RossK nails it

on the question of how we should be dealing with Harper and his caucus on the question of state intervention into the most private personal aspects of womens’ lives.

Our CPC Government has taken to playfully allowing certain MPs to mouth off about their desire to roll back womens’ rights to suit the religious sensibilities of the Bronze Age crackpots who dominate the shriekiest corner of their base.  The latest of these unwanted flirtations started in December with the goofy, slyly veiled twitterthreats of nobody MP Stephen Woodworth, who claimed to have no agenda…

…he just wanted to debate “policy”, that’s all, nothing to do with legislation restricting womens’ rights…

…until it was:

“My inclination is that I probably will be looking at a motion,” Mr. Woodworth said in a telephone interview on Wednesday after issuing a second news release to state his opposition to Canadian law which declares babies to be human at the moment they have fully emerged from the birth canal.

…and finally it ended this week, as we all knew it would but Woodworth refused to cop to, with yet another dead-on-arrival, socially-retarded motion that’s meant to profoundly impact womens’ reproductive autonomy.  This year’s back door is a committee to decide “when life begins”:

An Ontario Conservative MP has filed a motion in the House of Commons asking parliament to form a special committee to study a 400-year-old definition of a human being – a move that effectively brings the emotionally divisive issue of abortion back on the table.

Let’s be clear:  if an NDP MP filed a motion proposing a taxpayer money-sucking committee to study the equally ridiculous question of “where the universe ends”, it would be roundly ridiculed, and rightly so.  But Woodworth’s bill has the overwhelming stench of Wedge, so rather than being universally castigated as the brain droppings of a Bronze Age crackpot, it’s being taken seriously.  Which is just what Stephen Harper wants, because it gives him yet another opportunity to say “No, we won’t be re-opening blah blah blah”, and re-establish himself as The Grownup in a roomful of brain-damaged children.

In Normal Times, a woman’s right to reproductive self-determination wouldn’t be a question: this battle was fought and won by the side of liberty long ago.  But in these strange and savage times, things are almost never what they seem.  Our image-obsessed PM occasionally allows his braindead backbench bulldogs to escape the yard and run up the street chasing cars and biting tires and barking madly so that he comes across as The  Reasonable Guy when he gets them on-leash and herds them back to the yard.

Moronic anti-choice bills make their way into the House with depressing regularity (and they’re not always tabled by Conservatives).  To actually pass one would revive fears of Harper’s Hidden Agenda and likely be political suicide for the CPC, but since they’re in the Parliamentary driver’s seat with little in the way of Opposition there’s good reason for vigilance at the very least.

RossK is right: any CRAP MP who starts flinging this manipulative shit around should absolutely not be let off the hook to sneak away like Eddie Haskell while Harpie does his best Dad-yelling.  And not just the MPs: it’s time for Harper himself to come clean on the issue.  Coyly stating that he’s “somewhere between the two extremes” is no longer good enough, for me anyway.

I’m serious:  I’m reachin out, baby:

24 Responses to “RossK nails it”


  1. 1 cityprole Friday, February 10, 2012 at 5:36 pm

    Emperor Steve probably wants us to go impregnate ourselves for more little blonde haired, blue eyed babies to grow up in Canada and serve the Third Rei**…er, keep the population growing…make no mistake, it is almost exclusively Caucasian women who avail themselves of both birth control and abortion services here in Canada…not to play the reverse race card or anything, but, c’mon….

  2. 2 B York Friday, February 10, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    I totally agree cityprole. The highest birthrate in this country is among Aboriginal people. I’m sure Steve and his fellow racist followers feel very uncomfortable about that. In fact, the projections are such that if white Canadian women don’t start reproducing post haste, Canada will be continuously dependent on immigration to fill jobs (because for some reason – ahem racist – the fact that Aboriginal populations are growing doesn’t seem to factor into the labour force projections).

    But beyond the racist economic incentive, I think there are definitely a whack of Harper MPs who are just way too invested in punishing women on religious grounds.

    What I want to know is how they got the definition of human life SO RIGHT 400 years ago.

  3. 3 JJ Friday, February 10, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    The Harper Yoot! 😯

    I’ve always suspected the Forced Birthers’ real agenda was to build up an army with all these unwanted fetuses… a highly-trained, elite fighting force of Christian Soldiers for the next Crusade, or maybe for that big battle that takes place before the Rapture 😛

  4. 4 JJ Friday, February 10, 2012 at 6:05 pm

    there are definitely a whack of Harper MPs who are just way too invested in punishing women on religious grounds.

    Bingo. That’s my feeling exactly.

  5. 5 thereginamom Friday, February 10, 2012 at 8:59 pm

    Excellent post, JJ!

