Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

The "Media Party"


waldo

Recommended Posts

nice! As before, still waiting for you to mansplain why the 'ladies night for the ladies man' was so offensive... to you! An event sponsored by women, organized by women and put on by women. C'mon, mansplain it, hey!

Still waiting for you to explain why you think that any attractive blonde woman who talks about sexism is being a hypocrite. Can only women in burkas complain about sexism? Is that your opinion?

Edited by Argus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I call it weak-kneed sycophancy to business interests, under the guise of "justice" which doesn't frankly even come into the equation.

I don't care about business interests. I care about taxpayer interests. If the taxpayer funded prisons are incapable of making use of free labour to offset the costs of housing prisoners then I'm willing to turn the job over to private interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still waiting for you to explain why you think that any attractive blonde woman who talks about sexism is being a hypocrite. Can only women in burkas complain about sexism? Is that your opinion?

hypocrite? Did I use that word? As I recall, I emphasized the frivolity of the basis of Rempel's sexism labeling... I contrasted her weak and PMO fueled initiative to the statements/position of the organization behind the event (by women, for women). I pointedly highlighted Rempel's absolute refusal to directly debate one of the event organizers (on CBC's Power & Politics), etc. I never directly emphasized her looks, her hair colour... you're the one that appears fixated with her blonde hair as you keep mentioning it. Of course, yes, I did speak to her twitter/instagram battles, particularly highlighting her own twitter profile pic as it fueled much of the twitter exchange. You seem to be the one repeatedly trying to steer the discussion towards women, sexism/Islam and burkas - clearly, in this regard, you appear to have a deeply recessed concern that you should just get out, once and for all! Perhaps start a thread!

and, once again, you refuse to explain why you feel... why YOU feel... the event was sexist. Mansplain it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hypocrite? Did I use that word?

And yet you were so delighted by the accusation she 'sat like a prostitute' whatever that meant, you took the picture as your avatar. I'm afraid that speaks pretty plainly to your deep rooted sexism if not myisogyny. Any comment about the woman who complainted to Trudeau about being sexually harrassed by Colin Kenney and his non response?

Edited by Argus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet you were so delighted by the accusation she 'sat like a prostitute' whatever that meant, you took the picture as your avatar. I'm afraid that speaks pretty plainly to your deep rooted sexism if not myisogyny.

you've already tried this before... have you nothing new, like, uhhh... explaining why you're so personally outraged at the event... why you consider it sexist. You've been asked repeatedly to provide your explanation - you refuse. Instead we just get your continued white knight crusade. Is there a problem that allows you to so fixate and spend cycles on only a select sliver of this topic... while continuing to avoid providing a simple statement on why you believe the event was sexist. Is there a problem?

as for your continued fixation on that avatar, as already stated to you, the "hooker look" was a twitter comment Rempel took exception to... and, of course, that image was mentioned by Solomon during the P&P interview with Rempel. As I already stated, I switched up the avatar given the heightened and trumped up PMO driven profile surrounding the event that ensued. Clearly, the little mouse Rempel, the virtual unknown, was pushed forward to attempt to take the heat off the Harper Conservative Senate scandal. Obviously, she wasn't ready for prime time. It's her own twitter profile pic... what could be so wrong with it... it's her own provided/used profile image. You should like it given your repeated fixation on, and references to, "blonde hair".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you've already tried this before... have you nothing new, like, uhhh... explaining why you're so personally outraged at the event... why you consider it sexist.

Already stated, and the Toronto Star seemed to agree.

as for your continued fixation on that avatar, as already stated to you, the "hooker look" was a twitter comment Rempel took exception to..

Not much of a shocker there, the surprise why you took such a delight in it.

It's kind of like my interest in the Republican congressman who wanted to make drug testing mandatory for food stamp recipients being caught with cocaine. I love to see the raw hypocrisy. Only in your case it's a flaming liberal who also acts like an adolescent sexist.

Edited by Argus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you've already tried this before... have you nothing new, like, uhhh... explaining why you're so personally outraged at the event... why you consider it sexist. You've been asked repeatedly to provide your explanation - you refuse. Instead we just get your continued white knight crusade. Is there a problem that allows you to so fixate and spend cycles on only a select sliver of this topic... while continuing to avoid providing a simple statement on why you believe the event was sexist. Is there a problem?

Already stated, and the Toronto Star seemed to agree.

you keep mentioning that TorStar opinion piece... apparently, you don't know what an opinion commentary is... an opinion commentary that was not written by any TorStar journalist, by any of its editorial staff, by anyone associated with the paper. Of course, that doesn't stop you from your claim, your implication, that the paper agrees with the sexist nature of the event.

how did I miss your "already stated" explanation of why you personally think the event was sexist? Since I played fetch and responded to your request to provide the video you asked for... it would seem the least you could do is either summarize your reasons on why you believe the event to be sexist, or... just provide the link to your prior, as you claim, "already stated" explanation. Thanks in advance, hey.

as for your continued fixation on that avatar, as already stated to you, the "hooker look" was a twitter comment Rempel took exception to... and, of course, that image was mentioned by Solomon during the P&P interview with Rempel. As I already stated, I switched up the avatar given the heightened and trumped up PMO driven profile surrounding the event that ensued. Clearly, the little mouse Rempel, the virtual unknown, was pushed forward to attempt to take the heat off the Harper Conservative Senate scandal. Obviously, she wasn't ready for prime time. It's her own twitter profile pic... what could be so wrong with it... it's her own provided/used profile image. You should like it given your repeated fixation on, and references to, "blonde hair".

Not much of a shocker there, the surprise why you took such a delight in it.

It's kind of like my interest in the Republican congressman who wanted to make drug testing mandatory for food stamp recipients being caught with cocaine. I love to see the raw hypocrisy. Only in your case it's a flaming liberal who also acts like an adolescent sexist.

flaming liberal??? Adolescent sexist??? C'mon Argus, it's her own image... the one she chose for her twitter profile avatar. Clearly she likes the image. What could possibly be wrong with using it? Why would you so object? Apparently, your expressed "love" for raw hypocrisy doesn't extend beyond your white knight support for Ms. Rempel. Imagine that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PIK, it seems MLW member Argus is otherwise detained from answering the challenge to identify his personal reasons for viewing the 'ladies night' event as sexist. Perhaps you can stand in and offer your presumed reasons for also viewing the "for women, by women" event as sexist... don't, as you say, run (away now), hey!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

flaming liberal??? Adolescent sexist??? C'mon Argus, it's her own image... the one she chose for her twitter profile avatar. Clearly she likes the image.

There's nothing wrong or out of the ordinary with the image.

What could possibly be wrong with using it? Why would you so object?

I've already stated why I find it amusing, and an indication of your hypicrosy. Here you are very much on the ideological left, supposedly one of those inclusive types, hating racism, sexism, homophobia, etc., yet when some total moron posts on twitter that she looks like a prostitute in that picture you seize upon it with an adolescent delight, crowing about her being unfit to comment on sexism (as she was doing) because, somehow, this anonymous twit as the defining authority of such things. You loved it so much you even took the picture for your avatar. Thats not the sign of someone who dislikes sexism, quite the contrary. It's the sign of an adolescent who gets turned on when anyone says anything sexual about a pretty girl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PIK, it seems MLW member Argus is otherwise detained from answering the challenge to identify his personal reasons for viewing the 'ladies night' event as sexist. Perhaps you can stand in and offer your presumed reasons for also viewing the "for women, by women" event as sexist... don't, as you say, run (away now), hey!

Ask the women that did find it sexist. And IMO it was, using his so called sex appeal to lure the womens vote,well it did work for his father.lol

Edited by PIK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's nothing wrong or out of the ordinary with the image.

I've already stated why I find it amusing, and an indication of your hypicrosy. Here you are very much on the ideological left, supposedly one of those inclusive types, hating racism, sexism, homophobia, etc., yet when some total moron posts on twitter that she looks like a prostitute in that picture you seize upon it with an adolescent delight, crowing about her being unfit to comment on sexism (as she was doing) because, somehow, this anonymous twit as the defining authority of such things. You loved it so much you even took the picture for your avatar. Thats not the sign of someone who dislikes sexism, quite the contrary. It's the sign of an adolescent who gets turned on when anyone says anything sexual about a pretty girl.

no - you've already tried this angle before. The emphasis on the "hooker look" came from the reference Solomon made to the image and the Twitter comment on his Power & Politics program. Following your false narrative, you continue to state this is the reason I jumped on the image for my current avatar... I continue to say that's not the case. As I stated, it's a nod to the PMO antics pushing the little mouse, not ready for prime time Rempel forward in an attempt to take the heat off the Harper Conservative Senate scandal... that coupled with the fact Rempel couldn't actually make a case for her claimed "sexist labeling", other than moronic comments like the e-invite poster had pastel colours and apparently "a girly font".

and once again, you refuse to state why you personally label the 'ladies night' (by women, for women) event sexist. You "claim" you already provided an explanation. I've asked you to either summarize your "claimed" prior explanation, or provide a link to the related post that includes it. Is there a problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And IMO it was, using his so called sex appeal to lure the womens vote,well it did work for his father.lol

oh really... care to state how the, as you say, "so called sex appeal" was used... to lure? This was an event organized by women for an audience of intended women. One of the organizers of the event came on the CBC Power & Politics show intending to debate Rempel over her claim the event was sexist. Rempel refused to appear together with the event organizer on the P&P program... refused to debate. What does that say to you, hey PIK?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can call it anything you want, but when you hurt someone you have to be punished else the individuals you hurt are going to start taking their own vengeance. Society has to support a justice system, and if it perceives a lack of justice they'll stop supporting it.

Rolling up victim's compensation and perp punishment into one big ball does not serve society, the victim, or the perp. Those are two very different things and should be treated separately and distinctly. Victims should indeed be compensated. That may or may not involve the perp, depending on the crime and the circumstance.

