159

Everyone’s talking about Justin Trudeau

The Liberal leader stole attention from Harper’s annual trip to the north


 

Sean Kilpatrick/CP

Between you and me, let’s not make too much of Justin Trudeau’s run of good press in the dog days of summer. This week, which was a good week for Trudeau, may end up being a bunch of forgotten news cycles in a long, mostly boring lineup of Canadian political summers that even historians forget all about.

For a second, though, let’s make something of it and review the last few days in Trudeau’s life. The Liberal leader came out as a handyman; announced his family was adding a new member; condemned forthcoming legislation in Quebec that would ban religious symbols in public workplaces; and admitted to smoking pot while he was a Member of Parliament.

If he truly is a handyman, Trudeau might curry favour with the sprawling Home Depot crowd that covers the country’s suburbs. When his family expands, he could impress the pro-family crowd that worships working parents who sacrifice neither career nor children. Smacking down an anti-religious freedom bill wins points among the civil rights crowd. And, hey, marijuana might alienate stodgy conservatives, but plenty of young people might see their own youth reflected in their pot-smoking Liberal hero.

Either these various entreaties into various voter bases mean something, which is possible, or they mean nothing, which is possible. Asking people how they’ll vote in the middle of the summer, two years from an election, is a fool’s game. But for five days in August, matched against a prime minister’s high-profile trip to Canada’s north, Trudeau stood out. Everyone’s talking about him. Who’s talking about the Leader of the Official Opposition?


What’s above the fold this morning?

The Globe and Mail leads with a Senate committee’s urgent recommendation that old rail tankers be retired as soon as possible. The National Post fronts a father’s disbelief that his son, a suspect in the Bulgarian bus bombing that killed five Israelis, could commit such a crime. The Toronto Star goes above the fold with a report that confirms eight of nine bullets fired at 18-year-old Sammy Yatim hit the teenager’s body. The Ottawa Citizen leads with a European company’s disappearance after agreeing to provide the Canadian military with submarine technology worth $1 million already paid by the navy. iPolitics fronts the gradual acceptance of the sustainable food movement by mainstream retailers and producers. CBC.ca leads with uncertainty about Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s intention to run in another federal election. CTV News leads with tension in Egypt as supporters of former president Mohamed Morsi prepare large protests. National Newswatch showcases Greg Weston’s CBC story about Harper’s uncertain future.


Stories that will be (mostly) missed

1. Surveillance. Last year, police requested permission to conduct surveillance fewer times than in previous years, but spent more time conducting the surveillance once it was approved. 2. Nunavut. Premier Eve Aariak says her territory is the last Canadian jurisdiction not to have control over its own natural resources, a situation she’d like to change as soon as possible.
3. Spying. Robert Decary, the outgoing watchdog of Canada’s national spy agency, says poor and incomplete record-keeping prevented him from concluding the agency didn’t spy on Canadians. 4. Wireless. Four NDP MPs wrote to the chair of the Commons industry committee to force a meeting that would debate the merits of the government’s upcoming wireless spectrum auction.
5. Polio. The disease that’s eradicated in most of the world has experienced a resurgence on two continents: in Somalia, and in a part of Pakistan where a warlord forbade vaccinations. 6. Peru. Archaeologists in a northern province confirmed that pre-Hispanic societies were ruled by women, a revelation bolstered by the uncovering of burial tombs holding female bodies.


 

Everyone’s talking about Justin Trudeau

  1. And, hey, marijuana might alienate stodgy conservatives

    Remember when journalists reported politicians breaking the law like it was a bad thing?

    Jesus man. Quit slobbering.

    • Awww, dude… lighten up, man… want me to roll you one?

      • john g is making a factual statement.

        • Jesus (was a) man?
          I’m pretty sure the other two sentences in his comment consist of a question and an imperative.

    • WHAT ABOUT ALL THE TIMES STEPHEN HARPER HAS JAYWALKED AND THE RIGHT WING PRESS JUST HUSHED IT UP!!! CLEAR MEDIA BIAS!!!

    • Not even the police take this particular law particularly seriously.

      • But it’s still a law.

        Many people do take various laws not seriously, but the law is still the law.

        (btw, I don’t care if Justin smoked pot, whenever. But to say the law is not being taken seriously by the police is not making the law go away.)

        • I’ll remind you of that next time you do 105 kph on a major highway Frannie

        • It’s also against the law to overspend during elections.

