noahbody Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 As should Liberal MP Karen Redmond who jumped on the bandwagon without seeing anything.It appears that Moore's reputation as a good guy on the Hill helped him in this case. And they should both have to give lap dances to Peter Milliken. Quote
capricorn Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 As should Liberal MP Karen Redmond who jumped on the bandwagon without seeing anything. Really, I was surprised Redmond jumped in on this. I would have expected her to be more level headed. She fooled me. I agree she should also apologize for aping an air head. Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
capricorn Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 And they should both have to give lap dances to Peter Milliken. That would give him reason to raise a point of privilege. Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
myata Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 (edited) There're so many sites with scantily clad figures these days, one needs to navigate like on a mine field not to hit one. Can she be sure it wasn't Britney Spears e.g.? Her variosly clad pictures can be found on all major info sites like MSN, Yahoo, etc... Edited December 6, 2007 by myata Quote If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant
myata Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 Not to say, that is, that Harper, with his strong moral socially conservative principles, shouldn't be concerned Quote If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant
Michael Bluth Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 Not to say, that is, that Harper, with his strong moral socially conservative principles, shouldn't be concerned Porn! On their screens! In the House of Commons! We aren't making this up. Ok, maybe we are.... Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Wild Bill Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 And they always, always feel they have the right obligation to scold people for their behaviour.My god, what a terribly unfun place Canada would be with the NDP in charge. Now there's an idea for a thread! "If The NDP Were In Charge..."! We could adapt all sorts of old jokes, like the one about how the Witnesses banned sex standing up 'cuz it might lead to dancing! Thinking about that female NDP MP and how the whole thing fizzled in her face got me thinking about an old Britcom called "Rumpole of the Bailey". It was about an old British barrister who bumbled through his court cases yet somehow usually won. The key point was how he was always sneaking a shot of whiskey or some food treat away from the eyes of his shrewish wife, who was constantly bossing him around and telling him what to do. "for his own good!". He called her "SWEBO", for "She Who must Be Obeyed!" There's just something about socialists that wants to paint the whole world battleship gray... Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Topaz Posted December 6, 2007 Author Report Posted December 6, 2007 So IF he was looking at his girlfriend and she was wearing a bikini, why did he lie? Why didn't HE clear it all up IF that is what he was looking at?? Quote
M.Dancer Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 (edited) It certainly is less identifiable as sexism than some posters commentary on Ruby Dhalla was in these forums. If I was an MP, I would ensure I was not in her party so that I could sit opposite of her and gaze longingly at her...... Edited December 6, 2007 by M.Dancer Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Michael Bluth Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 So IF he was looking at his girlfriend and she was wearing a bikini, why did he lie? Why didn't HE clear it all up IF that is what he was looking at?? It was cleared up within the day the accusation was made. Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Shakeyhands Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 one way or the other it was inappropriate to do in the house, while is session... Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
JerrySeinfeld Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 Did anyone see how this ditzy NDP broad tried to tie a "photo of a scantily clad woman" (lol) to the Montreal massacre? What fucking planet are these people living on. The Montreal massacre was perpetrated by Marc Lepine, formerly Gamil Rodrique Gharbi, son of a muslim wife beater. Canadian men are far from the knuckle-dragging woman killing beasts we're all made to feel guilty about each december 6. Rather they're wuss-bags who sat and did nothing while their women were being shot to death by the son of an algerian muslim wife beater. Very good microcosm of what some Canadians would have us do in Afghanistan (ie. nothing). Quote
Michael Bluth Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 What fucking planet are these people living on. Well said. Mathyssen was digging herself quite a hole before she saw how ridiculous her actions were. From Today's Star... She said no one else saw the image. When Moore noticed her whispering about it to a colleague, Mathyssen said he closed the window and she saw what appeared to be 16 to 20 similar pictures in the file. She sits 3 rows behind Moore and four seats over. Is it plausible she saw the picture from that far away on what looked to be a 17" or 19"? Sort of. Is it plausible she saw 16 to 20 "similar pictures" from that far away? Come on. Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Topaz Posted December 6, 2007 Author Report Posted December 6, 2007 Well said. Mathyssen was digging herself quite a hole before she saw how ridiculous her actions were. From Today's Star...She sits 3 rows behind Moore and four seats over. Is it plausible she saw the picture from that far away on what looked to be a 17" or 19"? Sort of. Is it plausible she saw 16 to 20 "similar pictures" from that far away? Come on. Another way to settle this is to have the media take a picture of his grilfriend sometime and then see if it could have been her on the screen. Quote
Fortunata Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 She sits 3 rows behind Moore and four seats over. Is it plausible she saw the picture from that far away on what looked to be a 17" or 19"? Sort of. Is it plausible she saw 16 to 20 "similar pictures" from that far away? Come on. In the news they showed Moore speaking and you could easily see Mathyssen sitting right in the line of sight. As far as all this goes, I can't see why Mathyssen would be making up something; clearly what she saw offended her. How would she know it was a girlfriend and how would the people in the gallery know it was a girlfriend? I have to question Moore's common sense in having a picture of his girlfriend, scantily clad, up for all to see. It doesn't have to be a scantily clad stranger on a screen to be seen as inappropriate. Quote
