Trudeau's silence is deafening!
'As a human being, I can't do that': Worker at migrant holding facility quits over family separations
Antar Davidson was told to separate tearful Brazilian siblings and stop them from hugging
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-monday-full-episode-1...
I really liked Scheers response to Trumps actions, Jagmeet was also forceful. But PM fancy socks has been missing in action. And now Trump is again accusing Canadians. Where is our social justice PM?
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trump-accuses-canadians-of-smuggling-u-s...
There are many Canadians who say the government should make nice with the Trump regime at all costs. These are Quislings who will only alienate the great many Americans who stand shoulder to shoulder with Canada against this fascism. They desperately need to grow a spine.
https://twitter.com/RealWillDaley/status/1009062262752075777
House of commons needs to do more to include Indegenous languages.
The PM was trumpeting an era of new relations with the first nations. Where is he now? Buying a new pair of fancy socks?
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/house-of-commons-has-to-do-more-to-inclu...
House committee calls on Liberals to subject parties to privacy laws.
What do they have to hide. It is the taxpayer who funds them afterall.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/house-committee-calls-on-liberals-to-sub...
Commons speaker says no to call for an emergency debate on Canada-US trade.
If the threat of losing hundereds and thousands of jobs is not a emergency I dont know what is. The opposition should be more foreceful. Go NDP (well cant say Go Singh in this case since he is not an MP yet)
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/commons-speaker-says-no-to-tory-calls-fo...
Trudeau's silence is deafening!
'As a human being, I can't do that': Worker at migrant holding facility quits over family separations
Antar Davidson was told to separate tearful Brazilian siblings and stop them from hugging
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-monday-full-episode-1...
I will lend you a helping hand by saving you from going deaf.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-says-he-won-t-play-politics-on-u...
Immigration minister should look into this.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/b-c-families-adopting-from-japan-in-limbo-...
Canadian parents will not forget our Pipeline King PM's behaviour over saying nothing concerning the separation and incarceration of these children in cages!
Canadian parents will not forget our Pipeline King PM's behaviour over saying nothing concerning the separation and incarceration of these children in cages!
I find it hard to believe how low some will go to score a few petty partisan political points. The Trump ethos seems to be permeating north of the border.
The only way to stop a bully is to stand up to him!
I find it hard to believe how low some will go to score a few petty partisan political points. The Trump ethos seems to be permeating north of the border.Canadian parents will not forget our Pipeline King PM's behaviour over saying nothing concerning the separation and incarceration of these children in cages!
I think you would be singing a very different tune if Thomas Mulcair was currently our PM.
Judging by your posts here, I think you're just myopically playing more petty partisan political games with very serious issues.
The only way to stop a bully is to stand up to him!
I find it hard to believe how low some will go to score a few petty partisan political points. The Trump ethos seems to be permeating north of the border.Canadian parents will not forget our Pipeline King PM's behaviour over saying nothing concerning the separation and incarceration of these children in cages!
Trudeau's silence is deafening!
'As a human being, I can't do that': Worker at migrant holding facility quits over family separations
Antar Davidson was told to separate tearful Brazilian siblings and stop them from hugging
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-monday-full-episode-1...
I will lend you a helping hand by saving you from going deaf.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-says-he-won-t-play-politics-on-u...
You two should take your act on the road.
All the worlds a stage......and being PM is just an extension of Trudeau's drama career.
Trudeau won’t condemn Trump’s migrant policy. That’s duplicitous and irresponsible.
Opinion: It’s tempting for the Canadian government to play nice with Donald Trump’s America. But that approach is morally bankrupt—and likely to backfire
For a leader whose political career has been marked by the criticism that he’s merely a haircut who was born on third base, the perception of Justin Trudeau as a serious, tough-nosed customer enjoyed a boost in recent weeks. All it took was a couple of tough words over a trade dispute for our bullying neighbour to the south, whose president spiked a G7 communique, levelled painful tariffs, and tilted the global order like a wobbly pinball machine. There was our Prime Minister, standing up for Canada despite the importance of the relationship with the U.S. to our economy and our politics—and Canadians loved him for it.
