What the Liberal Party thinks of gays, cripples, Asian women, and so on
What would you think if the second-most important member of the Liberal Party machine in Ontario held these views? And publicly proclaimed them?
- Olivia Chow looks like a dog
- Steven Fletcher is funny when he's mad because he's a cripple
- Harper and Duceppe are gay or something
- Ontario voters outside of Toronto, like Barrie, represented by a Liberal MP, are unimportant and a joke
- People are stupid, pity politicians who have to pretend to be nice
- Jack Layton is an asshole
Mike Klander is the Executive Vice-President for the "Paul Martin 's Liberals" for the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario). These are from the Google cache of his blog, just deleted because he was caught.
I'm not sure what you are thinking, but I'm thinking a very public firing is in order.
I think that makes the Jack Layton comments (given that Layton is popular in Ontario and part of the Liberal strategy is to make NDP voters feel comfortable casting their vote for the Liberal Party) and the attitude towards Ontario cities like Barrie (and presumably anywhere else outside of the 416 area code) particularly rich.
[A liberal socialist blogger is disgusted too.]
From Paul Well's blog on Maclean's:
But now the fun is just beginning. Because this is quite a bit bigger than beer and popcorn. So now we get to find out whether anything is a firing offence to Paul Martin, besides working in Jean Chretien's PMO of course.
What is Paul Wells talking about?
Get a load of this screen capture:
That was posted by Mike Klander at his blog, now deleted in its entirety. The woman is, of course, Olivia Chow, Toronto city councillor, federal NDP candidate, and wife of federal NDP leader, Jack Layton.
Here are some other gems from the Liberal Mike Klander. For instance, some choice items from his stop ten list of things that will make Klander sick:
- The terms "culture of entitlement", "adscam" or "whistleblower"...blow this!
- Harper being flanked by the sexy Rona Ambrose at every opportunity
- Harper being flanked by the ethnic Rahim Jaffer at every opportunity
- The 10 day break during Christmas...I celebrate Christmas for two, maybe three days, it not like we're fasting in the desert or something
- Olivia Chow
Or these reasons why the Liberals will win:
- Our jet is bigger than theirs
- Layton is a weasel
- They have Ralph Klein
- We have Earl Provost
Who's Earl Provost? Never mind. The size of someone's jet?
From April 22, the grand strategy of the Liberal Party with regards to delaying the election until the second Gomery Report:
In the end if Harper actually does hold off then the public will have 7 more months of Gomery...just enough time to get bored of it and more time to move on to important issues.
Important issues? Got that? $350 million of your money flushed by the Liberals to enrich their friends and recharge their coffers isn't an important issue. The Liberal Party just has to wait long enough for the stupid electorate to realize that.
But there's more. So much more.
Remember that picture of Harper and Duceppe taken at the Holocaust memorial service last spring?
Here's Klander's caption for a post entitled "Bed Buddies?":
Yes indeed, politics does make for strange bedfellows...but is there more to it?
I would bet that his wife couldn't make his eyes roll back into his head like that.
Always leave it to progressives to descend into homophobic jokes. Just how important is same-sex marriage that the gay community will put up with this crap?
Let's move on. When Conservative MP Steven Fletcher suggested to Liberal Health Minister Ujjal Dosanjh that they continue a heated discussion about health care funding outside of the committee room, Klander had to share his insight:
Now what did Klander think of this? He thinks a cripple in a wheelchair getting mad is funny.Mr. Dosanjh: Let me respond to your platform . . . Your current leader wants to commodify health care and not have the health care one currently finds with the Canada Health Act. . . . Your party continues to say one thing in their public policy platforms and has said many other things prior to the public-policy platform.
Mr. Fletcher: It is the Liberal Party that has a hidden agenda on health.
Mr. Dosanjh: In fact, I'm happy to repeat those lines for you if you forget.
Mr. Fletcher: We could take this outside. I would be happy to. [Mr. Fletcher is a strapping 6 foot 4 and weighs 220 pounds. He is also a quadriplegic who uses a wheelchair.]
Mr. Dosanjh: I'm not a physical kind of guy. [Mr. Dosanjh is 5 foot 8 and tips the scales at 170 pounds.]
Mr. Fletcher: Neither am I, but don't be surprised if you find yourself with tire marks.
This is funny so stop pretending that its [sic] not...stop being so politically correct will you?
It's not funny. Fletcher is angry. Fletcher is furious. Fletcher wants answers. As a guy who knows the inside of the health care system far better than most, he has a right to know. Klander is dismissing Fletcher's indignation because he is in a wheelchair. This isn't about political correctness. This is about ridiculing a person because of his physical infirmities, precisely because that person would likely be hard-pressed to use physical force to compel others to listen to him.
Political correctness is about giving someone more deference than they deserve for fear of offending them if they were treated like everyone else. Klander is extending Steven Fletcher far less respect than he would anyone else because he is crippled (and perhaps Klander feels superior and less threatened as a result, but there I'm just speculating).
Oh, and for people in "vote-rich Ontario" who are thinking of voting Liberal, this is what the Executive Vice-President of the Ontario wing thinks of you, at least those of you outside of Toronto:
Check out the Live 8 website and the list of all the concert venues: Hyde Park, London; Circus Maximus Rome; Red Square Moscow, Palais de Versailles, Paris; Museum of Art, Philadelphia; Siegessäule, Berlin and finally Park Place in Barrie (everyone time I say that I can't help but using the Monster Truck announcer voice - PARK PLACE IN BARRIE)
Barrie! Where the hell is Barrie? You know, London, Rome, Moscow, Berlin and Barrie. I'm sorry but I don't even know what the hell the Siegessäule is, but it sure sounds more impressive than PARK PLACE.
Barrie is north of Toronto, on the shores of Lake Simcoe. Nice place. Very prosperous. Easy to find on a map.
Currently represented by one of Klander's Liberal friends, Aileen Carroll. Perhaps readers who live in Barrie and are represented by Ms Carroll can drop her an email and ask for her opinion. Oh, and don't forget to email the Conservative candidate, Patrick Brown, and the NDP candidate, Peter Bursztyn.
I bet Brown and Bursztyn will both tell you that the Conservative and NDP party organizations were thrilled to hear about Barrie's good fortune to be selected to host this event, with the economic windfall it represented.
Hey, Barrie might be a Conservative riding this time around, at least if the nice people in Barrie hear about Klander.
Now to why he is an executive vice-president and not an elected member of parliament:
People who are involved in politics are inevitably asked the question: "Do you think you will ever run for office?"
I say NO...not because I don't think it's noble profession or because I think the commitment is too great...and NO not even because you have to be nice to really stupid people.
I say NO because at any moment, at any place, in any pose or any situation, your picture can be taken and broadcast to the world...if you don't think that's a good enough reason, than look at this roster of winners.
OK, so the electorate is stupid (perhaps concentrated in Barrie), and you might look silly in a picture. Good reasons to avoid public office instead of dealing with stupid constituents and having your picture taken. But to harbour those attitudes and try to get other people elected?
Seems hypocritical to me.
Finally, we'll end it with an example of how the second-in-command of Paul Martin's team in Ontario sees Jack Layton, the leader of the NDP. Remember that the Liberals want to court NDP voters, to make them feel welcome in the Liberal Party, so as not to split the "progressive vote" and allow the Conservatives to come up the middle in tight ridings:
I'm not sure how best to describe how I feel about this guy: an asshole? a weasel?....hum...perhpas both...a weasel's ass!
Desparate attempts at being relevant are fading fast...
I apologize for sounding so bitter but he's also my MP so I have to live with it on a daily basis.
I'm curious. Are any NDP supporters in Ontario (presumably NDP supporters in Barrie need not answer) feeling welcome in the Liberal Party? Like their concerns will be considered if they decide to vote strategically and deliver the Liberal Party back into power?
Maybe it's just me, but with the attitudes expressed by this high-ranking member of the Liberal Party, I think I'd leave my vote with the NDP.
The question is not about Klander's views, as such, or his right to hold them and express them publicly on a blog for over 7 months, but how the Liberal Party thought it appropriate to make him the executive vice-president of the Ontario party machine.
Did they not know? Or did they not care? Or did they share his attitudes? Good questions, probably best posed by people who have donated to the Liberal Party. Let's hope they start asking some hard questions.
Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary
Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!
Comments
I've had a few words to say over at my place about the KKKlander controversy--which appears to be slipping under the corporate media radar at present.
