babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » election 2006   » Cons accuse Layton, Martin of supporting child pornography

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Cons accuse Layton, Martin of supporting child pornography
speechpoet
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3693

posted 18 June 2004 07:50 PM      Profile for speechpoet     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Unbelievable.

The NDP's response is here.


From: Sunny Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 18 June 2004 07:52 PM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Where do they get that idea? It's not like the NDP platform says something like, "We will reduce GST on essentially family items like food, clothing and child pornography"?
From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
LukeVanc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2735

posted 18 June 2004 07:56 PM      Profile for LukeVanc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
LOL.

Low point of the debate: Harper's constant Harping on child pornography. When will middle class reactionaries wake up and smell the coffee? The Conservatives are explioting the issue for their own gain. Conservative punitive measures to control child pornography are based on American-style criminal justice and end up doing more harm than good.

Sorry that I don't have a link to the article, but in the Province a few days ago it was reported that someone on the Conservative campaign bus was watching soft core pornography over satellite television.

[ 18 June 2004: Message edited by: LukeVanc ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 18 June 2004 08:12 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
from CNEWS

NIAGARA FALLS, Ont. (CP) - Now that's a hot button issue.

Perhaps it was because the Conservative campaign found itself in the Honeymoon Capital of Canada that satellite receivers on a media bus suddenly began showing decidedly liberal images.

Tory officials scrambled Wednesday to turn off televisions aboard a media bus when a soft-porn movie of a very affectionate couple suddenly filled the screens.

"So much for family values," quipped one reporter.

An earnest young Conservative worker was at a loss to explain why the TVs, which receive satellite signals, were set to that station.

"I never watch those kinds of programs," he said with a grin.


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 June 2004 08:12 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It will be interesting to see if all the pundits like Craig Oliver etc...are as hard on the Conservatives for accusing the Paul Martin and NDP of supporting child pornography as they were when Jack accused Martin of being responsible for the deaths of homeless people.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 18 June 2004 08:14 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
It will be interesting to see if all the pundits like Craig Oliver etc...are as hard on the Conservatives for accusing the Paul Martin and NDP of supporting child pornography as they were when Jack accused Martin of being responsible for the deaths of homeless people.


Lets hope they are far more so!

Though I sincerely doubt it.


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 18 June 2004 08:17 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
How can we trust anything Harper and the reform party says ?. They will give Canada U.S.-style health care and pour Canadian taxes down the hole of MILITARIST-Keynesianism a la Uncle Sam.

Poor Canadians will end up having to enlist and fight for U.S. colonialism abroad in order to afford an education if Stephen Harper and the Reform/AlLIE-ance are elected. God help us.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
The Oatmeal Savage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4353

posted 18 June 2004 08:26 PM      Profile for The Oatmeal Savage   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Doug:
Where do they get that idea?

OTTAWA – Jack Layton says he would shut down child porn sites; but has he spoken to his Caucus lately?

Eleven members of the NDP Caucus voted against prohibiting the creation or use of child pornography. (April 23, 2002) NAYS: Blaikie, Comartin, Davies, Desjarlais, Godin, Martin, McDonough, Nystrom, Proctor, Robinson, Wasylycia-Leis.


From: top of the food chain | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 18 June 2004 08:28 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So TOS can you show me what the vote was actually about, not just the reform spin?
From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 18 June 2004 08:33 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Savage, they voted against a bill. I don't suppose you have any interest in what the bill actually says or would have done, you're only interested in proving to us how ethically bankrupt Conservatives are by claiming it means New Democrats support child pornography. Get real, loser.
From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
bugaboo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5668

posted 18 June 2004 08:38 PM      Profile for bugaboo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Although I have never expected much more from the cons than I would from any other reactionary organization, I must admit that even I never thought they'd stoop this low. Accusing your political opponents of supporting child pornography? This is one step above accusing your opponents of outright pedophilia, and as far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong), this is unprecedented in Canadian politics.

How is it that the cons always manage to drag politics further and further into the gutter?


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 18 June 2004 08:38 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If I'm not mistaken, the law that the NDP voted against was worded so broadly that it would have given the police the power to raid the AGO during a Michelangelo exhibition because there were some Rennaissance paintings of naked children.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 18 June 2004 08:42 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, the NDP doesn't support child pornography

"This includes building on a program pioneered by the NDP government in Manitoba to report child porn websites, to have them shut down, and to have their creators prosecuted.

Stephen Harper's Conservatives are referring to a debate in Parliament on the issue of what judges can consider "artistic merit" when hearing cases. We trust the courts to be able to make the distinction between art (for example, images of nude angels seen in ecclesiastical art) and images of sexual assaults on children.


In addition to the Internet proposal set out by Mr. Layton in this campaign, the NDP has on two occasions introduced The Internet Child Pornography Prevention Act to address this issue. The NDP's bill proposed to license Internet service providers and ensure that they co-operated to minimize the use of the Internet for the publication and proliferation of child pornography. It would also restrict those who have committed serious child sex offences from access to the Internet."

Reality Check

But YES, the CONSERVATIVES UNDER STEPHEN HARPER SUPPORT US-STYLE HEALTH CARE IN CANADA

Stephen Harper Dodges Questions About U.S. Style Health Care in Canada


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Pigeon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5886

posted 18 June 2004 08:44 PM      Profile for Pigeon   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Look around internationally. A need to prevent child pornography is being used as a cover for repressive policies and actions whose actual motivation would not stand public scrutiny. It is a much better mantra these days than fighting terrorism given that Dubya and Blair rather tarnished that one.
From: Calgary | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
simonvallee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5141

posted 18 June 2004 08:47 PM      Profile for simonvallee   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Just clicked on the link to the CPC's website and read it. Really funny.

Just to the right of the main text, under Harper's image, you can see this written:

quote:
QUOTE OF THE DAY
"[They've] gone to a new low." - Stephen Harper...

Though this applied to the Liberal attack ads, this is just another proof the world's built on irony.


From: Boucherville, Québec | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
BLAKE 3:16
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2978

posted 18 June 2004 08:57 PM      Profile for BLAKE 3:16     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't really want to post this but I feel compelled. I am not able to talk, or type, about the murder of Holly Jones without becoming very upset. I find it repulsive that misogynists like Stephen Harper and Julian Fantino have exploited her death to promote their hateful agendas. I also find it disgusting that Harper's porn baiting has given Holly Jones' killer an excuse for his actions.

