He said, She said, They said

[jdobbin]

And that still doesn't justify extending an insult towards one woman to be insulting to all women.

It doesn't all by itself. But the media and Harper government have been pretty relentless on her switching parties and have personalized it much more so than they might have done with a man. The language has been charged.

It is the personal attacks on her character that female voters have been fairly sensitive about if calls to radio stations the last few days are any indication.

[cybercoma]

And that still doesn't justify extending an insult towards one woman to be insulting to all women.

It doesn't all by itself. But the media and Harper government have been pretty relentless on her switching parties and have personalized it much more so than they might have done with a man. The language has been charged.

It is the personal attacks on her character that female voters have been fairly sensitive about if calls to radio stations the last few days are any indication.

She just so happened to switch parties right before one of the most critical votes her party has ever had, male or female it calls for contempt and shows a lack of loyalty.

[jdobbin]

She just so happened to switch parties right before one of the most critical votes her party has ever had, male or female it calls for contempt and shows a lack of loyalty.

The sexualized namecalling was inappropriate. There were several of those references made after she left. It was that type of boorish and sexist behaviour that angered women.

[Ricki Bobbi]

The sexualized namecalling was inappropriate. There were several of those references made after she left. It was that type of boorish and sexist behaviour that angered women.

What names would have been appropriate to call her in your view? Opportunist? Unprincipled? Disloyal? Deceitful?

The people who said what they said were very, very upset. They thought they were going to bring down the Government. Stronach was elected as a Conservative and crossed the floor for a cabinet seat.

[Drea]

She just so happened to switch parties right before one of the most critical votes her party has ever had, male or female it calls for contempt and shows a lack of loyalty.

And how do you feel about Emerson?

Did he show contempt and a lack of loyalty?

If you lived in his riding would you vote for him as a Conservative?

What names would have been appropriate to call her in your view? Opportunist? Unprincipled? Disloyal? Deceitful?

No problem. Certainly a far cry better than slut or whore. All of the words here are not sexist. They don't attack her gender, her womaness. So I would have considered them legitimate -- if they had have been used

[Ricki Bobbi]

No, not at all. I respect women who think for themselves. If they choose to vote NDP, Green, Liberal or Conservative. So long as their vote is not dictated. So long as it is their decision. The sad part is that most conservative women only think they are thinking for themselves. They are actually only parrotting what they have been told. Poor brainwashed souls.

Where are you getting that from?

What experience/research/study has shown that Conservative women only think they are thinking for themselves?

Seems to be another example of the faux open-mindedness of the Canadian left. "Conservative women can't be thinking for themselves, because they wouldn't vote that way if they were really thinking for themelves." That appears to be the logic you are appling to this situation.

[sharkman]

And how do you feel about Emerson?

Did he show contempt and a lack of loyalty?

If you lived in his riding would you vote for him as a Conservative?

What names would have been appropriate to call her in your view? Opportunist? Unprincipled? Disloyal? Deceitful?

No problem. Certainly a far cry better than slut or whore. All of the words here are not sexist. They don't attack her gender, her womaness. So I would have considered them legitimate -- if they had have been used.

Emerson didn't have a romance going with someone and then dump them as he dumped his party, which is a big difference.

The truth is Belinda was played like a fiddle by the Liberals that wooed her. She still doesn't get that. Her behaviour, first with Bill Clinton, then Peter and now Domi, show a woman who has a pattern of deceit. The liberals can have her. Your cheap shot at conservative woman is silly.

[jdobbin]

Emerson didn't have a romance going with someone and then dump them as he dumped his party, which is a big difference.

The truth is Belinda was played like a fiddle by the Liberals that wooed her. She still doesn't get that. Her behaviour, first with Bill Clinton, then Peter and now Domi, show a woman who has a pattern of deceit. The liberals can have her. Your cheap shot at conservative woman is silly.

The remarks you make are media generated. Clinton and Domi? There isn't any evidence of either. As for MacKay, who broke up with who?

This Conservative focus is right wing attacks on morality. Usually without evidence.

[Ricki Bobbi]

The remarks you make are media generated. Clinton and Domi? There isn't any evidence of either. As for MacKay, who broke up with who?

This Conservative focus is right wing attacks on morality. Usually without evidence.

Hmmm neither Tie Domi nor Stronach challenged Domi's statement of claim in court. Ergo their legal acceptance of the statement of fact about the existence of a relationship. There's one for you.

Clinton hmmm ... it was in the Enquirer so it's gotta be true.

Stronach broke up with MacKay.

[sharkman]

Emerson didn't have a romance going with someone and then dump them as he dumped his party, which is a big difference.

