Trudeau Proves Himself Unfit for Top Job … Again

When Canadians vote …at least those who do … we are NOT choosing Canada’s Best Matinee Idol or Best Smile or Friendliest Media Photo-op Champion …. or even Best Orator.

We are choosing the person we believe will best LEAD the nation, protect our country, advance our economy, preserve our environment and address social inequalities and injustices.

And being a democracy, with so many varying ideas, philosophies, ideologies, it’s not surprising that every election, a whole lot of voters end up very unhappy with any results. But … except for the most partisan types incapable of saying or thinking anything good of those they oppose … I submit all the major party leaders until now would have had the intellectual abilities, experience and knowledge needed to govern, even if we disagreed with their policies.

Justin Trudeau?  No!

Remember, we’re talking about the Prime Minister of Canada.

As I have written on this blog before, he has never impressed me … from his silver-spoon upbringing, a lack of any meaningful job or business experience, any special community service involvements and not even much in the way of credible major political ideas, contributions or accomplishments … apart from self-promotion and self-advancement.

In fact, this past week, he showed once more his total lack of even basic historical knowledge and understanding Canadians should EXPECT from a Prime Minister.

In a Toronto speech, Trudeau compared the Harper government’s immigration policies towards Muslims to Canada’s anti-Semitic policies turning away Jews during the Second World War. Many Jews turned away and/or sent back ended up dying in the Holocaust.

“So we should all shudder to hear the same rhetoric, that led to a “none is too many”  immigration policy towards Jews in the 30s and 40s being used today to raise fears against Muslims”  Trudeau said.


In fact and insult to BOTH Jews and Muslims.

Over the past decade, Canada has welcomed  an average of over 56 thousand immigrants a year from Muslim countries each year, almost 625,000 … and still counting.

In addition, Muslims who feel persecuted abroad and board an aircraft bound for any Canadian city (or arrive at the border by ship or by car) and then claim “refugee” status.

And when they get here, we immediately provide them with all kinds of assistance, health coverage, free education, social services … and legitimate refugees face a welcoming attitude by most Canadians. Even phony refugee claimants and illegal economic migrants, Muslim or whatever, are given rights and access to government services NONE of the Jews received from McKenzie King’s openly anti-Semitic policies, ministers and bureaucrats.

We don’t inter Muslims arriving here, even from terrorist-infested Muslim states,  in enemy-alien camps in rural Ontario or Quebec, as Canada did to some of the very few European Jews who did make it here;  we don’t turn away ships loaded with refugees and send them back to die in gas chambers, as we did to the Jews; and I haven’t seen bans on Muslims living/buying homes in areas of Canadian cities, attending schools or universities, or joining golf/country clubs, as Canada did to the Jews in the period Trudeau cited.

A disgraceful comparison by the Liberal Leader.

Not to mention …but let’s … that there are FORTY-NINE Muslim-majority nations in the world … giving legitimate Muslim refugees LOTS of choices and possibilities that was certainly NOT available to Jews fleeing for their lives.

What Trudeau is REALLY doing is playing the race/religion card to ingratiate himself with Muslim-Canadian  voters … and clearly is not onlyt willing, but actually trying to distort history and the facts for his own selfish political advancement (again).

NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair …. no fan of the current Tory government’s immigration policies himself … took Trudeau to task for using the “Jewish” comparison.

“Using any reference to the Holocaust in relation to the situation in Canada is singularly inappropriate,” Mulcair said this week.

As Canadians, both inside Parliament and out, debate current government policies, proposals and actions on immigration, civil rights etc. there are MANY aspects that can be targeted and torn apart.

But comparing Canada’s treatment of Muslims today to the way the Jews were treated in the Second World War shows an ignorance NOT WORTHY of any educated person …. especially one who dreams of becoming our Prime Minister.

Harv Oberfeld

(Reminder: You can receive FREE alerts (no ads, no spam) of new postings on this blog by following @harveyoberfeld on Twitter.)

This entry was posted in National. Bookmark the permalink.

147 Responses to Trudeau Proves Himself Unfit for Top Job … Again

  1. DBW says:

    Larry @95. My first reaction to your post was

    and to leave it at that, but I really do want to learn here. That is why I am asking questions.

    I was only being up front and honest about my political voting. I start with the party that best represents my values. For the most part that has been the NDP. Then I consider my local candidate and then I consider the leader. In that order. If you have a different method then good for you. Other people may wait for the election and see what specific issue is most prominent (free trade, wage and price controls) or a scandal (adscam) or contrasting leaders (Trudeau/Clark or Turner/Mulroney) or some may be just tired of the current government (Mulroney’s Conservatives). There are dozens of reasons for people voting the way they do. In fact, if I didn’t like my local MP I was sorely tempted to vote Liberal or Green last election because I was one of the few NDP supporters who did not like Jack Layton.

    Maybe I am reading you wrong but I hope you are not suggesting that we only vote for the Liberals or the Conservatives because they are the only ones who have ever held power.

    And I am confused by Harvey’s response to my #90. (As a side note it is 1.4 BILLION not million hits to c-51 while Justin is just shy of 10 Million).

    I did not ask Harvey to write about c-51 nor have I ever tried to defend Justin Trudeau nor have I shown any partisanship by suggesting that Mulcair would be the best Prime Minister. All I have tried to ascertain first through Harvey and then through others is why Harper is more suitable to be Prime Minister than the SUPPOSED lightweight, silver spoon Trudeau.

    In the link above from Harvey’s blog post of 2011 before the election, he said and I quote:

    “The lessons of history are very clear: freedom and democratic rights should be paramount. Always!”


    “ANY loss or diminuiton of that …which we have ALREADY had under Harper’s minority … be condemned: not de-facto endorsed by calling for him to be given even more dictatorial powers under a majority.”

    We have had four years of a Harper majority and I see nothing different from what Harvey said four years ago.