Now here we are, days after revelations that Donald Trump’s “zero-tolerance” migrant policy has led to the separation of children from their families and their imprisonment in cages in detention centres lit 24-hours a day by fluorescent light. It’s a practice that the chair of the United Nations Human Rights Council called “unconscionable” and “nothing short of torture.” The President has refused to change the policy despite public pressure as more and more people see the harrowing images emerging from the detention facilities and hear the audio of children wailing. And here is the same Prime Minister, unleashing a mealy-mouthed blast of mad-libs about not “playing politics” with the “extremely difficult situation.”
Suddenly, just when we needed moral leadership the most, the Prime Minister went from “We won’t be pushed around” to a cringe-inducing hedge: “I have been very clear on the role that Canadians expect of me—to stand up firmly and unequivocally for our values, for our interests, to protect Canadians and to make sure that we’re doing well, as well as having a constructive relationship with the United States.”
Pardon me?
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/trudeau-wont-condemn-trumps-migrant-poli...
The silence from the the govt, official opposition and the future official opposition on the childeren being separated from their parents is deafening. Goes on to show how cold hearted these politicians are.
Human rights, what human rights. Harper supported this guy for president and was a part of the group that took out a full page ad in NYT in his support.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/us-united-nations-human-rights-1.4713021
Senate passed the marijuana bill
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/senate-passes-government-pot-bill-1.4713222
NDP MP Fin Donnelly, an advocate for ending shark fin imports, said it's "ridiculous" that Canadians have had to wait so long for federal legislation on the matter.
"I truly believe this bill strikes a balance between protecting animals from backward practices and preserving the Canadian industry from undesirable market conditions."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/all-party-senate-games-animal-protection...
Not too close with Trudeau: Bellegrade.
Who want to be?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/perry-bellegarde-trudeau-afn-election-...
Ex-Liberal MP received ‘secret’ cut
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/collingwood-project-payment-mp-bonwick-1.4...
Where’s Waldo er I mean our Pipeline King PM?
Dark money is not infinite, as no quantity can be infinite. However visible (or luminous) money only accounts for 4.5% of the money in the universe. The other 95.5% is comprised of dark money, including 23% dark money mass and 72.5% dark money energy. Dark money energy is a repulsive force. Literally.
Dark money is the cause of universal inflation. It pushes luminous things further apart from each other at an ever-increasing rate. Every luminous thing has to tunnel through dark money to get to its destination, which may have the effect of making the dark money have greater volume, but lower density. Dark money's gravity is a function of its mass and its pressure (M + 3P), which seems to be less than the repulsive force of dark money energy.
Funny how the world imitates nature.
Feds assembling Indegenous Advisory team
https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/05/23/feds-assembling-indigenous-advisory...
Trudeau meets with muslim community
https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/06/18/politics-this-morning-133/148410
Plan underway to support workers threatened by US tariffs. We will believe it when we see it. There was also a plan on electoral reform.
https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/06/19/freeland-says-work-underway-support...
Two MPs considering a run for the OLP leadership. They are already abandoning the fancy socks, pretty hair, trust fund baby Pipeline King. They would prefer to be leaders of a party that has no official status and pretty much no future than to be seen in a room with the selfy man.
https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/06/18/gta-liberal-mps-holland-vaughan-con...
A diverse coalition of activists, academics, and NDP members is calling on the federal New Democrats to “disassociate” itself from a parliamentary group that seeks to deepen engagement with Israel.
https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/06/19/activists-former-mps-urge-ndp-leave...
An old Con drops out of the race. This and the Liberal MPs thinking of running for OLP leadership means that the two parties are in trouble. Go NDp Go Singh
https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/06/18/blaming-religious-divisive-forces-f...
Ridicule is the worst thing for your political reputation. If Trudeau can't gain some respect between now and the election, he is going down in flames. Looks like Canada wants to Wynne him.
Here are some suggestions for our Prime Minister.
1. Brown shoes don't make it. Never had, never do, and never will. If you are going to wear a $1500 navy blue suit, anything but black shoes is horrendous disrespect of the tailor. Nonetheless, if you are wearing a tan suit or a beige suit, brown shoes will do, however so do black shoes. So it is unneccesary for brown shoes at any time. He looks great in a suit. He ruins it with the shoes, and people just ridicule him. He is supposed to represent our country in foreign events.
2. Socks must match each other and the shoes. Therefore all socks should be black. If you have all black socks, you do not have to be concerned with pairs.
3. "Social Justice" is not just divide and conquer of identity groups. "Social Justice" is also feeding the poor, healing the sick, locking up really really bad people like Liberal politicians, classrooms, teachers, nurses, doctors, etc.
Out of top ten ridings for child poverty 5 are held by Libs, 3 by NDP and one each by a Con and Independent.
Out of the bottom ten 6 Con, 2 Lib and one each by NDP and Bloc
The Cons are way ahead in taking care of the residents in their ridings as compared to the Libs. And the Libs claim to be champions of social justice. What a laugh
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/poverty-federal-children-1.4710221
It does not work that way. People who are better off are more likely to vote for the greed party than any other so of course you expect less poverty in Conservative ridings relative to others.
You do not want parties in power making policies for only their own ridings when it comes to poverty.
It would be more shocking to see Conservatives being elected where there is more poverty- more often.
I think it is very unrealistic to compare what the government says regarding Trump and the US and what an opposition party says. The government is less free to say what they want without consequence.
The PM is responsible to know that the leader of the US uses executive power to affect the US trade relationship. He knows that the President is erratic and vengeful and that Canada's relationship with the US is the worst it has been in a long time. He also knows that if he speaks up on this issue the chance that the President of the US will punish Canada is very high and the chance that it would make a difference to help these children is somewhere around zero. Knowing that to speak up will not help refugee children and that it might hurt Canadian children he is not as free to share his opinion.
The US is the most important external relationship Canada has based on potential to affect Canadians and it is led by a man who does not respond to facts or logic.
Why would we criticize Trudeau for this?
If we are to criticize him, I would do it on another point: Knowing the present risk to NAFTA and damage to Canada, the government of Canada should be preparing a plan to put Canada in a better economic position. I suspect this might be being discussed to some degree but investments will have to be made. These investments should be based on employment potential. Canada's financial position is deteriorating and seeing a large investment into the delivery of raw bitumen for export is the wrong direction if we are to consider the need to make investments based on employment. (This is apart form the environmental considerations.)
Trudeau should be signalling that Canada will update an industrial plan to provide opportunities for Canadian workers based on all contingencies for the US trading relationship. Canadians need to be assured that the government is not banking on something magically resolving the trade relationship with the US and the deteriorating global economy given the trade war with China.
There are multiple areas of investment that Canada can prepare for:
1) Research - the government of Canada should update on an urgent basis how we deal with foreign degrees to position Canada to take advantage of the human resources that are turning away from the US. In some areas in health care clinical practice is more difficult given standards. However, health research is an area where Canada could attract and benefit.
2) Canada should provide a marketing plan to assist universities obtaining more foreign students -- by adding places so that Canadians are not faced with reduced places.
3) Canada should inject considerable funding into the promotion of tourism. The economic difficulty will reduce the dollar making it more attractive and many people may want to find an alternative to travel to the US -- this includes Canadians and US residents as well as foreign countries.
4) Select technology where Canada could take a lead role with the help of investment and attractive human resource positions.
5) Marketing of Canada to investment in technology
6) Key environmental technology investments.
7) Micro investments to assist start-ups -- particularly in areas that are most vulnerable -- this includes rural and remote Indigenous communities as well as places of expected job loss.
8) Cultural industries (these industries have a strong history of higher than average return in employment for dollars invested)
9) A new approach to shipping to allow businesses in Canada greater access to shipping with Caanda post. This with an emphasis on small and startup businesses.
10) Income assistance for displaced workers.
11) More controversial perhaps -- consideration of alternate trade arrangements with other countries to replace trade being lost to the US
We need to know that the government is on this and not just hoping for a breakthrough on the US trade file.
Also Canadians likely want to hear about punishment for Trump businesses as many are demanding.
I think it is very unrealistic to compare what the government says regarding Trump and the US and what an opposition party says. The government is less free to say what they want without consequence.
The PM is responsible to know that the leader of the US uses executive power to affect the US trade relationship. He knows that the President is erratic and vengeful and that Canada's relationship with the US is the worst it has been in a long time. He also knows that if he speaks up on this issue the chance that the President of the US will punish Canada is very high and the chance that it would make a difference to help these children is somewhere around zero. Knowing that to speak up will not help refugee children and that it might hurt Canadian children he is not as free to share his opinion.
The US is the most important external relationship Canada has based on potential to affect Canadians and it is led by a man who does not respond to facts or logic.
Why would we criticize Trudeau for this?
If we are to criticize him, I would do it on another point: Knowing the present risk to NAFTA and damage to Canada, the government of Canada should be preparing a plan to put Canada in a better economic position. I suspect this might be being discussed to some degree but investments will have to be made. These investments should be based on employment potential. Canada's financial position is deteriorating and seeing a large investment into the delivery of raw bitumen for export is the wrong direction if we are to consider the need to make investments based on employment. (This is apart form the environmental considerations.)
Trudeau should be signalling that Canada will update an industrial plan to provide opportunities for Canadian workers based on all contingencies for the US trading relationship. Canadians need to be assured that the government is not banking on something magically resolving the trade relationship with the US and the deteriorating global economy given the trade war with China.
There are multiple areas of investment that Canada can prepare for:
1) Research - the government of Canada should update on an urgent basis how we deal with foreign degrees to position Canada to take advantage of the human resources that are turning away from the US. In some areas in health care clinical practice is more difficult given standards. However, health research is an area where Canada could attract and benefit.
2) Canada should provide a marketing plan to assist universities obtaining more foreign students -- by adding places so that Canadians are not faced with reduced places.
3) Canada should inject considerable funding into the promotion of tourism. The economic difficulty will reduce the dollar making it more attractive and many people may want to find an alternative to travel to the US -- this includes Canadians and US residents as well as foreign countries.
4) Select technology where Canada could take a lead role with the help of investment and attractive human resource positions.
5) Marketing of Canada to investment in technology
6) Key environmental technology investments.
7) Micro investments to assist start-ups -- particularly in areas that are most vulnerable -- this includes rural and remote Indigenous communities as well as places of expected job loss.
8) Cultural industries (these industries have a strong history of higher than average return in employment for dollars invested)
9) A new approach to shipping to allow businesses in Canada greater access to shipping with Caanda post. This with an emphasis on small and startup businesses.
10) Income assistance for displaced workers.
11) More controversial perhaps -- consideration of alternate trade arrangements with other countries to replace trade being lost to the US
We need to know that the government is on this and not just hoping for a breakthrough on the US trade file.
Also Canadians likely want to hear about punishment for Trump businesses as many are demanding.
Hopefully some of your excellent suggestions are a part of the govt plan which Freeland says they are coming up with.
Lots of scuttlebutt on my facebook about boycotting US goods...
Out of top ten ridings for child poverty 5 are held by Libs, 3 by NDP and one each by a Con and Independent.
Out of the bottom ten 6 Con, 2 Lib and one each by NDP and Bloc
The Cons are way ahead in taking care of the residents in their ridings as compared to the Libs. And the Libs claim to be champions of social justice. What a laugh
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/poverty-federal-children-1.4710221
Am I hearing a defense of Conservatives for their generous social spending? LOL Well, its good for a laugh.
From a prior post by gadar:
The Cons are way ahead in taking care of the residents in their ridings as compared to the Libs.
What is more likely happening is that wealthier ridings are more conservative, and vote more for Conservative politicians. Wealthier ridings would also have a lower level of poverty.
This is born out by the fact that the NDP has 3 of the worst ridings compared to the Liberal's 5, but the Liberals have many more seats than the NDP. So the percentage of seats in that high poverty range is much higher for the NDP than for the Liberals. Chances are, that's because those NDP ridings are working class ridings where there are higher levels of poverty.
What is more likely happening is that wealthier ridings are more conservative, and vote more for Conservative politicians. Wealthier ridings would also have a lower level of poverty.
Thanks for stating what should have been blatantly obvious to anyone reading the original post. Conservatives care very little, especially modern reform conservatism that has taken over all shades of Tory parties from BC to New Brunswick. Why anyone would defend the conservative record on social spending is whimsical at best.
Conservatives are doing everything in their power to destroy what we value as national institutions. In Alberta, Jason Kenney is trying to privatize health care and force the issue onto a national stage. If he wins, he's got a pro-privatization platform in health care that will be a template for forcing the issue onto a national stage. Considering Ontario was silly enough to elect Ford, I won't look to Ontario for leadership to push back on it. In BC, forces are suing the government to mandate private health insurance coverage. Dr. Day and his ilk are nothing more than conservative activists.
Progressives better realize that in order to fight this, you have to at least be willing to tango with someone who only agrees with you 80% of the time. I'll take 20% disagreement over a 90% disagreement, because reform conservatives are only a few steps away from tea bag style anti-government politics. They're doing a lot at the ground level to destroy social services we all consider very important in this country. That is the true enemy.
Progressives who will fight other progressives are missing the bigger picture. Conservatives are on the verge of doing some great damage to the Canadian social system. They've got some big bulldogs about to pull strings in Alberta and force some pretty harsh right wing ideas on the nation as a whole, and it will be done through the legal system if Kenney wins his majority he so seeks. Just watch it all unfold in the coming decade. We need to protect health care by strengthening it and making a new commitment to pubilc care and improvements to it, not dismantling it.
Trudeau's silence is deafening!
'As a human being, I can't do that': Worker at migrant holding facility quits over family separations
Antar Davidson was told to separate tearful Brazilian siblings and stop them from hugging
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-monday-full-episode-1...
I will lend you a helping hand by saving you from going deaf.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-says-he-won-t-play-politics-on-u...
You two should take your act on the road.
Thanks for stating what should have been blatantly obvious to anyone reading the original post. Conservatives care very little, especially modern reform conservatism that has taken over all shades of Tory parties from BC to New Brunswick. Why anyone would defend the conservative record on social spending is whimsical at best.
Conservatives are doing everything in their power to destroy what we value as national institutions. In Alberta, Jason Kenney is trying to privatize health care and force the issue onto a national stage. If he wins, he's got a pro-privatization platform in health care that will be a template for forcing the issue onto a national stage. Considering Ontario was silly enough to elect Ford, I won't look to Ontario for leadership to push back on it. In BC, forces are suing the government to mandate private health insurance coverage. Dr. Day and his ilk are nothing more than conservative activists.
Progressives better realize that in order to fight this, you have to at least be willing to tango with someone who only agrees with you 80% of the time. I'll take 20% disagreement over a 90% disagreement, because reform conservatives are only a few steps away from tea bag style anti-government politics. They're doing a lot at the ground level to destroy social services we all consider very important in this country. That is the true enemy.
Progressives who will fight other progressives are missing the bigger picture. Conservatives are on the verge of doing some great damage to the Canadian social system. They've got some big bulldogs about to pull strings in Alberta and force some pretty harsh right wing ideas on the nation as a whole, and it will be done through the legal system if Kenney wins his majority he so seeks. Just watch it all unfold in the coming decade. We need to protect health care by strengthening it and making a new commitment to pubilc care and improvements to it, not dismantling it.
Thank you good sir/madam for shining the much needed light on the threat the Cons pose. The Cons would indeed want us all to be fighting among each other over petty disagreements when they are preparing to nuke all the stuff we collectively cherish. Anybody trying to drive a wedge between the 80% agreeing public is only trying to serve the Cons. I am not going to shy from calling out anybody who gives a pass to the Con agenda and tries to burn any bridges among the forward thinking people of all stripes.
Sean
You are one of the saner voices on this board so I was taken aback by your comments and very much disagree with your point of view Trump is being a bully and he needs to be confronted by our PM as well as others and the sooner the better. Either Canada stands for healthy principles or it does not I think we do and we need to shout it from the rooftops This will also give other less courageous to speak out against caging these children as well
I think it is very unrealistic to compare what the government says regarding Trump and the US and what an opposition party says. The government is less free to say what they want without consequence.
The PM is responsible to know that the leader of the US uses executive power to affect the US trade relationship. He knows that the President is erratic and vengeful and that Canada's relationship with the US is the worst it has been in a long time. He also knows that if he speaks up on this issue the chance that the President of the US will punish Canada is very high and the chance that it would make a difference to help these children is somewhere around zero. Knowing that to speak up will not help refugee children and that it might hurt Canadian children he is not as free to share his opinion.
