Now that Justin..............

[ilurkthereforiam]

Trudeau is the leader of the federal liberal party. Is he their saviour or will he get slammed and the liberals will be looking for someone to replace him in four years?

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

Time will tell.

[Anonymous]

I think that will be up to Harper and his party and how Trudeau faces his own members who have an axe to grind.  Justin will have gray hair before Christmas os 2013.

[ilurkthereforiam]

I can't see anyone taking him serious with ads like rgis.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/04/15/justin-trudeau-attack-ad-striptease_n_3084700.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-politics

[brandeentertainment]

I would love to see if he could shake things up .. 

I don't really like him so much but I would like to a fresh young face around there. He had fun and did it for Charity I think it was hilarious and shows he is normal .. I wish the people that governed our country based things on smart decision not images or wanting them to be upstanding role models all the time..

Crosby is paid to be a role model.. politicians Prime ministers are paid to run a country and an economy and make sure we can have the best lives and living situations as possible etc..etc..

Look what he's wearing

He was drunk or having a drink

he swore

the list can go on forever a bunch of crap that is normal for human and good and honest ones too .. Not to mention how much time gets wasted covering stories of this stuff and diverting people from the real issues at hand..

My opinion The people running that add should spend there money on something other then showing me Justin is a normal person who did something for fun and charity..

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

A. That video was in 2011 and was not a striptease.

B. He was raising money to help people through the liver foundation.

C. For a 40 year old man (at the time) some people couldn't raise a buck if they took their shirt off and I guess it bugs them that some people can.

[pigdog47]

Andrew Coyne commentary in the National Post:

My favourite line in Justin Trudeau’s acceptance speech came as he began his appeal for party unity, after the bitter divisions of recent years. “I don’t care,” he said, “if you thought my father was great” — pause, sly smile — “or arrogant…”

There is a lot going on in that short passage. It tells us of his capacity for irony (I don’t care if you thought he was arrogant). It acknowledges an uncomfortable fact (lots of people hated Pierre Trudeau), while subtly depicting it as a virtue (he was arrogant because he was great).

Above all, it invokes his patrilineage in support of his demand for loyalty. This was his party. I am his son. And this is now my party. “The era of hyphenated Liberals ends right here, right now!”

He is in every position to say so. This is his party, wholly and absolutely. With 80% of the vote, he obliterated his rivals. He is the party’s only real asset, beyond its history and its name. If there is little likelihood of serious new divisions breaking out, it is in part because there is so little left to fight over. The Liberal party is now essentially the Justin Trudeau party.

And if we are honest, we will concede this is almost entirely a function of heredity. No one would pretend he won because of his platform, or his record in office, or his character and accomplishments. But neither was it simply a matter of celebrity or good looks. The reason he is the leader of the Liberal Party today, the reason 40% or more of Canadians say they would like him to be prime minister, is because of who his dad was.

We have not seen anything quite like this before in our public life. Dynastic politics is not unknown in Canada — Preston Manning was the son of a long-serving Alberta premier; Paul Martin, of a powerful federal cabinet minister — but never has it appeared in such purely monarchical form: the conferral of so high an office on someone so otherwise unqualified for it, but almost as an inheritance. And, what is more, the widespread consensus that this is right and appropriate.

This may — or may not — be irrational, but it is undeniable, and it is extraordinarily potent. It taps into the most profound longings in our psyche, rooted in the passing of the generations — the desire to be worthy of our parents, to be an example to our children, to pass on what we have been given. Harnessed to an overtly idealist message, such as Trudeau is attempting, it takes on a sense of noblesse oblige, as if he were somehow above mere politics.

Trudeau himself has spoken in these terms, suggesting his leadership bid arose not out of a sense of entitlement but rather obligation: to give back, not just to society, but to his father. At a time of deep and corrosive cynicism about politics, and the means and motives of its practitioners, we should not be surprised to find the public responding as it has. It does not necessarily mean people are prepared to hand him the keys to the government. But it does mean they will be prepared to give him, more than most politicians, the benefit of the doubt as he finds his feet.

