Queen Honours Cretien

[FiveParadox]

Re: Chrétien’s Appointment to the Order of Merit

Sorry, 5P, but you are just as wrong as Jokey. Only the majority of the voters that showed up to vote gave the crook a majority. There's a huge difference between that and Canadians period. And that means that Ontario and Quebec voted to crook in. And that means that ON and QC don't care if the PM is a crook or not which says something about their principles. Crime pays, especially if you are ChRETIeN.

I am not wrong, but thanks for the intervention, L Gilbert.

The electorate decided to vote more for the Liberal Party than for any other single party and, therefore, the electoral mandate to govern rested with the Liberal Party; the person who could therefore command a majority of voices, and therefore the person who should have been invited to be prime minister, was Jean Chrétien. The Canadian electorate voted for a House of Commons that could be best managed by Mr. Chrétien and a Liberal Government, and so that is what was done. Perhaps we should review the Canadian electoral system and how it functions — but that would probably be best for another, seperate thread.

The great work that Jean Chrétien has done for Canada is irrefutable; his prime ministership saw our federal budgets re-balanced, despite the vitriolic opposition of the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada; the prime minister fought to defeat the referendum on the secession of Québec, and scored a victory for Confederation; the prime minister played a key part in the repatriation of the Constitution Acts, 1867–1982 and the evolution of Canada as an independent and sovereign kingdom of its own; he helped to pioneer the “living tree” that is our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which has seen Canada become one of the world’s most progressive nations. Mr. Chrétien’s public service, despite the shortcomings it may have had, continues to have a major positive impact on the Canadian people and State, and that absolutely deserves recognition.

Canadians should be proud to have a prime minister in the ranks of the Order of Merit — it is an order which can have only twenty-four persons at any occasion, and a Canadian prime minister is one of them. It concerns me that there are Canadians so sadistic, and eager for self-punishment and denigration, that they refuse to recognise Canadian excellence and display it on the world stage. Mr. Chrétien, as another recognition of his tremendous public service to Canada as prime minister, is also a Companion of the Order of Canada, the nation’s highest honour.

I thank Her Majesty The Queen of Canada for having recognised the work of Mr. Chrétien to make Canada better. The former prime minister’s Order of Merit appointment strengthens the fact that Canada is a leader amongst the Commonwealth of Nations members, and presents an opportunity for Canadians to work harder to ensure a more fair, just and progressive nation where peace, order and good government are the cornerstones of public service and democracy.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Members should perhaps be reminded that the decisions of The Right Honourable Jean Chrétien P.C., O.M., C.C., Q.C., the 20th Prime Minister of Canada to launch these armed interventions, were entirely supported by The Honourable Stockwell Day P.C., M.P. (Okanagan—Coquihalla), then the Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, and later The Right Honourable Stephen Harper P.C., M.P. (Calgary Southwest), as Leader of the Canadian Alliance. Mr. Harper didn’t seem to have a problem with sending the Canadian Forces for that cause, so it’s odd that any conservatives here would suggest that Mr. Chrétien was negligent for having done so.

The fact is that Canadians supported Mr. Chrétien’s strong leadership enough to give the Liberal Party three majority terms as Her Majesty’s Government for Canada, helping to shape much of what Canadians are proud of today. We can only hope that at some moment very soon, Canadians open their eyes and realise what a mistake has been made by allowing Mr. Harper to hold the reins of government for as long as he already has. The prime minister’s recent trip to Rideau Hall to demand a “do-over” of the Governor General of Canada should make it obvious enough to all Canadians that the Conservative Party of Canada is more ready than ever to return to the opposition benches of the House.

Canadians should be extremely proud to have Mr. Chrétien join the prestigious ranks of the Order of Merit; it should be remembered that there are only twenty-four members at a time, so to have a Canadian amongst its ranks is very exciting and a source of patroitism and pride. I appreciate the fantastic work that Mr. Chrétien has done for national unity, for the patriation of the Constitution Acts, 1867–1982, for the enshrining of rights and freedoms, and for the progressive work that the former Government had done for Canadians during its golden decade.

Quite so, FP, the honour is well deserved. It is only the political opponents of Chrétien who are whining about it. And they would be expected to so whine, same as political opponents of Obama whined about him winning a Noble Prize.

Some people are just sore losers (though I fail to see why anybody would think that they lost because one of our PM won such an outstanding honour).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I am not wrong, but thanks for the intervention, L Gilbert.

