Joseph Brean (in the National Post);
Pierre Trudeau, of course, inspires deep emotions, both positive and negative, and usually simplistically extreme. The haters tend to be rural Western right-wing ideologues who see in him everything they dislike about urban Eastern left-wingery. And so Trudeau-hatred is rarely more than a niche emotion, a mass-produced populist scorn that looks ever more unsophisticated the more unyielding it gets, like hating olives.
If hairy-fingered readers who can still recall the glory years of the NEP know someone in the city who can assist you with the necessary typing, the Post provides an email address – jbrean@nationalpost.com.
Keep your sentences short.
From the comments – “My opinion of Trudeau was formed at a very young age. I met Trudeau back around 1970 at Exibition Stadium in Toronto. I was a cub scout attending a jamboree and PET was the guest speaker. Afterwards a group of us were chosen to go backstage and meet the PM. We where waiting behind a curtain. He didnt know we where there. He call the crowd of cubs and scouts “the Hitler youth of tomorrow” and spit on the ground.”
Ouch.
People that are Mr. Brean’s likesake are too set in their ways to consider seriously any counter-examples to his expressed opinion in the matter. After a while, others become jaded enough to throw up their hands and consider such stereotypes usable. (According to Mr. Brean himself, in the second page of that piece, Mulroney himself does so, indicating that he’s unaffected by snubs.)
Remember the “hidden agenda” crap? I suspect that it’s a fall-back for those who hold the same stereotype about the ‘right wing fringe’. Instead of try to find out why the supposed ‘fringe’ is so popular, they spout off about ‘hidden agendas’ and such. The only basis for it is conservatives’ habit of being more polite and less volatile than their liberal counterparts. In other words, the ‘hidden agenda’ is one of high impulse control.
My two bits worth sent to Mr. Brean:
Mr. Brean,
Your comments on Pierre Trudeau demonstrate a complete ignorance of Canadian history.
Your statement: “Pierre Trudeau, of course, inspires deep emotions, both positive and negative, and usually simplistically extreme. The haters tend to be rural Western right-wing ideologues who see in him everything they dislike about urban Eastern left-wingery. And so Trudeau-hatred is rarely more than a niche emotion, a mass-produced populist scorn that looks ever more unsophisticated the more unyielding it gets, like hating olives.” is a clear example of total ignorance of the subject matter.
I don’t think that Canadians generally hate Trudeau – we despise him for what he did, and the legacy he left for generations of Canadians. And this view is not confined to the West, as you so incorrectly state. There are many Easterners who very strongly hold the same views. As only one example, an ill conceived idea to rename Ottawa’s Queensway to the “”Pierre Elliott Trudeau” freeway a few years ago met with such vehement and visceral opposition that it was immediately shelved by its proponents.
You were, and are, far too young to be able to personally recall Trudeau and his many acts of random and planned stupidity, but that is no excuse to write the tripe that you did. You would be well served to acquaint yourself with Canada’s history before spouting off on subjects of which you have no knowledge nor expertise.
Neil
Former Easterner
I’m a citizen of Australia and Canada. Resident of Montreal for over 30 years. I’m an engineer working on hydroelectric projects worldwide for more than 40 years (and still going strong.
Like one of the earlier commenters, I don’t hate PET – I loathe him with every fibre of my being. Everyone of us would be better off if he had never been born.
If you’re looking for an anti-Turdeau niche, try 805 of the population of QC.
GodDamnItKate! The Sunday hangover was almost gone. Balance was coming back to the force. There were signs that I would be able to watch the game without being too grumpy but noooooooo….. You had to go and make me send an e-mail to some elitist eastern pissant who doesn’t have a clue.
Ugh…
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go and buy some beer and some green food coloring.
Perview is my fiend!
.. try 80% of
Mine for young Mr. Brean:
I am an educated eastern urbanite, who had the misfortune to be alive while Trudeau tried his best to destroy the Canadian economy, deny our glorious history, and tax individual initiative out of existence. A man who wrested power from our elected representatives and entrusted it to nine un-elected ermine clad judges, and celebrated friendships with the world’s sorriest collection of petty tyrants, thugs and communist dictators ever assembled, while shunning our traditional English and American democratic allies.
Mr. Trudeau famously said the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation, but presided over an explosion of the state to the point where it had business in every other room in your house. Hate an olive? One may not like olives, but they are harmless. The damage Trudeau did to our military, the RCMP and our economy will be a hundred year blight before and if it is corrected. I celebrated his death, cheering for cancer to make the man suffer slowly, and feeling nothing but revulsion for him and his dilletante idiot sons.
A man of your age should either do some research or not comment on matters of which you seem to have little knowledge.
Peter
After the pigs famous finger I got to give it back to him standing on the highway overpass just outside of Field BC at the first tunnel. It was a good feeling then and just as nice as I think about it now. Often wondered if he saw my brakeman mates and I return the gesture.
PET (as in lap dog?) must be a product of Canada’s “dumbed down” education system. This person quotes a dictionary meaning of “irony” but hasn’t a clue how to recognize it in real terms.
Listen up, PET: in the context you’ve chosen to use it, which you obviously misunderstand, irony means using words that mean the opposite of what is actually said. My admiration for trent is altogether genuine and my words stated that clearly. No irony there at all.
That Trudeau didn’t, and Brean and PET don’t appear to appreciate people like trent, who are the backbone of this nation, isn’t ironic either. It just shows what shallow, self-referential, arrogant fools they are.
Sorry about the possible hyperbole. (Look it up, lap dog.)
After the pigs famous finger I got to give it back to him standing on the highway overpass just outside of Field BC at the first tunnel. It was a good feeling then and just as nice now as I think about it now. Often wondered if he saw my brakeman mates and I return the gesture.
Being old enough to be able to say that I actually lived through and survived the PET disastrous period contrary to the writer still wet behind the ears. I have no idea if he is part of the Fascist-left or simply one of its useful idiots. However he is certainly a member of the Fascist-left agenda driven media, which disqualifies him from any reasonable debate or opinion.
Perhaps the worst thing is that these people are so out of touch with the Canadian people and with reality and yet they believe they have the right to lecture the same.
YEAH, Peter! Thanks for your powerful, intelligent comments to the little prig.
“PT was a brilliant speaker who intimidated people on both the right and left…..” Adrian Smits
That’s one view.
The truth is that PET lost more arguements than the ultra-rightwing facist Liberals and state corporatists that Trudeau led, like to admit.
When PET was losing an arguement and this happened often, he always retreated to calling the opposition unCanadian, anti-Canadian, anti-Quebec, anti-French, rednecks, cowboys, Indian fighters, etc, etc, etc.
He lived totally in his own little world of brute force and social regressiveness.
Google ‘Nesbitt-Larking Trudeau’ for Larking’s analysis of Trudeau’s immature behaviour.
I’ve just this minute read that the cows and church reference was meant to be satirical. (trent @ 11:16) I’m not clairvoyant, so how would I have known? (NB, lap dog: given trent’s sentiments, it’s actually ironic that he would do a send up of such estimable realities as farmers and church.)
But it’s clear that trent has the brains to disavow the despicable legacy of Trudeau.
My above comments about irony stand.
I wasn’t around during Turdeau’s reign, but my dad loathes him, and I was never a fan of him despite how much they gushed on about him and his “greatness”. His disrespect for our troops during world war II, his visits behind the Iron Curtain and his general contempt for democracy has only lowered my perception of him to about the same as that for pond scum.
Brean is a product of the Leftist cult that has permeated the entire education systems for the past three decades.
It’ll take some time to and something really major affecting their dream world to bring them into reality.
He’s a good example of a “twit” for sure, and has the nerve to be condescending. They do seem to talk down from a loftier perch.
Well written letters of substance, like those of “irwin daisy, Doug, WL Mackenzie Redux, sub-urban.ca, Neil, Peter”—thanks, guys!—are of great value: to the writers (among other things, putting one thoughts on paper is a fine way to expand one’s thinking), as well as to others with an interest in the topic. We all have different experiences, perspectives and areas of expertise.
I really appreciate reading the intelligent comments by others at SDA. They broaden both my knowledge and my perspective. Only a person who’s altogether satisfied with parochialism would make the kind of comment to which I’m responding. (Oh well, I suppose narrow minds will always be with us.)
The media of Canada failed to inform Canadians about the PET’s sordid ideaology and past. The Canadian Intelligence knew all about Turdo and published their findings – the MSM did not report these facts. PET was a cowardly piece of fluff – the media made him, true blue Canadians are tearing him down via blogs like this – Thankyou once again, Kate, for posting such a timely topic.
‘History will not be kind to PET, for Kate and her posters shall write it’ with apologies to Sir Winston Churchill.
To a curious observer;These people resent their messages to sda readers because most of us dont want to give a brainless twit like Mr.Bean,and the newspaper for whom he works,the satisfaction of us visiting their comment section.Besides,they conveyed our thoughts really well.We are not sheeples.
One of my favorite comments about PET came in an National Post article following his death.
The individual apparently knew Trudeau quite well, commenting “it took some time for us to realize there was less to him than that meets the eye.” It takes some people longer than others to recognize PET’s qualities.
A curious observer@2:38PM:
Your comment is interesting. The telling part of your post is “You’re sheeple. Whatever.”, indicating to me that you are no doubt a Trudeau lover – a left wing non thinker – upset by our views of PET.
Does the fact that we reposted our e-mails on SDA upset you, or more to the point, does it upset you to see that there are so many of us that do not share your perceived opinion of PET?
And why did you post your comment? Is that the manner in which you seek validation of your views? If sending letters “is inherently a waste of time” do you not feel that posting to a blog is the same waste of time? If so, why did you post here?
And to answer your question – I personally have no need for that recognition or stroking that you seem to feel we require. I was psychologically profiled a few years back for a position that required such testing (and passed with flying colours and accepted the employment offer that followed) – and the testing revealed that my need for such recognition – the need for approval by others – approached zero. Having read many of the posts of most of the others whom you reference in your note, I suspect they are in the same or a similar position.
As to why we sent chastising letters to Mr. Brean – unlike the “sheeple” you seem to think we are, we do not intend to let such comments go unchallenged. Were we “sheeple” we would have let it pass.
However, your post seems to be a cry in the night for some of the attention you accuse others of needing. There – now you have a moment of that attention from a commenter on SDA. Does that make you feel better now?
He was simply nothing but another useless frenchman,who never did a days work or useful thing in his life,besides fulfilling the definition of a near pedophile.
Pierre Trudeau, of course, inspires deep emotions, both positive and negative, and usually simplistically extreme. -Check
The haters tend to be rural Western right-wing ideologues who see in him everything they dislike about urban Eastern left-wingery. -Yup
And so Trudeau-hatred is rarely more than a niche emotion, a mass-produced populist scorn that looks ever more unsophisticated the more unyielding it gets, like hating olives. -You bet.
Unsophisticated, simplistically extreme right-wing ideologues,
27 yrs. old or not, I think the boy’s got sda pretty much nailed.
Manny
Yeppers…weez aint hip enuf to get the muzings of the great pet…..and that midle finger in prince jorge ment we are number wun….rite?
Syncro
a curious observer – would you have just accepted a statement that we did not require the validation? I think not. And one result of many in a profile does not “share with everyone here your detailed psychological make-up”. But I would be pleased to compare my entire profile to yours if you can find an independant and qualified third party to do so – and if you think you are up to it.
Yeah, you got it, Manny.
Now go fuck yourself
to “A curious observer”
Emails are posted here for the same reason that letters to the editor are posted in newspapers: for discussion.
Manny:
Sure lots of people who express love/hate for a politician are being simplistic in their judgement. Take the love on the left for Tommy Douglas as an example. Or Che Guevera. Or Al Gore. And the newest can-left love, none other than PET’s son.
But the important thing that you and this dogmatic columnist overlook is that a very strong case can be made the PET is well deserving of hatred from anyone who cares about this country. It is easy to label him the the worst PM ever just as we can easily name Hitler a murderous despot – the evidence is clear and irrefutable except for those on the lunatic fringe. To say that Hitler was such and that you hate him for his deeds doesn’t make you simplistic its just an easy – simple and correct opinion and feeling to have.
After trent exposed the satirical nature of his post, my response was simply, “But it’s clear that trent has the brains to disavow the despicable legacy of Trudeau.” I made no comment about where he comes from or what he does.
So, how could anyone possibly know whether “[I] still think that trent is a ‘salt of the earth’ type” or not?
Stick to the facts.
“Joseph Brean is 27 years old and was born in 1980. He’s not old enough to know about which he talks.”
Anyone who studies history (or paid attention in history class) is capable of liking or disliking Trudeau. Don’t be patronizing.
I’m young and I do not “hate” Trudeau but I have never had a shred of respect for the man and the damage he did to Canada.
BTW, I’m a big city, Eastern gal, born and bred, who’s never been taken in by the Trudeau worship that engulfed most of my university friends, who still vote NDP. I’ve never had any illusions that only “redneck yahoos” from Alberta can’t stand the jerk.
a curious observer – why are you afraid of seeing why you think as you do? Are you concerned that a look at your profile might reveal some “black holes” (what some psychologists call physcological weaknesses)?
My point is that you are trying to criticize people who are more capable of rational thought than are you.
Hmmm . . . I like olives too: even spicy ones. Also tapenade. Does that mean, ergo, that I must like Trudeau?
Sheesh: what simplistic, sophomor[on]ic thinking.
uh..sorry to say it, but most of you people are ideologues. An ideologue is someone who is too partisan to acknowledge that even the parties they despise introduce policy with merits from time to time. I haven’t once seen Kate give any credit to any party but the one’s she would vote for. This is probably the most overtly biased and partisan punditry I’ve ever read. Even John Gormley is capable of giving credit where its due.
I would probably never vote for Harper, but I don’t think everything he’s done is horrible for the country. I agree with some of his legislation or policies within it. In many of your world’s it seems to be more about your team winning, than the country winning. The real effects felt by the average Canadian when it comes down to whether the Liberals or Conservatives are in power are often relatively minor. Fiscal restraint, tax cuts, etc. are all good currency of the times in which we live. Even if the NDP were to form a government, it would never be politically expedient to run a deficit in this day and age. In fact they would probably introduce tax cuts of their own, albeit to a selective demographic I’m guessing. Case in point: Who was the first government in Canada to run a balanced budget after decades of deficits across the country? Answer: The Saskatchewan NDP. So many of you employ the word “socialist” to describe leftist governments in Canada, and all this does is demonstrate ignorance as to what the term actually means. Not even Sweden has a socialist government. When you have a capitalist market economy underpinning the functions within the state, you don’t have socialism. Far from it.
There are no radical parties in Canada in an absolute sense. Our voting system doesn’t allow for it. All parties have to offer broad appeal politics.
So I guess what I’m getting at is that being so overtly partisan is something I can’t understand. I have friends in all parties who are hacks like most of you people and all would swear to anyone that party x and party y are full of crooks and disingenuous liars. At the end of the day when you sit back and observe, you realize that no party is inherently evil, and just how hilarious it is to suggest something as ridiculous as that.
There are different philosophies out there, but beyond the partisan hackery that most politicians embody, a lot of them are fairly good, hard working people.
If you look at the practical effects of the policy implementations of government, in a non partisan world, the SDA cronies would herald some of the decisions by Chretien’s liberals or Sask’s former NDP government and give credit where its due, because is satisfies they philosophy, only it was implemented by a banner other than the party they regularly vote for. Both of them gutted a lot of government programs and spending; normally consistent with the desires of fiscal conservatives. Maybe your favourite political party would do this to a larger extent and in a faster manner, but does that polarize the voting choices as much as many here would have you believe? It shouldn’t.
The political tide of the day is for smaller, government employing tenets of the new public management approach that started in the 80’s and early 90’s. Any party you elect is going to tow this line, just to different degrees.
So here’s an appeal to some people here. Give credit where it’s due if you feel a party other than the one you vote for has done something right. I’ll start. I wouldn’t vote for Harper, but I was happy with the accountability act, I thought mandating a switch to energy efficient light bulbs was a good step. I like the idea of a “feebate/rebate” system for car purchases, although I think they could have done it a little better. I also don’t think the answer in Afghanistan is to just abruptly pull our troops out. While I think the results are probably mixed, a lot of Afghan citizens benefit from some of the increased security in the region, women especially. That said, I think the Taliban need to be engaged if at all possible. So, kudos the Conservatives in those areas.
Now it’s someone elses turn to say something nice about a party they normally don’t like (or even despise). Heh..I’m not trying to hold hands and sing Kumbaya here, just reduce the blatant and redundant partisanship that goes on around here.
I think the biggest difference between the attitudes towards Trudeau and Mulroney is the media.
The media, which is mostly liberal (this is a fact), tends to portray liberals more favourable than conservatives.
So, it is reasonable to conclude that this bias influences those who do not analyze the issues for themselves.
And additionally, the attitudes reported by the media are not necessarily reflective of the attitudes of the people, that Trudeau is not as loved as the media says, and that Mulroney is not as hated as the media claim.
Syncro, it ain’t about Trudeau, it’s about the reaction of most of those commenting on this thread. It demonstrates the kid has it right. Most of you are positively foaming at the mouth. What a laugh.
A curious observer:
Glad to see you have appointed yourself arbiter of discussion quality. A job well done.
Steve, I think you’re full of it. I don’t think Gormley is capable of giving credit where it is due.
And Neil has been tested and his need for approval is approaching absolute zero. Man, you couldn’t make this stuff up. Hilarious.
manny:
“it ain’t about Trudeau”
This thread is about Trudeau, did you not notice?
Please read the original posting.
No, sf, you are absolutely wrong. It isn’t patronization, it’s factual.
No one who didn’t live through the cold war and felt the fall of the Berlin Wall can understand the feelings of those who did from a “history book”.
History books can’t portray the absolute vile that Western Canadians (in general) felt for PE Turd, nor can they explain the hysteria from those same people during Trudeau-mania.
I don’t care how many books you’ve read, or how many economic policy positions you’ve studied.
Unless you watched the news the night PE Turd give the finger to protesting farmers you can’t understand what that meant. As my significant other explains it; “I was in Alberta when the NEP came down it was like a siege mentality went up. Listening to Lougheed on the radio talking about turning off the taps.”
History books can not express this and reading them will not pass it on. Sure, you can ‘like or dislike’ him, but you have no capacity to understand the absolute hate from those who lost their jobs, homes and more because of PETurds policies.
If I’m being patronizing it’s because you think you know everything.
Cheers,
lance
Isn’t he the “multiculturalism” guy?
Yeah, he surely was a blessing for Canada and the world…
Umm, Steve…if you could, please identify one of the policies that the Liberals have…I’m not aware of what they believe. They seem to twist in the wind whichever way it blows.
And an ideologue can be defined as “An advocate of a particular ideology, especially an official exponent of that ideology”…to that definition, you are partially correct. We do tend to be right-of-centre folks here and we advocate for our right-of-centre views…on a right-of-centre blog…d’uh! However, I am not aware of any of us being “official exponents”. If you were to actually pay attention to the comments, we have healthy debates within our ranks regarding the direction of the conservative movement…hardly what you would deem to be ideologically-driven.
Manny, don’t you ever get tired of being wrong? If you were to pay attention, there is a significant portion of SDA commenters who are easterners (and even Americans!). So, your “Check” was incorrect. I am another urban easterner who p!sses on PET’s grave (metaphorically speaking). The final straw for me was the SOB’s middle finger salute in BC (although, I thought it was Salmon Arm, not Prince George).
And finally, dear curious observer, how very condescending of you! Please, return the favour and invite us to your, oh-so-sophisticated blog (or favourite blog) so that we can curiously observe YOUR progressive intellect. Let me guess…Rabble?
Kate:
straw poll, “Would you prefer more bipartisan content on SDA?”
no.
“I think the biggest difference between the attitudes towards Trudeau and Mulroney is the”
simply that a lot of people call a spade a spade,whilst others have to run next door to find out what they susposed to think.
Is that idologically fancy enough for you?
It also good Idea to remember,out of the ketchup bottle comes ketchup,and out of quebec comes crooks.
The west are beginning to realize how great they have it,and now better learn how to keep it that way.
“Um, no, unless you think any of the follow comments inspired by reposted emails constitutes riveting discussion”
Almost as riveting as the overworked, half-clever, “um” usage. I suspect there’s a mental “whateverrrr” in there somwhere.
Hi Steve,
You obviously did not read most of the comments above your own. There is a difference between Libs and Cons. Cons don’t idolize Trudeau and Libs do.
Also I think you should check your definition of ideologue. From what my friends tell me it’s not about acceptance of other’s ideas but rather having a set of beliefs that are impractical and idealistic.
Not dressing as a German and terrorizing Jewish neighbourhoods… you could say that I’m ideologically against that. I can’t stop some idiots from doing it, but I wish somehow I could.
Not shutting down Alberta because Quebec is jealous. I’m an ideologue against that too.
Why don’t you tell us your thoughts on Mike Harris or Preston Manning? Then we’ll see who the ideologue is.
The truth about trudeau was well known before he won the leadership. The mlm refused to tell the truth about him. The cbc was full of a bunch of beaniack like reporters. If the net had been available then (algore, why did you take so long to invent it) he would never have been electedd PM. However, his desire to ruin Alberta didn’t turn out very good. With non liberal, non trudeau, non cbc thinking, we went out and did it our way. Just remember, that separtist feeling out here is just waiting to break out in full force, if dion and libs ever get back in power.
Many of the bad legislation we have is because libs caved into the ndp to stay in power.
“somwhere”
Sorry, somewhere.
lance,
Point taken. In my email to Bream, I said:
While I do not “hate” Trudeau, I consider him to have done more damage to Canada than any other Canadian, and I have not a shred of respect for him. Many others more directly and personally hurt by Trudeau have very good reason to hate him.
I was a young Liberal from 1966, card carrying until 1984. I met the man on four occasions.
After 1972 Trudeau could not win a seat west of Winnipeg South, and that was always as a result of fresh pork.
At his zenith (Trudeaumania- 1968) resulted in only 45.5% of the vote, and that was his highest total.
1972 was a Minority, 1979 he lost power.
In 1980 he beat the (useless) Clark over an 18½ ¢ gas price rise… and then raised gas even more than that.
He left his home province out of the Constitution.
He left us in deficits.
Liberals were excited to swamp the meetings to choose his replacement in 1984.
Trudeau did have charisma. For this young at the time guy his wife sure looked good (1973).
But Trudeau also made people feel that he thought he was better than the people, the party, and the press.
He was fortunate that the media loved selectively and unfairly denigrating Stanfield, and that the PCs ran an idiot after him.
Trudeau treated the Press like crap. They fawned all over him.
The country was in recession with high unemployment and he only cared about the constitution.
I certainly don’t hate the man, but this notion that his era was nirvana, is ridiculous.
Eeyore, the article said TEND to be rural Western right-wing ideologues. Tend to be, not exclusively are. Check?
Lance, you were watching the news when Trudeau gave the finger to “protesting farmers”? Didn’t happen. But you’re excused, being wet behind the ears in those days, or not old enough to know about which he talks.