit through diversity.’ A cabinet based on a single fixed quota will be committed to neither
Trudeau said that if he becomes prime minister, half of his cabinet will be composed of women. “The number of studies that have pointed out that boards, organizations that reach gender parity or even close to gender parity create better decisions, have much better governance than other places – (that) is a very powerful argument to me.”
He said he has no worries about compromising the merit principle. “I have no fears that on a purely merit basis, we will have an embarrassment of riches from which to choose in order to reach gender parity.”
http://www.canada.com/news/Trudeau+blasts+Mulcair+centralizing+approach+...
NR, you seem devoted to right wing talking points, as if you are a true believer. Are you against affirmative action for everyone or just women?
Why is always so easy to spot Liberal dirty tricks? Bob Rae anyone?
Mulcair says he walked away from Conservatives over policy, not pay
When Justin welcomed Eve Adams - a lifelong right wing Conservative - into the Liberal caucus his pretense to be a progressive leader began to fade.
However it was only when he promised - even before reading Harper's terror bill C-51 - to support C-51 was he fully exposed as another Liberal who really doesn't understand what liberalism used to mean..
http://ipolitics.ca/2015/06/30/mulcair-held-talks-in-2007-on-joining-tor...
Trust Charlie Smith to try and throw the Liberals a bone here.
NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair's 2007 negotiations with Conservatives add new wrinkle to election race
http://www.straight.com/news/481186/ndp-leader-thomas-mulcairs-2007-nego...
On the bright side,this may lead 'right wing liberals' to view Mulcair as a 'moderate'
If it's a smear,it failed.
True, a cabinet with 70-80% women would accurately reflect the merit principle better than gender parity. But parity seems a good step.
True, a cabinet with 70-80% women would accurately reflect the merit principle better than gender parity. But parity seems a good step.
That's sexist and insulting to men. Don't get me wrong, depending on whose in the cacus that could be true, but its not automatically true. Look parity is a worthwhile goal, but you can't control who the people pick, you can only do the best that you can with the hand your dealt.
Mulcair's promise to have 50% women on federal councils/boards is more realistic, because its a broader group.of people.which means a wider selection of women to choose from.
Is this kosher?
I'm watching TV and a Conservative anti-Trudeau commercial comes on. Whatever.Change the channel. Anmd then it accures to me,I'd been watching an American channel (WFFF Fox44)
Canadian propaganda material election campaigns can now buy time in foreign countries? Are you kidding me? I hope I'm overreacting.
True, a cabinet with 70-80% women would accurately reflect the merit principle better than gender parity. But parity seems a good step.
That's sexist and insulting to men. Don't get me wrong, depending on whose in the cacus that could be true, but its not automatically true. Look parity is a worthwhile goal, but you can't control who the people pick, you can only do the best that you can with the hand your dealt.
Mulcair's promise to have 50% women on federal councils/boards is more realistic, because its a broader group.of people.which means a wider selection of women to choose from.
Actually it is funny.
I would say if we took a random sampling of the female MPs in the House and we made them the government -- I am confident the result would be an improvement.
I am not saying that women are generally smarter than men but perhaps they have to be better at their jobs in order to succeed in certain areas. I am confident that the House of Commons is one of those.
To me this is a truth that seems so obvious that I cannot say it hurts. It just is.
Most affirmative action is not based on quotas. It's based on "preference".
I don't personally have anything against quotas, but it's very rare to see them enshrined in law, and progressives have reasonable disagreements about whether to use them at all.
Most affirmative action takes the form of "if you have multiple qualified candidates, a little preference should go to underrepresented groups". All other things being equal, if two people are tied, we should try to increase the number of women and minorities.
Incidentally, the NDP's approach to recruiting diverse candidates is more similar to a preference than a quota. And it's the reason why they're closer to parity than any other party. And probably have the most credibility in terms of having a diverse cabinet.
I have no problem with the idea that the cabinet would be half female. My problem with Trudeau's announcement is that it does nto follow a great record by that party and it includes no new specific measures to elect more women.
I also think that the move by the NDP to elect more women would do more to achieve the goal of parity.
That said I remember when the Spanish government having an all female Canadidate. Made me want to consider Spanish lessons.
My problem is not with parity or even an all female cabinet -- it is based on the reality that we are not electing enough women to the House and that is the source of the cabinet. A committment to improving that is what would get my attention.
MPs also have power. a gender balanced House would have an impact on House votes in my opinion. I want to see that objective addressed and I think if it were there would be no trouble with cabinet parity. And in that context there would likely not need to be a specific effort to achieve parity in cabinet if the House already had it.
More ammunition for Mulcair to get out the big bright orange padlock
Leo Housakos says measures to pass Bill C-377 through Senate within rules
'Draconian steps' used to move along anti-union bill by Conservative senators, Speaker says
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/leo-housakos-says-measures-to-pass-bill-...
That's sexist and insulting to men.
Poor men. How they suffer in the political world. Won't someone think of the men?
This Justin
Trudeau’s green shift for votes
Justin Trudeau stood on a park overlooking Vancouver’s English Bay Monday to make the case that when it comes to battling climate change the Liberal Party he leads today will not do what the Liberal Party under Jean Chretien did which was precisely nothing.
In the battle for the hearts, minds and, most importantly, votes of the green anyone-but-Harper crowd, the Liberals start at a disadvantage to the NDP and the Green Party because of the legacy of that inaction the last time the Liberals ruled in Ottawa.
It was Chretien who signed the Kyoto Protocol, committing Canada to do its part to substantially cut global greenhouse gas emissions (GGEs) but then he did nothing about it.
Chretien, in 1997, committed Canada to lowering GGEs by 6% by 2012 compared to where they were in 1990. He then did nothing to push the country towards that target.
By 2008, Canada’s GGEs had actually grown by 24%.
http://www.torontosun.com/2015/06/29/trudeaus-green-shift-for-votes
Fuelled by Notley’s victory, NDP take on Liberal stars in heart of Toronto
Jennifer Hollett, the former MuchMusic VJ and now digital strategist, and Linda McQuaig, journalist and author, are the NDP candidates in the two federal ridings located in the heart of downtown Toronto – and right now, they are basking in an orange glow emanating from Rachel Notley’s Alberta.
Canvassing in their ridings of Toronto Centre and University-Rosedale, both women have noticed a change in the reception at the door since the New Democrats’ upset win in the Prairie province in May.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/fuelled-by-notleys-victory-...
That's sexist and insulting to men.
Poor men. How they suffer in the political world. Won't someone think of the men?
I'm tired of sexist remarks like this attacking people who participate here. I would like the mods to discourage this kind of sexism, as 'johnny on the spot' as they attend to other forms when they occur. Or is it the case that certain types of sexism are permitted?
Flag it then, though it's sarcasm, really.
Mulcair's promise to have 50% women on federal councils/boards is more realistic, because its a broader group.of people.which means a wider selection of women to choose from.
Yup, I'll bet he would have [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binders_full_of_women]binders[/url] full of women to choose from.
Mulcair's promise to have 50% women on federal councils/boards is more realistic, because its a broader group.of people.which means a wider selection of women to choose from.
I haven't seen that promise and it's important. Where did you come across it?
I'm going to jump in and answer the opening "question"- even though likely someone else has, multiple someones even. Most Canadians dont vote by ideology ["right wing" "left wing" etc]. There are about 2% of voters who will put a priority on how to stop the NDP. It is as eventful as debating how many siants there really are.
Flag it then, though it's sarcasm, really.
I haven't flagged anything for years. It's just that remarks like that crop up from time to time, and they're generally not tolerated if they're going the other way, sarcasm or not, and so why should they in any event.
Flag it then, though it's sarcasm, really.I haven't flagged anything for years. It's just that remarks like that crop up from time to time, and they're generally not tolerated if they're going the other way, sarcasm or not, and so why should they in any event.
But isn't that the point? It would not be irony going the other way.
This comment put the way it is makes a point. Anyway, as a man, I sure was not offended by it and I thought it made the point clearly.
I am not speaking for how others took it but I did not see it as offensive. Written the other way I would have -- so the direction of such a comment is part of the meaning.
I think some jokes can cross the line, but there has to be some room for humor. Mocking sexism and racism can sometimes be the most effective tool to change the conversation.
Flag it then, though it's sarcasm, really.I haven't flagged anything for years. It's just that remarks like that crop up from time to time, and they're generally not tolerated if they're going the other way, sarcasm or not, and so why should they in any event.
Your assumption that the mods tolerate my comment rests on an assumption that they see everything on the board, which as you presumably know they do not.
You could open a thread in reactions, should be good for a laugh. The whole idea that men are an opressed group sure is good for a laugh.
Talk about right-wing media supporting right-wing Leaders, where is the picture of Tom Mulcair the front-runner?
