Stronach crosses the floor

[Winsor_Pilates]

The defending of the sexist wording being used is just total BS
Playing it off as being used in a certain context is such a copout, and I find it hard to believe anyone could truely believe that, without viewing the situation with extreme bias.

These words would never be used if Belinda was a male. If a man walked the floor yesterday, would he be called a prostitute, whore or slut?
There's not a person on here that could answer yes with an honest, straight face.

It's funny, that on another post, almost everyone seemed to be in agreement that the childish language used around Canadian politics of late have been embarrasing by both sides. And now that Stronach crosses the floor, it's all good to act like A-holes again?
And all the people who say don't be so sensitive, I bet you wern't saying that when the Liberals MP called the Conservatives the KKK.

No matter what party you support, you should demand a little more professionalism from their members and the media. Don't make excuses for the people who have made stupid comments.

[CaramonLS]

I've called men sluts and whores before. Its not a gender specific word.

And if some "guy" in the PC party crossed the line, I'd be more than willing to call him a power mongering whore.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by CaramonLS@May 18 2005, 07:26 PM
I've called men sluts and whores before. Its not a gender specific word.

And if some "guy" in the PC party crossed the line, I'd be more than willing to call him a power mongering whore.

Apparently the guy who said she was "whoring herself out" issued an apology today. I saw him on the television set saying that his wife had given him the gears for using such language.

I think they mentioned he's an evangelical minister so that's good that he would be so kind.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally posted by CaramonLS@May 18 2005, 06:26 PM
I've called men sluts and whores before. Its not a gender specific word.

They're not by definition, but they are used toward females far more than toward males and the impact of them is much stronger when speaking of a female, which is why they are being used. Do you honestly think these references would have been made as often if she was a male?

And if some "guy" in the PC party crossed the line, I'd be more than willing to call him a power mongering whore.

Fine, how about the media references of her being a blonde, or of her in bed with Martin. Does it not bother you that this important political move (whether you agree with it or not) has been reduced to these things? I'm just wondering where you would draw the line, are all of these things fair game, or would you admit some comments have gone too far?

Also the fact that you would call them whores, isn't what's troubling to me. I expect a bit more profesionalism from our MP's and journalists than I do from a bunch of people on this forum.
If the MP who called her a whore, can admit it was wrong of him, why can't you?

[Blaster86]

Conservatives call her a slut and a whore.

I, as a Liberal call her a Savior. I don't care WHY she crossed the floor, just that she did and she gave all the right reasons.

The only reason I am worried with her now is if she flips and does it again at another turn and goes to the CPC.

This is how politics works, she already was one of the more moderate Conservatives. A 'Red' Conservative if you will. So the Liberals are not a very large ideologic leap for her, the jump was a surprise but not totally unfounded.

She is not the first to jump ship because of Harper, and probably won't be the last.

On another note, any word on what her beau Mackay is doing?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by Blaster86@May 19 2005, 02:11 AM

On another note, any word on what her beau Mackay is doing?

Apparently he took it hard.

I read that he was asked not to attend the press conference because Harper didn't want things to get messy.

But today, it seems like he is going to try and use what happened to gain sympathy from the public.

[CaramonLS]

Originally posted by Winsor_Pilates+May 19 2005, 01:51 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Winsor_Pilates @ May 19 2005, 01:51 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-CaramonLS@May 18 2005, 06:26 PM
I've called men sluts and whores before. Its not a gender specific word.

They're not by definition, but they are used toward females far more than toward males and the impact of them is much stronger when speaking of a female, which is why they are being used. Do you honestly think these references would have been made as often if she was a male?

And if some "guy" in the PC party crossed the line, I'd be more than willing to call him a power mongering whore.

Fine, how about the media references of her being a blonde, or of her in bed with Martin. Does it not bother you that this important political move (whether you agree with it or not) has been reduced to these things? I'm just wondering where you would draw the line, are all of these things fair game, or would you admit some comments have gone too far?

Also the fact that you would call them whores, isn't what's troubling to me. I expect a bit more profesionalism from our MP's and journalists than I do from a bunch of people on this forum.
If the MP who called her a whore, can admit it was wrong of him, why can't you? [/b][/quote]
Well calling her a whore in this type of PC world is a no-no. I mean it probably wouldn't have gotten even half the press if it was:

a) a woman making the whore comments.

b) referencing a man instead of a woman.

Maybe its just me, but I just don't see whore as really being a sexist word. I mean its not like he said "she should be crossing buns instead of crossing the floor".

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+May 18 2005, 08:14 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ May 18 2005, 08:14 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Blaster86@May 19 2005, 02:11 AM

On another note, any word on what her beau Mackay is doing?

Apparently he took it hard.

I read that he was asked not to attend the press conference because Harper didn't want things to get messy.

