Yes, a government that seeks equality for women, and has made a huge step forward in this direction through it’s cabinet appointments. Hopefully, as women continue to move closer to equality in Canada, there will be less fat shaming of women used as a method of marginalzation.
I don’t really want to continue with this OT silliness, but you might note that this particular derogatory adjective could equally have been applied to a male, so it’s hardly misogynistic.
I was thinking further about this whole idea of intense political correctness, which got me wondering what Justin Trudeau himself might actually have said in private about some of the same folks I’ve been criticizing. I don’t know, and neither do you, but I’m confident he has a sense of humour. It brought to mind an anecdote from my past. I once worked for a department head in a very large organization who had a wicked sense of humour and his private comments about trivial attributes of some of the staff were, shall we say, very far from politically correct. But here’s the point: appointments and promotions in that department were scrupulously merit-based, regardless of gender or physical attributes or anything else, and he was widely respected for his impartiality and judgment. I have nothing but disdain for those who give only lip service to political correctness, and nothing but respect for those who actually practice the principles of fundamental fairness. And I sincerely hope that ends this stupid digression.
This tells me everything I need to know about you which is why I decided to stop replying to your posts weeks ago.
Have a nice hate-filled life.
Back to somewhat lighter stuff,
As a long time Albertan I am horrified by this. There should be a standard square based bottle of vinegar beside the ketchup and salt. Any establishment that truly appreciates fries will have malt vinegar. I realize in this fast paced and competitive world, compromises will be made, but we still should at least make an effort to be civilized.
Now I want a plate of fries.
I know I’m from Missouri, and we’re a bunch of disgusting roly-poly fatties 
, but Leona Aglukkaq looks like a perfectly ordinary weight to me.
I think “lard-bucket” might have some other meaning in this case?
No, trust me, it is used as an attack on a person’s appearance. These are politicians so there is plenty of fertile material on which to attack any of them. As easy as low lying fruit, in fact.
To sink, yet lower, to attack based on physical appearance denotes a really lacking imagination, in my opinion.
Pretending it was anything else, or entirely innocent is both sadly transparent and cynically hilarious!
Canada’s national colour scheme was established by royal proclamation in 1921 as red and white. Prior to that, we just used the default British décor of red, white, and blue.
On another note, I was reading up the other day on some of the cabinet members and I was particularly struck by the resume of the new Defense Minister - who apparently had successful careers as a police detective before having a decorated career in the army, rising to the rank of Lt. Colonel. Seems a very strong choice.
One detail struck me as amusing, given the whole “reasonable accommodation” debates we have seen off and on again (and of course in the election). The new Minister is a practicing Sikh, with the turban and facial hair that sect requires. Allegedly, the typical army gas masks don’t work with a beard - so this fellow went out and invented one that did. Got it patented, too. So he can add “inventor” to his list of accomplishments. 
Interesting, thanks. But why would the ceremony be “quite repetitive and prolonged”?
Sometimes the PM’s house might be just a bit too accessible: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-loop/wp/2014/09/22/white-house-intruder-incident-pales-next-to-a-really-scary-one-in-canada/
I believe because all 39 cabinet ministers repeat an identical oath (with the only difference being the ministry they represent). Same oath. 39 times in a row. Not exactly a thrill-a-minute.
Two oaths, actually. Each one swears the Oath of office as minister, and also the Oath of allegiance to Her Majesty.
The NY Times clip only showed Trudeau doing the oath of office as PM, but at the end, when he’s signing the documents, there’s two on the table in front of him. The second one is the Oath of Allegiance.
So, 31 swearings-in, where the only variation is the name of the oath-taker and the office, with no rousing inaugural speech afterwards. Yep, pretty repetitive and prolonged.
And the ones who weren’t members of the Privy Council had to take a third, much longer oath.
What a charming sentiment. But here’s the thing to understand about why I started this thread of praise and optimism.
If you want to talk about “hate” you should look at the guy you were so slavishly supporting, the guy who was so decisively rejected by the Canadian people. The guy who tried to divide the nation with racial fear-mongering using issues like the infamous niqab ban, the “barbaric cultural practices” law featuring a tip line for citizens to secretly snitch to government authorities about cultural minorities they didn’t like, and constant stalling and doubletalk on the Syrian refugee crisis about which his government was doing almost exactly nothing. The guy with such an appalling record on gender equality and women’s rights (while trying to pretend otherwise) that his party had by far the lowest proportion of women in any capacity, and Harper outright refused to attend a debate on women’s issues sponsored by the Toronto Star, the only federal leader who refused to participate. Maybe he didn’t want to be asked why he cut funding to the Status of Women Canada and closed 12 of their 16 offices. And then there’s the whole anti-science record, pulling out of international climate agreements and threatening scientists who dared to speak to the media about any research results that contradicted the Harper dogma.
And now we have the diametric opposite. Respect for women, respect for science, respect for basic facts and human rights.
So, yeah, tell us all about “hate”. It’s richly ironic that you now pretend to be offended by a casual adjective when you were so adamantly defending this guy. A casual adjective I used in a thread whose purpose was to praise a young new progressive PM and his enlightened choices for Cabinet and the celebration of a hopeful future.
Incidentally, in another thread I also referred to some of Harper’s candidates – specifically the ones whose candidacies were pulled because they turned out to be such obvious dipshits – as “dipshits”. And you can quote me, and feel free to rail about that, too. Your guy lost. I know it’s tough, but he deserved to lose, because we deserve better. Get over it. We seem to have a pretty bright future ahead of us.
wolfpup, political attacks are OK, female body shaming is not.
Exactly. If you wanted to keep this thread upbeat, you shouldn’t use a term which carries much more pejorative impact when applied to a woman than to a man.
Right. I’d forgotten about that one. So veterans like Ralph wouldn’t have had to swear that, but newbies to Cabinet like Justin himself would.
JFK had the right idea for his Cabinet: http://archive1.jfklibrary.org/JFKWHP/1961/Month%2001/Day%2021/JFKWHP-1961-01-21-E/JFKWHP-AR6287-E.jpg
This isn’t “Trudeau gets to work”, but it is “New Minister of Defence Gets to Work”, so…
Defence Minister orders top soldier to make suicide-prevention a priority
About bloody time this was looked into. The numbers are not good:
Good on Sajjan for taking this seriously.
Well, that guy was supported by 31.9% of the Canadian people, and that guy is now heading up the official opposition. And in the end, 61.5% of the Canadian people did not vote for Justin. Hardly a “decisive rejection.”
I note that in the 2011 election, there were many who complained that 60.38% of Canadians did not vote for the winner, Harper. Well, in the 2015 election, 61.5% of Canadians did not vote for the winner, Trudeau.
Just sayin’, is all.
Cite to the 2011 election results: here.
Cite to the 2015 election results: here.