Canadian Politics Redux

DarthMaeglin

Ok, I know I’ll be drawing a fair bit of heat for saying this, and I am, in fact, just trying to understand this.

What is so wrong with what happened to Chrystia Freeland over the weekend?

Now I’ll attempt to explain why these reactions are over the top to me. First, there was seemingly nothing planned about the encounter. The people literally just happened to be in the building when Freeland walked in.  Yes, they used vulgarities and called her names, but I’ll suggest we’ve all been aware of equal or stronger expressions on both sides of the aisle.

Further, none of the clips I’ve seen show anything approaching any sort of threat and neither did they make her gender part of the “attack”.

If the problem is the differences in stature (the implied intimidation), are we then saying only short people can express anger directly to our elected representatives? That’s not equal rights to me.

She’s a public figure, accosted in public, and she is (supposedly) second-in-command of a controversial government (to put it mildly), and where said government has seemingly been pissing on that region, such receptions should almost be expected (wasn’t it Trudeau the First that gave us the West Coast Salute as a reaction to hostile crowds?). As a public figure I feel it’s on her to develop thicker skin than most since as a public figure I feel she’s game for public criticism (politicians have zero problems with public affection).

Personally, the only way lines would have been crossed is if they had showed up at Freeland’s personal residence, a practice I find reprehensible, but that’s not what happened here.

If there’s footage of the encounter that shows verbal threats or attempts at an assault I will eat crow and change my stance but at the moment this feels like we’re being told we can’t express ourselves directly to our elected officials, something I do see as a cornerstone of an open democracy. There is also the possible angle that this is problematic in part because it was white right-wingers.

If I thought for a second that Freeland would have given these people a couple minutes of her time (instead of rushing into the elevator and hiding behind the other women present) that would change my view on this as well.

And to wrap up, for clarity, I’m calling for the maintenance of the right to yell “Fuck Trudeau” to his face right along with your right to yell “Fuck Poilievre” to his face. It cuts both ways and both sides are equally responsible for any deterioration of the political climate.

DarthMaeglin

I just read that she was called a bitch. Without denying the distastefulness of the name, the only solution to that is that we now just call everyone “assholes” instead, in the name of equal rights. But it could be said her gender was brought into the tirade, counter to what I thought.

One other angle here is that there don’t appear to be any children present, and at the end of the day what I see is adults adulting (even if in vulgar fashion).

HughFreakingDillon

if I was a woman of her height and saw that ripped-wife-beater-wearing-ape coming at me calling me a traitor and to get out of alberta, I'd be intimidated too. 

if you watch the whole video, it actually did seem planned. the guy and the woman recording kept commenting after about how it was perfect timing and all of that. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_9VIitMzlQ

HughFreakingDillon

and no, I don't agree that any public figure should "grow a thicker skin" to deal with this stuff. when you normalize this, then the next incident will be an escalation (assault, etc). This shit needs to be snuffed out. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

if I was a woman of her height and saw that ripped-wife-beater-wearing-ape coming at me calling me a traitor and to get out of alberta, I'd be intimidated too. 

if you watch the whole video, it actually did seem planned. the guy and the woman recording kept commenting after about how it was perfect timing and all of that. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_9VIitMzlQ

Different perspectives, possibly based on where we each stand. I did just watch what appears to be the unedited footage and the “perfect timing” doesn’t come across as anything other than coincidence.

And you seem to be endorsing my suggestion that physically large people aren’t allowed to express themselves as others are. Yes, it was a big burly guy, but are we not adults? All I saw was words, and the building’s security (or management) seem to be on scene extremely quickly. Am I therefore free to accost Trudeau if see him because he stands a couple inches taller than me?

Again (and having watched the full encounter I feel this is proven), zero verbal threats or attempts at physical assault. They didn’t even seemingly try to force their way onto the elevator.

More and more I’m being forced to assert that we are living in Monty Python World where the absurd rules and common sense is utterly abandoned. And it ain’t gonna have a pretty ending.

And again, why the “Heavens-to-Betsy” reaction to this incident, given what both sides have done over the last while?

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

and no, I don't agree that any public figure should "grow a thicker skin" to deal with this stuff. when you normalize this, then the next incident will be an escalation (assault, etc). This shit needs to be snuffed out. 

Then why hasn’t the escalation been called out along the way? I won’t give an inch on blaming both sides, sorry.

And I do feel that anyone who CHOOSES to put themselves in the public light (including entertainers and sports figures) then they need to prepare themselves to deal with the criticisms as well as the worship.

HughFreakingDillon

criticisms, yes. being accosted and sworn at incessantly by a man 3 times her size, no. 

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

if I was a woman of her height and saw that ripped-wife-beater-wearing-ape coming at me calling me a traitor and to get out of alberta, I'd be intimidated too. 

if you watch the whole video, it actually did seem planned. the guy and the woman recording kept commenting after about how it was perfect timing and all of that. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_9VIitMzlQ

Different perspectives, possibly based on where we each stand. I did just watch what appears to be the unedited footage and the “perfect timing” doesn’t come across as anything other than coincidence.

And you seem to be endorsing my suggestion that physically large people aren’t allowed to express themselves as others are. Yes, it was a big burly guy, but are we not adults? All I saw was words, and the building’s security (or management) seem to be on scene extremely quickly. Am I therefore free to accost Trudeau if see him because he stands a couple inches taller than me?

Again (and having watched the full encounter I feel this is proven), zero verbal threats or attempts at physical assault. They didn’t even seemingly try to force their way onto the elevator.

More and more I’m being forced to assert that we are living in Monty Python World where the absurd rules and common sense is utterly abandoned. And it ain’t gonna have a pretty ending.

And again, why the “Heavens-to-Betsy” reaction to this incident, given what both sides have done over the last while?

physically large people can have their opinion too. but this doofus has to know that she's going to be scared of what he might do with how big and angry he was. come on. you can't tell me that you'd expect her to stand her ground and try to talk some sense into this buffoon. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

if I was a woman of her height and saw that ripped-wife-beater-wearing-ape coming at me calling me a traitor and to get out of alberta, I'd be intimidated too. 

if you watch the whole video, it actually did seem planned. the guy and the woman recording kept commenting after about how it was perfect timing and all of that. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_9VIitMzlQ

Different perspectives, possibly based on where we each stand. I did just watch what appears to be the unedited footage and the “perfect timing” doesn’t come across as anything other than coincidence.

And you seem to be endorsing my suggestion that physically large people aren’t allowed to express themselves as others are. Yes, it was a big burly guy, but are we not adults? All I saw was words, and the building’s security (or management) seem to be on scene extremely quickly. Am I therefore free to accost Trudeau if see him because he stands a couple inches taller than me?

Again (and having watched the full encounter I feel this is proven), zero verbal threats or attempts at physical assault. They didn’t even seemingly try to force their way onto the elevator.

More and more I’m being forced to assert that we are living in Monty Python World where the absurd rules and common sense is utterly abandoned. And it ain’t gonna have a pretty ending.

And again, why the “Heavens-to-Betsy” reaction to this incident, given what both sides have done over the last while?

physically large people can have their opinion too. but this doofus has to know that she's going to be scared of what he might do with how big and angry he was. come on. you can't tell me that you'd expect her to stand her ground and try to talk some sense into this buffoon. 

This why it breaks down for me as simple partisan wedging:  I’ve seen buffoons given a pass in the past for worse.

Do I expect her to bump chests with the guy? No, but to call this a violent attack is equally asinine.

Is it really so hard to acknowledge all sides are responsible for creating this environment and if it is, in fact, dangerous could have been addressed long ago? The current PM has been FAR more divisive than his predecessor in his language and rhetoric. I’m also a big believer in that one reaps what they sow.

Edit: Justin’s behaviour was learned from daddy as a starting point. I mislabeled it the West Coast Salute when it was the Salmon Arm Salute. When that’s the bar set by our top politician (he of the fuddle duddle) where else can we end up?

https://parli.ca/salmon-arm-salute/

HughFreakingDillon

no, I don't see it that way. I don't see it as "violent attack" (who said that? the media? the PM?), but there's no doubt that there was a threat of intimidation at play.

but I still don't see Trudeau as being divisive. I just chalk that up to people not liking hearing the truth. 

I would call Jagmeet divisive. Pierre is divisive. But I don't look at Trudeau that way. 

you also have to take into consideration the full context of what female and public figures of colour have to deal with from apes like that:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harassment-women-public-life-journalists-politicians-1.6564376

HughFreakingDillon

I also find it odd that this has been condemned across all parties, but you're doubling down on it as not really a big deal:

Conservative leadership candidate Jean Charest called it "gross intimidation" and "dangerous behaviour" in a tweet. Former Liberal cabinet minister Catherine McKenna called it "beyond the pale."

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney referred to the incident as "reprehensible" and Conservative MP Dan Albas said, "What our Deputy PM experienced yesterday has no place here in Canada.

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

no, I don't see it that way. I don't see it as "violent attack" (who said that? the media? the PM?), but there's no doubt that there was a threat of intimidation at play.

but I still don't see Trudeau as being divisive. I just chalk that up to people not liking hearing the truth. 

I would call Jagmeet divisive. Pierre is divisive. But I don't look at Trudeau that way. 

you also have to take into consideration the full context of what female and public figures of colour have to deal with from apes like that:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harassment-women-public-life-journalists-politicians-1.6564376

I’m not talking press or individual subgroups here, I’m trying to deal exclusively with the attentions politicians invite upon themselves (with a nod to the fact government policies contribute strongly to the sentiments we saw on display). I did read the article you posted earlier (it was the source that informed me she was called a bitch, later confirmed in the unedited footage), and it veers far afield from the incident in question.

I’m really struggling to see where the line is as to what’s to be tolerated and what’s not.

And I’m truly sorry to say this but if you honestly can’t see Trudeau as being divisive then I don’t think you’re really paying open and unbiased attention to what’s been happening the last 7 years, especially since his second election as PM (his first term was defined by broken promises and a lack of basic democratic ethics, since then he’s just been wedging to cling to power, aided by poor showings by the opposition). I get we all have our biases but just as oftenreading suggested that it’s up to individual viewers to be critical and analyze what we’re told by the media, I see it as incumbent upon the individual to both acknowledge their biases and work against them. By no means do I claim perfection myself, and will continue to laugh loudly at those that do.

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

I also find it odd that this has been condemned across all parties, but you're doubling down on it as not really a big deal:

Conservative leadership candidate Jean Charest called it "gross intimidation" and "dangerous behaviour" in a tweet. Former Liberal cabinet minister Catherine McKenna called it "beyond the pale."

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney referred to the incident as "reprehensible" and Conservative MP Dan Albas said, "What our Deputy PM experienced yesterday has no place here in Canada.

I don’t want anyone’s voice silenced unreasonably, I’m arguing on principle not party (I had hoped I’d made clear that was the case, please see my above sentence regarding perfection). Sometimes the majority can be wrong.

HughFreakingDillon

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

no, I don't see it that way. I don't see it as "violent attack" (who said that? the media? the PM?), but there's no doubt that there was a threat of intimidation at play.

but I still don't see Trudeau as being divisive. I just chalk that up to people not liking hearing the truth. 

I would call Jagmeet divisive. Pierre is divisive. But I don't look at Trudeau that way. 

you also have to take into consideration the full context of what female and public figures of colour have to deal with from apes like that:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harassment-women-public-life-journalists-politicians-1.6564376

I’m not talking press or individual subgroups here, I’m trying to deal exclusively with the attentions politicians invite upon themselves (with a nod to the fact government policies contribute strongly to the sentiments we saw on display). I did read the article you posted earlier (it was the source that informed me she was called a bitch, later confirmed in the unedited footage), and it veers far afield from the incident in question.

I’m really struggling to see where the line is as to what’s to be tolerated and what’s not.

And I’m truly sorry to say this but if you honestly can’t see Trudeau as being divisive then I don’t think you’re really paying open and unbiased attention to what’s been happening the last 7 years, especially since his second election as PM (his first term was defined by broken promises and a lack of basic democratic ethics, since then he’s just been wedging to cling to power, aided by poor showings by the opposition). I get we all have our biases but just as oftenreading suggested that it’s up to individual viewers to be critical and analyze what we’re told by the media, I see it as incumbent upon the individual to both acknowledge their biases and work against them. By no means do I claim perfection myself, and will continue to laugh loudly at those that do.

the line is an angry ape thrice her size moving towards her in a threatening/intimidating manner while shouting obscenities.

that's the line. 

I'm not sure what his record as PM has to do with this idea that he's divisive. I have openly admitted I'm no Trudeau fan boy. I just couldn't vote for any of the other idiots. I'm not biased towards him (I'll say it again: I have voted for every single party in the past, depending on platform and present context-not person or party). I think he can come off as unprepared or ignorant sometimes and engages in double speak and deflection just like any politician. I certainly don't like it, but as we know in the south, if you play nice you don't win the game. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

no, I don't see it that way. I don't see it as "violent attack" (who said that? the media? the PM?), but there's no doubt that there was a threat of intimidation at play.

but I still don't see Trudeau as being divisive. I just chalk that up to people not liking hearing the truth. 

I would call Jagmeet divisive. Pierre is divisive. But I don't look at Trudeau that way. 

you also have to take into consideration the full context of what female and public figures of colour have to deal with from apes like that:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harassment-women-public-life-journalists-politicians-1.6564376

I’m not talking press or individual subgroups here, I’m trying to deal exclusively with the attentions politicians invite upon themselves (with a nod to the fact government policies contribute strongly to the sentiments we saw on display). I did read the article you posted earlier (it was the source that informed me she was called a bitch, later confirmed in the unedited footage), and it veers far afield from the incident in question.

I’m really struggling to see where the line is as to what’s to be tolerated and what’s not.

And I’m truly sorry to say this but if you honestly can’t see Trudeau as being divisive then I don’t think you’re really paying open and unbiased attention to what’s been happening the last 7 years, especially since his second election as PM (his first term was defined by broken promises and a lack of basic democratic ethics, since then he’s just been wedging to cling to power, aided by poor showings by the opposition). I get we all have our biases but just as oftenreading suggested that it’s up to individual viewers to be critical and analyze what we’re told by the media, I see it as incumbent upon the individual to both acknowledge their biases and work against them. By no means do I claim perfection myself, and will continue to laugh loudly at those that do.

the line is an angry ape thrice her size moving towards her in a threatening/intimidating manner while shouting obscenities.

that's the line. 

I'm not sure what his record as PM has to do with this idea that he's divisive. I have openly admitted I'm no Trudeau fan boy. I just couldn't vote for any of the other idiots. I'm not biased towards him (I'll say it again: I have voted for every single party in the past, depending on platform and present context-not person or party). I think he can come off as unprepared or ignorant sometimes and engages in double speak and deflection just like any politician. I certainly don't like it, but as we know in the south, if you play nice you don't win the game. 

I suggest you go read Brian Lilley’s column in the Sun today (I’ll use my other device to post it shortly, stupid paywall).

You honestly don’t recall all the medical experts in the country asking politicians to not politicize vaccines in the last election, with Trudeau doing so right out of the gates (reversing his stance from just weeks prior)? Shit, that’s what helped set the stage for the terrible, terrible, no good occupation of Ottawa (and let’s not forget the PM’s words regarding that)!

In terms of his policies, let’s look at just last week when he said there’s no business case (said the guy who doesn’t concern himself with monetary policy) for moving western natural gas to the east coast for sale to Europe (yes, the infrastructure needs building but Putin doesn’t seem to be going anywhere anytime soon). Hell, the fact Germany’s firing up their coal plants again should make the case to our super-environmentalist government.

DarthMaeglin

And just to show I’m perfectly comfortable criticizing “my side”, I completely disagree with shutting down public consultations on any issue, but especially issues like this one.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/bil-7-long-term-care-public-hearings-1.6565577

DarthMaeglin

If there’s a troubling angle to the Freeland story to me, it’s the revelation that our Deputy PM and Minister of Finance travels the country with no security detail.

DarthMaeglin

Lilley’s column, and another that is non-partisan food for thought.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-if-justin-trudeau-wants-canadians-to-show-each-other-respect-he-should-lead-by-example

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/agar-politicians-arent-listening-to-people-no-wonder-so-many-are-angry


Edit: Yes, they condemn the incident, but I see that as much being they don’t want to face such attentions themselves.

DarthMaeglin

And the overreaction continues.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-investigating-freeland-1.6566633

If one isn’t allowed (in this case because of physical stature), NONE are allowed. Guess the harassment of company executives and anyone else in the public eye has to end or one will be punished. Protest in Canada will be far more polite hereafter! Hopefully this investigation ends with no charges (in my opinion).

HughFreakingDillon

isn't it standard procedure for the RCMP to investigate any perceived/actual threats towards high profile individuals in government? I'd expect the same if it were against Polliviere.