          If breaking the law means a party is unfit to govern, Harper should not be PM.

          • Well, yes it is, and in that case we might as well have Ms.May sit in the House all by herself. I think she leads the only party not having been accused of some electoral overspending or overstepping EC rules. Now, wouldn’t that be fun; Ms.May in the House all by herself talking to herself.

          • Yes but the conservatives plead guilty. As in, the were guilty. Not just accused. Guilty.

          • And paid a a large fine because of the seriousness of the charges. I’m not sure sharing a joint with friends at a backyard bbq would carry the same consequence.

          • The NDP paid fines too for campaign overspending. Don’t be so ignorant when you want to be.

          • Well at least now you are admitting the conservatives broke the law. What does it say about them that they so readily flout the laws of the land? How can we possibly trust them to govern?

          • I’ve said that ALL Canadian political parties have broken the Election’s Canada’s rules and the law in that regard except Liz May’s party.

            So, fine, if you want to highlight the CPC then I will highlight the LPC or the NDP: Can any of the major Canadian political parties (except the Greens) be trusted to govern, since they ALL have overstepped EC rules??

            What is your point? I already have said, that the way you go about it, only Ms.May will be sitting in the House. What was not to understand about that post??

          • My point is that holding up the fact Trudeau smoked a joint while he was an MP as some character flaw is meaningless in light of your claim that all political parties break the law.

            I kind of thought that was obvious…

          • But I have never said that it was or was not meaningless whatever flaw you keep referring to. This is what I have said:

            ————————-

            “But it’s still a law.

            Many people do take various laws not seriously, but the law is still the law.

            (btw, I don’t care if Justin smoked pot, whenever. But to say the law
            is not being taken seriously by the police is not making the law go
            away.)”

            —————————

            What are you trying to concoct here? I was the one who said: “the law is still the law”. So, what’s your point?

          • Silly me. I thought you were trying to participate in the discussion – the one where john g suggested it was bad to break the law.

            So if you do not think it is bad to break the law, your point is just that the law is still the law, no matter how silly that law is, and that breaking that law does not reflect on the person, I guess we are done.

            Thanks

          • I thought we were having a debate too, until I realized you were just trying to trap me into your pretense.

            Look: this is what I said to begin with. Now you can spin it differently all day long in order to pretend I said something else, but I did not.

            This is what I said to begin with:
            ——————————————-
            “But it’s still a law.

            Many people do take various laws not seriously, but the law is still the law.

            (btw, I don’t care if Justin smoked pot, whenever. But to say the law
            is not being taken seriously by the police is not making the law go
            away.)”

            ———————–

            Now please go twist and turn whatever you want. It still remains that what I’ve said is what I’ve said: Nothing more, nothing less. And you pretending that I have said otherwise is nothing but trying to set a trap. I didn’t fall in your trap and now you are ticked off. Interesting.

          • OK. So you did not join the discussion, and did not have a point.

          • You seem to have fallen into something.

          • Round and round the mulberry bush…

          • When did this happen?

          • Yes, you should continue if your intention is to tell me when the NDP paid fines for election overspending.

          • Your other option would be to retract the assertion and apologize.

          • Paul Dewar violated CRTC rules that don’t have anything to do with Elections Canada.
            You’re obviously too fragile to retract your comment, so for anyone else reading let’s be clear – your claim that the NDP was fined for overspending in violation of EC(and calling another commenter “ignorant” for not knowing this fabricated “fact”) was 100% bull$hit.

            It was only the Conservatives who cheated in the election.

          • So your position is that all parties are breaking the laws. So why are you singling out Trudeau?

        • Funny when even decrim is suggested Cons, say it’s not necessary because NOBODY gets charged with possession anymore. I am sensing a bit of a mixed message here.

          • Did I say that? Who are you talking about? Who said what? Your message is the mixing-it-up, man.

        • And Ford the alcoholic coke snorting hero is just a great super hero!!

  2. Do you really believe that Trudeau has only used marijuana “5 or 6 times” in his life?

    Look, I like the guy. He has a warm smile, charisma, media savvy, and
    he seems intelligent. He made a strategic decision to disclose
    something he was fairly certain would become public knowledge
    eventually, but he should have told all of the truth. People will
    believe that “5 or 6 times” is the truth. That’s just how badly people
    want to believe this man, which may be about as much as they want to
    disbelieve Harper.

    Don’t think I am a Harper fan. I didn’t vote for him. But
    it is obvious that the desire for a change has already put voters in a
    trance, if they believe Trudeau. It isn’t a true confession. There isn’t
    any transparency or courage on display for everyone to admire. He has a
    Machiavellian streak, that until now, we hadn’t seen. That’s a good
    thing, because for a while, I thought he was a lamb on the way to
    slaughter.

    Voters may believe him when he expresses a preference for
    legalisation of marijuana, but he knows there are obstacles to
    implementing such a policy. There are enforcement issues, not the least
    of which, is the need for mandatory blood tests, on demand, without
    warrant. It is a thorny legal question and a practical one and it isn’t
    certain that technology is available for roadside testing or that such
    devices would be acceptable in court as evidence.

    The under 30 crowd imagines a world where marijuana is as unregulated
    as tomatoes, that anyone can grow as many as they like, and Trudeau
    will give it to them. But, will he? I am betting that, if elected,
    Trudeau will decriminalise pot, but he will be reluctant to legalise it,
    which will cause under 30 voters to feel betrayed.

    • What makes you so sure that this policy is aimed at the under-30 audience? I have a child in her thirties and I welcome a politician who acknowledges what most Canadians do: “pot is a reasonably benign substance and hey, I use it too. So let’s stop making professional adults, people with cancer, and hey, anyone else who wants to smoke it, criminals.”

      Are there any Canadians left who see pot as a Reefer Madness kind of narcotic? In fact, WERE there ever such Canadians — we seem pretty okay with the stuff.

      • All the party leaders know they need the under 30 crowd to vote. This is particularly true for Trudeau. He thinks this is the issue that will get them out. But once elected, voters should not be sure about what he will actually do.

        • I beg to differ, and also to point out that everything you wrote after your line “Look, I like the guy” kind of belies that you like the guy at all. Under-30 has a poor track record for paying attention and voting. Justin may attract youth to his campaign — as he did in his leadership campaign — but he knows who votes and who doesn’t. He’s aiming at middle-class, middle-age, middle-income — you have heard that the middle road is best, right Geoffrey?

          • He also knows the M/C were young once upon a time.:)

          • Yes, that is true, and when young one thinks differently because most of the world and how it functions is not understood fully when being young.

            Most older people understand that nothing is as simple as Justin makes his pot declaration out to be.

            I am not against decriminalizing pot. That one is not too difficult to do (although that too needs proper scrutiny).

            But legalizing pot is a different story because then many, many more questions need to be answered. Who will sell the pot? Where? How? Will the feds be in charge? Or the provinces? Will the provinces agree? Must all provinces agree before Justin could proceed with his implementation? And so forth.

            I am not against Justin saying what he says; I am against empty slogans being hailed as smarts politics.

          • You obviously know squat about what his position is, so why don’t you move on?

          • No one knows what his position is. Should everyone now just ‘move on’?

            Oops.

          • If you bothered to dig or ask on the liberal blog you would know at least something about his position. As it is you just make it up as you go along.

          • Actually I looked up Justin’s page to try and find what his proposals are in regards to decriminalizing and legalizing pot. But there is nothing there to be found either.

            What am I making up, kmc2? I am asking how Justin proposes to go about making his promises real.

          • There are all kinds of links available to the legalize or not debate all over the liberal.ca community page, which is open to anyone to read, though not comment.[in fact if you take out a free supporter membership you may even get your say? Er…please don’t do that.]
            It has been pointed out to me that this is a long standing policy initiative, and not just JT’s baby, as you frequently assert.

          • at the LCBO? and SAQ?.

            or the drugstore where they aready do ifyou have a percprciption for it.. i dont htink it is that hard. your making it seems like it would be some kinda supermess. make it like ciggrets but more restricted? easy. only pharmacies can sell, it or. like they doin oregon , and itz been done it works. leave it be. get over the “omg it is so complex. cuz itz not. hey, mabye make a senate subcommite deal witht hat question eh? like THEYRE SUPPPOSED TO. duh.

          • The many other questions that you need answered will be answered. Legalization make more sense for public safety, health reasons and reducing the availability to minors.

          • How does legalizing pot make sure that minors have less access to it?

