Centerpiece

Everyone is entitled to Health Care - question is, how much do they pay. Free for all makes no sense. The first action item is to provide quarterly or semi-annual statements itemizing the services and their cost - so that people adapt the mindset that it's not free. Secondly, payment should be geared to income and settled at tax time. Thirdly, private services should be allowed - geared to medicare rates. MRIs for example. Knee and hip replacements are another as our aging population demands. Assembly line operations have their benefits. Open our minds - drop the ideology.

He doesn't have the intellect to understand the issues enough to say yes or no. He simply says what he's told to say. He is completely devoid of any leadership traits - which should not be surprising because he's never really led anything. That's not a partisan judgement - just an obvious and ugly fact that has played out over his term.

I'd hazard a guess that a significant number of those are dual citizens. I can't find a cite to support such a claim but perhaps someone else can find some data. As an example, remember Lebanon's troubles back in 2006? 15,000 Lebanese Canadians were brought back to Canada at a cost of $94 million. At the time, about 25,000 Lebanese residents held Canadian citizenship. Link: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/94m-for-lebanon-rescue-but-canadian-evacuee-grateful-1.627646

I don't understand the logic behind granting automatic Canadian citizenship to a newborn whose mother is illegally in Canada. I could understand the child ultimately having a fast path to citizenship under the right criteria - but there are many situations where both mother/father/both should just get returned to their own country ASAP. It shouldn't be about bureaucratic convenience - it should be about what's right.

You're right - but it's pretty obvious that having a baby increases your chances to stay on "humanitarian" grounds - if only because governments do not want to be accused of being heartless in separating mother and child. Can you just imagine how The Star and CBC would jump on these types of cases if Stephen Harper was still PM? So if you're here illegally, why not roll the dice if you're OK having a child?

The attached link has a very clear explanation for how our refugee system works - and the process that each and every "asylum seeker" is entitled to pursue. Should these people have this many avenues of appeal? Link: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/what-happens-when-asylum-seekers-cross-the-border-into-canada?video_autoplay=true

As predicted, The Star is motoring along with its continuous anti-Ford campaign. A few headlines from today's paper: "Exceeding expectations, lowering the bar".......Martin Regg Cohn "Ford putting in little effort to bring Ontarians together.......Bob Hepburn "Exposing Ford's Doug-whistle sex-ed agenda"......Mandy Pipher To top it off, their editorial entitled "Upholding our Values" was a churlish rant against Ford and Lisa MacLeod on "Asylum Seekers". Now - lets juxtapose these headlines against the latest poll that shows the vast majority of Ontarians agree with each and every major plank of Ford's agenda to date. Link: https://www.campaignresearch.ca/single-post/2018/07/12/Majority-of-Ontario-residents-are-in-support-of-Doug-Ford’s-first-actions-as-Premier

I would normally agree but the Toronto Star and others acted as shills for the Liberals by continuing to call it an "accounting dispute". Let's not forget that the Liberals called in "outside experts" to discredit Bonnie Lysyck's criticisms. The Star went out of their way to marginalize the AG with various columns. If anything, this review will reinforce the credibility of the AG and FAO going forward. As an example of the Star's duplicity, Martin Regg Cohn had this to say about Ms. Lysyck: Link: https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2017/12/06/auditor-general-bonnie-lysyk-could-use-a-good-editor.html

I'm watching CBC Power and Politics and they are questioning the merits of the inquiry. Firstly, lets remember it was a campaign promise - but secondly and most important, it was the Auditor General who called their Fair Hydro Plan "bogus accounting". Never in Canadian history has an Auditor General issued such strong opinions. Yet CBC did not focus on those facts - nor did their "Power Panel". Is one required? Absolutely! Link: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-auditor-general-blasts-bogus-hydro-accounting-strategies-in-ontario/

The first wave of thousands of illegal crossers were from Haiti - because Trump announced that Haiti would be considered safe again after the 2011 earthquake and the TEMPORARY sanctuary program would soon be ending in 6 months or so. That would give them time to prepare to return home. It's seldom reported that Canada also had a temporary sanctuary program for Haitians which was terminated in August, 2016 under.....wait for it.....Justin Trudeau!!!! But thanks to Trudeau's stupid, virtue signalling tweet, Haitians all headed to the border - crossing illegally to avoid being sent back. Link: https://torontosun.com/2017/08/09/canada-in-fact-removed-special-status-for-haitians-long-before-the-us/wcm/287a6f1a-46cf-43b4-b4de-ac3d2595215b

You're entitled to your opinion of course. But given that Rose Knight did indeed come forward and confirm that what was written did in fact happen - and Trudeau has not denied any of it.........I find it puzzling that you find it a non-issue. Your insistence that she divulge the exact indiscretions, tawdry or not - flies in the face of Trudeau's own sanctimonious musings that women are always to be believed. While details might have a bearing on the seriousness of his indiscretions, whether it was an unwanted hug, a sloppy kiss or copping a feel - she was made uncomfortable enough to write the column. That in itself is enough to out him as a hypocrite. As for any excess lewdness if she did give details? Be careful what you wish for.

I personally am not calling for any "punishment" other than the just dessert of being outed as a hypocrite - with his usual arrogance piled on top. Your retreat to the absence of a formal complaint is nonsense. There were more than "allegations". There was a news editorial describing the allegations which Trudeau has never denied - including his day-late apology. Unsubstantiated innuendo? Let him deny any of it. Let him say she's lying. All this after first having no recollection at all! The victimized reporter had the courtesy to leave out the groping specifics and now you say she left out the details? Priceless!

It's not about whether he's a pervert - and to compare him to Trump is humorous, but not accurate. I'd like to think that most professional/educated men have gone through life without being accused of inappropriate actions - at least to the extent that the affected party didn't scold them or raise a formal complaint. But even among that supposed "refined" class of people, there's the odd beer-fueled yahoo who carries things a bit too far. The picture of Trudeau with his frothy beer stein seems to indicate this was the case in this instance. Not the end of the world - but clearly makes this PM out to be the hypocrite that he's accused of being. His mantra has always been that he's been careful to respect women's space and "head space" all through his life. And now, he has the gall to tell us about the awakening for all men and what all men are learning - instead of taking responsibility for his own actions! Arrogance - once again. It's only a big deal because on top of the overt election lies of his government, this PM continues to be an empty-suited hypocrite.

Perfect!!!!

I kind of like the guy - really.......there's one in every crowd. Life wouldn't be the same without Eyeballs.

We've had governments that have told the odd lie - or exaggerated - or validly changed direction......but we have never had a government like this gang. Never has a government looked Canadians in the face at election time and told so many overt, bald-faced lies - each one designed to pick off blocks of voters - and each block left holding the bag. Whether it was modest deficits and balanced budgets to attract disenchanted red Conservatives and blue Liberals, getting rid of Harper's "embarrassing" emission targets to attract the eco-crowd, or ending first past the post to attract NDP voters. All calculated lies - and of course, now you have Military spending. Jumpin' junipers, there otta be a law!!

Gives a new meaning to the "Scales" of Justice.

The shameful part is that Canada and others HAVE made the commitment - most are just not honouring it. We made a commitment to get to 2% of GDP by 2024. We are spending about 1% now and are on track to get to 1.4% at best. Trudeau has said he will not honour the commitment and has no intention of getting to 2%. Liberals are as usual, spinning like a top. Link: https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada-will-not-double-its-defence-budget-despite-calls-from-trump-trudeau-1.4007323

Canada has 100 cities with a population of 25,000 or more - 5 with over one million and 25 more with more than 100,000. If we actually had a real plan for re-settling refugees, we could direct them to various locations in a manner that would put very little stress on municipal resources - but only if we had a longer range plan to support and integrate these refugees into their new home over an extended period. Right now, the federal government pays lip service for a year and then dumps them on the provinces. It's really not rocket science if we'd just grab hold of the issue. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_100_largest_population_centres_in_Canada

It is indeed an old expression - and meant to mean "watch out - there are consequences to your actions". Our revolving door justice system has diluted the "consequences" to the point that Gangs consider sentences the "cost of doing business". Here's a link to some statistics that surprised even me. Take a look at the "median length" of days in custody. The median for all violent offences is 75 days - and keep in mind, these are sentences. It doesn't account for parole (after as little as serving one-third of the sentence) or statutory release, which is pretty well mandatory after serving two thirds of the sentence. It's really quite interesting. Link: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2015001/article/14226/tbl/tbl06-eng.htm

Enough is enough. The cumulative fiascos no longer make this a partisan issue. It's not about Liberal or Conservative - it's about the competency of this individual for the office of Prime Minister. He's embarrassed Canada on the world stage with his India trip and now this. He has aliented just about every country that he's asked to meet with - Japan and its PM Abe (not showing for the TPP signing), China (trying to lecture them on gender equality, etc....instead of talking trade), India (say no more), the US and Trump, Belgium (not meeting with the Royal couple). Add to that his complete ignorance on domestic issues - and his sickening virtue-signalling that has led directly to the flood of illegal migrants. It's crystal clear that he hasn't "grown into" the job as some had optimistically hoped - not does he appear to have any desire or capability to do so. As I said - it's not partisan. He's totally incompetent - unable to explain anything more complicated than red fish, blue fish. The sooner he's gone, the sooner Canada can reclaim some semblance of integrity. Bring on Marc Garneau - who should have been chosen. And yes - it is that bad.

And in spite of all this - he STILL insists that he did nothing inappropriate. That's what unbridled arrogance does. As Rex Murphy said: "It can only appear as an 'awakening' to someone who has slumbered far longer and far deeper than he should" Link to Rex Murphy: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/rex-murphy-trudeaus-awakening-on-groping-allegations-is-ahem-a-bit-of-a-reach?video_autoplay=true Link to Trudeau's denial: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/video-trudeau-on-groping-allegation-i-did-not-act-inappropriately/

I was talking about the more current iteration of Wynne and Trudeau - who have bastardized the term "progressive". If an NDP government - or any government for that matter - can combine constructive, socially progressive policies with some semblance of fiscal responsibility, they can lay claim to a Progressive label. Personally, I think it would be more "progressive" if we focused on Healthcare and care for the elderly. Get that right before we make more "grand plans".

Heard a good one today. We all know about the "ers" and "ums" that stunts the speech of our PM. Someone said he's "groping for words". Had to laugh at that one.

I agree entirely but I'd suggest you put the word "progressive" in quotes. There's nothing progressive about unending deficits and debt - for which the word has now become a synonym. And there's certainly nothing progressive about taking in 50,000 refugees on a virtuous whim with no plan. The word quite frankly, has been ghoulishly sullied by Kathleen Wynne and Justin Trudeau.