The electorate decided to vote more for the Liberal Party than for any other single party and, therefore, the electoral mandate to govern rested with the Liberal Party; the person who could therefore command a majority of voices, and therefore the person who should have been invited to be prime minister, was Jean Chrétien. The Canadian electorate voted for a House of Commons that could be best managed by Mr. Chrétien and a Liberal Government, and so that is what was done. Perhaps we should review the Canadian electoral system and how it functions — but that would probably be best for another, seperate thread.

Quite so, FP. If tomorrow Harper got a majority (by getting 40% of the votes), the same wignuts will shout from the rooftop, how their Messiah has the majority, how he has the trust of Canadian people, how he has the mandate to govern any way he sees fit.

Because a liberal got the majority, it was somehow not legitimate; it was obtained by crooked meas. If a Conservative gets a majority, it was obtained fairly, it means he has the mandate from the Canadian, he is another Messiah.

Political partisanship knows no bound.

Indeed, I still remember the Messianic fervor generated by the first Mulroney victory. To hear the conservatives speak at that time, we practically had the Second Coming. Nobody talked of him not getting 50% of the vote. But when a Liberal gets a majority somehow that is not considered legitimate,

 

[Cannuck]

What you two "wingnuts" cant seem to wrap your mushy little heads around is that the man was crooked. He was a slime bag. The fact that people voted for him doesn't change that. Harpy has nothing to do with it. His leadership skills (or lack thereof) have nothing to do with it. The silly Queen has nothing to do with it. Mulroney has nothing to do with it. The fact you both get sexually aroused at the sight of the Liberal Party logo has nothing to do with it. The man was crooked. The fact that you two like him says volumes about your personal ethics level.

 

[Colpy]

I am not wrong, but thanks for the intervention, L Gilbert.

The electorate decided to vote more for the Liberal Party than for any other single party and, therefore, the electoral mandate to govern rested with the Liberal Party; the person who could therefore command a majority of voices, and therefore the person who should have been invited to be prime minister, was Jean Chrétien. The Canadian electorate voted for a House of Commons that could be best managed by Mr. Chrétien and a Liberal Government, and so that is what was done. Perhaps we should review the Canadian electoral system and how it functions — but that would probably be best for another, seperate thread.

The great work that Jean Chrétien has done for Canada is irrefutable; his prime ministership saw our federal budgets re-balanced, despite the vitriolic opposition of the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada; the prime minister fought to defeat the referendum on the secession of Québec, and scored a victory for Confederation; the prime minister played a key part in the repatriation of the Constitution Acts, 1867–1982 and the evolution of Canada as an independent and sovereign kingdom of its own; he helped to pioneer the “living tree” that is our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which has seen Canada become one of the world’s most progressive nations. Mr. Chrétien’s public service, despite the shortcomings it may have had, continues to have a major positive impact on the Canadian people and State, and that absolutely deserves recognition.

Canadians should be proud to have a prime minister in the ranks of the Order of Merit — it is an order which can have only twenty-four persons at any occasion, and a Canadian prime minister is one of them. It concerns me that there are Canadians so sadistic, and eager for self-punishment and denigration, that they refuse to recognise Canadian excellence and display it on the world stage. Mr. Chrétien, as another recognition of his tremendous public service to Canada as prime minister, is also a Companion of the Order of Canada, the nation’s highest honour.

I thank Her Majesty The Queen of Canada for having recognised the work of Mr. Chrétien to make Canada better. The former prime minister’s Order of Merit appointment strengthens the fact that Canada is a leader amongst the Commonwealth of Nations members, and presents an opportunity for Canadians to work harder to ensure a more fair, just and progressive nation where peace, order and good government are the cornerstones of public service and democracy.

Five:

Chretien did not work to make Canada better; he worked to maintain his own power and enrich himself.

He was, quite simply, by far the most corupt Prime Minister in living memory, if not in our history......and yes, I know all about (and loathe) Brian Mulrooney.

Chretien had at least one mobster in cabinet. Yep, check out Gagliano.......then tell me the Liberal Party did not know he was connected.........then Chretien went beyond the call to protect him........for this he gets an award??????

Chretien used the RCMP repeatedly as his own personal gestapo. Including in an attempt to smear, persecute, and prosecute the president of the BDC, a man of principle that refused to sanction Chretien's corruption. As noted by the judge that finally cleared the man......for this he gets an award??????

Chretien totally ignored the building move towards a "yes" vote in Quebec, until it was almost too late.........winning by less than a percentage point........for this he gets an award????

Chretien is a Quebecer, a product of the Quebec Liberal Party...........that turned out to be so corrupt that they stole millions upon millions of dollars from the Canadian taxpayer......which got a shrug from Chretien.....for this he gets an award?????

I could go on and on and on and on..........but I have other things to do......so let me just say this.........the Queen may give her awards to whomever she pleases, and she may have been charmed by this vicious little rat bastard, but that does not in any way change what he was....and is.

Oh, and one more thing; this bit of foolishness:

the “living tree” that is our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

A living tree that bends and changes with the environmental conditions in which it exists is useless as a tool to defend human rights. A bill of rights is a DEAD document by definition, otherwise it is useless. I

 

[AnnaG]

I am not wrong, but thanks for the intervention, L Gilbert.

The electorate decided to vote more for the Liberal Party than for any other single party ......

Wrong, not the entire electorate. Only those that showed up to vote.

and, therefore, the electoral mandate to govern rested with the Liberal Party; the person who could therefore command a majority of voices, and therefore the person who should have been invited to be prime minister, was Jean Chrétien. The Canadian electorate voted for a House of Commons that could be best managed by Mr. Chrétien and a Liberal Government, and so that is what was done. Perhaps we should review the Canadian electoral system and how it functions — but that would probably be best for another, seperate thread.

That part you have right.
I could just as well say that Canadians are Conservatives because the electorate voted a conservative government in. It's wrong. Not all voters are Liberal or Conservative and not all voters vote all the time.

The great work that Jean Chrétien has done for Canada is irrefutable; his prime ministership saw our federal budgets re-balanced, despite the vitriolic opposition of the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada;.........

Yeah, well, the Glibs have their own vitriol, too.

........the prime minister fought to defeat the referendum on the secession of Québec, and scored a victory for Confederation; the prime minister played a key part in the repatriation of the Constitution Acts, 1867–1982 and the evolution of Canada as an independent and sovereign kingdom of its own; he helped to pioneer the “living tree” that is our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which has seen Canada become one of the world’s most progressive nations. Mr. Chrétien’s public service, despite the shortcomings it may have had, continues to have a major positive impact on the Canadian people and State, and that absolutely deserves recognition.

Well, the guy's in the history books for his accomplishments. But he's also in there because of his nefarious shenanigans. I think it says something about a society if they are willing to look the other way concerning the nefarious bit. Lots of pols seem to have done a decent job without peddling their influence or doing something that would be frowned upon yet have not been recognized.

Canadians should be proud to have a prime minister in the ranks of the Order of Merit.........

Ordinarily, I'd say, "yes", but rewarding bad behavior even if there was good done, IMO, is just stupid at best and insane at worst. How about rewarding someone like Madoff or Ponzi himself for donating millions to charity. Would that be a good idea? "Oh, well they did do naughty things but they did a lot of good for some people so they should get an award".
Or how about giving Sadam Hussein a posthumus award for ruling successfully for so many years. Ayatollah Khomeini? It's laughable.

— it is an order which can have only twenty-four persons at any occasion, and a Canadian prime minister is one of them. It concerns me that there are Canadians so sadistic, and eager for self-punishment and denigration, that they refuse to recognise Canadian excellence and display it on the world stage. Mr. Chrétien, as another recognition of his tremendous public service to Canada as prime minister, is also a Companion of the Order of Canada, the nation’s highest honour.

Excellence? Sorry, but I can't see ChRETIeN as being excellent. I think those that do, including QE2, have lower standards than Canadians and others should have.

I thank Her Majesty The Queen of Canada for having recognised the work of Mr. Chrétien to make Canada better. The former prime minister’s Order of Merit appointment strengthens the fact that Canada is a leader amongst the Commonwealth of Nations members, and presents an opportunity for Canadians to work harder to ensure a more fair, just and progressive nation where peace, order and good government are the cornerstones of public service and democracy.

Is it fair, just, and good government to peddle influence? Sorry, I can't see it.

 

[AnnaG]

nuts again.

 

[AnnaG]

nuts

 

[big]

Really big? Evidently you seem to think it is very easy to get rid of the deficit. Then why didn’t Mulroney do it? Why didn’t Bush do it in USA? Why isn’t Harper doing it (all he has to do is to pass it on to the provinces)?

Or is it only liberals who know how to pass it on the provinces (in Canada) and to the states (in USA, presumably you would claim that is what Clinton did, that is how he got rid of the deficit). Do the conservatives lack the know-how to do it?

Try only here to understand what indebtedness can mean for a Queen.

 

[FiveParadox]

Five:

Chretien did not work to make Canada better; he worked to maintain his own power and enrich himself.

Mr. Chrétien absolutely worked to make Canada better.

What personal gain could the former prime minister have made by re-balancing the federal budgets? None. What personal gain could the former prime minister have made by repatriating the Canadian constitution? None. (In fact, the passage of the Constitution Act, 1982 largely took power away.) What personal gain could the former prime minister have made by defending Confederation against the onslaught of Québec secession? None. (Except, perhaps, for the personal pride and patriotism of having saved the nation.)

He was, quite simply, by far the most corupt Prime Minister in living memory, if not in our history......and yes, I know all about (and loathe) Brian Mulrooney.

I think that the history books may beg otherwise; I would very much argue that Canada’s most corrupt prime minister was one of the fathers of Confederation. The Right Honourable Sir John A. Macdonald P.C., P.C., G.C.B., K.C.M.G., the First Prime Minister of Canada, was undoubtedly the most corrupt and scandalous head of Government that Canada has had. Should that prime minister be condemned for that corruption? Absolutely. Should the fantastic work that Sir John did for Canada be forgotten and unacknowledged? Absolutely not.

Chretien had at least one mobster in cabinet. Yep, check out Gagliano.......then tell me the Liberal Party did not know he was connected.........then Chretien went beyond the call to protect him........for this he gets an award??????

Mr. Alfonso Gagliano P.C. has not been convicted of any organised crime-related offence.

Once The Honourable Mr. Justice John Gomery Q.C., the Commissioner of Inquiry into the Sponsorship Program and Advertising Activities placed much of the blame for the sponsorship issues on Mr. Gagliano for dishonest conduct, he was promptly dismissed as the Ambassador to Denmark by The Honourable Bill Graham P.C., Q.C.; moreover, The Right Honourable Paul Martin P.C., the 21st Prime Minister of Canada, permanently revoked Mr. Gagliano’s membership with the Liberal Party of Canada.

All appropriate steps were taken to protect the integrity of the Liberal Party.

Chretien used the RCMP repeatedly as his own personal gestapo. Including in an attempt to smear, persecute, and prosecute the president of the BDC, a man of principle that refused to sanction Chretien's corruption. As noted by the judge that finally cleared the man......for this he gets an award??????

That’s nonsense — those investigations were at the direction and on the advice of the Business Development Bank of Canada. Two of the Crown corporation’s executives: Mr. Michel Vennat, Chairman, and Mr. Jean Carle, Vice President of Public Affairs, spoke to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and precipitated those investigations. The prime minister had no role to play on that issue, other than the appointments of Mssrs. Carle and Vennat to the Business Development Bank.

Chretien totally ignored the building move towards a "yes" vote in Quebec, until it was almost too late.........winning by less than a percentage point........for this he gets an award????

Her Majesty’s Government for Canada would have had to downplay the sovereigntists’ threats and sway, to combat division. Without the hard work of the former prime minister (and The Honourable Stéphane Dion P.C., M.P. (Saint-Laurent—Cartierville), I have no doubt that we would have had a very serious separation-related constitutional crisis on our hands.

A living tree that bends and changes with the environmental conditions in which it exists is useless as a tool to defend human rights. A bill of rights is a DEAD document by definition, otherwise it is useless.

We have a Canadian Bill of Rights, and it is a static document. The complementary Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms must be an evolving document to ensure that as society becomes more progressive, our guaranteed rights and freedoms represent the values that society-at-large has adopted. If your argument is true, then women shouldn’t be appointed to the Honourable the Senate of Canada because that wasn’t an option with the original Constitution Act, 1867. Should the Persons Case be overturned?

 

[big]

Why do you think a queen would bother honoring someone who already has the title of right honorable? Because the arbitrary and absolute power of a queen is not possible if lay people don't accept to be reduced to pathologic flatterers.

 

[Cannuck]

What personal gain could the former prime minister have made by re-balancing the federal budgets? None.

Hardly. The mood of the country was to get the books balanced. Cretin followed Klein's lead when he saw how popular it was. So, in a nutshell, the personal gain was re-election.

What personal gain could the former prime minister have made by repatriating the Canadian constitution? None.

Hardly. Again, re-election.

What personal gain could the former prime minister have made by defending Confederation against the onslaught of Québec secession? None.

Hardly. Like every other federalist politician in Kweebeck, they were fighting for their jobs....and far from "saving the nation" it was Cretin and Cretin alone that almost cost the federalist side.

All appropriate steps were taken to protect the integrity of the Liberal Party.

The Liberal party only has integrity in the eyes of card carrying Liberals like yourself.

 

[big]

far from "saving the nation" it was Cretin and Cretin alone that almost cost the federalist side.

