Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      


  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 9428
Reputation: 306.8Reputation: 306.8
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:16 am    Post subject: Trudeau to veterans your asking for too much Reply with quote

( trudeau has told veterans that there asking for more than Canada can give right now but he had lots of money for Khadr and others when they came calling )


John Ivison: Trudeau is in a fight he can't win with veterans, and his frustration shows

Trudeau was elected on a platform that raised expectations to infinity. To Blaszczyk, even the Tories look good right now. ‘At least we weren’t given false promises’



Brock Blaszczyk, seen here in Afghanistan in 2010, told Justin Trudeau last week: “I was prepared to be killed in action. What I wasn’t prepared for, Mr. Prime Minister, was Canada turning its back on me.”


John Ivison


February 5, 2018
6:53 PM EST

Filed under
Full Comment



You have to be pretty tone-deaf to tell a man who lost a leg in Afghanistan that the government is fighting veterans groups in courts “because they’re asking for more than we’re able to give right now.”

Yet that’s exactly what the prime minister did at a town-hall in Edmonton last Thursday — a gaffe that has gone viral on social media and infuriated veterans.

Brock Blaszczyk stood to ask Justin Trudeau a question, with his prosthetic leg and medals in clear view. He was a corporal in the Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry, who lost a leg to a road-side bomb in Afghanistan in 2009.

He asked Trudeau why his government is fighting a legal battle with veterans (the Equitas class-action lawsuit), even though the Liberal election platform said “no veteran will be forced to fight their own government for the support and compensation they have earned.”

Further, he complained he was not eligible for the new lifetime pension option, yet the Liberals have found money to pay for the re-integration of ISIL fighters and the $10.5-million compensation payment for Omar Khadr.


“What veterans are you talking about — those fighting for the freedoms and values you so proudly boast about, or those fighting against?” he said. “I was prepared to be killed in action. What I wasn’t prepared for, Mr. Prime Minister, was Canada turning its back on me.”


It was more devastating than anything Trudeau has faced in the House of Commons, by several degrees.

“Thank you, sir, for your passion and strength, and your justifiable frustration and anger,” the prime minister replied courteously. But then it seemed as if his frustration got the better of him — he shot back with the line about veterans asking for more than the government can afford to give.

The crowd started booing and the Teflon Prime Minister was in trouble.

“Hang on … you’re asking for honest answers,” he pleaded in vain. He tried to explain what he meant but, as any good politician knows, when you’re explaining, you’re losing.

“It was pretty disappointing,” said Blaszczyk in an interview. “He said we were asking too much but, from the personal side of things, I felt like saying ‘what did you ask from me?’”

The Conservatives have labelled the exchange “shameful” and “reprehensible.” They’ve released an ad that overlays the footage with examples of wasteful government spending — Omar Khadr’s settlement ($10.5 million); Trudeau’s vacation ($215,000); the cover artwork for the budget ($212,000); Liberal staff moving expenses ($220,000).

Yet the prime minister has grounds for frustration on this file.

Since taking office, the Liberals have pledged an additional $10 billion for veterans — a huge investment in financial support that the government says should leave most soldiers better off


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks at a town hall meeting in Edmonton on Feb. 1, 2018. Jason Franson/The Canadian Press

In future, an amputee like Blaszczyk might expect to benefit from three separate payments — two of them tax-free and index-linked. From April 2019, there will be a pain and suffering award available as a lump sum or lifetime pension, delivering a maximum of $1,150 a month. On top of that, there is another disability award for more severely injured veterans, again as a lump sum or lifetime pension, up to $1,500 a month. The third component is an income replacement benefit, which is taxable, based on 90 per cent of the veteran’s previous salary, with a one-per-cent escalator over inflation.

However, since the government was keen not to create a disincentive to work, it also involves independent testing on the ability to work and a clawback once the veteran earns $20,000 in income.

Blaszczyk said he has had a total of $320,000 in lump-sum compensation for his injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder. But he does not know how much ongoing funding he will be entitled to, in part because he works, which will affect income replacement payments.

What is clear is the level of mistrust and confusion between veterans and the government — the system is insanely complicated and soldiers are wary of bureaucrats seeking reasons to disqualify or downgrade allowances.

Blaszczyk said he was expecting $80,000 from the enriched Liberal formula but received half that, because the maximum amount was available only to double amputees. (He is considered 100-per-cent disabled by Veterans Affairs and has 58-per-cent soft tissue loss and 88-per-cent nerve damage in his remaining leg.)