The US is the most important external relationship Canada has based on potential to affect Canadians and it is led by a man who does not respond to facts or logic.
Why would we criticize Trudeau for this?
If we are to criticize him, I would do it on another point: Knowing the present risk to NAFTA and damage to Canada, the government of Canada should be preparing a plan to put Canada in a better economic position. I suspect this might be being discussed to some degree but investments will have to be made. These investments should be based on employment potential. Canada's financial position is deteriorating and seeing a large investment into the delivery of raw bitumen for export is the wrong direction if we are to consider the need to make investments based on employment. (This is apart form the environmental considerations.)
Trudeau should be signalling that Canada will update an industrial plan to provide opportunities for Canadian workers based on all contingencies for the US trading relationship. Canadians need to be assured that the government is not banking on something magically resolving the trade relationship with the US and the deteriorating global economy given the trade war with China.
There are multiple areas of investment that Canada can prepare for:
1) Research - the government of Canada should update on an urgent basis how we deal with foreign degrees to position Canada to take advantage of the human resources that are turning away from the US. In some areas in health care clinical practice is more difficult given standards. However, health research is an area where Canada could attract and benefit.
2) Canada should provide a marketing plan to assist universities obtaining more foreign students -- by adding places so that Canadians are not faced with reduced places.
3) Canada should inject considerable funding into the promotion of tourism. The economic difficulty will reduce the dollar making it more attractive and many people may want to find an alternative to travel to the US -- this includes Canadians and US residents as well as foreign countries.
4) Select technology where Canada could take a lead role with the help of investment and attractive human resource positions.
5) Marketing of Canada to investment in technology
6) Key environmental technology investments.
7) Micro investments to assist start-ups -- particularly in areas that are most vulnerable -- this includes rural and remote Indigenous communities as well as places of expected job loss.
8) Cultural industries (these industries have a strong history of higher than average return in employment for dollars invested)
9) A new approach to shipping to allow businesses in Canada greater access to shipping with Caanda post. This with an emphasis on small and startup businesses.
10) Income assistance for displaced workers.
11) More controversial perhaps -- consideration of alternate trade arrangements with other countries to replace trade being lost to the US
We need to know that the government is on this and not just hoping for a breakthrough on the US trade file.
Also Canadians likely want to hear about punishment for Trump businesses as many are demanding.
Sean
You are one of the saner voices on this board so I was taken aback by your comments and very much disagree with your point of view Trump is being a bully and he needs to be confronted by our PM as well as others and the sooner the better. Either Canada stands for healthy principles or it does not I think we do and we need to shout it from the rooftops This will also give other less courageous to speak out against caging these children as well
I think the difference here is context --
First, Canada has spoken out in the past on values with the Trump administration so there really is no reasonable confusion on what Canadians and the government of Canada thinks. We are in the middle of a serious dispute with an irrational person (Trump). We are also in the middle of a debate over reconsideration of immigration rules due to the deterioration of US human rights and refugee policy.
Trudeau spoke out today. He did this the moment others did. There was probably a desire to do so earlier but held back by not wanting to be the leader of the charge -- this time. The reason is that Canada this time is the most vulnerable. I get the principle of standing up but rushing to be the first international leader to challenge Trump when Canada has the most serious spat with him (most serious due to Canadian integration and potential damage here). Is being first rather than say third or fourth that much of an issue balanced with the responsibility that the PM owes Canada to consider the implications as well as the rightiousness of a response?
My response was first a questionning of those who sought to compare what a PM says with that of an opposition leader. No matter what you think of the PM, the context due to the role is different. An opposition leader speaking is domestic politics, a PM speaking is international relations. There are moments when you might be a little slower when it comes to international relations and even choose not to be public about it for a time while you choose the best way to go about it.
So I am sorry but if you want to compare the PM with another speaker, compare him with another national leader. It is wrong on an issue such as this with a country that until recently was a friend and ally and has recently turned hostile while remaining dangerous and powerful over the fate of this country.
Without regard for who the PM of this country is or what party he leads, recognition that a PM in this position is in a dangerous and difficult position is appropriate. How he handles this can have a little bit of understanding. That he came out and said soemthing eventually is worth consideration and so too is the pause that he would have needed to know exactly how to respond responsibly given not just the moral necessity but the responsibility that goes with his role.
It is a cheap shot to compare this with an opposition leader who can say anything without much consequence to anyone other than his or her own personal reputation and that of a domestic political party. I cannot respect the political opinion that a response to children in cages is a partisan thing. I think most people are horrified by it. The suggestion by some that New Democrats are upset by this and the PM is not is offensive to Canada and the role of the PM. I am going to guess that the average Conservative and the average Liberal is also upset.
I wasn’t making any comparisons with others Canadians need to march to our own beat and do the right thing
Just like had more people opposed and spoken out against Hitler at the very beginning he never would have gotten as far as he did with his evil intentions I’m not saying Trump is Hitler but who knows what Trump and the people surrounding him left to their own devices are capable of doing. Trump is clearly In The wrong here and needs to be forced to stop his bad behaviour concerning helpless children
I wasn’t making any comparisons with others Canadians need to march to our own beat and do the right thing
Just like had more people opposed and spoken out against Hitler at the very beginning he never would have gotten as far as he did with his evil intentions I’m not saying Trump is Hitler but who knows what Trump and the people surrounding him left to their own devices are capable of doing. Trump is clearly In The wrong here and needs to be forced to stop his bad behaviour concerning helpless children
The Canadian government is very much seen to be opposing Trump. Waiting a couple days in this case was not a big picture thing.
I do not think Canada needs to be overly preachy when people know our positions. I think behaving better is more meaningful.
I also do not criticize the caution in managing what is a crazy man with a lot of power. This is not to agree with him but to choose when and how we respond. I think since Canada is on his shit list, it does not seem that we have held back too much over all.
Sean
You are one of the saner voices on this board so I was taken aback by your comments and very much disagree with your point of view Trump is being a bully and he needs to be confronted by our PM as well as others and the sooner the better. Either Canada stands for healthy principles or it does not I think we do and we need to shout it from the rooftops This will also give other less courageous to speak out against caging these children as well
I think the difference here is context --
First, Canada has spoken out in the past on values with the Trump administration so there really is no reasonable confusion on what Canadians and the government of Canada thinks. We are in the middle of a serious dispute with an irrational person (Trump). We are also in the middle of a debate over reconsideration of immigration rules due to the deterioration of US human rights and refugee policy.
Trudeau spoke out today. He did this the moment others did. There was probably a desire to do so earlier but held back by not wanting to be the leader of the charge -- this time. The reason is that Canada this time is the most vulnerable. I get the principle of standing up but rushing to be the first international leader to challenge Trump when Canada has the most serious spat with him (most serious due to Canadian integration and potential damage here). Is being first rather than say third or fourth that much of an issue balanced with the responsibility that the PM owes Canada to consider the implications as well as the rightiousness of a response?
My response was first a questionning of those who sought to compare what a PM says with that of an opposition leader. No matter what you think of the PM, the context due to the role is different. An opposition leader speaking is domestic politics, a PM speaking is international relations. There are moments when you might be a little slower when it comes to international relations and even choose not to be public about it for a time while you choose the best way to go about it.
So I am sorry but if you want to compare the PM with another speaker, compare him with another national leader. It is wrong on an issue such as this with a country that until recently was a friend and ally and has recently turned hostile while remaining dangerous and powerful over the fate of this country.
Without regard for who the PM of this country is or what party he leads, recognition that a PM in this position is in a dangerous and difficult position is appropriate. How he handles this can have a little bit of understanding. That he came out and said soemthing eventually is worth consideration and so too is the pause that he would have needed to know exactly how to respond responsibly given not just the moral necessity but the responsibility that goes with his role.
It is a cheap shot to compare this with an opposition leader who can say anything without much consequence to anyone other than his or her own personal reputation and that of a domestic political party. I cannot respect the political opinion that a response to children in cages is a partisan thing. I think most people are horrified by it. The suggestion by some that New Democrats are upset by this and the PM is not is offensive to Canada and the role of the PM. I am going to guess that the average Conservative and the average Liberal is also upset.