"Almost" means nothing in politics. Who is the Cretin now!?

 

[Risus]

Mr. Chrétien absolutely worked to make Canada better.

What personal gain could the former prime minister have made by re-balancing the federal budgets? None. What personal gain could the former prime minister have made by repatriating the Canadian constitution? None. (In fact, the passage of the Constitution Act, 1982 largely took power away.) What personal gain could the former prime minister have made by defending Confederation against the onslaught of Québec secession? None. (Except, perhaps, for the personal pride and patriotism of having saved the nation.)



We have a Canadian Bill of Rights, and it is a static document. The complementary Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms must be an evolving document to ensure that as society becomes more progressive, our guaranteed rights and freedoms represent the values that society-at-large has adopted. If your argument is true, then women shouldn’t be appointed to the Honourable the Senate of Canada because that wasn’t an option with the original Constitution Act, 1867. Should the Persons Case be overturned?

The Charter of Rights has not done anything good for Canada, unless you are a criminal. There was nothing wrong with what was in place before.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Try only here to understand what indebtedness can mean for a Queen.

What does indebtedness have to do with deficit, big? The two are totally different. Deficit may lead to indebtedness, but it is not the same as debt.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Why do you think a queen would bother honoring someone who already has the title of right honorable?

Why indeed? It could only be because he deserves it (at least in the eyes of the Queen). Quite a feather in the cap for Chrétien and indeed for Canada, in spite of all the whiners (the whiners probably would like to see Mulroney, Harper or somebody like that get the award, presumably that will show that Queen knows her business).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

The Charter of Rights has not done anything good for Canada, unless you are a criminal. There was nothing wrong with what was in place before.

Are you kidding? Charter of Rights has been very good for Canada, it is the best document of its kind in the world. It has led to all kind of minority rights, which otherwise would have been very difficult.

Before the Charter what we had was dictatorship of the majority. Well, not even the majority, a party can get a majority with 40% of the votes. So what we had was dictatorship of 40% of the people. 40% of the people could decide to pass any legislation (by electing a majority government), stripping away minority rights etc, and the minorities didn’t have any recourse.

Now they do, the Charter. Charter has contributed to Canada being one of the most liberal, progressive, tolerant nations in the world.

 

[Risus]

Are you kidding? Charter of Rights has been very good for Canada, it is the best document of its kind in the world. It has led to all kind of minority rights, which otherwise would have been very difficult.

Before the Charter what we had was dictatorship of the majority. Well, not even the majority, a party can get a majority with 40% of the votes. So what we had was dictatorship of 40% of the people. 40% of the people could decide to pass any legislation (by electing a majority government), stripping away minority rights etc, and the minorities didn’t have any recourse.

Now they do, the Charter. Charter has contributed to Canada being one of the most liberal, progressive, tolerant nations in the world.

An example: a low life with a criminal record, from a 3rd world country, comes into the country illegally. Because of the darn charter, he is clothed, housed and fed on our tax dollars. Without the charter he is put on a leaky boat back to where he came from.

 

[Cannuck]

- Concerning the deficit, it was simply shoveled onto the provinces.

Really big? Evidently you seem to think it is very easy to get rid of the deficit. Then why didn’t Mulroney do it? Why didn’t Bush do it in USA? Why isn’t Harper doing it (all he has to do is to pass it on to the provinces)?

Mulroney didn't do it because there was no appetite for deficit elimination at that time. It wasn't until the Reform Party gathered steam and convinced (or arm twisted) Ralphy to do it in Alberta that people woke up and became willing to accept the pain (well, that and the low interest rates at the time helped). As for Bush, downloading onto the States wasn't much of an option because of the limited social transfers that the US has.

Harper isn't doing it because we don't have a spending problem as much as we have a revenue problem. You may not have noticed but there is a recession on.

Or is it only liberals who know how to pass it on the provinces (in Canada) and to the states (in USA, presumably you would claim that is what Clinton did, that is how he got rid of the deficit). Do the conservatives lack the know-how to do it?

As I said, Ralphy (a Conservative) slew the deficit dragon first and he did it bu downloading onto municipalities. Cretin just copied him

As for Clinton, spending increased 30% and tax revenues increased 85% during his two terms. Some may call that a tax and spend liberal. I personally think that he, Cretin and King Ralph were all just dumbass lucky to gain power at a time where the global economy was smoking hot. I don't give any of them too much credit. Hell, in Alberta, a monkey could have been premier over the last 20 years and we would not have been any better or worse.

 

[Cannuck]

An example:

Reference re Ng Extradition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia