The new Tories, sleeping with Belinda Stronach

Ben Kenobi · January 20, 2004, 17:54

At agathon's bequest, here's another canada politics thread. Has anybody heard anything about the opposition to Stephen Harper for Tory leadership?

Specifically, this woman?

Monk · January 20, 2004, 18:00

Hmm.

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 18:03

Cheers Ben.

While she's not Mariah Carey and that picture is not too flattering I'd have to say that although I wouldn't vote for her, I'd definitely sleep with the new improved Belinda I saw today on CBC.

woof woof!!

Why are all the NDP women so uggerly though?

Winston · January 20, 2004, 18:07

I'd do the same as Ted Striker.

Ben Kenobi · January 20, 2004, 18:14

I hope she's prolife like Harper.

Nothing better than having a pretty woman who just happens to be prolife.

Quote:

Why are all the NDP women so uggerly though?

Confusion of gender roles. Remember the Tories also had Kim Campbell who was easy on the eyes.

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 18:15

Power is an aphrodisiac.

It sucks going to a progressive meeting. Half the women there are dykes and the ones that aren't are usually either pug ugly beasts, have crew cuts, or have indulged in some evil form of mediaeval self mutilation.

chequita guevara · January 20, 2004, 18:20

Women tend to be more progressive, so just set your sights a little broader than activist meetings.

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 18:23

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Women tend to be more progressive, so just set your sights a little broader than activist meetings.

Some of them are quite broad.

Anyway, I's a married man now. And no she doesn't have a crew cut.

She does have a few interesting tattoos though.

Must.. stop... engaging in... reactionary sexist behaviour...

Ben Kenobi · January 20, 2004, 18:27

I saw your other post, Agathon. On my 'urge'.

There's nothing wrong with 'reactionary sexist behavior' as defined by the progressives.

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 18:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

I saw your other post, Agathon. On my 'urge'.

There's nothing wrong with 'reactionary sexist behavior' as defined by the progressives.

Having said that, don't take my statements re: Ms Stronach as gospel. It behooves a man to check out the upholstery first.

BTW - loved that exchange you and Tass had in the Community Forum. He came out looking like a 19th century vicar.

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 18:31

Ben, she's pro gay marriage which might dampen your enthusiasm.

Bugs ****ing Bunny · January 20, 2004, 18:35

British Tories don't look like that. They look like flappy-breasted old witches with insane hair. The women look even worse.

Ben Kenobi · January 20, 2004, 18:37

Darn.

I thought that might be the case.

My sources have not given me any information on Belinda Stronach, so I've been in the dark up until now.

At least Harper will be a good candidate for the Tories.

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 18:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

At least Harper will be a good candidate for the Tories.

You'll never win with him.

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 18:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
British Tories don't look like that. They look like flappy-breasted old witches with insane hair. The women look even worse.

Virginia Bottomley? She must have been alright in her younger days.

cinch · January 20, 2004, 18:51

Bring back Refooooooorm!!!

Now there's a face you could love!

Ben Kenobi · January 20, 2004, 18:53

What have we 'won' if we become Liberal lite?

cinch:

That's after his makeover. He's not wearing his glasses.

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 18:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
British Tories don't look like that. They look like flappy-breasted old witches with insane hair. The women look even worse.

Don't say that. I still have nightmares about John Major servicing Edwina Currie.

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 18:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
What have we 'won' if we become Liberal lite?

A chance to actually put some of your policies into action.

She did say, specifically, that the power of religious organisations to determine whom they would marry would remain untouched.

Ben Kenobi · January 20, 2004, 19:04

Even Svend Robinson says that.

I don't think you need to come out for gay marriage in order to be elected. There are plenty of conservative voters who are not happy with the liberal party. I'd rather see the Tories pick up those votes in the next elections, rather than abandoning their identity.

Seeker · January 20, 2004, 19:33

I think gay marriage is a non-issue for most canadians WRT who they will vote for.

Ben Kenobi · January 20, 2004, 19:36

Everyone I know considers it to be THE issue of the election.

Seeker · January 20, 2004, 19:40

I guess we run in different circles...mostly university age or just graduated young men and women with jobs in teaching, biological sciences, and tech?

notyoueither · January 20, 2004, 19:48

The biggest thing an anti stance would do is serve the NDP and Liberals in denouncing the New Tories as yet more Western based right wing extremists. Whether it is true or not, that is the image the Tories have to ditch if they want to have a prayer of forming a government.

Ben Kenobi · January 20, 2004, 19:53

4 years ago, Mr. Chretien affirmed that Marriage ought to be between one man and one woman. If affirming such a position today makes one a right wing extremist, what has changed so much in 4 years?

Agathon · January 20, 2004, 19:57

I think it sucks that you are all focusing on Ms Stronach's ideas and principles, you should be focusing on her as a bootylicious piece of Tory ass.

What is the world coming to.

notyoueither · January 20, 2004, 19:57

The Supreme Court, and Canadian society.

I would be interested to see poll numbers on the issue, but I would be surprised if a clear majority did not favour churches being able to perform the ceremony for gays if they wish to, and for that ceremony to then be recognised by the state.

cinch · January 20, 2004, 20:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Everyone I know considers it to be THE issue of the election.

Really? Interesting.

Most of the non-college-folk* I encounter seem to think money (in the form of Mad Cow, trade, and good ol' tax cuts) is the make-or-break deal, as per usual. Even here, in the Texas of Canada, most people don't give two craps about gay marriage.

*I discluded college folk because I wanted to make clear that these weren't just left-wing ideologues I was talking to... And yes, most of the people I talk to at Uni are either left-wing ideologues or completely a-political.

molly bloom · January 20, 2004, 20:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Agathon

Don't say that. I still have nightmares about John Major servicing Edwina Currie.

Or Mulroney servicing Reagan:

" That tight enough for ya, Ron?"

In Great Britain it is a truism that many Tory politicians resemble Ann Widdecombe, and the majority of them are male.

In Australia, many Liberal (the Down Under Tories) male pollies look like Eichmann and the women resemble Ilse Koch (yes, Bronwyn Bishop, we're talking about you) unless they look like a pregnant manatee (Amanda Vanstone).

Ben Kenobi · January 20, 2004, 20:13

Well, most of the people I see in a regular basis will be conservatives, some idealogues, and some most certainly not.

One of the things that really attracted me to Denise, were the positions we shared on these issues often superceding church differences.

nye:

Canadian society changes so dramatically in 4 years? I think not.

Quote:

did not favour churches being able to perform the ceremony for gays if they wish to,

The devil is in the details. Let's suppose you asked the question, do you believe that marriage should be redefined from one man and one woman to 2 men or 2 women, and see how well you do.