Jump to content

Justin Trudeau


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Jaydee said:

CNN spreads Canada on Vaccine roll out.

How will liberals debunk a liberal news outlet that criticizes the very liberals who consider it to be a beacon of truth. It might actually be fun to write the rebuttal and attribute it to white supremacists hacking into the CNN server. Madness has a finite ceiling and as water floods into the room I can't help thinking these folks are sucking air out of the last two inches of the space that's left. 

At what point does a snake eating its own tail begin to choke? 

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rex Murphy: Trudeau's true face has emerged while in power, and it isn't pretty

Rex Murphy  2 hrs agoimage.png.5268d9d23a04511bc3c7937616c2cc3d.png

There’s a catchy line in one of T.S. Eliot’s early poems. Actually, now that I think about it there are many catchy lines in T.S. Eliot’s early poems. Many more in fact than in his later ones.

He wrote in Prufrock “there will be time/Time to prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet.” It’s the latter part that stays so solidly in mind that of preparing “a face to meet the faces that you meet.” There in ten short and plain words is the essence of all political campaigning. Political parties, and their leaders particularly, are the masters of this craft of preparing their faces. Today we call it image making, or more stolidly communications strategy, or media relations.

They are all the same thing — the art of constructing a public face best calculated for the moment of a vote.

The trouble for political leaders however is that having constructed one face — through promises, statements of high purpose and virtue, declaring certain issues as ones most close to the heart, elements of their very character — that it is almost a certainty that the face that emerges once they win power — I think we should call it their real one — is a perfect stranger to the visage most people were invited to look at in the campaign. The prepared face.

The makeup has faded or ran; the colour has drained; that fresh new look so appealing on its first runway appearance has, not suddenly — if professionally applied it had some staying power — but gradually evaporated. For Oscar Wilde enthusiasts it’s the reverse Dorian Gray effect — the portrait stays the same, the real face ages.

There comes a time when the audience looks up and, almost with a shock, notices the once new face, that charming even dazzling fresh performer they voted for is — can you believe it? — if not just the same as the tired, cynical, transactional pol he or she replaced. In the same moment the audience realizes that all the talk and promises, the twin raw elements of all political cosmetics are just that, talk, verbal camouflage.

And then there follows the cardinal insight, which I daresay no single person in the entire country has not at one time or the other heard or said to themselves: “This bunch is the same as the last bunch. There’s not an ounce of difference between them.” With the additional gloomy observation: “What’s the point? They’re all alike.”

It is from this experience that apathy grows, that people move away from politics and politicians, and look to a visit to the polls as more a penance than a privilege, and vote with so little hope that their vote can or will actually, really, change things.

This evolution attends not only the party which wins power, though there the return to form is most blatant. Opposition leaders are prone to change of costume as well. For example, there are many in the Conservative party today who are quite dismayed at what they perceive as Erin O’Toole’s campaigning for leadership under one set of ideas and having won going another route — from blue to red.

But for a truly panoramic illustration always go to the party who wins, the party in power. Five years after his accession to the PM’s office, Justin Trudeau is not the actor people saw on the runway in 2015.

Just recently his government annulled the inquiry into sexual harassment in the military. Who, from the face that greeted them five years ago, consumed with women’s’ rights and equity in all things, the world’s self-declared leading male-feminist would have predicted that cancellation of an inquiry into sexual harassment?

And who prepared his face more as a new politician, one who would abandon the cynical horse-trading, never bend to deal-making. Yet the Bloc Québécois voted with him on this. Was there a horse traded there? A deal made? It is surely mere coincidence that Air Canada, based in Quebec, got Christmas news, a bailout of billions, on the same day.

Who walked the catwalk more exuberantly promising the most transparent government ever just five years ago? His party has done everything from proroguing Parliament to “talking out the close” and has forbidden aides to testify in the WE affair.

Who was going to bring Canada back, make her a respected and influential play in the councils of the world? That mask has faded entirely. When even a CNN reporter, Jake Tapper, rants about Canada’s shortcomings in managing the COVID crisis and securing vaccines.

And where is that vital open-faced and seemingly naïve actor who in the early days was talking of “charm offensives” and floating into international conferences with bright sock wear and an eager world press?

Time has done its work on that facade. What was once new is old again. I recall when Jean Chrétien cancelled the inquiry into what was known as the Somali inquiry. The hard nosed reporters of that day remarked then, in a kind of rough praise, that “this was the old man” doing his street-fighter thing. The more things change the more they stay the same.

If the flood of rumour and speculation of a post-budget election has any merit and I think it does, be on your guard. You will be seeing a return to the make-up room by all the players and every one of them will come out fresh and new.

National Post

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Canada was a serious country we'd demand transparent government.

Last fall the National Post ran a series “A Serious Canada”. Which while not exactly fiction was, alas, history, describing a place that vanished long ago and has evidently not yet been summoned back into existence despite our best efforts. Including demonstrating how much sillier things are getting on, say, Tuesday’s front page.

