Will Ruby Dhalla Survive this Political Scandal?

jdobbin · May 16, 2009

Uhhm, the Liberals started the attack ads with MArtins campaign of "Stephan Harper wants to put guns in our streets crap". You Liberals are just pissed cause us Tories are better at them then you are. Get over yourselves.

The Tories started the attacks with John A. MacDonald in 1863. That is just how Conservatives run.

Keepitsimple · May 16, 2009

The Tories started the attacks with John A. MacDonald in 1863. That is just how Conservatives run.

Dobbin - the attack ads that were run by the Liberals at he end of Martin's demise were absolutely shameful - and that was really the start of the whole show....depicting Harper as a scary - you won't recognize Canada....guns in the street.....and that's just the ads.....how can anyone forget Martin's desparate attempts at the end of the election to create out-and-out fear about Harper. It was shameful.

jdobbin · May 16, 2009

Dobbin - the attack ads that were run by the Liberals at he end of Martin's demise were absolutely shameful

The ads you speak of didn't run if I recall.

Oleg Bach · May 16, 2009

Ruby will not survive this scandal - sure she may continue as a liberal politican- but she is now tainted. So the body may present itself as breathing, but the soul is now gone - NO one with any sense of principle or civil fairness will ever take her seriously ever again - and those that do don't and will never count again. No different than an abusive husband that states he has changed...will always be suspect.

August1991 · May 16, 2009

Hrm, I think it was a group of homecare professionals that brought this to the light of day. It has nothing to do with the Conservatives. Try to stick to the facts. I know it's tough but please, do try.

If I understand properly, these foreign caregivers made a presentation before a committee of the Ontario legislature. As a result, the Toronto Star made further enquiries.

The suggestion that this is some kind of vast right wing conspiracy is absurd.

-----

I think Liberals are blinded (by their egos? sense of entitlement?) to the impact of this scandal on their political fortunes. How else to explain the vociferous way in which they have defended Dhalla and attacked these foreign women or anyone who defends them? I heard this decent woman, Agatha Mason, an ordinary Canadian, state her case on the CBC:

"She has a conscience," Mason said, noting that this is "one of the occasions when I wish the childhood story of Pinocchio was true." She gestured to her nose as she spoke - a reference to the tale of the wooden puppet whose nose would grow every time he told a lie.

The Toronto Star

It is wrong to suggest that this woman had ulterior motives or is part of some grand scheme.

This scandal confirms the perception of Liberals as hypocrites. They tell us to do one thing but they themselves do something else. They defend the downtrodden in public but mistreat them in private.

There's worse. Limousine leftists are also hypocrites but at least they do it on their own dime. The lavish Liberal lifestyle of people like Dhalla is based entirely on their access to the public trough.

I am frankly surprised by the response of many Liberals to this scandal. By attacking ordinary people such as these caregivers, Liberals are adding wood to their own pyre.

Edited May 16, 2009 by August1991

jdobbin · May 16, 2009

I am frankly surprised by the response of many Liberals to this scandal. By attacking ordinary people such as these caregivers, Liberals are adding wood to their own pyre.

What utter BS. It is a they said/she said situation and are you assuming with typical right wing gutter politics that it is something you can exploit.

August1991 · May 16, 2009

What utter BS. It is a they said/she said situation and are you assuming with typical right wing gutter politics that it is something you can exploit.

Dobbin, you have presented the sense of entitlement clearly. In your view, the word of Ruby Dhalla MP is the same as the words of three foreign caregivers and the words of an ordinary Canadian woman (Agatha Mason) who works to solve problems for these caregivers.

(Previously Dobbin, you argued that Ruby Dhalla MP should be entitled to the presumption of innocence.)

When I heard Mason speak (and admittedly to my ear, she had a slight Jamaican lilt), I heard someone who lives in the world that I live in. This is a practical world of, for example, my hydro bill due date and my dentist's phone number. This woman Mason deals with such practical questions on behalf of others.

IMV, it is extremely harmful for Liberals such as Karygiannis or numerous Liberal apologists on comment forums to attack these women or their credibility. This will only play to the NDP.

(BTW, this is not an issue in Quebec at all.)

Edited May 16, 2009 by August1991

Smallc · May 16, 2009

This has nothing to do with the Liberal Party of Canada. It has everything to do with accusations leveled against Ruby Dhalla which may or may not be true. Though I am sure that this will affect Liberal poll numbers in the short term, this is a non story when it comes to Canadian politics.

jdobbin · May 16, 2009

Dobbin, you have presented the sense of entitlement clearly.

August, you have shown the disdain for women in many posts. This is a great one for those on the right by attacking a woman by using unsupported claims of other women as cover. It is a classic smear and gutter politics. We have seen this before from you when you claimed people in Quebec supported Trudeau because they though he was a wife beater. That was a classic smear on your part and I called you for it back then.

In your view, the word of Ruby Dhalla MP, is the same as the words of three foreign caregivers and the words of an ordinary Canadian woman (Agatha Mason) who works to solve problems for these caregivers.

Mason also talked about slavery which I think is over the top. I am still seeing this is as she said/they said. You are thinking that this is gospel and it makes it all the better that you can attack a Liberal woman over it.

When I heard Mason speak (and admittedly to my ear, she had a slight Jamaican lilt), I heard someone who lives in the world that I live in. This is a practical world of, for example, my hydro bill due date and my dentist's phone number. This woman Mason deals with such questions on behalf of others.

And to describe slavery in the context of some of the women who worked a grand total of a few weeks is ridiculous. You think this is slavery?

IMV, it is extremely harmful for Liberals such as Karygiannis or numerous Liberal apologists on comment forums to attack these women or their credibility. This will only play to the NDP.
(BTW, this is not an issue in Quebec at all.)

The credibility about the claim is absolutely necessary. What would you have any MP do in regards to people making claims against them? While some might be true that is not the job of a committee to determine. It is the job of the courts.

Anything else is a smear campaign and gutter politics.

Don't let your disdain of women let you slide down the path further.

August1991 · May 16, 2009

This has nothing to do with the Liberal Party of Canada. It has everything to do with accusations leveled against Ruby Dhalla which may or may not be true.

It has everything to do with the Liberal Party.

Paul Martin handpicked Ruby Dhalla and parachuted her into the riding for election. Michael Ignatieff had her stand on the stage beside him in Vancouver when he officially became Liberal leader.

More directly, Ruby Dhalla has explicitly made it her cause to defend ordinary people, immigrants, women against the difficult powers of life - much like many Liberals now vacuously claim to do. In short, Ruby Dhalla is the modern Liberal Party writ large.

-----

The Liberal Party of Canada, of Laurier and Trudeau, needs time to rethink itself. This Dhalla/Ignatieff direction is a desperate attempt to avoid change.

The federal Liberal Party is like General Motors. Once successful, they cannot believe that the old buttons no longer work.

Edited May 16, 2009 by August1991

Smallc · May 16, 2009

There is no reason that Liberal leaders should be expected to know what goes on in the Dhalla household. There is no reason at the current time that what went on has anything to do with Ruby Dhalla, and there is in fact no reason to believe that it went on at all save for the word of a couple of people. If she is taken to court, and wrong was found to have been done, then it will speak badly of Ms. Dhalla, but it says nothing of the Liberal party of Canada in the same way that What Brian Mulroney does says nothing about the Conservative party.

Bryan · May 16, 2009

Q: Why is Michael Ignatieff still in Canada?

A: Because Ruby Dhalla’s holding his passport.

(edit: I'm making this one my signature.)

Edited May 16, 2009 by Bryan

Smallc · May 16, 2009

Q: Why is Stephen Harper still in Canada?

A: Because Fox News hasn't hired him yet.

August1991 · May 16, 2009

Q: Why is Michael Ignatieff still in Canada?
A: Because Ruby Dhalla’s holding his passport.

Too funny!

Bryan · May 16, 2009

Too funny!

I can't take credit, I got it from Steven Taylor.

tango · May 17, 2009

QUOTE (Bryan @ May 15 2009, 11:59 PM) *
Q: Why is Michael Ignatieff still in Canada?

A: Because Ruby Dhalla’s holding his passport.

OK, that is good ... so for once I will laugh at something 'Angry' Stephen Taylor said. :lol:

It's certainly not looking good for Dhalla: Caught in two major blatant lies!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National

OTTAWA and TORONTO -- A caregivers' advocate threatened to call the police on Ruby Dhalla the day before the Liberal MP returned the passport and other personal documents belonging to a Filipina caregiver hired by the Dhalla family, the Commons immigration committee heard yesterday.

The testimony of Agatha Mason, executive director of Intercede, a support group for immigrant caregivers, contradicts that of Ms. Dhalla, who denied allegations that she withheld passports of foreign caregivers, mistreated them and did not pay any overtime.

Ms. Mason said caregiver Richelyn Tongson called to tell her how she couldn't get her passport, birth certificate and marriage licence back from the Dhalla family despite repeated requests over three months. Ms. Tongson also told of slave-like working conditions in the home.

"I gave her [Ms. Dhalla] clear directions that she was breaking the law and she has 24 hours in which to return the documents. I remember that clearly," Ms. Mason said. "And, as far as I remember, the documents were returned the following day."

Ms. Dhalla insists that it was her brother, Neil Dhalla, who employed the women and she told the committee that, when Ms. Mason called her at her Ottawa office, she redirected the call to her brother in Mississauga.

"In fact, it was the opposite," Ms. Mason said. "I had a conversation with her brother and I was directed to her."

This is where not being a slave to one party comes in very handy: I delight in the fall of corrupt politicians of any party.

Edited May 17, 2009 by tango

Mr.Canada · May 17, 2009

The ads you speak of didn't run if I recall.

I saw them on TV many times...guns in the streets and the 0other one about the aircraft carriers. They ran. Do your homework before shooting your mouth off.

jdobbin · May 17, 2009

I saw them on TV many times...guns in the streets and the 0other one about the aircraft carriers. They ran. Do your homework before shooting your mouth off.

You saw them on the news. The ad never ran on television as an advertisement because it was pulled prior to that.

Please do your homework.

Oleg Bach · May 17, 2009

You saw them on the news. The ad never ran on television as an advertisement because it was pulled prior to that.
Please do your homework.

I wish my teachers said please...they never did - and I never did.

capricorn · May 17, 2009

You saw them on the news. The ad never ran on television as an advertisement because it was pulled prior to that.
Please do your homework.

Rappelez-vous la dernière campagne, en 2006, quand les libéraux de Paul Martin avaient diffusé des publicités télé laissant clairement entendre que Stephen Harper voulait envoyer des soldats armés dans les rues des grandes villes canadiennes.

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/opinions/chroniq...-la-bagarre.php

Focusing on one ad that suggested Harper would station armed soldiers on the streets of Canadian cities, Tory MP Jason Kenney told a news conference in Ottawa that the Liberals have sunk to a new low.
The Liberals say they have pulled that ad from their website and will not run it on English TV.

The Conservatives said the ad was running in Quebec, and that it was broadcast in English Canada before it was pulled.

"This is without precedent in Canadian politics," he said. "This is the most vicious, baseless attack ad that our politics has ever seen."

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/na...b-ads-reax.html

The ad did run in Quebec before the Liberals pulled it. I don't recall seeing the English version on TV except for political shows. Yet it was downloaded so often from the Liberal website and circulated so widely, that it caused the same negative impact on the Liberal campaign as a TV ad.

Edited May 17, 2009 by capricorn

jdobbin · May 17, 2009

The ad did run in Quebec before the Liberals pulled it. I don't recall seeing the English version on TV except for political shows. Yet it was downloaded so often from the Liberal website and circulated so widely, that it caused the same negative impact on the Liberal campaign as a TV ad.

It was on the Liberal website and then was pulled before it aired on English or French TV. Jason Kenney said it was on French and English TV but I never saw evidence that he was correct.

In any event, Conservatives have their own ad campaigns where eyebrows were raised.

Oleg Bach · May 17, 2009

If Harper is "vicious" - then tell me what vice he practices? If he is "baseless" - then explain what is the foundation or base of his over all plan of action - and what is the foundation of the liberal plan of action? Harper is guilty of but one bit of vice - one bit of viciousness - to needlessly allow Canadian youth to die in order to appease the Americans - To know that an action is useless - to know that there is no real base based in the best interests of Canada - being in Afghanistan - yet - to continue to allow our soldiers to be bush wacked - is vice - is viciousness - or just plain stupidity - I can not believe that Harper is that stupid - so yes - in this instance he if full of vice or what we call vicious - to kill indirectly for no good reason is evil. BUT evil and stupidy are kin.

capricorn · May 18, 2009

In any event, Conservatives have their own ad campaigns where eyebrows were raised.

Whose eyebrows? Michael's? :lol:

jdobbin · May 18, 2009

Whose eyebrows? Michael's?

Every time Ignatieff raises his eyebrows, the Liberals rise a point in the polls.

Oleg Bach · May 18, 2009

Every time Ignatieff raises his eyebrows, the Liberals rise a point in the polls.

Every time he lowers his eyebrows the liberals drop in the polls. He sure looks like count Dracula when he takes those caterpillar brows and frowns them down - and when he raises them - he looks like the all well meaning smart guy - almost likeable - with the "what me" look...other than that bit of dribble - He is like a deballed cosack - a swordless and skilless Scythian.