August1991 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 We are all watching, in real time, the death of the Federal Liberal Party. The arguments between Chrétien/Paul Martin, guys like Warren Kinsella/Jean Lapierre getting involved, arguing - that was so 2003. Now, in 2019, we are seeing the federal Liberal Party committing suicide. ===== Key point: It is not the death of Canada. Canada - this place of rocks and trees - is so much richer, better, more complex than the federal Liberal Party with its red flag and a maple leaf. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 Not the death, just a bump in the road but that'll teach them to with a name instead of brains 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted February 14, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 (edited) 17 minutes ago, scribblet said: Not the death, just a bump in the road but that'll teach them to with a name instead of brains No, it's the end. Death. 4444. The players managed to resurrect the federal Liberal Party with the name Trudeau. Heck, even Trudeau Snr said that he used the Liberal name to gain power. ===== To me, Canada is far more than a red flag, or the federal Liberal Party. Edited February 14, 2019 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 If the sponsorship scandal didn't kill them, why would this do it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted February 14, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 43 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: If the sponsorship scandal didn't kill them, why would this do it? The sponsorship scandal killed the federal Liberal Party - until the apparatchiks (after looking: Dion, Ignatieff, etc) found a good name, with good hair. This scandal will kill the federal Liberal Party: even a good name and good hair are not a way to get elected, win power. ======= But as I say, Canada - this place of rocks, trees - uh - snow, is far more than a red flag, a maple leaf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 2 hours ago, August1991 said: We are all watching, in real time, the death of the Federal Liberal Party. Not hardly. From what I can gather, Quebecers are largely mystified about what all the fuss is about. OF COURSE a big Quebec company should get special treatment. And all that corruption stuff, meh, that's kinda in the past anyway, so big deal. The Liberals remain strong in Quebec, and that could be enough, as long as fortress Maritimes remains all red, to carry them into another government. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted February 14, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Argus said: Not hardly. From what I can gather, Quebecers are largely mystified about what all the fuss is about. OF COURSE a big Quebec company should get special treatment. And all that corruption stuff, meh, that's kinda in the past anyway, so big deal. The Liberals remain strong in Quebec, and that could be enough, as long as fortress Maritimes remains all red, to carry them into another government. Argus, I have noted this also. But it is not "Quebecers" who are mystified. ======== As I say, this place called Canada is far more than a red flag, a maple leaf. We (French/English/Catholic/Protestant) managed to create a civilised place in this world. The federal Liberal Party is no longer part of that process. With Justin Trudeau, apparitachks in the federal Liberal Party have made of us the Austrian-Hungarian Empire - circa 1912. Edited February 14, 2019 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 26 minutes ago, August1991 said: The sponsorship scandal killed the federal Liberal Party - until the apparatchiks (after looking: Dion, Ignatieff, etc) found a good name, with good hair. This scandal will kill the federal Liberal Party: even a good name and good hair are not a way to get elected, win power. You're a smart man, and yet your definition of 'dead' seems so different from mine. You must be a vampire. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted February 14, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said: You're a smart man, and yet your definition of 'dead' seems so different from mine. You must be a vampire. The civil war between Chretien/Martin signaled the end of the federal Liberal Party. Until they found another Trudeau with hair. Now it's dead. ===== What's the line? "The federal Liberal Party is not dead. But it smells funny." Edited February 14, 2019 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted February 14, 2019 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: You're a smart man, and yet your definition of 'dead' seems so different from mine. You must be a vampire. On further thought, Michael, at issue is where these many federal Liberal voters will go. Some will hold their noses and vote for Justin. Others will vote Green. Many/most, I suspect, will stay at home. Maybe some will vote for Singh. Heck, some may even vote Conservative. But Justin Trudeau is now damaged goods, and any partisan federal Liberal is in denial to believe otherwise. And without a star candidate/name like Justin Trudeau, the federal Liberal Party is just a party with Dion/Ignatieff as leader. Edited February 14, 2019 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 Ontario voters continued voting for a corrupt provincial Liberal gov't so there's not much reason to believe they will not continue voting for a corrupt Federal Liberal gov't. If the Liberals party wants to win a majority they would be smart to remove Trudeau, but I don't see that happening before the election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 Only two scandals have had an electoral impact as far as I can remember (before I've had my coffee). The Pacific Scandal and the Customs Scandal. Both MacDonald and King came back from those. Right now, Jason Kenny is embroiled in the leadership race cheating affair and yet it is not having an effect on his electoral chances. Mike Pearson had the most scandal ridden government that I can remember, yet the Grits won a majority in the '68 election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 I just listened to Paul Wells on the Current. Trudeau could be making the case that he is standing up for Quebec jobs against the Ontario Conservatives. There seems to be an avoidance of the fact that SNCL's attempts to lobby for suppressing prosecution failed. The Trudeau Government did not interfere with the prosecution process. They may have wanted to, but they didn't. As for Wilson-Raybould's "demotion," Trudeau should had said the Vetrans Affairs was not getting the ministerial clout it deserved and so he was putting a high powered minister in charge to turn things around because veterans deserve the best. The Prime Minister's weakness lies in his lack of political instincts. Maybe that is a bad thing or, maybe that is a virtue. At present, he is inching towards a minority next fall. In another two years, after the 2022 election, he may have acquired those instincts he is lacking or, perhaps he will be able to spend more time with his family and get some skiing in. Given the choice, I would rather be skiing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 8 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said: I just listened to Paul Wells on the Current. Trudeau could be making the case that he is standing up for Quebec jobs against the Ontario Conservatives. There seems to be an avoidance of the fact that SNCL's attempts to lobby for suppressing prosecution failed. The Trudeau Government did not interfere with the prosecution process. They may have wanted to, but they didn't. As for Wilson-Raybould's "demotion," Trudeau should had said the Vetrans Affairs was not getting the ministerial clout it deserved and so he was putting a high powered minister in charge to turn things around because veterans deserve the best.............. Interesting, and that is why SNC where able to buy the legislative changes needed to avoid prosecution. (Quebec jobs). It still doesn't explain why Rabould was demoted, or at least moved to another position. Something happened in her eyes. I'm also wondering why she can't speak out in Parliament which give her immunity - right ? The cover up and cries of 'witch hunt' from the Committee won't go over so well... one thing that puzzles me is why there isn't more said about gov't interference in the Norman case or is that just simmering for now., Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 36 minutes ago, scribblet said: one thing that puzzles me is why there isn't more said about gov't interference in the Norman case or is that just simmering for now., A bit off topic but they just cast the light on a civil servant who may have been the culprit and Norman is innocent. 36 minutes ago, scribblet said: nteresting, and that is why SNC where able to buy the legislative changes needed to avoid prosecution. (Quebec jobs). The same could be said for the Trudeau government pushing through the Trans mountain Pipeline over the strident objections of the BC Government. (Alberta jobs). 40 minutes ago, scribblet said: It still doesn't explain why Rabould was demoted, or at least moved to another position. Something happened in her eyes Maybe she received bad advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 2 hours ago, scribblet said: Ontario voters continued voting for a corrupt provincial Liberal gov't so there's not much reason to believe they will not continue voting for a corrupt Federal Liberal gov't. If the Liberals party wants to win a majority they would be smart to remove Trudeau, but I don't see that happening before the election. Corruption is bad and all but... as long as they're giving us all that free stuff, well... is it really that important? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said: A bit off topic but they just cast the light on a civil servant who may have been the culprit and Norman is innocent. Seems more like they wanted to make an example of Norman, political prisoner in effect, to send a message to the rest of the chain of command, but as the defence presented its case, it has started to become embarrassing for the RCMP that they were involved in a targeted political hit, so they're charging everybody now to make it look like they are impartial instead of just cronies of the PCO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 If anyone breeches Cabinet secrecy, that is a crime. Active members of the military should never participate in politics. Their role is to obey the orders of the civil power. So, given that, how is Admiral Norman a political prisoner. If the rest of the chain of command do not understand the boundaries, they should resign. On the other hand, Admiral Norma is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 3 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said: If anyone breeches Cabinet secrecy, that is a crime. Active members of the military should never participate in politics. Their role is to obey the orders of the civil power. So, given that, how is Admiral Norman a political prisoner. If the rest of the chain of command do not understand the boundaries, they should resign. On the other hand, Admiral Norma is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. No, Scott Brison may not use cabinet confidence to cover up his corruption, Admiral Norman had a mandate to blow the whistle on the Liberals, he was perfectly within the bounds of his oath to the Crown, whereas the Liberals were allegedly engaged in influence peddling, which is the crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 Canada is a fundamentally corrupt country, Ottawa is like a third world banana republic. Military officers however do not report to the Government of Canada, military officers are bound by oath to the Queen. As such officers are bound by oath to blow the whistle on influence peddling where they find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 If this were America, Norman would be protected by the first amendment, same as Daniel Ellsberg, as Norman simply outed one of Canada's Pentagon Papers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 As the military chain of command is arms length from the Government, anytime military officers are want to invoke their oaths to the Commander-in-Chief, they could take the government down in a matter of hours, and as there is endemic corruption at DND, an officer of the Crown could just pick something at random and call it what it is, then walk straight into a press conference. This is why the politicians fear them. The mechanism the politicians use to try to cow the military, is intimidation; "don't throw your career away, if you mess with us we will destroy you" Norman wasn't cowed. Called their bluff. So now the Government has a serious problem. They're scurrying like rats and hoping that the Public Prosecution Service will save them from themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 By "blowing the whistle," you mean he allegedly breeched cabinet secrets. This is the equivalent of what Julius and Ethel Rosenberg did in the US. They were not protected by the first amendment. They were executed. Cabinet Secrets are the most classified of all documents. It far outweighs what ever you think Mr. Brison may or may not have done. When I was in university, I was a Progressive Conservative activist. After graduation I joined the Reserves and never spoke of politics again until I left the Reserves. If an officer feels the need to become engaged in politics, they must first resign. Doug mention the oath to the Queen. HM is head of the Canadian Forces and she too refrains from politics. In 1944, the General Staff advised the government that they needed conscripts to be used in combat. If the government did not comply, they said they would all resign. They did not go public with it. They did not make it political. If Admiral Norman wanted to make a statement, that should have been his course of action. To draw this back to the OP, King's government survived that crisis and the Trudeau government will survive this. It will be something else that will bring them down...some day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 (edited) False. The Rosenberg's were spies working for the Soviets. Cabinet confidence is not national security classification. Admiral Norman was not working for a foreign power. He was working for the Commander-in-Chief, to get the right ship for the navy, which was his lawful mandate, despite apparent Liberal influence peddling to the otherwise. Edited February 14, 2019 by Dougie93 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted February 14, 2019 Report Share Posted February 14, 2019 I would also continue to caution against publishing to the internet false accusations of treason against military personnel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.