Liberals Using sexist Card via Stronach

[jefferiah]

I think the afore mentioned of example of women calling men "dogs" does not mean "you sly dawg you". So I really dont think dog is gender specific. Yet, lets say it is, for the skae of argument. How does a gender specific insult make a person a chauvinist? Lets say dog is only feasible as an insult when used with a woman. Sexism and chauvinism implies a biased view towards women in general. The fact that Peter McKay called Belinda Stronach a dog doesnt mean he views all women this way, and it doesnt mean all conservatives view women as less than men. Just because a term is gender specific doesnt make it sexist. Lets take "bitch" for example. I cant use it on a man. I know that. But women use it to describe other women all the time. Does this mean they are self-hating women? Of course not bitch is like saying naggy, unfair, woman. What difference does it make if it indicates a woman really. Cmon. I think people are fishing and over-analyzing the term dog a little too much to blow it up into something its not. Calling Belinda a dog doesnt mean he thinks women are dogs, or that it shows conservatives think badly of women. Think. Suppose he said "she is a worm". I suppose that would be wrong too. The proper thing to say would be "that person is a worm". Although I suppose if he did that the liberals would say he would be making a mockery of political correctness and is therefore double chauvinist.

[jefferiah]

yep typical Liberal Canada thinking all people are created equal some more equal than others. Puhlease

Well, I'm not sure it's indicative of all Liberals, but it certainly is duplicitious.

Wondering further on my point above, perhaps if Belinda had thrown the insult Peter's way the reaction wouldn't be silent, but rather, would be met with approving laughs, cheers of female empowerment, and calls of "you go girl!"

The insult would have been met by the same faked outrage no matter what sex or party the sharp tounged idiot belonged to. As has been said before the only reason this story has any legs is because MacKay is too stuborn to apologize. If he had, nobody would be talking about it anymore.

The fact that he is so stuborn definitely plays into the hands of Belinda though. She has been trying to rebuild her political image as a champion on women in politics. Pete's little outburst helped to hasten her makeover a smidge.

you are right. McKay should have apologized. but it would not have changed the reaction. this is not a terrible thing in belinda's life. she is not all that offended. the liberals are glad to have this chance to exploit an insult and turn it into sexism. i dont think a man or women should be called a dog in politics or anywhere. That said everyone has thrown an insult here and there. I am sure he didnt mean anything about women in general by it. But I think the liberals love using it against him. But yeah after seeing how he refused to admit it, I lost alot of respect for McKay too. But turning it into a an all out attack on women is pretty petty. Especially all this analyzation of the word "dog". My goodness. People are really fishing arent they. And the thing is that they are not only using it against McKay, but against Conservatives in general. I think a truly honest and intelligent seeker of sexual equality would be more offended at Stronach than McKay.

[MightyAC]

you are right. McKay should have apologized. but it would not have changed the reaction. this is not a terrible thing in belinda's life. she is not all that offended. the liberals are glad to have this chance to exploit an insult and turn it into sexism. i dont think a man or women should be called a dog in politics or anywhere. That said everyone has thrown an insult here and there. I am sure he didnt mean anything about women in general by it. But I think the liberals love using it against him. But yeah after seeing how he refused to admit it, I lost alot of respect for McKay too. But turning it into a an all out attack on women is pretty petty. Especially all this analyzation of the word "dog". My goodness. People are really fishing arent they. And the thing is that they are not only using it against McKay, but against Conservatives in general. I think a truly honest and intelligent seeker of sexual equality would be more offended at Stronach than McKay.

Politics is primarily an on going popularity contest. All parties attack and exploit everything they can. The Cons, NDP and Bloc would do the same thing.

The fact remains that Pete had the power to take away all of their amunition with a quick apology. However, he didn't thought he could get away with it. That was a bonehead move. This story will evaporate today or tomorrow...but it still lasted a few days longer than it had to simply because MacKay is a stuborn fool that thought he got away with one.

[mcqueen625]

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?

If you listened to the new broadcast Peter McKay never used the term Dog, and Liberal member did, and Peter supposedly just made a gesture, they said toward where she sits. Besides, if the shoe fit, wear it Bimbo, Belinda

[M.Dancer]

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?

If you listened to the new broadcast Peter McKay never used the term Dog, and Liberal member did, and Peter supposedly just made a gesture, they said toward where she sits. Besides, if the shoe fit, wear it Bimbo, Belinda

Well, I don't know about the new broadcast, I haven't heard it yet, but the old broadcast had a liberal heckler asking if they (at least) cared about the dogs, and Mackay said while gesturing to Stronach's empty seat, you already have her.