But today, it seems like he is going to try and use what happened to gain sympathy from the public. [/b][/quote]
I saw him on the news. He's gone to the family farm (don't know where that is) and was marching around in rubber boots and carrying very long-handled tools and buckets and such.

He said he hasn't slept in a couple days but that part is personal so didn't go any further. He seemed like a guy that got dumped hard which is exactly what happened, though I don't think I've ever seen a dumping quite this spectacular.

They should tone down any "the poor guy" stuff and tone up the "what kind of a woman does this?" talk. Forget the politics and all that, it was really a harsh and humiliating thing to do to someone.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by CaramonLS+May 18 2005, 08:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (CaramonLS @ May 18 2005, 08:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

They're not by definition, but they are used toward females far more than toward males and the impact of them is much stronger when speaking of a female, which is why they are being used. Do you honestly think these references would have been made as often if she was a male?

Fine, how about the media references of her being a blonde, or of her in bed with Martin. Does it not bother you that this important political move (whether you agree with it or not) has been reduced to these things? I'm just wondering where you would draw the line, are all of these things fair game, or would you admit some comments have gone too far?

Also the fact that you would call them whores, isn't what's troubling to me. I expect a bit more profesionalism from our MP's and journalists than I do from a bunch of people on this forum.
If the MP who called her a whore, can admit it was wrong of him, why can't you?

Well calling her a whore in this type of PC world is a no-no. I mean it probably wouldn't have gotten even half the press if it was:

a) a woman making the whore comments.

b) referencing a man instead of a woman.

Maybe its just me, but I just don't see whore as really being a sexist word. I mean its not like he said "she should be crossing buns instead of crossing the floor". [/b][/quote]
If Anne McClellan called Stockwell Day a whore or a slut or suggested he was giving Harper the old in-'n-out, you don't think it would get a lot of attention?

I do.

I agree it's not like saying she should be baking hot-cross buns, but it is like saying she stands on the corner yelling "booty for sale".

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@May 18 2005, 07:24 PM
I saw him on the news. He's gone to the family farm (don't know where that is) and was marching around in rubber boots and carrying very long-handled tools and buckets and such.

Wow, he really must be hurt. Rubber boots, long handles and buckets. that's rough. I wouldn't wish that kind of misery on anyone. :P

[FlamesAddiction]

How many people actually listened to her whole statement?

I just heard the soundbites until now. After listening to the whole thing, I am even more impressed with her decision. She sounds like he heart is in the right place.

http://www.cbc.ca/clips/ram-newsworld/stro..._stmt050517.ram

[CaramonLS]

To me she sounds like a big fat Phoney.

She couldn't tell Mackay until right before she decided to defect? Yeah thats respectable.

I'd respect her decision a lot more if she didn't take a cabinet position with the Liberals... thats one of the things that just makes this whole situation reek of underhanded power seeking.

[longsuffering]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction@May 18 2005, 08:42 PM
How many people actually listened to her whole statement?

Hey, hey, now.

Don't try and bring facts into the debate.

You don't expect the CPC supporters on this board to actually let gacts get in the way of their 'intellectual' commentary do you?

They've got their heads so far .................. stuck in the ground, that they refuse to even consider that one of their Party's former moderate 'stars' could no longer support a party, or party leader, that doesn't wish to include moderates.

Let the CPC'ers continue to engage in name calling. Let them continue to demonstrate what tolerance would look like in their Canada, Canada where women would be bitches and whores and rights activists would be bleeding heart homohuggers.

They are probably doing more to convince people to turn away from the former (and future?) Reform Party.

Welcome back to the fringe CPC.

[CaramonLS]

Originally posted by longsuffering+May 19 2005, 04:08 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (longsuffering @ May 19 2005, 04:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-FlamesAddiction@May 18 2005, 08:42 PM
How many people actually listened to her whole statement?

Hey, hey, now.

Don't try and bring facts into the debate.

You don't expect the CPC supporters on this board to actually let gacts get in the way of their 'intellectual' commentary do you?

They've got their heads so far .................. stuck in the ground, that they refuse to even consider that one of their Party's former moderate 'stars' could no longer support a party, or party leader, that doesn't wish to include moderates.

Let the CPC'ers continue to engage in name calling. Let them continue to demonstrate what tolerance would look like in their Canada, Canada where women would be bitches and whores and rights activists would be bleeding heart homohuggers.

They are probably doing more to convince people to turn away from the former (and future?) Reform Party.

Welcome back to the fringe CPC. [/b][/quote]
You look just as ignorant as the people you are attempting to insult.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Come on the name calling isn't a attack on her being a female, and neither is the term being in bed with the enemy. Sorry, but that term has been used for decades if not centuries to explain deals which could be viewed as underhanded which this one certainly was if you think about it for a while. She gets treated with the kid gloves as can be seen by her having no political experience and still getting a spot in the shadow cabinet.

Furthermore with the name calling I have heard much worse being used to describe Harper and especially Day on these boards or at least very similar comments.

I sort of respected her before for having views that differed from the party and keeping those views, but to go out and act like she did seems just sort of corrupt, although we all know that the Liberals wouldn't do anything that was corrupt right? I am done with these guys (and I use the term in a gender neutral sense) attempting to pull the wool over my eyes, and tell me that they are the clean saviours of canada and no one knew what was going on except for three or four people.... who really were not liberals. But if they have already been proven to be corrupt why give them the benifit of the doubt with respect to determining whether they used means that would be considered corrupt in luring conservative MPs to their party, especially with the alligations which have been floating around as of late.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally posted by longsuffering+May 19 2005, 04:08 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (longsuffering @ May 19 2005, 04:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-FlamesAddiction@May 18 2005, 08:42 PM
How many people actually listened to her whole statement?

Hey, hey, now.

Don't try and bring facts into the debate.

You don't expect the CPC supporters on this board to actually let gacts get in the way of their 'intellectual' commentary do you?

They've got their heads so far .................. stuck in the ground, that they refuse to even consider that one of their Party's former moderate 'stars' could no longer support a party, or party leader, that doesn't wish to include moderates.

Let the CPC'ers continue to engage in name calling. Let them continue to demonstrate what tolerance would look like in their Canada, Canada where women would be bitches and whores and rights activists would be bleeding heart homohuggers.

They are probably doing more to convince people to turn away from the former (and future?) Reform Party.

Welcome back to the fringe CPC. [/b][/quote]
Wow . . . thats all I can say is wow.

you sound like a liberal trying to marginalize everyone who dosen't agree with you.

Unreal

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally posted by RougeUnderoos+May 19 2005, 01:45 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RougeUnderoos @ May 19 2005, 01:45 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-CaramonLS@May 18 2005, 07:26 PM
I've called men sluts and whores before. Its not a gender specific word.

And if some "guy" in the PC party crossed the line, I'd be more than willing to call him a power mongering whore.

Apparently the guy who said she was "whoring herself out" issued an apology today. I saw him on the television set saying that his wife had given him the gears for using such language.

I think they mentioned he's an evangelical minister so that's good that he would be so kind. [/b][/quote]
Shocking that a conservative is willing to apologize for a poor taste comment, but the Liberal's still refuse to apologize for alluding to the conservative party being bo better than the KKK, or that crosses are being burnt in Kamloops.

[Clarkey]

Whoever said that Martin is respected on the world stage needs to get off the pot. First of all no one knows who he is, and second the person he needs to get respect from most to benefit our economy is Bushy. Not to say that we need to become a doormat to the U.S.

I think Belinda Stronsa was pretty promising for all Conservative Party supporters when she first came onto the scene but then she opened her mouth for the first time and the balloon was immediately deflated. Most conservatives thought she was useless but didn't care because she was able to steal a vote in Ontario.

To the left wingers who claim she is some kind of hero out of all this, get your blinders off you are laughable. I don't care what your affiliations are, you have to she that she is a useless tit.

[browna]

Originally posted by longsuffering@May 18 2005, 10:08 PM
Welcome back to the fringe CPC.

Because one member left?
It became clear that she was in it for the publicity, and needed the "power". She didn't get that with the Conservaties, with the leadership or in the immediate future, or did she seem that motivated to pay her dues (like a guy like McKay is doing) in order to get the chance down the road.

Paul Martin shining a fake diamond in her eye was enough for her to jump.
When Martin's done with the vote, and the likely sooner then later election, she may be out of caucus if the Libs get back in, and then she's back to square in the position of no power and no hope of power within the Liberals anytime soon, without paying dues...and then it won't be long before she's twisting in the wind again, and "troubled and unhappy" (as Peter McKay put it).

And yes, Rouge, what a kick in the teeth. Like your gf dumping you at the beginning of overtime Flames vs. Greasers, Game 7 in the playoffs, to go cheer for the Oilers because she likes the color of the uniforms better. Hard to believe she tells him a few hours before doing the deed....and, I think he said they haven't yet formally talked about the personal relationship...she just drops the bomb on him and runs.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch@May 18 2005, 09:44 PM
Shocking that a conservative is willing to apologize for a poor taste comment, but the Liberal's still refuse to apologize for alluding to the conservative party being bo better than the KKK, or that crosses are being burnt in Kamloops.

I thought they did apologize for that. If not, I agree they should have.
But on the other hand, the Conservative who called her a prostitute has also refused to appologize. There are stubbern people who have said dumb things on both sides. Shocking that you only point out the examples that back up your arguement.