" ... the Prime Minister was caught in a storm of controversy Wednesday afternoon when frustrations in the House of Commons saw Trudeau grabbing one lawmaker and then, accidentally elbowing another. The altercation occurred when members had gathered for a vote on a controversial assisted-dying bill. Trudeau, impatient to get the vote started, is seen on video striding over to Opposition whip Gordon Brown. He grabs Brown's arm to direct him to his seat. New Democrat Party (NDP) Parliament member Ruth Ellen Brosseau gets elbowed by Trudeau in the process." CNN
--------------
"What sort of man would elbow a woman!" Evidently Trudeau is that sort of man, and on the floor of the House of Commons as well. Trudeau became impatient with members not quick enough to do his will and waded into a group of them pushing and shoving a bit. This doesn't sound like the Canada depicted in John Candy's comic masterpiece, "Canadian Bacon."
Seriously, sort of, this is the kind of behavior to be expected in the 3rd World. The last time we had something vaguely like this happen in the US Congress was an incident involving Dick Cheney Senator Leahy. The "F" word was spoken in direct address.
Of course in the 19th Century there were various parliamentary skirmishes like the occasion in which Senator Charles Sumner was beaten nearly to death at his desk in the senate chamber. But then, perhaps he needed a good beating.
Poor Trudeau, he may have overestimated the potential power inherent in his position. His nice wife is meeting resistance in her desire to have a couple more flunkies around the Prime Ministerial Lodge or whatever it is called. How ungenerous! What is it called? pl
media ramps up gnat coverage. what about the assisted dying camel?
would it be out order to ask what's going on in Canada? I don't mean the brawl.
Posted by: rjj | 19 May 2016 at 09:23 AM
Seems pretty overblown. Isn't this the same country that gave us the manly sport of Hockey? If not, we southern neighbors can still think so. Sad to see that whiny androgeny is not limited to what's become of the states.
Posted by: tim s | 19 May 2016 at 09:37 AM
tim S
"Overblown?" You don't know enough Canadians. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 19 May 2016 at 09:38 AM
Parliamentary pugilism is hardly new.
Distance between government and opposition benches in the British House of Commons is the length of two rapier blades plus six inches.
Posted by: johnf | 19 May 2016 at 09:45 AM
Well, the NDP ‘blockers’ who, swaying from side to side, were preventing opposition whip (Conservative MP) Gord Brown from moving up the aisle. From what I saw on TV last night, the swaying trio were Tom Mulcair (the leader of the NDP), David Christopherson and the ‘injured’ Ruth Ellen Brosseau.
Though I don't agree with what Trudeau did as far as interfering in the procedure (the Speaker should have done his job at that point) and elbowing Brosseau by accident, the NDP believes that they are still the opposition party and not number 3.
Posted by: The Beaver | 19 May 2016 at 09:57 AM
@What is it called?
sounds like a Quondam Darling throwing a tantrum.
Posted by: rjj | 19 May 2016 at 10:12 AM
Col.,
"Poor Trudeau, he may have overestimated the potential power inherent in his position."
Do you mean he is not the "Commander in Chief" of Canadians? It almost looks like he's been taking lessons in legislative leadership from Governor McAuliffe. There have to be better examples of Canadian leadership available as role models.
Posted by: Fred | 19 May 2016 at 10:13 AM
It now seems that there are too many terror and terrorism incidents associated around France or French, one wonders why French speaking countries are more in center of it and not the english or german speaking countries. I think at this time french security is easier to compromise.
Posted by: kooshy | 19 May 2016 at 10:25 AM
Colonel, IMO, our Borgistas in south of border, they don't like this new Canadian PM.
Posted by: kooshy | 19 May 2016 at 10:28 AM
Col: Here's a story on the Cheney-Leahy spat: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/24/cheney.leahy/
Posted by: Matthew | 19 May 2016 at 10:30 AM
What about the legislation? Seems a little too complicated and too um, vital to be ramjacked. Am being lazy but can anybody provide a quick summary?
Posted by: rjj | 19 May 2016 at 12:29 PM
Kooshy,
Only because he's not pro-Israel enough. Otherwise he's a perfect avatar for the globalism types. Sold off the gold reserves, demanded more immigration, and now he's investing Canada's fund into "low income housing" in Mumbai.
Posted by: Tyler | 19 May 2016 at 12:49 PM
Tyler
Interesting thing that the Macau casino man is backing Trump. A suspicious man might guess that this is to balance their preference for HC. A fall back position. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 19 May 2016 at 12:55 PM
Tyler,
Surely you don't expect the Canadian Prime Minister to invest Canadian pension funds in Canada to create jobs for Canadians and returns on investment for other Canadians?
Posted by: Fred | 19 May 2016 at 01:04 PM
it could be about Gingrich. Adelson gave him $50 million last election. The quid pro quo would be that Gingrich as VP is an ironclad guarantee that Israel will not be hurt by a Trump administration.
Posted by: WILL | 19 May 2016 at 01:25 PM
Far be it from me to be suspicious.
However, I have noticed that our own ‘Israeli lobby’ has been very happy to identify its fortunes – and by extension, those of Jews in Britain – with the Blairites in the Labour Party, and the ‘modernisers’ in the Tory Party.
(It has been reliably reported that Cameron and Osborne refer to Blair as ‘the master’.)
That for varying reasons, both grassroots activists in the Labour Party, and also very much of its traditional working class constituency, hate Blair seems to have escaped them.
(I think it was ‘Harry’ who suggested that most Labour activists would like to see him hanged – he can correct me if, if as is not unlikely, I have misremembered. My own view is that this is somewhat over the top – in general, a long custodial sentence would be regarded as adequate.)
Likewise, the fact that a very large section of the Tory ‘grassroots’ deeply distrust Cameron and Osborne appears to have escaped most of those in our ‘Israeli lobby’. If you look at comments on the ‘Express’ site, you will find ample references to ‘CaMoron.’
A major difference between the United States and Britain is that in your country the alliance between Zionists and Evangelical Christians is very much more significant.
(Here, not only are the Evangelicals much less important – the ‘cult of the Shoah’ is fading with them, as with the rest of us. On this, I speak of what I know, having all kinds of Christian denominations among my family and friends.)
My own view has long been that, if the ‘Anti-Defamation-League’ had any brains, they would long ago have done something about Adelson, given that he manages to incarnate in a single figure a good few of the most traditional anti-Semitic stereotypes.
However, he is not entirely stupid, and his support for Trump may indeed reflect a kind of belated attack of ‘horse sense’.
Posted by: David Habakkuk | 19 May 2016 at 01:28 PM
Sir,
Absolutely. I think they know that to an extent the "gig" is up and they are going to kiss the ring.
Posted by: Tyler | 19 May 2016 at 01:43 PM
Fred,
I'm one of those crazy types who believes countries are formed for the prosperity of their citizens and progeny vs. being a bazaar & spending their blood and treasure on the 3rd World.
Posted by: Tyler | 19 May 2016 at 01:45 PM
Sir
Trump needs to raise over a billion dollars to compete with the big bucks Hillary and her Super PACs are going to use to attack him. So, he's happy to raise it from anyone willing to write a big check. He's hired a Vampire Squid man to raise the big bucks. Does that mean he's gonna be in the pocket of the Squid? I don't think even he knows yet.
The Ziocons need a little hedge in case Trump comes through. But, their first choice is the Borg Queen as this Times story notes.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/07/06/opinion/sunday/are-neocons-getting-ready-to-ally-with-hillary-clinton.html?referer=%3Ca%20href=
The question is will Trump continue his pander or mock the Ziocon crew. His AIPAC shtick was epic pander but as he readily agrees his whole campaign is an act. I think at this point it is hard to know what he'll do if and when he gets to the Oval Office. But...that is the risk those sick and tired of the Borgistas are willing to take.
Posted by: Jack | 19 May 2016 at 04:07 PM
David H. sometime when there is an open thread would you explain the BBC Board redo?
Saw Armando Iannuci's MacTaggart Lecture. Sounded as if BBC was being run more and more like the old Hollywood studio system: from on high with the "talent" as providers of specified content.
Between the Borg lamprey and the changing of the generations it isn't what it was - will this board change accelerate its decline?
Posted by: rjj | 19 May 2016 at 05:29 PM
He's only not pro-Israel in comparison to Harper. But you can't be pro-Israel enough.
Posted by: Walker | 19 May 2016 at 06:23 PM
Walker
If you mean Webb IMO his American nationalist and marine qualities would erase an Israeli bias. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 19 May 2016 at 06:35 PM
Trudeau is just a frustrated hockey player-- and angry that no Canadian teams made the Stanley Cup playoffs.
Posted by: oofda | 19 May 2016 at 06:56 PM
Colonel Lang,
A running-mate Webb would make a Trump ticket rather more attractive to me. A running-mate Gingrich would make a Trump ticket rather less attractive to me.
I really truly hope that Trump does Not not NOT pick a brand-name Republican for his running mate. EsPECially not something like Gingrich or Christie or some such thing. (I can already predict he won't pick Cruz because he said his VP would have to be somebody liked by the Senators and Representatives to help get things done legislatively. And Cruz is not liked by any Senator or any Representative. So if Trump remembers what he said about picking a VP running-mate who is "liked", he won't pick Cruz).
Posted by: different clue | 19 May 2016 at 07:19 PM
My own view has long been that, if the ‘Anti-Defamation-League’ had any brains, they would long ago have done something about Adelson, given that he manages to incarnate in a single figure a good few of the most traditional anti-Semitic stereotypes.
that is a feature - keeps them in business. Sanders winning big in rural areas of almost every state does not advance their cause.
Posted by: rjj | 19 May 2016 at 07:33 PM