As you recall, in addition to a tantalizing picture of British people actually drinking beer together, the Post featured Chinese and Russian espionage efforts “at levels not seen since the Cold War” along with federal government spending on consultants at levels not seen ever despite spending on the public service not seen ever, and the “We love Canada” feminist Liberals in cahoots with the “Canada should be demolished” Bloc voting to shut down that silly old inquiry into sexual harassment by senior military officers. What is this, the Babylon Bee?

No. But apparently it’s not 2015 any more either. So can someone explain how it’s possible, especially in a country as blessed by history and geography as Canada, that we should stumble about in such a silly way on such serious matters? For of course, pace Chesterton, “silly” is not the opposite of serious. Chinese and Russian espionage are very serious because of their potentially ominous consequences. And our response can be both silly and ominous. Indeed, it can be ominous because it is silly. Which it is.


Think for a moment about what we know about our Disarmed Forces. The NDP did manage not to vote to abolish them at its convention. But why bother? They are so small, so poorly equipped, and so tied in knots teaching junior ranks about the perils of microaggression, and apparently often teaching them by example the perils of actual harassment, that the only way we could fight a significant conflict is if our adversaries kindly gave us ample warning of their intentions and we listened.

Which we aren’t, since it’s not much of a secret what China wants to do, or Russia, or Iran. So now think for a moment about the probable state of our security establishment. How seriously do you think they are functioning? I don’t dispute that they contain many talented and serious people alarmed about how things are going, just as our Armed Forces do. But that fish, too, is undoubtedly rotting from the head.

Here a hand may be raised in protest to say “You don’t know that.” Which I don’t, because another way in which Canada is not serious, especially its governments, is that they talk endlessly about openness but, pace William F. Buckley Jr., are shocked and offended if they encounter it. It would be bad enough to adopt secrecy as official policy. But what can you do with people who talk openness while mocking it … and get away with it?

One silly answer is keep re-electing them. For, in Joseph de Maistre’s chilling words, “Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle mérite.” Which, since governments assumed the responsibility for making us all bilingual half a century ago, I’d better translate: “Every nation has the government it deserves.”

That politicians should occupy themselves attempting to baffle us as to whether they are rogues or fools is not surprising. As it is not surprising that many turn out to be both. But if we let them do it to us, it’s we who get the blame. And we do, including federal spending on “professional and special services” rising from $9.5 billion when the Trudeau gang took over to $16.4 billion in 2019-20 (and guess who gets it) and government salaries rising from $36.8 billion to $47.5 billion in roughly the same period. Apparently COVID made them do it.

Speaking of which, even that picture of Britons and beer was not included to make you feel better. Rather, it accompanied a story about how “lockdown fatigue is giving way to lockdown rage more than a year into the pandemic.” Unsurprisingly, since our governments have spent a year sternly and sanctimoniously flopping about, aided and abetted by the usual “hey you Canadians, get out of that swimming pool” commentariat, instead of trying to earn our trust by being open and, for good measure, sensible.

Thus, for instance, the Ontario government assured us Thursday that schools would remain open, and on Monday closed them.

The usual cloud of foolish rhetoric accompanied this ataxic pivot. But getting mad and rioting aren’t serious responses, at least not morally or intellectually. Instead of acting like sheep prone to rabies outbreaks, we need to insist on responsible, transparent government on everything from espionage to epidemics.

It’s what a serious country would do.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lesson of the Plucked Chicken

During those final days of the collapsing Marxist experiment in the Soviet Union, Soviet novelist Chingiz Aitmatov retold the following story, which has been paraphrased here.

On one occasion, so it was narrated, Stalin called for a live chicken and proceeded to use it to make an unforgettable point before some of his henchmen. Forcefully clutching the chicken in one hand, with the other he began to systematically pluck out its feathers. As the chicken struggled in vain to escape, he continued with the painful denuding until the bird was completely stripped. “Now you watch,” Stalin said as he placed the chicken on the floor and walked away with some bread crumbs in his hand. Incredibly, the fear-crazed chicken hobbled toward him and clung to the legs of his trousers. Stalin threw a handful of grain to the bird, and it began to follow him around the room, he turned to his dumbfounded colleagues and said quietly, “This is the way to rule the people. Did you see how that chicken followed me for food, even though I had caused it such torture? People are like that chicken. If you inflict inordinate pain on them they will follow you for food the rest of their lives.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our Not So Prime...minister..

Quite the friends list.  Let’s see...Child Sex Offender, Misogynist , attempted murderer, gay Pervert , Sexual assault..and then there’s that Sophie video!

And these are the ones we know about,,,,


  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WTF ??   Just keeps getting worse !!

Ottawa drops specific COVID-19 screening for travellers from Brazil as variant spreads throughout British Columbia

Canada has dropped specific screening requirements for travellers arriving from Brazil, measures aimed at reducing the spread of a highly contagious variant of COVID-19 that is now spreading rapidly throughout Western Canada.

