Carney is trying to appeal to as many voters as possible. That’s smart. Cutting taxes isn’t an original idea. Claiming PP “was right” is kind of funny.
Why the sudden change in policy by the Liberals?
And why is Carney allowed to complain about the last five years of Liberal rule without a whiff of irony about his being one of Dear Justin’s advisors?
This is again the Liberals getting a sense of the wind and saying anything to keep power. With his well-established record for lying and manipulating facts, can anything Carney says be trusted (and by extension the Liberal party)?
Cuz their approval rating was in the toilet maybe?
An advisor is just that-someone who advises another but ultimately is not the decision maker.
All politicians get a sense of the wind. PP’s been doing this since day 1. He smelled the “we need someone like trump to lead us” blood in the water and ran with it. Now he’s sensing that wind change, so he’s trying to walk that stuff back. And he’s failing, as far as I can tell. We’ll know for sure on election night.
Look, historically I haven’t been the type to excuse “my team” from misdeeds and lies, etc, but ever since the cons got all trumpy, I just can’t entertain voting for them. I know you’ve always tried to label JT as more trumpy than the right, but I, and I think most folks more objective than us (non-canadians), disagree with that.
Put up a leader who doesn’t demonize immigrants, and “the left”, and I’d listen. Until then…
The Conservatives tried putting forward reasonable leaders but Canadians kept voting for Trudeau’s bombastic bullshit so the CPC decided to match Trudeau’s preaching style. Has nothing to do with Trump, despite everyone’s unsupported insinuations. It’s cute how now the PM’s resume is suddenly relevant.
Now events have turned and the Liberals went with a leader who has less charisma than Harper. By shuttering our democracy the Liberals also took away most of the attention from anything the other parties were trying to do. It was the Liberals who didn’t want a crisis to go unexploited when covid broke out, after all, and they have proven quite adept at manipulating the Canadian populace. Look at the continued hatred of your fellow citizens (the Freedom Convoy). They’re doing an excellent job of blurring the lines between Carney’s campaigning and his governing.
Do I get to laugh my ass off when others choose Carney as my Prime Minister and when his financials are finally disclosed you’ve elected a stooge for the Chinese government? That’s what I mean about voting for something, not just cock blocking someone else’s vote.
Yeah, you really were considering giving Carney a chance.
Carney is trying to appeal to as many voters as possible. That’s smart. Cutting taxes isn’t an original idea. Claiming PP “was right” is kind of funny.
Why the sudden change in policy by the Liberals?
And why is Carney allowed to complain about the last five years of Liberal rule without a whiff of irony about his being one of Dear Justin’s advisors?
This is again the Liberals getting a sense of the wind and saying anything to keep power. With his well-established record for lying and manipulating facts, can anything Carney says be trusted (and by extension the Liberal party)?
Cuz their approval rating was in the toilet maybe?
An advisor is just that-someone who advises another but ultimately is not the decision maker.
All politicians get a sense of the wind. PP’s been doing this since day 1. He smelled the “we need someone like trump to lead us” blood in the water and ran with it. Now he’s sensing that wind change, so he’s trying to walk that stuff back. And he’s failing, as far as I can tell. We’ll know for sure on election night.
Look, historically I haven’t been the type to excuse “my team” from misdeeds and lies, etc, but ever since the cons got all trumpy, I just can’t entertain voting for them. I know you’ve always tried to label JT as more trumpy than the right, but I, and I think most folks more objective than us (non-canadians), disagree with that.
Put up a leader who doesn’t demonize immigrants, and “the left”, and I’d listen. Until then…
The Conservatives tried putting forward reasonable leaders but Canadians kept voting for Trudeau’s bombastic bullshit so the CPC decided to match Trudeau’s preaching style. Has nothing to do with Trump, despite everyone’s unsupported insinuations. It’s cute how now the PM’s resume is suddenly relevant.
Now events have turned and the Liberals went with a leader who has less charisma than Harper. By shuttering our democracy the Liberals also took away most of the attention from anything the other parties were trying to do. It was the Liberals who didn’t want a crisis to go unexploited when covid broke out, after all, and they have proven quite adept at manipulating the Canadian populace. Look at the continued hatred of your fellow citizens (the Freedom Convoy). They’re doing an excellent job of blurring the lines between Carney’s campaigning and his governing.
Do I get to laugh my ass off when others choose Carney as my Prime Minister and when his financials are finally disclosed you’ve elected a stooge for the Chinese government? That’s what I mean about voting for something, not just cock blocking someone else’s vote.
if the whole deal for you is an "I told you so", laugh away.
If you think that’s what I want then you haven’t been paying attention.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
"shuttering our democracy". I just can't take things like that seriously.
Aside from the GST holiday/bribe, what legislation has passed through the House of Commons since September? And when was the last time the House sat? Leadership races have been held several times without prorogation (“shuttering our democracy”, without reasonable justification).
Maybe you should take it seriously.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Carney is trying to appeal to as many voters as possible. That’s smart. Cutting taxes isn’t an original idea. Claiming PP “was right” is kind of funny.
Why the sudden change in policy by the Liberals?
And why is Carney allowed to complain about the last five years of Liberal rule without a whiff of irony about his being one of Dear Justin’s advisors?
This is again the Liberals getting a sense of the wind and saying anything to keep power. With his well-established record for lying and manipulating facts, can anything Carney says be trusted (and by extension the Liberal party)?
Cuz their approval rating was in the toilet maybe?
An advisor is just that-someone who advises another but ultimately is not the decision maker.
All politicians get a sense of the wind. PP’s been doing this since day 1. He smelled the “we need someone like trump to lead us” blood in the water and ran with it. Now he’s sensing that wind change, so he’s trying to walk that stuff back. And he’s failing, as far as I can tell. We’ll know for sure on election night.
Look, historically I haven’t been the type to excuse “my team” from misdeeds and lies, etc, but ever since the cons got all trumpy, I just can’t entertain voting for them. I know you’ve always tried to label JT as more trumpy than the right, but I, and I think most folks more objective than us (non-canadians), disagree with that.
Put up a leader who doesn’t demonize immigrants, and “the left”, and I’d listen. Until then…
The Conservatives tried putting forward reasonable leaders but Canadians kept voting for Trudeau’s bombastic bullshit so the CPC decided to match Trudeau’s preaching style. Has nothing to do with Trump, despite everyone’s unsupported insinuations. It’s cute how now the PM’s resume is suddenly relevant.
Now events have turned and the Liberals went with a leader who has less charisma than Harper. By shuttering our democracy the Liberals also took away most of the attention from anything the other parties were trying to do. It was the Liberals who didn’t want a crisis to go unexploited when covid broke out, after all, and they have proven quite adept at manipulating the Canadian populace. Look at the continued hatred of your fellow citizens (the Freedom Convoy). They’re doing an excellent job of blurring the lines between Carney’s campaigning and his governing.
Do I get to laugh my ass off when others choose Carney as my Prime Minister and when his financials are finally disclosed you’ve elected a stooge for the Chinese government? That’s what I mean about voting for something, not just cock blocking someone else’s vote.
Yeah, you really were considering giving Carney a chance.
We're not stupid.
I may be an idiot, but I’m not stupid either, thanks.
Care to disprove or argue any of the substance of my post or just more put downs?
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Cons have done the same. No one sounded the “shuttering democracy” alarm bells.
In one case the opposition parties weren’t going to allow the minority Conservatives to even try to govern, usurping the vote and mandate that had recently been delivered by the public.
Now, to be fair, I’m not as familiar with Harper’s second proroguing, so maybe you can educate me.
And again, Parliament doesn’t need to be closed for the governing party to run a leadership contest. Especially when we were facing fucking Trump.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Carney is trying to appeal to as many voters as possible. That’s smart. Cutting taxes isn’t an original idea. Claiming PP “was right” is kind of funny.
Why the sudden change in policy by the Liberals?
And why is Carney allowed to complain about the last five years of Liberal rule without a whiff of irony about his being one of Dear Justin’s advisors?
This is again the Liberals getting a sense of the wind and saying anything to keep power. With his well-established record for lying and manipulating facts, can anything Carney says be trusted (and by extension the Liberal party)?
Cuz their approval rating was in the toilet maybe?
An advisor is just that-someone who advises another but ultimately is not the decision maker.
All politicians get a sense of the wind. PP’s been doing this since day 1. He smelled the “we need someone like trump to lead us” blood in the water and ran with it. Now he’s sensing that wind change, so he’s trying to walk that stuff back. And he’s failing, as far as I can tell. We’ll know for sure on election night.
Look, historically I haven’t been the type to excuse “my team” from misdeeds and lies, etc, but ever since the cons got all trumpy, I just can’t entertain voting for them. I know you’ve always tried to label JT as more trumpy than the right, but I, and I think most folks more objective than us (non-canadians), disagree with that.
Put up a leader who doesn’t demonize immigrants, and “the left”, and I’d listen. Until then…
The Conservatives tried putting forward reasonable leaders but Canadians kept voting for Trudeau’s bombastic bullshit so the CPC decided to match Trudeau’s preaching style. Has nothing to do with Trump, despite everyone’s unsupported insinuations. It’s cute how now the PM’s resume is suddenly relevant.
Now events have turned and the Liberals went with a leader who has less charisma than Harper. By shuttering our democracy the Liberals also took away most of the attention from anything the other parties were trying to do. It was the Liberals who didn’t want a crisis to go unexploited when covid broke out, after all, and they have proven quite adept at manipulating the Canadian populace. Look at the continued hatred of your fellow citizens (the Freedom Convoy). They’re doing an excellent job of blurring the lines between Carney’s campaigning and his governing.
Do I get to laugh my ass off when others choose Carney as my Prime Minister and when his financials are finally disclosed you’ve elected a stooge for the Chinese government? That’s what I mean about voting for something, not just cock blocking someone else’s vote.
if the whole deal for you is an "I told you so", laugh away.
If you think that’s what I want then you haven’t been paying attention.
I just found the comment out of character. That's all.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Carney is trying to appeal to as many voters as possible. That’s smart. Cutting taxes isn’t an original idea. Claiming PP “was right” is kind of funny.
Why the sudden change in policy by the Liberals?
And why is Carney allowed to complain about the last five years of Liberal rule without a whiff of irony about his being one of Dear Justin’s advisors?
This is again the Liberals getting a sense of the wind and saying anything to keep power. With his well-established record for lying and manipulating facts, can anything Carney says be trusted (and by extension the Liberal party)?
Cuz their approval rating was in the toilet maybe?
An advisor is just that-someone who advises another but ultimately is not the decision maker.
All politicians get a sense of the wind. PP’s been doing this since day 1. He smelled the “we need someone like trump to lead us” blood in the water and ran with it. Now he’s sensing that wind change, so he’s trying to walk that stuff back. And he’s failing, as far as I can tell. We’ll know for sure on election night.
Look, historically I haven’t been the type to excuse “my team” from misdeeds and lies, etc, but ever since the cons got all trumpy, I just can’t entertain voting for them. I know you’ve always tried to label JT as more trumpy than the right, but I, and I think most folks more objective than us (non-canadians), disagree with that.
Put up a leader who doesn’t demonize immigrants, and “the left”, and I’d listen. Until then…
The Conservatives tried putting forward reasonable leaders but Canadians kept voting for Trudeau’s bombastic bullshit so the CPC decided to match Trudeau’s preaching style. Has nothing to do with Trump, despite everyone’s unsupported insinuations. It’s cute how now the PM’s resume is suddenly relevant.
Now events have turned and the Liberals went with a leader who has less charisma than Harper. By shuttering our democracy the Liberals also took away most of the attention from anything the other parties were trying to do. It was the Liberals who didn’t want a crisis to go unexploited when covid broke out, after all, and they have proven quite adept at manipulating the Canadian populace. Look at the continued hatred of your fellow citizens (the Freedom Convoy). They’re doing an excellent job of blurring the lines between Carney’s campaigning and his governing.
Do I get to laugh my ass off when others choose Carney as my Prime Minister and when his financials are finally disclosed you’ve elected a stooge for the Chinese government? That’s what I mean about voting for something, not just cock blocking someone else’s vote.
if the whole deal for you is an "I told you so", laugh away.
If you think that’s what I want then you haven’t been paying attention.
I just found the comment out of character. That's all.
I think it’s a fair point all the same, and I’d be laughing through tears of dismay, just to be crystal clear.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Cons have done the same. No one sounded the “shuttering democracy” alarm bells.
And many people cried foul then and are now seemingly using it to justify the most recent prorogation of OUR Parliament.
It's all just strategy. Unfortunately, many of these rules, as we see down in the US, were intended for use only when absolutely necessary. There's no real verbiage that disallows it at the PM's discretion. He did it so he wouldn't face a confidence vote prior to being able to get a new leader in place. We both know that. He would have likely faced one and PP would be in power right now. So, while I fully understand the frustration of those who don't like it when "their side" is on the receiving end, these things tend not to rile me up so much as I know it's not illegal, and I know they all do it. I don't like to minimize it by saying it's a game, but it honestly really is.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Cons have done the same. No one sounded the “shuttering democracy” alarm bells.
And many people cried foul then and are now seemingly using it to justify the most recent prorogation of OUR Parliament.
It's all just strategy. Unfortunately, many of these rules, as we see down in the US, were intended for use only when absolutely necessary. There's no real verbiage that disallows it at the PM's discretion. He did it so he wouldn't face a confidence vote prior to being able to get a new leader in place. We both know that. He would have likely faced one and PP would be in power right now. So, while I fully understand the frustration of those who don't like it when "their side" is on the receiving end, these things tend not to rile me up so much as I know it's not illegal, and I know they all do it. I don't like to minimize it by saying it's a game, but it honestly really is.
In normal times I might agree with you, but we know it’s not and the Liberals move was entirely self-serving putting their party above country. Why? You nailed it, because with Trudeau as leader they would have been lucky to fit in a minivan after an election. But he hung on desperately so far beyond his due date that even many here started saying he had to go, so their only option was to deny the people proper representation during what could easily be described as a time of crisis.
Natural governing party of raping democracy is what this proves them to be beyond a doubt. If you want another clue, look at how much governing occurred through Orders-in-Council (our equivalent of the Executive Order) during the last decade. Hint, it’s A LOT, showing a disdain for the legislative process.
And yes, I’m being hyperbolic because simply presenting the facts gets ignored and draws putdowns.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
yeah, I'm confident all political parties will be self serving in that regard if they believe it will succeed in retaining power. And I'm also confident all political parties cry foul when the other does it.
I would imagine there'd naturally be an increase in OIC's when the governing party is in the minority. There are ways of overturning those, so those don't concern me as much. Trump's EO's did concern me mainly because they were 99% asshole moves.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
yeah, I'm confident all political parties will be self serving in that regard if they believe it will succeed in retaining power. And I'm also confident all political parties cry foul when the other does it.
I would imagine there'd naturally be an increase in OIC's when the governing party is in the minority. There are ways of overturning those, so those don't concern me as much. Trump's EO's did concern me mainly because they were 99% asshole moves.
They all do it so it’s no big deal it was done during a crisis? That’s when we MOST need a functioning democracy, not rule by edict with no oversight. But that’s the currently preferred method of governance for Canada’s Liberals.
Many people saw Trudeau’s excessive OICs as asshole moves, like his gun bans which have yet to be legislated and debated. He doubled Harper’s OICs which was who the article I read months ago compared Trudeau to. And lets not forget the stalemate the Liberals forced in Parliament prior to shuttering through prorogation. Why? Because the Liberals wouldn’t respect the will of the House and rulings against them by the Speaker. Yeah, business as usual in Canadian politics.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Who was holding things up in parliament before the shut down?
and question period is an absolute embarrassment on all sides
1996: Toronto 2003: St. Paul 2005: Thunder Bay 2008: West Palm Beach, Tampa 2009: Chicago I, Chicago II 2010: Boston 2011: Toronto I, Toronto II, Winnipeg 2012: Missoula 2013: London, Pittsburgh, Buffalo 2014: St. Paul, Milwaukee 2016: Quebec City, Ottawa, Toronto I, Toronto II 2022: Hamilton, Toronto 2023: St. Paul I, St. Paul II 2024: Vancouver I, Vancouver II
yeah, I'm confident all political parties will be self serving in that regard if they believe it will succeed in retaining power. And I'm also confident all political parties cry foul when the other does it.
I would imagine there'd naturally be an increase in OIC's when the governing party is in the minority. There are ways of overturning those, so those don't concern me as much. Trump's EO's did concern me mainly because they were 99% asshole moves.
They all do it so it’s no big deal it was done during a crisis? That’s when we MOST need a functioning democracy, not rule by edict with no oversight. But that’s the currently preferred method of governance for Canada’s Liberals.
Many people saw Trudeau’s excessive OICs as asshole moves, like his gun bans which have yet to be legislated and debated. He doubled Harper’s OICs which was who the article I read months ago compared Trudeau to. And lets not forget the stalemate the Liberals forced in Parliament prior to shuttering through prorogation. Why? Because the Liberals wouldn’t respect the will of the House and rulings against them by the Speaker. Yeah, business as usual in Canadian politics.
do we respect the courts or not?
OTTAWA — A federal judge has dismissed a legal challenge of Justin Trudeau’s move to prorogue Parliament, concluding the prime minister did not exceed the bounds of his authority.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
what would parliament had accomplished during this "crisis"? they would have bitched and argued and looked to get their sound bites on evening news. that's it. seems like it was handled as well as it could have been, prorogation or not.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Who was holding things up in parliament before the shut down?
and question period is an absolute embarrassment on all sides
You got me. It was the opposition parties, because the Liberal government wasn’t producing the unredacted documents they were ordered to by the will of the House and rulings against them by the Speaker of the House.
However, had the government produced the required documents then the logjam would have lifted.
Chicken or the egg?
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
what would parliament had accomplished during this "crisis"? they would have bitched and argued and looked to get their sound bites on evening news. that's it. seems like it was handled as well as it could have been, prorogation or not.
Yes, The Anointed One has done quite well. Or has he? Who knows, honestly? I’d personally prefer democratic oversight of the government, not the edicts we currently call governing.
I don’t understand this comfort with having no real representation in a time of crisis? And the same idiots who screwed up the country are acting like it was someone else, acting entitled to continue.
We’ll really be able to resist American influence when Carney’s Carbon Tariff gets enacted, won’t we? He’s sure to support getting our resources to international markets, especially after saying they should all stay in the ground, right?
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
yeah, I'm confident all political parties will be self serving in that regard if they believe it will succeed in retaining power. And I'm also confident all political parties cry foul when the other does it.
I would imagine there'd naturally be an increase in OIC's when the governing party is in the minority. There are ways of overturning those, so those don't concern me as much. Trump's EO's did concern me mainly because they were 99% asshole moves.
They all do it so it’s no big deal it was done during a crisis? That’s when we MOST need a functioning democracy, not rule by edict with no oversight. But that’s the currently preferred method of governance for Canada’s Liberals.
Many people saw Trudeau’s excessive OICs as asshole moves, like his gun bans which have yet to be legislated and debated. He doubled Harper’s OICs which was who the article I read months ago compared Trudeau to. And lets not forget the stalemate the Liberals forced in Parliament prior to shuttering through prorogation. Why? Because the Liberals wouldn’t respect the will of the House and rulings against them by the Speaker. Yeah, business as usual in Canadian politics.
do we respect the courts or not?
OTTAWA — A federal judge has dismissed a legal challenge of Justin Trudeau’s move to prorogue Parliament, concluding the prime minister did not exceed the bounds of his authority.
You conveniently skip the part where the case was dismissed because the legislation around prorogation is incredibly poorly written and essentially allows for the closing of Parliament so that the Prime Minister can take a 6 month shit.
The courts are also constantly turning repeat offenders back into the streets to reoffend, is that acceptable? Legal isn’t always right, is it?
I can only imagine the heads exploding here if a Conservative government had acted the same under identical circumstances, seriously.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
yeah, I'm confident all political parties will be self serving in that regard if they believe it will succeed in retaining power. And I'm also confident all political parties cry foul when the other does it.
I would imagine there'd naturally be an increase in OIC's when the governing party is in the minority. There are ways of overturning those, so those don't concern me as much. Trump's EO's did concern me mainly because they were 99% asshole moves.
They all do it so it’s no big deal it was done during a crisis? That’s when we MOST need a functioning democracy, not rule by edict with no oversight. But that’s the currently preferred method of governance for Canada’s Liberals.
Many people saw Trudeau’s excessive OICs as asshole moves, like his gun bans which have yet to be legislated and debated. He doubled Harper’s OICs which was who the article I read months ago compared Trudeau to. And lets not forget the stalemate the Liberals forced in Parliament prior to shuttering through prorogation. Why? Because the Liberals wouldn’t respect the will of the House and rulings against them by the Speaker. Yeah, business as usual in Canadian politics.
do we respect the courts or not?
OTTAWA — A federal judge has dismissed a legal challenge of Justin Trudeau’s move to prorogue Parliament, concluding the prime minister did not exceed the bounds of his authority.
You conveniently skip the part where the case was dismissed because the legislation around prorogation is incredibly poorly written and essentially allows for the closing of Parliament so that the Prime Minister can take a 6 month shit.
The courts are also constantly turning repeat offenders back into the streets to reoffend, is that acceptable? Legal isn’t always right, is it?
I can only imagine the heads exploding here if a Conservative government had acted the same under identical circumstances, seriously.
In a ruling made public late Thursday, Federal Court Chief Justice Paul Crampton said the courts do have a role to play in reviewing the advice, and it is important that it be exercised to maintain public confidence in the institutions of government.
However, he concluded the applicants failed to demonstrate that Trudeau exceeded limits established by the written Constitution, unwritten constitutional principles or any other legal limits.
Crampton wrote in his ruling that he understood why MacKinnon and Lavranos might find the circumstances surrounding Trudeau’s decision to seek prorogation to be troubling.
He said this is particularly so in a broader context in which the executive branch has been increasingly drawing functions away from the legislative branch through concentration of power in the cabinet and the Prime Minister’s Office.
However, the applicants bore the burden of demonstrating that the prime minister’s decision, viewed in its entirety, exceeded the scope of his authority, Crampton wrote.
“They failed to meet that burden.”
Of course court decisions aren't always right, for the reason you pointed out. But I read the judgment above, and I agree with it. Am I legal or constitutional scholar? HAHA, nope. But I agree with it.
Maybe some heads would explode. Not mine.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
yeah, I'm confident all political parties will be self serving in that regard if they believe it will succeed in retaining power. And I'm also confident all political parties cry foul when the other does it.
I would imagine there'd naturally be an increase in OIC's when the governing party is in the minority. There are ways of overturning those, so those don't concern me as much. Trump's EO's did concern me mainly because they were 99% asshole moves.
They all do it so it’s no big deal it was done during a crisis? That’s when we MOST need a functioning democracy, not rule by edict with no oversight. But that’s the currently preferred method of governance for Canada’s Liberals.
Many people saw Trudeau’s excessive OICs as asshole moves, like his gun bans which have yet to be legislated and debated. He doubled Harper’s OICs which was who the article I read months ago compared Trudeau to. And lets not forget the stalemate the Liberals forced in Parliament prior to shuttering through prorogation. Why? Because the Liberals wouldn’t respect the will of the House and rulings against them by the Speaker. Yeah, business as usual in Canadian politics.
do we respect the courts or not?
OTTAWA — A federal judge has dismissed a legal challenge of Justin Trudeau’s move to prorogue Parliament, concluding the prime minister did not exceed the bounds of his authority.
You conveniently skip the part where the case was dismissed because the legislation around prorogation is incredibly poorly written and essentially allows for the closing of Parliament so that the Prime Minister can take a 6 month shit.
The courts are also constantly turning repeat offenders back into the streets to reoffend, is that acceptable? Legal isn’t always right, is it?
I can only imagine the heads exploding here if a Conservative government had acted the same under identical circumstances, seriously.
In a ruling made public late Thursday, Federal Court Chief Justice Paul Crampton said the courts do have a role to play in reviewing the advice, and it is important that it be exercised to maintain public confidence in the institutions of government.
However, he concluded the applicants failed to demonstrate that Trudeau exceeded limits established by the written Constitution, unwritten constitutional principles or any other legal limits.
Crampton wrote in his ruling that he understood why MacKinnon and Lavranos might find the circumstances surrounding Trudeau’s decision to seek prorogation to be troubling.
He said this is particularly so in a broader context in which the executive branch has been increasingly drawing functions away from the legislative branch through concentration of power in the cabinet and the Prime Minister’s Office.
However, the applicants bore the burden of demonstrating that the prime minister’s decision, viewed in its entirety, exceeded the scope of his authority, Crampton wrote.
“They failed to meet that burden.”
Of course court decisions aren't always right, for the reason you pointed out. But I read the judgment above, and I agree with it. Am I legal or constitutional scholar? HAHA, nope. But I agree with it.
Maybe some heads would explode. Not mine.
Fine, you’re clearly going to excuse basically anything the Liberals do in order to give the finger to Conservatives, that’s the only conclusion I can draw after all this time.
Legally Trudeau was covered. As a leader and our fucking Prime Minister it was a dereliction of duty. At least he got his farewell tour in before he had to give up the jet, the ecowarrior that he claims to be. Doing what he did certainly helped Trump fuck us over.
Wasn’t it nice for Carney to call the election the last day before Parliament was due to resume? Why not make an attempt at governing and face the House or why not call the election immediately after he fake-signed his bribe into law? He’s a coward on top of being a liar.
And based on the crickets clearly no one’s worried about Beijing (yet again) interfering in our elections, I can only assume because it fucks the Conservatives, since most here just vote to cockblock apparently.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
well, I guess we're at one of those impasses again where we can't have a constructive discussion without you constantly cursing me out and making wild assumptions based on my lack of freaking out.
again, I don't know enough about the election interference to comment. Every time someone doesn't respond to a specific post of yours you go apeshit. For me it's mostly cuz I don't like to speak about something I know nothing about. Yes, it's important if it's true. But I haven't researched it yet. And no one is obligated to respond to anything on this forum, fwiw.
I don't get this "cock block" shit. I mean, in simpler times I weighed my options by all 4 parties. I didn't mean my vote was to "block" a PP vote. I meant I couldn't vote for him under any circumstances. But again, not sure why the intent behind a vote matters. My vote and my reasoning are my right. You're acting like you have the moral high ground on "why" some vote. I mean, you said a few days ago you couldn't vote for Carney. So isn't that a vote against the liberals? Or is it a vote for PP in your case? Makes zero difference to me, as that is your prerogative, and ultimately means the same damn thing.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
How insanely out of touch do you have to be to run an ad claiming “if you work hard you’ll be able to buy a nice home in a quiet neighborhood”. What an absolute slap in the face to low income households. Whoever approved that ad needs to lose their job.
Disclaimer... yes they all suck. That said... every time I see PP's commercials..... it's more bull shit promises from a populist con man.
To a certain degree.. and I mean a very fine, thin layered degree... I want PP to win.
And then I want to be here one year later to say that "would ya look at that! Nothing changed... crime still exists, housing costs are still high, homelessness is still a thing, etc." The problem I had with O'Toole is that he sung a very familiar tune, just without the pizzazz and dooshiness of PP. But while it all sounded amazing sunshine and rainbows... never did I see an actual plan as to how this miracle was going to happen. I'm seeing the same thing from PP.
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
well, I guess we're at one of those impasses again where we can't have a constructive discussion without you constantly cursing me out and making wild assumptions based on my lack of freaking out.
again, I don't know enough about the election interference to comment. Every time someone doesn't respond to a specific post of yours you go apeshit. For me it's mostly cuz I don't like to speak about something I know nothing about. Yes, it's important if it's true. But I haven't researched it yet. And no one is obligated to respond to anything on this forum, fwiw.
I don't get this "cock block" shit. I mean, in simpler times I weighed my options by all 4 parties. I didn't mean my vote was to "block" a PP vote. I meant I couldn't vote for him under any circumstances. But again, not sure why the intent behind a vote matters. My vote and my reasoning are my right. You're acting like you have the moral high ground on "why" some vote. I mean, you said a few days ago you couldn't vote for Carney. So isn't that a vote against the liberals? Or is it a vote for PP in your case? Makes zero difference to me, as that is your prerogative, and ultimately means the same damn thing.
I can’t vote for Carney, which doesn’t automatically mean that I’m voting against him. I don’t understand why that concept is difficult to grasp.
For me it’s quite simple: if you’re voting against a party, then you’re cockblocking someone else’s vote. Again, when this is your tactic, one needs to be more aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences. We all need to be on guard against that but if you’re deciding your vote based on being against something then I feel it incurs responsibility for one’s choice.
I can only assume you and PJ Soul have the same visceral reaction to Carney’s claims that he’s going to fix everything that’s wrong with the country (after he spent 5 years helping break the country, but we aren’t talking about that for the obvious reason). What about the NDP ads?
I honestly think I could claim that the sky is blue and that would be disputed. Because I have said that I lean to the right of the political spectrum.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
well, I guess we're at one of those impasses again where we can't have a constructive discussion without you constantly cursing me out and making wild assumptions based on my lack of freaking out.
again, I don't know enough about the election interference to comment. Every time someone doesn't respond to a specific post of yours you go apeshit. For me it's mostly cuz I don't like to speak about something I know nothing about. Yes, it's important if it's true. But I haven't researched it yet. And no one is obligated to respond to anything on this forum, fwiw.
I don't get this "cock block" shit. I mean, in simpler times I weighed my options by all 4 parties. I didn't mean my vote was to "block" a PP vote. I meant I couldn't vote for him under any circumstances. But again, not sure why the intent behind a vote matters. My vote and my reasoning are my right. You're acting like you have the moral high ground on "why" some vote. I mean, you said a few days ago you couldn't vote for Carney. So isn't that a vote against the liberals? Or is it a vote for PP in your case? Makes zero difference to me, as that is your prerogative, and ultimately means the same damn thing.
no access to campaign planes or buses limited to 4 questions only, no follow ups could not ask attendees at his rallies questions selective questions from “press” . I have seen some very softball and leading questions. PP: oh, that is an excellent question, wink wink
between this and refusing a security clearance, he is not overly transparent
1996: Toronto 2003: St. Paul 2005: Thunder Bay 2008: West Palm Beach, Tampa 2009: Chicago I, Chicago II 2010: Boston 2011: Toronto I, Toronto II, Winnipeg 2012: Missoula 2013: London, Pittsburgh, Buffalo 2014: St. Paul, Milwaukee 2016: Quebec City, Ottawa, Toronto I, Toronto II 2022: Hamilton, Toronto 2023: St. Paul I, St. Paul II 2024: Vancouver I, Vancouver II
well, I guess we're at one of those impasses again where we can't have a constructive discussion without you constantly cursing me out and making wild assumptions based on my lack of freaking out.
again, I don't know enough about the election interference to comment. Every time someone doesn't respond to a specific post of yours you go apeshit. For me it's mostly cuz I don't like to speak about something I know nothing about. Yes, it's important if it's true. But I haven't researched it yet. And no one is obligated to respond to anything on this forum, fwiw.
I don't get this "cock block" shit. I mean, in simpler times I weighed my options by all 4 parties. I didn't mean my vote was to "block" a PP vote. I meant I couldn't vote for him under any circumstances. But again, not sure why the intent behind a vote matters. My vote and my reasoning are my right. You're acting like you have the moral high ground on "why" some vote. I mean, you said a few days ago you couldn't vote for Carney. So isn't that a vote against the liberals? Or is it a vote for PP in your case? Makes zero difference to me, as that is your prerogative, and ultimately means the same damn thing.
I can’t vote for Carney, which doesn’t automatically mean that I’m voting against him. I don’t understand why that concept is difficult to grasp.
For me it’s quite simple: if you’re voting against a party, then you’re cockblocking someone else’s vote. Again, when this is your tactic, one needs to be more aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences. We all need to be on guard against that but if you’re deciding your vote based on being against something then I feel it incurs responsibility for one’s choice.
I can only assume you and PJ Soul have the same visceral reaction to Carney’s claims that he’s going to fix everything that’s wrong with the country (after he spent 5 years helping break the country, but we aren’t talking about that for the obvious reason). What about the NDP ads?
I honestly think I could claim that the sky is blue and that would be disputed. Because I have said that I lean to the right of the political spectrum.
Interestingly, "cockblocking" someone else's vote is what I've done essentially the last few elections lol.
With respect.. as to your warning that I 'need' to be on guard against that... my only reply is... no, no I don't. I also don't 'need' to be aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences.
I don't particularly think I'm personally to blame for having to choose between the lesser of two or three evils. I blame those who in power who are irresponsible, greedy dooshes.
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
well, I guess we're at one of those impasses again where we can't have a constructive discussion without you constantly cursing me out and making wild assumptions based on my lack of freaking out.
again, I don't know enough about the election interference to comment. Every time someone doesn't respond to a specific post of yours you go apeshit. For me it's mostly cuz I don't like to speak about something I know nothing about. Yes, it's important if it's true. But I haven't researched it yet. And no one is obligated to respond to anything on this forum, fwiw.
I don't get this "cock block" shit. I mean, in simpler times I weighed my options by all 4 parties. I didn't mean my vote was to "block" a PP vote. I meant I couldn't vote for him under any circumstances. But again, not sure why the intent behind a vote matters. My vote and my reasoning are my right. You're acting like you have the moral high ground on "why" some vote. I mean, you said a few days ago you couldn't vote for Carney. So isn't that a vote against the liberals? Or is it a vote for PP in your case? Makes zero difference to me, as that is your prerogative, and ultimately means the same damn thing.
I can’t vote for Carney, which doesn’t automatically mean that I’m voting against him. I don’t understand why that concept is difficult to grasp.
For me it’s quite simple: if you’re voting against a party, then you’re cockblocking someone else’s vote. Again, when this is your tactic, one needs to be more aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences. We all need to be on guard against that but if you’re deciding your vote based on being against something then I feel it incurs responsibility for one’s choice.
I can only assume you and PJ Soul have the same visceral reaction to Carney’s claims that he’s going to fix everything that’s wrong with the country (after he spent 5 years helping break the country, but we aren’t talking about that for the obvious reason). What about the NDP ads?
I honestly think I could claim that the sky is blue and that would be disputed. Because I have said that I lean to the right of the political spectrum.
Interestingly, "cockblocking" someone else's vote is what I've done essentially the last few elections lol.
With respect.. as to your warning that I 'need' to be on guard against that... my only reply is... no, no I don't. I also don't 'need' to be aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences.
I don't particularly think I'm personally to blame for having to choose between the lesser of two or three evils. I blame those who in power who are irresponsible, greedy dooshes.
In my books choosing not to vote is a perfectly acceptable option, something I’ve done in several elections because I couldn’t vote for any of the candidates in good conscience. Clearly I don’t subscribe to the belief that not voting denies one the right to criticize their government.
As I said, it’s not just the cockblocking voters that need to be mindful of the Law of Unintended Consequences, everyone should do their best to analyze all the parties and their claims.
"The world is full of idiots and I am but one of them."
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Comments
We're not stupid.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Maybe you should take it seriously.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Care to disprove or argue any of the substance of my post or just more put downs?
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Now, to be fair, I’m not as familiar with Harper’s second proroguing, so maybe you can educate me.
And again, Parliament doesn’t need to be closed for the governing party to run a leadership contest. Especially when we were facing fucking Trump.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
Natural governing party of raping democracy is what this proves them to be beyond a doubt. If you want another clue, look at how much governing occurred through Orders-in-Council (our equivalent of the Executive Order) during the last decade. Hint, it’s A LOT, showing a disdain for the legislative process.
And yes, I’m being hyperbolic because simply presenting the facts gets ignored and draws putdowns.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
I would imagine there'd naturally be an increase in OIC's when the governing party is in the minority. There are ways of overturning those, so those don't concern me as much. Trump's EO's did concern me mainly because they were 99% asshole moves.
Many people saw Trudeau’s excessive OICs as asshole moves, like his gun bans which have yet to be legislated and debated. He doubled Harper’s OICs which was who the article I read months ago compared Trudeau to. And lets not forget the stalemate the Liberals forced in Parliament prior to shuttering through prorogation. Why? Because the Liberals wouldn’t respect the will of the House and rulings against them by the Speaker. Yeah, business as usual in Canadian politics.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
and question period is an absolute embarrassment on all sides
2003: St. Paul
2005: Thunder Bay
2008: West Palm Beach, Tampa
2009: Chicago I, Chicago II
2010: Boston
2011: Toronto I, Toronto II, Winnipeg
2012: Missoula
2013: London, Pittsburgh, Buffalo
2014: St. Paul, Milwaukee
2016: Quebec City, Ottawa, Toronto I, Toronto II
2022: Hamilton, Toronto
2023: St. Paul I, St. Paul II
2024: Vancouver I, Vancouver II
OTTAWA — A federal judge has dismissed a legal challenge of Justin Trudeau’s move to prorogue Parliament, concluding the prime minister did not exceed the bounds of his authority.
However, had the government produced the required documents then the logjam would have lifted.
Chicken or the egg?
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
I don’t understand this comfort with having no real representation in a time of crisis? And the same idiots who screwed up the country are acting like it was someone else, acting entitled to continue.
We’ll really be able to resist American influence when Carney’s Carbon Tariff gets enacted, won’t we? He’s sure to support getting our resources to international markets, especially after saying they should all stay in the ground, right?
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
The courts are also constantly turning repeat offenders back into the streets to reoffend, is that acceptable? Legal isn’t always right, is it?
I can only imagine the heads exploding here if a Conservative government had acted the same under identical circumstances, seriously.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
In a ruling made public late Thursday, Federal Court Chief Justice Paul Crampton said the courts do have a role to play in reviewing the advice, and it is important that it be exercised to maintain public confidence in the institutions of government.
However, he concluded the applicants failed to demonstrate that Trudeau exceeded limits established by the written Constitution, unwritten constitutional principles or any other legal limits.
Crampton wrote in his ruling that he understood why MacKinnon and Lavranos might find the circumstances surrounding Trudeau’s decision to seek prorogation to be troubling.
He said this is particularly so in a broader context in which the executive branch has been increasingly drawing functions away from the legislative branch through concentration of power in the cabinet and the Prime Minister’s Office.
However, the applicants bore the burden of demonstrating that the prime minister’s decision, viewed in its entirety, exceeded the scope of his authority, Crampton wrote.
“They failed to meet that burden.”
Of course court decisions aren't always right, for the reason you pointed out. But I read the judgment above, and I agree with it. Am I legal or constitutional scholar? HAHA, nope. But I agree with it.
Maybe some heads would explode. Not mine.
Legally Trudeau was covered. As a leader and our fucking Prime Minister it was a dereliction of duty. At least he got his farewell tour in before he had to give up the jet, the ecowarrior that he claims to be. Doing what he did certainly helped Trump fuck us over.
Wasn’t it nice for Carney to call the election the last day before Parliament was due to resume? Why not make an attempt at governing and face the House or why not call the election immediately after he fake-signed his bribe into law? He’s a coward on top of being a liar.
And based on the crickets clearly no one’s worried about Beijing (yet again) interfering in our elections, I can only assume because it fucks the Conservatives, since most here just vote to cockblock apparently.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
again, I don't know enough about the election interference to comment. Every time someone doesn't respond to a specific post of yours you go apeshit. For me it's mostly cuz I don't like to speak about something I know nothing about. Yes, it's important if it's true. But I haven't researched it yet. And no one is obligated to respond to anything on this forum, fwiw.
I don't get this "cock block" shit. I mean, in simpler times I weighed my options by all 4 parties. I didn't mean my vote was to "block" a PP vote. I meant I couldn't vote for him under any circumstances. But again, not sure why the intent behind a vote matters. My vote and my reasoning are my right. You're acting like you have the moral high ground on "why" some vote. I mean, you said a few days ago you couldn't vote for Carney. So isn't that a vote against the liberals? Or is it a vote for PP in your case? Makes zero difference to me, as that is your prerogative, and ultimately means the same damn thing.
To a certain degree.. and I mean a very fine, thin layered degree... I want PP to win.
And then I want to be here one year later to say that "would ya look at that! Nothing changed... crime still exists, housing costs are still high, homelessness is still a thing, etc." The problem I had with O'Toole is that he sung a very familiar tune, just without the pizzazz and dooshiness of PP. But while it all sounded amazing sunshine and rainbows... never did I see an actual plan as to how this miracle was going to happen. I'm seeing the same thing from PP.
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
For me it’s quite simple: if you’re voting against a party, then you’re cockblocking someone else’s vote. Again, when this is your tactic, one needs to be more aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences. We all need to be on guard against that but if you’re deciding your vote based on being against something then I feel it incurs responsibility for one’s choice.
I can only assume you and PJ Soul have the same visceral reaction to Carney’s claims that he’s going to fix everything that’s wrong with the country (after he spent 5 years helping break the country, but we aren’t talking about that for the obvious reason). What about the NDP ads?
I honestly think I could claim that the sky is blue and that would be disputed. Because I have said that I lean to the right of the political spectrum.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022
no access to campaign planes or buses
limited to 4 questions only, no follow ups
could not ask attendees at his rallies questions
selective questions from “press” . I have seen some very softball and leading questions. PP: oh, that is an excellent question, wink wink
staffers pushing reporters and taking away mic’s, threatening taking away questions
where have I seen this playbook before?
between this and refusing a security clearance, he is not overly transparent
2003: St. Paul
2005: Thunder Bay
2008: West Palm Beach, Tampa
2009: Chicago I, Chicago II
2010: Boston
2011: Toronto I, Toronto II, Winnipeg
2012: Missoula
2013: London, Pittsburgh, Buffalo
2014: St. Paul, Milwaukee
2016: Quebec City, Ottawa, Toronto I, Toronto II
2022: Hamilton, Toronto
2023: St. Paul I, St. Paul II
2024: Vancouver I, Vancouver II
With respect.. as to your warning that I 'need' to be on guard against that... my only reply is... no, no I don't. I also don't 'need' to be aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences.
I don't particularly think I'm personally to blame for having to choose between the lesser of two or three evils. I blame those who in power who are irresponsible, greedy dooshes.
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
As I said, it’s not just the cockblocking voters that need to be mindful of the Law of Unintended Consequences, everyone should do their best to analyze all the parties and their claims.
10-30-1991 Toronto, Toronto 1 & 2 2016, Toronto 2022