Tory MP claims his fingernails are clean

peter_puck · April 4, 2008

Great. Just great. Good to see all of us Conservatives can still get dragged through the mud because of something one insignificant person said 16 years ago. No matter what we do or say we are always shackled to the perception that all Conservatives are like that.

This happens because there is a very small, but real, minority of these people in the Conservative party and conservative movement. When someone says something REALLY stooopid, it drowns out the more sane voices.

We need to move beyond not saying things like that to not tolerating them. Years ago it worked with the racists, now we need to apply that to the homopobs as well.

I am not suprised that the guy said what he said, what is shocking is that he felt free to say it. I know lots of conservatives and I don't know one who would laugh at a joke that involved the "n" word. We need to apply the same concept of shame to the jerks like him.

peter_puck · April 4, 2008

I don't want to make excuses for the guy but Geez, 40 years old and said something stupid with a bottle of beer in his hand, how unusual. You obviously don't get out much.

I have gotten very drunk, but I have never started to find men attractive. The moral here ? Drunk or not, I am what I am, a hetrosexual male. Drunk or not, he is what he is, a homophobic bigot.

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

Political correctness is out of control. We now judge people according to some kind of strange code based on their words and not their deeds.

Do you know that his deeds reflect a tolerance we don't see in his words?

I can say I'm surprised that many on the right wing are coming to the man's defence. Had he said something about Jews or French Canadians though, he might be tossed out of caucus.

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

Nice to see that people still have an emotional reaction. This tape is 16 years old, and until we see it how do we know what the context is, it could be one of those tapes taken at a roast night, we just don't know.

Have you seen the tape now on the news? Does it look like a roast? If he said the same thing about Jews, would you be making the argument that the tape was 16 years old?

Edited April 4, 2008 by jdobbin

Alta4ever · April 4, 2008

Have you seen the tape now on the news? Does it look like a roast? If he said the same thing about Jews, would you be making the argument that the tape was 16 years old?

No i haven't seen it yet, the 10:00 news is about to come on.

August1991 · April 4, 2008

Never had that problem or never regretted anything I ever said. I was brought up to believe in the good nature of every human being and colour or race never entered my mind.....except perhaps on "The Jeffersons" which I always had a laugh at Red Foxx over his old age perspective.....

So, you're holier than the Pope.

In fact, political correctness finds its roots in Protestant Calvinism. Political correctness is just another way for some people to feel morally superiors to others. English Canadians have always had a penchant for smugness.

And now the whitewashing comes out....
Tories stand by MP Lukiwski after anti-gay remarks

Before we know it Harper will try to spin Lukiwski into a hero and the NDP the evil villains.......

Dobbin will like this anecdote. Eugene Whelan once made a comment about Africans, hats and the sun. Trudeau came to his defence.

Here's how wikipedia describes the incident:

He became a well known figure due to his plain-spokenness (which occasionally got him in trouble) and his green stetson hat.

Plain spokenness. Right. That makes Eugene Whelan sound like Harry Truman.

----

In politics, anything goes. If Clinton or McCain can defeat Obama because of remarks of a pastor, then so be it. I just think that distinguishing bad and good politicians according to some strange code of politically correct terms is bound to fail in the long run. First, we want politicians who perform well - not necessarily speak well. Second, smart politicians will just learn the lingo.

Political correctness is a feature of the Left: all symbol, no substance.

Edited April 4, 2008 by August1991

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

In fact, political correctness finds its roots in Protestant Calvinism. Political correctness is just another way for some people to feel morally superiors to others. English Canadians have always had a penchant for smugness.

And French Canadians have been know for their tolerance?

Dobbin will like this anecdote. Eugene Whelan once made a comment about Africans, hats and the sun. Trudeau came to his defence.

Do you believe that Whelan was intolerant or ignorant?

I believe he should have been tossed years earlier from his job. I don't think he was competent and I don't think the department of agriculture benefited from his years in office.

I personally think his remarks were ignorant rather than intolerant. However, Trudeau should have taken the opportunity to remove him from office and replaced him with someone else.

The right wing thinks if they call something politically correct often enough that people will forget gay bashing remarks.

Edited April 4, 2008 by jdobbin

Wilber · April 4, 2008

I have gotten very drunk, but I have never started to find men attractive. The moral here ? Drunk or not, I am what I am, a hetrosexual male. Drunk or not, he is what he is, a homophobic bigot.

He may very well be but I have also heard people say some pretty outlandish things under the influence. It can depend on the audience and whether the intent is to outrage or impress. It would be nice to see the whole tape.

capricorn · April 4, 2008

I don't give a rats ass about what Lukiwski said 16 years ago. But, IMO he has to go. Simply put, he is a victim of the worst kind of political sleaze and opportunism. His resignation would subtract one thing the opposition could use to try to hang the Conservatives with in the next election.

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

I don't give a rats ass about what Lukiwski said 16 years ago. But, IMO he has to go. His resignation would subtract one thing the opposition could use to try to hang the Conservatives with in the next election.

The opposition might be wiser to focus on actual actions and not mere words. I'd rather they reminded Canadians that a mere four years ago Opposition Leader Harper and every single MP in his party voted against making it a hate crime to promote or advocate the killing of gays and lesbians. The legislation passed thanks to the Bloc, NDP and Liberals.

Subsequently, Opposition Leader Harper attempted to prevent lesbians from obtaining Canadian legal rights to marry and as Prime Minister, he attempted, in December 2006, to take away their legal right to marry.

Because he doesn't yet have a majority, he was on the losing side in each of these actions.

Actions speak louder than words.

FTA Lawyer · April 4, 2008

I do not support what this guy said, but before this story broke I never knew he existed. I am certainly not prepared to define a man I know nothing about entirely on the basis of a mistake he made 16 years ago.

That would be the true definition of intolerance if you ask me.

I grew up in small-town Alberta, come from a red-neck farming family and played in a rough junior hockey league up to age 21. I've said some absolutely revolting things about other groups that I would now have a tough time actually admitting that I said them. My mother would be devastated to know some of the things that have come out of my mouth in the past.

If someone produced a tape of me in one of my most shameful moments, I would have a tough time convincing people who didn't know me that the words of times past are not who I am today.

But that wouldn't mean I am a homophobic racist bigot just because I might once have said some things a homophobic racist bigot might say.

That all being said, I'm not sure that an elected official has the luxury of just saying "I wish I could take those words back..." I'm not convinced he needs to resign or be booted from his party post, but I'd like to see something more than just a predictable apology.

FTA

Alta4ever · April 4, 2008

The opposition might be wiser to focus on actual actions and not mere words. I'd rather they reminded Canadians that a mere four years ago Opposition Leader Harper and every single MP in his party voted against making it a hate crime to promote or advocate the killing of gays and lesbians. The legislation passed thanks to the Bloc, NDP and Liberals.
Subsequently, Opposition Leader Harper attempted to prevent lesbians from obtaining Canadian legal rights to marry and as Prime Minister, he attempted, in December 2006, to take away their legal right to marry.

Because he doesn't yet have a majority, he was on the losing side in each of these actions.

Actions speak louder than words.

Oh if we are focusing actions of the past, lets look at the past of the NDP Golden boy Tommy Douglas, what was he advocating in his early political career, eugenics, forced serilization among other this where is the NDP apology?

Edited April 4, 2008 by Alta4ever

jbg · April 4, 2008

I do not support what this guy said, but before this story broke I never knew he existed. I am certainly not prepared to define a man I know nothing about entirely on the basis of a mistake he made 16 years ago.

Though I am not a fan of political correctness it does at least beget an apology.

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

The opposition might be wiser to focus on actual actions and not mere words. I'd rather they reminded Canadians that a mere four years ago Opposition Leader Harper and every single MP in his party voted against making it a hate crime to promote or advocate the killing of gays and lesbians. The legislation passed thanks to the Bloc, NDP and Liberals.
Subsequently, Opposition Leader Harper attempted to prevent lesbians from obtaining Canadian legal rights to marry and as Prime Minister, he attempted, in December 2006, to take away their legal right to marry.

Because he doesn't yet have a majority, he was on the losing side in each of these actions.

Actions speak louder than words.

I think you have it nailed. There seems to be a lot of anger about this being an attempt to smear the Tories over long ago made remarks. However, the fact is that the right wing has had very little tolerance of gays and lesbians and that continues to this day.

Alta4ever · April 4, 2008

I think you have it nailed. There seems to be a lot of anger about this being an attempt to smear the Tories over long ago made remarks. However, the fact is that the right wing has had very little tolerance of gays and lesbians and that continues to this day.

Bull :angry:

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

Oh if we are focusing actions of the past, lets look at the past of the NDP Golden boy Tommy Douglas, what was he advocating in his early political career, eugenics, forced serilization among other this where is the NDP apology?

Tommy Douglas advocated these views in 1933. After a trip to Nazi Germany in 1938, he rejected his former views on eugenics.

If Harper now favours C-250 and lesbians marrying, he's been very quiet about it.

Then again, he's been very quiet about the religious motives on which some of his actions are based:

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/st...96-76f3db32808e

August1991 · April 4, 2008

The opposition might be wiser to focus on actual actions and not mere words. I'd rather they reminded Canadians that a mere four years ago Opposition Leader Harper and every single MP in his party voted against making it a hate crime to promote or advocate the killing of gays and lesbians.

The Criminal Code forbids murder; you make it sound as if Harper condones violence against gays and lesbians. That's false.

----

Thoughts matter as do words. But actions matter most. People think crazy things and sometimes even say crazy things. No government should police people's thoughts. It should police people's words with great trepidation.

Underneath this story is an agenda to change people's thoughts. Freedom of thought is perhaps the most fundamental freedom of all.

Tommy Douglas advocated these views in 1933. After a trip to Nazi Germany in 1938, he rejected his former views on eugenics.

He advocated similar ideas as "recently" as 1968. Edited April 4, 2008 by August1991

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

Bull :angry:

You think that gay bashing should be a hate crime and that gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry?

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

The Criminal Code forbids murder; you make it sound as if Harper condones violence against gays and lesbians. That's false.
----

Thoughts matter as do words. But actions matter most. People think crazy things and sometimes even say crazy things. No government should police people's thoughts. It should police people's words with great trepidation.

Underneath this story is an agenda to change people's thoughts. Freedom of thought is perhaps the most fundamental freedom of all.

He advocated similar ideas as "recently" as 1968.

These are arguments against any hate crime legislation. However, Harper does not oppose hate crime legislation when it's based on religion, race or ethnicity. If he opposed all hate crime legislation, he'd merely be taking the libertarian position. But he specifically opposed hate crime legislation in reference to lesbians and gays.

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

Oh if we are focusing actions of the past, lets look at the past of the NDP Golden boy Tommy Douglas, what was he advocating in his early political career, eugenics, forced serilization among other this where is the NDP apology?

And one from the Conservatives as well since many of their members supported the same thing?

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

The Criminal Code forbids murder; you make it sound as if Harper condones violence against gays and lesbians. That's false.

So Harper's support for hate crimes for other things is wrong because the criminal code forbids murder and violence?

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

Stephen Harper will likely protect, offering some minor reprimand and calling the case closed.

It will be difficult for Harper to do anything other than protect him. When Harper himself made homophobic comments in the House of Commons, he subsequently apologized and considered the case closed:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2002/10/23/...act_021023.html

jazzer · April 4, 2008

I've said some absolutely revolting things about other groups that I would now have a tough time actually admitting that I said them.

Were you 40 when you said them?

FTA Lawyer · April 4, 2008

Were you 40 when you said them?

No, but my point is still the same. If the ill-conceived videotape is the first and only time this guy has said these types of remarks, seems to me it would be really wrong to persecute him just because we've all seen the tape.

All I'm saying is that a who a person is cannot be determined on nothing more than a single example of a really stupid thing spewing from his mouth. And like some others here, I hate that the reason this guy might be pushed from his job is mere political correctness.

If he really is unfit to be an elected representative because of his outrageous personal views, then fine, he can disappear. But, if he is really good at his job, has acted in public office with integrity and will nevertheless be tossed because of an off-side remark from 16 years ago, just because that one remark sounds bad...then I object.

FTA

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

And like some others here, I hate that the reason this guy might be pushed from his job is mere political correctness.
FTA

Harper seems unable to decide how to deal with homophobic comments and to what extent they're inappropriate. When he himself made them, he viewed a subsequent apology as sufficient.

When Larry Spencer made homophobic comments and then apologized for them, Harper asked for Spencer's resignation.

So now Harper needs to decide if Lukiwksi will be treated like Spencer or if he'll just accept that if he could get away with it, so can Lukiwski.

Harper knows that racist and sexist comments are totally unacceptable but homophobic comments are merely politically incorrect.