    Made me think of the PRENDA legislation in the states. Woody’d be getting hard over that, eh?

  6. 6 bleatmop Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 11:25 pm

    To be fair, there were/are many LPC MP’s that were in that pro-life caucus.

  7. 7 The Arbourist Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 7:49 am

    We do not need more of this.

    What part of women are autonomous human beings does the fetus fetish brigade NOT understand? It is bullcookery like Woodworth’s that needs to be called out and a big hattip to JJ for doing so.

  8. 8 fhg1893 Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 4:29 pm

    So, it’s perfectly okay for the left to bring up the third reich when talking about the Conservative government, but it’s not okay for Larry Miller to say the same thing about the left? Especially when the comparison is actually a reasonably accurate one? Interesting…

    And speaking of which, guess what’s scheduled for this week, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday? 🙂

    But enough crowing about the long-delayed demise of something profoundly evil.

    Harper derangement syndrome is certainly alive and well, but JJ’s not a sufferer as far as I’m concerned. But I do have to ask. While your inquiry is certainly relevant given the circumstances, If Harper doesn’t answer, or alternatively, sweeps the issue under the rug in a, “we weren’t elected to do that, we’re not reopening this debate” gesture sure to come now that the PM is back from China, what difference does it make, or at least, how much difference does it make for the next three years or so?

    So far, it seems to me that Harper has mostly stuck to the Tory election platform, without too much deviation. We knew pretty much what we were getting on May 2nd, and it hasn’t been that surprising so far. The hidden agenda myth seems to ingrained in the left that the left is STILL going to believe in a Harper hidden agenda even after he’s eventually gone from power.

    So yes, while some Tory backbenchers have all the political instincts of a moth gazing at a bug-zapper, if Harper comes back with a “we’re not reopening this discussion” statement, doesn’t that result in a defacto pronouncement on reproductive choice, at least for now?

  9. 9 Terrence Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 7:18 pm

    It’d be nice if Harper came clean on his real position, but it’s not in his interests.

    Ambiguity can be very advantageous. Right now, there are anti-choice people who truly believe he is one of them (I’ve met them), and so they donate and support Conservative candidates.

    If Harper’s clarifies his position in a pro-choice direction, he loses them, and gains nothing in return. Why? Because nobody on the left would believe his clarification; and even if they did, they wouldn’t switch their support based on that one issue.

    If he clarifies his support on a pro-life direction, he also gains nothing, while confirming every rumor about his hidden agenda.

    Besides, if Harper can string those supporters along indefinitely by being a bit vague, why not do so? The worst they can do is stay home and close their wallets, but they’re not even going to do that, for the most part, because they know the Liberals or the NDP would be even worse.

    The Manning Centre conference is going to be fun this year 🙂

  10. 10 JJ Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 7:40 pm

    Indeed, that’s what I was alluding to in my 2nd-last paragraph. The LPC is infested with fetus fetishists.

  11. 11 JJ Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 7:42 pm

    Thanks, R-Mom!
    Some of what’s going on in the States right now is scary-crazy. The GOP candidates are arguing about birth control… contraception, not abortion. Unbelievable! 😯

  12. 12 JJ Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 7:48 pm

    Yes, we had that for a couple of million years or however long women have been trying to get un-pregnant, we don’t need to go back to it.

    I’m pretty sure Woodworth believes every word he says, although I sincerely doubt Harper does. However, I find it irritating that Harper seems to be using numbskulls like Woodworth — and threats to womens’ rights — as a way to burnish his cred as a social moderate. Enough of this manipulation.

  13. 13 JJ Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 8:16 pm

    You’re absolutely right. This issue is red meat, bait, and there’s no percentage in Harper coming clean on it for the reasons you stated.

    If he reveals himself to be pro-choice (which I am pretty sure he is since there’s no evidence of him giving a hoot about social issues at all, and believe me, I’ve searched), he doesn’t gain anything and loses momentum with social conservatives. If he reveals himself to be anti-choice… (quick, hire that crop duster again and load it up with prozac).

    Like him or not, nobody can deny Harper is a skilled political opportunist with the manipulative instincts of a rattlesnake in a rat’s nest. He walks a fine line and I grudgingly have to give him credit for doing it well. I do not expect him to reply to my tweet 😛

    Hope you’ll be liveblogging the Manning Centre!

  14. 14 JJ Sunday, February 12, 2012 at 8:22 pm

    Omg, it’s this week already? 🙂 😎

    I don’t seriously expect Harper to be forthcoming with any kind of clarification on this issue — it serves a dual purpose for him, giving a glimmer of hope to the socons and at the same time, allowing him to look like a social moderate and not scare away all the centrist votes he got last time around. But I still think the media and everyone else should keep pushing the issue, just because… who likes being manipulated? Not me.

    if Harper comes back with a “we’re not reopening this discussion” statement, doesn’t that result in a defacto pronouncement on reproductive choice, at least for now?