The truth is Belinda was played like a fiddle by the Liberals that wooed her. She still doesn't get that. Her behaviour, first with Bill Clinton, then Peter and now Domi, show a woman who has a pattern of deceit. The liberals can have her. Your cheap shot at conservative woman is silly.

The remarks you make are media generated. Clinton and Domi? There isn't any evidence of either. As for MacKay, who broke up with who?

This Conservative focus is right wing attacks on morality. Usually without evidence.

Uh, pretty much everything on this board is media generated.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Drea,

Elton John sung 'The Bitch is Back', and it was written by Bernie Taupin.

Generally, conservativism is 'male', because it is a patriarchal notion.

To the best of my recollection, Stronach left McKay to join the liberals (and get a cabinet post) without McKay's prior knowledge. He read about it in the papers like everybody else, and then had to deal with it. Some silly comment about it may have been foolish on his part (because he is in the public eye, but does anyone really believe that no one else has uttered disparaging words about an ex?), I see it as contemptable that the Liberals would try to smear all conservatives with the 'anti-women' brush over a personal comment about an ex. I also do not find it surprising, generally politics is a cesspool. Rather than trying to rise above it, today's politicians seem to have embraced that cesspool, and gain notoriety by being able to fling the biggest turd.

[jdobbin]

Uh, pretty much everything on this board is media generated.

So what evidence is there that Stronach had an affair with Domi and that it was not a negotiating tactic for a settlement made by Domi's wife?

[jdobbin]

To the best of my recollection, Stronach left McKay to join the liberals (and get a cabinet post) without McKay's prior knowledge. He read about it in the papers like everybody else, and then had to deal with it. Some silly comment about it may have been foolish on his part (because he is in the public eye, but does anyone really believe that no one else has uttered disparaging words about an ex?), I see it as contemptable that the Liberals would try to smear all conservatives with the 'anti-women' brush over a personal comment about an ex. I also do not find it surprising, generally politics is a cesspool. Rather than trying to rise above it, today's politicians seem to have embraced that cesspool, and gain notoriety by being able to fling the biggest turd.

This story turned out to be patently untrue.

[August1991]

Best comment I've read so far:

Ok , let me see if i got this straight. Peter MacKay had the unmitigated gall to allegedly insult an empty chair and the whole freakin world is goin nuts . Must be a slow week.

Link

[Drea]

No, not at all. I respect women who think for themselves. If they choose to vote NDP, Green, Liberal or Conservative. So long as their vote is not dictated. So long as it is their decision. The sad part is that most conservative women only think they are thinking for themselves. They are actually only parrotting what they have been told. Poor brainwashed souls.

Where are you getting that from?

What experience/research/study has shown that Conservative women only think they are thinking for themselves?

Seems to be another example of the faux open-mindedness of the Canadian left. "Conservative women can't be thinking for themselves, because they wouldn't vote that way if they were really thinking for themelves." That appears to be the logic you are appling to this situation.

Why would any woman vote for the subervience of women except if she were brainwashed? "Stick to yer knittin' yah Chow Chow Dog."

What research? I live in BC's Bible Belt. I "research" it every day. In most every business situation I come across... Fortunately this is changing as the population grows.

[August1991]

Generally, conservativism is 'male', because it is a patriarchal notion.

If you mean conservative as meaning reticent to change, then you are wrong. It's an empirical fact that women are on average less more risk-averse than men. Men also tend to be first adopters (although there are exceptions).

In this world, it is the Conservatives such as Stephen Harper who are asking that we do things differently. Big government doesn't work and we have to find somehow an alternative. The Liberals (and NDP) are asking for more of the same.

So, it is the Conservatives who are radical and the Liberals and NDP who are "conservative".

Moreover, some women may prefer an interventionist State since they view government as a replacement for a dutiful husband. In this, I think they are sadly mistaken. Governments provide false security.

I suppose this should really be posted in the discussion about the "gender gap".

Edited October 22, 2006 by August1991

[Drea]

Moreover, some women may prefer an interventionist State since they view government as a replacement for a dutiful husband. In this, I think they are sadly mistaken. Governments provide false security.

Because without a husband a woman is utterly helpless. So she needs a "replacement".

Do people not see that this attitude is antiquated. Thinking educated women have no "need" for a "dutiful" husband. On the same token, thinking, educated men have no need for a "dutiful" wife either.

Let the poor uneducated saps marry each other -- the woman can't earn, the man can't cook. They need one another.

[sharkman]

Why would any woman vote for the subervience of women except if she were brainwashed? "Stick to yer knittin' yah Chow Chow Dog."

What research? I live in BC's Bible Belt. I "research" it every day. In most every business situation I come across... Fortunately this is changing as the population grows.

It sounds like you have developed some judgemental attitudes. I also live in B.C.'s bible belt. Not many vote for the subservience of women since it's not on the ballots anymore. But, and follow this carefully, some women expect big government to solve all of their challenges. That is the Liberal style government that wants to have a hand in every single part of our lives. The conservative model is generally to have smaller government where independent people prefer to handle more of their own lives.

[Drea]

Why would any woman vote for the subervience of women except if she were brainwashed? "Stick to yer knittin' yah Chow Chow Dog."

What research? I live in BC's Bible Belt. I "research" it every day. In most every business situation I come across... Fortunately this is changing as the population grows.

It sounds like you have developed some judgemental attitudes. I also live in B.C.'s bible belt. Not many vote for the subservience of women since it's not on the ballots anymore. But, and follow this carefully, some women expect big government to solve all of their challenges. That is the Liberal style government that wants to have a hand in every single part of our lives. The conservative model is generally to have smaller government where independent people prefer to handle more of their own lives.

Does this include the freedom to with my body as I please? Marry who I please? Smoke what I please? I see the conservatives as wanting more government intervention, not less. I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Does this include the freedom to with my body as I please? Marry who I please? Smoke what I please? I see the conservatives as wanting more government intervention, not less. I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

It's pretty easy to mark it up to a 'matter of perspective' when you are talking about the things the Conservative-haters *say* they will do if they win a majority.

There is no plan to re-introduce a bill governing abortion.

You appear to have married who you pleased without the Government attempting to stop you.

Sorry you can't smoke crack or heroin legally if you please to do so. The Liberals and NDP aren't proposing to change the law on that either. I hope:lol:

So there are some restrictions on you doing what you please.

[Drea]

But what if I decide to marry my girlfriend? What if I decided to smoke a joint (shoulda clarified that one!)? Currently when I smoke a doobie, I have no fear of government intervention. If there should ever be (God forbid!) a majority con gov't then they can (and will) run roughshod over our rights, just like the man down south.

[Ricki Bobbi]

But what if I decide to marry my girlfriend? What if I decided to smoke a joint (shoulda clarified that one!)? Currently when I smoke a doobie, I have no fear of government intervention. If there should ever be (God forbid!) a majority con gov't then they can (and will) run roughshod over our rights, just like the man down south.

So it is the old *scary* *scary* *scary*.

If the Conservatives get a majority God Forbid they will run roughshod over your rights.

I haven't heard about massive crackdowns on marijuana possession since the Conservatives came into power.

Yes Drea you are a centrist, you are a happy person and aren't calling Harper scary.

You do remember the standard leftie line used to be that if Harper was ever Prime Minister God Forbid the Conservatives would run roughshod over your rights.

[sharkman]

But what if I decide to marry my girlfriend? What if I decided to smoke a joint (shoulda clarified that one!)? Currently when I smoke a doobie, I have no fear of government intervention. If there should ever be (God forbid!) a majority con gov't then they can (and will) run roughshod over our rights, just like the man down south.

Fearmongering now? No doubt a conservative gov. would run all over your rights just like Mulroney did.(Not) Like someone told you in a thread earlier, our politics are decidedly to the left of the U.S. Hence, the conservatives are not in line with the Republicans no matter how many times you care to repeat it. And our Liberals are left of the Democrats. You kind of sound like a Liberal party hack.

It is the Liberal governments of the past decades who have been dabbling in our rights. Although this isn't what I was refering to with a smaller government style that the conservatives go with. I'm talking about tax less spend less. a government program (handout) for every imaginable thing. 100's of millions to promote Canada in Quebec, for instance.

P.S. The Tories have been considering making pot possession a ticketable offense. You probably know this.

[Drea]

He's got a minority govt.

He's essentially neutered.

He has, in the past, pandered to the likes of the Christian Action Party. That, my friend, is ka ka.

Unless of course, you are FOR a theocracy...

and we centrists and leftists will trot this out as many times as possible to remind people of Harper's real supporters.

[watching&waiting]

Now that is just palin so wrong that I wonder how you can say that without a smilie behind it.

Harper does not care about SSM the way people have said. He promised a true free vote in the house on this topic to end all the arguments once and for all. If it stands he will live with it, if it falls he will live with that as well. He has said many times that the MP's should be allowed to vote the way their electorate wants them to, so we can finally have it done by fair impartial vote. So what is wrong with that? The Liberal rammed it thru knowing full well that many of they members were not wanting to support it. There will be CPC members who also will support it, and the same with NDP. But it should be an open and honest vote. So if that is scarey then you have big problems

As far as Marijuauna laws go, the way to proceed is to have a law that is based in proper ledgislation to address the fact that there are many uses that should be made legal, while still making the dealing etc illegal. It is no biggy. The CPC has said open and free votes on these and many others. Does democracy really scare the liberal that much?