The change is taking place as the B.C. government raises the alarm about travellers circumventing the rules imposed by Ottawa for all international arrivals travelling by air. Premier John Horgan said his government may impose travel restrictions unilaterally, after learning that more than 100 passengers arriving at Vancouver International Airport have refused to quarantine as required by Ottawa since Feb. 22. “We haven’t taken travel restrictions off the board, quite frankly.”

Health Minister Patty Hajdu’s office declined to explain why the extra screening was scrubbed by the federal government. 




  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, deicer said:

Please supply full context for that statement.

Chrystia Freeland's 'epiphany' that COVID-19 is an 'opportunity' is actually pretty dark.



Beware of politicians having epiphanies.

It’s quite enough to deal with them when their inspirations are earth-bound, but when they start receiving prompts from the celestial world it’s time to really start worrying.

In full and fair justice to Minister Freeland, it is very clear that she was not, repeat not, alluding to divine authorities or archangelic visitation when she spoke of having an epiphany. The minister was instead calling on the word’s secondary meaning, that of being visited by a sudden thought, what we sometimes call a flash of insight. And so it is on purely mundane grounds that we must approach her comments.

Now Liberals have been promising something like national child care for nearly a couple of decades. From which we might deduce that the need or justification for it has been established and clearly on their minds before even the phrase COVID-19 was invented, and well before its current and cruel manifestation.

And if it has, in their understanding, and for so long in their councils, been seen as either justified or necessary purely on its own merits, what is there about COVID-19 that attends such a program, as an epiphany in the minister’s mind? Is she saying or implying that without some sort of national, indeed international, medical crisis, a case for such a program could not be made? Obviously, she is not, because as already demonstrated the Liberals have been dangling national child care promises for years. So often in fact it might be seen as one of their favourites. It’s up there with ending boil-water advisories on reserves.

Perhaps instead we should attend to the other, more troubling phrase, her characterization of COVID-19 as a “political opportunity.” It’s troubling for two reasons. This plague has brought death and vast anxiety to very, very many people. It is, to be most gentle, in any context, more than jarring for a leading public figure to characterize it as a “political opportunity.”

To those who follow politics it immediately calls to mind that crass attitude of mind of Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s chief-of-staff, when he declared, with a super abundance of cynicism “never let a crisis go to waste.”

It is not right, and it is not proper, that politicians, Liberal or Tory, Republican or Democrat, at any time play politics under the cover of tragedy. It is also neither right nor proper to “use” a crisis to bring in policies or programs — that absent such a crisis — they would not bring in or could not bring in. It is equivalent to saying “well, we could do such and such in normal times, but now that people are distracted by anxiety, or off their centre of balance because of the hard times we are going through, if we act now — we’ll get it past them.”

No one would want a government who thought along such lines. Yet, that there is — and I will try to be fair — a tinge of such callous opportunism present in the current government is hard to miss. Outside of Freeland’s perhaps careless phrasing there is the more deliberate declaration made by the PM himself, half a year ago in the UN.

His statement was as follows: “This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset. … This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems.” That is far more declarative and direct than Freeland’s musing. He was saying for his government, and pointing out to other governments that the pandemic gave them the “chance” as he put it “to accelerate” — and this is the key part — “our pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems.”

Opportunity for a reset. Our pre-pandemic efforts. There were ideas, on a vast scale — how else to describe the reimagining of “economic systems?” — that were present before the pandemic, but now the COVID-19 crisis gives us the “opportunity” to pursue. The Liberals have a much freer hand to reimagine our national economies, to restructure economic systems. Without the COVID crisis they could not, or would not dare to try.

That’s actually a pretty dark run of thought. That is, or at the very least certainly appears to be, a plain statement that COVID-19 could or should be seen as a “political opportunity” to pursue broad ideological ambitions.

Freeland may have been a little careless or loose in her phrasing. The prime minister’s declaration has about it, in contrast, clear evidence of pre-thought and considered reflection. If he was serious I expect the direction of his “reimagined” Canadian economy is one where our national energy industry, the building of pipelines, and support for all the worlds directly and indirectly supported by the energy industry will have very little place.

We’ll get more than a hint of what is actually the case in just about a week, when for the first time in a long time Canadians are allowed to see the books — or at least have a peep at them. The Budget at last.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, we get laughed at with Trudeau’s fashion trip to India, Canada’s problems with ethics, our inability to vaccinate like other civilized countries. Now, we are laughed at for our nations fashion sense at the Olympics......think denim:


In 2021, does Canada deserve better than uniforms that look like they were vandalized by angry teens with Sharpies? Not really

Are our Tokyo Olympics uniforms juvenile? Yes. Do they lack a coherent vision? Also yes. Should Canadians be embarrassed? Probably. But do they accurately represent Canada? Absolutely.




Our image in the world just keeps getting better and better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, st27 said:

First, we get laughed at with Trudeau’s fashion trip to India, Canada’s problems with ethics, our inability to vaccinate like other civilized countries. Now, we are laughed at for our nations fashion sense at the Olympics......think denim:


Our image in the world just keeps getting better and better.

Give it another month when the Turd is elected to a majority. Even politicians in Bangladesh will be laughing at Canadians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...