Free Advice to Peter MacKay

[Ricki Bobbi]

That reads as if you're saying he denied it, ERGO he didn't do it.

More deceiftfulness on your part.

1. MacKay denied calling Belinda Stronach a dog. (Proven fact.)

2. He never called her a dog in the House of Commons on Thursday, October 19th. (Proven fact.)

Two separate statements of fact.

Ergo your reading is deceitful and dishonest.

[Figleaf]

Conservative majority? You're dreaming in technicolor.

Weaseling dishonesty? Yes. What else would you call his attempt to deny the exchange?

Dreaming in technicolor because?

Because they have no hope at all of winning a majority, obviously.

He denied calling her a dog. He never called her a dog.

His reference to her as a dog is a fact. Weasel around it all you like -- it does your credibility no more good than it does his.

Your misrepresenting what he denied is clearly 'weaseling dishonesty' if you are going to hold yourself to the same standard you are trying to hold Peter MacKay to.

Exactly how am I 'misrepresenting' the weaseling of Mackay?

[Ricki Bobbi]

Exactly how am I 'misrepresenting' the weaseling of Mackay?

MacKay didn't try to deny 'the exchange'.

He denied calling Stronach a dog.

He never did call Stronach a dog so he was being honest.

He never tried to deny the exchange so you are being weaselingly dishonest in trying to frame it that way.

[gerryhatrick]

That reads as if you're saying he denied it, ERGO he didn't do it.

More deceiftfulness on your part.

1. MacKay denied calling Belinda Stronach a dog. (Proven fact.)

2. He never called her a dog in the House of Commons on Thursday, October 19th. (Proven fact.)

Two separate statements of fact.

Ergo your reading is deceitful and dishonest.

Whatever Ricki. He called her a dog in the House of Commons. You toodle off to the law courts if you like with your Hansard, I'll go with the court of public opinion which has already delivered the correct verdict on this one.

[watching&waiting]

Figleaf you did not Like the reference to Trudeaus fuddle duddle, So how about "pour me a tequila Shelia and lie down and love me again"

This is stupid first off lets say he said Ask her(meaning Stronach, she one of yours now" That could very easily mean if you want to ask about that dog ask Stronach she knows the dog and its owner. That would fit very easily into everything said. Just how does it mean that he was calling her a dog. He never said Dog and told you to ask her. What is there about that that translates into an insult. It is only in the minds of Liberals and others who use their minds very little, that this is even an issue.

So when things get taken out of context we then revert to the rules of english language.

Question

how is your dog doing with this plan etc.

Answer

Ask her (motioning to empty chair), she is with you now.

The subject of the question is the dog and the intent to see how it was doing. The answer ask Stronach, she is with you now. Meaning go ask her about the dog, she is with your side now.

This has taken a whole weekend of yipping and yapping and it is just going way too far. By the laws of the english language there was no insult. But lLiberals only speak deciet and deception. They do not speak english. Time for people to get a life.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Whatever Ricki. He called her a dog in the House of Commons. You toodle off to the law courts if you like with your Hansard, I'll go with the court of public opinion which has already delivered the correct verdict on this one.

Yup, that court of public opinion made up of you and your fellow Harper haters. There aren't enough of you out there to prevent a majority in the spring.

[betsy]

Gee, that would be like smearing

a whole party based on something one prominent member said. Where have you heard that before?

Refresh my memory please. Who?

You can't guess?

No. I can't think of anyone...either from the NDP or Conservatives.

So whom are you refrring to? And what incident?

Search your memory, I'm sure it will come to you.

Hah! Just as I thought. You've got no answer.

[Figleaf]

Figleaf you did not Like the reference to Trudeaus fuddle duddle,...

I expressed neither a liking or dislike for such a reference. I did point out that calling someone names is worse than simple swearing.

... So how about "pour me a tequila Shelia and lie down and love me again"

Kind of juvenile, but kind of funny too. I can't remember what exact point Crosby was trying to make. I also can't detect what your point is here. Care to enlighten me?

[gerryhatrick]

Exactly how am I 'misrepresenting' the weaseling of Mackay?

MacKay didn't try to deny 'the exchange'. He denied calling Stronach a dog.

Actually he said this:

"Check the record of Hansard," he told reporters on a ferry in Halifax harbour, referring to the official transcript of House of Commons proceedings. "It's not there. It's not there. I said nothing about a dog."

He doesn't deny calling Stronach a dog, he denies saying anything about a dog.

He is denying the exchange because if he admitted the exchange he would be admitting saying something about a dog.

An MP mentioned a dog, and Mackay answered directly to that. Assuch, he is saying something about a dog in that exchange.

[Figleaf]

Gee, that would be like smearing

a whole party based on something one prominent member said. Where have you heard that before?

Refresh my memory please. Who?

You can't guess?

No. I can't think of anyone...either from the NDP or Conservatives.

So whom are you refrring to? And what incident?

Search your memory, I'm sure it will come to you.

Hah! Just as I thought. You've got no answer.

Oh, I know exactly what I'm refering to. I want to give you the opportunity to demonstrate that you have recall capabilities better than a slug.

[gerryhatrick]

Whatever Ricki. He called her a dog in the House of Commons. You toodle off to the law courts if you like with your Hansard, I'll go with the court of public opinion which has already delivered the correct verdict on this one.

