Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Is Justin Trudeau the Real McCoy?

Has Justin got the right stuff?
A confession readers, I've been out of the country these last few days and haven't been able to devote the necessary time to create a post worthy of your valued time.

That being said, I really don't want to leave a blank until Friday so will endeavour to spark a little debate in the comments section as to the bone fides of the recently elected leader of the Federal Liberals, Justin Trudeau.

Fair disclosure, I've never voted Liberal, but do believe that a renewed and competitive Liberal party can keep Harper honest in the short term and perhaps actually challenge for the Holy Grail in the not-to-distant future.

One of the biggest knocks against Justin (funny how we've already become accustomed to calling him by his first name) is that he purportedly lacks the necessary intellectual prowess and that he's a lightweight, a dilettante who doesn't really have the right stuff to lead our great country.

I'll take issue with both these assertions, not the fact that he isn't a genius, but rather the point that it is not necessarily necessary.

A high IQ is not always the mark of a great leader, far from it and many with pedestrian brains have done quite well at the top job, thank you very much.

In Canada, few would claim that Jean Chretien was a towering intellect,  but there's no argument that he was far more successful than Paul Martin.
Those traits that mark political success, scrappiness, savvy, ruthlessness and instinct are not products of high or low intellect,

Here's a list of the IQs of a selection of American presidents and it makes my point rather convincingly that the highly intelligent don't necessarily make better presidents than those with average brains. There are good and bad among the two categories.
A key comparison is the highly intelligent presidents, Jimmy Carter who was an utter failure, compared to the highly successful Bill Clinton.
On the low end of the presidential intelligence scale, Ronald  Reagan is considered a winner, while Dubya, a failure.


IQ PRESIDENT PARTY
182William Jefferson Clinton[D]
175James Earle Carter[D]
174John Fitzgerald Kennedy[D]
155Richard Milhous Nixon[R]
147Franklin Delano Roosevelt[D]
132Harry S Truman[D]
126Lyndon Baines Johnson[D]
122Dwight David Eisenhower[R]
121Gerald R. Ford[R]
105Ronald Wilson Reagan[R]
098George Herbert Walker Bush[R]
091George Walker Bush[R]


The Conservatives haven't taken any chances on a new wave of Trudeaumania  taking hold and have aired a number of nasty attack ads on television calling into question Justin's ability to lead.


I'm reminded of similar ads run by the Conservatives against Jean Chretien telling Canadians that he wasn't Prime Ministerial material because of a speech impediment (due to a childhood illness.) The public was furious over the ads and it may very well have contributed to the Liberal Party's convincing victory.
Justin has taken the high road and it seems to have struck a chord with Canadians, tired of the nasty and partisan politics practiced by the Conservatives.
"One thing Justin Trudeau has done right is to appeal to Canadians sense of common decency.
While Harperites are convinced they can destroy him by going negative, Trudeau has come out on top by taking the high road.
I recall the negative Conservative campaign against Jean Chretien and a television commercial making fun of his crooked face and impaired speech (due to a childhood illness) which not only backfired, but contributed to a Liberal rout as Canadians were roundly offended by such a cheap shot.

Despite what the Conservatives are saying, I get the sense that Canadians want Trudeau to succeed, at least as an opposition leader where his mettle can be tested for a few years affording us a chance to evaluate his potential.

"It worked for Barack Obama. Now, Justin Trudeau is aiming to capitalize by being a hopey-changey kind of guy.
A message on the federal Liberal party website, promoting an ad that defends the new leader against recent Conservative attacks, reads: "Hope and Hard Work. Be Part of the Change."
Catch those two words in there? Hope. Change.
Obama's "Yes, We Can" could be coming next." Link
As for pluck, Justin is no namby-pamby, he demonstrated his prowess and guts by taking on a highly favored Conservative senator in a charity boxing match, which he won, much to everyone's surprise.

Justin showed what he's really made of by running for Parliament in a Montreal working class district in the decidedly separatist riding of Papineau where he won and held his seat, even after the Orange wave of the last election that swept Quebec.

I haven't made up my mind as to his fitness for the job, I suppose time will tell.

Even though I still won't vote Liberal, I'm hoping for the party's resurgence, if for nothing else, than to chop down the insufferable 'Uncle' Thom Mulcair and the infuriating Ndp.

By the way, off topic, but regarding Mulcair's support of the Quebec's government's attack on the Supreme Court for breaking some rule in 1982 by allegedly discussing the court's position with the federal politicians of the day, while deliberating over the issue of repatriation of the constitution, an apparent no-no.

What good can come by dredging up the issue and who really cares.

Cui prodest scelus is fecit?

Even if it is true, something which I have no idea, rehashing this old news can only serve the PQ government in Quebec, nobody else.

Is pandering to the separatists, so important to Mulcair that he would rip off this painful national unity bandage, just to pander to the radical separatists?

One more reason why I detest him and the NDP.

Back to the knitting...
So readers, what is your take on Justin?

113 comments:

  1. I only wish he was running for Quebec, Justin would be better than anything we have now

    ReplyDelete
  2. All politicians are elitist shit birds who only look after themselves and their gold plated benefits.

    There was a time they might have had some semblance of integrity but those days are long gone with the career politicians.

    Sorry to be negative but that is how things seem to be. Give Justin a chance at power and you would see instant sell out to gain his end.





    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Charbonneau commission gives a good insight into civil servants behind the politicians also.

      Every single person is a "lifer politician" or a "lifer civil servant".

      The more years they are there the more corrupt they become.

      They are surrounded by lobbying gifts, crony capitalism, loony environmentalists, organized crime unions, organized crime construction, bankers etc.

      There should be a limit of 10 years.

      The civil service needs to start a "where is your self respect" campaign like they did in Italy recently against organized crime. All the top civil servants need to be fired (retired for millions in backpay).

      People need to stand up to the politicias, civil servants etc and make them accountable on individual transactions.

      The government is there to serve the people. This has become the tail wagging the dog.

      First civil servants master their job. After they achieve a level of comfort then they look to enrich themselves on the public purse with gifts, bribes, "I saw nothing, I know nothing". This is the spot they need to be moved out.

      Save ourselves the embarrassment, legal costs and the biggest one of all the cost to society.

      Think of the multiplier effect on these bribes and gifts. For $100K there is a manipulation of a 10 million dollar contract. That's 100 times the cost on society for their personal greed for $100K.

      Have a faster job path through the civil service and eject them with a package ready to re-enter normal society after 10 years.

      Retire them out before the problems even start.

      Delete
    2. At this point its not whether to give a chance to Justin Trudeau. It is just about how badly the Conservatives are going to lose. They got their first and last majority. Their record on every front has been mediocre at best. They have burned their bridges with such a large part of the electorate that had given them a chance in the last election. Furthermore the CPC are seen increasingly as a bunch of hypocites in power. The temporary foreign worker issue was all avoidable, the CONs were warned about the consequences and went ahead anyway. They just are "cancelling" the program because they got exposed.

      More then any special talent Justin Trudeau might have, at this point its all about the CPC repelling voters. Furthermore the NDP aka bloc quebecois light support is bleeding to the Liberals. With those votes and those of a significant fraction of the CPC voters going to the Liberals, it is obvious the CPC is going lose.

      Delete
    3. I think you are counting your chickens too soon. Remember that 18 new seats are being added for the next election..the majority of them will favor the Conservatives out west and in Ontario. I could see perhaps a conservative minority government but I dont see Justin winning the next election. Once he starts opening his mouth more and making more dumb juvenile comments then people will grow tired of him.
      I am not crazy about Harper and the Cons but at this point I dont see a better alternatve. The NDP have always been very reckless with their spending and are too socialist for my taste. The Liberals with pretty-buy Justin at the helm is celebrity culture at its worst. Then again most under-35 canadians spend far too much time watching reality tv so he may get a big chunk of their votes. There is one other person who would be even worse than Justin and god help us if he ever decides to run and that would be Ben Mulroney. I cant stand listening to him..he is such an over-rated media guy..the only possible way he got to where he is again with his last name..there is not an ounce of talent in him.
      I find it quite laughable and pathetic to some degree on how people think Justin is a capable leader because he beat a Conservative senator in a boxing match. Wow..is this the new way we judge whether or not a leader is good..is he a good boxer...does he have a nice smile..does he have good hair..is he related to someone famous. Sorry but give me boring Stephen Harper anyday..I prefer the quieter more cerebral types as opposed to the glamorous show-offs but that goes against what most think make soneone a good person.

      Delete
    4. Most of those new seats will be added in the greater toronto area where the CPC is already toast. The rest of the seats are going to be in Urban Alberta and BC. Where the CPC are weakening, if not weakened. Whatever the case they have already lost their ability to even get a majority.

      Delete
    5. "I find it quite laughable and pathetic to some degree on how people think Justin is a capable leader because he beat a Conservative senator in a boxing match. Wow..is this the new way we judge whether or not a leader is good..is he a good boxer...does he have a nice smile..does he have good hair..is he related to someone famous. Sorry but give me boring Stephen Harper anyday..I prefer the quieter more cerebral types as opposed to the glamorous show-offs but that goes against what most think make soneone a good person"

      I just love that he's driving both Harper and the PQ crazy !!! For that reason alone I'd vote for him !!!! LOL LOL

      Delete
    6. Westerner: You wrote "There was a time they might have had some semblance of integrity but those days are long gone with the career politicians."

      When was that time? Which politicians do you have in mind?

      I think you're very confused. There was a time MDs, the "big" boss, and politicians amongst other self-proclaimed elitists were seen as society's "betters". The British were masters at creating an ordered society. So were East Asian cultures.

      Today, however, we question authority, and why not? We're better educated. We have to be to get ahead. The internet puts our collective body of knowledge at our fingertips, the youth use it for all their worth, and are they going to change the world, for better or for worse. They are apathetic and disenfranchised voters (paradox, really, since they don't vote) and therein lies the problem.

      Patrick Watson, a very savvy journalist, said years ago on the radio promoting a documentary he narrated in the late 1980s on CBC, stated way back then that voter apathy will lead us to the democracy we deserve. Maybe this is what you have stuck in your craw, Westerner.

      Too, it's always easy to glamorize the "good ol' days". Politicians were crooked womenizers then, and they are today.

      So much for the "good ol' days"!

      Delete
  3. At the end of the day, a political leader must inspire the masses and be able to manage a good team. Chrétien didn't need to be an economy whizz himself, he could use Paul Martin for that. But Paul Martin could not inspire the masses.

    I have my reservations on Trudeau, but I don't like those who are already sure that he's worthless. He's promising, and that's more than can be said for Harper.

    Mulcair is having a hard time, but I don't think he's terrible either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Making fun of Jean Chrétien for having Bell’s palsy was so beyond the pale… it totally discredited his opposition.

      And yet it appears to be typical of and par for the course for the slimy Conservatives to do such a thing… attacking the person rather than policy. And now we can see Westerner’s cynicism in action, complaining about all politicians without reservation.

      As Yannick says, one may have one’s reservations about Trudeau… but seeing that there is someone who complains about his instantly selling-out only helps to strengthen the opposite opinion.

      PS: Yannick, “whizz” means “to pee”… I think if you mean a “wizard”, that would be a “wiz”…

      Delete
  4. The Editor writes:

    "Justin showed what he's really made of by running for Parliament in a Montreal working class district in the decidedly separatist riding of Papineau where he won and held his seat, even after the Orange wave of the last election that swept Quebec."

    "Decidedly separatist riding of Papineau"? Hardly. First of all, the riding has only existed since the 2004 election and has only been won once -- in 2006 -- by the Bloc Quebecois. And it was a squeaker, with the BQ winning by less than 42% of the vote. In other words, the other 58% of the vote was split between the federalist parties. Indeed, it is a shoo-in riding for a big name non-separatist party candidate as it is made up of (mother tongue) 45% French, 8% English, and 47% allophones. And, as we all know, 99% of anglos and allos are federalists (literally 99%) and vote as such.

    So, Editor, you are not, in my opinion, justified in suggesting that Justin was in any way "brave" in running in Papineau, nor is the riding in any way, shape or form a "decidedly separatist" riding.

    Perhaps he was brave only in terms of comparing him to his father who most certainly did run -- and always ran -- in one of the most save Liberal seats in the country: Mount-Royal.

    And a minor correction:

    "James Earle Carter" was never a president of the United States. But a "Jimmy Carter" was. Not sure if he legally changed his name, but I think he did. Anyway, he was sworn in as president as "Jimmy Carter":

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxXB4GDlks0

    ReplyDelete
  5. The Editor writes:

    "One of the biggest knocks against Justin (funny how we've already become accustomed to calling him by his first name) is that he purportedly lacks the necessary intellectual prowess and that he's a lightweight, a dilettante who doesn't really have the right stuff to lead our great country.

    "I'll take issue with both these assertions, not the fact that he isn't a genius, but rather the point that it is not necessarily necessary."

    I agree with you. I don't think intellectual capacity is necessary. I'll take good policy and common sense any day of the week over intellectual capacity. And I don't think Justin has either good policy or common sense.

    Justin is a segregationist. This is a horrible thing to be and this one point alone disqualifies him from being an MP, in my opinion, let alone either the Leader of a major federal party or Prime Minister. His support of the race law/hate law Bill 101 is beyond the pale and tells me everything I need to know about his character.

    He is unfit and unqualified.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Versus the other parties that aren't openly against bill 101 in either way or worst yet wanting to strengthening bill 101. Whichever federal party there is will not openly go against bill 101 and the minorities in Quebec are on their own. A partition movement is probably the only way to get the minorities from the shackles of bill 101.

      Delete
    2. FROM ED
      EDITOR, you are right. The riding of Papineau was decidely separatist. It was held by Vivien Barbot who was very well liked and now leads the Bloc. A lot of the pots and pans banging arose in that neighbor hood. My fieinds living their tell me Justin worked hard to beat Barbot that everyone found likeable. Apparently they saw leadership in Justin.
      Tony Kondaks, being the eternal oppositionist, likes to create facts to support his lies. Tony tries to tell us the Papineau was only since 2004. the truth is that it was created in 1947 and in 2004 part of another riding was added. It is 47% Francophone only 17% English.
      When Tony calls a man like Justin a segeragationist he is out of line. Justin is NOT racist. Accusing a man of being racist because he supports 101 is disgraceful. Ed








      5 English

      Delete
    3. Actually Ed, Barbot was only interim chef until the Bloc chose their new leader, a non-entity called Daniel Paillé.

      Delete
    4. Ed:

      1) I thought you said you weren't going to read my posts any more.

      2) Please go to the following link and you'll see that:

      i) from 1987-2003 Papineau was merged with another riding, so it didn't exist during that time;

      ii) I didn't bring up the pre-1987 status of Papineau because we were talking about separatist support and the Bloc Quebecois wasn't even in existence pre-1987; and

      iii) My language demographic stats are from that same link.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papineau_%28electoral_district%29

      As usual, Ed, you stand corrected.

      Delete
    5. Ed writes:

      "When Tony calls a man like Justin a segeragationist he is out of line. Justin is NOT racist. Accusing a man of being racist because he supports 101 is disgraceful. Ed"

      I called him (at least here) a segregationist, not a racist.

      Although I do think that one is just as bad as the other.

      But a segregationist he is and, yes, he is one specifically because he supports Bill 101 so strongly.

      Justin Trudeau, Segregationist

      Delete
  6. Editor, you used the term "dilettante" to describe Trudeauopoulos. Good choice. The Liberals are desperate to come up with something because Martin, then Dion then (ugh!) Ignatieff were abject failures. He certainly has Chrétien in his pocket, so that's a big help.

    I have to hand it a former young colleague of mine, who at the age of 20 or 21 (now going back a good dozen years) called it. This goth-leaning youth said way back then that Trudeauopoulos was being groomed for and by the Liberal Party. Score one for the lady. I never forgot it because it struck a chord with me. Then came the eulogy at his father's funeral, and I was convinced.

    For me, however, one Prime Minister Trudeau was enough, thank you. Too much form, not enough substance. One good thing he may do is get the youth more engaged in politics. There isn't enough of that these days.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with your assessment, above, Mr. Sauga.

      By the way, could you explain "Trudeauopolous" I am intrigued by this moniker!

      Delete
  7. LordDorchester

    Negative attack ads, subverting democracy w "robocalls" and Western Canadian electoral Gerrymandering, knocking Canada's international standing down several pegs with that embarrassment John Baird and a foreign policy swiped from the Republican Party. Harper's time is up. If Justin is the only guy to unseat him, then so be it, he's got my vote. He's polling well in Quebec and Ontario (key to 24 Sussex) at the moment but he'll need a winning team of advisors to keep him on the straight and narrow. May have to yank Eddy Goldenberg out of retirement. Harper's team is savy and I'm convinced they are backed by Texas Oil money so he had better learn the game fast or he'll be another bug splattered of the windshield of the Canadian politics.

    ReplyDelete
  8. From The Rationalist:

    When Justin Trudeau trounced Patrick Brazeau, the pundits were shocked. Yet anyone with the least training in boxing could have predicted a Trudeau victory after watching the first 30 seconds of the first round.

    So, it's become common currency to dismiss Justin as an intellectual featherweight. Well, how do you explain the FACT of his 98 percentile score when he wrote the LSAT (law school admission test) before opting for a teaching career? And guess who else has had a 98 percentile score? http://www.zimbio.com/Barack+Obama/articles/5903/Pres+Barack+Obama+IQ+just+how+smart

    I can recall Jean Chretien once stating that he's never suffered from his opponents' underestimate of himself. I think we're in for a few surprises with Justin. And besides, he's certainly more pleasant to look at than the other guy ....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ahhhhh...the pretty boy angle! Where have I heard that one before? Another pretty boy that appealed to women? Pattern sound familiar?

      Delete
    2. Pretty boy angle or whatever else, more likey the Cons are handing him the next election doing the best campaigning for him by just being their smug, unaccountable, non transparent selves. Fiscally, you can't pay off a deficit by cutting revenue. Cutting corporate taxes while running a record deficit? Furthermore if they actually cared about working Canadians they would have cut all employer contributed payroll taxes and contributions.

      Delete
    3. @the rationalist

      "...it's become common currency to dismiss Justin as an intellectual featherweight. Well, how do you explain the FACT of his 98 percentile score when he wrote the LSAT..."

      nobody says he's dumb. what's "common currency" is that his speech is empty. and when there's a bit of substance usually it's a copy and paste thing from his father.

      read this, it's pretty good:

      http://tinyurl.com/ce9k3vm

      http://tinyurl.com/bolf5yz
      http://tinyurl.com/bvakh33
      http://tinyurl.com/but8c9s

      Delete
    4. From The Rationalist:

      "Nobody says he's dumb." Perhaps not in so many words, but I think the Editor was working on the premise, to put it kindly, that he ain't no genius but after all, successful leadership does not necessarily call for high intelligence. I don't think the Editor was aware of Justin's LSAT score. A 98 percentile LSAT score gets you into a very exclusive club - Mensa. Reserved for only the most intelligent among us.

      His speeches are not empty. They are calculated to garner support and if the proof is in the pudding, Justin has just been selected leader of the Liberal Party on a first ballot vote of over 80%

      Frankly, I am much more interested in what Justin is thinking and what Justin has to say than the meandering onanism of Josée Legault's tired and worn out ethnic nationalism. Has the orange wave not taught us anything? People are tired of Legault's message. If they could have elected Trudeau père with 74 out of the 75 Quebec ridings and sent smiling Jack to Ottawa on a phenomenal wave, you don't think Justin can do likewise?

      Ah but of course, the onanist ethnic nationalists know better than les gens peureux.

      J'tanné.

      Delete
    5. @the rationalist

      "I don't think the Editor was aware of Justin's LSAT score. A 98 percentile LSAT score gets you into a very exclusive club - Mensa."

      right. only detail here is the only source available for this "fact" is justin trudeau himself. err... can you spot the weakness in the point you're trying to make, mate?

      "I am much more interested in what Justin is thinking and what Justin has to say than the meandering onanism of Josée Legault's..."

      of course. we all are. but josée legault's point is precisely that the man has not said anything apart from a contradiction here and there. that is of course if, like me and her, you don't consider all the canada is my dream and we should all get along mantra that he served during the "debates" between the lpc contenders. on sensitive stuff like quebec's distinctiveness he's repeating his dad's shit word for word. and we can see where this has lead. on constitution he's just repeating people don't want to hear about it, even though it's false and even if it wasn't, a politician who doesn't care about the constitution he hopes to be sworn in by is a total absurdity.

      "...you don't think Justin can do likewise?"

      though call at this point. i hope not. he's not worthy.

      "j'tanné"

      if you're tanné try something new. liberals with junior might not be the one for you.

      Delete
    6. From The Rationalist:

      "only detail here is the only source available for this "fact" is justin trudeau himself. err... can you spot the weakness in the point you're trying to make, mate?"

      Justin Trudeau and the folks who run the LSAT. If he were lying it would come out. And it would bury him. The stakes are too high for him to have lied. So like it or not he's smarter than you or me. And probably a lot smarter that Stephen or Tom. Certainly a lot better looking.

      Delete
    7. @the rationalist

      "Certainly a lot better looking."

      why do you bring this up?

      Delete
  9. FROM ED
    Thanks for the list of President's IQs. Nice to know I'm up there with FDR. If high school tests were accurate. i don't see how Chretien could be seen as smarter that Paul Martin. He is certainly not more honest. He alone destroyed the Liberal Party. When the slimy Sheila Fraser spoke of Liberal Corruption two weeks before an election, Chretien sat silent even knowing it was his doing that got them in trouble. He could have said a few words that would have cleared Paul Martin but he chose to remain cowardly silent and his whole party paid for it. Justin is certainly more honest than Stephen (Karl Rove) Harper. I wish him luck. he has my vote. Ed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i don't believe you bench 147 ed. according to my evaluation your iq is somewhere between 100 and 110. 147 types don't believe everything they read on the internet. plus they wait until a dude comes up with a program before giving him their vote.

      Delete
    2. Dudent said: "i don't believe you bench 147 ed. according to my evaluation your iq is somewhere between 100 and 110."

      Pretty bold statement for someone who hasn't mastered the Shift key yet.You're "evaluation"? Quiet everyone, Dr. Sigmund Dudent has pronounced his "evaluation." I guess my IQ must be higher that Ed's because I think you're blowing smoke. I call bullshit on you having any sort background outside of your imagination that would give you the licence to "evaluate" anyone's IQ to a 10-point range. Show us your credentials. Show us your proof.
      I generally try to cut you some slack because of your lack of maturity but every once in a while you hook up a fire hose to your alleged brain and hose us all down with whatever drivel happens to be sloshing around in there at the time. This is one of them. Please, grow up soon.

      Delete
    3. @diogenes

      "I guess my IQ must be higher that Ed's because I think you're blowing smoke."

      you? hum... i'd say around 100.

      Delete
    4. Mr. Potatohead adds his 2 cents. We all know what your opinion is worth.

      Delete
  10. Les "liberals" ont beaucoup de jugement...Ishhh

    Courchesne avoue avoir commis une erreur

    http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/377066/courchesne-avoue-avoir-commis-une-erreur

    @Mister Trudeau

    Un conseil : Évitez toute proximité avec les "liberals" du Québec.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Argent illégal au référendum 1995 : « ça confirme les pires scénarios » - Stéphane Bédard

    http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/societe/2013/05/01/001-gilles-cloutier-argent-illegal-referendum-1995-reactions.shtml

    "Gilles Cloutier a soutenu mardi que le camp du non a largement dépassé le plafond des dépenses permises en camouflant certains coûts."

    Hmmm...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hmmmm....so the NO camp cooked the books huh?

      Well, let's take a look at the options they faced.

      Option A)Allow a gang of psychotic nationalists to assemble completely confusing ballot questions and manipulate the Quebec media to have what THEY want (and not what the reasonable majority wants).

      Option B)Use a superior war chest to level up the home field advantage of the language crazies.

      Ever hear the expression, "All's fair in love and war?"

      Well, here's the thing, Gloryhole, the separatist side fought a very dirty fight during the referendum - but you choose to stick your head in the sand and focus only on the ballshots committed by the other side.

      You like to point to things like monetary trangressions...well what about flagrant rights abuses, namely, stripping your opponent's right to a vote:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995#Rejected_ballots

      See, it's only unfair when the Federalists do something, but when a seppie does it...

      Oh here it comes... "There's no such thing as a separatist with integrity."

      Delete
    2. Eeesh - just think of the outcome of the 95 referendum had they had a question that the population could understand - I don't think it's the money behind these things you'd better give thought to; it's the dishonesty of your crazy political leaders. Thousands of rejected "no" votes for no reason. Had the question been worded "would you like to leave Canada and become a country without assistance from Canada"? you would not have reached 35% in the outcome. Half the people did not even know that they were voting for starting their own country - Only mentally deficient Parizeau and his stupid cohorts knew he intended to withdraw quebec from Confederation the day after a 50+1 win. What a nut case. We would have had civil war the next morning. Be grateful that you never did achieve the goal - we'd probably still be at war now. Or maybe the province would have partitioned - nice thought - maybe I'll dream of that end result tonight! Possibly by now we would have been rid of the approximately 2.5M that are holding us hostage - imagine - 2.5M people holding 33M hostage. Something is wrong with this picture.

      Delete
    3. Les fédérastes sont vraiment malhonnêtes.

      Delete
    4. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE CALGARYWednesday, May 1, 2013 at 1:00:00 PM EDT

      Canada would be far better off almost 20 years later would the YES side have won in the quebec referendum of 1995.
      Official bilingualism cancelled: $2,400,000,000 saved per year X 18= $45B-$50B with interest.
      http://www.fraserinstitute.org/publicationdisplay.aspx?id=2147484098
      French CBC cancelled: probably $7-8B saved.
      http://www.canadianstudies.ca/NewJapan/cbc.html
      Tranfer payments: probably $125B with interest.
      http://www.fin.gc.ca/fedprov/mtp-eng.asp

      Total: $185B or 33% of Canada's debt.
      What does quebec bring to Canada?
      Nothing. quebec is not worth the cost of keeping.
      The quicker they separate the better.

      What could Canada do if it was $185,000,000,000 richer?
      More hospitals, better roads & infrastructure. Lower taxes at all levels.

      Think about it.
      Would you keep your free-loading cousin in your house, let him/her eat all your food, monopolize your TV, drink your beer, sleep in every morning all the while you have to go out and work?

      Exactly....
      quebec please leave.

      Delete
    5. The Fraser institute mostly compiles the amount of money spent by provinces on offering French education. Unless you are arguing that the day of a Yes every French school in this country would be closed (and even then, it's not necessarily a given that the money spent on those schools would be much lower if the kids went to an English school district), then Canada would not have saved all that money.

      It is NOT 2.4 billions of dollars spent from federal dollars every year on bilingualism.

      The Fraser institute is a Conservative think-tank with an obvious bias in showing that Bilingualism is expensive and unneeded. Hardly a good source.

      Delete
    6. Here is some interesting info on the Fraser institute.

      http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/Stephen+Hume+Fraser+Institute+exempt+status+makes/8180605/story.html

      Delete
    7. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE CALGARYWednesday, May 1, 2013 at 1:37:00 PM EDT

      @Yannick

      I can hardly agree with your hard facts, buddy.
      Actually I am not remotely interested in what you have to say on here.
      My agenda is to have Canada give the boot to that pompous, xenophobic, self-centered, racist, Marxist, MONEY WASTING, french-power province, quebec.
      Anything less than, I don't give a rat's ass.

      Delete
    8. Then keep being wrong buddy :)

      See, I (unlike you) has read the Fraser report at length.
      I (unlike you) do not trust information that agrees with me unless I read into it first.
      I (unlike you) have a critical mind and don't just go digging for info that benefits me, and then keep on going in my merry life.
      I (unlike you) have an agenda of TRUTH.

      I know that you are not even remotely interested in what I have to say. After all, I keep refuting nonsense after nonsense you post on here, but it all glides on your back like water on the feathers of a duck. You are impervious to truth, integrity, and reality.

      By the way - you never answered my question so long ago. Is there something else important in your life but money? Every single one of your comment revolves around it.

      Delete
    9. Firstly the NO side, if they played by the rules, would have been at a disadvantage because the YES side were not - spoiled ballots etc. No one from the NO side has ever scrutinized the YES side's campaign in any great depth simply because the whole referendum was so traumatic that we are all, except for some zealots, trying our very best to forget it. If the YES campaign were ever as scrutinized as the NO side I speculate many a varied transgression would be uncovered

      What we have here with these so called revelations are attempts by Quebec Seperatists to build on the whole myth thing. This is, sadly, part of the general Quebec Francophone tenancy to blame everything on "les anglais", sadly a leftover lesson they learned from their now largely defunct Quebec Catholic Church ( who I prefer to call the Jesuit boy-loving douchebags). Here are some of the myths being popularized:

      1. The 95 referendum was stolen from us (Started immediately after the NO side won in 95)
      2. The constitution was illegally repatriated back in 82 (This is the latest manufactured myth - started by some obscure CEGEP history prof)
      3. Quebec values are incompatible with Canadian values (one of my favourites, BTW define Quebec values?)
      4. The Federal government collects more money in Quebec than it spends (by far the oldest myth)
      5. The Duram report is being implemented by the RoC in secret (|reader submitted this to Le Devoir a few years ago)
      6. // the list goes on and an "ad nausem"

      I am of the belief that as time passes Quebec Francophones, are becoming their own worst enemy. The process of globalization is creating within them all kinds of knee-jerk reactions that border on the bizarre. During this time their own tructed politicians are enriching themselves, most likely secretly planning to retire to their ranches in Arizona, where they will probably live out the rest of their natural lives - in English

      Delete
    10. To be more precise, of the 2.4 billions/year figure blindly and dumbly repeated by right-wingers in this country, 0.9 billions of it is provincial money (and hence nothing that should concern them) and only 1.6 billions/year is federal money.

      Confronted with this fact, the conservative changes the subject, keeps mum, or when pressed, will reveal the truth : "a factor of 33% does not matter! any dollar spent on bilingualism is one dollar too many!"

      Why throw figures around then? Facts are irrelevant, pundits are opposed to bilingualism on ideological, not pragmatic reasons, and that is what it all boils down to.

      Delete
    11. I forgot to mention that of the 1.6 billions that the feds spend, translation costs for federal ministries account for 0.3 billions, while spending on training, bilingualism bonuses, etc.. of the federal workforce is 0.1 billions, which leaves 0.8 billions of various direct transfers more or less related to the OLA.

      This 0.8 billions includes the operational budget of Radio-Canada, and various industry and health subsidies targeting linguistic minorities. I'm unsure that we would necessarily spend less on subsidies in small communities without an OLA, after all we either need to support small communities' industries or we don't, but certainly different people might get the money.

      All in all, it's a lot easier to say "2.4 billions are spent on bilingualism every year!" than it is to figure out where that money is being spent and whether or not we'd really save if we scrapped the whole thing.

      Delete
    12. If we have a vote on this blog for uns gar to leave, will it be honoured by him? Very, very annoying person pretending to be a quebec hater but offers nothing to this forum to help the cause of the federalists that post here and reside here. Sick of his stats and telling us to leave - he is a separatist; just doesn't reside here. Out of all the separatists that post here he is the most annoying right after "student".

      I'm sure Marc that their politicians have already reserved their private jet to get them to hell out of here when everything falls apart. I honestly believe that they should not be allowed to collect any public money in the way of pensions when this place falls into the "black hole" including Duceppe that collects a great and undeserved life pension from the feds. Why should they be allowed to take advantage of the very programs they are out to destroy? Don't get it - hope there is a pension reform deal in place to stop this abuse when the shit hits the fan.

      Delete
    13. "...let him/her eat all your food, monopolize your TV, drink your beer, sleep in every morning all the while you have to go out and work?"

      Est-ce que votre femme passe aussi ses journées avec lui ... ?

      Delete
    14. Those allegations against the No side were already known. The Supreme Court dismissed Quebec AG case. The Spending limit imposed by the Quebec government was too strict.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libman_vs._Quebec-Attorney_General

      Delete
    15. "If we have a vote on this blog for uns gar to leave, will it be honoured by him?""

      I don't usually intervene in the comments section but I want to make one thing perfectly clear, this blog is not democratic, I make the rules.

      The principle that everyone can voice an opinion is sacrosanct on this blog and publishing the opinions contrary to those held by the majority is even more important in order to offer fair debate.

      I know this principle may irk some, but in the end, it makes for a more interesting discussion.
      End discussion....

      Delete
    16. Fine Editor but he is very annoying - realize it's your blog and was just a suggestion. My apologies if I broke some rule I didn't know about.

      Delete
    17. "Fine Editor but he is very annoying "

      I didn't mean to sound so authoritarian'

      Delete
    18. Regarding, the allegation of funding violations during the 1995 referendums, the separatist ability to repeat old and settled controversies is stunning and franckly annoying. Seperatist seem to be incapable of formulating one argument in favor of seperation. None of their argument is coherent and hides some disturbing thinking. For example, notable separatist J-P Perrault, attacked McGill went it partenered with the Outaouais University in order to help train more doctor.
      http://www.imperatif-francais.org/bienvenu/articles/2008/le-mariage-uqo-mcgill.html
      "Les professeurs viendront d'où et formés selon quelle culture?" What does this even mean? So J-P if you had to be transfered to Ottawa for an emergency would you refuse because the doctors is an anglophone.
      "Dans quelle langue se donneront les cours?" Yes, they will be speaking english. Spare me the english are going to assimilate me speech, J-P. What would you rather do, collaborate with McGill or go to Ottawa.
      Again this proves that the separatism mindset is so focused on french=good and english=bad. The recent allegations about campaign over-spending is just another over-blown story by a couple of separatist, that seem to be living in a parallel world.


      Delete
    19. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE CALGARYWednesday, May 1, 2013 at 5:41:00 PM EDT

      @cutie
      "Fine Editor but he is very annoying"

      Go re-read some of your comments in the past few weeks. YOU are very annoying. If not openly racist.

      Delete
    20. @cutie003

      "My apologies if I broke some rule I didn't know about."

      you weren't aware of the rule that says the editor makes the rules?!? thanks for the laugh, mate.

      @liam

      "...the separatist ability to repeat old and settled controversies..."

      how can it be settled if we learn new things today?!? you dowplay the gravity of buying a vote and then you accuse others of living in a "parallel world"?!? you are the lost soul, liam. i'm sorry

      Delete
    21. @un gars bs de calgary

      "I can hardly agree with your hard facts, buddy."

      facts are facts. you can't "agree" or not with them, mate.

      if you meant you can't agree with a reasoning that is based on hard facts, then i'm curious to know what it is that you'll agree with.

      Delete
    22. Yes Liam but he collects his Old Age pension from Ottawa, his Algonquin College working pension from Ottawa but he would rather die in french in a quebec hospital. How likely is that? Bet it would be a different story if it were one of his children or perhaps grandchildren - all of a sudden he may have a change of heart? Big blowhard. I hope he leaves this area and has to try to sell his house - let's see that happen. Thousands of homes up for sale - maybe 1 in a 1,000 that are sold. He alone has caused a lot of these problems so I hope he has to pay for it himself right out of his old checkbook. Miserable old goat.

      Delete
    23. Again Student I remind you that in 2006, Elections Quebec asked retired Quebec court judge Bernard Grenier to investigate potential breach of electoral spending laws. Grenier cleared Charest of any wrongdoing. Grenier also concluded by saying: "I think it's now time to move forward, to move ahead."

      Delete
    24. Cutie - I guess everyone is a seperatist who doesnt agree with your partition fantasies. I am really sick and tired of you accusing every Tom Dick and Harry of being a seperatist. I am about as far away from being a seperatist as is possible and you accuse me of one. Do you really think un gars living in alberta is a seperatist..are you serious?? He comes on here going on and on about how great Alberta is and how entrepreneurial it is..he is right in this regard..but how does that make him a seperatist???
      I will tell you what a seperatist is..its the pur-laine Quebecois who wants nothing to do with Canada and wants Quebec to become a country..a french speaking one. A seperatiat wants the anglos gone..a seperatist is often short on facts and high on emotion.
      According to the law of cutie anybody who offends her gets labelled a seperatist..makes a lot of sense. Lets be clear though..I do find much of what un gars says useless and annoying..then again I find a lot of what cutie says annoying and useless as well..but I am quite sure that neither are seperatists but I can think of many other names to call them.

      Delete
    25. @liam

      "...I remind you that in 2006, Elections Quebec asked retired Quebec court judge Bernard Grenier to investigate..."

      and i remind you that s.r's link above if from today. it's new stuff. judge grenier wasn't aware of this. what's your opinion on the no side's frauds liam?

      Delete
    26. FROM ED
      YANNICK,
      Une gars is not worth your time. he comes only to post his own words and cares nothing about anyone else's. posts. He is insulting and annoying, which is why he comes here. He has nothing constructive to say so he digs the internet daily searching out the word Quebec to find some dirt that he can pretend is his own knowledge.
      He brags about Alberta. Alberta has oil because the Federal government had Imperial Oil drill there. When it was discovered it became the property of all Canada because Natural Resources belonged to the Federals. Since Alberta was in poverty the Feds gave them control of the oil and when Ralph Klein whined they should have the peripheral business (such as transport etc.) the feds gave that away also. Knowing that Alberta was in poverty because of the dust bowl days no one in the ROC objected. During the dust bowl summers Quebecers sent cheese and butter to the prairies in a Canada wide program to help farmers whose stock had died to due lack of grass. This man never had a decent word for anyone. Just igmore his bullshit. Ed


      Delete
    27. @MarcManCan

      I appreciated your post so much that if there was a 'LIKE' button, I would have clicked on it !!

      "....During this time their own tructed politicians are enriching themselves, most likely secretly planning to retire to their ranches in Arizona, where they will probably live out the rest of their natural lives - in English"

      LOL AMEN !!

      Delete
    28. "Les fédérastes sont vraiment malhonnêtes."

      Oh yeah...and the separatists are a pillar of honesty !! (gag)

      Delete
    29. You're right Ed, but it scratches an itch, like Cat would say.

      By the way, what's going on with bill 14 these days? Heard anything?

      Delete
    30. Anyone who starts up a petition to kick quebec out of Confederation is a separatist in my books complicated. You can call him what you wish. You quite frankly don't know what side of the fence you are on even after all these months on this blog.

      Delete
    31. To add to that complicated, my "dream of partition" is no more unrealistic than the "dream of stealing a province" from Canada is for the separatists. Being unrealistic is thinking that they can steal land including businesses and homes from one country and making them into another country without TOTAL support of the population is their "dream" not mine. I will say again, there will be all out civil war should the separatists even think of that but a lot less of a problem if areas that don't want to go with them are allowed to democratically stay within Canada. They started this shit, not the majority of us. How do you think these movements get started if not with ideas? My idea is just as good and more logical than theirs and you will not convince me otherwise. There are many of us here that feel this way so it's not just "my" dream of partition. You are the unrealistic one, not me.

      Delete
    32. Cutie - Your logic is really flawed. He wants Quebec out because its a drain on Canada..totally different reasons for the true Quebec seperatists. The problem with people like you is that you can only see things in black or white..a problem that afflicts many people. Life is way more complex than that. In your mind it simplifies things to put people in categories..for instance the seperatist box is one you really like..anybody who gets on your nerves is thrown in that box. And on the other side of the spectrum is the federalist box..all good people are thrown in that box.

      But the reality of the situation is that many federalists are clueless, corrupt and immoral..just look at the Liberal party for example. And some seperatists are actually decent intelligent people.

      And your argument that the seperatists are stealing a province rings hollow if the vast majority of Quebecers one day do want to leave. There are places all over the world where people want to seperate from other countries..look at Scotland, the Basques in France, the Catalan in Spain. Believe me if one day Quebec actually does vote to seperate there will be years and years of negotiations so they are not going to be able to grab everything..they will have to take on their share of the debt. My guess is that the easy part will be the vote for seperation..the negotiations will drag on for a very very long time.

      You say that I cant make up my mind..not true. I am against Quebec seperation..this should be clear from my posts..but I also believe the anglophone population refuses to take any share of the blame for the situation we have in Quebec now and that really bothers me. So yes I cant stand the PQ and what they are doing but I am also quite angry at the arrogance and stubborness of the anglophone population who never acknowledge that maybe they are part of the problem also.

      Talking about partirion to me is just a total waste of time at this point..bring it up if and when we actually have a referendum..I wouldnt hold my breath on that one.

      Delete
    33. I don't care why he's a separatist - black and white - he's a separatist nonetheless. Why do you have to complicate everything so much? Sometimes things are just as simple as black and white and you read far too much into everything and I mean Everything! It wouldn't matter whether the anglophone apologized for 100 years over a war that happened 250 years ago; the separatists would still keep being the nasty, mean spirited people they are - they have proven this with Bill 14 - What is wrong with you that you don't see that? Nothing but partition of this province and letting those areas leave that want to leave will bring an end to this debate. Why on God's earth do you think it is up to them to bring this mess to an end? Why can't the federalists bring it to an end? What is wrong with that idea? You are the most stubborn individual I've ever run across as you do not try to find an end to this never ending debate and I want to get this to hell over with before real problems become totally out of hand! Why can the federalists not hold referendums? Why is it up to the separatists to call the time and opportunity to call these referendums? They make all the rules and you think this is acceptable - I do not agree with that - find fault with what I'm saying vs what they are saying and maybe you will finally understand what the hell I'm getting at.

      Delete
    34. By the way - who are "all" these people I call separatists? Only un gars (and he is, just for different reasons, does not change the fact that he is a separatist) and all along I've said at heart you are - you just can't reconcile that in your own mind. If you were positively a federalist, you would not make excuses, whatever they may be, to break up Canada. That is black and white - there are no grey areas here. The federalist areas of quebec will remain federalist and the areas that are determined to go are the ones that we must let go, to end this. If you don't see this, then you recognize their right to push out all the federalist votes they can, before THEY call the next referendum. That is why we have a right - and the responsibility - to decide when the referendum(s) are held. We must not delay this for much longer or they will have cleansed quebec of our votes which they are intentionally doing every day and every minute of every day. God - does that make it clear yet?

      Delete
    35. Regarding the referendum on Quebec sovereignty in 1995: “Controversy arose over whether the scrutineers of the Chomedey, Marguerite-Bourgeois and Laurier-Dorion ridings had rejected numerous ballots without valid reasons, mostly by being overly strict on what marks voters could use to indicate their choices (for instance, rejecting ballots with check-marks or “X”s that were crooked, too large, made with a pen instead of a pencil, etc.). In these ridings the “No” vote was dominant, and the proportion of rejected ballots was 12%, 5.5% and 3.6%. In the riding of Chomedey, an average of 1 of every 9 ballots were rejected. Thomas Mulcair, member of the Quebec National Assembly for Chomedey, told reporters after the vote that there was “an orchestrated attempt to steal the vote” in his riding.” (link)

      Delete
    36. FROM: Spoiled votes saga nears end
      The long-running saga of the spoiled ballots from the last Quebec referendum looks destined to end in anticlimax.
      BY HUBERT BAUCH, THE GAZETTE (MONTREAL), APRIL 21, 2008

      The long-running saga of the spoiled ballots from the last Quebec referendum looks destined to end in anticlimax. It now seems likely that all will never be told about the extent to which the separatist side tried to rig the vote, given the impending destruction by powers that be of vital evidence in the affair. A Superior Court hearing is scheduled for the last day of this month to entertain a request by Quebec's elections chief for leave to finally put the 4.8 million ballots from the 1995 sovereignty referendum to the shredder. And presumably to the recycling bin after that.

      At the heart of the case are the 86,501 ballots from that vote that were deemed spoiled because of improper marking, and thus not counted toward the final tally of 50.6 per cent for the federalist No side and 49.4 for the sovereignist Yes. Their number was substantially greater than the 54,288-vote federalist margin of victory, but at 1.82 per cent of the overall vote not out of line with the spoilage rate in recent elections and the previous sovereignty referendum in 1980.

      What raised a stink about the counting, starting on referendum night, was the aberrant rejection rate in a few ridings, which just happened to be be staunch federalist enclaves where the No was expected to rack up Soviet style majorities. In the Chomedey riding in Laval, almost 12 per cent of the cast ballots were rejected in the counting, more than six times the 1.82-per-cent average; in the Montreal Island ridings of Marguerite-Bourgeois and Laurier-Dorion, the rejection rate was 5.5 per cent and 3.6 per cent, respectively.

      Doubts surfaced immediately that voters in these ridings suffered such disproportionately poor penmanship in the marking of ballots, and suspicions have flourished since that there was a plot hatched at the height of the Yes organization, controlled by the Parti Québécois, to prevent No votes from registering by, among other things, declaring them invalid because of improper marking. […]

      Delete
  12. Cutie003: "If we have a vote on this blog for uns gar to leave, will it be honoured by him? Very, very annoying person pretending to be a quebec hater but offers nothing to this forum to help the cause of the federalists that post here and reside here. Sick of his stats and telling us to leave - he is a separatist; just doesn't reside here. Out of all the separatists that post here he is the most annoying right after "student".
    One of the nice things about living in a free country is the ability to choose what we wish to read and what we don't. I urge you to exercise this privilege. If you find what he writes vexing, simply skip over it. Problem solved.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Usually do Diogenes but sometimes he just gets under my skin - he hates all of us in quebec not just the separatists and I guess that bothers me more than anything else. We know the province is in a mess and don't need him pointing it out every time he posts but that's what he does and then tells us to "leave". And I agree with you about it being a free country - just hate the fact that people abuse that right at will and when it suits them. Wish he would find something else to do with his free time.

      Delete
    2. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE CALGARYWednesday, May 1, 2013 at 5:43:00 PM EDT

      @ cutie

      Read what you've just wrote above.
      "he hates all of us in quebec" then you follow with
      "just hate the fact that people abuse that right at will and when it suits them."

      See... you hate as well.

      "Wish he would find something else to do with his free time."

      Because we all know YOU have too much time, Peggy.

      Delete
    3. FROM ED
      Diogenes, If you were in a group of five or six people and one of them kept shouting insults at everyone. If nobody else seemed bothered, would you stay there needlessly or would you just go where people are talking sense. When I put up a post I go to great lengths to make sure it's fact. Often I dig into the web to check things I've known since High School but just want to be sure I've got it right. I'd like to be on a blog where others at least take it seriously but with Un Gar and the trolls, I wonder is it worth it. I want to be with people that at least have some integrity. Gars and the trolls destroy this and the Editor doesn't seem to care that they are turning his blog into a Rant and Rave. What happened to all the talk about showing respect to others. Do we not deserve this right? Ed

      Delete
    4. Ed, I hear what you're saying and it's much the same as Cutie. If reading what a poster writes makes you unhappy, skip over it. You know by the bold faced type at the top of each comment who the author is, so when you see one by Un Gars, leave it unread and drive on to the next. I almost never read S.R.'s post because he writes in french and every time in the past I've gone to the bother of working out the translation, it hasn't been worth the effort. So now I see his name and skip to the next. Do I feel I missing something? No because I know the odds are it's crap.
      The problem is not what Un Gars writes. The problem is that you let it bother you AND you persist in reading it.

      Delete
  13. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE CALGARYWednesday, May 1, 2013 at 5:51:00 PM EDT

    Eight new schools for Calgary

    http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/eight-new-schools-for-calgary-1.1262239

    I wonder how many new schools are being built in the whole of quebec now...

    Ah right.... quebekistan.
    Another demonstration in quebec today. Coalition des luttes anticapitalistes. LOL!!!!
    quebekistan.
    http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/montreal/201305/01/01-4646376-manif-du-1er-mai-le-club-357c-dans-la-ligne-de-mire-de-la-clac.php

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Le Québec aura 20 écoles neuves

      http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/education/201104/05/01-4386874-le-quebec-aura-20-ecoles-neuves.php



      Delete
    2. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE CALGARYWednesday, May 1, 2013 at 6:41:00 PM EDT

      Bravo S.R.
      Une province de 8 millions va avoir SEULEMENT le double qu'une petite ville de 1 million?
      quebec=fail
      Ton lien date de 201, sous les liberaux, tes amis.
      S.R.=fail

      13 dans la grande région de Montréal.

      LOL!!!!

      Montreal=4 millions de ti-counes comme toi. 13 ecoles? Calgary prorate serait 32 ecoles.

      Je doute serieusement que toutes les 13 ont etes construite...

      Les prix seront sans doute hors de controle avec des greves des zunions, la corruption des contracteurs, etc.

      Delete
    3. Ce sont nos besoins actuels.

      À part les rodéos et le frottage de "pick-up",y'a-t-il des compétitions de "celui-qui-pisse-le-plus-loin" à calgary,afin de divertir les culs-terreux (imbibés de bitume)?

      Delete
  14. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE CALGARYWednesday, May 1, 2013 at 6:52:00 PM EDT

    @ S.R.
    Une de tes "13" ecoles probablement fictives ne sera pas finie avant 2015.
    Pauvre cave de petit quebecois.
    http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/education/201304/10/01-4639334-une-deuxieme-ecole-primaire-verra-le-jour-a-lile-des-soeurs.php

    ReplyDelete
  15. UN GARS BIEN INNOCENT DE CALGARYWednesday, May 1, 2013 at 7:07:00 PM EDT

    Three horses die in Calgary Stampede

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/07/12/calgary-chuckwagon-crash.html

    How many horses die in Quebekistan? LOL tout le monde sur le BS, no money to afford horses

    Quebec Fail yet again

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. J'ai cru un instant que c'était vraiment lui qui répliquait ...Mdr!

      Delete
  16. UN GARS BIEN INNOCENT DE CALGARYWednesday, May 1, 2013 at 7:12:00 PM EDT

    Record price for single family homes in Calgary (452,900)

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/real-estate/Calgary+real+estate+market+continues+climb/8320751/story.html

    What's the worth of a house in Montreal? Quebekistan homeowners have worthless properties LOL!!

    Only in Quebekistan, here in Calgary we own half-million dollar homes and live in English in harmony

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Des maisons extra laides préfabriquées (cabanes) et transportées sur des camions à 350,000$/unité

      Bonjour la déprime!

      Delete
    2. FROM ED
      EDITOR, I.m throwing down the gauntlet. If une gars is allowed to continue insulting and making fools of us you are going to start losing posters. I can't believe you delete other people's posts and let his go on. I've had enough of being angered. I am
      going to do other things now. Good Luck. Ed

      Delete
    3. @ed

      "If une gars is allowed to continue insulting and making fools of us..."

      the only fool he's making is himself, mate. don't worry.

      Delete
    4. Ed, it's just a troll who's pretending to be Un Gars to make fun of him, like Super Student and such before. Just ignore him.

      Delete
    5. Ed, Ed, Ed,
      Please, the comments section is an area of controversy.
      Would you really like to read posts that say...
      " Oh editor, you are so smart!"...or;
      "Ed, you are the greatest thing since cream cheese!"

      Nope, it is an area where the opinions of others makes our blood boil. That is what makes things interesting.

      This isn't Church, or the Lions Club where the audience applauds the sermon or the speaker no matter what!!!
      CONTROVERSY... I love it....

      I have never, nor ever will censor someone who contravenes the opinion of the majority on this blog. In fact, I encourage it.

      Ed, you've been called an idiot and other bad names just like I. Take it as a badge of honour.

      The only thing worse than being castigated is to be ignored.

      Embrace the debate!!!!! ..er... at least that is my opinion.

      Delete
    6. FROM ED
      EDITOR,
      You are right I'm sure but this asshole just keeps pouring it on and now that he knows your backing him he gets
      worse. If he was actually giving an opinion maybe I'd feel different but any fool can tell he is enjoying being as annoying as possible. I have serious things to do, more Important than reading insult after insult. Sorry Sir, i simply don't have time for this.
      Good luck Ed

      Delete
    7. I'm sorry but the author should really take care when stating stats. The IQ chart is a old hoax that's been around for several years.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Presidents_IQ_hoax

      Delete
    8. I agree with you Editor. English-Canadians must embrace the debate. It is one of only two ways they have to raise a little, the other is to become Americans.

      Delete
    9. You're just mad because we conquered you.

      Delete
    10. Y.L,

      You raised the point of being Americanized. I believe S.R raised that point too some time ago and yet I remember a number of those who claimed to be sovereignists also raised this point.

      My question then, what is so fundamentally wrong by being an American?

      Delete
    11. It's a very good question Troy. In my opinion there is nothing fundamentally wrong by being an American. On the contrary. What is fundamentally wrong it's the fact that English-Canadians don't accept they are Americans. They have the same language and the same culture!! The American and the English-Canadian watching Hawai 5-0 are axactly the same!! Nothing differianciate one from another.

      Delete
    12. Only someone who has no understanding of either Canada or the United States could possibly say something so patently foolish.

      When you are trapped in the Quebec bubble, you are unable to see anything beyond language.

      Delete
    13. @troy

      "what is so fundamentally wrong by being an American?"

      there's nothing wrong with "being an american". but there is also nothing wrong in not wanting to become one. the point here troy is about a culture vanishing and not about the moral value of "being an american". you were slightly off.

      Delete
  17. Is Justin Trudeau the Real McCoy? NO,no,no…he is a lying hypocrite just like daddy…

    Who is this hypocrite Trudeau? What does he really stand for?

    "Let me say very clearly that I support Bill 101," Trudeau said Thursday.

    "It is a reality that helps Quebec remain mainly French in a bilingual country. If we want Canada to remain bilingual — and I want it — we need to understand that Quebec must remain primarily francophone." Justin Trudeau

    "Canada isn't doing well right now because it's Albertans who control our community and socio-democratic agenda. It doesn't work," Trudeau said in French to interviewer Patrick Lagace on the Tele-Quebec program Les francs-tireurs (The Straight Shooters).

    Lagace then asked Trudeau if he thought Canada was "better served when there are more Quebecers in charge than Albertans?"
    Trudeau replied: "I'm a Liberal, so of course I think so, yes. Certainly when we look at the great prime ministers of the 20th century, those that really stood the test of time, they were MPs from Quebec... This country - Canada - it belongs to us."

    Trudeau specifically named prime ministers Pierre Trudeau, Chretien and Paul Martin but also included Progressive Conservative Mulroney on his list of great Quebec prime ministers of the last century.

    “I always say that if, at a given time, I
    believed that Canada was really the Canada of Stephen Harper, and that we were
    going against abortion, that we were going against gay marriage, that we were
    moving backwards in 10,000 different ways, maybe I would think of wanting to
    make Quebec a country,” when the interviewer asked for clarification he replied
    “Oh yes, absolutely. If I no longer recognized Canada, I know my own
    values very well.” Justin Trudeau


    .” ….Given these facts, should French-speaking people concentrate their efforts on Quebec or take the whole of Canada as their base? In my opinion, they should do both; and for the purpose they could find no better instrument than federalism”, Pierre Trudeau,.

    Justin Trudeau supports the racist, bigoted, xenophobic bill 101. Yes he supports a French only Kebec and forced french “bilingualism” all over the country, nice eh? Just like a daddy a French first, Kebec first bigot, hypocrite, from the province of the Qlue Qlux Qlan. Get back to the tax and spend, have not, high debt, socialist province of Kebec and shut up you parasite Trudeau, yes Kebec where you fit right in.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Even with the Anonymous title, no mistaking James Wolfe and his schizo like past the comes up every single blog entry.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The use of Kebec instead of Quebec is a straight giveaway. Strange he made no snipe about the Quebec "French" being Métis and not French at all.

      Delete
    2. Well, at least you know where he stands.

      Unlike Jarry..or Yannie...where do you stand.

      On the fence?

      I think most of the Schizos are from where?

      Metis..you think all those French guys kept things in their pants?

      Doubt it.

      Delete
    3. Why don't you tell me where most of the Schizos are from? Also I know I don't stand with a WASP supremacist. You can stand with him and where the white robes and cone masks together.

      Delete
  19. More Kebec travel stories! (Am I James Wolfe?)

    #1 the language police!

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/01/travel/quebec-11-things/index.html?sr=sharebar_twitter

    Yes S.R, it's CNN and nobody watches that channel or reads it's internet site as you know.

    Thankfully only english tourists will see it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Would you buy a used car from this woman?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJ1k20Zr0Y4

    There are quadruple the dislikes already!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Imperatif Bilingue, not!
    https://www.bulletinaylmer.com/en/imperatif-bilingue-not/2013/05/02/
    By BULLETIN | Published: MAY 2, 2013

    I totally agree with the writers of two letters in the last Bulletin, Madelaine Prévost and David Desjardins, about Impératif Français. Mr. Perreault’s French-only club serves no purpose but to divide the population and discriminate against Anglophones. His linguistic witch hunt has been fired up by the PQ’s Bill 14.

    Abolish English in Quebec hospitals? So if an Anglophone visitor is admitted to the Gatineau Hospital, it will be illegal for the nurses and doctors to provide help in his/her own language, even if they are fluently biligual? That’s obscene!

    Another example is at the Aylmer Marina. The safety regulations for the beach are only in French. How can something as important as this, in a sector with a large Anglophone population, be justified? Who accepts responsibility if someone has an accident because they were unable to read the Code? Mr Perreault? Ms. Marois? Nope! The blame will be on the victim for not being able to read French.

    My son and I were at Outaouais en fête last year, as we do every year, and after winning one of the games, my son chose a Quebec cowboy hat and flag because he’s proud of his province. The man running the game asked, “Are you a real Quebecois?” to my then-5 year old son. I replied that, yes, my son and I are true Quebecois! Since when did being a Quebecois means being Francophone?

    My family, as well as many others here, are Anglos and have been here for 50-plus years. We belong here, and are proud to call Quebec our home. We fully respect that Quebec is a French province and choose to live in harmony here.

    I’m nervous about this year’s Outaouais en fête. Thanks to Bill 14, I’m sure Mr Perreault’s speech will be a ‘Rallying the Troops’, causing trouble with some festival-goers after a few
    visits to the beer tents.

    In the 21st century, there is no place for the intolerance that Impératif français and Mme Marois are trying to stir up. I believe there are more pressing issues. Why not rename themselves Impératif bilingue and promote unity and harmony in our great province, instead of generating animosity?

    Dave Beauchamp
    Aylmer

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yea! Another reasonable francophone that also wishes the IF would disappear from our sight never to return. The fact that the city provides free accommodation to this group has to be challenged by Gatineau people. This building could be put to much better use such as offering free french and/or english courses to those that are interested in improving their skills in the other Canadian official language. Are you listening Gatineau City Councillors? This is a very important matter and I resent paying taxes to support this militant anti-English language group of malcontents. They are adversely affecting everything in our community from our "good neighbour" policy to our real estate values. Time to get rid of this bunch to somewhere that would appreciate these kinds of intimidation like Saguenay or elsewhere up the line in quebec.

      Delete