Why does heredity hold such power over us? Is it supposed that he has inherited the same abilities as his father? I doubt it, though he clearly has a talent for politics, as we are starting to learn. In its most irrational form, it is tied to intimations of fate, even inevitability, as if he had been destined all his life for this. Less mystically, it is bound up in the realities of his situation: being the son of a prime minister naturally affects both who he is and how we see him.

I think it explains, for example, his unusual self-assurance. At its worst, this emerges in those flaky episodes for which he is known, a sort of narcissistic flippancy. At its best, it reveals a jaunty unconcern for convention, a readiness to do things his way, whatever the flak he takes for it. This is a precious gift, in a profession that is not kind to those inclined to self-doubt.

He benefits, moreover, from having grown up in the public eye. We feel as if we know him, indeed as if he were somehow ours. You can see it in the almost protective attitude he seems to evoke: when Martha Hall Findlay mildly dissed him for his privileged upbringing at a public debate, the reaction, both in the room and out, was astonishing.

None of this means he is ready for government, or even that he will be a success as leader. He is lacking in experience; he has to date shown little evidence of depth; his judgment has been called into question on many occasions. If he exceeded expectations in the campaign, it is mostly because expectations were so low to start with. Though in his forties, he seems much younger, as if he were just now emerging from an extended adolescence.

But he is a Trudeau, and for now that is all that matters.

[ilurkthereforiam]

"Quebecers are better than the rest of Canada"

Does that statement not bother you?

[pierrelebel]

"Does that statement not bother you?"

NO.

Look at the context, will you?

Those words were spoken in reference to his father.

Why are the Conservatives so afraid of this relatively young man with limited parliamentary experience?

What bothers me is the willingness of the prime minister and his party to sink so low to attack his opponent by taking words and images totally out of context and giving them a misrepresentation of the facts.  One would expect better from a prime minister, regardless what one thinks of his policies and political orientation.

[ilurkthereforiam]

Then there i no point in trying to reason with you Pierre if you cannot see how wrong that statement is regardless of the context.

He said all the best prime ministers came from Quebec.

He is as arrogant as his father was.

[pigdog47]

This quote by Mr. Trudeau likely gets taken out of context as well:

“I’d think of wanting to make Quebec a country.” (Canadian Press, February 14, 2012)

[pierrelebel]

You are absolutely correct:

"there is no point in trying to reason with you"

I am not member of any political party nor do I support any political party, provincially or federally. I respect the rights of those who support one party or another, one political position or another, to express their views.

However, these American style attack ads full of misleading out-of-context words and images is not something most Canadians can agree with, regardless of the party they support.

[ilurkthereforiam]

and all the parties use attack ads.

What is your point?

I don't have a problem with attack ads as long as we know who is making them.

There is a risk in using them because they can backfire.

I am not affiliated with any party either and I would vote for the liberals if they would stop making pompous, arrogant donkey's rear ends their leaders.

[pigdog47]

It strikes me as unethical that a politician, in this case Mr. Trudeau chose to skip Parliament sessions in order to rake in $$$ with his fundraising tour.  Even more so because his cash machine dwarfed his competitor's abilities to raise money.  I think it is reasonable to expect an MP to be present at his job when he is supposed to be there.  I suspect that only a Union Member would also be able to get away with pulling a similar stunt.  Double Dipping on the taxpayer's dime.  

[pierrelebel]

Here are the 10 MPs with the most absences during Canada's 41st Parliament so far.

1. Romeo Saganash - NDP - 94 absences
2. Maria Mourani - Bloc Quebecois - 82 absences
3. Thomas Mulcair - NDP - 74 absences
3. Paul Dewar - NDP - 74 absences
5. Nathan Cullen - NDP - 70 absences
6. Ed Fast - Conservative - 67 absences
7. Peggy Nash - NDP - 62 absences
8. Niki Ashton - NDP - 61 absences
9. Sana Hassainia - NDP - 60 absences
10. Gerry Ritz - Conservative - 54 absences

ource: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/03/01/mp-attendance-canada-records_n_1313249.html 

[ilurkthereforiam]

The reason why your list has no liberals is because there aren't many liberals left.

Trudeau has a reputation for being absent in parliament.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

Some people will hate Trudeau no matter what is said. Their dislike is in their DNA and like some ancient war, they have no idea where the hatred comes from.

For others they hate him because, well, he just looks too good. His hair is right, his look is right, he's in good shape, he has a sense of real humour and a pleasant smile, beat a Conservative boxer and worst of all, a lot of women drool over him. That, really hurts the testosterone of some males. Trudeau has charisma.....and that is worth it's weight in gold.

Then there are those who dislike him because he came from a wealthy family and because they never made much of their own lives, they dislike that he had it pretty easy.

All of these people seem to forget about Harper.....his lies.....his long, long list of broken promises......his avoiding the people and the press......his destruction of democracy.....his pandering to big corporations and big oil in particular. They forget he never really has had much of a job other than what his father got for him at Imperial Oil. They forget that the called Quebec "a nation within a nation".

Trudeau hasn't said much as of yet but nonetheless these narrow minded people in Canada are picking at anything they can find out of pure desperation from Trudeau's taking off a shirt for charity, to a comment about Quebec taken out of context.

Even I, haven't decided how I feel about Trudeau yet......but I do know how I feel about Harper and not based on anything except what he has said over many years and what he has done to discredit Canada in the eyes of the world.

Like his boxing which was patient and tactical, Harper has every right to be scared of Trudeau. For one thing Trudeau actually has a personality and he's not afraid of the press or talking to Canadians.......all of which are three strikes against Harper. People seem to forget that when you are trying to sell anything, be it a product or ideas, the first thing you have to sell...........is yourself. The only, only reason Harper got into power was because of the mistake made in Quebec. In our political system he was sadly the only choice left. After that he only remained in power because of the poor choices of leaders the other side had. But..........that's all over. The Liberals now have a Very saleable product and if Trudeau has the right ideas for the country and personality to put them to the public.....then Harper has a real problem he won't know how to handle short of attack ads which will only backfire on him with the general public. 

My prediction is at least Harper's majority days are over......and second time around he should be looking for a new home. 

[pigdog47]

Thank you for providing that link, Pierre.

Other than extenuating circumstances such as a serious illness, I have trouble understanding how/why this absenteeism is tolerated, either by their peers, or the public at large.  

[pigdog47]

Yahoo News:

The fourth worst record belongs to Liberal leadership candidate Justin Trudeau. While Trudeau missed 36 per cent of the votes in the lower chamber, McGregor emphasizes that most of those misses are related to his leadership campaign and not his 'speaking circuit' career.

[ Related: Justin Trudeau under fire for earning speaking fees while serving as a Member of Parliament ]

[pierrelebel]

"I have trouble understanding how/why this absenteeism is tolerated, either by their peers, or the public at large.  "

I agreee.

Want top know how bad it is in the CanadianSenate?

"OTTAWA - A review of the rules for Senate attendance appears to be on the backburner, six months after the Conservatives promised action on absenteeism.

The issue arose last July when The Canadian Press revealed that the youngest senator — Conservative Patrick Brazeau — had the worst attendance of the parliamentary session, missing both committee meetings and chamber sittings.

The committee on internal economy — the same one that has now embarked on an audit of housing allowances — was asked to take on the study at the request of Conservative Senate Leader Marjory LeBreton.

A Senate spokeswoman said committee staff have been busy reviewing rules, policies, records and media reports.

But she said they haven't reported back to the senators, and there is no set time frame for their report.

The chair the of the committee also suggested the attendance-rule review is not a high priority."

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/02/13/senate-attendance-review-canada_n_2675397.html 

It is not a partisan question as it affects members of all parties. Why can't Canadians who foot the bill get answers and action?