We need to create a society where women and children are free of violence and where people who are disturbed enough to act this way get the help they need before they act on their violent impulses, and if they do, assume responsibility for their actions.

Laws need to be enforced to protect actual children. We have laws against child abuse, rape, and other forms of violence. I am not a lawyer, and I have only reported suspected child abuse in Toronto, Ontario. My understanding is that in Canada if a person suspects a child is being abused they MUST report it to the appropriate Children's Aid Society themselves. Phone numbers for the various CASs are found in the phone book.

Previously, one could tell someone else and then they could have the onus of reporting it. Now anyone who suspects a child is being abused has a legal obligation to report it. It is also a moral duty. It is awful but necessary. If you question my use of the word "awful" I would suspect that you haven't had to do it.

From the NDP website:

quote:
Stephen Harper's Conservatives are referring to a debate in Parliament on the issue of what judges can consider "artistic merit" when hearing cases. We trust the courts to be able to make the distinction between art (for example, images of nude angels seen in ecclesiastical art) and images of sexual assaults on children.

I think this response is quite regressive. Few people object to pictures of cherubs, which is what is being said here. It is a common sense approach and quite understandable. We should support the NDP MPs whose votes are being villified.

However, representations of child abuse can be important artistically and to deepen our understanding of the violence perpetuated against young people. In 1993, Toronto police confiscated dozens of drawings by local artist Eli Langer from the artist run centre, Mercer Union. Many of these pencil drawings depicted children in sexual situations with older people. The police acted on complaints filed by three people who had read Kate Taylor's review of the show in the Globe and Mail. None had seen the drawings themselves.

Eli Langer's life was made a living hell. He was scapegoated in the media, threatened with all sorts of legal sanctions, lost possession of his own drawings and faced their destruction, and as a promising young artist had his name tainted as a child pornographer. No children were involved in the production of these images. Eventually charges were dropped and the drawings returned, but not without a huge struggle.

There are depictions of child abuse and sexual exploitation throughout the Bible and the works of Shakespeare. One of the finest contemporary American novelists, Dennis Cooper, writes frequently about child rape and incest. Diana Hartog's masterful Photographer's Sweeteheart is written from the point of view of a pedophilic photographer at the turn of the century. Toronto artist, Shary Boyle, the illustrator of The Story Of Jane Doe draws and paints very upsetting images dealing with issues of children, sex, and violence. These are not "ecclesiastical" images.

We cannot solve problems if we are not allowed to talk about or represent them.


From: Babylon, Ontario | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 18 June 2004 09:55 PM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Cons are getting desperate the snivelling fools exploiting a poor young girls death. That's how power hungry they are and they complain about liberals being power hungry.
pound for pound the Cons are way more corrupt than the Liberals can ever hope to be and that's saying alot. Anyhoo the alternative to such arrogance is simple vote NDP.

[ 18 June 2004: Message edited by: mary123 ]


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 18 June 2004 10:26 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Part of the problem with simply passing laws against the making and distribution of child pornography is that, if badly written, they can be constitutionally challenged and possibly struck down, voiding all the effort that went into a new law in the first place.

It's hard to explain this to an electorate that is conditioned into thinking in 30-second sound bites, but I think the NDP can do a fine job of explaining why some of its MPs voted against that particular bill, and I would not be surprised if an analysis of the bill in question showed it would not stand up to a Constitutional scrutiny.

Parliament can pass a law saying my wet socks should be confiscated, but that absurd law would likely be thrown out on search-and-seizure grounds or other similar basis.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
speechpoet
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3693

posted 18 June 2004 10:28 PM      Profile for speechpoet     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Jurisdiction. The provinces are the ones who deal with toxic waste.
From: Sunny Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407

posted 18 June 2004 10:31 PM      Profile for John K        Edit/Delete Post
Bev Desjarlais supports child porn? Who knew?

Seriously, I had feared that the Cons might intelligently exploit the Holly Jones case by using it as a justification for the notwithstanding clause. It would have been a bogus argument since I very much doubt the child porn that fueled Briere's desires would have been saved by the 'artistic merit' defense, but it would still have been somewhat clever.

But to stoop to this kind of smear. Unbelievable. And good on Jack for being quick off the mark in today's Globe&Mail by citing the Manitoba law as an example for others to follow.

[ 18 June 2004: Message edited by: John K ]


From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 18 June 2004 10:40 PM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is sick. Jeesh these people have stooped lower than a Nixononion Republican. I do hope they're bashed around for it -- what a stupid thing to suggest. This is not a partisan issue and it shouldn't be treated as such. I'm really not suprised that a hack like the Oatmeal Savage would treat it as such though.
From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 18 June 2004 10:45 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Cons are proving that they have no credibility.

The name Stephen Harper will become Canadian cuss words over the next four years.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 18 June 2004 10:49 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by speechpoet:
Jurisdiction. The provinces are the ones who deal with toxic waste.

Now, my socks are not that bad.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407

posted 18 June 2004 10:51 PM      Profile for John K        Edit/Delete Post
If I was advising Layton, which I'm not, I would hit back harder at Harper and the Cons for this outrageous smear. Like Paul Martin, Layton too is a husband and father, and he should demand a full retraction and apology.
From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 18 June 2004 10:56 PM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree.
From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299

posted 18 June 2004 11:10 PM      Profile for Scott Piatkowski   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It was the lead story on The National tonight, complete with a Reality Check debunking the Reformatory claims. I think it's getting the appropriate amount of coverage.
From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
bittersweet
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2474

posted 18 June 2004 11:18 PM      Profile for bittersweet     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
From the Toronto Star, June 15, this letter from Megan Davis Williams, National Director, Canadian Conference of the Arts, an umbrella arts lobby:

quote:
Artists also need Charter protection

Stephen Harper and his Conservative party are running on a platform where the only mention of art is in the context of removing the artistic merit defence from the Criminal Code of Canada in cases where works of the imagination are alleged to be "child pornography". The legal defence of artistic merit, which has been upheld by Supreme Court decisions over many years, would continue to protect Canadians who make
expressive works that do not fit the mainstream definitions of art. How do Harper and his party reconcile amending laws to protect the freedoms of some Canadians (read, those who are affiliated with religious
organizations that might speak against the right of lesbians and gays to marry), with curtailing that same freedom for Canada's creators? The Charter is meant to protect all of us and cannot be withheld from a specific group like artists.