Luckily few Canadians main priority is that their favorite political party benefit from Trump's insane policies and horrible presidency. Unfortunately there are a few Canadians who desire that Trudeau and the Liberals be negatively impacted politically by what's happening in the US even if it means that the government of Canada missteps on this grave issue that would negativily impact millions of people. Thankfully, most Canadians understand that if Trudeau and his government fail in dealing with important issues like this it will hurt Canadians and very many others even if it serves the partisan purpose of weakening the Liberals chances in the next election and helping their favourite party win more votes in the next election.
It is ok to be 100% malevolent so long as you are only 80% efficient...
Thanks for stating what should have been blatantly obvious to anyone reading the original post. Conservatives care very little, especially modern reform conservatism that has taken over all shades of Tory parties from BC to New Brunswick. Why anyone would defend the conservative record on social spending is whimsical at best.
Conservatives are doing everything in their power to destroy what we value as national institutions. In Alberta, Jason Kenney is trying to privatize health care and force the issue onto a national stage. If he wins, he's got a pro-privatization platform in health care that will be a template for forcing the issue onto a national stage. Considering Ontario was silly enough to elect Ford, I won't look to Ontario for leadership to push back on it. In BC, forces are suing the government to mandate private health insurance coverage. Dr. Day and his ilk are nothing more than conservative activists.
Progressives better realize that in order to fight this, you have to at least be willing to tango with someone who only agrees with you 80% of the time. I'll take 20% disagreement over a 90% disagreement, because reform conservatives are only a few steps away from tea bag style anti-government politics. They're doing a lot at the ground level to destroy social services we all consider very important in this country. That is the true enemy.
Progressives who will fight other progressives are missing the bigger picture. Conservatives are on the verge of doing some great damage to the Canadian social system. They've got some big bulldogs about to pull strings in Alberta and force some pretty harsh right wing ideas on the nation as a whole, and it will be done through the legal system if Kenney wins his majority he so seeks. Just watch it all unfold in the coming decade. We need to protect health care by strengthening it and making a new commitment to pubilc care and improvements to it, not dismantling it.
Thank you good sir/madam for shining the much needed light on the threat the Cons pose. The Cons would indeed want us all to be fighting among each other over petty disagreements when they are preparing to nuke all the stuff we collectively cherish. Anybody trying to drive a wedge between the 80% agreeing public is only trying to serve the Cons. I am not going to shy from calling out anybody who gives a pass to the Con agenda and tries to burn any bridges among the forward thinking people of all stripes.
---------
Progressives are going to have to stop giving up before a fight is over. Kenney needs to be defeated in Alberta, despite the polls it can be done. I have 6th sense that if he wins, he's going to go on a rampage and try to force a harsh right wing agenda at a national level. It would be wise for everyone in the progressive movement put aside feelings on oil and support the Alberta NDP to get them re-elected. They need all the national support they can get.
Trust me, Kenney is dangerous. He's cocky, he's arrogant, and he doesn't believe in any benefit of any social service like health care. Whatever social moderation he has is outdone by his radical, economic conservatism. He needs to be defeated at all costs. It won't be Alberta that suffers, it will be his push legally to try and bring things down nationally. More attention needs to be paid to this guy. They just destroyed Alberta PC and have installed a massively right wing opposition.
At this point Wynne is history, and I know she's the topic of this thread, but Kenney is an urgent coming danger.
I certainly don't like Kenney, and I also want to see the Alberta NDP returned to government. However...
I have 6th sense that if he wins, he's going to go on a rampage and try to force a harsh right wing agenda at a national level.
How can Kenney force any significant agenda at the national level? Even if he wins, he'll just be the premier of one province.
Okay, so maybe the feds and other provincial governments will like what they see in Alberta, and copy him? Not likely, if voters in the other provinces truly are opposed to what Alberta is doing. Their leaders will know not to implement anything remotely like the UCP program, lest they get tossed from office.
And if voters elsewhere don't really care enough to vote out their governments for adopting that agenda, or maybe even like the agenda, well, then you've got bigger problems than what's going on in Alberta.