        • Anyone is better than Harper

    • ‘People will believe that “5 or 6 times” is the truth. That’s just how badly people want to believe this man…’

      Are you suggesting that he smoked less than that? More? Do you have proof either way? And, more fundamentally, does it even matter? The only real controversy here is that he smoked WHILE he was an MP, so once was enough to put him in ‘hot water’. I’m struggling to see your point.

      • ” I’m struggling to see your point.”

        Then you’re in a trance. QED.

        • Must be the pot.

          • I can’t believe we’re talking about Justin and the coming Trudeaupia without Francien chiming in. I miss her.

          • SURELY JUSTIN CHIMED IN WHEN HE WAS DOUBLE DIPPING BLAH BLAH BLAH BLATHER YADA YADA

            there!

          • Now stop that! I was enjoying the peace and quiet and now you’ve gone and jinxed it.

            But I DO like the term “Trudeaupia.”

          • She’s busy preparing herself, probably having a toke or two. Which might explain a lot really.

          • More of a methy-crazy buzz on FV, not a nice mellow pot buzz.

          • She makes me hallucinate. I have this crazy idea she’s really PWs having a little fun at our expense.

          • She shuts down anything that could pass as a discussion on here by shrieking like a banshee about JT, no matter what the thread is actually about, and I honestly don’t think PW is nearly that much fun (or cruel) … (wondering about your idea of fun now, kcmbuddy: suggest you spark up a fattie and giggle awhile — maybe crank some tunes, open a fresh bag of Cheezies).

          • Too much competition for the cheezies in our house…one wife and daughter[12] and two dogs. I’m boring these days i’m afraid. My idea of fun is a trip in my boat, a cold beer and Harry Potter on the audiobook thingie [ i love it for some reason] over the long long winter nights. Is this what family life does to you? Where did i go wrong:)

            My principle objection to FV is she thinks opinions and facts are interchangeable, no matter how many times it is pointed out to her.
            She’s simply impervious to plain old fashioned logic – frankly it scares me. She may be the future.
            Well’s can be fun.Or he used to be. Does it all from the safety of twitter now. Can’t say i blame him. A couple of sanctimonious libertarians helped to ruin what was a great blog site at Macleans – it still pisses me off when i think about it.

          • That was fun. Glad to see the old duffer had a good sense of humour.

          • Wow – this has given me a great gift idea for my friends who still partake – a copy of Harper’s hockey book.

          • You spoke too soon ;-)

          • You spoke too soon…:-)

    • Why do you keep making stuff up about his motives?

      Also, just an FYI (and the god’s honest truth), I am in Trudeau’s age group, and I have smoked pot 5 or 6 times. Just sayin’…

      • You mean 5 or 6 times today.

        • Wow. You are one funny guy.

          I will take that as an admission you are fabricating his motive. And yet you write as though it is fact. That says a lot about you.

          • Goeffrey, I am afraid you are falling for the long hair and unbuttoned shirt. Trudeau’s long standing position is against pot, and in particular against pot use by youth. As someone who has worked with youth, I suspect he is well away of both the “stoner” personality and the scientific literature that suggest pot use is a much greater problem for young people. The guy doesn’t drink coffee, probably hasn’t had a fast food meal in a year and only eats organic. Smoking anything is a pretty disgusting way to ingest materials given all the other crap that tags along for the ride. It is not really a surprise that a health freak like Trudeau would not be a regular pot consumer.

            The real argument against Trudeau is that he is now a hypo-grit coming out in favour of pot legalization. Of course he claims it is to deny access to underage users.

            The second argument against Trudeau is that he was easily pressured to “take a puff” by a friend. What else might he be pressured into?

    • “…the need for mandatory blood tests, on demand, without
      warrant.”

      Right. We’ll definitely need that. Under the current legal regime with no Canadians consuming Marijuana it’s not an issue, but before it’s legalized we’ll really have to think about the impact of introducing Marijuana into the population.

      • Ha ha

    • I’m over 40 and I haven’t voted for the Liberal party since, well, ever, mostly because of all the lies they’ve told while campaigning over the years (hello, Red Books!). I also don’t smoke the ganja, not because of stupid laws, but because I have in the past and find that it just makes me sleepy. It doesn’t do anything for me.

      Nonetheless, this issue is actually causing this particular 40+ year old man to consider voting for Trudeau’s party, in spite of their history, just because he is correct on this issue. So you may be correct in that he’s using it as a political tool to sway voters, but I think you are incorrect about the age demographic. Everyone I know who is my age (and older, for that matter), be they small-c conservatives, liberal, or what have you, do not consider smoking a bit of pot to be a big deal deserving of a criminal label. Some partake, some don’t, but nobody has a shit fit if they are out somewhere and someone near them pulls out a joint. Nobody cares, because nobody is being harmed. Trudeau really is tapping into a huge well of support with this.

      Considering where the Liberal Party has stood in the past with this (solidly with Nixon and friends), Trudeau’s departure on this issue may actually signal that the Liberal Party is actually starting to listen to Canadians, and not just their executive. On other issues besides legalization of marijuana. Which would be a good thing.

      • I agree with your sentiments – except…”no one is being harmed”, unless you are just talking about consenting adults. My spouse surprised me on this [ and she is most definitely not a Conservative] by expressing her doubts[she’s a HS teacher] We have a good number of problem and at risk kids in our system[who doesn’t?] including a lot of Aboriginal kids. There’s no doubt where uncontrolled use of pot is permitted in some of these families the result is unmotivated kids. I agree with JT’s general direction as far as adults go – it’s time -, but there will have to be some careful thinking about it’s effect on the younger at risk kids; they don’t need another reason or excuse not to care. Plus there are studies showing harmful effects on brains that aren’t yet fully developed. I can’t see how making it legal for everyone and removing another parental tool is going to help in any way.

        • That is a good point. I don’t know how to keep it out of the hands of kids, but prohibition certainly isn’t working on that front. Liquor control laws don’t really work on that front, either, in that kids who want to don’t find it too difficult to access alcohol.

          • Bootlegging is a big problem in the north. I can’t see legalization helping much, although it could if more resources were applied. Certainly jailing some of these guys ( who aren’t always the brightest) without serious counselling/ rehab is not doing anything either. It’s an across the board social problem.

    • Excellent comment! Good questions raised. All of us need to pay attention.

    • Why do you assume he is lying? There are probably lots of people like him. I tried it a couple of times when I was younger – literally two times – and didn’t get anything out of it, so I stuck to alcohol & caffeine as my drugs of choice. I don’t use a lot of those, either.
      I’m far more suspicious of those who claim they have never tried it, than those who say they’ve tried it but never used regularly.

      • There are in my experience lots of people who have tried it infrequently, not liked it or simply been too frightened of their reaction to continue. My self i quit when i thought i heard the grass talking to me. I decided 3 days in a blacked out room after a bottle of scotch was much safer…i often wonder whether i made the right choice:)
        Those days for better or worse are far gone. Now one too many bottles of beers gives me a heart burn for half the night. Sigh…who ever said getting old was fun?

        • They make these really good acid reducing pills now, for those times when we want to cut slightly loose. I never leave home without one.

  3. J T will rule the agenda by the time 2015 roles around and media will sell subscriptions and papers by the thousands ,because everyone wants to know about Justin Trudeau .

  4. In a crisis-ridden world of 7 billion people…..but where journos apparently can’t find any actual news….they recycle tweets…and call it dog days.

  5. MacKay is a bad Justice Minister. If the laws of a country are clearly wrong, you flount them. You don’t carry out a Holocaust for instance. On this file Dion was too timid. As a genius who does not like this 20th century American culture the world lives under, I need an escape from the fact that being single is the best way to make the world a better place. Gambling on sports is nice but expensive. Coffee is good. Videogames are okay. Pot is best. How about that childcare cost estimate not including daycare, an extra bedroom or the odd vacation in Canada’s plentiful wilderness?! Soccer?!

  6. The negative reaction from Harper, MacKay, CPC spinners and others opens every MP especially Conservative MP’s to a “must answer” question: “Have you ever smoked pot?”
    If the answer is yes, then as the PM said “it speaks for itself”.
    He seems to be implying that any Conservative MP who has smoked pot should resign.

    • I think the more pertinent question would be “Have you ever smoked pot since becoming an MP.” That’s a very important distinction.

      • I don’t think it is. New drug laws don’t kick in when you are elected. Poor judgement is poor judgement. Breaking the law is breaking the law.
        Sure the scrutiny picks up, the political implications with lines being drawn in the sand by your party.
        Conservatives and Harper don’t do nuance. Ask Iggy the importance of what you did before MP.

        • Do you think it is as relevant as what you did as a party, during an election? Twice?

          • Cheating in elections is the worst it gets for sure.

    • Wouldn’t it be easier/faster to just ask MPs who hasn’t smoked pot?

      On the other hand it might be fun to have them all declare it in a recorded vote in the H of C and see if anyone else actually stands up to say no along with Stephen Harper.

      Or better still, have a debate about personal marijuana use, first:

      Member from High Somewhere:

      “One time me and my friends got so ripped on weed oil we thought we were camping and roasted wieners on the coffee table.”

      Some Honourable members: “Oh no!”

    • The Cons latest MP spinner – Blake Edwards(?) – Tim Hudak look-a-like – I swear I’ve never seen him before – looked like a deer in the headlights when asked if and when he last toked up. He did what teenagers do when their parents ask them – well, some kids did it at the party, but I didn’t – honest!
      So if they want to continue with attacking Justin on this, they better be prepared to answer some questions, straight up.

  7. Give Trudeau a chance. He only wants what is best for Canadians. He has the experience of watching the stress his mother was under when she had to sneak around 24 Sussex just to grab a puff or two, not to mention the difficulty she must have had trying to score a dime bag out on the street. He talks about how he was influenced by his brother`s stress when he was facing unfair possession charges just before his untimely death. Trudeau would like to see a more relaxed society when he and his children are living at 24 Sussex. There are enough problems in the world without his kids having to worry about getting caught with a little dope smoking.

  8. I think our marijuana laws are a case of circling the wagons and shooting inward, but it isn’t going to make me like or vote for a politician more because they once smoked it.

    I’m also not interested in lectures from Conservative hypocrites who say MPs should set an example, and then demonstrate that respect for the law as a party with systematic disregard for election financing laws.

    • Exactly! Wasn’t the party actually convicted of breaking the law to win an election? Slightly bigger stakes Han a few puffs…

    • “I’m also not interested in lectures from Conservative hypocrites who say MPs should set an example…”

      It can’t compare to breaking election laws, but search Google for “Peter MacKay beer bong”. Talk about setting an example.

  9. Do you believe anything Trudeau
    says about himself? Really? The man is a nice guy, affable,
    intelligent, charming, and charismatic but he is a politician. People
    are so gullible to imagine that he is being honest, without looking for
    assurances.

    Who were the visitors who brought the joint to his place? Surely
    they knew before arriving that Trudeau would approve. How would they
    know that, if he had only used the stuff ‘five or six’ times in his
    life?

    However you vote, at least stop believing anything a candidate says without exercising sensible skepticism.

    • Hmmmm. Indeed. How would someone’s friends know whether or not that person approved of something unless they’d seen that person doing that something…uh….one thousand times?
      For example, I don’t smoke pot and therefore none of my friends have ever brought pot to my place or smoked it in front of me.

      Thank gawd someone is exercising some sensible skepticism.

      • If only we had some sort of means of sharing our thoughts and ideas with others.

        Maybe we could develop a system of vocalizations in which accepted meanings are assigned to different sounds. Or even a visual system in which the sounds are represented by different symbols.
        It might even make dinner parties more interesting.

      • Canada has followed blindly the FAILED, one trillion dollar, US war on drugs.

        Everyone knows about booze and prohibition; another failed war, that time on booze.

        If science was used to determine what was sold and what wasn’t booze would be GONE in a heart beat. Again if science determined what was sold and what wasn’t sugar and fast food would be instantly gone. Pot has never killed a single human being. Booze kills over 150,000 north Americans each year. Tobacco products kill over 450,000 north Americans each year. Pot has never killed anybody.

        Don’t believe me? Do some research and quit repeating false truths about something you obviously know nothing about.

        • I am pretty sure he’s being sarcastic.

          • You’d be wrong about that too, Gayle. Are you a conservative hack who blindly follows or do you ever concern yourself with such trivial details like facts. Like scientific research. Oh, I forgot, Harper does not believe in science does he..in case you are wondering…..that was meant to be sarcastic.

          • No, she’s right: the guy you replied to was being sarcastic. So you had no reason for a hissy fit at her at all, conbot.

          • Anybody confusing Gayle of being a conbot must be smoking something a bit stronger than weed!

          • If you hang around for a while, you will realize you’ve incorrectly characterized both of them.

        • Hoo boy, Jim.

          I hope it’s almost 4:20 in your time zone.

      • No one expects to get or dares to ask for coffee at JT’s house either eh.

    • It’s interesting how you dismiss Trudeau’s version of events – that he has indulged occasionally, that there’s just no way he couldn’t be any less then a pot head, because after all he’s a politician. Yet there’s no questioning Harper’s assertion that he’s never done the stuff….isn’t he a politician too? I’ll put it down to plain old cynicism, shall i?

      Personally i believe both their stories. It’s not in Harper’s character and he has a medical condition. Trudeau strikes me as a pretty calculating individual underneath the Indiana exterior. He would have to be a lunatic to confess this much and risk someone else coming out and claiming they’ve smoked a bag a day with him since HS. While it’s true politicians are always trying to sell us something about themselves, it has to be at least plausible. JT is no Rob Ford.

      • YouTube Marc Emery/Trudeau where he claims he smoked 5 times with him alone. Called him a hypocrite.

    • I don`t appreciate your assumption that we Liberals lack the ability to be skeptical about Trudeau. We know he may not be perfect. He may not have any ideas about how to operate a G-8 economy, but we know a winner when we see one. Martin, and Dion and Ignatieff couldn`t beat Harper but we`re convinced this Trudeau kid can get rid of Harper and that`s all that really matters. So, who cares if he has smoked up 5 or 6 times or 10 thousand times, we think the young cool generation will vote for him. We`ll take our chances on him after that. He`ll have a lot more time to run the country if he can purchase pot legally rather than hustle a few joints out in the street.

      • And that is why most of us don’t vote Liberal. You have just put it in a nutshell. Nothing about the people of Canada. Nothing about policy. It’s all about winning.

        • Pot/kettle – you know the drill.

  10. Only the press keep talking about Trudeau. Nobody in my office is.

    • Undoubtedly your office represents the entire country.

      Which is odd, because last night at the Fringe Festival in Edmonton, I heard quite a few people talking about Trudeau. No one was talking about Harper though.

      • I think you’re right. Even in my little town people know who JT is, if not what he stands for. Given the much higher profile of the PM this is pretty remarkable. Poor Tom, I doubt if one person in a half dozen on the street would recognize him, or know anything about him.

      • And I’m sure the Fringe Festival also represents the entire country. What type of person goes to Fringe Festivals?

    • You work from home?

    • If you’re going to claim that, you have to tell us where you work.

  11. Well George Takei just gave Justin a big boost….and in today’s culture, that matters.

    Meanwhile we now have a photo of Peter Mackay glugging from a beer bong.

  12. Public opinion on this one is obviously spliff split.

    • There should be a joint committee to discuss this.

      • Agreed. You need to weed out the good arguments from the bad.

        • Time to hash it out!

          • patchouli <– on a roll

        • Another committee would just be a token gesture that served no higher purpose.

      • …with at least one tokin’ Liberal on it.

      • Their recommendation would be to stone the Conservative Caucus.

        • Oh, doobie serious!

          • yes, we should try to keep the conversation as high minded as possible

  13. It’s interesting how these stories about Harper maybe not quitting before 2015 wont die; there was another one in the post yesterday i think.It is possible, although unlikely. Part of what makes me wonder a bit is the fuss around the coalition and the story going around that Harper had to be threatened by the likes of Flaherty, because he was prepared to toss the keys over to Dion at some point. He had to be pushed to fight. I’m not convinced that Harper is a no quitter kind of guy. He has a bit of a track record of wanting to take the ball home when the game isn’t going well for him. O f course there is no sign of the other possibility happening – other contenders trying to angle him toward the exit with a hearty slap on the back…not yet anyway.

  14. I don’t know what all the fuss is about. A little puff…ffffffft…fffffft…neber hurt any…u just ave to concen..heh… where’s Francyanne at?…she rocks man!

  15. Justin announces the birth of a new child (ordinary behaviour), Justin announces he wants to change pot laws without any substance attached of how to go about such changes (ordinary behaviour), Justin installs a dimmer (ordinary behaviour). Canadians are ecstatic!

    Harper announced 100 million to be spent on mapping out Canada’s North for future development purposes (something like scouting out where cross country train tracks could be laid down, in days gone past) and not many Canadians care.

    Image carries the day. No wonder this country is not really serious about ‘opportunity cost’. Many Canadians are at a loss on a daily basis. Hooray for Canada! Image makes the man.

    • “Image carries the day.”

      For a fan of Harper, you might not want to lament this. It certainly has saved his bacon thus far.

  16. Where were all the Conservatives tsk tsking about Rob Ford’s escapades? Why does the prime minister attend cottage barbecues hosted by a politician who has a conviction (gasp) for marijuana possession?

    • And maybe much worse… could be cuz his last name isn’t Trudeau?

  17. Believe me. No one is talking about this guy. Not at work, not my neighbours, church, facebook. No one. Didn’t even read the article. Not interested.

    • Yes, you have convinced me. Your experience must be reflective of the whole country, and not just your circle of friends.

      Everyone! Time to pack it up and go home. We have failed…

      • Come on Gayle; this is just the media stirring up something that isn’t there.
        It’s not ‘Everyone’ since everyone would by definition include every Canadian voter in my circle.

        • Well I am pretty sure the person who wrote that headline did not expect anyone to take it to mean that literally everyone in the country is talking about Justin Trudeau. Most people understand that.

          All you have to do is look at the number of people who have commented on the articles on this site involving Trudeau to know people are interested in him. The media is writing what people want to read.

          • A more honest headlne would have been ‘Everyone, Talk about …”

            I hate media manipulation of public opinion.

          • The media is not creating interest in Trudeau. They are reflecting it.

          • big LOL

          • I get it. You are one of those media conspiracy theorists.

            My mistake was assuming you were reasonable. Sorry about that.

          • You got it in one. Justin is on every pop up window, every headline, and on every media site. One particular polling firm wants you to constantly vote on Justin. Justin will be the worst disaster this country has ever had. As usual the Liberals are going for the “star” quality rather than ability. Both Harper and Mulcair have clawed their way up the ranks of their parties. Justin shows up at a funeral and is hired. Pathetic.

          • You mean the paid Liberals commentators who have five different personalities? Oh and they take shifts in making sure each comment board is stuffed to the gills with all three of them making multiple comments, responding to themselves etc. Yeah. Nobody I know is talking about Trudeau – just the media.

          • And you.

          • Not me at all. Except when I see articles like this.

          • Sure. I totally believe you, and I totally believe that you have your finger on the pulse of the nation.

            Trudeau should heed your words and just give up now.

          • Gayle, I work for the government. I think I’m highly representative of government workers who are mostly pro Liberal…and I can assure you, nobody is talking about Trudeau.

          • Yes, I told you I believe you.

            Since you work for the government, which apparently makes you “highly representative” of a group of people who are pro-liberal, you probably had time to ask each and every government employee if they are talking about Trudeau.

            Or, I wonder if you are one of those conservatives who get irate whenever someone says something positive about the liberals and/or Trudeau. I live in Alberta so am familiar with those type of people – the kind of person most people avoid certain topics with, if you catch my drift…

            Anyway, I can see you have made a considerable effort to assert that no one is talking about Trudeau, even though you must know that it is not possible for you to know that to be a fact. I find that kind of weird. Especially since another post here on Trudeau and marihuana has yet more comments. For a guy no one is talking about, he sure gets a lot of hits.

          • If you are sincere, have you thought of cancelling the Google alert?

          • I don’t have Google alert. Do you realize how small the media is in Canada.

  18. MacKay is a hypocritical weener. Justin it seems has been truthful. No idea why exactly his credibility is ‘up in smoke’ (haha get it? he’s clever with words eh? *sarcasm*) The fact of the matter is that Justin is trying to change the laws, as our current laws do not make sense, and are ruining many many lives needlessly at a HUGE cost. Yes he consumed cannabis a few times is not a big deal considering basically the majority of Canadian’s have too. Scientifically cannabis *IS* much better for you than alcohol, and less addictive than caffeine, so why is it such a big “Credibility” issue? He’s telling the truth, how is his credibility hurt exactly? He was being responsible even.

    I would argue “One who breaks an unjust law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.” – Martin Luther King Jr.

  19. The guy smoked pot while he was an MP and people are jumping on it like a tiger on a lamb. Considering 4 out of ten Canadians smoke the stuff, I don’t see the big deal. Also considering that it is the law that people have tried to get rid of the most in all of history because it is so obviously pointless and constricting I barely consider it breaking the law at all. If anything it makes him more of a “man of the people.” a bit more down to earth and less ornery and pompous than the vast majority of other politicians, and lets face it, the majority of them have done a LOT worse and have gotten away with it.

Sign in to comment.