[ 18 June 2004: Message edited by: bittersweet ]


From: land of the midnight lotus | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Oatmeal Savage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4353

posted 18 June 2004 11:32 PM      Profile for The Oatmeal Savage   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So the NDP voted against it because the bill was written poorly. Remember the arguements for the gun registry, "If it saves one life"?
Why didn't that arguement apply here?

From: top of the food chain | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Thrasymachus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5747

posted 18 June 2004 11:40 PM      Profile for Thrasymachus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If I remember correctly, 8 out of 9 NDP caucus members voted against the gun registry for exactly that reason. Nice try troll. BTW, this move by the Tories shows what kind of assholes are in the Tory war room. They can't keep their evil little mouths shut. Oh well, it was fun watching Harper squirm when confronted with his own party's press release.
From: South of Hull | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 19 June 2004 12:03 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Am so angry at these power hungry Con opportunists trampling over the memory of a little girl as a cheap election ploy. Now this is truly disgusting behaviour. And telling.

Do we really want these jokes representing us in power, in the world, on the international stage. No thanks. One George Bush loony is enough in this world thank you very much.

[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: mary123 ]


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Pimji
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 228

posted 19 June 2004 12:19 AM      Profile for Pimji   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Can anyone imagine Stockwell Day as a Minister of Foriegn Affairs? But then can anyone imagine George Bush as president of the United States?

The party that espouses good ol' family values also supports the cutting social services.

If they believe Martin supports child abuse then what do they think of the Vatican?

[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: Pimji ]


From: South of Ottawa | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
David Orchard Supporter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6001

posted 19 June 2004 12:19 AM      Profile for David Orchard Supporter     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The conservative claims regarding Paul Martin and the NDP being pro-child pornography is appaling. I hope this becomes the begining of the end for Stephen Harper. He and his ultra-right wing party should be shot to hell!
From: Alberta | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 19 June 2004 12:27 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think this is the turning point. Harper may have just stepped on a landmine.
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
faith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4348

posted 19 June 2004 12:53 AM      Profile for faith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I clearly remember when this debate took place. The artistic community instantly recognized the lack of understanding for the creative process within the bill and held its collective breath that it would not pass. I think that the Conservatives have so little respect for the arts that infringement on the creative process is just an inconsequential little detail that no one who is 'right thinking' should bother themselves about.
Clearly children need protection and everything should be done to put policies in place including taking the time and effort to make intelligent and constitutionally sound law.
When I read the twisting of the words from the MPs that voted against this bill I was sickened at the smear against these people. Perhaps the if the Cons just keep talking , people will wake up to just how disgusting their mind set really is.

From: vancouver | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
kyall glennie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3940

posted 19 June 2004 12:58 AM      Profile for kyall glennie   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I called the Conservatives out of disgust on this issue. That is sick to imply support for child pornography. They didn't know it was still on their web site and they apologised to me, saying the wording was very harsh and that Harper himself had distanced himself from it.

If we're going to bring up voting records from two years ago, then let's get the NDP researchers to task - how many things have the Alliance/Tories voted for or against that would really suprise Canadians? Surely there are many. Layton brought up their support for the meat packing businesses tonight at his rally in Regina, compared to no support for family farmers.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Northern54
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5325

posted 19 June 2004 12:59 AM      Profile for Northern54     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is really good. There must be something to the recent up-tick in the NDP numbers with SES or we wouldn't be getting such an off-the-wall comment. The Conservatives are saying that we are worth "bashing" and I can't think of a better way for them to do it. The NDP and Jack Layton support porn. That will sell well. Sheesh...

It sounds like there has been a recovery of NDP fortunes in western Canada... And this is the Conservative reaction to it...


From: Yellowknife | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 19 June 2004 02:43 AM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Gir Draxon?
Heywood Floyd?
Maybe even... Shane?

Will you be around shortly to condemn the vile scum-sucking vermin in the Conservative campaign who are hurling this bullshit at honourable people?

Oatmeal Sausage has shown his true colours, but I expect better from our other local Conservatives.


From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299

posted 19 June 2004 03:14 AM      Profile for Scott Piatkowski   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Just so we all have our arguments right, the vote in question was on an opposition day motion, not on a bill. Governments consider these votes to be questions of confidence, so they routinely whip their caucus to vote against. As well, as indicated, the wording was such that thinking people could easily disagree without being labelled child pornographers.

I trust that you all noticed Harper trying to spin the debate discussion on the notwithstanding clause toward child porn. He even used a subtler version of the argument contained in the press release. Something like: "There have been courts that have said that child pornography has artistic merit and we disagree..."


From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 19 June 2004 03:30 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Anyone cut-n-paste the full text of the smear? I only heard about it after they'd already frantically yanked it off their website.

Many are already comparing this to the '93 Deformed-Chretien ad. Let's hope.

Here's an unscientific sampling of right-wing reaction:
Surprise, surprise. The FreeDumbMinions mostly think the e-mail was swell, accurate and a great idea.

The comments on Andrew Coyne's blog seem a bit more attached to reality.


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
The Oatmeal Savage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4353

posted 19 June 2004 03:52 AM      Profile for The Oatmeal Savage   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mary123:
Am so angry at these power hungry Con opportunists trampling over the memory of a little girl as a cheap election ploy. Now this is truly disgusting behaviour. And telling.

Do we really want these jokes representing us in power, in the world, on the international stage. No thanks. One George Bush loony is enough in this world thank you very much.

[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: mary123 ]


No problem with Jack using homeless deaths as an election ploy, though.


From: top of the food chain | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 19 June 2004 04:07 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Unlike your clear lack of intellectual rigor in understanding the situation with respect to the NDP votes on the motion in question, Jack Layton was justified in his accusation since it is well-documented that the IMF-motivated cuts in the 1995 budget are directly responsible for a rise in homelessness and a simultaneous increase in the death rate of homeless people as a result.