    I am simply asking if he thinks anything has changed? Does he still think that “freedom and democratic rights are paramount”? Is he still concerned that Harper was “given even more dictatorial powers under a majority”? Is he worried about what else Harper can do with future majorities? Remember, I am referencing Harvey’s words. If he prefers Harper to the supposed lightweight then well and good; the discussion is over. But if he still stands by those words, then I would contend that Rafe’s statement is still true only Trudeau is the 3 and Harper the 2.

    And to BMCQ’s credit, he is the only one who has attempted to show that Harper is worth voting for. However, I don’t agree that Harper would be able stand up to Putin any more than any other Canadian Prime Minister. He will need the help of the UN or NATO. And yes, Canada did do better than most during the recession, a recession that was caused by the banks and the corporations that the Conservative are fond of supporting. As well, many would suggest that Canada was hit less because Chretien and Martin didn’t deregulate as much as say the US had.

    Anyway Larry, if you were actually looking for a response, I hope this helps.

    (Response: I still believe and stand by what I wrote on my earlier blog. And also EVERY other criticism I’ve written about Harper and also Mulcair as well as Trudeau. That’s what will make this election so difficult …not only for me, but I suspect MANY, MANY Canadians …and I think we’ll see how much that plays out when we witness the size of the voter turnout. h.o)

  2. BMCQ says:

    Hugh – 89

    Thanks for going to the effort of Posting The IMF Warning.

    In fact I was commenting primarily directly to address your claim of Canadian Federal Debt, not the Debt in the Housing market.

    I stand by what I said regarding Federal Debt. Canada is an 8 in a Sea of 2’s!!

    The Household Debt is more complicated and I am really not qualified to offer an opinion other than to say what I said in my original Post to you.

    I believe I said that there were things that can be done but there is risk and a huge Political Price to Pay for the Government that attempted to do something about High Real Estate Prices.

    From what I understand there seems to be no real threat of a Housing Bubble at this time.

    For at least 5 years now MSM and others have been promoting the “Housing Bubble” story. Along with the story about the ever increasing Interest Rates.

    Neither has happened, in fact Real Estate has continued it’s increase and in Fact Interest Rates have come down 4 times!!!!

    How would one square that Circle?

    Raising Interests and increasing the Down Payment Percentage Minimum and gradually increasing Interest Rates would have a dramatic affect on Housing Prices but it would be a very risky proposition.

    Someone better qualified than me would be better to comment on those two things.

    Another thing that would have a dramatic affect on Housing Prices would be a restriction on who can purchase and have property Titled in their name if they are offshore Buyers. once again you could open a huge can of Worms and it would be a very dangerous thing for any PM regardless of Party if they implemented restrictive regulations like that.

    Even if you put an additional Tax on Off Shore Purchasers when buying Property.

    first thing that would happen then is your two Heroes Justin and Mulcair would scream that a new Head Tax was implemented by the Hated Harper!!!

    Yes I would guess that most of you here would welcome a similar Off Shore Purchaser Sales Tax .

  3. Splashdancer says:

    Latest poll, support for Bill C-51 has collapsed.

    A certain Harper just woke the sleeping bears.

  4. Splashdancer says:

    Here is a better link to the latest C-51 poll…Bad news for Harper.

  5. larry Bennett says:

    The big fellow at Van Global said that Bibi Netanyahu, having won the election – has now endangered the peace initiatives in the Middle East. (am not sure if that is his own conclusion, or those of the network) though I suspect the latter. How anyone can call the Obama disaster with Iran, a “peace initiative”, is beyond me! That said, Netanyahu can be worrisome, but there really doesn’t seem to be an alternative for Israel, that would be realistic.

  6. 13 says:

    Just reading all the posts every day takes me quite a while. I seldom go to the links posters attach because they are usualy just a piece of op ed that supports their position.
    Some one claims your site is rife with right wing conservatives. Funny I fit that bill yet I seldom feel like Im in a crowd on this blog.
    I dont get the endless eaf dredging of problems that have been ongoing federaly and provincialy under various parties and leaders. Yet he manages to blame the age old problems on the current government/leader.
    Bill c51/abortion/gun laws/ Putin playing war games/ keystone pipline/terrorism local and abroad/ support for Isreal / imigration and imigrants. These and so many other reasons to support Harper and dismiss Trudeau.
    I would have a hard time if forced to choose between the two Pamelas for PM.

  7. BMCQ says:

    Splashdancer – 100

    Actually Splasher if you read my post I said “About to embark on Five Years of a Balanced Budget”. That does not mean they “Have Had”, it means “Will soon have”!!

    In fact after I Posted I thought I could have been more succinct and I should have pointed out that just a few weeks ago the Finance Minister commented that even with current LOWER Oil Prices Canada is very close to a Balanced Budget for the CURRENT Fiscal Year, 2014 – 1015.

    That in fact was much much better than what The Government was expecting!

    Now please understand that I did not say Balanced this year. I said the FM announced they planned Balanced Budgets for the future coming years..

    Again, The Finance Minister did state that they felt they could Balance the Budget for the coming years, that is all any observer one can go by.

    As a Canadian I certainly hope the Government can accomplish to manage the Balanced Budgets.

    I find it very interesting that so many that post here actually want the Federal Conservative Government or The Liberal Provincial Government to fail.

    Do we not understand that once Elected the Government is responsible to provide Programs that assist the People they have the responsibility of Governing?

    As an example I have never voted Federal Liberal but I would have never wanted a collapse of Oil Prices on a Paul Martin Gvernment., why would I want to see a Government from any Party fail?

    To me that would be Un Canadian!!

    You keep referring to past Deficits.

    Can you not recognize and understand and grasp that the World went through an Economic Collapse for those years an Canada actually survived better than virtually every other Country in the World?

    Why not ask the People in Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain, and even the U.S. if they may have been happy to be residing in Canada during that period.

    Hell, most of them would most likely be in Canada today, even with The Evil eyed Man Stephen Harper as Prime Minister!

    As to your pathetic little “Gotchya Moment” outing me as an Economic Moron.

    If it makes you feel better that is just fine with me.

    If I am incorrect in a Statement I have no problem whatsoever being corrected.

    Why would that bother anyone?

    And finally Splasher please read the Post of

    DBW – 101

    He and I do not agree on much but he actually supports my Statement on The Economic Collapse. Read and Learn Splasher!

    Keep in mind that DBW and I do not agree most of the time but I always find his posts interesting and I am surethat he reads other Posts here with an open mind and like me I am sure he could from time to time change his mind on any one issue.

    DBW – 101

    Always enjoy your Posts even if I only agree with you some of the time and you are somewhat picky with H.O.!

    Please take that as a compliment!

  8. workforfun says:

    I would have a hard time if forced to choose between the two Pamelas for PM.
    Martin and Wallin Laugh In – eh!

  9. Splashdancer says:


    Glad to know you are a economic mind-reader, pray-tell, a seer, crystal ball troll.

    Corporate losses will be claimed against next year`s taxes, there will be deficit this year and next, and the year after that too.

    World growth is in a 5 year stall.

    Your nuanced statement about embarking on future surpluses is absolute garbage, propaganda drivel, meaningless tripe.

    Ravings of a Harper booster club cheerleader, a statement based on nothing.

    Like I said, that one statement makes my case, .

    I never said anything about the last 8 deficits ran by Harper, twist in the wind 2 4 6 8 who do we appreciate, Harper Harper Harper!

  10. e.a.f. says:

    I admit I didn’t read all of BMCQ’s comment all that closely. Just saw the comments regarding “tax”. The state of Florida has been charging “non-residents” a higher property tax since the 1930s. Works like a hot dam in the middle of the right wing state.

    Approx. 10 yrs ago some areas of the state of Washington charged higher taxes for non residents. Works for the Americans.

    I think its a great idea. it increases the amount of money taken in by the government while not impacting citizens. People who use Canadian housing as part of their investment portofolio, and don’t live here, pay taxes, etc. benefit from everything we pay taxes for, but they don’t have to pay. So my suggestion is that property transfer tax, increase it to 5% for off shore investor types, non residents, etc. that house on Point Grey Road at $51M sold to an off shore investor? 5% of that would have done nicely in the provincial coffers. That buyer has the security of knowledge there is police and fire protection for their property. There isn’t going to be a revolution, no squatters, etc. yet what do they pay in taxes to get all of that? not much, less than the working person in Surrey.

    P.E.I. has had regulations for a long time for who can and can not buy and what type. It has kept housing prices down and an influx of Americans was avoided.

    If someone “keeps” a house in Canada for investment purposes or just vacant, whatever, they ought to pay a higher rate of property tax. its done elsewhere. It can be done here. Municpal governments get a lot more money, citizens don’t have to bear the brunt of it.

    its not a head tax, everyone is free to come. its not racism. its just good business for governments.

    I would include commercial buildings in the tax and bare land. Great way for several levels of government to take in more money without raising taxes for the “locals”.

  11. Gene the Bean says:

    EAF – whats wrong with Harper advancing his agenda? Isnt that his job?
    Don’t you advance YOUR agenda here?

  12. BMCQ says:

    e.a.f. – 110

    Really quite amazing how you could simply pick out just one point from my Post to read.

    Quite the talent!

    Funny I always read your Posts all the way through. but then I am not quite as talented as you!

    You have more or less agreed with me and outlined what should and could be a very interesting topic on this Blog.

    I would like to say that “Heaven Forbid” you and I might have much more in common on this topic than you think.

    Dare we veer that far off topic?

    Splasher – 109

    Very Classy!

  13. larry Bennett says:

    BMCQ – Great points at #102. An old fellah that lives where I do, keeps arguing that Harper should just stop immigration from China, each time there is a report of housing costs (as much as $1 million, in yesterday’s paper) for an average house in Vancouver. I always ask him if he thinks Trudeau or Mulcair would be willing to stop such sales, and he curses and talks of notwithstanding clauses and yadda, yadda. But as you point out, Harper would be accused loud and long about the old head-tax bugaboo, etcetera and ad infinitum.
    e.a.f. – So now you are suggesting that we should be like the Americans! That’s an astounding proposal coming from the Left of the spectrum. I always thought your kind despised everything American?
    DBW – Would it make us kindred spirits were I to tell you that, I too was one of (many) Conservative voters who didn’t support Layton either? Okay – maybe not so much, eh? Oh well, we can still agree to disagree.

  14. mrt says:

    I am unsure of who to vote for Federally, but I am doing my best to be informed!

    Hugh presented some stats from the BC Govt. budget. IMHO, if those stats were attached to the NDP party we would see the daily head lines screaming, but the Liberals are getting a free ride here.

    Now to me that is frightening, no one is being held to account!

    Has anybody watched Clark’s performance in the BC Legislature lately?

  15. mrt says:

    Norm Farrell @Norm_Farrell

    StatCan: BC has 4,400 fewer jobs than in Sept 2011 when the BC Jobs Plan was announced but the workforce has grown by 143,400. #bcpoli

    Thank you Norm Farrell, for your ability to analyse the stats and for posting them on your blog!!

  16. Splashdancer says:

    Here is the Real Harper Conservatives in action, I know you will approve Larry, reformacons in action.

    This anti-abortion group isn`t a holier than thou organization, they are targeting Justin Trudeau and Justin Trudeau only.

    Mulcair is pro-choice too, Mulcair is the official opposition yet this Alberta-based Conservative party anti-abortion group is only after Trudeau, that`s classy.

    If this anti- abortion group was pure to the cause, they would campaign to stop abortions on the merits, not target one man, especially since Stephen Harper has had a majority for 5 years and he`s not budged on the abortion issue.

    Just crass partisan politics by a Federal Conservative front group.

  17. larry Bennett says:

    Now I am aware that this blog is not exactly the salon of Mme. de Sevigne, but really, one senses that some few stated positions (you know who you are) sound more like a case of confected outrage. Or else that these same, are still in their “the wonder of me” phase. There seems too, to be a lot of “whataboutery” or what is known as “argument by analogy”, of which I too, am guilty. Poor Harve, it must be like herding cats.

  18. Splashdancer says:

    This is for BCMQ

    “OECD reduced its 2015 and 2016 economic growth forecasts for Canada, citing drag caused by lower prices for oil and other commodities”

    The OECD has sharply cut its growth forecasts for Canada for this year and next, a continuing reminder of how sinking oil prices are pulling down the country’s economy.

    The downgraded projections from the Paris-based Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development come amid mounting job losses in Canada’s oilpatch. Talisman Energy, Nexen Energy and ConocoPhillips Canada have all separately announced plans to eliminate hundreds of workers in the coming weeks.

    The OECD now estimates the Canadian economy will expand by 2.2 per cent in 2015. That’s 0.4 of a percentage point lower than previously thought.

    The group also trimmed its forecast for 2016 to growth of 2.1 per cent, down 0.3 of a percentage point since its November forecast. ”

    The effects of lower prices, said Bartlett, will be “disproportionately felt by companies in the energy and oil sector. There’s a spillover effect on investment as profits get squeezed and investment gets delayed or taken off the table.”

    That leads to lower government revenues as well as reduced employment and household income. ”

    You are welcome Q.

    By the way, $billions of military procurement dollars weren`t spent, botched procurements, that allotted money over the last 5 years, unspent, sent back to Ottawa, all to facilitate the illusion of a balanced budget, veterans money returned to general revenue too.

    Classic bait n switch, even with all the returned money, all the service cuts, Canada will still run a deficit, that`s why Harper has delayed by months the federal budget, Harper wants to leave no time for anyone to prove out the real deficit for this year.

    Hey BCMQ, nice looking legs, you look good in a skirt and pom poms!


  19. DBW says:

    BMCQ, @101 while I do appreciate the compliment (despite the risk to my street cred), please do not use me in your argument with splashdancer, especially when we hardly agree about the economic meltdown.

    We might agree that Canada has weathered the recession better than others, but I blame right wing ideology for causing the recession and Liberal policy under Chretien and Martin for Canada not being hit as hard in the first place.

    I may be wrong in my analysis and certainly can be corrected, but splashdancer is not going to be learning anything by reading my scribbles that will make him change his mind on anything let alone the recession.

    But shifting back (sort of) to the theme of Harvey’s post, this morning I read an article in which the writer was complaining about the over emphasis on leaders suggesting that we end up with a much weaker parliament as power remains in the PMO (of whatever party) rather than with the MPs who are supposed to represent us.

    Maybe we should be talking about electoral reform rather than which leader sucks the least. Maybe we should be looking for a way to stop a Prime Minister of any party from holding 100% dictatorial power to push his agenda when they never get even close to 50% of voter support. Maybe that way compromise can become the norm rather than polarization.

  20. 13 says:

    If you want to find a concentrated group of voters that HATE the name Trudeau, go to Alberta. Its to bad the Rockies manage to keep that sentiment from spreading West.

  21. nonconfidencevote says:

    Splashdancer, you’re resorting to name calling again.
    Its an itch you just seem to want to scratch. Again and again and again.
    It negates the validity of the arguement. Its petty.
    You hate harper and the conservatives, we get it.
    Try again without the visceral feeling……

  22. BMCQ says:

    DBW – 119

    Please re-read my post. I was very careful that I prefaced my comments by pointing out that you are very seldom in agreement with me! I hope that helps you!

    I agree I certainly would not want to see your “Street Cred” damaged in the eyes of “Splasher’, Hugh, Laura, and about 90% of the others that Post here.

    One if the big differences between me and you is the fact I do not mind agreeing with anyone if I feel they present a worthwhile opinion backed up with some credible fact. What a Concept!

    A wise woman once told me, “One should never allow their own Ideology to Cloud their Judgement”!!

    I will not get into the causes of the World’s “Economic Meltdown” with you because I doubt if you would agree with me and others that a very large part of the problem can be attributed to the “Entitled” Socialist Ideology promoted by many of The EU Countries. Do you recall my reference up the page to Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain? Other than Ireland which was proactive those Countries are in even deeper trouble as I type this. Soon to be joined by France who is in very serious trouble and perhaps………..

    Interestingly enough Countries like Canada, USA, Australia, and other similar Countries have done far better than those with “Entrenched” Entitlement Programs.

    I always find it very interesting how those on the Left always seem to seek out Capitalist Financial Fund Managers to handle their Personal Pension, RRSP, Savings and other Financial Investments!! Interesting don’t you think?

    Some may attempt to paint the picture that growh in Canada ha been somewhat slower than anticipated. That is true but once again, a “7 in a Sea of 3 and worse”!!!

    Please do not tell any of your friends here but I commend you on your observation about Paul Martin, Chretien and former Bank of Canada Chairs in their steadfastness of not allowing Canadian Banks to de-regulate or merge with others.

    That action alone could be perhaps the most important decision affecting The Economy of Canada since the end of WW ll !!!

    Each and every Canadian resident is in great Debt to those mentioned and the others that supported and had input in their incredibly astute judgement !!

    Please do not be concerned about losing “Street Cred” from e.a.f. because I have once again complimented you as he never ever reads all of my Post anyway, amazingly he has the almost Zen Like ability to only pick out the bits that he may agree with. Incredible!

    Your secret is safe with me!

    By the way, I already see where that “Campaigning Genius” Mulcair is running so “Frightened” about losing Seats to “The Menasa” Member Justin and his Liberal Juggernaut in Quebec that he is already long before the Writ is dropped offering co-operation to The Libs to join together in a Coalition Government!!!!

    I can only imagine.

    A scenario like that would play out something like “Two Scorpions Circling Each other in a Bottle”!!

  23. BMCQ says:

    DBW – 119

    Parliamentary Reform

    I am certainly not Constitutional Expert but I believe Parliamentary Reform and changes in The PMO would require Constitutional change.

    I am going to guess that over 80% of Canadian Voters would like a “Triple A” Senate, Abolish, Abolish, Abolish. but that very much desired Legislation would be unattainable because of the Formula PET put in place in the Constitution all those years ago.

    What a “Bloated Stinking Piece of S**t he managed to create there, correct all of you Liberals?

    Perhaps like Justin PET was getting his ideas from Margaret.

    In his wisdom he virtually guaranteed Constitutional Change is impossible with out Quebec and Ontario being in agreement something about a “Veto”!!!!

    In my opinion that alone guarantees that there will be no chance at all in Senate Reform.

    I am (again) guessing that the same applies to Electoral Reform.

    Talk about power in The PMO.

    I seem to remember that PET once refused to sign Candidate Papers for two Alberta Liberal MP’s because they did not vote with The Libs on, was it Capitol Punishment? He refused to sign their Papers. I believe they in turn ran for Reform and were Elected. Imagine that!!

    If I am wrong on that I am sure a “Fact Checker” here will correct me.

    There are many problems with “The British Parliamentary” System.

    In my opinion each and every Vote in Parliamentary should be a “Free Vote”!!

    Remember all those years ago when Ronald Regan a Republican President could convince a Democratic Senate to support him on Legislation?

  24. G. Barry Stewart says:

    BMCQ: “In my opinion each and every Vote in Parliamentary should be a “Free Vote”!!”

    I agree… but how to enable that? If you’re being ‘whipped’ you’d be thrown out of caucus, or the party, if you voted against the party line.

    A solution could be secret ballot, just like the plebe voters practice. The problem would be that an MP couldn’t verify to constituents that he or she voted a certain way. Another problem could be underhanded pay-offs, to vote in favour of a lobby group (though we’re not free of that, currently… it’s just more open.)

    Still, I think I’d prefer a secret ballot. Let everyone make their speeches for and against, then go to secret ballot so everyone can vote with their conscience as the main ‘whip.’

  25. Hawgwash says:

    Way too much tit-for-tattery goin’ on here.
    That’s ok though, I’ve been able to get lot’s of spring chunking done this past week.
    Thank you all.

  26. DBW says:

    Hey BMCQ, @122

    No hard feelings. I just didn’t want to get caught in any crossfire. I am glad to see that we agree a little more on the recession (eg former Liberal policy which has helped the Conservatives get through this better than they might have), I just felt uncomfortable when you told splashdancer to “Read and Learn” as if he and I were in opposing camps.

    I agree with a lot – most – of what splashdancer has said although I wish he weren’t quite so aggressive.

    Side note. I don’t know how I come across here, but I am pretty self-effacing. The internet allows me time between parries to collect my thoughts and talking to strangers (who can’t physically hit me) allows me to be a bit more forceful. That is the power of the internet and blogs like this one and that is good.

    I have right wing friends and if we were discussing Harper or Trudeau as we have here, after a couple of minutes I would have said “Whatever, let’s play darts.”

    As to electoral reform, it looks like we agree somewhat there as well. I am no fan of the Senate as it presently stands. But a chamber of second thought isn’t a horrible idea. I am always struck by how reasonable former Prime Ministers and Presidents sound when they are interviewed about current events long after they have left politics and they don’t have to worry about being partisan. If only we could find a handful of people like that rather than the bloated trough that is today’s Senate.

    And the simplest start for electoral reform would be the preferential ballot. I am not even talking yet about proportional representation. Just put the candidates in order and eliminate the bottom ones until somebody has the support of 50% of the voters in their riding. That’s how parties vote for their leaders so it isn’t all that strange.

    I am not sure how many ridings would have different outcomes but there would be some. Just a guess, but I bet any second place Liberal in 2011 would have had a good shot at winning as the third place NDP or Conservative voters would have likely placed their second choice with the Liberals. As well we would be more likely to vote for minor parties when we know our vote wouldn’t be wasted giving those people a better chance at winning or at least becoming more credible.

    And we need more free votes and the opportunity for backbenchers to have a greater say. Just not sure how.

  27. e.a.f. says:

    Hi BMCQ,

    its e.a.f., yes I’m quite talented if I do say so myself. yes, the reading skills have been with me a long time and yes I can pick out the “necessary words” when I want. As a lowly 8th grader, back in the last century the assessed my reading speed at 900 wpm. Then I developed the skill of “selective hearing” and “selecting reading”, etc.

    I’m not against taxes. Its just who has to pay what and when. You “gotta make it to pay it” and “you should be proud to pay taxes in a country like Canada” was one of the family mottos. The other one was, “taxes in Canada, you don’t pay taxes. see what we’re paying in Europe, now that is taxes”.

    gotta run, have to take care of things to maintain “the talent”.

  28. Laura says:

    I know I’m wasting my time but…

    No, the origins of the financial crisis had nothing to do with “entitled socialist ideology”.

    It was caused by financiers in places like Wall Street indulging in high risk activities, credit rating agencies that failed to do their jobs or had undisclosed conflicts of interest and regulators who didn’t regulate because they tended to have too cozy relationships with the same corporations that were indulging in highly speculative trading.

    Instruments such as credit-default swaps which were supposed to ameliorate risk instead concentrated it.

    Central banks should have seen the collapse coming and instituted policies to reverse course but failed to do their jobs because they bought into the same ideology and couldn’t see the problems in spite of some economists pointing them out.

    So when housing bubbles in the US, Ireland and Spain popped as they inevitably would everyone in the chain caused by the inter-connectedness of international finance suffered.

    There has been no valid study of the crisis that has not determined that “capitalists” caused the financial meltdown.

    What I find interesting is how people on the political Right who usually find it so hard to even say the word “socialist” quickly decided to “socialize” the losses of the investment class.

    Lowly taxpayers bailed out banks and financial institutions and suffered reduced social spending in order to bail out the rich that had caused the crisis.

    Then to top it off the Right adopted Keynesian (ie, “left-wing”) ideology in order to keep the economy from crumbling.

    All in all, very revealing for those of us with an interest in such matters.

  29. Laura says:

    BMCQ, no, there are no constitutional roadblocks to electoral reforms. Elections are governed by the Canada Elections Act, not the Constitution and can be changed by parliament.

    And parliamentary reforms could also easily be accomplished without opening the constitution.

    Just look at Conservative MP’s Michael Chong’s efforts. His reform bill was watered down to almost nothing by his own party by the time it was passed but many of his ideas should have and could have been implemented.

    The only reason we don’t see electoral and parliamentary reform is that the party that benefits the most from the status quo is always the party that holds the majority of seats.

    Asking them to put in place a system that is fairer or which would curb their power to some degree never seems to be on their agenda.

    Therefore ideas for reform always come from the opposition benches, whichever party that is at the time. After all the Reform party used to have all sorts of ideas for reforming the system, but all of that got shelved when they took power.

    C’est la vie.

  30. BMCQ says:

    G. Barry Stewart – 124

    You and me and a very high percentage of “The Great Unwashed’ fully agree on the Free Vote thing.

    Problem is, now once again I am not an expert, just my opinion, the way the British Parliament System works that almost never happens, even if they say it can. As you and I have already mentioned The Ship etc. etc.

    Problem with a Secret Vote is the Voting Member regardless of the level of Government would then not be Accountable to his Constituents because they would have no record of his Vote.

    Easy for me to say but if I was a Sitting Member I would be asking Constituents to comment in certain issues on my Web-Site.

    I do however have a good idea that might work though.

    How about a “Secret Ballot” on all Issues at all Union Meetings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Now please, don’t everybody here all get up and applaud that idea all at once!!!

    DBW – 126

    I honestly believe that many that Post and read here have much more in Common with Parliamentary, Constitutional. Senate, British Parliamentary System Reform than what we might think.

    I am open to almost anything personally other than the Proportional Representation. Sorry.

    Laura – 129

    I think almost everyone regardless of Political Leanings agrees and understands that the whole Financial Crisis was prompted by Lehmans, other large Banks and others taking advantage of Lax Regulations in the Banking Industry. On top of that there were obviously other factors of the wholesaling of MTG, High Ration Financing etc. etc.

    Add the Jessie Jackson and Bill Clinton idea of putting people in Homes with Mortgages that amounted to sometimes up to 50% over the Value of the Residence you had the “Perfect Storm”.

    My point was about the huge contributing factor Entitlement has played in the still FESTERING Stinking Boil that is having a devastating affect on the ability of many Families in The EU just to find a job and put Food on the Table.

    The problems that are causing the on-going Financial crisis in The EU are unsustainable and they must be FIXED before there is any advancement toward a stable healthy job providing fully functional Economy that works for all.

    Frankly I am sick and tired of people on the Left that cannot understand the problem of Entrenched Entitlement!

    By the way Laura, I have always addressed your questions to me and I have answered all of those questions to the best of my ability. You may not agree and I am totally happy with that.

    However a few weeks ago on another thread when you spoke of our Governments not demanding that Corporations take normally Exported Resources and use them here locally in “VALUE ADDED MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS” I stated the following to you.

    Why not take yourself, that Economic Genius Jim Sinclair, John Horgan, Restaurant, Food, Wine,and Travel Critic Jenny Kwan and invest your own money into a Corporation that can take what is now and normally exported Resources and “Add Value” right here in B.C.!!

    Show the rest of just how easy it is. I then asked you to let me know your thoughts. Funny, but you disappeared for weeks and have just recently re-appeared. Perhaps you were off in Cuba or perhaps Venezuela or even Bolivia assisting them with their own “Value Added” issues.

    Perhaps you could comment now.

    I should tell you that my company does “Add Value” to over 3 Million Pounds of Non- Ferrous Metals that are normally Exported out of Canada.

    Trust me it not easy and getting tougher. And guess what Laura I am really good at it!!! But it is still a challenge each and every day of the year!

    Trust me with people like that Public Speaking Genius Mayor Gregor his two part Brain, Ballem and Meggs, Mayor Corrigan and some of the “Bloated Stinking Bureaucracies” and “Red Tape” in this part of the World it is not easy!! Especially when you are competing with Countries that have no First World Regulations at all!! One needs to be on their game each and every minute of the day!!

    I look forward to your response.

    I am not trying to be Snarky here but…….

    Speaking about that Hard Working, Champion of the Underclasses and Mother Teresa like NDP MLA Jenny Kwan I hear she is just about to “Dip her Snout” just a little Deeper into the already “Gurgling” “Public Trough” once again. Imagine from Vancouver Councillor, to NDP MLA, to Federal MP all in one Life Time!!!

    I am wondering, do they have a Le Croc or a Gotham in Ottawa?

    Mr. Mulcair has already commented that if The NDP become Government Jenny will be taking him to Disneyland!!!!

    Sorry it is early and I seemed to get a little Amped up here.


  31. Laura says:

    BMCQ, what I do with my personal business is my business. I have never asked you what you do because its irrelevant. Not once. Rest assured my family and I are heavily invested in Canada.

    As for entitlement programs, many of the countries that did the best have high levels of social services and anti-poverty programs and many of the countries that did the worst have low levels of services and anti-poverty programs.

    The correlation you wish to see just isn’t there.

    Whether its the US Senate, the Economist magazine or any number of other sources, the financial crisis origin is clear, it was greed and corruption among the financiers and bankers.

    Countries that told them to go hang did well, those that bailed them out with public money, saw average people hurt.

    Bringing Jesse Jackson etc into the discussion is silly, US policies on home ownership didn’t cause housing bubbles in Spain, Ireland etc. The common denominator is the financial districts.

    Your wish to declare social programs and entitlements as the cause of anything negative is not going to go anywhere, the evidence doesn’t support you and I can easily demonstrate that over and over all day.