    For now. Until the next time he wants to pull a Ward Cleaver to reassure all the moderates that it’s just a few nutcases in his caucus that have a “hidden agenda”, not him.

  15. 15 bleatmop Monday, February 13, 2012 at 12:44 am

    Ah indeed you did. I just feel its important to keep reiterating that fact. The LPC is just as guilty in this as the CPC.

  16. 16 fhg1893 Monday, February 13, 2012 at 5:37 am

    Omg, it’s this week already?

    Yup. There’s some kind of celebration planned for Wedensday post vote. I try to tell them that Quebec is poised to throw a gigantic wrench into the works, and I’ve got a feeling it’s going to derail this train for quite a while, but nobody’s paying attention that message. I remind them what happened to the last guy who decided that a post-vote celebration wasn’t always the best idea, but their silence seems to implore that they are convinced that “our guy isn’t going to end up like him!” That is probably so, but as I told them, I’m not ready to declare victory in this battle until I can light the offending article on fire and toss it off of the Peace Tower without excessive legal consequences. And it seems like that will be a long time coming, much longer than my peers think. C’est la vie.

    I agree with you, the PM is trying to have it both ways, and as much as I like to accuse the Liberal Party of Canada for turning my Charter rights into an either-or proposition, it’s duplicitious for the PM to stand for Charter rights in one circumstance, even if it is only a token gesture, while continuing to tease both sides of this contentious issue for political gain. For a guy who talks about principles all the time, he should take a clear and unambigious stand. I think he can believe whatever he wants, his conscience is his choice, and Canadians should respect that. But when you hold the office of the defacto head of state, it should be expected that you make a firm and clear decision about just how much your personal beliefs influence the job you do.

  17. 17 jkg Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 9:07 pm

    So, it’s perfectly okay for the left to bring up the third reich when talking about the Conservative government, but it’s not okay for Larry Miller to say the same thing about the left? Especially when the comparison is actually a reasonably accurate one? Interesting…

    Quite right. I suppose when it comes to the seriousness and competency of this government, we should really use anonymous internet chatter as a baseline and justification for deliberation and discourse of legislation in the House of Commons. I can fully expect the next round of legislative debates in which John Baird calls the Opposition “newbs” and “fags” and decries that “they did it too on teh internet!” so that backbenchers can continually make reasonably accurate, sophomoric, fallacious arguments (genetic and association all wrapped in a reductio ad Hitlerum to name those committed by Larry Miller) in hopes of painting past Members of Parliament and Cabinet Ministers as modern analogues of Hitler’s fascism. Thankfully, given that we are dealing with Harper’s Ministry, most of the time they do not really believe what they say (Taliban Jack followed much later by actually adopting parts of Jack’s stance on Afghanistan anyone?), for if they did, well, it wouldn’t be interesting; I will put it that way.

  18. 18 fhg1893 Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 5:41 am

    So because it would otherwise “lower the discourse,” nevermind that a certain study found that Jack Layton, and the NDP were consistentenly the most disrespectful MP’s in the commons, we shouldn’t respond, or rebut Irwin Cotler’s lies. Nevermind that they were uttered in the mad pursuit to tar-and-feather someone who actually had the sheer audacity to, dare-I-say-it, tell the unpleasant truth in the House of Commons about former cabinet ministers and senators?

    Well, I guess that’s the modern political left Ladies and Gentlemen. With drastic prognistacations about the bloodbath that will certainly follow from last night’s dustup, nevermind that a meer hour or so before the main event, you had a sitting MP proclaim that he did not submit himself to the grossly disproportionate, heavy-handed will of the state, and somehow, someway, he had found the strength of character and super-human ability not to kill anybody! Yes, the call of his toys was strong, and oh so seductive, but somehow, he managed to resist their siren song! SHOCK! HORROR! OUTRAGE! Yes, the lovely and attractive political left, who have been oh so inconvinienced by that horrible bugbear, democracy, that because things aren’t going exactly the way they want, they state that it would preferable to break up the country than to have to endure the oppressive and fascist will of the people for just one more second!

    In other words; thankfully, much of the time, they really do believe it, because much of the time, it’s the truth. Too bad all those boring, and not-interesting lies are starting to catch up to the political left eh?

  19. 19 jkg Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 11:22 am

    we shouldn’t respond, or rebut Irwin Cotler’s lies

    That is a wonderful strawman there. It is good to know just as long as a mystical non-cited “study” is around, it is perfectly justifiable for the “Taliban Jack” meme but to also consider reductio ad Hitlerum as unpleasant truth. “They did it too” is so much better. I suppose given the emotional investment into this debate, those would be considered truths. I feel very sorry for Larry Miller who was so victimized for being demanded something better than tenuous Hitler arguments when debating legislation. I anxiously await the full acceptance of Hitler comparisons to the highly intrusive lawful access legislation next round in the House. Harper’s Ministry is doing a fairly good job, I might add, borrowing from past tactics, except this time around, his own cabinet minister is stating that anyone who opposes legislation is a supporter of child pornography. I guess the first time around when Paul Martin was accused of that, it just wasn’t convincing enough of a lie.

  20. 20 fhg1893 Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 12:32 pm

    That is a wonderful strawman there.

    Oh dear. It’s a strawman is it? *gasp* Well, then that completely invalidates everything doesn’t? Only… It just happens to be true.

    You see, Hitler did confiscate guns from Jews. Or that is to say technically that they were confiscated by his thugs on his orders, or orders from Himmler. Just how thinly do we have to split this particular hair exactly? In any case, Cotler claimed in the House that Hitler did not confiscate guns from Jews. He lied.

    it is good to know just as long as a mystical non-cited “study” is around, it is perfectly justifiable for the “Taliban Jack” meme but to also consider reductio ad Hitlerum as unpleasant truth.

    Your google-foo sucks.
    http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110601/layton-rude-house-110601/

    But okay, fair enough the reductio ad Hitlerum is kinda lame huh? Afterall, it barely scratches the surface, we haven’t talkeed about Pol Pot or Stalin who flew in the face— Oh wait, they liked gun control too now didn’t they… Oh. Oopsie. And yes, I have no problems comparing Allan Rock and Sharon Carstairs to Hitler, Pol Pot, or Stalin. The shoe most certainly fits.

    feel very sorry for Larry Miller who was so victimized for being demanded something better than tenuous Hitler arguments when debating legislation.

    As established, it’s not tenuous at all, but quite an apt comparison, and quite fitting for the Liberals.

    I anxiously await the full acceptance of Hitler comparisons to the highly intrusive lawful access legislation next round in the House.

    Oh! What’s this? An original thought? Well, not really an informed one, but original at least. You see, if it WAS an informed thought, it would have the knowledge that we, that is, the firearms owners of this country, are already talking about turfing Vic Toews in the same way we turfed Mak Holland, and for precisely this reason. But, I sense leftist blinders again. Gun owners being persona non-grata and all…

    Harper’s Ministry is doing a fairly good job, I might add, borrowing from past tactics, except this time around, his own cabinet minister is stating that anyone who opposes legislation is a supporter of child pornography.

    Except of course for the fact that they might just back down…
    http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/16/vikileaks-twitter-account-shifts-focus-to-minister-vic-toews-spending-habits/

    And when I next get the chance to talk to the Tories, I’m going to advise them that my money is most definitely going to walk if they continue pursuing the “Lawful Access” bill. You leftists would know that sort of thing, if you ever bothered to listen to people not named “Trudeau.”

  21. 21 fhg1893 Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 1:30 pm

    I anxiously await the full acceptance of Hitler comparisons to the highly intrusive lawful access legislation next round in the House.

    Oh, and silly me, I almost forgot. This is already routine, and has been for a long time. Perhaps you’re unfamiliar with the comments section of Rabble.ca, the comments section of the CBC, the editorial pages of the Toronto Star, and the Progressive Bloggers. And other than my minor excoriation, we rarely ever say anything at all.

  22. 22 JJ Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 8:41 pm

    Meh. There are nazis on both sides of the spectrum.

    In other news… *click* That was the sound of our virtual champagne glasses 🙂 😎 😀 😛

  23. 23 fhg1893 Friday, February 17, 2012 at 5:01 am

    Indeed. 🙂 😎 😀

    February has been some kind of gun owner love-in it would seem. Brian Lilley is talking about the warrantless search provisions in the Firearms act, and this little gem has just landed on our proverbial doorstep:

    http://jiv.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/27/0886260511433515.abstract

    After the passage of C-68, a decrease in the rate of the decline of homicide by firearm was found by interrupted regression. Joinpoint analysis also found an increasing trend in homicide by firearm rate post the enactment of the licensing portion of C-68.

  24. 24 fhg1893 Monday, February 20, 2012 at 6:49 pm

    Oh for… A challenger appears!

    http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/petition-the-queen-to-disallow-long-gun-registry-ban.html

    Protip: Check the signatures. Some are priceless! 😆


Wait. What?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Mac Security Portal
Rose's Place
Blogging Change

Incoming!

  • 630,834
[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

Archives


%d bloggers like this: