Liberals Using sexist Card via Stronach

[Ricki Bobbi]

Uhmmm, Stronach is not educated - she's a college drop-out. As for articulate, she is wholy inept - like a deer caught in the headlights - in front of the cameras in anything but a tightly scripted environment.

That is one of the reasons she crossed the floor. She was used as an example of how NOT to perform in a media opportunity.

Poor Belinda. Because of her bad choice she has to use Daddy's money to pay for her limo and driver instead of government money.

[gerryhatrick]

Uhmmm, Stronach is not educated - she's a college drop-out. As for articulate, she is wholy inept - like a deer caught in the headlights - in front of the cameras in anything but a tightly scripted environment.

That is one of the reasons she crossed the floor. She was used as an example of how NOT to perform in a media opportunity.

Poor Belinda. Because of her bad choice she has to use Daddy's money to pay for her limo and driver instead of government money.

If Stronach were a man would you and Argus be laughing about her using "daddy's money" and riding "daddy's" coattails all her life? Not likely.

This is typical of rightwing Conservatives. They want women back in the kitchen having babies.

Belinday is "brainless", says Argus. She's a "dear in the headlights"..."wholy inept".

Just because she's a woman.

In reality, she's a very talented and accomplished woman:

She has chaired the boards of Decoma International Inc., Tesma International Inc., and Intier Automotive Inc., all in the auto parts sector. She was a founding member of the Canadian Automotive Partnership Council and served on the Ontario Task Force on Productivity, Competitiveness and Economic Progress. She is a director of the Yves Landry Foundation, which furthers technological education and skills training in the manufacturing sector.

In 2001, the National Post named Stronach as the most powerful businesswoman in Canada; and, in the same year, the World Economic Forum named her a "Global Leader of Tomorrow." Fortune Magazine ranked her #2 in its list of the world's most powerful women in business in 2002. She was also named one of Canada's "Top 40 Under 40." In April 2004, Time Magazine ranked her as one of the world's 100 most influential people.

Stronach is honorary chair of the Southlake Regional Health Centre fundraising campaign and a former honorary chair of the Howdown fundraising campaign. In 2003, she received one of Canada's oldest and most distinguished awards, the Beth Shalom Humanitarian Award, presented in recognition of outstanding achievement in humanitarian service.

But oh no, no woman could possibly be deserving of anything she's done. She must have been given all those awards and placed on all those boards just because of "daddy", right?

Conservatives have a lot to learn about women.

[Ricki Bobbi]

But oh no, no woman could possibly be deserving of anything she's done. She must have been given all those awards and placed on all those boards just because of "daddy", right?

Conservatives have a lot to learn about women.

After dropping out of university she worked at a company with $20 Billion annual revenues for just seven years before becoming a Vice President.

This was nepotism plain and simple.

Pretty sad trying to cry sexism in this case.

Oh yeah, all those boards she sat on ... was because of her position at Magna.

[Wilber]

To Ms Stronach, Messrs Mackay, Harper, Goodale and Layton, .

Mr Mackay:

Discussing your personal life in public has its perils.

If you said it, meant it and would say it again to her face, don't apologize unless you want to. If you didn't say it, don't apologize. If you did say it and wouldn't say it to her face, think about apologizing.

Mr Harper:

Talk to your man and find out which of the above apply.

Ms Stronach:

There are not separate mens and womens leagues in politics. If you want to fight with the men you will either have to fight like a man or fight smarter than the men. Falling back on your gender when you feel insulted will not get you the respect you desire. Just ignore him or call him a twit and move on.

Messrs Goodale and Layton:

Surely there must be something more important to this country that you would cause you to expend so much righteous indignation.

To all:

I realize many MP's have good intentions and work very hard for their constituents but you often make it very difficult to respect that fact.

When I listen to the all the childish BS being expended on bitterness between a couple of ex lovers for the purpose of making political hay, it is no wonder that fewer people are interested in politics and have less respect than ever for the institution and politicians in general.

Try acting like adults, this is not why we sent you to Ottawa.

W.

[jbg]

Your conservative wife is jealous of this educated, intelligent, articulate, good looking woman.

Uhmmm, Stronach is not educated - she's a college drop-out. As for articulate, she is wholy inept - like a deer caught in the headlights - in front of the cameras in anything but a tightly scripted environment.

She did a great job at "democratic renewal" in the Cabinet.

[Guest Warwick Green]

Your conservative wife is jealous of this educated, intelligent, articulate, good looking woman.

Uhmmm, Stronach is not educated - she's a college drop-out. As for articulate, she is wholy inept - like a deer caught in the headlights - in front of the cameras in anything but a tightly scripted environment.

She did a great job at "democratic renewal" in the Cabinet.

If I were the new leader I would dump Stronach and replace her with someone of higher moral standards - like Paris Hilton.

[Guest Warwick Green]

And mailman is now henceforth person-person.

Mankind to be wiped out by language police

TO THE man on the street, the man on the street has never been much of a problem.

But the language police of Scotland's largest council have decreed otherwise. The man on the street and the girls in the office are now officially wrong....

The issue is laid out in "Language Matters: A Guide for Good Practice", which has been circulated to the council's staff and elected officials.

"Sexism continues to disadvantage women both as service users and employees. The use of sexist language, whether spoken or written, reinforces this discrimination," it declares. All staff, it orders, should now stop their sexist ways.

The guide offers a full list of the most shameful examples of sexist-speak. Top of the list are endearments.

"Don't assume it is acceptable to address women by endearments such as 'dear', 'pet' and 'love' when you would not address men in such a way," the guide instructs. "Don't refer to women as 'girls', for example, 'the girls in the office'."

It adds: "The term 'ladies' should only be used in situations where the parallel term 'gentlemen' is used."

All references to a person's gender should be avoided, the guide goes on. "A person's gender is rarely relevant to the job they do, so don't use 'lady' or 'woman' to highlight gender inappropriately, for example 'woman driver', 'lady curator', 'lady councillor', 'woman director'. Similarly don't add 'ess' to the end of job titles as in 'manageress' or 'stewardess'."

"Some words and phrases such as 'manpower' and 'man the office' exclude or ignore women. Use inclusive terms like 'staff' and 'workers' and 'staff the office'."

With communication dealt with, the guide moves on to terms of address. The old custom of referring to a married couple as Mr and Mrs John Smith is completely barred, the guide declares. "Women have names too!" it exclaims.

Equally, the requirement for women to reveal their marital status through the term 'Mrs' or 'Miss' is condemned. "If the woman does not offer her preferred title, assume Ms", the guide instructs.

The suffix 'man' is completely out. Job titles like storeman and clerkess should be replaced with 'storeperson' and 'clerical officer'.

And then there is the man on the street. "The word 'man' is often used as a general term when it is actually intended to mean 'people'. 'Human beings' or the 'human race' is preferable to 'mankind' and the 'ordinary person' replaces the 'man in the street'."...

Richard Cook, director of the Campaign Against Political Correctness, added: "Now that this document is in print as a guide to staff it could be used by more zealous managers looking for an excuse to discipline employees."...

http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1563412006

[Argus]

If Stronach were a man would you and Argus be laughing about her using "daddy's money" and riding "daddy's" coattails all her life? Not likely.

If Stronach were a man who was mainly noted for an obsession with fashion, and had dropped out of school but still given control of his daddy's company, then yes, I would most certainly note it.

This is typical of rightwing Conservatives. They want women back in the kitchen having babies.

Absurd hyperbole.

Belinday is "brainless", says Argus. She's a "dear in the headlights"..."wholy inept".

Just because she's a woman.

Spittle. When I first heard she was running for the Tory leadership I was quite interested. What an outstanding way to change the view everyone had of the Conservatives! A young, intelligent, beautiful woman at the helm! I was quite enthused at the notion.

Then came her very first press conference. I was left shaking my head. She couldn't speak, and seemed helpless dealing with even the most obvious, softball questions. In the days and weeks which followed it turned out this was not an aberation, and I stopped wanting her as the leader, instead believing that would be a disaster.

Based on her lack of abilities, not her gender.

You, on the other hand, seem to have fallen into the same fateful game which overcame the NDP a while back, where they insisted on choosing women as their leaders - regardless of the fact those women were entirely incompetent to the task at hand. This is merely sexism by another name.

In reality, she's a very talented and accomplished woman:

In reality she has accomplished nothing.

But oh no, no woman could possibly be deserving of anything she's done. She must have been given all those awards and placed on all those boards just because of "daddy", right?

Is this a troll? Are you really this naive? OF COURSE it was because of daddy. She was given control (with suitable "advisors") of daddy's gigantic company, and of course, the companies which dealt in the same industry wanted to please daddy, too. Really, you're being absurd. What do you think the odds are of someone else who was a failed college student being given control of a multi-billion dollar company? I mean, it's not like she started out on the floor and worked her way up for years and years to learn the business.

And then she ran for the leadership of the Tory party - again, with no intermediate steps to learn politics - bankrolled by daddy's money once more, with the only thing going for her being people like me who thought this would be a great way to change the party's image - though of course, as they came to know her most changed their minds.

Conservatives have a lot to learn about women.

You have a lot to learn about reality.

[Argus]

Your conservative wife is jealous of this educated, intelligent, articulate, good looking woman.

Uhmmm, Stronach is not educated - she's a college drop-out. As for articulate, she is wholy inept - like a deer caught in the headlights - in front of the cameras in anything but a tightly scripted environment.

She did a great job at "democratic renewal" in the Cabinet.

Yes, please cite her list of accomplishments there.

The only democratic renewal came when she and her party were turfed.

[jbg]

Yes, please cite her list of accomplishments there.

The only democratic renewal came when she and her party were turfed.

Too many to mention or list. Can't remember them offhand, since I'm an amnesiac.

[watching&waiting]

What is a dog? Is he or she not mans best friend ? Also the only person to say the word dog was a liberal. So just how can Mackay be the one charged with uttering this against an empty chair? The liberals are just so desperate that they try to take things like this and make issues out of them. They know that they will never be able to compete with the records of even this minority government, that their liberal dominated senate has tried its best to make everything that much harder to pass. But this minority did mange to pass things and are still fighting to get others past, and people know that they have lived up to their words. Which is something Liberals can not say. They talk one way and then do things another. This has been proven time after time. There are many times I look at this site and certain posters and I think that there only purpose here is to cause trouble. If and when taken to task they do not talke heat very well. But every site needs to have all sides and types, if they are going to really debate the things that come our way.

I have no doubt about what MacKay meant when he looked at the empty chair and said "ask her, you hav her now", but is that calling her a dog? Could he not have meant to ask her about my dog as she could tell you about that, as she knew the dogs owner and the dog? There are just so many things that do not add up in this, that I wonder if the liberals are not trying to smoke screen the Montreal debates where they are trying to eat each other and where it shows the huge rifts in the party. The liberal have a record of doing such things and they can not come off with I am better then that. Remember "Get me some Tequila Shelia and lie down and love me again" ? Not to mention the time of Kim Campbell. But that is all in the past right. The Libberals have changed right? Not likely and if anything the corruption and deciet is running far deeper into their ranks then ever before. Just look at the tactics they are using in this whole thing. It was made and given birth to by Liberals and is being pushed by Liberals, and remember it was a liberal that said dog, not any CPC or any other. Only Liberals say they heard MacKay but the record shows no such reference etc. So who would anyone trust in this. Surely not a Liberal. I will wait and hear what Mackay has to say on this when he is good and ready, because I believe, it will end up showing just how low and pittiful the Liberals have again sunk. Their credibility is already below curb level, I guess the sewers are the next playing field, but by the actions of the Montreal debates this weekend, I think they already found the sewers.

[Ricki Bobbi]

I have no doubt about what MacKay meant when he looked at the empty chair and said "ask her, you hav her now", but is that calling her a dog? Could he not have meant to ask her about my dog as she could tell you about that, as she knew the dogs owner and the dog? There are just so many things that do not add up in this, that I wonder if the liberals are not trying to smoke screen the Montreal debates where they are trying to eat each other and where it shows the huge rifts in the party.

Smokescreen is the key.

Watch out for the Liberal apologists. They attack without thought or even a consideration of the truth. It worked so well for them in January they are thnking of using the same playbook again.

[gerryhatrick]

But oh no, no woman could possibly be deserving of anything she's done. She must have been given all those awards and placed on all those boards just because of "daddy", right?

Conservatives have a lot to learn about women.

After dropping out of university she worked at a company with $20 Billion annual revenues for just seven years before becoming a Vice President.

This was nepotism plain and simple.

I'll post it again:

She has chaired the boards of Decoma International Inc., Tesma International Inc., and Intier Automotive Inc., all in the auto parts sector. She was a founding member of the Canadian Automotive Partnership Council and served on the Ontario Task Force on Productivity, Competitiveness and Economic Progress. She is a director of the Yves Landry Foundation, which furthers technological education and skills training in the manufacturing sector.

In 2001, the National Post named Stronach as the most powerful businesswoman in Canada; and, in the same year, the World Economic Forum named her a "Global Leader of Tomorrow." Fortune Magazine ranked her #2 in its list of the world's most powerful women in business in 2002. She was also named one of Canada's "Top 40 Under 40." In April 2004, Time Magazine ranked her as one of the world's 100 most influential people.

Stronach is honorary chair of the Southlake Regional Health Centre fundraising campaign and a former honorary chair of the Howdown fundraising campaign. In 2003, she received one of Canada's oldest and most distinguished awards, the Beth Shalom Humanitarian Award, presented in recognition of outstanding achievement in humanitarian service.

Pretty sad trying to cry sexism in this case.

Why? Because you don't think she's accomplished, therefore there's no sexism?

It matters little who she is or what she's accomplished, calling her a "dog" in her workpalce REEKS of sexism as well as just a general messed up attitude towards women.

What kind of man calls his ex a dog in public? Is that what you're defending here? Is that what Conservatives stand up for?

[Guest Warwick Green]

I have no doubt about what MacKay meant when he looked at the empty chair and said "ask her, you hav her now", but is that calling her a dog? Could he not have meant to ask her about my dog as she could tell you about that, as she knew the dogs owner and the dog? There are just so many things that do not add up in this, that I wonder if the liberals are not trying to smoke screen the Montreal debates where they are trying to eat each other and where it shows the huge rifts in the party.

Smokescreen is the key.

Watch out for the Liberal apologists. They attack without thought or even a consideration of the truth. It worked so well for them in January they are thnking of using the same playbook again.

In the eyes of the public this is now yesterday's issue but it hasn't stopped Jolly Jack from continuing to go on about it. That's why the NDP are a rump group.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Why? Because you don't think she's accomplished, therefore there's no sexism?

It matters little who she is or what she's accomplished, calling her a "dog" in her workpalce REEKS of sexism as well as just a general messed up attitude towards women.

What kind of man calls his ex a dog in public? Is that what you're defending here? Is that what Conservatives stand up for?

Ahhh, tiresome.

She chaired the board of three companies owned by Daddy does not equal accomplishment!

She chaired the board of three companies owned by Daddy = NEPOTISM!

MacKay never called her a dog. Your 'analogies' are strained and deceitful.

What we stand for is honesty in government, keeping electoral promises and fiscal responsibility.

We have delivered. The Liberals didn't. That is why you keep up this sad charade of trying to manufacture a scandal.

[jefferiah]

Once again, though, the point I am making is that society has a way of being so paranoid about things like sexism and racism that when one person who happens to be a member of a certain group is insulted people automatically label it sexism or racism. Peter Mckay's calling Stronach a dog in the workplace is not sexist. People insult each other in politics all the time. He did not insinuate women are dogs. Think about it. Does this mean that from now on if you want to insult someone or even criticize someone you had better make sure they are of the same race and gender as you, just in case someone thinks you have it out for all the other members of that race or gender.

[gerryhatrick]

Why? Because you don't think she's accomplished, therefore there's no sexism?

It matters little who she is or what she's accomplished, calling her a "dog" in her workpalce REEKS of sexism as well as just a general messed up attitude towards women.

What kind of man calls his ex a dog in public? Is that what you're defending here? Is that what Conservatives stand up for?

Ahhh, tiresome.

She chaired the board of three companies owned by Daddy does not equal accomplishment!

She chaired the board of three companies owned by Daddy = NEPOTISM!

There is quite a bit beyond that in there, which you conveniently ignore. But it's really irrelavent to be examining what she's done. I only bring it out to put the like to these very tiresome attacks on her as being brainless etc.

MacKay never called her a dog. Your 'analogies' are strained and deceitful.

How are my analogies strained or deceitful? You haven't been able to answer them straight on at all.

Your arguing of this point is strained and deceitful if anything is.

[Figleaf]

I certainly think Peter Mckay should have watched his tongue about Stronach. Calling her a dog is not good PR for the Conservatives. But I also think the liberal reaction was sort of out of this world. ...

You mean Liberal, I think.

[Figleaf]

... This is what I cant stand about liberals. They turn everything and everyone who disagrees with them into "a bible-thumping nazi, women hating fascist." Its ridiculous!

What? I'm a liberal (though not a Liberal) and I resent that comment.

[Ricki Bobbi]

There is quite a bit beyond that in there, which you conveniently ignore. But it's really irrelavent to be examining what she's done. I only bring it out to put the like to these very tiresome attacks on her as being brainless etc.

How are my analogies strained or deceitful? You haven't been able to answer them straight on at all.

Your arguing of this point is strained and deceitful if anything is.

She wouldn't have accomplished any of that without Daddy's influence and money.

Your analogy doesn't make sense.

He motioned towards her chair and said you already have her = he called her a dog!

Open to interpretation. Decorum is missing on both sides of the aisle. But not in your spiteful hateful world.

You hate Harper and the Conservatives. Always do. Close-minded. But that's ok, come spring you'll have another four years of spewing your hatred towards the Government confirmed by Canadian voters!

[gerryhatrick]

Your analogy doesn't make sense.

And you're unable to explain why, conveniently.

He motioned towards her chair and said you already have her = he called her a dog!

Open to interpretation.

He did that in answer to the question "Peter, what about your dog?"

Please Ricki, what other interpretations is that open to, in your view?

You hate Harper and the Conservatives. Always do. Close-minded. But that's ok, come spring you'll have another four years of spewing your hatred towards the Government confirmed by Canadian voters!

I know it's become a habit for you, but please try harder to refrain from personal attacks.

My position that Mackay called Belinda a dog is a solid position based upon logic and common sense and evidence. It's hardly "hateful" or "close-minded" to take a position in such a way.

[jefferiah]

Figleaf I apologize for that comment. I know that was quite a generalization on my part. I am sorry for that I should have thought before that, however I do find that many leftists use this approach to logic, labelling the conservatives in our country as war mongering, religious right, etc etc....I think Canada is a very liberal country overall, even with the Tory's in power, and I really dont get these complaints about how unfair the Tory's are. I am sick of people complaining about this. The other day on the news I saw a Muslim girl complaining that Franklin Graham was invited to speak in Winnipeg soon, and that Canada has a double standard because they would not allow a very controversial Muslim to come speak (one who made comments about Jews and and in support of Jihad). I dont understand why a grade three student gets kicked out of school for bringing a paring knife in her lunch kit, while a Sikh teenager can wear a kirpan (dagger) to school. Nothing against Sikhs. But Canada has a push-over government. Even more so with liberals in power. If you have to check your religion and your prayers at the door when you go to school, I am sure a Sikh can check his kirpan.

[g_bambino]

I certainly think Peter Mckay should have watched his tongue about Stronach. Calling her a dog is not good PR for the Conservatives. But I also think the liberal reaction was sort of out of this world. And its things like this that make me leary about supporting liberals. Somehow calling Belinda Stronach a dog became the ultimate sexist remark in the liberals minds. It was even equated with "discouraging women from entering politics in the future". Something of that nature. McKay called Stronach a dog, not all women. As far as I know, there are alot of people who don't like Stronach out there, and most of them are not her ex-boyfriend. I think the luberals should stick to the real reason for demanding an apology. Belinda Stronach was offended by being called a dog, not all women. How does this really relate to all women? And when the media gave a little attention to her affair with Tie Domi (and it wasnt all that much really), which you have to expect since she is a public figure, she said that was sexism too. Isn't that a little bit ridiculous?

Someone else may already have brought this up in this very lengthy thread, but my first thought upon hearing about this was, even if MacKay did allude to Stronach as a dog, MPs throw insults at each other in the House (and out of it) all the time. The only difference now seems to be that it's okay to throw insults at male MPs, but not at females. So, this appears to be simply an instance of women like Belinda screeching demands to be treated equally, while all the while expecting to be treated differently.

[Figleaf]

blah

Edited July 28, 2007 by Figleaf

[jefferiah]

Classical Liberal a la Von Mises, figleaf?