(and should you doubt that the IMF provided the blueprint for the 1995 budget, I invite you to look here and here.)


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 19 June 2004 04:20 AM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oatmeal, Jack literally wrote the book on homelessness in Canada. It was not an election ploy, it was a genuine expression of his concern for the downtrodden and his distain for those who tread on them.

Even attempting to draw a comparison to accusing your political opponents of supporting child pornography is outrageous. As far as i know, this is a new low in canadian politics.


From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 19 June 2004 05:41 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
How to lose an election
From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 19 June 2004 07:44 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
WTF?

They really should change their name to the RepubliCons because this is a classic Republican tactic. Reminds me of Poppy Bush's "Willie Horton" ad and attacking Dukakis because he vetoed a bill as Governor that would have imposed criminal penalities on teachers who refused to recite the pledge of allegiance in schools.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 June 2004 10:22 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by beluga2:

The comments on Andrew Coyne's blog seem a bit more attached to reality.



Well, a few of the other sort have turned up since you posted that link, beluga, but it's an interesting discussion, isn't it.

I wonder whether Harper will finally retract his non-retraction. His first reaction yesterday seems to me a great mistake. Note Paul Wells's line: "Fine. He'll wear it." Good for Wells.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 19 June 2004 11:01 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Oatmeal Savage:
It's the context, stupid. Fresh off the Holly Jones case being in the news,Harper releases a 'Martin supports child porn' memo out (3 times no less!!) and it reeks of cynical political opportunism.
What reeks is using the memory of a murdered and sexually molested young child to help win an election. You stall in the polls so you call your opponents child pornographers? Is this what is meant by "demanding better"? Is your mantra: winning the election by all smears neccessary? Fear-mongering anyone? Yeah you're supposed to be above such tactics?
Martin reacted angrily against Conservative Leader Stephen Harper:
"This is personal. I'm a father; I'm a husband. He crossed the line and he should apologize."
Jack Layton was also singled out.
This is personal it goes beyond politics.
Using kiddie porn to smear Layton and Martin is also a smear on every person who ISN'T a Harper conservative. You conservatives believe you corner the market on morality. You know best. This smug and condescending attitude of yours is most apalling and dishonest. Your holier than thou attitude is disgusting. I am so mad at this whole story.
This cheap stunt is in the territory of US style mud slinging. And all the more disgusting and vomit inducing is capitalizing off a young child's murder in the news for your cynical and desperate attempts at political victory.

[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: mary123 ]


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 June 2004 11:14 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Conservatives exploit dead children.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 19 June 2004 11:18 AM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Wonder if Bush the Lesser put Harpo up to it?

Wonder if The Oatmeal Savage is one of Harpo's Inner Brain Trust?

"Enquiring Minds want to know," and all that.

And am I gloating? Gawddamn right I am!! I hope this entire filthy party is wiped out in this election.

And I agree that this demonstrates their hunger for power, and their panic— they're starting to realize that some votes may have "drifted" their way, but the support is wide and shallow. The NDP is gaining strength, and it's got them scared shitless. GOOD!!

Yeah.... I'm gloating!!

[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 19 June 2004 11:36 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Conservatives exploit dead children.

That should be everyone's rallying cry. Short, sweet, succinct.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
BugBear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3379

posted 19 June 2004 11:44 AM      Profile for BugBear   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Conservatives exploit dead children.


Cons exploit everyone


From: 2nd London Tractor Factory | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 19 June 2004 12:43 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"Stick a fork in us and turn us over. We're done."

An admission of defeat by a contributor to Andrew Coyne's weblog. Let's hope they're broiled to a crisp. Nothing personal mind you.


Edited to add...

The actual quote from "jonny":

quote:

Put a fork in us, we're done. BUT, if it's any consolation, we were done before that stupid e-mail from the Tory war room (that the press will refer to from here until June 28). CONS didn't respond to negative LIB ads that were very effective here in ONT.
Votes are now "Locked and Loaded".

I disagree with this last point, however. Give Stephen Harper and the Conservatives a fighting chance to dig a deeper hole. There's still a few days left for the bottom to completely drop out of their campaign.

[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407

posted 19 June 2004 12:47 PM      Profile for John K        Edit/Delete Post
An excellent column by Paula Simon's in today's Edmonton Journal that hits the nail squarely on the head. Don't know if the link will work for non-Journal subscribers so I'll post excerpts:

quote:
It is possible to write smart, tough laws that throw the book at people who create or use "real" pornography that victimizes real children, without violating the rights of legitimate artists to free speech and creative expression. And an MP who refuses to support a clumsy law that violates the Charter protections of free speech is no more a supporter of child pornography than is Stephen Harper himself.

The sexual victimization of children is an issue that should concern every Canadian.

I'm the mother of a daughter not much younger than Holly Jones. The thought of what happened to Holly chills me to the marrow of my bones. But we don't get any closer to protecting our children by wasting time punishing artists when we should be catching child abusers.

Stephen Harper and his party owe Paul Martin and the 11 NDP members they attacked so foully an immediate apology. Then they should apologize to all the rest of us.

And particularly the family of Holly Jones. Their precious child was exploited in the worst way imaginable. For the Conservatives to exhume and exploit her again is an act of political pornography that should shame every Canadian.


[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: John K ]


From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 June 2004 12:48 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
N. Beltov, we all know that you meant that in the nicest possible way.

Where the hell are the old-time Tories on this outrage? Bill Davis? Hugh Segal? etc? Or have they really become pod people? As the old party has become a pod party.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 June 2004 12:52 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
John K, could you take that URL and run it through

tinyurl.com, so that we can cure the sidescroll?

Thanks very much.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407

posted 19 June 2004 12:56 PM      Profile for John K        Edit/Delete Post
I'll try. Here goes. Darn that subscriber-only content.

http://tinyurl.com/2amdo


From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 June 2004 12:57 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, but, John, you also have to go back and erase the original long link that is causing the sidescroll.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 June 2004 01:00 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hmmn. I see your problem with the subscriber-only barrier. Is there some way we can invent a collective user-name/password combo? There is a thread somewhere where we publish those.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 19 June 2004 02:15 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Harper continues his sleazy preoccupation with the child pornography issue:

quote:

Canada's Conservative leader Stephen Harper, buoyed by polls showing further declines for Prime Minister Paul Martin's Liberals, pressed his attack on Saturday on Martin's voting record on child pornography.