It remains one of the most challenging files in government, as the Conservatives well know, and they should be wary about throwing stones.

It wasn’t so long ago that Julian Fantino stormed out of a meeting with veterans after being told he was talking “hogwash” — causing a rupture that helped sweep the Liberals to victory.

New Veterans Affairs Minister Seamus O’Regan accused the Conservatives of having developed “amnesia” over their own policy failures.

In truth, there are no gods and precious few heroes on the veterans file — beyond men like Braszczyk. Both Conservative and Liberal governments have been defendants in the Equitas case, in which Ottawa maintains it has no legal obligation to its ex-soldiers.

Trudeau may well be frustrated that his government is getting no respect for all its efforts at improving the quality of life for veterans. But he was elected on a platform that raised expectations to infinity and beyond. Former Conservative minister Erin O’Toole was right when he said Trudeau either “didn’t cost, understand or care” about what he was promising, in order to secure the veterans’ vote.

To Blaszczyk, even the Tories look good right now. “At least we weren’t given false promises,” he said


http://nationalpost.com/opinio.....tion-shows
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 9428
Reputation: 306.8Reputation: 306.8
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I honestly doubt this was a true "gaffe " trudeau would of been fully aware that at a town hall in Edmonton he could of got a question about the military or veterans as there is a huge military base just outside of Edmonton

his initial statement was clearly something he had prepared in advance if he got such a question , this was a line the liberals though they could get away with using until they realised just how offended the veterans were

no one even seems to remember exactly what they promised to veterans back in 2015 but its clear whatever was in there platform wasn't something they had much interest in actually doing , just another promise made simply to make sure the liberals won the election and won a majority
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6197
Reputation: 294.9
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The rest of the world is finding out about Justin-the-lesser Trudeau.

Quote:
How dare you kill off mankind, Mr Trudeau, you spineless virtue-signalling excuse for a feminist
By Piers Morgan for MailOnline

PUBLISHED: 11:48 EST, 6 February 2018 | UPDATED: 11:51 EST, 6 February 2018

Mankind ended last night.

I know, I know, you probably didn't realize.

But it happened.

A world leader publicly pronounced it dead.

Yes, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau killed off 'mankind' because he finds the word offensive.

I'm not kidding. I wish I were.

There's always a moment in every movement when someone tries so hard to be a part of it that they make a complete and utter politically correct plonker* of themselves.

In the new wave of modern feminism, the list of contenders for the coveted title of Chief PC Plonker is long and distinguished.

But now a clear winner has emerged in the form of Trudeau, the handsome young politician publicly drooled over by many of the same women who claim to find male objectification of female flesh so demeaning.

Trudeau - who is photographed topless far too often for it to be accident - knows his fanbase and thinks he knows what they want to hear.

Amid the #MeToo and #TimesUp firestorm of the past few months, he's been biding his time, waiting for the perfect occasion to throw his virtue-signalling voice behind the feminist cause.

It finally came last Friday night when he addressed students in a Q&A at MacEwan University in Edmonton.

In video footage just released, a young woman from the World Mission of God, a non-denominational church guided by the ideals of 'God the Mother', stood up to ask him a question.

'We came here today,' she began, 'to ask you to look into the policies that religious charitable organisations have in our legislation so it can also be changed because maternal love is the love that's going to change the future of mankind….'

On hearing that last word, shirt-sleeved Trudeau recoiled like he'd been shot by a crossbow and instantly raised his left arm in indignant angst.

'We like to see 'peoplekind',' he declared, rudely interrupting the woman and flapping the same arm around aggressively, 'not necessarily mankind. It's more inclusive.'

'There we go!' she cried, excitedly. 'Exactly!'

The crowd erupted with cheers and applause. Or rather, the other women in the crowd did.

Most of the men just looked bemused and stayed silent.

'We can all learn from each other!' Trudeau added, milking his audience like a greedy dairy farmer.

I've watched the video a few times now and it gets worse with every viewing.

Trudeau comes over as the worst kind of hectoring, bully pulpit smart-a**; dripping with virtuous self-aggrandizing sanctimony. [....]
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....z56MHkFck1


The only good thing is when the rest of the world starts laughing at us, we straighten up. This is probably worth one Rolling Stone cover if it gets around.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1

  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Trudeau to veterans your asking for too much

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB