Anybody remember "family affairs critic" Larry Spencer?

[gerryhatrick]

Wasn't all that long ago....just over two years actually.

Spencer said in an interview with the Vancouver Sun that a “well-orchestrated” campaign to “convert” young boys in school playgrounds and locker rooms to homosexuality was underway since the 60's

It included plans to “deliberately infiltrate the North America’s judiciary, schools, religious community and the entertainment industry".

He capped it all off with a call to re-criminalize homosexuality and lock up gays.

“If somebody brought a bill in the House to do that I’d certainly vote for it. Yeah, I’d like to see that be the case,” he told the Sun.

The idiot didn't even know the source of his fears. Some activists speech from the 60's he said...the name slipped his mind though.

Spencer: “His quote went something like this ... ‘We will seduce your sons in the locker rooms, in the gymnasiums, in the hallways, in the playgrounds, and on and on, in this land.’ It was quite a long quote stating what was going to happen to the young boys of North America.”

Anyone know the source of Spencers fear and ignorance? Well, his ignorance is his own doing...and perhaps we can partly blame his environment.

The source of his fears in this case is not a speach by a gay activist in the 60's at all, but rather an obviously SATIRICAL essay that ran in 1987 in a Boston publication.

Naturally, a piece of satire is fair game for the extreme rightwing to pick up and run with. And then poor ignorants like the Canadian Alliance's "family affairs" critic Larry Spencer lap it up without question.

[fellowtraveller]

As I recall, Spencer was turfed out of the Alliance caucus over this issue in 2003, and not allowed to join the new Conservative Party in 2004.

I checked my watch, it is now 2006.

I'm sure your OP had a point though, would you mind summarizing it?

[gerryhatrick]

As I recall, Spencer was turfed out of the Alliance caucus over this issue in 2003, and not allowed to join the new Conservative Party in 2004.

I checked my watch, it is now 2006.

November of 2003, JUST before the previous election. And it is now only Feb. 2006, just barely over 2 years since.

And the news of the day indicates Harper only "suspended" him from caucus at first. Other news indicates it was done "temporarily", presumably so a review could take place. When I heard about it, it took me 2 minutes on the internet to confirm that the idiot was developing opinions against homosexuals based on a piece of obvious satire. Why wouldn't Harper have kicked him off caucus with permanence immediately?

I'm sure your OP had a point though, would you mind summarizing it?

Well, perhaps you'd wish this was all just opinion, but the bulk of what I wrote is straight facts. Quotes, and the like. But please, indicate which of my opinions you disagree with, specifically.

I think the fact that this man was made a "family values critic" in the Harper government is something worth considering. I'm not suggesting Harper shares Spencers views, but he surely must have talked to him about issues that might be considered "family values" to the (then) Canadian Alliance, don't you think? Strange his idea of a homosexual agenda/campaign as evidenced by some satire wouldn't come up!

[shoop]

Disagree with you calling Spencer "family values critic." He never had that title.

He was never part of the Harper *government*.

Tsk, tsk your terminological mistakes have this odd effect of always making the situation look worse than it actually was.

Believe it or not the leader of a party may not talk to *every* critic about *every* issue that may affect they are responsible for. There would be no reason for critics if that were the case. The leader would just handle every single issue on his own.

The role of a party leader is to provide leadership (duh) for the caucus and party. This does not mean knowing the thoughts of everyone of his MPs.

Do you really think that Paul Martin *knew* about Carolyn Bennett's hatred for Americans and her plans to childishly stomp on a George W. Bush doll on television?

Trying to point to an issue more than 2 years old, that was dealt with effectively, is simply sad no matter what side of the aisle you sit on.

Well, perhaps you'd wish this was all just opinion, but the bulk of what I wrote is straight facts. Quotes, and the like. But please, indicate which of my opinions you disagree with, specifically.

I think the fact that this man was made a "family values critic" in the Harper government is something worth considering. I'm not suggesting Harper shares Spencers views, but he surely must have talked to him about issues that might be considered "family values" to the (then) Canadian Alliance, don't you think? Strange his idea of a homosexual agenda/campaign as evidenced by some satire wouldn't come up!

[gerryhatrick]

Disagree with you calling Spencer "family values critic." He never had that title.

He was never part of the Harper *government*.

"family affairs critic" then? I changed it. Either way, it's the same in my view.

Is your point about the "Harper *government*" to say that he was never in government?

Believe it or not the leader of a party may not talk to *every* critic about *every* issue that may affect they are responsible for. There would be no reason for critics if that were the case. The leader would just handle every single issue on his own.

What nonsense. The party leader should speak with a member about those issues that are part of the critics area of focus. If Stephen Harper had chosen a defense critic who believed Canada should get Nukes and fire one at Mexico, would you make the same excuse? Come on.

Do you really think that Paul Martin *knew* about Carolyn Bennett's hatred for Americans and her plans to childishly stomp on a George W. Bush doll on television?

Carolyn Parrish you mean? She didn't hate Americans. This is getting pretty sad now.

And there was nothing wrong with what she did on that comedy show. Quite funny actually, too bad there's so many PC folks around.

[betsy]

Larry Spencer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Larry Spencer is a Baptist pastor in Canada, and former Member of Parliament (MP) for the Saskatchewan riding of Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre.

He was first elected as candidate of Canadian Alliance in the 2000 federal election. He was appointed family issues critic for the CA caucus, but was later suspended from the caucus for his controversial remorks. When the CA merged into the new Conservative Party of Canada, he did not join the caucus of the new party, and thus became an independent. He sought re-election in the 2004 federal election as an independent conservative, but lost.

In late November 2003, Spencer caused controversy in Canada by Vancouver Sun reporter Peter O'Neil when he said that he would support any initiative to outlaw homosexuality. He stated that in the 1960s, a "well-orchestrated" conspiracy began and led to recent successes in the gay rights movement. This conspiracy, he further said, included seducing and recruiting young boys in playgrounds and locker rooms, and deliberately infiltrating North America's schools, judiciaries, entertainment industries, and religious communities. According to him, this conspiracy started with a speech given by a U.S. gay rights activist in the 1960s whose name he could not remember.

As a result of his comments, Spencer was stripped of his job as family issues critic by Canadian Alliance leader Stephen Harper on November 27, 2003. He also temporarily removed himself from the party's caucus, and apologized "completely and without reservation" for his remarks.

[shoop]

Actually it was family issues critc. Same in your view because your view is hatred and bile for the CPC regardelss of what they actually do.

Yes, Spencer was never in Government. That was exactly my point.

Your analogy to Mexico just shows how much you have blown the issue out of proportion.

You see nothing wrong with what Parrish did? Man, you are a joke. Good thing you are in opposition now. The U.S. is Canada's most important trading partner and military ally. A government Member of Parliament doing what Parrish did deserves to be kicked out of the Government caucus. Thank you for doing the right thing Mr. Dithers ... for once.

"family affairs critic" then? I changed it. Either way, it's the same in my view. Is your point about the "Harper *government*" to say that he was never in government?

The party leader should speak with a member about those issues that are part of the critics area of focus. If Stephen Harper had chosen a defense critic who believed Canada should get Nukes and fire one at Mexico, would you make the same excuse? Come on.

Carolyn Parrish you mean? She didn't hate Americans. This is getting pretty sad now.

And there was nothing wrong with what she did on that comedy show. Quite funny actually, too bad there's so many PC folks around.

[gerryhatrick]

Larry Spencer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

, but was later suspended from the caucus for his controversial remorks. When the CA merged into the new Conservative Party of Canada, he did not join the caucus of the new party, and thus became an independent.

It's good to remember that Wikipedia is not always fair and accurate. It is the result often of small numbers of people making submissions.

In this case, it gives the impression that he chose not to join the new party, but of course he was not permitted.

[gerryhatrick]

Actually it was family issues critc.

Family issues, not affairs. Quite right.

Same in your view because your view is hatred and bile for the CPC regardelss of what they actually do.

This fragment makes no sense. I can understand you think I have "hatred" for the CPC. It's usually the same pattern with a rightwinger...accuse critisism as being "hatred".

Yes, Spencer was never in Government. That was exactly my point.

Pretty moot point. Is being an MP not being part of government? It matters little, he was in Harpers caucus and in Parliament. That better?

You see nothing wrong with what Parrish did? Man, you are a joke.

I think what was really wrong with it is how all the self-loathing Canadians like yourself decided to scream and cry over it and boohoo the end of the world because the US would certainly react to an improv comedy sketch by closing the border.

The rightwing will never stand up for Canada becuse they've always been afraid of US reaction to every burp and sneeze up here.

The U.S. is Canada's most important trading partner and military ally.

Case in point.

If you choose to believe such a thing is "anti-Americanism" then it makes it easier for the Bill O'Rielly's and Ann Coulters and Tucker Carlsons to repeat that we're guilty of anti-Americanism.

If you choose instead to see it for what it is...a silly improv comedy bit playing upon the earlier news of her being caught making offhand remarks.....then you've got some sensible perspective.

George Bush is the common denominator in MANY international relationships that have soured with the US. Why do people like you blame Canada first always?

[shoop]

Being an *opposition* MP is not being a part of Government in the House of Commons by definition. Yes, your correction is better.

Why is it self-loathing to look out for Canada's best financial and international interests? To me the self-loathing is more apparent in bits like *Talking to Americans*. Woo hoo, laugh at the dumb Americans. But when it gets down to it, they don't know anything about Canada because they don't have to. Boy we are superior to them .... (while deep down cursing the fact they won't give us any *respect*).

Don't try and connect me to O'Reilly, Coulter or Carlson. They are arrogant, childish jerks. They are guilty of the same thing Parrish was guilty of. Not treating the other side with the respect they are due.

How am I blaming Canada first? Why generalize when you have no proof? Is GW Bush perfect? ... No way. But does that absolve Parrish of behaving like an immature child? No way.

Pretty moot point. Is being an MP not being part of government? It matters little, he was in Harpers caucus and in Parliament. That better?

I think what was really wrong with it is how all the self-loathing Canadians like yourself decided to scream and cry over it and boohoo the end of the world because the US would certainly react to an improv comedy sketch by closing the border.

The rightwing will never stand up for Canada becuse they've always been afraid of US reaction to every burp and sneeze up here.

If you choose to believe such a thing is "anti-Americanism" then it makes it easier for the Bill O'Rielly's and Ann Coulters and Tucker Carlsons to repeat that we're guilty of anti-Americanism.

If you choose instead to see it for what it is...a silly improv comedy bit playing upon the earlier news of her being caught making offhand remarks.....then you've got some sensible perspective.

George Bush is the common denominator in MANY international relationships that have soured with the US. Why do people like you blame Canada first always?

[tml12]

Wasn't all that long ago....just over two years actually.

Spencer said in an interview with the Vancouver Sun that a “well-orchestrated” campaign to “convert” young boys in school playgrounds and locker rooms to homosexuality was underway since the 60's

It included plans to “deliberately infiltrate the North America’s judiciary, schools, religious community and the entertainment industry".

He capped it all off with a call to re-criminalize homosexuality and lock up gays.

“If somebody brought a bill in the House to do that I’d certainly vote for it. Yeah, I’d like to see that be the case,” he told the Sun.

The idiot didn't even know the source of his fears. Some activists speech from the 60's he said...the name slipped his mind though.

Spencer: “His quote went something like this ... ‘We will seduce your sons in the locker rooms, in the gymnasiums, in the hallways, in the playgrounds, and on and on, in this land.’ It was quite a long quote stating what was going to happen to the young boys of North America.”

Anyone know the source of Spencers fear and ignorance? Well, his ignorance is his own doing...and perhaps we can partly blame his environment.

The source of his fears in this case is not a speach by a gay activist in the 60's at all, but rather an obviously SATIRICAL essay that ran in 1987 in a Boston publication.

Naturally, a piece of satire is fair game for the extreme rightwing to pick up and run with. And then poor ignorants like the Canadian Alliance's "family affairs" critic Larry Spencer lap it up without question.

Gerry,

This guy is old news...really, is that how desperate the left has become?

I love what I have been hearing from leftist posters the last few days, things like:

"Mulrooney was corrupt, so this justifies Liberal corruption."

"Remember when [insert name here] was Reform/Alliance critic in year [year...latest 2003] when he/she advocated extreme right-wing position."

I think you need to stop worrying about the past and start realizing Prime Minister Harper has a new party in a new time period. Relax...the Earth has not fallen apart I swear to you...

[shoop]

Gerry is symbolic of how pathetic the left has become. Next they will start bringing up misdeeds from Diefenbaker's time in office.

Gerry,

This guy is old news...really, is that how desperate the left has become?

Relax...the Earth has not fallen apart I swear to you...

[tml12]

Gerry is symbolic of how pathetic the left has become. Next they will start bringing up misdeeds from Diefenbaker's time in office.

Gerry,

This guy is old news...really, is that how desperate the left has become?

Relax...the Earth has not fallen apart I swear to you...

Uh-oh...we're in trouble now Shoop!!!

[gerryhatrick]

Gerry,

This guy is old news...really, is that how desperate the left has become?

What a pathetic response. This news is a lot newer than the sponsorship scandal. I supose you were out chastising the Cons and the NDP for dredging up really old news?

But you need to get real here. I am not "the left" and I'm certainly not "desperate". I am overjoyed with the election outcome, thankyou v.much.

I brought this up just for betsy to stand in contrast to her post about EGALE. I thought she needed to have a look in a mirror in the form of Larry Spencer.

Sure it's an oldie (2 WHOLE YEARS!) but a goodie.

Now, which one of you rightwingers was talking about the National Energy Program just the other day......you remember which one? I gotta find him so you can tell him your line about "old news".

[gerryhatrick]

Gerry is symbolic of how pathetic the left has become. Next they will start bringing up misdeeds from Diefenbaker's time in office.

Gerry,

This guy is old news...really, is that how desperate the left has become?

Relax...the Earth has not fallen apart I swear to you...

Ah...the sound of two right hands clapping. Strangly empty sound!

Now...what was that about the National Energy Program?

[shoop]

Uhhh, don't recall anybody starting a thread about the NEP here. Care to point that one out? Didn't think so...

Good luck digging up the Diefenbaker quotes.

Ah...the sound of two right hands clapping. Strangly empty sound!

Now...what was that about the National Energy Program?

[gerryhatrick]

Uhhh, don't recall anybody starting a thread about the NEP here. Care to point that one out? Didn't think so...

I didn't say anyone did. Why do you waste our time?

[shoop]

Nobody seems to be complaining but you. So sorry, I can see how bringing up quotes from MPs who got kicked out of caucus years ago is valid. But refuting your sad assertions is a *waste of time*.

Maybe if you actually made defensible points you wouldn't have to try and divert the conversation when you get shot down. Nah, you would actually have to be able to formulate a coherent argument to do that.

I didn't say anyone did. Why do you waste our time?

[tml12]

"What a pathetic response. This news is a lot newer than the sponsorship scandal. I supose you were out chastising the Cons and the NDP for dredging up really old news?"

I suppose you think the sponsorship scandal is really old news.

That is the only bad news the left has to worry about...

"But you need to get real here. I am not "the left" and I'm certainly not "desperate". I am overjoyed with the election outcome, thankyou v.much.

I brought this up just for betsy to stand in contrast to her post about EGALE. I thought she needed to have a look in a mirror in the form of Larry Spencer."

You certainly do a good job of imposing as a leftist...or are you just *not right.*

"Sure it's an oldie (2 WHOLE YEARS!) but a goodie."

Ah, corrupt Liberals are still in power. This guy was never in power, in fact, hasn't even been an MP in almost three years.

Furthermore, you just criticized me for criticizing your post for being old, then you agree it's "an oldie."

I love you Gerry, I really do...

"Now, which one of you rightwingers was talking about the National Energy Program just the other day......you remember which one? I gotta find him so you can tell him your line about "old news"."

Relax Gerry, no one is talking about the NEP.

[gerryhatrick]

Uhhh, don't recall anybody starting a thread about the NEP here. Care to point that one out? Didn't think so...

NEP/RAPE of ALBERTA, 25 Years AGO TODAY

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.p...4102&hl=the+nep

[gerryhatrick]

I suppose you think the sponsorship scandal is really old news.

It is you who made the lame complaint about something being "old news". Larry Spencer is 2 year old news. So what?

Ah, corrupt Liberals are still in power. This guy was never in power, in fact, hasn't even been an MP in almost three years.

Name one "corrupt" Liberal in power? No?

It doesn't matter that Larry Spencer was never in power. He was part of Harpers caucus and was the "family affairs/issues/values/whatever critic"!

Relax Gerry, no one is talking about the NEP.

Geoffrey on Feb. 2nd 2006:

Alberta lost its oil with the NEP, and now we are the richest region in North America.

Geoffrey on Jan. 31 2006

In Alberta, we got a kick in the ass when Trudeau brought in the NEP.

Montgomery Burns on Dec. 25th 2005:

Albertans have not forgotten how the Liberal Party (and Lougheed by agreeing to the NEP program) destroyed Alberta's economy back in the 80s.

The NEP is all the rightwingers talk about. Boo f'n hoo. Don't tell me about "old news", old boy!

[Wilber]

Disagree with you calling Spencer "family values critic." He never had that title.

He was never part of the Harper *government*.

"family affairs critic" then? I changed it. Either way, it's the same in my view.

Is your point about the "Harper *government*" to say that he was never in government?

Believe it or not the leader of a party may not talk to *every* critic about *every* issue that may affect they are responsible for. There would be no reason for critics if that were the case. The leader would just handle every single issue on his own.

What nonsense. The party leader should speak with a member about those issues that are part of the critics area of focus. If Stephen Harper had chosen a defense critic who believed Canada should get Nukes and fire one at Mexico, would you make the same excuse? Come on.

Do you really think that Paul Martin *knew* about Carolyn Bennett's hatred for Americans and her plans to childishly stomp on a George W. Bush doll on television?

Carolyn Parrish you mean? She didn't hate Americans. This is getting pretty sad now.

And there was nothing wrong with what she did on that comedy show. Quite funny actually, too bad there's so many PC folks around.

"damn Americans, I hate those bastards." Carolyn Parrish

[geoffrey]

I suppose you think the sponsorship scandal is really old news.

It is you who made the lame complaint about something being "old news". Larry Spencer is 2 year old news. So what?

Ah, corrupt Liberals are still in power. This guy was never in power, in fact, hasn't even been an MP in almost three years.

Name one "corrupt" Liberal in power? No?

It doesn't matter that Larry Spencer was never in power. He was part of Harpers caucus and was the "family affairs/issues/values/whatever critic"!

Relax Gerry, no one is talking about the NEP.

Geoffrey on Feb. 2nd 2006:

Alberta lost its oil with the NEP, and now we are the richest region in North America.

Geoffrey on Jan. 31 2006

In Alberta, we got a kick in the ass when Trudeau brought in the NEP.

Montgomery Burns on Dec. 25th 2005:

Albertans have not forgotten how the Liberal Party (and Lougheed by agreeing to the NEP program) destroyed Alberta's economy back in the 80s.

The NEP is all the rightwingers talk about. Boo f'n hoo. Don't tell me about "old news", old boy!

I didn't know I spoke for the right, thanks I guess...

So out of all my posts, 2 were NEP related... I must really like to dwell on the topic. Grow up gerry.

[gerryhatrick]

I suppose you think the sponsorship scandal is really old news.

It is you who made the lame complaint about something being "old news". Larry Spencer is 2 year old news. So what?

Ah, corrupt Liberals are still in power. This guy was never in power, in fact, hasn't even been an MP in almost three years.

Name one "corrupt" Liberal in power? No?

It doesn't matter that Larry Spencer was never in power. He was part of Harpers caucus and was the "family affairs/issues/values/whatever critic"!

Relax Gerry, no one is talking about the NEP.

Geoffrey on Feb. 2nd 2006:

Alberta lost its oil with the NEP, and now we are the richest region in North America.

Geoffrey on Jan. 31 2006

In Alberta, we got a kick in the ass when Trudeau brought in the NEP.

Montgomery Burns on Dec. 25th 2005:

Albertans have not forgotten how the Liberal Party (and Lougheed by agreeing to the NEP program) destroyed Alberta's economy back in the 80s.

The NEP is all the rightwingers talk about. Boo f'n hoo. Don't tell me about "old news", old boy!

I didn't know I spoke for the right, thanks I guess...

So out of all my posts, 2 were NEP related... I must really like to dwell on the topic. Grow up gerry.

It was said that nobody mentions the NEP. Someone mentioned it just the other day as they were ranting about Liberals...can't find that one.

To put the lie to the statement I searched up some old quotes. Sorry yours were in the mix, but oh well.

I stand by my statement that rightwingers like to talk about the NEP. I retract the obvious implication that I was calling you a rightwinger.

[gerryhatrick]

Do you really think that Paul Martin *knew* about Carolyn Bennett's hatred for Americans and her plans to childishly stomp on a George W. Bush doll on television?

Carolyn Parrish you mean? She didn't hate Americans. This is getting pretty sad now.

And there was nothing wrong with what she did on that comedy show. Quite funny actually, too bad there's so many PC folks around.

"damn Americans, I hate those bastards." Carolyn Parrish

Yes, I'm aware of that quote. I still say she does not hatre Americans.

It was an offhand comment made during the run-up to the Iraqi war, and she's quite obviously referring to the American administration pressuring Canada to give them support for Iraq. To argue that Carolyn Parrish has a "hatred for Americans" because of that statement is plain silly.

That's like saying a frustrated child hates thier parents when they tell you they do.