Sophie Gregoire-Trudeau

bush_cheney2004 · May 14, 2016

As one columnist put it, it's out of sync with Trudeau's messaging around helping the middle class.

Indeed....Sophie and husband should have learned a valuable lesson here. The people love you...until you provide a big fat gaffe to be exploited with glee.

waldo · May 14, 2016

As one columnist put it, it's out of sync with Trudeau's messaging around helping the middle class.

oh my! Does your "helping the middle class" extend to maximizing participation in projects/charitable work aimed towards... possibly towards... ostensibly towards... to some degree towards... the "middle class"?

.

waldo · May 14, 2016

Indeed....Sophie and husband should have learned a valuable lesson here. The people love you...until you provide a big fat gaffe to be exploited with glee.

just how gleeful are you?

.

WestCanMan · May 14, 2016

Amazing in 2016 we still have people attacking women for wanting to do things other than just cooking, laundry and raising children.

Wrongo. Whether or not people want her to speak on their behalf, it's not up to the public to fund her. She's no different than your next-door neighbour. If she wants to hire people to help get her work done she can but she has no right to ask Canadians for money. We never elected her and she doesn't act in an official capacity.

capricorn · May 14, 2016

aimed towards... possibly towards... ostensibly towards... to some degree towards...

.

Come on waldo. Is it aimed, possibly, ostensibly or to some degree? Pick one.

BubberMiley · May 14, 2016

If you believe that I can sell you some swampland...

The thread sort of fell apart when your lie was exposed. You really believed Maureen did everything herself and hired babysitters from down the block when she went out? :lol:

Smallc · May 14, 2016

Wrongo. Whether or not people want her to speak on their behalf, it's not up to the public to fund her. She's no different than your next-door neighbour. If she wants to hire people to help get her work done she can but she has no right to ask Canadians for money. We never elected her and she doesn't act in an official capacity.

She wants to do her part to make this country a better place. I don't see the harm in another staff member given that.

bush_cheney2004 · May 14, 2016

She wants to do her part to make this country a better place. I don't see the harm in another staff member given that.

So this is really just NannyGate #2, with famous/wealthy American Negroes (MLK Jr. & Michelle Obama) providing the backdrop for a Canadian political story.

Look at the bright side...it's not the same 'ole boring stuff !

Big Guy · May 14, 2016

While I don't have a problem with someone holding membership in many political parties, the parties themselves do. How do you answer the following question for the Conservative party?

Conditions of Membership:

I do not hold membership in another federal political party.

.. or the Member declaration for the NDP?

I hereby state that I am not a member nor supporter of any other federal political party, nor a member or supporter of any other provincial or territorial party where there is a provincial or territorial NDP.

I don't see the statement explicitly in the Liberal party membership application, but you do agree to abide by their constitution which includes the following:

Qualification for membership

(d) not be a member of any other federal political party in Canada;

I follow the law.

I am interested in politics and am very interested in what information and specifically what each party is sharing with their members. For that reason I pay for access to that information by becoming a member.

As to - "While I don't have a problem with someone holding membership in many political parties, the parties themselves do." The parties can have whatever attitude they want to. Political parties do not tell me what I can and cannot do - the law of the land does. Last I saw, any Canadian has the freedom to do what they want within the confines of the law.

There are places and situations where an application will request your SIN. I choose to not give it.

Since it is NOT illegal to maintain a membership in all Canadian political parties, I then accept their directions as suggestions which I choose not to follow.

BTW - I also hold a "membership" ($10 American) to a White Heritage (KKK affiliated) organization based in the USA using an alias and a third party e-mail address. I receive their weekly digital newsletter to the "insiders" and find them very informative. I believe that you will never defeat your enemy unless you get to know and understand them.

Edited May 14, 2016 by Big Guy

Smallc · May 14, 2016

So this is really just NannyGate #2, with famous/wealthy American Negroes (MLK Jr. & Michelle Obama) providing the backdrop for a Canadian political story.

I guess?

bush_cheney2004 · May 14, 2016

Nanny problem solved.....

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVPxgU7WwAIfXd6.jpg

bush_cheney2004 · May 14, 2016

Recycled from last Trudeau NannyGate...."Look Daddy...it's a rat !"

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LtUIGU3lDVE/Vl9eeFPCFQI/AAAAAAAA554/Wxps0Q3hyXI/s1600/trudeau%2Brats.jpg

The_Squid · May 14, 2016

I think Rona could stop flipping flapjacks and do some babysitting for the Trudeaus.... She'll be doing something useful.

waldo · May 14, 2016

Recycled from last Trudeau NannyGate...."Look Daddy...it's a rat !"

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LtUIGU3lDVE/Vl9eeFPCFQI/AAAAAAAA554/Wxps0Q3hyXI/s1600/trudeau%2Brats.jpg

it beggars belief! You're all over this thread like a... dirty rat! As a claimed American, why is this just so important... bordering on definitional... to you?

.

-1=e^ipi · May 14, 2016

But Obama was elected. The Prime Minister is not. MPs are the only ones elected. The PM happens to be an MP, but doesn't have to be.

The Prime Minister is elected because all MPs are elected and all Prime Ministers are MPs. Do you need me to draw you a Venn Diagram?

-1=e^ipi · May 14, 2016

She wants to do her part to make this country a better place. I don't see the harm in another staff member given that.

I want to do my part to make this country a better place.

Please use tax payer money to hire me 2 staff members, 2 nannies and a giant palace.

cybercoma · May 14, 2016

The thread sort of fell apart when your lie was exposed. You really believed Maureen did everything herself and hired babysitters from down the block when she went out?

Laureen Harper.

cybercoma · May 14, 2016

The Prime Minister is elected because all MPs are elected and all Prime Ministers are MPs. Do you need me to draw you a Venn Diagram?

All Prime Ministers are not MPs. John Turner wasn't an MP when he was appointed Prime Minister. William Lyon Mackenzie King also "governed from the hallways" for a brief period. We do not elect the position of Prime Minister. They are appointed by the Crown. Save your Venn Diagram and open a Canadian civics book instead.

cybercoma · May 14, 2016

More importantly, the Prime Minister is a "first among equals." Being that as it may, does this mean his equals' spouses will also be getting additional help?

(You'll also note we don't elect his equals. They too are appointed by the Crown.)

Edited May 14, 2016 by cybercoma

Smallc · May 14, 2016

More importantly, the Prime Minister is a "first among equals." Being that as it may, does this mean his equals' spouses will also be getting additional help?

(You'll also note we don't elect his equals. They too are appointed by the Crown.)

I'm sure it would vary by province. Since we already give the PMs wife assistant, it seems that something is expected of them beyond what may have been typical in the long past.

Smallc · May 14, 2016

I want to do my part to make this country a better place.

Marry Justin Trudeau and I'll consider your request.

BC_chick · May 14, 2016

Serious question - why not?

There it is. The crux of it all.

PM's wife is *not* the same role as First Lady and never has been (one side) but why not?!? (Other side)

Well, the obvious answer for the nay side is we're not the US. We are parliamentary system and no other parliamentary system has this role so why should should we emulate the US on this one issue?

On the flip side, why not break the mold and make it a partnership and recognize the spouse behind the great partner?

It all depends on your political stripe.

Not shockingly, I disagree that we should change things up. The spouse of a PM is nothing to be celebrated, this person has nothing nothing for us as an electorate.

Conversely I think the US makes too much of a big deal of the First Lady. Really what is their great achievement other than marrying someone?

Edited May 14, 2016 by BC_chick

bush_cheney2004 · May 14, 2016

....Conversely I think the US makes too much of a big deal of the First Lady. Really what is their great achievement other than marrying someone?

Odd question coming from a system that bestows royalty and status on queens and princesses across the sea born of marriage and procreation.

Canada is not the U.S., but it likes to define things in U.S. terms for whatever reason(s) it needs to.

The FLOTUS position and budget is defined by U.S. Public Law 95-570 (1978).

-1=e^ipi · May 14, 2016

For those who think that a pm's spouse is such an important position, are you saying that single people should be excluded from ever being prime minister? How about people who are divorced or are widowed?

Being a spouse to a pm shouldn't matter because it's the only way to ensure that marital status has nothing to do with the position.

But then again, we have a government that greatly hates merit and is all about birth right and identity politics. So if they thought that being married was a 'qualification', it wouldn't surprise me.

waldo · May 14, 2016

Canada is not the U.S., but it likes to define things in U.S. terms for whatever reason(s) it needs to.

The FLOTUS position and budget is defined by U.S. Public Law 95-570 (1978).

au contraire! As is oft the case, the U.S. co-opted a more universal label... "a woman who has great importance, influence, or success in a specified activity or profession". Why it appears to have political attachment all the way back to the Roman Empire; to the wife of Gaius Octavius.

in U.S. public law you say?... I guess if by "defined position", you mean the word "spouse"... and if by "budget" you mean, "assistance and services provided by the spouse in connection to the discharge of the President's duties and responsibilities". Wait now - that long list of activities U.S. spouses have been engaged in over the years... just how do the majority of those have anything to do with duties and responsibilities of the U.S. President and how does this reflect on the related work done by the typically 20+ staffers dedicated to or accessible buy the spouse of the U.S. President? Oh my... someone needs to contact the U.S. Government Accountability Office... there appears to be a possible serious breech of U.S. law here!

.