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/canadas-political-leaders-launch-...
Talk about right-wing media supporting right-wing Leaders, where is the picture of Tom Mulcair the front-runner?
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/canadas-political-leaders-launch-...
Yeah, and they've even donned one anothers colours as Harper is wearing red while Trudeau wears blue. Nice to see the two right-wing parties' leaders being so chummy.
NDP whittles away at the Conservatives’ voting coalition
The voting coalition that propelled the Conservatives to a majority victory in 2011 was a formidable one. It combined the party’s traditional stronghold of the West with voters in rural and suburban Ontario, with a strong emphasis on new Canadians. It united the fastest growing parts of the country, leading many to argue that the 21st century would be one dominated by the Conservative Party.
That may still happen, but recent polls have suggested that this Conservative coalition is falling apart. In its place, the New Democrats may be constructing one that could prove to be as potent.
The latest polls put the Conservatives at about 29 per cent support, down more than 10 points since 2011 and, with small regional variations, back to where they were in 2004, when the Liberals won a minority government.
Their coalition has not shifted geographically, but has only gotten smaller. The Conservatives are still doing well in the West and are leading—though marginally so—in Ontario. But without strong support in Quebec or Atlantic Canada to cushion losses in the rest of the country, the Tories are on track for defeat.
This is because the New Democrats appear to be in the process of building their own voting coalition. Its two pillars are Quebec and British Columbia, where the party is leading in the polls. It then adds on to that Canada’s city centres stretching from Edmonton in the west to St. John’s in the east.
If an election were held today, the New Democrats would likely win more than 50 seats in Quebec and more than 20 in British Columbia, alone putting them halfway to a strong minority government. But the party’s support in Alberta, the Prairies, Ontario and Atlantic Canada is also inching upwards, with the NDP polling at around 30 per cent, give or take a few points, in each of these regions.
Based on where their support has stood in the past, that gives them some very good chances of winning the cities in these areas. In Atlantic Canada, that means Halifax and St. John’s.
In Ontario, the NDP is in a very good position to win a large number of ridings in Toronto, Hamilton, London, Windsor and in their traditional strongholds in southwestern and northern Ontario.
But it is in the West where this coalition starts to get more interesting for the New Democrats. The unpopularity of Greg Selinger’s provincial government limits the party’s potential in Manitoba, but new boundaries in Saskatchewan could deliver several seats in Regina and Saskatoon. Rachel Notley’s stunning victory in Alberta opens up a large number of ridings to the NDP in that province, particularly in Edmonton and Lethbridge.
This is where the New Democrats are able to nibble away at the Conservatives’ coalition. The party has moved ahead dramatically in British Columbia, prising that province out of the Tories’ grip. Winning urban ridings in Alberta and Saskatchewan further knocks holes in the Conservative coalition’s western contingent.
And with the NDP moving forward in Ontario, where the Liberals remain competitive as well, the Conservatives are in danger of being pushed out of the suburban parts of the province that gave them victory in 2011. That whittles the vaunted Conservative coalition down to rural ridings between the Rockies and the Ottawa River. That is not enough to win a majority government, let alone a minority one. And for Stephen Harper, the next election is likely majority-or-bust.
http://www.hilltimes.com/news/news/2015/07/06/ndp-whittles-away-at-the-c...
I am not speaking for how others took it but I did not see it as offensive. Written the other way I would have -- so the direction of such a comment is part of the meaning.
In any other situation the perspective of 'the eye of the beholder' is generally sufficient to establish a case.
Your assumption that the mods tolerate my comment rests on an assumption that they see everything on the board, which as you presumably know they do not.You could open a thread in reactions, should be good for a laugh. The whole idea that men are an opressed group sure is good for a laugh.
But historically there's been a raft of similar, gender based remarks of that nature on the board hasn't there? You assume that men are not themselves members of oppressed groups in their own right, as if one person's oppression cancels out someone else's. Poverty, disabled, entire ranges of incapacity may be present. Certainly along racial lines. Maybe some of us are communist, and monuments are being thrown up these days against our very existence. Many of us are simple workers, and who among us hasn't experienced repressive challenges. Some of us have had to organize to fight against it. Personally I believe it's better to reject the notion that slurs are ok based on the fact that someone was born a certain gender, whether they're directed at minority, marginalized groups, or more broadly against half of humanity in this case. And why should some of the participants on this board represent as piñatas for the kind of reactionary swings that gets taken for granted around here?
