New Governor-General

[August1991]

The story about Michaelle Jean's separatist leanings definitely has legs.

Not Lafond's connection to the FLQ? (That's what made me post.)

To be honest, I'm truly surprised to see these names associated with a Canadian Governor-General. "Canada" is a broad term, but surely it means something.

What is going on in English Canada?

[shoop]

Not Lafond's connection to the FLQ? (That's what made me think.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The whole ball of wax, however you want to term it.

Using Paul Wells as a barometer of conventional wisdom it is pretty easy to see how quickly things have gone from fawning to desperate for Michaelle Jean.

Posted by Paul Wells on August 4th. "If the rumours are true, then Paul Martin has made, in Michaëlle Jean, an absolutely spectacular choice for Governor General.

A good day for our prime minister. A good day for our country."

In twleve little days the spectacular choice has become...

Posted by Paul Wells on August 16th. "Michaëlle Jean may yet be able to save her appointment. It is only proper that she be allowed to try."

So when Jean steps down (gets pushed) is it still Quebec's turn?

[August1991]

No matter how you look at it, a sovereignist-led witch-hunt may yet turn out to be the best thing that could happen to governor general designate Michaëlle Jean and the prime minister who appointed her.

Hebert - Toronto Star

Chantal Hebert is usually clued in, but in this case, she's not. PM PM has provoked a weird situation in Canada and I suspect PM PM is calling his markers. He needs Hebert on side.

Dany Laferrière is a decent person. What the Hell is he involved in a choice of GG? Why did the PMO talk to him? Why is Dany Laferrière on Radio-Canada talking about Haiti?

The PMO is desperate. This nomination is seriously off the rails.

Weird. You guys know what you're doing?

[shoop]

Chantal Hebert is usually clued in, but in this case, she's not.  PM PM has provoked a weird situation in Canada and I suspect PM PM is calling his markers. He needs Hebert on side.

The PMO is desperate.  This nomination is seriously off the rails.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think she is being merely guilty of being overly optimistic.

While what she says in this sentence is true "No opposition party or major political voice has, so far, called on Jean to forsake the appointment or on Paul Martin to reconsider it." It is only because the opposition leaders/major political voices are all waiting for Jean to come out with her statement before saying something.

The element of the Canadian public that is interested in this story are simply waiting to hear what Jean has to say for herself. A good test of her political saavy.

If she can't talk her way out of this jam then she really doesn't deserve to be GG.

My vibe is that Jean is a little better than 50/50 to step down at this point.

[August1991]

I used to believe Hebert, and she is very good. I am surprised that she didn't refuse, and resign, rather than write that. She should know better. Now I know that she can be bought. It is sad. The stakes this time are very, very serious.

Let us see what happens. Maybe Hebert has sold her rights and PM PM will survive.

Given English Canada and Ontario, federalists may have chosen right. But then, maybe not. Maybe Hebert has chosen right.

But I cannot believe ever that Hebert wrote what she thinks is the truth.

Rather, I think now that federal Canada will change - peacefully Thank God - in the next few years.

Let's see what happens. Canada is on line for changes.

I think she is being merely guilty of being overly optimistic.

Shoop,you are too generous to Hebert in this case. I think Hébert knows better.

[shoop]

I'll give Harper credit. For once he appears to be playing things shrewdly.

Harper calls on Martin to clear the air about Jean.

He is putting the pressue on Martin to defend the choice. Any Liberal attempts to call him a bigot will fall on deaf ears (or be preaching to the converted.)

Beautiful timing how the release is issued the day of Hebert's scyhophantic column.

[Guest eureka]

I believe Hebert was right on. The "Sovereignist" witch hunts that are the preeminent feature of Quebec life and culture have, to this date, been carefully kept out of headline news, particularly in English Canada.

This has the potential to wake up all decent people in every community and bring a backlash against the "Sovereignists" that they have not had to fight before.

[shoop]

Even the Toronto Star is calling on Jean to speak out and clear the air.

EDITORIAL: Michaelle Jean must speak out.

Woo hoo, PM Dithers slam dunk choice is blowing up in his face. Man he is a bad bad PM.

[newbie]

From ctv.ca

"I want to tell you unequivocally that both he (husband Jean-Daniel Lafond) and I are proud to be Canadians and that we have the greatest respect for the institutions of our country. We are fully committed to Canada. I would not have accepted this position otherwise," Jean said in a brief written statement released Wednesday.

"We are equally proud of the attachment to Quebec that we have always shown beyond any partisan considerations. Let me be clear: we have never belonged to a political party or the separatist movement," she says.

Okay, folks, what more do you want. There's her statement. Now put this witch hunt to bed and let her get on with her life.

[August1991]

"witch hunt"

Is that what you call raising legitimate questions about the person designated to become the head of state?

No one is suggesting that we burn her at the stake, nor is anyone suggesting that she lose her job and be blacklisted.

In a democracy, it is normal to ask questions of people in authority. To do so is not a "witch hunt".

[BHS]

Okay, folks, what more do you want. There's her statement. Now put this witch hunt to bed and let her get on with her life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You seem to be suggesting by "get on with her life" that she's still a private person and that it's illegitimate for the public to question her motives or opinions. Not so. She's the designated to become highest ranking member of our government and the head of our armed forces.

[newbie]

Funny how you ---'s seem to attack the messenger. The point that seems lost on you is that Michaëlle Jean has now made her comments that you so demanded of her. The "witch hunt" I was referring to is a deliberate attempt to discredit the woman on speculation and innuendo. Of course questions can be raised, but there seems to be an automatic and spiteful knee-jerk reaction to ANY decisions made by our ruling government. You will have your chance in the next election to exercise your democratic rights.

[shoop]

newbie shouldn't the sincerity of her statements be judged? or no matter what she said she automatically deserves a free pass at this point?

The main page of CTV.ca had the following poll question.

"Michaelle Jean says she is proud to be Canadian and is 'fully committed to Canada.' Do you believe her?"

60% of respondents answered no.

Methinks the issue still has legs.

[newbie]

newbie shouldn't the sincerity of her statements be judged? or no matter what she said she automatically deserves a free pass at this point?

The main page of CTV.ca had the following poll question.

"Michaelle Jean says she is proud to be Canadian and is 'fully committed to Canada.' Do you believe her?"

60% of respondents answered no.

Methinks the issue still has legs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess folks of your political persuation will never be satisfied. Everyone and everything is suspect if it comes from the "other" party. And polls, well I suppose I could find one that says just the opposite. Like I said, use the power of the voting booth to make your statements.

[August1991]

Like I said, use the power of the voting booth to make your statements.

Fine, but it's not enough merely to vote. The vote must also be informed. To have an informed vote, one must ask questions and think sceptically about the answers.

This is not a partisan issue. It is not because Jean is a Liberal appointee. I would expect every citizen to ask questions.

[mirror]

I guess folks of your political persuation will never be satisfied. Everyone and everything is suspect if it comes from the "other" party. And polls, well I suppose I could find one that says just the opposite. Like I said, use the power of the voting booth to make your statements.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excellent comments.

I totally agree. It is always the same. Those who don't like the GG's appointmernt have their own political agenda they are constantly trying to promote. One would think there would be more substatitive issues to get excited about!

[BHS]

I guess folks of your political persuation will never be satisfied. Everyone and everything is suspect if it comes from the "other" party. And polls, well I suppose I could find one that says just the opposite. Like I said, use the power of the voting booth to make your statements.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excellent comments.

I totally agree. It is always the same. Those who don't like the GG's appointmernt have their own political agenda they are constantly trying to promote. One would think there would be more substatitive issues to get excited about!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Newbie: My problem is not the Jean is a Liberal appointment. I could care less. It's that our de facto head of state is appointed by anyone that rankles me. And as such, I really can't follow your advice about voting on the issue, since I can't to vote on that period, and constitutional reform is a less likely topic for parliament to consider than health care reform. You ****.

mirror: You can be such a knob. Of all people. As if you were non-partisan. As if you don't push your political agenda every chance you get. Sheesh.

[mirror]

I guess folks of your political persuation will never be satisfied. Everyone and everything is suspect if it comes from the "other" party. And polls, well I suppose I could find one that says just the opposite. Like I said, use the power of the voting booth to make your statements.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excellent comments.

I totally agree. It is always the same. Those who don't like the GG's appointmernt have their own political agenda they are constantly trying to promote. One would think there would be more substatitive issues to get excited about!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Newbie: My problem is not the Jean is a Liberal appointment. I could care less. It's that our de facto head of state is appointed by anyone that rankles me. And as such, I really can't follow your advice about voting on the issue, since I can't to vote on that period, and constitutional reform is a less likely topic for parliament to consider than health care reform. You ****.

mirror: You can be such a knob. Of all people. As if you were non-partisan. As if you don't push your political agenda every chance you get. Sheesh.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BHS....Now! Now!

No more name calling.

Remember what Greg said today - stick to the issues and leave the personal insults out of it or you will be banned.

[shoop]

BHS....Now! Now!

No more name calling.

Remember what Greg said today - stick to the issues and leave the personal insults out of it or you will be banned.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mirror, you called me a dickhead. Do you forget? So shove the sanctimonious bull.

It's not a matter of going after Jean for purely partisan reasons.

Jean is a bad choice. When push comes to shove and she has to choose to defend Canada versus a sovereign Quebec there are serious doubts as to what she will choose to do.

Canadians should never have questions about how their GG would react in that situation.

[Guest eureka]

You are so right, August, that people need to ask questions and to be informed in order to vote.

And, if what is going on in these threads is "asking questions" and trying to be informed, then God help us all. I don't think I have ever seen so much blatant partisanship about any issue.

Witch Hunt it is. The unconscionable denigration of someone's character without even a shred of the so important information or a relevant question.

If the posters here are a sample of a group of more aware and active participants in political life, then give me the ignorant and uninformed.

Newbie, I appreciate your balanced and fair expression on the topic.

[shoop]

I don't think I have ever seen so much blatant partisanship about any issue.

Witch Hunt it is. The unconscionable denigration of someone's character without even a shred of the so important information or a relevant question.

Newbie, I appreciate your balanced and fair expression on the topic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Eureka, are you actually serious? You chastise blatant partisanship and appreciate balanced and fair expression BUT you say there isn't a shred of information or a relevant question?

You really are being partisan and biased in saying there is nothing about this issue for Canadians to be concerned about.

INFORMATION Jean is on film toasting independence in one of Lafond's documentaries. That is an undeniable fact. (Even the CBC showed it )

RELEVANT QUESTIONS

Here are three for you.

Was she toasting Quebec independence in that clip?

Would she choose to support the best interests of Canada or a sovereign Quebec if her vice-regal duties required her to make a choice?

Why didn't she directly confront the allegations levelled against her in the statement she released today?

[BHS]

BHS....Now! Now!

No more name calling.

Remember what Greg said today - stick to the issues and leave the personal insults out of it or you will be banned.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I see you talking trash in this forum all of the time. I'm bookmarking this post to throw back in your face next time I see it, because I'm positive it will happen again.

[mirror]

BHS....Now! Now!

No more name calling.

Remember what Greg said today - stick to the issues and leave the personal insults out of it or you will be banned.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mirror, you called me a dickhead. Do you forget? So shove the sanctimonious bull.

It's not a matter of going after Jean for purely partisan reasons.

Jean is a bad choice. When push comes to shove and she has to choose to defend Canada versus a sovereign Quebec there are serious doubts as to what she will choose to do.

Canadians should never have questions about how their GG would react in that situation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are making a mountain out of a molehill. The GG is a figurehead, not some partisan politician. They only problem with the GG is in your mind. Get over it, as she is here to stay.

[BHS]

You are making a mountain out of a molehill. The GG is a figurehead, not some partisan politician. They only problem with the GG in in your mind. Get over it, as she is here to stay.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The ENTIRE problem is precisely that she is a figurehead. If this blows up in PMPM's face it will accomplish two things: First and foremost, it will be as funny as hell, and in a nation full of comedians that's an important consideration. Secondly, it will get people thinking about and talking about how ridiculous it is to have our governments' bills signed into laws by unaccountable political appointees instead of elected officials.

[newbie]

An attempt to answer shoop's questions:

1.Was she toasting Quebec independence in that clip?

How do you know she wasn't toasting the independence of French-ruled Caribbean island of Martinique? That probably was the case given the background of the film's topic: the life of Aime Cesaire.

http://channels.aol.ca/news/article.adp?id...816183309990004

2. Would she choose to support the best interests of Canada or a sovereign Quebec if her vice-regal duties required her to make a choice?

I believe she will be taking an oath of allegiance, and why would she even choose this position if she were a hard core separatist?

3. Why didn't she directly confront the allegations levelled against her in the statement she released today?

I don't think it would have mattered what she said today, it wouldn't be enough for her critics.

I think Jack Layton said it best:

"Here we have an accomplished woman who has said she loves this country and is willing to take on the responsibilities of being a spokesperson for it. I think that's something that should be celebrated."