Justin Trudeau = Harper with a smile

1277 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

But yes, Kropotkin's choice is legitimate and should be respected for exactly what it is.

I have never voted Liberal and I never will vote Liberal. I don't fucking know why anyone who wants to discuss politics from a nuanced perspective is labelled a Liberal.  You are usually better than that Sean, I am disgusted with your misrepresentation of my views.  Just because I think the NDP is not the answer does not mean I think that the Liberals are the answer.  Just because I think that the NDP is going to lose out to the Liberals next election does not mean I necessarily want that outcome it is merely political analysis.

I will say it again I have never voted Liberal and unlike many on this board I do not trust Mulcair precisely because he sat as Liberal Cabinet Minister in a neo conservative government that is very similar to the Campbell government that has screwed BC residents.  The NDP is taking up the left wing side of the Ottawa political spectrum while trying to appeal to the middle class status quo voters. They can't do both well and given the party's pragmatic approach to winning power at any cost it is the left wing vision that suffers.

I do not believe in the lesser of evils politics and that is all that can be said about the current NDP. It is the lesser of evils however like all lesser of evils parties it will only make tiny changes and none of those tiny changes will deal effectively with the big problems we are facing. You can't fight the effects of globalization when  you agree with free trade agreements and support NATO in all its endeavors. You can't fight the effects of climate change by supporting pipelines that run east instead of north or south. You can't get real change out of a party led by a Liberal named Mulcair or the real Liberal party led by Trudeau.

 

Kropotkin, again I apologize -- I must have confused you with someone else-- the person in a recent thread said I consider myself a Liberal now. Anyone remember who that was? I can't find the reference.

Again I apologize-- I don't mean to call you dirty names.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Apology accepted.  We agree on way more than we disagree on Sean. We do agree that being called a liberal is a nasty insult, right up there with being called a Stalinist.  In the past I have been accused of both of those things on babble.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

K, I can't think of any reason anyone might call you a Stalinist; that's silly. I have NEVER met a Stalinist in my life. What a silly thing to say to anyone. Go look at my cat picture on th Lib thread; it'll give you a laugh. Kind of out of time, but pretty cute. Cheers K!

janfromthebruce

Brachina wrote:
http://www.leaderpost.com/mobile/story.html?id=8442359 This basically says it all, Trudeau blew it, he's letting Harper get away with it, because now its all about Justin's big mouth. Justin Trudeau, Harper's new bff\target. The NDP will continue to attack Harper on this, but Justin deflected enough energy to himself that Harper will survive it. Hopefully Justin pays for this with his popularity.

The remarks drew the expected response from Opposition leader Thomas Mulcair, who may or may not be a demagogue, but who happens to be the one who's leading a party that's opposed the Senate for the past 50-plus years. "Justin Trudeau's solution to the Senate scandal is to replace Conservative bagmen, hacks and operatives with Liberal bagmen, hacks and operatives," Mulcair said.

demagogue: (in ancient Greece and Rome) A leader or orator who espoused the cause of the common people.

So by Canadian population, how many people see themselves as commoners and how many see themselves as elites and millionaires?

Excellent come back from Mulcair.

That said, Trudeau just couldn't stand that Harper was hogging the spotlight and just had to be the centre of attention.

Brachina

janfromthebruce wrote:

Brachina wrote:
http://www.leaderpost.com/mobile/story.html?id=8442359 This basically says it all, Trudeau blew it, he's letting Harper get away with it, because now its all about Justin's big mouth. Justin Trudeau, Harper's new bff\target. The NDP will continue to attack Harper on this, but Justin deflected enough energy to himself that Harper will survive it. Hopefully Justin pays for this with his popularity.

The remarks drew the expected response from Opposition leader Thomas Mulcair, who may or may not be a demagogue, but who happens to be the one who's leading a party that's opposed the Senate for the past 50-plus years. "Justin Trudeau's solution to the Senate scandal is to replace Conservative bagmen, hacks and operatives with Liberal bagmen, hacks and operatives," Mulcair said.

demagogue: (in ancient Greece and Rome) A leader or orator who espoused the cause of the common people.

So by Canadian population, how many people see themselves as commoners and how many see themselves as elites and millionaires?

Excellent come back from Mulcair.

That said, Trudeau just couldn't stand that Harper was hogging the spotlight and just had to be the centre of attention.

A LMFAO. You should tweet that it deserves a larger audience.

socialdemocrati...

Stockholm wrote:

Required reading!

"I don’t just want to replace Harper w a hipster — a cooler, kinder, gentler soul w much the same policies."

http://www.ipolitics.ca/2013/05/26/why-hating-harper-is-wrong/ …

Great article.

More oil. More senators. More corporate tax giveaways. More resource giveaways to other countries.

Why do Liberals hate Harper again?

janfromthebruce

Because they want to give out red perks to their team and feel entitled.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

Required reading!

"I don’t just want to replace Harper w a hipster — a cooler, kinder, gentler soul w much the same policies."

http://www.ipolitics.ca/2013/05/26/why-hating-harper-is-wrong/ …

Great article.

More oil. More senators. More corporate tax giveaways. More resource giveaways to other countries.

Why do Liberals hate Harper again?

Everytime someone attacks Le Dauphin after identifying themselves as leftie, you almost always see attacks from Lib partisans,like this:

"Yet another Harpecon apologist. Harper has got to go and the likes of you with him"

I get this on the Huff Post all the time. I'll actually write vote for Tom and they'll call me a Harpercon. In their arrogance, they simply can't see how anyone but them are Canada's progressive champions. Its ridiculous.

 

socialdemocrati...

I'm still trying to find a right way to engage with a Liberal supporter. They were much more open minded in defeat than they are with this Trudeau bounce. It helped that I was able to point at Ignatieff's Iraq stance, which many Liberal voters were willing to admit frustrated them, even after his pseudo-non-apology. And even then, I tried to do it in a way that involved minimal gloating or insults.

My advice for engaging with a Liberal in 2013: get them on record with a few issues that they say a good progressive government should support. Because in a year's time, Trudeau will throw that issue under the bus. And in 2014, you should be able to ask that Liberal voter if they'll give Tom a second look. Get them to draw a line in the sand now: on the environment, on corporate favors, SOMETHING they think Trudeau will fix that Harper broke. (And if they say abortion or gays, point out that Harper hasn't done anything on those issues, and ask them to pick something else.)

If they say their important issues are "not left nor right" or "socially progressive fiscally conservative", they're a partisan hack and can't be reached. They will move right with the party when it's convenient.

janfromthebruce

Or if they think that the senate should be abolished as its only use is patronage.

addictedtomyipod

aahhhh, aahhh, is it aaahh aaah just me or aaahhhh does aaahhh aaahhh Justin say aaahhh a lot aaahhh  when he speaks ad lib.

Drives me nuts.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

addictedtomyipod wrote:

aahhhh, aahhh, is it aaahh aaah just me or aaahhhh does aaahhh aaahhh Justin say aaahhh a lot aaahhh  when he speaks ad lib.

Drives me nuts.

Here is a speech by a Liberal leader who mangled speeches in both official languages. He also had some of those same traits when he spoke without notes. Jean got better with his ums and ers as the years went by and I suspect that Justin will as well. Jack always spoke better than he did as did both the AM's and Ed. He won government they never did.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/news-video/video-jean-chretien-says-...

 

janfromthebruce

Not the only person who has publicly commented that Justin uses a lot of "word whisperers" especially when he doesn't really know what he is talking about or with unprepared speech. Chretien had problems expressing himself in English, whereas Justin Trudeau has problems in his English although he is bilingual.

Considering he's been delivering canned speeches at 10 thousand a pop or more, there would be an expectation that he was more concise speaker.

addictedtomyipod

janfromthebruce wrote:

Not the only person who has publicly commented that Justin uses a lot of "word whisperers" especially when he doesn't really know what he is talking about or with unprepared speech. Chretien had problems expressing himself in English, whereas Justin Trudeau has problems in his English although he is bilingual.

Considering he's been delivering canned speeches at 10 thousand a pop or more, there would be an expectation that he was more concise speaker.

Yes, it is with unprepared speaking that he does very badly.  It is a big part of the job though and will definitely not help him. I find it so distracting that I don't hear what he is trying to say. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

addictedtomyipod wrote:

Yes, it is with unprepared speaking that he does very badly.  It is a big part of the job though and will definitely not help him. I find it so distracting that I don't hear what he is trying to say. 

A greater disfluency rate when speaking spontaneously is the norm for most people. At least one study has shown that in fact a higher rate of disfluencies actually leads to a greater retention of the speakers points.

Quote:

A recent study at Stir­ling and Edin­burgh Uni­ver­si­ties (U.K.) found that the use of “ers” and “ums” in speech boosted lis­ten­ers’ reten­tion. These speech boo-boos, called “dis­flu­en­cies,” actu­ally helped peo­ple remem­ber what had been said.

Here’s how it worked: Vol­un­teers lis­tened to a series of sen­tences, some includ­ing ver­bal blun­ders and some not. When tested, vol­un­teers remem­bered more of the sen­tences with the dis­flu­en­cies (62% vs. 55%), a sta­tis­ti­cally sig­nif­i­cant difference.

http://www.guilamuir.com/blog/news/presentation-skills-can-dreaded-%E2%8...

 

It is also a speech habit that is seemingly universal across linguistic groups.

Quote:

Filler words in different languages

  • In Afrikaans, ah, em, and eh are common fillers.
  • In Arabic, يعني yaʿni ("I mean") and وﷲ wallāh(i) ("by God") are common fillers.[2][3][4]
  • In American Sign Language, UM can be signed with open-8 held at chin, palm in, eyebrows down (similar to FAVORITE); or bilateral symmetric bent-V, palm out, repeated axial rotation of wrist (similar to QUOTE).
  • In Bengali, mane ("it means") is a common filler.
  • In Bislama, ah is the common filler.
  • In Bulgarian, common fillers are ъ (uh), амии(amii), тъи(tuhi, so), така (taka, thus), добро(dobro, well), and значи (znachi, it means).
  • In Catalan, eh /ə/, doncs ("so"), llavors ("therefore"), and o sigui ("it means") are common fillers.
  • In Czech, fillers are called "slovní vata", meaning "word cotton/padding". The most frequent fillers are čili or takže ("so"), prostě ("simply"), jako ("like").
  • In Danish, øh is one of the most common fillers.
  • In Dutch, eh, ehm, and dus ("thus") are some of the more common fillers. Also eigenlijk ("actually"), zo ("so"), nou ("well") in Netherlandic Dutch, allez ("come on") or (a)wel ("well") in Belgian Dutch, weet je? ("you know?") etc.
  • In Esperanto, do ("therefore") is the most common filler.
  • In Filipino, ah, eh, ay, and ano are the most common fillers.
  • In Finnish, niinku ("like"), tota, and öö are the most common fillers.
  • In French, euh /ø/ is most common; other words used as fillers include quoi ("what"), bah, ben ("well"), tu vois ("you see"), t'vois c'que j'veux dire? ("you see what I mean?"), tu sais, t'sais ("you know"), and eh bien (roughly "well", as in "Well, I'm not sure"). Outside of France, other expressions are t'sais veux dire? ("you know what I mean?"), or allez une fois ("go one time"). Additional filler words used by youngsters include genre ("kind"), comme ("like"), and style ("style"; "kind").
  • In German, a more extensive series of filler words, called modal particles, exists, which actually do give the sentence some meaning. More traditional filler words are äh /ɛː/, hm, so /zoː/, tja, and eigentlich ("actually").
  • In Hebrew, eh is the most common filler. Em is also quite common. Young speakers commonly use "Ke'ilu" (the Hebrew version of "like").
  • In Hindi, matlab ("it means") and "Mah" are fillers.
  • In Hungarian, filler sound is ő, common filler words include hát, nos (well...) and asszongya (a variant of azt mondja, which means "it says here..."). Among intellectuals, ha úgy tetszik (if you like) is used as filler.
  • In Icelandic, a common filler is hérna ("here"). Þúst, a contraction of þú veist ("you know"), is popular among younger speakers.
  • In Indonesian (Bahasa Indonesia), anu is one of the most common fillers.
  • In Italian, common fillers include "tipo" ("like"), "ecco" ("there") and "cioè" ("actually")
  • In Irish Gaelic, abair /ˈabˠəɾʲ/ ("say"), bhoil /wɛlʲ/ ("well"), and era /ˈɛɾˠə/ are common fillers, along with emm as in Hiberno-English.
  • In Japanese, common fillers include ええと(e-eto), あの(ano, or "that over there"), その(sono, or "that"), and ええ (e-e, also an expression of surprise).
  • In Kannada,Matte for also,Enappa andre for the matter is are the common fillers.
  • In Korean, eung, eo, ge, and eum are commonly used as fillers.
  • In Lithuanian, nu, am, žinai ("you know"), ta prasme ("meaning"), tipo ("like") are some of common fillers.
  • In Maltese and Maltese English, mela ("then"), or just la, is a common filler.
  • In Mandarin Chinese, speakers often say 這個 zhège/zhèige ("this") or 那個 nàge/nèige ("that"). Other common fillers are 就 jìu ("just") and 好像 "very like/"kinda like".
  • In Nepali, maane or माने ("meaning"), chaine or चैने , chai or चैं, and haina or हैन ("No?") are commonly used as fillers.
  • In Norwegian, common fillers are øh, altså, på en måte ("in a way"), ikke sant (literally "not true?", meaning "don't you agree?", "right?", "no kidding" or "exactly"), vel ("well"), and liksom ("like"). In Bergen, sant ("true") is often used instead of ikke sant. In the Trøndelag region, skjø' (comes from "skjønner" which means "see(?)" or "understand?") is also a common filler.
  • In Persian, bebin ("you see"), چیز "chiz" ("thing"), and مثلا masalan ("for instance") are commonly-used filler words. As well as in Arabic and Urdu, يعني yaʿni ("I mean") is also used in Persian. Also, eh is a common filler in Persian.
  • In Portuguese, é, hum, então ("so") and tipo ("like") are the most common fillers.
  • In Punjabi, matlab ("it means") is a common filler.
  • In Romanian, deci /detʃʲ/ ("therefore") is common, especially in school, and ă /ə/ is also very common (can be lengthened according to the pause in speech, rendered in writing as ăăă), whereas păi /pəj/ is widely used by almost anyone.
  • In Russian, fillers are called слова-паразиты ("vermin words"); the most common are Э-э ("eh"), это ("this"), того ("that"), ну ("well"), значит ("it means"), так ("so"), как его ("what's it [called]"), типа ("like"), and как бы ("[just] like").
  • In Serbian, znači ("means") and ovaj ("this") are common fillers.
  • In Slovak, oné ("that"), tento ("this"), proste ("simply"), or akože ("it's like…") are used as fillers. The Hungarian izé (or izí in its Slovak pronunciation) can also be heard, especially in parts of the country with a large Hungarian population. Ta is a filler typical of Eastern Slovak and one of the most parodied features.
  • In Slovene, pač ("but", although it has lost that meaning in colloquial, and it is used as a means of explanation), a ne? ("right?"), and no ("well") are some of the fillers common in central Slovenia, including Ljubljana.
  • In Spanish, fillers are called muletillas. Some of the most common in American Spanish are e /e/, este ("this"), and o sea (roughly means "I mean", literally means "it means").,[5] in Spain the previous fillers are also used, but ¿Vale? ("right?") and ¿no? are very common too.
  • In Swedish, fillers are called utfyllningsord; some of the most common are öhm, ja ("yes"), ba (comes from "bara", which means "just"), asså or alltså ("therefore", "thus"), va (comes from "vad", which means "what"), and liksom and typ (both similar to the English "like").
  • In Ukrainian, е ("eh", similar to "um"), ну ("Nu (well)"), і ("and"), цей ("this"), той-во ("this one") are common fillers.
  • In Urdu, yani ("meaning..."), flana flana ("this and that"; "blah blah"), haan haan ("yeah yeah") and acha ("ok") are also common fillers.
  • In Telugu, ikkada entante ("Whats here is...") and tarwatha ("then...") are common and there are numerous like this.
  • In Tamil, paatheenga-na ("if you see...") and apparam ("then...") are common.
  • In Turkish, yani ("meaning..."), şey ("thing"), "işte" ("that is"), and falan ("as such", "so on") are common fillers.
  • In Welsh, de or ynde is used as a filler (loosely the equivalent of "You know?" or "Isn't it?"). Ym... and Y... are used similarly to the English "um...".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filler_%28linguistics%29

As one of the people who in his late 30's had to learn how not to use fillers in my spontaneous speech I find this particular attack on Trudeau to be extremely juvenile. I could get straight A's in university at the time but when speaking spontaneously on those same subjects I used the same "ers" and "ums" as fillers. 

As for his speaking at events the studies also show that most people have a far lesser incident rate of disfluencies when giving a prepared speech compared to speaking on the same subject in a spontaneous situation such as during question and answer sessions.

Maybe it is time to be focusing on what Trudeau is saying and not presuming that because he has a speech problem that affects a large segment of the population he is proving he is stupid and doesn't know his stuff.  By the way almost all people use fillers to a certain extent and it is a problem that can be overcome with a speech coach so I will predict that Trudeau is going to lessen the occurrence rate substantially over the next few months.  Like most people he will likely learn to just pause a half second instead of saying er.

 

 

Sean in Ottawa

This is already being reduced by Trudeau. He does have a minor lisp as well though that is harder to manage. You reduce the umms and ahs when you simply slow down a bit. People speaking under pressure often loose track of the speed of their words as time seems to slow down and this makes them speed up tripping over themselves and rattling faster than they can organize their ideas. Speakers who want to address this can simpy slow down a few words a minute and this issue will go away.

The greater problem I have is that his words and ideas sound naive and simplistic quite often. He sounds amateur and not thought through.  That may go in the end but it is part of what is giving him the lightweight image. If I was his image consultant I'd recommend a shorter haircut for a bit to make him look a little older and as I say a more measured speaking style.

The major trouble is of course the issue of substance-- even if he does not have any someone in the Liberal party will have to create some so that there is something worth listening to.

Perhaps with some work he may be ready for 2015. The politics will hopefully come to trust, experience, policies and principles and the NDP can do well.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I think that in many places it will be close three way races and the level of motivation of each parties supporters will be the key.  The other key point will be which party can get quality candidates that are already known in their community. I personally am not into the cult of the leader and think that a leader has more potential to lose elections than they have to win them.  Trudeau has gotten the party back in the game and time will tell whether he can keep them there for two years.  The Conservatives are having a hard time so far making their negative images of Trudeau stick and the NDP needs to concentrate on the Conservatives so he may survive. The other thing is that as the title of this thread implies he is an alternative to Harper that the board rooms of corporate Canada will accept easily so he will get the usual easy ride in the MSM.

janfromthebruce

The NDP job is not to ensure Trudeau's survival - full stop. The NDP is not the liberal party's backup party. The NDP's job is to get as many New Dems elected on a progressive platform.

Sean in Ottawa

Of course that is true Jan.

The NDP needs to run two seperate themes of attack--

1) The conservatives are destructive, dishonest and have the wrong priorites -- are leading a terrible government. The are the party of mean and greed.

2) The liberals are posers, people who talk the talk and then sell out those who support them, they may do less damage than the Conservatives in some areas of policy but they are dangerous, have the wrong priorites and cannot be trusted.They take up the space of progressives by making promises but they do this to get power withoiut any real committment to change. Theya re thye party of entitlement and national neglect.

These are complicated but you can see shades here that can be brought out in various ways depending on the particular issue.

addictedtomyipod

Whatever K, I am just pointing out that it is extremely distracting and that is Justin's problem and not mine. You calling me juvenile for saying so says more about you than me.

 

 

 

 

 

Sean in Ottawa

Please quote when responding some 6 posts after the fact saying "you" as when you say you it seems to involve the last poster and this is not about me.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

addictedtomyipod wrote:

Whatever K, I am just pointing out that it is extremely distracting and that is Justin's problem and not mine. You calling me juvenile for saying so says more about you than me.

You were making comments about a trait that I shared with him and many, many other Canadians. For me it is right up there with complaining about his lisp or insulting Duffy and Ford not for their greed and hypocrisy but for their size. I called your comments juvenile not you. Lots of people engage in juvenile behaviour and that does not mean they are juvenile just that some of their behaviours are.

Tape yourself sometime when you are talking spontaneously about something and get back to me about your rate of disfluencies because everyone has some level of them. What he says is what needs to be highlighted not a speech problem that he is going to learn to overcome.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Can someone help me with Trudeau's stance on the pipelines. The Libs on Huff Post are trying to portray him as the only champion of the environment. I thought he supported the Nothern Gateway pipeline. They say he didn't. How about his stance on Keystone? Can anyone help me with this? I don't know how to argue with them. I could really use the help. And as a side note, I get told my stance is simply nothing more then demonizing the Libs. What's a good counter? I probably should just stay away from Huff Post but I can't help it given all the Trudeau shilling that passes for "news" every day there.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Arthur it sounds like you have a Don Quixote complex. The Tyee is way better reading and the comments section is even fairly good.  I thought all the parties supported pipelines just different ones.  It is news to me if Trudeau has opposed all pipelines. 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

K, that is what I thought too. Yep, I should ignore the Huff Post, but I can't stand all the front page stuff he gets. It drives me to distraction. Now, they're championing him as the advocate of "transparency in government", because he says he is. its infruating! I just can't help it. Maybe I'm addicted to punishment. You know the joke right, "Why are you banging ahead against the wall? Answer: "because when I stop, its going to feel so good!".

Sean in Ottawa

Trudeau is confused because he just wants to be PM and has not thought through, and apparently does not care to think through, all the things he says on the way.As well he wants to gain the supporters of everyone with money to donate including industry. He wants support form both environmentalists and industry at the same time.

In the process he is confusing his supporters. Those who are not confused will not support him.

To imagine it graphically he is so firmly ensconced on the fence that the fence post has entered his body leaving him impaled there unable to take a coherent position on either side.

Does that help?

Sean in Ottawa

No, don't blame the media for Trudeau speaking on this issue with a forked tongue. That's not their fault.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

No, don't blame the media for Trudeau speaking on this issue with a forked tongue. That's not their fault.

Sean, do you have some references.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Ok, he supports Keystone XL, but opposes Northern Gateway, and says he's open to other more environmentally friendly piplines, whatever the hell that means, http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/04/14/it-may-be-light-but-justin-trudeaus-policies-offer-glimpse-at-next-liberal-platform/.

Sean in Ottawa

Just google it-- google Trudeau supports and Trudeau opposes and read what follows.

He is in favour of pipelines he says but when in BC he says he is against that pipeline but doesn't sound so sure when he is in Alberta.

I can't keep track.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

It seems the that Conservatives support all pipelines especially those heading West and South. The Liberals support some pipelines especially the US preferred choice of going South and the NDP supports some pipelines especially the Irving supported one heading East.

All the major parties have shitty policies when it comes to moving tar sands gunk.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

It seems the that Conservatives support all pipelines especially those heading West and South. The Liberals support some pipelines especially the US preferred choice of going South and the NDP supports some pipelines especially the Irving supported one heading East.

All the major parties have shitty policies when it comes to moving tar sands gunk.

 

Yep. Oh well when the temperature evens out to twenty degrees, and we have nothing to eat, no one will care about the environement anymore so it won't matter anyway.

addictedtomyipod

kropotkin1951 wrote:

addictedtomyipod wrote:

Whatever K, I am just pointing out that it is extremely distracting and that is Justin's problem and not mine. You calling me juvenile for saying so says more about you than me.

You were making comments about a trait that I shared with him and many, many other Canadians. For me it is right up there with complaining about his lisp or insulting Duffy and Ford not for their greed and hypocrisy but for their size. I called your comments juvenile not you. Lots of people engage in juvenile behaviour and that does not mean they are juvenile just that some of their behaviours are.

Tape yourself sometime when you are talking spontaneously about something and get back to me about your rate of disfluencies because everyone has some level of them. What he says is what needs to be highlighted not a speech problem that he is going to learn to overcome.

I'm not running for Prime Minister and if I have any speech impediments it doesn't fucking matter.  Sheesh.

Yes you did call me juvenile for expecting our leaders to be better than  us.  Go figure.

Sean in Ottawa

Just a few with speech differences who I guess you feel do not qualify as better:

(The point being that their speech was the reason they lacked any chance at greatness or rising above)

 

Aesop - Greek storyteller, and a huge collection of his fables

Aneurin Bevan - British Labor Party Leader in 1930's.

Antonio Bassolino - Mayor of Naples

Arnold Bennett - British writer and journalist.

Charles Canon Kingsley - English orator, writer, and chaplain to Queen Victoria.

Charles Lamb - British essayist, on his stuttering.

Claudius - Roman Emperor.

Erasmus Darwin - Famous physician, scientist, and grandfather of Charles Darwin.

Field Marshall Lord Carver - British military leader.

George Washington -

Henry James - American Novelist.

Joseph Priestley - (1733-1804) the English chemist and scholar who identified/discovered oxygen

King Charles I - King of England, 1625-1649.

King George VI - King of England, 1937-1952.

Lenin -

Lewis Carroll - Author of Alice in Wonderland.

Louis II the Stammerer - King of France, 877-879

Ludwig Quidde - Nobel Peace Prize recipient, 1927.

Mario Savio - 1960's Free Speech leader at Berkeley

Michael II - Byzantine Emperor 820-829.

Napoleon the First -

Nevil Shute (1900-1960) - English novelist and aeronautical engineer.

Niccolo Fontana - Italian mathematician famous for his algebraic solution of cubic equations

Prince Albert of Monaco -

Proinsias De Rossa - a political leader of the Democrat Left in Ireland.

Robert Boyle (1627-1691) - British scientist.

Senator Joseph Biden - Democrat from Delaware.

Sir John R. Hicks - British economist who received the Nobel price in economics in 1972.

Somerset Maugham - British writer considered one of the best short story writers of all time.

Steven Hawking - scientist

Thomas Becket - Archbishop of Canterbury

Thomas Kean - Governor of New Jersey from1982-1990

Virgil - Roman poet.

Demosthenes - (384-322 BC) Prominent Greek statesman and orator of ancient Athens.

Thomas Jefferson - (April 13, 1743 - July 4, 1826)

Theodore Roosevelt

Sir Isaac Newton

Aristotle

Winston Churchill

Charles Darwin

Brachina

I've been thinking, how well do you think Justin would hold up under that kind of Grilling Mulcair gave Harper?

socialdemocrati...

Banning the oilsands isn't a viable option. But what IS a viable option is pricing the oilsands fairly, according to the mess that they make. And if that incidentally makes several oilsands projects unviable, it will be because they no longer enjoy the subsidies and the blind-eye of a corporate friendly-government.

On that note, keeping the oilsands domestic is an important part of that. If the oil is going overwhelmingly to foreign interests, we lose political control. Not to mention that we would drain the oil at 10x the rate (America) or 40x the rate (China). If it's a domestic supply, the rate of development slows drastically, and Canadian sovereignty over its own resources remains in tact.

Brachina

Mulcair has also made it clear that even an West East Pipeline has to pass a proper enviromental assessment, including show real evidence that they have the tech to deal with Oil Sands corrosion on the pipelines before it can be approved.

addictedtomyipod

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Just a few with speech differences who I guess you feel do not qualify as better:

(The point being that their speech was the reason they lacked any chance at greatness or rising above)

 

Aesop - Greek storyteller, and a huge collection of his fables

Aneurin Bevan - British Labor Party Leader in 1930's.

Antonio Bassolino - Mayor of Naples

Arnold Bennett - British writer and journalist.

Charles Canon Kingsley - English orator, writer, and chaplain to Queen Victoria.

Charles Lamb - British essayist, on his stuttering.

Claudius - Roman Emperor.

Erasmus Darwin - Famous physician, scientist, and grandfather of Charles Darwin.

Field Marshall Lord Carver - British military leader.

George Washington -

Henry James - American Novelist.

Joseph Priestley - (1733-1804) the English chemist and scholar who identified/discovered oxygen

King Charles I - King of England, 1625-1649.

King George VI - King of England, 1937-1952.

Lenin -

Lewis Carroll - Author of Alice in Wonderland.

Louis II the Stammerer - King of France, 877-879

Ludwig Quidde - Nobel Peace Prize recipient, 1927.

Mario Savio - 1960's Free Speech leader at Berkeley

Michael II - Byzantine Emperor 820-829.

Napoleon the First -

Nevil Shute (1900-1960) - English novelist and aeronautical engineer.

Niccolo Fontana - Italian mathematician famous for his algebraic solution of cubic equations

Prince Albert of Monaco -

Proinsias De Rossa - a political leader of the Democrat Left in Ireland.

Robert Boyle (1627-1691) - British scientist.

Senator Joseph Biden - Democrat from Delaware.

Sir John R. Hicks - British economist who received the Nobel price in economics in 1972.

Somerset Maugham - British writer considered one of the best short story writers of all time.

Steven Hawking - scientist

Thomas Becket - Archbishop of Canterbury

Thomas Kean - Governor of New Jersey from1982-1990

Virgil - Roman poet.

Demosthenes - (384-322 BC) Prominent Greek statesman and orator of ancient Athens.

Thomas Jefferson - (April 13, 1743 - July 4, 1826)

Theodore Roosevelt

Sir Isaac Newton

Aristotle

Winston Churchill

Charles Darwin

 

You want to put Justin in with this group? LOL.  Usually how it works is that great people do great things.  Justin so far does not fit this profile.  He was elected leader as a populist not on his accomplishments.  I don't expect anything from Trudeau but to be a puppet that will be manipulated by big biz, result in a failed government and I see his rise to the top as a real disappointment.  We just don't need this right now.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

He will be as the the title says, Harper with a smile.  I think that people tend to see Harper as in control when in fact he is just a nasty arrogant head waiter to the corporate boardrooms.  Trudeau will take his orders from the same people that tell Harper what policies are best.  The majority of Canadians prefer to be ruled by parties that are corporate sycophants.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

He will be as the the title says, Harper with a smile.  I think that people tend to see Harper as in control when in fact he is just a nasty arrogant head waiter to the corporate boardrooms.  Trudeau will take his orders from the same people that tell Harper what policies are best.  The majority of Canadians prefer to be ruled by parties that are corporate sycophants.

Actually, the worst thing is that most Canadians don't even realize who is actually calling the shots.

Sean in Ottawa

addictedtomyipod wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Just a few with speech differences who I guess you feel do not qualify as better:

(The point being that their speech was the reason they lacked any chance at greatness or rising above)

 

Aesop - Greek storyteller, and a huge collection of his fables

Aneurin Bevan - British Labor Party Leader in 1930's.

Antonio Bassolino - Mayor of Naples

Arnold Bennett - British writer and journalist.

Charles Canon Kingsley - English orator, writer, and chaplain to Queen Victoria.

Charles Lamb - British essayist, on his stuttering.

Claudius - Roman Emperor.

Erasmus Darwin - Famous physician, scientist, and grandfather of Charles Darwin.

Field Marshall Lord Carver - British military leader.

George Washington -

Henry James - American Novelist.

Joseph Priestley - (1733-1804) the English chemist and scholar who identified/discovered oxygen

King Charles I - King of England, 1625-1649.

King George VI - King of England, 1937-1952.

Lenin -

Lewis Carroll - Author of Alice in Wonderland.

Louis II the Stammerer - King of France, 877-879

Ludwig Quidde - Nobel Peace Prize recipient, 1927.

Mario Savio - 1960's Free Speech leader at Berkeley

Michael II - Byzantine Emperor 820-829.

Napoleon the First -

Nevil Shute (1900-1960) - English novelist and aeronautical engineer.

Niccolo Fontana - Italian mathematician famous for his algebraic solution of cubic equations

Prince Albert of Monaco -

Proinsias De Rossa - a political leader of the Democrat Left in Ireland.

Robert Boyle (1627-1691) - British scientist.

Senator Joseph Biden - Democrat from Delaware.

Sir John R. Hicks - British economist who received the Nobel price in economics in 1972.

Somerset Maugham - British writer considered one of the best short story writers of all time.

Steven Hawking - scientist

Thomas Becket - Archbishop of Canterbury

Thomas Kean - Governor of New Jersey from1982-1990

Virgil - Roman poet.

Demosthenes - (384-322 BC) Prominent Greek statesman and orator of ancient Athens.

Thomas Jefferson - (April 13, 1743 - July 4, 1826)

Theodore Roosevelt

Sir Isaac Newton

Aristotle

Winston Churchill

Charles Darwin

 

You want to put Justin in with this group? LOL.  Usually how it works is that great people do great things.  Justin so far does not fit this profile.  He was elected leader as a populist not on his accomplishments.  I don't expect anything from Trudeau but to be a puppet that will be manipulated by big biz, result in a failed government and I see his rise to the top as a real disappointment.  We just don't need this right now.

Come on -- you know that was not what I was saying.

The point was his speech impediment is not an issue and should not be made to be one.

Trudeau is not great because of other reasons than his lisp. To go after someone for physical issues like this is deeply offensive and I was trying to put in a more diplomatic way. Since you keep arguing I'll be more direct. What you said was ignorant, bigoted, offensive, regressive and has no place here. Does that help make it clear?

Now since I assume you are here because you are none of those things I'd drop it and move on.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Ignoring his Lisp, Trudeau is walking on water at Huff Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/06/05/justin-trudeau-mps-senators-expenses_n_3390561.html. They aren't allowing many posts critical of him. I mean a Lib talking about accountable MPs is just absurd. Fine, is it going to apply to the PMO too if he's PM?

Sean in Ottawa

No worries. The conservative media will take care of that. The NDP just has to be credible, positive and give a reason to earn votes.

addictedtomyipod

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

addictedtomyipod wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Just a few with speech differences who I guess you feel do not qualify as better:

(The point being that their speech was the reason they lacked any chance at greatness or rising above)

 

Aesop - Greek storyteller, and a huge collection of his fables

Aneurin Bevan - British Labor Party Leader in 1930's.

Antonio Bassolino - Mayor of Naples

Arnold Bennett - British writer and journalist.

Charles Canon Kingsley - English orator, writer, and chaplain to Queen Victoria.

Charles Lamb - British essayist, on his stuttering.

Claudius - Roman Emperor.

Erasmus Darwin - Famous physician, scientist, and grandfather of Charles Darwin.

Field Marshall Lord Carver - British military leader.

George Washington -

Henry James - American Novelist.

Joseph Priestley - (1733-1804) the English chemist and scholar who identified/discovered oxygen

King Charles I - King of England, 1625-1649.

King George VI - King of England, 1937-1952.

Lenin -

Lewis Carroll - Author of Alice in Wonderland.

Louis II the Stammerer - King of France, 877-879

Ludwig Quidde - Nobel Peace Prize recipient, 1927.

Mario Savio - 1960's Free Speech leader at Berkeley

Michael II - Byzantine Emperor 820-829.

Napoleon the First -

Nevil Shute (1900-1960) - English novelist and aeronautical engineer.

Niccolo Fontana - Italian mathematician famous for his algebraic solution of cubic equations

Prince Albert of Monaco -

Proinsias De Rossa - a political leader of the Democrat Left in Ireland.

Robert Boyle (1627-1691) - British scientist.

Senator Joseph Biden - Democrat from Delaware.

Sir John R. Hicks - British economist who received the Nobel price in economics in 1972.

Somerset Maugham - British writer considered one of the best short story writers of all time.

Steven Hawking - scientist

Thomas Becket - Archbishop of Canterbury

Thomas Kean - Governor of New Jersey from1982-1990

Virgil - Roman poet.

Demosthenes - (384-322 BC) Prominent Greek statesman and orator of ancient Athens.

Thomas Jefferson - (April 13, 1743 - July 4, 1826)

Theodore Roosevelt

Sir Isaac Newton

Aristotle

Winston Churchill

Charles Darwin

 

You want to put Justin in with this group? LOL.  Usually how it works is that great people do great things.  Justin so far does not fit this profile.  He was elected leader as a populist not on his accomplishments.  I don't expect anything from Trudeau but to be a puppet that will be manipulated by big biz, result in a failed government and I see his rise to the top as a real disappointment.  We just don't need this right now.

Come on -- you know that was not what I was saying.

The point was his speech impediment is not an issue and should not be made to be one.

Trudeau is not great because of other reasons than his lisp. To go after someone for physical issues like this is deeply offensive and I was trying to put in a more diplomatic way. Since you keep arguing I'll be more direct. What you said was ignorant, bigoted, offensive, regressive and has no place here. Does that help make it clear?

Now since I assume you are here because you are none of those things I'd drop it and move on.

Huh?  JUstin does not have a speech inpediment.  I merely talked about his 'uuuummmmms'  This does not qualify as a speech impediment.    Are you saying that he has one?  I'm saying he is not good at speaking ad lib.  I take offense at you calling me ignorant, offensive and regressive by pointing out his inability to deliver a good sentence when required.  You owe me an apology.

Sean in Ottawa

Trudeau has a Lisp we have been talking about that through the thread.This is what I was reacting to and Kropotkin was as well.

The lisp is pronounced enough that you can hear it most of the time when he is speaking.

The fact that he is a lousy speaker who does not think well on his feet is a different thing and I think you can sort this thread and see the difference.

I take issue with what he says -- not how he says it.

Frankly I am not that worried about the umms and ahhs either. It is the content that is the big problem. Even subtracting the delivery his words are often incoherent, poorly thought out, simplistic or lacking in substance.

No, I don't owe you an apology.

trotwood73

With breath-test judgment pending, Goldring ready to sit as a Liberal

[...]

If he beats the rap, Goldring hopes he’ll be allowed back into the Conservative caucus, he told me last month.

But should the invitation not be forthcoming, he said he’d be willing to consider joining  Justin Trudeau’s Liberals in the House.

“I came here to work for Canadian unity,” said Golding, who was first elected as a Reform Party MP in 1997.

“The Libs are going to be on the rebound. If it came down to the Libs or Conservatives, there is not that much difference between the two of them.”

Sean in Ottawa

Sounds like some great NDP ad copy.

Might be good to get it ready. If any of the other parties runs ANY ads then run it.

In fact -- it could be a micro ad of only 15 seconds -- don't need much to get *that* across

Whose birthday is it?

trotwood73

I came across the article thanks to this Tweet:

Peter Goldring said what no one who isn't a New Democrat is permitted to say in Canadian politics. So long, Peter. blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2013/06/06/wit…

— Dan Gardner (@dgardner) June 6, 2013

NorthReport

Just another Liberal pig at the trough feeling "entitled to his entitlements".

Conservatives accuse Justin Trudeau of profiting from not-for-profits

Group that aids seniors asked Trudeau to reimburse funds after it lost money

The Conservatives have accused Justin Trudeau of "lacking any decency," saying he refused to reimburse a charity that lost money after it paid him to speak at a fundraising event.

The Grace Foundation of Saint John, N.B. waited almost a year to ask Trudeau to return his $20,000 speaker's fee. It described "An Evening with Justin Trudeau" as a success on its website a week after he spoke.

Trudeau, through a Toronto-based organization called Speakers' Spotlight, has garnered hefty fees speaking at various events. Although he started this part of his career before he was elected, he continued while he was an MP.

Last June 27, he was hired by the Grace Foundation to speak about empowerment and youth at the Imperial Theatre in Saint John.

The event was "a huge disappointment and financial loss," for the organization according to a March 6 letter to Trudeau from Grace Foundation board member Susan Buck, which was given to CBC News by a spokesperson for the Prime Minister's Office.

In the letter, Buck asked Trudeau for a refund. There is no mention of why she waited nine months to contact him.

120 tickets sold for Trudeau speech

Information provided by the Prime Minister's Office says Trudeau was paid $20,000 by the Grace Foundation plus travel costs, meals and accommodation. Tickets for his speech were $50 and 120 were sold for a total of just $6,000, but there was no refund from Trudeau.

CBC News was unable to reach Buck on Friday. Attempts to reach other board members of the Grace Foundation, as well as its president, were also unsuccessful.

On its website, the Grace Foundation describes itself as a charitable organization that supports the Church of St. John and St. Stephen Home, a licenced 80-bed seniors' residence in Saint John. Its fundraising operation, the foundation says, provides "additional programs, activities and assistance" for the residents.

A week after Trudeau spoke, a newsletter from the Grace Foundation thanked several corporate sponsors, including RBC Dominion Securities and National Leasing, for contributing to the "success of Grace Foundation's first fundraising event." There is no mention that the event was a bust.

However, a PMO spokesperson said in an email Friday that the charity "incurred a massive $21,000 financial loss, and ultimately let a staffer go because of this."

In question period in the House of Commons on Friday, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, standing in for the prime minister who is on a European visit, said Trudeau was getting paid $160,000 as an MP, "but he went and took a $20,000 cheque from a group of seniors trying to do a fundraiser to buy furniture."


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/14/pol-justin-trudeau-aske...

Sean in Ottawa

I am not impressed with MPs moonlighting working for pay while they are supposed to be working full time for the people who elected them.

Having residual income from investments, royalties etc. from work done before they became MPs is one thing-- actively spending time on other paid work while receiving a good public salary is another matter.

Pages

Topic locked