With little more than a week to go before the June 28 election, the race remained tight in popular votes but pollsters projected the Conservatives would take more seats because of the way the votes are distributed.

Speaking at a pancake breakfast in the Atlantic province of New Brunswick, Harper repeated his criticism of Martin's record on tightening child porn laws.

"Paul Martin's record on child pornography is shameful and just another reason why his government must be defeated on June 28," Harper declared.

He ignored a request by Martin that he apologize for a press release his campaign had issued on Friday headlined "Paul Martin Supports Child Pornography?"


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=5462748


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 June 2004 02:24 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is so disgusting. The CPC is a pod-party.

Both Martin and Layton should begin demanding to hear from the old Tories, like Davis and Segal.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tackaberry
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 487

posted 19 June 2004 03:08 PM      Profile for Tackaberry   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I can't believe he is going to try and ride this out. This is the first bad move I've seen the Cons make.

On a related side note, the Star ombudsman piece in the Star discussed how the paper is being fair to all parties in their coverage, while giving a nudge nudge wink wink at the end that they are still a Liberal paper.

Anyway, the connection is that while the Ombudsman is extolling their fair reporting, they mention only the Child Pornography charge leveled against the Libs, but not the NDP.

[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: Tackaberry ]


From: Tokyo | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 19 June 2004 03:23 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I can't believe he is going to try and ride this out. This is the first bad move I've seen the Cons make.

It's disgusting all right, but I wonder how decisive (or even important) it'll prove to be. My sense is that it won't, not unless Martin can somehow exploit it with a lot more skill than he's exhibited so far.

It won't turn off more than a very few committed Reform voters, if any; and of swing voters, it just may attract as many as it repels, if not in fact a few more. But I imagine that most undecided voters will simply write it off as typical campaign mudslinging, and won't take it into account one way or the other.

[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 19 June 2004 03:26 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by 'lance:
It's disgusting all right, but I wonder how decisive (or even important) it'll prove to be. My sense is that it won't, not unless Martin can somehow exploit it with a lot more skill than he's exhibited so far.

Yeah. See, now here's a concrete example of the difference between Chretien and Martin. Chretien is an absolute MASTER at this sort of thing. He can turn attacks from other parties around so easily and make them bite the attacker back twice as hard. He'd have had Harper for lunch, and be looking for dessert right about now.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 19 June 2004 03:33 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So what is Layton going to do? Harper slimed the entire NDP caucus, after all.

In Ontario, anyway, I think it will matter a lot whether the media decide to go after Harper, and Paul Wells's blog gave me hope. (Wells, on Harper's refusal to repudiate the entire memo: "Then he'll wear it.")

It's absolutely true that there are as many right-wingers (well: obviously, many more) here as in Alberta, but they're funny, these Ontarians. I think they may react to such a cheap shot, especially as Harper continues to repeat it, robotlike. They will react if the press keep it alive as an issue.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 19 June 2004 03:34 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
See, now here's a concrete example of the difference between Chretien and Martin.

All clichés are true: there's simply no substitute for experience. Chrétien was first elected in 1963 or whatever, and could learn from people like Trudeau, Marchand, Pelletier, etc. (notwithstanding Trudeau's reported disdain for this provincial hick, at least early on).

Martin wasn't elected until 1988, and ... well, just who did he learn politics from, apart maybe from his father? There's no indication he ever learned it very well.

edit:

quote:
They will react if the press keep it alive as an issue.

Harper's refusal to apologize is still the top item on the Glob home page, for what that's worth.

[ 19 June 2004: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 19 June 2004 04:26 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Martin wasn't elected until 1988, and ... well, just who did he learn politics from, apart maybe from his father?

he was brought into politics by John Turner. 'Nuff said, eh?

Blake 3:16, that's one of the best posts i've seen for a long time. Sums it up perfectly.


From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407

posted 19 June 2004 04:43 PM      Profile for John K        Edit/Delete Post
Here's the full Paula Simons column. Like I said darn that subscriber-only content.

quote:

Tories use of Holly Jones case is political pornography
Harper owes apology to Martin, NDP, Holly's family

Paula Simons
The Edmonton Journal

Saturday, June 19, 2004

The first press release arrived in my e-mail in-box at 11:25 Friday morning.

"THE NDP CAUCUS SUPPORTS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY?" read the headline on a news release from the Conservative Party of Canada.

It went on to name 11 New Democrat MPs whom, it insinuated, had demonstrated their support of child pornography by their refusal to vote for Bill C-12, which removed the defence of artistic merit from Canada's child pornography legislation.

The controversial bill passed third reading in the House of Commons on May 12, but had not yet been approved by the Senate when the election was called, and died on the order paper.

Two hours later, a second, similar e-mail binged into my mailbox. "Paul Martin Supports Child Pornography?" it was headlined.

Of course, as every journalist knows -- we've had it hammered into our heads by our lawyers -- putting a question mark at the end of a libelous accusation doesn't remove the libel.

Perhaps that sudden realization explains the next e-mail I received from the Tory mother ship -- a frantic "recall" notice:

"Conservative Party/Parti Conservateur would like to recall the message, 'Paul Martin Supports Child Pornography?/Paul Martin soutient la pornographie juvenile?' it said tersely.

But the spam-o-rama continued.

Another e-mail, with the "Paul Martin Supports Child Pornography?" headline. Another recall notice.

Then, finally, an e-mail with the less actionable subject line: "How tough is Paul Martin on Child Pornography?"

It took three hours more to recall and rewrite the press release about the NDP -- that's six hours from the time it first went out.

It's revolting. Especially coming, as it does, the day after the man who murdered and dismembered 10-year-old Holly Jones pleaded guilty and publicly blamed his vile acts on his addiction to kiddie porn.

What could be more despicable, more gruesome, than to capitalize on Holly's suffering, and her family's grief, to score cheap election points?

Sure, it would be easy to shrug this off as the over-eagerness of the kids in the Conservative "war room," flying high and stupid on election momentum.

But Conservative Leader Stephen Harper didn't apologize for the actions of his staff. In fact, he went right on attacking the Liberals' record on child pornography, at the same time decrying Holly's murder.

Smear campaigns like this are nothing new for Harper's party. It was his predecessor as leader, Stockwell Day, who, while an Alberta MLA, wrote a letter to the Red Deer Advocate accusing Red Deer lawyer Lorne Goddard of supporting pedophilia and child pornography, simply because Goddard was defending a man charged with those crimes. Goddard sued for libel -- and Alberta taxpayers picked up Day's big bill.

In our society, there is hardly any worse calumny than to accuse someone of supporting child pornography. And with good reason. It is a scourge, made instantly accessible to anyone who wants to see it over the Internet.

That any political party would throw around such filthy accusations so carelessly and casually is vile enough.

But it's quite possible to loathe child pornographers, and their customers, without supporting a law that would have banned all depictions of sexual acts involving minors, regardless of their artistic merit.

There's a world of difference between a novel like Nabokov's Lolita or a film like Atom Egoyan's Exotica and the kind of despicable smut you find on the web.

First of all, works of art are works of the imagination. They don't exploit real children.

Second of all, they can offer strong moral commentary on the evils and dangers of sexualizing children.

Whether we like them or not, they are expressions of free thought and free speech. So long as they don't put real children at risk, they are properly protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

"Zero tolerance" sounds very grand, but it leaves out the balancing need for common sense. A zero-tolerance policy on any depiction of children having sex could lead you down the road to absurdities like banning productions of Romeo and Juliet.

It is possible to write smart, tough laws that throw the book at people who create or use "real" pornography that victimizes real children, without violating the rights of legitimate artists to free speech and creative expression. And an MP who refuses to support a clumsy law that violates the Charter protections of free speech is no more a supporter of child pornography than is Stephen Harper himself.

The sexual victimization of children is an issue that should concern every Canadian.

I'm the mother of a daughter not much younger than Holly Jones. The thought of what happened to Holly chills me to the marrow of my bones. But we don't get any closer to protecting our children by wasting time punishing artists when we should be catching child abusers.

Stephen Harper and his party owe Paul Martin and the 11 NDP members they attacked so foully an immediate apology. Then they should apologize to all the rest of us.

And particularly the family of Holly Jones. Their precious child was exploited in the worst way imaginable. For the Conservatives to exhume and exploit her again is an act of political pornography that should shame every Canadian.

psimons@thejournal.canwest.com



From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Ranger03
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5302

posted 19 June 2004 07:38 PM      Profile for Ranger03        Edit/Delete Post
Topic
quote:
Cons accuse Layton, Martin of supporting child pornography

Another wonderful example of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Way to go Steve you are becoming the image of king ralphie


From: bed | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 19 June 2004 09:32 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The release has been deleted from their website.

They need to be hammered for this, repeatedly, until Harper is forced to fire some people and apologise.

Odd that Heywood and Draxon aren't in here apologising.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 19 June 2004 09:49 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The release has been deleted from their website.

I'll say it has. It's been replaced by:

quote:
ADODB.Field error '80020009'

Either BOF or EOF is True, or the current record has been deleted. Requested operation requires a current record.

/english/subpage.asp, line 0


Amateurs!


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 19 June 2004 11:05 PM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, they would use Microsoft Active Server Pages, those bastards.
From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 19 June 2004 11:14 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by John K:
Here's the full Paula Simons column. Like I said darn that subscriber-only content.

Sigh. That's just another reason why you SHOULDN'T quote the whole article here.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3145

posted 20 June 2004 12:39 AM      Profile for Tim     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A couple responses from the NDP:

Reality Check: No, we don't support child porn

Proctor responds to Conservative's accusations


From: Paris of the Prairies | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 20 June 2004 12:53 AM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
To respond to arborman:

I don't feel the need to apologize. If the ND's and the Libs defeat legislation designed to prevent kiddie porn, they deserve to be called on it.

I mightn't like the presentation of the message but the content was right.


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 20 June 2004 01:02 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Conservative logic on child pornography:

1 - Opposed to child pornography

2 - Most people access child pornography on the 'net.

3 - the CRTC is the organization to oversee the 'net in Canada

4 - Conservatives want to dismantle or severly curtail the CRTC.


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Sara Mayo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3714

posted 20 June 2004 01:07 AM      Profile for Sara Mayo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If the ND's and the Libs defeat legislation designed to prevent kiddie porn, they deserve to be called on it.

Which raises the obivous question: did the NDP and Liberals defeat legislation designed to prevent child pornography? The answer is no.

The only "proof" the Conservatives have offered is the April 23 Oppositon day motion which was essentially exactly the same as current legislation, minus the defence for artisitic merit. Yes the NDP and Liberals voted against it, but it was not legilsation, is was simply a motion, not even a private members' bill. Second of all in eliminating the artisitc merit provisions, the conseqeunces would mean that authors like Nabokov could be jailed for writing classic novels like Lolita, Churches could be banned from having images of naked cherubs, and a person who writes a twisted fantasy just for themselves could be charged. I can be persuaded that the artisitic merit defence should be tightented, but I don't agree with eliminating entirely as Conservatives want. We have to rememebr that the artistic merit defence has only been accepted by the courts in cases where no real children were harmed, ie the works are purely fictional.


From: "Highways are monuments to inequality" - Enrique Penalosa | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
CanadianAlien
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1219

posted 20 June 2004 01:19 AM      Profile for CanadianAlien   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's like there is a heavy blanket covering this election campaign, nothing seems to really catch .. even though it should.

Think of things that have fired up elections in the past like free trade for example. I am amazed that I find myself absorbing Gilles Duceppe's straightforward machinations towards Quebec independence with something approaching non-chanlance, tinged with admiration for his lack of guile.

What I am gettting at is, speaking for myself, I am horrified by what the Cons represent and stand for.

I am as upset as any would-be potential Cons voter, that the liberals have F845ed up so much, due primarily to being in power too long.

At the end of the day though, the Liberals, properly chastised by a near death experience, are still light years better than the Cons.

What is going on?!


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gearhead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5182

posted 20 June 2004 01:26 AM      Profile for Gearhead        Edit/Delete Post
Isn't getting worked up about these comments the news-cycle equivalent of feeding a troll? I mean, shouldn't the central issue, in response to these "accusations," be an analysis of why Harper is so clueless on this issue and deceitful to the electorate? Moreover, the shameless opportunism of riding that poor girl's coffin like a surfboard on a wave of anger, outrage and grief.
From: Edmonton | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
CanadianAlien
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1219

posted 20 June 2004 01:32 AM      Profile for CanadianAlien   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, yes, that is exactly my point. I mean, it is absolutely outrageous that Harper is trying to score on the tradegy of a child murder.

Why the #&%$^ are people not freaking out over it??!

What is it that has the electorate so pathetically engaged .. or perhaps it may be better to say .. the media .. with this?


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 20 June 2004 01:34 AM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I mean, it is absolutely outrageous that Harper is trying to score on the tradegy of a child murder.

Wasn't the original justification for the gun registry the Marc Lepine murders? Isn't that scoring on a tragedy?


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
CanadianAlien
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1219

posted 20 June 2004 01:45 AM      Profile for CanadianAlien   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't know, you seem to know. If it was, it was justified. Are you making the point that the Cons are justified in the case of child pornography? Are you saying that they are motivated not by political gain but more purely by moral belief?

I just want to add: from all I know and have heard, Canada has one of the most stringent anti child pornography federal (and some priv) legislations in the world. At the time, I am sure that it did not have the equivalent in personal armament control.

[ 20 June 2004: Message edited by: CanadianAlien ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 20 June 2004 01:47 AM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'd say both. We've been leading the fight against child porn for years.

edited

Actually, I'd say just moral outrage. When we form the next government, we can finally start to take measures that fight child porn in Canada.

[ 20 June 2004: Message edited by: HeywoodFloyd ]


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
King Ralph
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5941

posted 20 June 2004 01:47 AM      Profile for King Ralph   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Both, NDP's whole platform is based on what they believe to be their moral superiority to gain political points
From: Calgary | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gearhead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5182

posted 20 June 2004 01:51 AM      Profile for Gearhead        Edit/Delete Post
Well at any rate, the media are selling lots of papers (though I am getting a free 3-weeks of the Globe & Mail right now and the recycling bags are filling up fast!). They love this back and forth bullshit (to use a Laytonism ) and will milk it to their own advantage.

Frankly, this issue will not be resolved by this election or the next government. It will come again in the next federal election next year...


From: Edmonton | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 20 June 2004 01:52 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Smear campaigns like this are nothing new for Harper's party. It was his predecessor as leader, Stockwell Day, who, while an Alberta MLA, wrote a letter to the Red Deer Advocate accusing Red Deer lawyer Lorne Goddard of supporting pedophilia and child pornography, simply because Goddard was defending a man charged with those crimes. Goddard sued for libel -- and Alberta taxpayers picked up Day's big bill.

Goddamn. I'd entirely forgotten that sorry incident. Methinks I spy a pattern. Bodes well for what life might be like under the Harpie Cons, doncha think?

Oh, and Heywood: I don't recall anyone ever accusing gun-registry opponents of supporting Marc Lepine. That would be the equivalent of what your party's dim-bulb e-mail monkeys did yesterday.


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 20 June 2004 01:55 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Some thoughts on this issue:
Nice to see Harper 'battle' the kiddie porn and abortion. He cares about dead and unborn children. It's just children of single
moms on welfare and homeless people he despises.

Oh how the Cons despise unwed pregnant moms on welfare. Remember Mike Harris and Kimberly Rogers.

quote:
Ms. Rogers, who was eight months pregnant and under house arrest after being convicted of defrauding welfare by getting a student loan to attend Cambrian College while also receiving social assistance, died in her sweltering apartment during a heat wave.

Cons hate pregnant women on welfare

Why didn't the Cons help this 'unborn' child.
Why didn't they help the mother who was trying to help herself.

Hypocritical political strategy to win the
election over the dead body of Holly Jones. The Cons fighting for justice for dead children and the unborn everywhere. Unfortunatley it's the poor, living ones they hate.

Is this the "common sense" Canada needs?

[ 20 June 2004: Message edited by: mary123 ]


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 20 June 2004 01:55 AM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You mean the same dim bulbs that managed to get people and the press talking about the Liberal and NDP voting records on child porn?
From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
CanadianAlien
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1219

posted 20 June 2004 01:58 AM      Profile for CanadianAlien   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Re beluga: it is the pot calling the kettle black!

The Cons were Harping (had to use that somewhere .. ) on about the Liberals scaremonging

But for Harper to say that Paul Martin and Jack Layton support child pornography ...

What extremism! Who is the scaremonger!


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
King Ralph
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5941

posted 20 June 2004 02:02 AM      Profile for King Ralph   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Layton said Martin kills homeless people hahaha you guys are so two sided its scary
From: Calgary | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 20 June 2004 02:16 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A parody of the brain dead conservative who sent out the infamous email.(no one claimed ownership - what a coward!)

Makes "common sense revolution" to me to profit off the tragedy of a young girl's death. After all she's dead and we the Cons are stalling in the polls. So we'll just call Paul Martin and Jack Layton 'child pornographers' and watch as hilarity ensues. And to the mother of Holly Jones hey lady it's nothing personal it's only politics.

What!!! You got a better idea?!?

[ 20 June 2004: Message edited by: mary123 ]


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erik Pool
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6137

posted 20 June 2004 02:20 AM      Profile for Erik Pool     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:
To respond to arborman:

I don't feel the need to apologize. If the ND's and the Libs defeat legislation designed to prevent kiddie porn, they deserve to be called on it.

I mightn't like the presentation of the message but the content was right.



But as we all know, it didn't happen. And I don't think you're dumb enough to believe it happened either. You're just putting on an act, like Harper himself.


From: Burnaby, BC | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gearhead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5182

posted 20 June 2004 02:31 AM      Profile for Gearhead        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by King Ralph:
Layton said Martin kills homeless people hahaha you guys are so two sided its scary

He did. He and his party cut back way too much on the social safety net. People ended up on the street. People died. End of story.


From: Edmonton | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 20 June 2004 02:33 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
HeywoodFloyd wrote:
"I mightn't like the presentation of the message but the content was right."

The Medium is the Message.
And I'll give you 10 points if you guess who wrote that sparky.


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 20 June 2004 02:41 AM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
uuuuh, duuh

i don't know.

how about....uh.uh.uh

I'm so dumb.

uh

marshall mcluhan?????

sheesh


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
CanadianAlien
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1219

posted 20 June 2004 03:39 AM      Profile for CanadianAlien   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Gosh, talking about McLuhan in this context is like talking about copper wire in reference to the internet.

bottom line here is the if the Cons want to say Liberals are scaremongering by bringning attention to right wing elements/policies of Cons, and rightly so, and the Cons cannot disagrree because they have been put forward front and centre (by Harper himself), then they should certainly not say the Paul Martin and Jack Layton support child pornography. It is absolute absurdity to say that.

On the other hand, to say the Cons are anti minority rights is not absurd. Without dispute Harper has insinuated by his acceptance of member bill's support that he also supports the abolition of minority rights, if they contravene his and many of his and his friends conceptions of what is right and wrong.

Layton's attack on Martin in the English debate on this matter was not wrong but erred in its acknowlegdgement Sauls's conversion to Paul (Martin) in that matter.

THe key diff is that while Paul may hold antiquated views on what marriage means (the old dog IS 65 yrs old) he has acknowledged that other people have the same sex couples have the same inalienable right to have what he has.

Harper on the other hand, and his cabinet in waiting cannot accept this.

That is the chasm btwn the candidates.

[ 20 June 2004: Message edited by: CanadianAlien ]

[ 20 June 2004: Message edited by: CanadianAlien ]

[ 20 June 2004: Message edited by: CanadianAlien ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
King Ralph
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5941

posted 20 June 2004 03:52 AM      Profile for King Ralph   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gearhead:

He did. He and his party cut back way too much on the social safety net. People ended up on the street. People died. End of story.


Thats pretty harsh, I got a tax cut from martin too and I sponsored a child from africa. I guess we should say he saves lives too then


From: Calgary | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
CanadianAlien
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1219

posted 20 June 2004 04:10 AM      Profile for CanadianAlien   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What we need to see is Martin and Layton put down their gloves for the 10 mintues to make a television spot, along with their party's candidates behind them, demanding an apology and retraction from Harper and the Cons about his outrageous and hurtful slur about them supporting child pornography.

NDP strategy is to take support from Liberals away from the Cons but this way they can both win, and oh yah, btw all of us broadminded and accepting Canadians do too.


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jacob Two-Two
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2092

posted 20 June 2004 04:13 AM      Profile for Jacob Two-Two     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, we could say you save lives, unless you would never sponsor a child without getting a tax cut beforehand. Even then, it would not have been a factor in his decision to cut taxes, whereas the fate of the homeless or potentially homeless are obviously a major factor in decisions regarding affordable housing, shelters, social assistance, etc. Paul Martin's not an idiot (except politically). He knew what he was doing, and didn't care.
From: There is but one Gord and Moolah is his profit | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 20 June 2004 04:20 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:
Actually, I'd say just moral outrage. When we form the next government, we can finally start to take measures that fight child porn in Canada.

Oh please. Spare me your holy-roller warrior rhetoric.

There've been laws on the books for years against child pornography. Police officers under all governments, NDP, Conservative and Liberal, have made every effort they can with the assistance of concerned citizens to track down and deal with the people who make and distribute this crap.

Your comment is just a lighter version of Stephen Harper's: it's a subtle insinuation that political parties besides the CPC are "soft" on child pornography, without doing those parties the courtesy of a reasoned explanation of just why you think they are "soft" on it.

Or are you afraid that if you had to defend that accusation you would find it wrought out of thin air, and you would be slapped for calling people liars?


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 20 June 2004 04:23 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
We NDP'ers would like to see some Conservatives and Liberals pushing votes to tackle Canada's abysmal child poverty and infant mortality rates before we can take them seriously about anything to do with children, the crooked liars that they are.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804

posted 20 June 2004 08:09 AM      Profile for Gir Draxon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This story has even caught the attention of CNN
From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 20 June 2004 08:09 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by beluga2:

" Smear campaigns like this are nothing new for Harper's party. It was his predecessor as leader, Stockwell Day, who, while an Alberta MLA, wrote a letter to the Red Deer Advocate accusing Red Deer lawyer Lorne Goddard of supporting pedophilia and child pornography, simply because Goddard was defending a man charged with those crimes. Goddard sued for libel -- and Alberta taxpayers picked up Day's big bill."

Goddamn. I'd entirely forgotten that sorry incident. Methinks I spy a pattern. Bodes well for what life might be like under the Harpie Cons, doncha think?

Oh, and Heywood: I don't recall anyone ever accusing gun-registry opponents of supporting Marc Lepine. That would be the equivalent of what your party's dim-bulb e-mail monkeys did yesterday.


You took the words right out of my typing fingers, beluga. Ooh, and were people mad in Alberta, mad at Day, mad mad mad.

That scandal helped to bring Day down -- and don't we all remember how much fun that was?

The Goddard incident was especially scary because it was an attack on two of the most basic principles of law in democracies, the presumption of innocence, and the right of all accused to competent legal representation. Harper's hatred for the courts is a little more indirect, but it is implicit in this latest attack.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 20 June 2004 08:31 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I know, it's amazing how much big name Reformatories think about kiddie porn, isn't it?

Ask them about abortion, they'll talk about kiddie porn. Ask them about SSM, they'll talk about kiddie porn.

It really is weird, their obsession.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 20 June 2004 08:36 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Harper was already pulling that during the debate.

And it is weird, either that or crooked. Who was the moralizing Reform MP who turned out to have raped an aboriginal woman when he was a Mountie?

I am really having to control myself, to prevent myself from saying feelthy nasty things about some of these knuckle-draggers.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 20 June 2004 08:44 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good strategy for the Cons to pump this child porno topic.

It takes folks off thinking about the Conservatives hidden agenda for health care, isn't that correct, Mr Klein?


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 20 June 2004 09:05 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Harper was already pulling that during the debate.

Yeah, that's what I was referring to.

(Yeah, it is that to which I was referring?)


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 20 June 2004 09:12 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Long thread! Continue here.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca