PM IN HOT WATER; The Prime Minister apologizes.

waldo · May 20, 2016

What's the problem? You managed to to read said link, found and quoted a portion......just the wrong portion

If that doesn't suffice, I can provide a quote from the current Speaker as confirmation of my point..........and a quashing of the meme that Trudeau was attempting to move the vote along.......as pointed out, if the Liberal Whip had of took his seat, regardless the actions of the Opposition, the vote would of proceeded.........hence the Prime Minister and Government Whip are uninformed as to how the House works, and in the case of the Prime Minister, unable to control his uninformed emotions.

I described the problem - again, your penchant to play 'go fetch'! Far be it for you to actually quote from a link you provide. It's as if... as if... you haven't the balls to actually support your statements!

I quoted you from your own linked 'go fetch' reference... I could care less if it suffices for you - it speaks to the traditional symbolic procedure followed... and it's the one that was being followed as both the Government Whip (Leslie) and the Speaker were looking at and waiting for the Opposition Whip (Brown) to proceed up the aisle. Your lame-assed attempt here has you quoting a scenario where the Opposition Whip is protesting... hasn't entered the House. Are you saying the Opposition Conservative Whip... was protesting? Cause I sure ain't heard or read that one anywhere/anytime!

.

Derek 2.0 · May 20, 2016

I quoted you from your own linked 'go fetch' reference... I could care less if it suffices for you - it speaks to the traditional symbolic procedure followed... and it's the one that was being followed as both the Government Whip (Leslie) and the Speaker were looking at and waiting for the Opposition Whip (Brown) to proceed up the aisle. Your lame-assed attempt here has you quoting a scenario where the Opposition Whip is protesting... hasn't entered the House. Are you saying the Opposition Conservative Whip... was protesting? Cause I sure ain't heard or read that one anywhere/anytime!

.

Not at all, I'm saying this dumpster fire for the Government could have been avoided if the government Whip simply took his seat (as confirmed by the Speaker today)........if Trudeau felt the need to get handsy, he should have seated Leslie.

waldo · May 20, 2016

Yes violence........if the Waldo went into his favorite watering hole or in his place of work for example, then proceeded to grab and drag a person against their will (well injuring another person), the Waldo could rightfully be charged with assault:

wtf kind of a "military man" are you? Did you ever get out of the barracks? :lol: But hey, if you want to play dueling dictionary references: "violence: behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something" --- make sure you come back when assault charges are laid!

.

Derek 2.0 · May 20, 2016

And Derek, the opposition whip was in the house, so your example makes absolutely no sense. It's clear he was planning to proceed to the front, being that he entered the house and was proceeding to the front.

No, it makes perfect sense, and was confirmed today by the Speaker of the House.......... :rolleyes:

Derek 2.0 · May 20, 2016

wtf kind of a "military man" are you? Did you ever get out of the barracks? But hey, if you want to play dueling dictionary references: "violence: behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something" --- make sure you come back when assault charges are laid!

.

I didn't provide a dictionary definition, but that which is found in the criminal code.

waldo · May 20, 2016

Not at all, I'm saying this dumpster fire for the Government could have been avoided if the government Whip simply took his seat (as confirmed by the Speaker today)........if Trudeau felt the need to get handsy, he should have seated Leslie.

what you're NOW saying doesn't align with what you presumed to FINALLY quote from your provided source. Again, are you stating the Conservative Opposition Whip was protesting? Yes or No? What you refuse to admit is the Opposition Whip had full designs on following standard procedure/protocol - he was blocked... being blocked by the NDP. All eyes were on the blockade. The earlier provided slo-mo video clearly shows it all unfolding. Your fantasy BS means nothing, Captain Hindsight!

.

Derek 2.0 · May 20, 2016

Blah, blah, blah. He took a guy by the arm. He shouldn't have done it. He apologized, and it's over.

Then why is it being sent to the Procedure and House affairs committee? Odd move if "it's over"........

Derek 2.0 · May 20, 2016

what you're NOW saying doesn't align with what you presumed to FINALLY quote from your provided source. Again, are you stating the Conservative Opposition Whip was protesting? Yes or No? What you refuse to admit is the Opposition Whip had full designs on following standard procedure/protocol - he was blocked... being blocked by the NDP. All eyes were on the blockade. The earlier provided slo-mo video clearly shows it all unfolding. Your fantasy BS means nothing, Captain Hindsight!

.

I didn't state he was or wasn't protesting, likewise those members of the NDP. My point, yet again, was that regardless if he were, if the Government Whip simply took his seat the vote would have begun absent the Opposition Whip.

waldo · May 20, 2016

I didn't state he was or wasn't protesting, likewise those members of the NDP. My point, yet again, was that regardless if he were, if the Government Whip simply took his seat the vote would have begun absent the Opposition Whip.

again, you FINALLY quoted from your go-fetch dropped link... you quoted this:

On occasion, a vote has been taken although one of the Whips had not appeared after the bells rang for the maximum prescribed length of time. In most cases, the Government Whip re‑entered the Chamber while the Opposition Whip, as an act of protest, remained outside the Chamber (sometimes with the entire caucus).

as we play your nonsense through, are you stating the Conservative Opposition Whip (Brown) did not enter the chamber... or was protesting? Who was masquerading as Opposition Whip (Brown) then?... who was that guy the NDP was blocking? Again, I provided you the quote from your own provided link - the one you didn't have the wherewithal to actually initially quote from. The quote I provided speaks to the traditional symbolic procedure and describes both Whips (Government and Opposition) entering the House/chamber with intent to walk up the aisle, stop next to Speaker, bow to each other and the Speaker, and return to their seats. That is what was occurring, that is what was unfolding - not your fantasy... not yet another of your 'silly buggar' routines unfolding!

.

Derek 2.0 · May 20, 2016

again, you FINALLY quoted from your go-fetch dropped link... you quoted this:

Waldo, the Trudeau can admit when he's wrong....its 2016...from the Speaker of the House:

Members ought to know, first of all, that if one whip walks down before the other and takes his or her seat, and that is either whip, the Speaker then reads the question and the voting process begins. Nothing else is required. That is what happens. That has happened before.

When the (Liberal) Speaker of the House reminds the Government Whip and Prime Minister of proper procedure where is the fantasy? I've now provided two differing citations, one of historic nature and one quoted directly after the the Prime Minister's first disjointed apology....... :lol:

waldo · May 20, 2016

no - you first quoted absolutely nothing; ala, again, your standard BS play where you never/rarely quote from a reference you provide... like you're purposely setting up a gotcha... an ignorant and silly play!

you then chose to ignore the standard procedure/protocol and opted to play out your quoted fantasy that presumes the Opposition Whip didn't appear/was protesting. When that blows up on ya

you then choose to play Captain Gotcha Hindsight by opting to ignore both the standard procedure/protocol and your own quoted fantasy play that falsely presumed on the Opposition Whip not appearing/protesting.

you then provide this gem (that you're apparently holding as your ace-in-the-hole), where the Speaker makes a statement and you gleefully pronounce, as Captain Hindsight, "Parliamentarians are stupid for not knowing procedure/protocol". Of course, that statement in itself, would have the Government Whip (Leslie), in the heat of the moment, blatantly ignore the actions of a 3rd party, the NDP, impeding upon the Opposition Whip. So strange for you to target the Government Whip action/inaction rather than the purposeful NDP obstruction of your favoured party's Whip - how strange of you!

.

G Huxley · May 20, 2016

This parliamentary scene actually looks like a football game seriously and the follow up monday morning quarterbacking.

PIK · May 20, 2016

His 3rd apology was better then the 1st two. I have a feeling a elder took trudeau to the wood shed and he came back with a better apology and got rid of motion 6 or 9 what ever it was. Everything that was said of harper is now coming true under trudeau.

Smallc · May 20, 2016

Then why is it being sent to the Procedure and House affairs committee? Odd move if "it's over"........

In the interest of fairness.

Smallc · May 20, 2016

No, it makes perfect sense, and was confirmed today by the Speaker of the House..........

Linky.

Shady · May 20, 2016

I wouldn't normally agree with the tactic - but if this bill isn't law by June 6th, we could have a problem.

It's a completely subjective deadline. If Justin wants to throw elbows, he should be elbowing the court, reminding them that the court has no authority in the process of legislation.

Smallc · May 20, 2016

It's a completely subjective deadline. If Justin wants to throw elbows, he should be elbowing the court, reminding them that the court has no authority in the process of legislation.

The court already rejected their 6 month extension request and granted them 4 instead.

Skybolts · May 20, 2016

It's a completely subjective deadline. If Justin wants to throw elbows, he should be elbowing the court, reminding them that the court has no authority in the process of legislation.

Thanks for that. What's your point? He should "assault" the court?

May 20, 2016

What a joke. I have no respect for Mulcair and crew now that they are making statements about violence against women. The neck brace stunt was childish, just as childish as blocking the whip, but diminishing the seriousness of violence direct at women with their game is disgusting. Instead of using the opposition spotlight to improve a much needed bill, make it as comprehensive as possible and get it into law, they made statements about women fearing to come to the HOC. That is the opposite of feminism, and the opposite of effective opposition.

Smallc · May 20, 2016

What a joke. I have no respect for Mulcair and crew now that they are making statements about violence against women. The neck brace stunt was childish, just as childish as blocking the whip, but diminishing the seriousness of violence direct at women with their game is disgusting. Instead of using the opposition spotlight to improve a much needed bill, make it as comprehensive as possible and get it into law, they made statements about women fearing to come to the HOC. That is the opposite of feminism, and the opposite of effective opposition.

The neck brace wasn't real....

Big Guy · May 20, 2016

Just in - Another camera angle has put to rest all of the excuses by the Liberals of the Evil Elbow Event. It shows JT, sitting in the PM chair, foaming at the mouth looking at the opposition whip who is being protected by a moving of peaceful phalanx of NDP volunteers. Suddenly, Trudeau leaps into the air like a deranged gorilla and lands on the floor of the legislature. He attacks the NDP phalanx creating a small opening, reaches in and places a claw like grip on the arm of the simpering opposition whip. Yanking the shaking whip through the crowd he looks for another victim and spots the harmless and buxom female NDP volunteer who has put her life on the line to protect the opposition whip and our form of democracy in the process.

Remembering his days as a dirty boxer, the PM resorts to using his elbows to inflict pain and damage. He targets the poor lady's breasts and uses them as a biological "speed bag" and then sulks back to his seat. When he sees that the NDP volunteer, now in deathly pain, is not only conscious but leaving the commons he again leaps out of his seat trying to finish her off. She is barely able to avoid him as she flees for her life.

In an attempt to save her, Mulcair reaches for his gun and points it at JT but unfortunately forgets he left it at home and instead is pointing his unloaded finger at JT. Now JT, having a genetic predisposition to single finger threats is not deterred and slinks back to his commons seat.

Outrage breaks out, pandemonium reigns and democracy is thwarted once more by Liberals Nazi tactics!

Canada is on the precipice of anarchy or dictatorship!!

Boges · May 20, 2016

What a joke. I have no respect for Mulcair and crew now that they are making statements about violence against women. The neck brace stunt was childish, just as childish as blocking the whip, but diminishing the seriousness of violence direct at women with their game is disgusting. Instead of using the opposition spotlight to improve a much needed bill, make it as comprehensive as possible and get it into law, they made statements about women fearing to come to the HOC. That is the opposite of feminism, and the opposite of effective opposition.

You believed what you read in a satire site?

DogOnPorch · May 20, 2016

The fellow has a temper...get used to it.

Shady · May 20, 2016

The court already rejected their 6 month extension request and granted them 4 instead.

How does the court have any say in how long legislation takes to pass? Where do they get their authority from? That's bizarre. That would be like the House of Commons giving the court a deadline on when to rule on something.