Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Belinda Stronach is a Liberal
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

He's trying to defeat the budget because P. Martin tacked on an extra 4.6 billion to appease the NDP and get their votes. Then he went around on a spree to five provinces promising them extra funding as well. The dollar shot straight down after the news.

The 27th was the day they announced that they would be tacking on the extra 4.6 billion.

21 Apr 2005 0.81 US dollars (noon) 0.8070 (1.2391)
22 Apr 2005 (high) 0.81 US dollars (noon) 0.8102 (1.2342)
25 Apr 2005 0.81 US dollars (noon) 0.8081 (1.2375)
26 Apr 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.8023 (1.2464)
27 Apr 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.8022 (1.2466)
28 Apr 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.7995 (1.2508)
29 Apr 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.7956 (1.2569)
02 May 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.7965 (1.2555)
03 May 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.7970 (1.2547)
04 May 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.7996 (1.2506)
05 May 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.8033 (1.2449)
06 May 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.8044 (1.2432)
09 May 2005 0.81 US dollars (noon) 0.8079 (1.2378)
10 May 2005 0.81 US dollars (noon) 0.8083 (1.2372)
11 May 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.8016 (1.2475)
12 May 2005 0.80 US dollars (noon) 0.8004 (1.2494)
13 May 2005 0.79 US dollars (noon) 0.7921 (1.2624)
16 May 2005 (low) 0.79 US dollars (noon) 0.7872 (1.2704)
17 May 2005 0.79 US dollars (noon) 0.7896 (1.2665)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
canuckistan
Mod Team
Mod Team


Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Location: Training future GS competitors.....

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 1:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gwangjuboy wrote:
canuckistan wrote:


The sex issue would NEVER be raised if you were talking about a man in the same situation.


PC madness. If God wanted men and women to be the same he would have equipped them both with tackle.


The Great Wall of Whiner wrote:

Quote:
Yes, bad choice of words. Sexual opportunist. Peter McKay is reported to be devastated to have the love of his life leave him for political ambition.



He's "reported to be devastated" but she's a "sexual opportunist".....see what I mean? Such puerile speculation about Stronach's private life is 100% sexist.

It's not about women "being the same" as men, it's about leaving the tired old schtick of women's sexualities out of discussions about their public lives.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 1:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Didn't everybody talk about Trudeau's sex life back when he was a bachelor?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
The Lemon



Joined: 11 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 1:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mithridates wrote:
He's trying to defeat the budget because P. Martin tacked on an extra 4.6 billion to appease the NDP and get their votes. Then he went around on a spree to five provinces promising them extra funding as well.


Respectfully, you're misinformed.

I. As of a few hours ago, The Conservatives are no longer "trying to defeat the budget". They flipflopped again. The "NDP" money is not attached to the budget. In fact, it is a separate bill, to be voted on separately on Thursday right after the budget vote. The Conservatives continue to say they will vote against that bill, even though they will support the budget:
"It's our intention to support Bill C-43, the original budget," Harper said on Tuesday night. "We'll oppose Bill C-48, which was the deal with the NDP, which is complete irresponsible fiscal policy." - CBC

II. The Conservative leader has assured anyone who has asked that if he's elected he'll give all those provinces the money (including the Newfoundlanders and Nova Scotians in the oil deal) that the Liberals have been promising.

GWOW wrote:
Didn't everybody talk about Trudeau's sex life back when he was a bachelor?

Could be worse. No one discusses Stephen Harper's bedroom life, except the pundit who uncharitably suggested Harper "combs his hair before he goes to bed every night".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 1:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, now I'm informed. Razz

Quote:
II. The Conservative leader has assured anyone who has asked that if he's elected he'll give all those provinces the money (including the Newfoundlanders and Nova Scotians in the oil deal) that the Liberals have been promising.


I did know about this part, though. Anything else would be political suicide.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Alias



Joined: 24 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 2:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
It's not about women "being the same" as men, it's about leaving the tired old schtick of women's sexualities out of discussions about their public lives.


Exactly. It was obvious now what the old boys club thought of her. One western mp said that she "whored herself out to the Liberals". Obvious remark to her gender.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Free World



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Drake Hotel

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 5:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Lemon wrote:
Mr. Winston Churchill, a parliamentarian of some note, "crossed the floor" twice in his career.

Winston Churchill did a lot of good, I'm not going to deny that. But to be fair, each time he "flip-flopped" it was to benefit himself. Each time he switched parties it resulted in a promotion for himself. If Belinda Stronach had served in the army during her youth as Churchill did, instead of living the life of a spoiled millionaire's daughter maybe we could take her selfish tactics with a grain of salt. However, from where I'm standing it looks to me like shameful self advancement at the cost of her constituents.
The Lemon wrote:
Her constituents came within 600 votes of electing a Liberal last year. It was a close-run thing. It could be argued that she's representing her constituents in particular far more now by refusing to bring down the government.

Wouldn't it be more correct to argue that the majority of her constituents would want her to support the Conservatives instead of the Liberals? Every interview I have seen with her constituents has led me to believe that they were shocked and disappointed by the news. They elected the Conservative candidate because they like the Conservative platform. In my opinion it is not very democratic to take that right away from the people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Lemon



Joined: 11 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 5:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Free World wrote:
Winston Churchill did a lot of good, I'm not going to deny that.

Well, don't go out on a limb or anything.

Free World wrote:
They elected the Conservative candidate because they like the Conservative platform.

This is an assumption. We don't elect parties, we elect people who usually happen to belong to parties.

There's absolutely nothing in Canada's Constitution about political parties. She had every constitutional right to do what she did.

In the last election, the constituents put their faith in her to represent them in Ottawa to the best of her ability. She says she's doing so, and they'll decide if they agree with what she's done in the next election. This morning they woke up in the riding of a senior cabinet minister. I'd say they did pretty well.

Quote:
In my opinion it is not very democratic to take that right away from the people.


Well, that's the way the cookie crumbles in parliamentary democracies. I'd argue it wouldn't be very democratic to force elected representatives to automatically vote a certain way in the House for their entire term, which is basically what you're saying.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mithridates



Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 5:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was thinking that she might have a lot of explaining to do in the next election, but when I checked the results for her riding:

Belinda Stronach CON 21818 42.45% X
Martha Hall Findlay LIB 21129 41.08%
Ed Chudak NDP 5111 9.95%
Daryl Wyatt GRN 2298 4.48%
Dorian Baxter PCP 1079 2.1%

It looks like the vote margin was quite minimal. I'm sure that was one of the factors that she looked at before deciding to jump ship. Were she in Alberta it would have been a different matter.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Free World



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Drake Hotel

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 6:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Lemon wrote:
Free World wrote:
They elected the Conservative candidate because they like the Conservative platform.

This is an assumption.

Wrong. That is what every one of her constituents has said when interviewed thus far.
The Lemon wrote:
This morning they woke up in the riding of a senior cabinet minister. I'd say they did pretty well.

Not if they would rather have a Conservative M.P. as their votes indicated.
The Lemon wrote:
I'd argue it wouldn't be very democratic to force elected representatives to automatically vote a certain way in the House for their entire term, which is basically what you're saying.

I agree and have never said otherwise. She could vote against the Conservative party if her constituents wanted her to. She should vote whichever way they want her to since she is representing them. There are other Conservative members of parliament who may be voting with the Liberals on Thursday because that is the wish of their constituents but they did not accept any bribe from Martin to jump ship.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Great Wall of Whiner



Joined: 24 Jan 2003
Location: Middle Land

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The bottom line is, she crossed the floor and the following benefits were bestowed upon her:

- Appointment to the Queen's Privy Council

- Two Ministry portfolios

- Being Liberal in Ontario

- Having a second chance at being Prime Minister

If she believes what she said then she would have left the Tories to sit as an Independent and consulted her constituents as had Keith Martin who switched last year from Blue to Red (whom I still consider a friend by the way.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Free World



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Drake Hotel

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Similiar benefits were offered to at least two other Conservative M.P.s but so far Belinda is the only taker.
Peter Mackay says he has not slept for 2 days. Rolling Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Moldy Rutabaga



Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Location: Ansan, Korea

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Again: I don't give a fiddler's behind about Belinda Stronach's sexual activities. Nor do I fault her for switching parties before an election (maybe). The voters will get their say.

Simply, I am disgusted that she joined a party of thieves, crooks, and liars, who have made my country look like a banana republic in my classroom. I make my prediction again also: if the Conservatives do not force an election this summer through a non-confidence measure, the Liberals will lie their way out of their promise to call an election after the Gomery report-- if it is even ever released.

Ken:>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cthulhu



Joined: 02 Feb 2003

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Moldy Rutabaga wrote:

Quote:
Simply, I am disgusted that she joined a party of thieves, crooks, and liars, who have made my country look like a banana republic in my classroom. I make my prediction again also: if the Conservatives do not force an election this summer through a non-confidence measure, the Liberals will lie their way out of their promise to call an election after the Gomery report-- if it is even ever released.


Liberals? Lie? Surely you GST, er, jest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Manner of Speaking



Joined: 09 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2005 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alias wrote:
Quote:
It's not about women "being the same" as men, it's about leaving the tired old schtick of women's sexualities out of discussions about their public lives.

Exactly. It was obvious now what the old boys club thought of her. One western mp said that she "whored herself out to the Liberals". Obvious remark to her gender.

Except that politicians, by profession, are all commonly thought of as "whores", regardless of their gender, and prostitution is not an occupation practiced exclusively by women. The people who referred to her in those terms could quite innocently could have been referring to the action of going over to the opposing party for personal gain, regardless of the gender of the person doing so. One could argue that Peter McKay was just as much of a *beep* for selling out the Conservative Party to a bunch of right-wing nutbars.

The "old boys" may have deliberately used sexist language to demean Stronach...but I find it just as interesting that the politically correct crowd are leaving no stone unturned in their search for politically incorrect behavior to condemn. I suspect the reason why is that subconsciously they don't think the self-serving actions of a female politician should be condemned as severely as those of a self-serving male politician. It's just a form of reverse discrimination.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International