In my world, Society has an obligation to protect its citizens and when it fails to do so, it should compensate them, yes. .It might then extract its pound of flesh from the perp in a way that is most beneficial to itself, but that second part may have little to do with the victim... (again, depending on the crime and the circumstance)

Suppose the kid in question is forty two and has already robbed nineteen banks in his lifetime, and been convicted of various crimes dozens of times. Do you think he's going to take your smiling advice to heart and reform himself?

The truth is a 'kid' doesn't start out robbing a bank. The kid starts out stealing from stores and burglarizing houses. And such kids are rarely thrown into prison. The system already gives them every opportunity to reform, unless their first offense involves serious violence.

.... and suppose he is not. The "truth" is specific to each individual crime and circumstance, and that is for jugdes to sort out. If it turns out that he has robbed nineteen banks, or been doing stores and houses since he was 12, that is quite different from a homeless first-timer trying to buy a sandwich. That is what judges do.

I'm sure that was a great comfort to the families of the people they murdered.

Again, rolling punishment in with victim's compensation is a useless effort that serves no one.

There have been cases where victims actually met with the perp, and the conversation was part of the therapy to get over this and get on with life. There are cases where they can't stand the site of him, and live in constand dread. What they need is help to get through this... death comes to us all and it comes in unexpected ways, and some of us get over it better, or should I say differently, than others. What they get in the way of victims services should be tailored for them.

As for the perp, society's responsibility is to ensure that this does not happen again, whatever that may take.... maybe that's a lifetime in jail... maybe its a significant period of rehabilitation followed by a lifetime of supervision... maybe it is psychiatric help... etc. etc. etc. Thats what judges do, (or should).

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh really... care to state how the, as you say, "so called sex appeal" was used... to lure? This was an event organized by women for an audience of intended women. One of the organizers of the event came on the CBC Power & Politics show intending to debate Rempel over her claim the event was sexist. Rempel refused to appear together with the event organizer on the P&P program... refused to debate. What does that say to you, hey PIK?

That's why they drool all over him, it can't be his policies because he does not have any. So what is i?, I am old enough to remember how the women in this country thru themselves at trudeau sr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the thread, 2 days ago the citizen headline right across the front page was about harper's aidfe and personal friend lobbied some one about amall, why is it so newsworthy and why make sure people read he is a friend of harpers. And today op-ed is a pic of mandela and chretien , why chretien when it was mulroney that was a close friend of his and a major player in ending aparthied. Never give a conservative credit for anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And today op-ed is a pic of mandela and chretien , why chretien when it was mulroney that was a close friend of his and a major player in ending aparthied. Never give a conservative credit for anything.

Your ability to only see a conspiracy against the conservatives everywhere you look is simply amazing. According to you, a left wing rag like the Star would never write about Mandela and Mulroney, would they?

Oh wait....

http://read.thestar.com/?origref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.ca%2F?origref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.ca%2F#!/article/52a10aa9ec0691bced0e2254-nelson-mandela-thanked-brian-mulroney-for-canada-s-anti-apartheid-pressure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good lord. The Canadian Press had a major feature with a picture of Mandela and Mulroney featured prominantly. Your selective examples prove nothing other than the fact that you have a victimization complex, which was demonstrated in hilarious fashion when you whined that the media was picking on Rob Ford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the thread, 2 days ago the citizen headline right across the front page was about harper's aidfe and personal friend lobbied some one about amall, why is it so newsworthy and why make sure people read he is a friend of harpers. And today op-ed is a pic of mandela and chretien , why chretien when it was mulroney that was a close friend of his and a major player in ending aparthied. Never give a conservative credit for anything.

:lol: damn Media Party!!! Imagine including the following pic that highlights Mandela receiving honorary Canadian citizenship!

PIK, how could the Ottawa Citizen be so brazen?

24nkvx4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good lord. The Canadian Press had a major feature with a picture of Mandela and Mulroney featured prominantly. Your selective examples prove nothing other than the fact that you have a victimization complex, which was demonstrated in hilarious fashion when you whined that the media was picking on Rob Ford.

When your party has a majority government for 4 years and does absolutely nothing to improve the country, you've got to lay the blame somewhere.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

When your party has a majority government for 4 years and does absolutely nothing to improve the country, you've got to lay the blame somewhere.

Man are you blind. This country is doing great no matter what the media party wants you to believe. Here is a little slap down on one reporter that also has no clue.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/op-ed/Andrew+Coyne+wrong+about+Senate/9305525/story.html

David Tkachuk tells it how it is and I can't wait for coyne to respond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David Tkachuk? Really? He's the Senate version of Pierre Poilievre or Paul Calandra. Absolutely no integrity and an obsequious sycophant through and through.

PIK suggesting the op-ed from Conservative Senator David Tkachuk slaps down NP's Coyne! Oh my! --- RCMP question credibility of 3 Tory senators in Duffy deal... Marjory LeBreton, Carolyn Stewart Olsen and David Tkachuk!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...