• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Liberal Minority Government 2021 - ????

No, saying ‘its ok to be who you are’ isn’t the issue, its putting ideas into childrens heads and reinforcing those ideas through repetition.
Which ideas are those again? Accepting those who are different than you? Love is love? Hating someone because who they love is awful?

Dangerous ideas in line with the CAF Ethos I know....
There isn’t any time spent in school on all sorts of important topics which shall directly effect them as they grow up. No discussions on how rent works, no discussions on mortgages, credit cards, car purchases, barely any discussion on how our political system works, etc. but they do hammer in lots of pride stuff.
Sounds like your gripe is with the provincial governments that have gutted education funding and that have watered down other aspects of curriculum such as music, the arts, and practical learning opportunities like auto shop and woodworking.

One doesn't take away the other.

When I was going to school, it was right when the whole gay rights movement was really taking off in school. At that time it was LGB, none of the other letters yet. Basically what was being pushed then was its ok to be gay, bi, etc, and to tolerate others.
Still is, just with our now expanded understanding of sexual orientation and gender.
Now they have gone from seeking tolerance to actively attacking others with different opinions. Those whose views don’t match up with their ever changing definition of acceptable. If you have the audacity to question any of it you will be declared a homophobe/transphobe and attacked.
And if I were to question the legitimacy of French as a Second Language or that the Québécois are just sore losers from 1763, Id be labelled a francophobe and lose my job. You are allowed to hold opinions, however, you are not immune from the consequences or perceptions of others for holdling them. Especially when its against a group of people that have a legal right to exist in the same society as you do.

If my kids have to learn to speak frog, your kids will have to learn that my daughter is a person that exists within Canadian society and deserves tolerance and acceptance.
I feel sorry for your daughter because that isn’t a state I wish for anyone to be in. That being said everything I have read indicates a super majority odds if you just leave them alone by time they are finished puberty they will be comfortable in their body. Its not a guarantee, but there have been enough studies affirming that the best practice is basically to wait and see.
I don't feel sorry for my daughter, because she knows that she has the love and support of her parents to become who she truly is. And that has fluctuated through the years from her wanting to be a dinosaur at age 3 to wanting to be an astronaut at age 7. The fact that she hss experienced body dysmorphia for the past 4 years when she started into puberty and tried to kill herself because of it makes me think this isnt a phase. Moreso, professionals with more letters beside their names than you or I could ever hope to have confirmed it. So I will take whatever article you read with very little weight.

As to the school outing them, until the child is 18 or emancipated they are the responsibility of the parent.
Until you start looking at things like the Charter (which states they're applicable to all regardless of age) and the various Child and Family Welfare Acta. Parents have a responsibility, yes, but the child has rights and protections afforded to them because, well, parents can be awful.

Denying a parent important information as to the wellbeing of their child based off ‘what ifs’ is wrong. ‘What if’ the child kills themselves because they didn’t get the treatment they need due to denying the parent the information they need to seek assistance for them?
What if the child kills themselves because the parents plan on shipping off to a "therapy camp?" What if the parent kills the child for the sake of family honour? What ifs go both ways. One has a more plausible result than the other. Which one do you think that is?

Especially for a mental illness which has a 32-50% suicide rate.
You know what leads to lowering that rate? Safe and inclusive spaces and protections against abuse.

If your child was doing heroin and the school found out do they have the right to keep that information from you?
You're reaching pretty damn far with that comparison. Gender and sexual orientation is very much not akin to substance abuse, and I say that as a recovering addict.

Meanwhile, more proof that the folks who run 'Family Friendly' gay pride parades can make bad choices too ;)

That's a criminal act and should be treated as such. That is not at all appropriate for ANY public arena and I would be saying that as well if it were a straight couple. Much like the Stampede Threesome of yesteryear.
 
Which ideas are those again? Accepting those who are different than you? Love is love? Hating someone because who they love is awful?

Dangerous ideas in line with the CAF Ethos I know....

Sounds like your gripe is with the provincial governments that have gutted education funding and that have watered down other aspects of curriculum such as music, the arts, and practical learning opportunities like auto shop and woodworking.

One doesn't take away the other.


Still is, just with our now expanded understanding of sexual orientation and gender.

And if I were to question the legitimacy of French as a Second Language or that the Québécois are just sore losers from 1763, Id be labelled a francophobe and lose my job. You are allowed to hold opinions, however, you are not immune from the consequences or perceptions of others for holdling them. Especially when its against a group of people that have a legal right to exist in the same society as you do.