    As many economists have pointed out, Paul Krugman being one, Europe’s central banks have acted much more “right-wing” than North America’s and that’s why they are playing with deflation. They seem to have seen the light and are not saying they will embark on a Keynsian QE of their own. So let’s see what happens.

    Have a good day.

  32. Laura says:

    By the way BMCQ, the people you vote for have far less experience than the people you denigrate.

    And when it comes to the public tit, your preferred parties are at the front of the line, not mine.

    Just saying, people that live in a glass house shouldn’t throw stones

  33. BMCQ says:

    Avoidance and Deflection!

  34. Laura says:


    I knew I was wasting my time.

  35. BMCQ says:


    In fact if you read my question to you at Post – 131 I asked nothing about what you or your family do with anything you might have or not have.

    I frankly do not are if you are a “Corporation of One” or if you rival George Soros in Net Worth.

    ONCE AGAIN LAURA, several weeks ago you stated that Canada should not Export Natural Raw Resources. You stated that we as a Country should process Raw Resources/Material here and produce “Value Added” Products.

    I suggested then and earlier up the page that you, Jim Sinclair, Horgan, and several others that always Mumble Accusations about “Value Added” provide the “Great Unwashed with a list of Products you and your potential partners would manufacture competitively so we could create Commerce here in B.C. and Canada.

    Well Laura I am still waiting!!

    (Edited, edited, edited, edited …h.o.)

    (Response: Let’s keep the personal attacks/criticisms out of the discussions. Seems very childish. Surely the issues themselves are what most are here for. And I’m not spending my time and efforts to have these kind of exchanges.

  36. Laura says:

    BMCQ, building things here instead of buying imports is what I advocate. I always buy Canadian where possible even if it costs me more money.

    Whether its cars, machinery, ships, cell phones, fighter jets, whatever, Canadians are quite capable of building them as we’ve demonstrated in the past.

    Trade deals that keep us being hewers of wood and drawers of water are not in our best interests.

    Countries with many times more people are able to take advantage of economies of scale and produce for our market at less cost than we could ourselves but in the long run such scenarios impoverish us.

    Our strengths are our resources, our educated population and our market. We should stop giving those things away.

    The counter-argument is that if we don’t give away access to our market then other countries won’t give us access to ours. What that argument fails to take into account is reality. We don’t sell much in the way of manufactured goods to other markets right now so there are few other markets to lose.

    What we’ve lost are the kinds of jobs that require engineers and scientists and managers and instead are aiming at being a supplier of resources for other country’s university graduates and their ideas while ours work for low wages in the hospitality industry or leave the country.

    The current economy is simply not serving the people of Canada well. People need to understand what would work better for us and provide better futures for our young people.

    That requires national leaders that think long-term and aren’t blinded by ideology and it means trade deals that serve all Canadians.

    Without that we will continue on as we are, with declining manufacturing, declining wages, higher debts.

  37. BMCQ says:

    Dear Harvey,

    If possible I would like to clarify one or two things here.

    I hope very much that you will consider Posting the following comments.

    Firstly I enjoy immensely the opportunity to take part in the argument discussion and debate here on your Blog!

    I have been here since about July and I have made a point of reading all posts by others no matter how much I might disagree.

    I cannot speak for anyone else that Posts and Reads here but I am quite confident that each and everyone here appreciates the Time, Effort, Blood, Sweat, and Tears you put into maintaining this Blog!

    We all also understand that there is most likely a significant Financial Cost to you personally to operate and maintain the Blog and we thank you.

    As I may have just proven perhaps your most important attribute is your ability to show great patience with some of the Posts sent in to your Blog.

    If possible I would like to point out that the comments I Posted that were edited by contained no Four Letter Words or Sexist Comments.

    I am quite confident the strongest word I Posted was the word “Bully”.

    By submitting this Post I just want Laura and others here to understand that I did not mean to be and do not feel was offensive or Childish.

    Having said that, I respect that this is your Blog and your opinion differs somewhat with mine on this and I certainly respect that.

    Laura and I are of differing opinions most often yet again, I read her posts and respect the argument she brings to the table.

    In the post I submitted I was simply attempting to back up and give support/evidence to my argument in the Post by referring back to Posts of Laura’s, mine and other individuals past posts to validate and prove my argument/point.

    I am quite confident if Laura was able to read my post she would have been annoyed but not offended.

    Just my opinion, I could be wrong but I am quite confident that Laura is more than capable of defending her own point of view.

    In fact I believe that if Laura and I were sitting down opposite one another during that exchange we both would have made our points, quite possibly stand by our own arguments and agree to disagree but it would have been respectful.
    I really do not think “The Gloves would have come off”!

    In future I plan to continue to engage in argument, discussion, and debate on this Blog with my friend Laura. I hope she in turn continues to engage in the same with me!

    Absolutely no hard feelings whatsoever!

    I hope I have been able to bring some clarity to the situation that I helped to create here!

    Thank you for your consideration here Harvey and thank you once again for your patience!

  38. 13 says:

    @hawg125 dbw126
    I found your comments about blog behavior interesting and it got me thinking about a comparable place to exchange ideas. Truth is I couldnt come up with another venue. Blogs allow a pretty open and honest exchange of ideas, as long as the moderator is fair and somewhat open minded. (ho is ok).
    The one other place I have found where you can ask hard questions and watch people deflect and avoid answering is at a regular monthly union meeting. Union executives are absolute masters at the art of deflection and avoidance.
    Start asking questions about financial statements
    and you get very little recognition from the chair.
    The use of media to tell lies also comes to mind. The BC Liberals are currently running an ad that tells the world how truckers are the lifeblood of the port of vancouver. Whistle blowers, independant oversight, better rates. All total BS. The only thing that the BC Gov and the unions and the POV have done is to royaly screw the truckers. The license to operate a truck on the POV was taken away from the truckers and given to the trucking company owners. This has turned the truckers from independant owner operators into something called a tag. Tag is a nice way of saying slave.

    (Response: just “ok” in allowing discussion? 🙂 h.o.)

  39. Noneck says:


    I have to support BMCQ’s post #138. Although I respect your rights as the moderator of this site, I don’t believe he was out of line in his responses to Laura (of course, I didn’t read the edited parts). BMCQ and I have been seen pushing each other’s buttons in the past (heck, I even called him a nasty name and you let it go), but I do respect his opinion and his right to defend it. As my debate coach one told me, it’s always good to examine the counter argument in order to fully defend your own. I try to read his posts (even the 10,000 word ones – wink, wink) as well as others, and I strongly believe the blog you are running gives us the chance to exercise our rights of free speech. Although I find myself agreeing with Laura more often than not, I still want the counter from BMCQ and other posters so that I stay well informed. He has remained a steadfast contributor and he has shown no need to be censored – edited, yeah, for sure. But not censored.

    Odd bedfellows, eh? But that’s the beauty of the blogging world.

    (Response: I agree. Most of his responses were NOT out of line…that’s why they were published. I found the parts that were NOT to be personal and derogatory …so they weren’t. h.o)

  40. BMCQ says:


    Thank you very much for Posting my comments!!

    That means a lot to me!

  41. 13 says:

    So in a related to federal politics kind of way, whom will win the seat in East Vancouver? If the NDP elects one J Kwan, it will take a bit of the sting out of supporting Harper and Clark. Not that the NDP have never colored outside of the lines, but its nice when they screw up just like everyone else.

  42. 13 says:

    Im sorry but I cant help but gloat, just a little. I know that when I support Harper I have to listen to the Duffy report, the Bill c51, the control freak. When I support the BC Liberals I get heckled for all sorts of stuff , LNG, BCR, its a long list.
    BUT REALLY JENNY KWAN??????????????

    What the heck? Why? Do you guys not see the optics? She stole from the poor and gave to the rich. She got caught.
    Oh well life goes on, and thanks for allowing me this little bit of jenny joy.

  43. Laura says:

    BMCQ, we’re good.

  44. BMCQ says:

    Laura – 144

    Great! Keep up the Good Fight!

    Neck – 140

    Do not want to get too Mushy here but Thank You!!

    After reading your Post I feel somewhat Cleansed!

    I admit I can be sarcastic, over confident, perhaps even a little arrogant from time to time.

    Believe it or not I can sometimes even be a little opinionated but I just happen to be very passionate about most things. Thank god I am not the only one.

    As you stated you and Laura have much more in common than you and me. Perhaps that is why the support from coming from you is important to me.

    Having said that there are plenty of things you and I have in common.

    I respect and admire anyone that can see both sides of any argument. I really value the argument and I strongly believe that by discussing our differences we can learn and yes sometimes change our mind.

    One should never be confined to an Ideological Straight Jacket!!

    G. Barry – 124 – Back to JT and Governance.

    We have discussed the “Free Vote” thing now what about a few other things JT, Mulcair, and Harper should be debating before the next Federal Election.

    Fixed Election Dates and the Federal Budget –

    As you are aware we currently have Fixed Election Dates but there seems to be flexibility in that.

    What we need to do is legislate PERMANENT Fixed Election Dates. They should be perhaps the second date in October every four years.

    The Federal Budget should come down each year sometime in March, no exceptions. That way the “Great Unwashed” have a clear Six Months between the Budget and The Election. That with both dates entrenched the Voter has six months to study the Budget. At the same time Fixed dates like that give the Governing Party less opportunity to manipulate. In other words the whole process becomes just a little more defined and transparent.

    Term Limits

    As with The U.S. President all Federal Politicians in Canada including the PM should be limited to
    Two Four Terms in Federal Politics. As a Country and a Society we need New Blood with fresh ideas every eight years. I am a Harper supporter myself but I believe those two Four Year Terms would be better for Canada.

    We did/do not need people like Joe Clark, Chretien, Libby Davies and others Dipping their Snouts into the Public Trough longer than the Eight Years.

    Within that new Parliament Template we should increase The Salarie3s for those Members. with the new eight year limit we still need to attract competent Candidates. By increasing Salaries by say 50% we can somewhat assure that we would attractive competent Candidates. Before you run off Lighting your Hair on Fire please understand that with those new higher Salaries Federal MP’s would be responsible to Fund their own Pensions. That way once they retire the Tax Payer is off the Hook and the retiring MP goes off on their own. Neat and Clean!


    Yes we all agree Canada need Senate reform!

    As Voters we need to encourage all of our Federal Politicians to do something with the Senate. Yes Quebec and Ontario have Veto’s and that is hard to fight but there are other things that can be done with the Senate.

    As Voters we need to demand that the Conservatives form a Bi-Partisan Committee to Study Senate Reform. We should demand that that Group come up with a Formula that can effectively starve Funding to the senate. A formula that forces Provinces like Quebec and Ontario to come to the Table to discuss Senate Reform.

    What we then would need as a partner to complete this co-operative endeavour would be for MSM to become involved and keep the story front and center each and every week.

    It is incumbent that MSM do their part by Holding the Feet of Politicians at the federal and The Provincial Level of especially Quebec and Ontario to the Fire!!

    As usual I am sure all other Posters and Readers here are in 100% agreement with me!

    See all of the things we have in common!

    13 – 143

    The Happiest Politician Man in Canada today?

    John Horgan!! Just think about what he just unloaded!!!

    I wonder, do they have a “Le Croc” and or a “Gotham” in Ottawa?

  45. BMCQ says:

    The reason I said the “Happiest Male Politician” is because obviously the happiest Politician period is most likely JK. By winning that nomination she really got off “The Hot Seat”!!

  46. Hugh says:

    “Bill C-51 has an appearance “of being a sort of creeping police state bill” that has raised concern about privacy and oversight of intelligence agencies, Clare said.”

    Said the head of Canada’s largest gun lobby Sheldon Clare, president of the 75,000-member National Firearms Association.

Comments are closed.