Michael Bluth Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 As far as all this goes, I can't see why Mathyssen would be making up something; clearly what she saw offended her. Nobody is accusing her of making anything up. She is guilty of over-reacting and not dealing with the issue correctly. She should have spoken to Moore and explained her feelings. Quietly and professionally. Instead she tried to score political points without having the full facts. Had she handled it properly the CBC wouldn't have had cause to scold her on national TV. Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Wild Bill Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 So IF he was looking at his girlfriend and she was wearing a bikini, why did he lie? Why didn't HE clear it all up IF that is what he was looking at?? Who said anything about a bikini? The report was "scantily clad" which could have meant anything short of a burka. This is how smears always work. You say something that's a total stretch but because there are a lot of people who don't like your target anyway when you're proven wrong in your accusation it doesn't just stop. The folks who WANT to believe the worst about your target will keep twisting possibilities, trying to come up with one that will stick. The woman was dead wrong and was forced to apologize. Get over it and move on. Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Fortunata Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 Who said anything about a bikini? The report was "scantily clad" which could have meant anything short of a burka.This is how smears always work. You say something that's a total stretch but because there are a lot of people who don't like your target anyway when you're proven wrong in your accusation it doesn't just stop. The folks who WANT to believe the worst about your target will keep twisting possibilities, trying to come up with one that will stick. The woman was dead wrong and was forced to apologize. Get over it and move on. I hardly think a fully dressed image would have provoked her bringing up something that clearly she thought was inappropriate. I would like to what the girlfriend thinks having her scantily clad image up in the HoC for all and sundry to gaze upon. As I said, it doesn't matter if it is a girlfriend or a stranger, there are somethings better kept for private viewing. Quote
M.Dancer Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 When an NDPer of the wymynish persuasion says scantily clad she means that the wymyn were not wearing sleaveless lumberjack jackets, nor were the size 18 jeans (Denver Hayes) rolled at the cuffs so the the Doc Martin's could be shown to the best advantage..... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
M.Dancer Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 I hardly think a fully dressed image would have provoked her bringing up something that clearly she thought was inappropriate. I would like to what the girlfriend thinks having her scantily clad image up in the HoC for all and sundry to gaze upon. As I said, it doesn't matter if it is a girlfriend or a stranger, there are somethings better kept for private viewing. It wouldn't the first time the NDP have lied in order to smear the reputation of a rival. Although it might be the first time they apologized with being ordered to by the court. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Shakeyhands Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 ...wymynish .....wymyn Now that is funny. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Shakeyhands Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 Nobody is accusing her of making anything up.She is guilty of over-reacting and not dealing with the issue correctly. She should have spoken to Moore and explained her feelings. Quietly and professionally. Instead she tried to score political points without having the full facts. Had she handled it properly the CBC wouldn't have had cause to scold her on national TV. Mmmmmmmm...not sure on that one. If I was looking at something inappropriate in the work place my manager would hear about it, there would be no quiet conversations. and as to if it was his scantily clad girlfriend, his mother or a chick from Hangers'R' Us, its still inappropriate no matter. Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Michael Bluth Posted December 6, 2007 Report Posted December 6, 2007 If I was looking at something inappropriate in the work place my manager would hear about it, there would be no quiet conversations. and as to if it was his scantily clad girlfriend, his mother or a chick from Hangers'R' Us, its still inappropriate no matter. That sucks for your co-workers. A quiet conversation on a first offence is the correct course of action. The pictures haven't been publicly released, so judging them as "inappropriate no matter" is just weak. They clearly were inocuous enough that Mathyssen backed down and apologized. Good on you for keeping an open mind though. Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Topaz Posted December 7, 2007 Author Report Posted December 7, 2007 Who said anything about a bikini? The report was "scantily clad" which could have meant anything short of a burka.This is how smears always work. You say something that's a total stretch but because there are a lot of people who don't like your target anyway when you're proven wrong in your accusation it doesn't just stop. The folks who WANT to believe the worst about your target will keep twisting possibilities, trying to come up with one that will stick. The woman was dead wrong and was forced to apologize. Get over it and move on. Duffy said he was looking at his girlfriend in a bikini and what was the big deal. Quote
Fortunata Posted December 7, 2007 Report Posted December 7, 2007 Duffy said he was looking at his girlfriend in a bikini and what was the big deal. If you notice Duffy is turning out to be quite the con cheerleader, from telling Nicholson(?) what a good long friend he's been and he's (Duffy) sure he'll do a good job, to criticizing viewers for complaining about the treatment of Schreiber when his pants fell down, to this. I'm not sure who he is trying to emulate from down south but, as on other procedures that ctv has come up with, it's a copy. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.