Yup, that court of public opinion made up of you and your fellow Harper haters. There aren't enough of you out there to prevent a majority in the spring.

No Ricki, the majority of Canadians. I have yet to meet anyone who doesn't say "Yeah, looks like he said it".

Your position on this is bizzarre, but perhaps not unexpected. You're defending your MP in the manner he chose to defend himself. Fine, but don't accuse people who see the obvious truth in the matter of being "Harper haters".

That is...how do you say....weak and deceitful.

[Figleaf]

Exactly how am I 'misrepresenting' the weaseling of Mackay?

MacKay didn't try to deny 'the exchange'.

He denied calling Stronach a dog.

So are you saying he is trying to deny the imputed meaning of the exchange? If so, he should say what alternate meaning we should draw from it. Failing that he's still just weaseling.

[betsy]

Gee, that would be like smearing

a whole party based on something one prominent member said. Where have you heard that before?

Refresh my memory please. Who?

You can't guess?

No. I can't think of anyone...either from the NDP or Conservatives.

So whom are you refrring to? And what incident?

Search your memory, I'm sure it will come to you.

Hah! Just as I thought. You've got no answer.

Oh, I know exactly what I'm refering to. I want to give you the opportunity to demonstrate that you have recall capabilities better than a slug.

Hello?

You've made the claim, not me.

I called you on it.

Why should I go through a "guessing game" on who you were referring to? And here I was being nice and all.... giving you a second chance to redeem yourself....after you've tripped all over yourself at the other thread.

And what do I get in return? Getting called a "slug."

Go Fig-ure!

[Ricki Bobbi]

No Ricki, the majority of Canadians. I have yet to meet anyone who doesn't say "Yeah, looks like he said it".

Your position on this is bizzarre, but perhaps not unexpected. You're defending your MP in the manner he chose to defend himself. Fine, but don't accuse people who see the obvious truth in the matter of being "Harper haters".

That is...how do you say....weak and deceitful.

Calling your interpretation the obvious truth is indeed weak and deceitful Gerry!

[gerryhatrick]

Calling your interpretation the obvious truth is indeed weak and deceitful Gerry!

It's not just my interpretation Ricki. Don't worry about it, we both know what happened.

Figleaf & Betsy, could you please crop your quote pyramid down a bit if you're going to continue that exchange? Thanks.

[Figleaf]

Gee, that would be like smearing

a whole party based on something one prominent member said. Where have you heard that before?

Refresh my memory please. Who?

You can't guess?

No. I can't think of anyone...either from the NDP or Conservatives.

So whom are you refrring to? And what incident?

Search your memory, I'm sure it will come to you.

Hah! Just as I thought. You've got no answer.

Oh, I know exactly what I'm refering to. I want to give you the opportunity to demonstrate that you have recall capabilities better than a slug.

Hello?

You've made the claim, not me.

I called you on it.

'Called me' on it? How so?

Why should I go through a "guessing game" on who you were referring to?

Why not?

And here I was being nice and all.... giving you a second chance to redeem yourself....after you've tripped all over yourself at the other thread.

That's an interpretation I don't agree with.

And what do I get in return? Getting called a "slug."

I never called you a slug. Never. Don't lie.

[betsy]

Oh, I know exactly what I'm refering to. I want to give you the opportunity to demonstrate that you have recall capabilities better than a slug.

I never called you a slug. Never. Don't lie.

Is that an "imputed" meaning then?

[Figleaf]

Oh, I know exactly what I'm refering to. I want to give you the opportunity to demonstrate that you have recall capabilities better than a slug.

I never called you a slug. Never. Don't lie.

Is that an "imputed" meaning then?

I told you I was giving you an opportunity to show your superiority over a slug. I never indicated that I believed you are a slug. Clearly in addition to remembering better you need to read more carefullly as well.

[gerryhatrick]

Mackay's despicable comments are being picked up worldwide:

Canadian FM accused of calling his ex a "dog"

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2006-10...tent_714044.htm

He's not just Peter Mackay, he's Canada's Foreign Minister. It's embarrassing.

[betsy]

Why should I go through a "guessing game" on who you were referring to?

Why not?

Because this is a forum, not a game board.

Oh well, okay...I won't pressure you. So you've got no answer, big deal. I guess there's no surprise there anyway.

[Figleaf]

Oh well, okay...I won't pressure you. So you've got no answer, big deal.

I do have an answer, and you know what it is. I'm just playing the game you started.

[betsy]

Oh well, okay...I won't pressure you. So you've got no answer, big deal.

I do have an answer, and you know what it is. I'm just playing the game you started.

Nah. I don't believe you.

[Figleaf]

Oh well, okay...I won't pressure you. So you've got no answer, big deal.

I do have an answer, and you know what it is. I'm just playing the game you started.

Nah. I don't believe you.

Okay.

[sharkman]

If you want to talk about sexism, this thread title is more sexist than Peter's remarks. Nobody seems too put out by it, and the only reason certain people are crying foul over,"You have her", is because of politics, plain and simple.

[Wilber]

I think this whole furor puts down intelligent capable women. It assumes they need some kind of special protection to function in the big wide world and hinders what they might accomplish rather than helping.

You almost never hear the word sexist applied to women's actions toward men. Many television commercials you see these days involve women making men look stupid. No talk of sexism there, nor should there be.