Now this would already have been forgetten had not MacKay in fine lawyerly fashion do everything except out and out lie about it. The twists and turns would be the envy of an acrobat. We hear (rightfuly) he didn't actually call her a dog. No he didn't....he infered....we hear it isn't in the hansard....no it isn't, it's on tape.

The Government had an opportunitu to seize the high ground buty instead choose to bury its head in the sand and send MacKay off on a junket to hide.. Shame really, instead the issue came around and bit them in the arse.

[watching&waiting]

I can think of many things I that I would say about Belinda, and dog is not what I would have thought to be all that hurtful. Since Belinda seems to not be without male companionship for any long period of time, and she does seem to have a penchent for male celebrity, I would think that dog has crossed the minds of many when they have thought about her.

If she had called MacKay a dog, would we all be wasting so much time asking her for an apology? Mackay inferred the actual issue and so we do not even have the event having legs. Maybe sign language is the norm in the house. Either way, it is only the opposition that is wasting time in the house howling about this and this at a time when their own leadership race, is likened to a trin wreck about to happen. Their party is fractured and split, and it seems like it is going to be divided into may parts, and they spend all this time about this. Boy we can really see where this is so much more important then getting the bills that actually mean something debated and passed.

It also was said today that the Surete Quebec are now further investigating the Sponsorship Scandel even further as they have many leads that show some of the major players had escaped from this and "were now laughing up their sleeves", as they put it. So it does seem that we have not heard the last of this, and it looks like now the areas that Fraser could not address are now going to be addressed and charges laid. You would think that the Liberals would be better at chosing what to fight about when these things are looming. But I guess their bad choices do not stop at petty politics, now do they.

[MightyAC]

You bring up many separate issues.

The one pertaining to this thread is that MacKay said something he shouldn't have. No big deal it happens. However, when it does happen a quick apology is in order. He didn't apologize, in fact he lied. That's the issue. It wasn't a story before but now it is.

Bringing up leadership races, sponsorship scandals, and the fact that Belinda is of low character is all a little song and dance routine meant to distract from the actual issue. MacKay lied and tried to avoid what otherwise would be a trivial issue.

Now let's stop defending a liar he's always been one. He ran for the leadership of the PC's promising never to merge the party but that was a lie to. I actually liked Pete...much better than Harper in fact. I had hoped he would take a shot at the leadership of the CPC or as I like to call it...the unholy alliance. I guess you can't expect to win a leadership race when you lied to your half of the party though.

His original burn was quite witty, I liked it. Too bad he had to lie and hide when a quick apology would have made him the winner. Anyway, Pete is now showing his ugly, stubborn side and tarnishing his reputation.

[watching&waiting]

The very fact that the Liberals would stop the government to even ask for this apology and then state they will continue, with this non issue is just showing that they are really not aparty anyone should vote for. Even if he called her using words instead of implied words, it would stlill be a non event. Maybe you just have not seen the implied apology for his implied offence.

The house has already ruled it did not offend the house and it has been already said that no apology will be forth coming. The liberals once again ignore the house rulings as they think they are above that. That is why they are in the position they are in now. The more they push this the more they will lose. But it is just so like the Liberals to eb singing while the ship they are in is sinking fast.

Also I do not think that MacKay is worried that this will be on his record, and of course in time it will be nothing but a blip.

[MightyAC]

Again you tip toe around the fact that a prominent CPC Minister lied and when caught he ran and hid. This issue will die soon...MacKay should have killed it with an apology but hey he's above that I guess.

I don't particularly like the Liberal party but I will defend them here. You call them a sinking ship yet even without a leader they are running neck and neck with your boys in blue. That has to be scary.

Just because you bought a little blue membership card (I don't know if a CPC membership is actually blue) doesn't mean you have to defend or attempt to excuse their mistakes. All parties make mistakes; they are simply a group of greedy, ambitious human beings. I prefer it when they simply admit they made a mistake and move on.

Those little cards sure are powerful though. Whether they are blue, red, orange, etc it causes people to loose all reason and defend the party to the bitter end. I think we should have those cards tested for mind controlling chemicals.

[jefferiah]

If he apologized for the mere insult it would appear to be conceding to the Liberal assertion that he was a sexist and his comment was aimed at all women. The thing is being called a dog is not so hurtful at all. I am sure Belinda's demand for an apology is not over the anguish she suffered. Pffttt.....Peter McKay did not actually use the word dog, but responded to the term dog when it was thrown at him by a liberal MP...and sort of in private. If this were so hurtful and damaging I dont think that Liberal MP would have told the absent Belinda for fear of sending her into a pit of mental despair at being called a dog. No....this is not an insult, but opportunity to the Liberals.

[M.Dancer]

I am sure Belinda's demand for an apology is not over the anguish she suffered.

You are 100% correct. Her demand for an apology is not for herself but in her own words for the dignity of the house.

[MightyAC]

Correct, an opportunity created by the lie and lack of apology. If Pete apologized right after it was made public he would not be conceeding to anything, just that he shouldn't have made the remark. Instead his deceitful cowardice gave the Liberals a chance to paint him as a woman hating ogre. That may not be the case but that's politics all parties capitalize on the mistakes of others. It's too bad that Pete allowed such a grand stage to be created on such a dumb issue with such a simple solution.

[M.Dancer]

Correct, an opportunity created by the lie and lack of apology. If Pete apologized right after it was made public he would not be conceeding to anything, just that he shouldn't have made the remark. Instead his deceitful cowardice gave the Liberals a chance to paint him as a woman hating ogre. That may not be the case but that's politics all parties capitalize on the mistakes of others. It's too bad that Pete allowed such a grand stage to be created on such a dumb issue with such a simple solution.

I don't think they are painting him as a woman hater.....just as you say, he's painted himself as a deceitful coward....as indeed he is and has been born out by his political decisions.....remember when he led the party of MacDonald? What happened to them, they were sold to the lowest bidder.........

[watching&waiting]

Well I guess it really take some doing but I can see that many here want to nflate this into some big bad thing. Well I say let them wait for the lection and see just how much water it holds. So blow it up and when it busts and the fallout is on the Liberals for portraying it as much more then it was, then I will just smile and watch the CPC majority roll over the Libs.

[M.Dancer]

CPC majority roll over the Libs

You still believe in Santa?

[M.Dancer]

Know what will be funny? If the Libs replace the Harperites, the whining from the western right about how Canada has failed them...western alienation.....how democracy is broke...etc etc etc....now that will be funnnnay!

[Argus]

Again you tip toe around the fact that a prominent CPC Minister lied and when caught he ran and hid.

That would be ONE for the Harper government as opposed to what, ten million for the previous Liberal government? You could not pick one day, one question period of the last ten years where various government ministers didn't get up and lie, including that pompous windbag, Goodale. They lied in their election ads, they lied in their red books, they lied in their budgeting and accounting, they lied in the House, they lied to reporters, they lied to everyone. Goodale is lying now when he claims this is a matter of principal as all know he has no principals. This is just some handy stick they hope to beat the government with. This continued shrill whining has no other purpose.

[Argus]

Correct, an opportunity created by the lie and lack of apology. If Pete apologized right after it was made public he would not be conceeding to anything, just that he shouldn't have made the remark. Instead his deceitful cowardice gave the Liberals a chance to paint him as a woman hating ogre. That may not be the case but that's politics all parties capitalize on the mistakes of others. It's too bad that Pete allowed such a grand stage to be created on such a dumb issue with such a simple solution.

It's too bad the Liberals and NDP care so little about this country, and have so little interest in making any possible contribution to its running that they will waste days on this pissante thing. If I was Harper I'd stop all his ministers from showing up in question period, just send the parliamentary assistants and have them read newspapers and not respond to any questions about this ridiculous, petty so-called issue.

[Argus]

I don't think they are painting him as a woman hater.....just as you say, he's painted himself as a deceitful coward....as indeed he is and has been born out by his political decisions.....remember when he led the party of MacDonald? What happened to them, they were sold to the lowest bidder.........

You make it sound like anyone else would have paid more for a bankrupt party with no supporters.

Woulda been interesting, though, if they'd gone into the next election as the PC party and been unable to afford to buy any advertising, or even pay for yard signs or a bus.

[watching&waiting]

Well I guess I will have to say that using my own experience of what it takes to call a person a dog. If a man is chasing many females and he is not so fssy about whether thay are married or not, I would call him a dog. Now all things being equall I have to use that same criteria for Belinda, and so yes I call her a dogand mean it. The whole rub here is that everyone kno that MacKay implied she was a dog and that all know he did not mean it. So there is no real hate and no real offense. Belinda was not there to hear it or see it, so she can not say she is hurt by it as it would only be those making something of it that would have made here aware. Toughen up Belinda you will be called much worse and I would even find it hard to think that with the trail of man in your wake that your own father has not mused the use of dog or bitch in heat, type phrases, whenit comes to the things you have been known to do.

[M.Dancer]

It's too bad the Liberals and NDP care so little about this country, and have so little interest in making any possible contribution to its running that they will waste days on this pissante thing. If I was Harper I'd stop all his ministers from showing up in question period, just send the parliamentary assistants and have them read newspapers and not respond to any questions about this ridiculous, petty so-called issue.

I wish you were Harper.....

[MightyAC]

Again you tip toe around the fact that a prominent CPC Minister lied and when caught he ran and hid.

That would be ONE for the Harper government as opposed to what, ten million for the previous Liberal government? You could not pick one day, one question period of the last ten years where various government ministers didn't get up and lie, including that pompous windbag, Goodale.

The typical party apologist approach when you have no defense is to say "uh well the other guys are worse"... The Green Plan sucks..."Uh well, the Libs did nothing". Emerson crossed the floor..."Uh well Belinda did too"... It kind of sounds like two 5 year olds arguing in the school yard doesn’t it?

Every government blames the one before...I wonder who John A. blamed? It must have been tough for him, maybe that's why he drank so much. The man would spend a week in a hotel room with a case of scotch and a few hookers...although can you blame him?

Whether or not a Liberal, Ralph Goodale, if that’s even his real name, or any other politician has lied in the past Pete MacKay still screwed up here. He made a quick witted, funny comment, which should not have been said. Instead of apologizing and winning this hands down he lied, acted like a coward and hid. Thus an issue was created.

A guy that would lie about such a trivial issue raises questions about his own character. A guy like that may even lie and sell out an entire party….nah, that could never happen Conservatives have an infallible “moral compass” right?

Argus, W&W, et al. you don't have to defend him...it's ok...life will go on. Sometimes it is ok to say yeah he blew this one big time and move on... Maybe it's the mind controlling chemicals in the party membership cards that are forcing these ridiculous song and dance routines.

I don’t even care about this issue I just get so sick of people that have already picked a side even before an issue arises.

[Argus]

Again you tip toe around the fact that a prominent CPC Minister lied and when caught he ran and hid.

That would be ONE for the Harper government as opposed to what, ten million for the previous Liberal government? You could not pick one day, one question period of the last ten years where various government ministers didn't get up and lie, including that pompous windbag, Goodale.

The typical party apologist approach when you have no defense is to say "uh well the other guys are worse"... The Green Plan sucks..."Uh well, the Libs did nothing". Emerson crossed the floor..."Uh well Belinda did too"... It kind of sounds like two 5 year olds arguing in the school yard doesn’t it?

What planet are you writing from? Seriously?

Unless one is an ideologue or zealot one attempts to select the party which is least offensive, least problematical in its behaviour and policies, and least dishonest.

Argus, W&W, et al. you don't have to defend him...it's ok...life will go on. Sometimes it is ok to say yeah he blew this one big time and move on...

I think the issue is so trivial that I really don't hold him much at fault if he did or didn't. I am much more annoyed with Goodale, Layton et al for wasting so much time and energy, being so self-righteous, so pompous, outraged and phoney and trying to make this into some grand condemnation of conservatism.

I notice their dishonesty doesn't bother you at all. They're all pushing the line that this is the mean, neo-cons, and this is what they think of women. Never mind that Mckay is a red tory of old.

[JAh-man]

Maybe the liberals wouldn't be doing this if some conservative weren't such easy targets.. Generalizing women as being weaker and less knwoledgeable proves my point.. It might be shocking too you guy's but thats sexism.. The rest of us realized this in the 60's.. As a coloured person the more I here about people black and asian people being barred from entering bars in Calgary it, makes me wonder if people really are as arogant as they portray themselves on this page.. Luckily I live in a place where conservatism doesn't exist.. Halalujah

[jefferiah]

How did McKay generalize women as being weaker Jah-man? he called belinda stronach a dog, not all women....woop dee doo.....some NDP woman called Stockwell Day a Cockroach....childish maybe....but I dont think that just because someone from the opposite sex insults a man its cuz she is a female chauvinist. I am sure Belinda has muttered enough insults about people under her breath. A Belinda supporter on this thread here, in another thread referred to me as a Prat. Whatever a prat is. Woopidee Diddly Doo