If my kids have to learn to speak frog, your kids will have to learn that my daughter is a person that exists within Canadian society and deserves tolerance and acceptance.

I don't feel sorry for my daughter, because she knows that she has the love and support of her parents to become who she truly is. And that has fluctuated through the years from her wanting to be a dinosaur at age 3 to wanting to be an astronaut at age 7. The fact that she hss experienced body dysmorphia for the past 4 years when she started into puberty and tried to kill herself because of it makes me think this isnt a phase. Moreso, professionals with more letters beside their names than you or I could ever hope to have confirmed it. So I will take whatever article you read with very little weight.


Until you start looking at things like the Charter (which states they're applicable to all regardless of age) and the various Child and Family Welfare Acta. Parents have a responsibility, yes, but the child has rights and protections afforded to them because, well, parents can be awful.


What if the child kills themselves because the parents plan on shipping off to a "therapy camp?" What if the parent kills the child for the sake of family honour? What ifs go both ways. One has a more plausible result than the other. Which one do you think that is?


You know what leads to lowering that rate? Safe and inclusive spaces and protections against abuse.


You're reaching pretty damn far with that comparison. Gender and sexual orientation is very much not akin to substance abuse, and I say that as a recovering addict.


That's a criminal act and should be treated as such. That is not at all appropriate for ANY public arena and I would be saying that as well if it were a straight couple. Much like the Stampede Threesome of yesteryear.
For starters the idea a mental illness (which body dysmorphia is) is natural and should be encouraged, especially in young children.

The idea that we start pushing gender confusion and sexuality on children which have no real concept of either and won’t until they have at least hit puberty.

The LGBT… organizations are also not love or acceptance oriented, they are only accepting of those who conform to their beliefs, much like how many religions and cults are.

As to which what if is more likely, the concept the transgender child will kill themselves is much more likely than the parents doing anything to them. When its literally a 30%+ likelihood that is a serious problem. I know the parents honour killing a child for that isn’t a issue as it would be front page news everytime it would happen.

At the end of the day all that is required is tolerating each other. Some try to push for more, but those same people are also intolerant of the other persons viewpoint.

Adults can make their own decisions, children lack the capacity to consent.
 
I have no idea why anyone should feel sorry for RMC_wannabe’s daughter. Sounds like she has the right environment and support all around.

I feel sorry for those that don’t.
Its not that I feel sorry in regards to where RMC_wannabe’s daughter is, I just feel sorry for anyone who feels uncomfortable in their own bodies and needs surgery and other supports to (hopefully) make them feel comfortable.
 
Its not that I feel sorry in regards to where RMC_wannabe’s daughter is, I just feel sorry for anyone who feels uncomfortable in their own bodies and needs surgery and other supports to (hopefully) make them feel comfortable.
Perhaps not the perfect example but plastic surgeons and tattoo specialists collect a lot of their income from folks who had forever Bob or Janet or some other personalized message indelibly inscribed on their (whereever) only to discover that Jim or Barb wasn't terribly impressed the first time they removed their pants. And that is only surface damage. How much greater the damage when a young teen begins to realize that they mistook a hormone imbalance or peer pressure for a miscue in genetics?
 
For starters the idea a mental illness (which body dysmorphia is) is natural and should be encouraged, especially in young children.

If you are going to discuss the subject, at least get the terms right.

Dysphoria vs. Dysmorphia: What’s the Difference
The differences between dysphoria vs. dysmorphia comes down to the following.

Gender dysphoria means someone feels the body they were born into doesn’t reflect their true self or who they are or identify with in terms of their gender.

Body dysmorphia is a disorder that results in someone perceiving a major flaw or problem with their own body, even if that perception is not based in reality. They see themselves, or a certain aspect of themselves, as “distorted” or “ugly.”
 
Last edited:
I would implore all of you who seem to think the "Rainbow Mafia" is coming for seven year olds, to actually look into the societal prejudices and now legislative discriminations that people are facing in those groups. That is definitely not something people enter into arbitrarily because someone said "it's OK to be who you are."
My daughter was your daughter's age when she came out as trans. A year later she lost interest and she wasn't trans anymore. She also came out as gay, which she also seems to have lost interest in.

My biggest issue was that she was allowed to miss a lot of math classes to attend gay-straight alliance meetings and other events which fell over her math period. I was never consulted or informed . Guess who is still struggling in math.

It seems like there is a lot of social pressure in kids to stand out with either their sexuality or mental health.

A similar issue to the school is parents not being informed about medical information. As you're aware I'm sure, 13-year-olds are treated as an adult in many medical situations where the doctors need the kids consent to disclose what they're speaking about. On one hand, it's good if the kid is experiencing any kind of abuse or their parents are assholes. The downside is good parents can be completely left in the dark about what's going on with their kids.

The example above of a 28 year old not being able to get her tubes tied but a teenager can transition is a good one that captures some of the absurdity involved.
 
Insert "I'll make him an offer he can't refuse" stereotype.

Conservative MP says justice minister threatened his professional reputation in an email

Conservative MP Frank Caputo says Justice Minister David Lametti sent him an email threatening his professional reputation during question period last week.

In the email — a copy of which has been shared with CBC — Lametti appears to criticize Caputo for applauding a question about former Supreme Court justice Frank Iacobucci.

In the email, Lametti wrote that he'd "let the community know" that Caputo applauded after Conservative MP Michael Barrett appeared to question Iacobucci's integrity during question period on Thursday.
 
Not sure if there is a better thread for this, but find it hard to understand why the minister's staff would not tell him for months that Bernardo was getting transferred.

Can't blame him for not being told, but this isn't exactly the first time it's happen with major issues that we know about. Seems like some housecleaning of the office is required, and would be seriously asking what the DM and others have been doing.

Shared article from CBC for those that seem to think they are a government stooge and do nothing but favourable sunshine articles as a demon legacy MSM site.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mendicino-bernardo-office-analysis-wherry-1.6876887

Marco Mendicino adds to the Liberal government's paperwork problems​

For the Trudeau government, the damage threatens to go far beyond the career of one minister​

aaron-wherry.jpg

Aaron Wherry · CBC News · Posted: Jun 15, 2023 4:00 AM EDT | Last Updated: 8 hours ago
A man adjusts his hair.

Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino appears before the Public Order Emergency Commission on November 22, 2022 in Ottawa. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)


We might still get around to having a real conversation in this country about why and how the Correctional Service of Canada decided to transfer Paul Bernardo to a medium-security facility.

But it's increasingly unclear that Marco Mendicino will still be the public safety minister if or when that conversation happens.

In the meantime, the Conservative leader's decision to demand the minister's resignation on Wednesday likely only ensures that Mendicino remains in place until a cabinet shuffle expected sometime later this summer.

The demand for Mendicino's exit was prompted by the CBC's report that staff in the minister's office were aware of Paul Bernardo's pending transfer as far back as March 2. Subsequent reporting confirmed that the Prime Minister's Office was also made aware in March and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was himself briefed on the transfer on May 29.

According to the version of events presented by the government, the minister's staff did not feel it necessary to tell him about the transfer of one of Canada's most notorious murderers until May 30, a day after the move was made and a day after Trudeau was briefed.

It's not obvious why Mendicino's advisers would keep their advance notice to themselves.

According to the minister's spokesperson, the office spent those weeks exploring whether the minister had any discretion to overturn the CSC's decision — and determined or decided that no such option existed. That is an important point that should be part of any debate about prison transfers.

But that apparent lack of options doesn't mean there was no reason to tell the minister about something that he inevitably would be asked about by reporters anyway.

WATCH: Poilievre, Mendicino get into fierce debate about Bernardo transfer


CP167301883.JPG


Poilievre, Mendicino trade heated words over Bernardo prison transfer​

21 hours ago
Duration 3:13
During an intense exchange in question period, Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre asked Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino about what he knew of Paul Bernardo's transfer to a medium security prison. Poilievre has called on the minister to resign.
And if they really did neglect to alert the minister to Bernardo's impending transfer, it's still puzzling that they also apparently failed to keep him from describing the transfer as "shocking" when he released a statement on June 2. That's not the word to use when, conceivably, you could have known about the event in question for three months.

In that same statement, Mendicino expressed concern with how the transfer was handled and said he would be speaking to the CSC commissioner directly. But it's now obvious that Mendicino could have done that before the transfer occurred.

Mendicino has now issued a new directive that stipulates, in part, that the CSC must "formally and directly" notify the minister when a dangerous or high-profile offender is transferred. That only reinforces the fact that something went terribly wrong here.

Is a minister about to lose his job?​

Despite the highly emotional and traumatic subject matter, this episode might still be marked down as only an unfortunate breakdown — except that it's difficult to view this latest controversy as an isolated incident, either for the minister or this government.

The Conservatives presented their own lengthy list of Mendicino's mishaps on Wednesday. And while some of the items on that list may have been unfairly framed, Mendicino's time at public safety has also been much messier than it needed to be.

A year ago, he talked himself into trouble when he suggested that the advice of law enforcement agencies had led the federal cabinet to invoke the Emergencies Act. A lack of clarity about what that advice entailed eventually culminated in an earlier round of demands for Mendicino's resignation.

Several months later, Mendicino's gun control legislation turned into an unnecessary problem for the government. After it passed comfortably at second reading, the Liberals decided to try to amend the bill while it was at committee.

Pandemonium ensued and the government ultimately was compelled to back down. More than a year after C-21 was first introduced, it is still winding its way through the Senate.

In the media realm, three similar things in a row constitutes a trend — and so now Mendicino will be described as "embattled" or "beleaguered."

If it still seems unlikely that Mendicino will resign or be fired, that's only because a government almost never gains anything from such transactions. If anything, the resignation of a minister usually only confirms that something went sideways. And when the Official Opposition is demanding someone's resignation, a government has all the more reason to deprive their rivals of a victory.

A prime minister is more likely to hold on and wait for the next cabinet shuffle, at which point a minister can be given a different portfolio (or dropped entirely) as part of a series of moves. For that reason, the consequences flowing from this latest episode might not become apparent until the prime minister — as expected — resets his cabinet this summer.

Another problem with the flow of information​

But the government's problems go beyond Mendicino and questions about the corrections system. As NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh noted on Wednesday, this is not the first paperwork-related breakdown for the Liberals.

"I think this is a problem that's bigger than just a minister resigning," Singh told reporters. "There's a culture in this government where multiple ministers have had serious allegations of not properly reading emails."

In April, International Development Minister Harjit Sajjan had to admit he had missed emails that might have alerted him to the fact that a senator was distributing unauthorized travel documents. And one of the major findings in David Johnston's report on foreign interference was that a key memo from CSIS failed to reach Bill Blair, Mendicino's predecessor as public safety minister.

WATCH: Poilievre demands Mendicino's resignation


Pierre_Poilievre_Marco_Mendicino_composite.jpg


Poilievre calls for Mendicino to resign​

1 day ago
Duration 1:03
Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre calls for Minister of Public Safety Marco Mendicino to resign following a CBC News exclusive that says staff in the minister’s office were notified of Paul Bernardo’s prison transfer months in advance.
One such incident looks unfortunate. Two seems sloppy. Three suggests there might be a real problem.
A year ago, this government was struggling to gain control over a series of breakdowns in service delivery — things like issuing passports. The ministers involved eventually got their departments back on track but the government came away from that experience with the sense that it needed to put a renewed focus on basic competence — on simply making sure the machinery of government runs smoothly.
The last few months suggest that the flow of information within government might be as big a problem now as passports used to be.
There is, as always, some chance that these are merely isolated incidents, that there won't soon be another example to add to this list of email-induced controversies. But the Liberals probably can't afford to assume that.
Even if there is no new public safety minister come the fall, the government has much more to fear from very basic — and damning — questions about its competence.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR​


Aaron Wherry
Senior writer
Aaron Wherry has covered Parliament Hill since 2007 and has written for Maclean's, the National Post and the Globe and Mail. He is the author of Promise & Peril, a book about Justin Trudeau's years in power.
 
It’s not clear to me why, exactly, we want political figures to be interfering in the routine and internal operational decisions of an agency. I mean, I get it, Bernardo’s an extremely shitty human being that we probably all want to see treated harshly- but do we want to normalize politicians meddling in routine correctional practices like security classification decisions and transfers?
 
It’s not clear to me why, exactly, we want political figures to be interfering in the routine and internal operational decisions of an agency. I mean, I get it, Bernardo’s an extremely shitty human being that we probably all want to see treated harshly- but do we want to normalize politicians meddling in routine correctional practices like security classification decisions and transfers?

I don't think I necessarily want ministerial interference, but at the same time, moving someone with a dangerous offender designation to a medium security facility doesn't seem to be a routine practice. If the person is too dangerous to consider releasing into society, that doesn't really make much sense.

More concerned is how much gets into his staff that doesn't get passed on. Even if he can't do anything about it, shouldn't find out about it via a news report.

Maybe this will drive the GoC to change the regulations around prisoner transfers in certain conditions, but this is the same guy who no one told him that China was looking to pressure MP Micheal Chong, which he also found out about in the news. Not telling him one thing is a mistake, two big things points to something more systematic, and likely a few other things they "forgot" to tell him about.

Lots of reasons why that might happen, but none of them are good. If they forgot to tell him about something with serious national security and foreign interference implications, and forgot to tell him Canada's most notorious serial killer is being moved to medium security, they aren't doing their job.
 
It’s not clear to me why, exactly, we want political figures to be interfering in the routine and internal operational decisions of an agency. I mean, I get it, Bernardo’s an extremely shitty human being that we probably all want to see treated harshly- but do we want to normalize politicians meddling in routine correctional practices like security classification decisions and transfers?

Are they our representatives or not ? If they are then they should know of and be working for the betterment of the country.

Our politicians should correct things in our departments and bureaucracy that aren't right.

This isn't right and should be fixed.

So yes, I want them interfering when something looks stupid. They should at least be asking why and demanding and explanation.
 
It’s not clear to me why, exactly, we want political figures to be interfering in the routine and internal operational decisions of an agency. I mean, I get it, Bernardo’s an extremely shitty human being that we probably all want to see treated harshly- but do we want to normalize politicians meddling in routine correctional practices like security classification decisions and transfers?
Exactly. I view it along the lines of the SNC-Scandal interference. We cried fowl there because they tried to force a minister to get involved in the justice system, yet here society is crying fowl because the minister is not getting involved in the justice system.
 
Exactly. I view it along the lines of the SNC-Scandal interference. We cried fowl there because they tried to force a minister to get involved in the justice system, yet here society is crying fowl because the minister is not getting involved in the justice system.

Context is everything.
 
Exactly. I view it along the lines of the SNC-Scandal interference. We cried fowl there because they tried to force a minister to get involved in the justice system, yet here society is crying fowl because the minister is not getting involved in the justice system.
At the very least someone in the Ministry or the Minister's staff should have realized the optics of this move and given the Minister the heads up so he wasn't blind-sided by the announcement. One or more people involved were clearly tone deaf on the issue.
 
Lets see.

Mendicino backdated government documents in a bid to mislead a federal judge.

Lied about the police asking the government to evoke the emergency act.

Lied about hunting rifles not being banned.

Lied about Chinese police stations in Canada being shut down.

And we're supposed to believe EVERYONE in his office knew about the transfer except him? Fuck off lol
 
Lets see.

Mendicino backdated government documents in a bid to mislead a federal judge.

Lied about the police asking the government to evoke the emergency act.

Lied about hunting rifles not being banned.

Lied about Chinese police stations in Canada being shut down.

And we're supposed to believe EVERYONE in his office knew about the transfer except him? Fuck off lol

I'm sure the usual crowd will be alone soon to provide forgiveness and blame Harper or Poillievre.

Fear not the Liberals know best and are the only option.
 
I
It’s not clear to me why, exactly, we want political figures to be interfering in the routine and internal operational decisions of an agency. I mean, I get it, Bernardo’s an extremely shitty human being that we probably all want to see treated harshly- but do we want to normalize politicians meddling in routine correctional practices like security classification decisions and transfers?

I don’t disagree with the above at all, however I do question the routine correctional process in this case.
We know that Corrections did in fact inform the Ministers Office and the PMO that this was coming. Why would they do that if this was just a routine thing? The fact that both offices were notified with the intent of Corrections Canada Senior staff presumably being that both the PM and the Minister would be briefed on it does suggest to me something.
Just not sure what that something is… concurrence, approval, disapproval, heads up for the expected public uproar, something else?
 
I


I don’t disagree with the above at all, however I do question the routine correctional process in this case.
We know that Corrections did in fact inform the Ministers Office and the PMO that this was coming. Why would they do that if this was just a routine thing? The fact that both offices were notified with the intent of Corrections Canada Senior staff presumably being that both the PM and the Minister would be briefed on it does suggest to me something.
Just not sure what that something is… concurrence, approval, disapproval, heads up for the expected public uproar, something else?

Something can be routine but, due to the specifics of who’s involved, still high profile and significant enough to at least give a courtesy call to senior government figures.

I have more thoughts on this whole thing but I want to jot them down after I have time to be a bit more thoughtful about it.
 
Back
Top