But, Angry, come on--all this indignation when Kate McMillan has called for a return to residential schools for Indian kids and you yourself have posted something like this? http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/122956.php
Why is racism not worth an indignant post when it's conservatives expressing it?
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 26, 2005 04:28 PM
Kate is the executive vice-president of...what exactly?
Posted by: Angry in T.O. at December 26, 2005 04:44 PM
She's probably more prominent (and influential) than Klander. Hell, that goes for you, too. Tell me honestly: had you ever heard of this gink before Wells blew the gaff on him?
Happy New Year, by the way.
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 26, 2005 04:47 PM
Dr.Dawg,
How fitting to go looking for moral equivalents. Lowering the bar is what the current Liberal regime thrives on.
BTW, there's a difference between elevating the discussion and asking hard questions without fear of violating political over sensitivities, and bringing the conversation into the gutter with over the top, in your face inhumane insensitivities.
If you can't see the difference I feel sorry for you.
Finally, Kate is a private citizen. We're all free to espouse whatever views we believe in. But this liberal filth is at the top of the Liberal party. You know, the party that wants to continue to run our country.
Posted by: Biff at December 26, 2005 05:02 PM
I figure the bar should be at the same height for any prominent figure. If there's any suggestion here that I'm a Liberal apologist, btw, go over to my place and think again.
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 26, 2005 05:05 PM
The question is not about his views, as such, or his right to hold them and express them publicly on a blog for over 7 months, but how the Liberal Party thought it appropriate to make him the VP of the Ontario party machine.
Did they not know? Or did they not care? Or did they share his attitudes?
[Added to post]
Posted by: Angry in T.O. at December 26, 2005 05:22 PM
My view? The Libs simply don't care. They have no values and no standards, other than getting into power. Loyalty to the party (the PMO) is the only criterion.
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 26, 2005 05:25 PM
I've spent a lot of time on this, digging up all of the previous cached pages from this slug's site that are still available. The reason I've put so much energy into this, instead of being with my family on Christmas Day, is that I think Klander's Krap is unacceptable for anyone - and if I can make that point by pointing out that a man who sits in the inner circle of Paul Martin's closest advisors holds these views, then I will do so.
This wasn't just one joke. This guy, month after month, in full view of his Liberal cronies and friends, while using his influence to make a living as a lobbyist for large companies, including a large tobacco company, spewed out hate and filth. It's unacceptable. And we need to say so.
Dr.Dawg, you want to point out someone with this major an indiscretion, with that kind of power, and I'll take that person on as well. It's wrong no matter who does it. That doesn't mean we minimize it for the one who did do it.
Posted by: Patrick at December 26, 2005 06:07 PM
Angry--a case of noblesse oblige--the Liberals consider themselves so far above us peasants we dare not question their right to state what they want to. If we said anything remotely similar we would be before a HRT before we could think twice.
If the MSM does not pick this up we will know exactly where they stand on this issue. It again will be up to the bloggers to make it known across Canada--it will be up to you to let Canadians know what the Liberals really think about us, the taxpayer. A man is thrown in jail because he tells the truth about the liberal involvement in Haiti, but we are supposed to accept this slaging of Ms. Chow, Fletcher et al as the voice from on high. I am not accepting it and will do all in my power to get these disgusting dictators removed from power.
Posted by: George at December 26, 2005 06:09 PM
I appreciate your work, Patrick, and there's no way I'm minimizing anything with respect to the wretched Klander. I'm just a little bemused by the outpouring of outrage from Conservative partisans who are not aboe a little racism of their own on occasion. I find this outrage a bit opportunistic. But that is in no way, shape or form an excuse for this Liberal operative.
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 26, 2005 06:10 PM
I'm NOT a "liberal blogger." I'm a socialist. Just for the record.
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 26, 2005 06:12 PM
Sorry to monopolize this thread, Angry. Klander has just stepped down, amid a flurry of spin. Two articles have now appeared in Google News, from Canoe and CFRA.
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 26, 2005 06:27 PM
To hear the Liberal spokesperson tell it, this guy had nothing to do with the Liberal's election campaign. Why, Executive Vice-President is a positively unofficial position. Hardly worth mentioning.
Nothing to see here. Move on. Move on.
Posted by: Patrick at December 26, 2005 06:52 PM
If Klander had lasted the day it would have been a sign that the Liberals are in significant disarray. Dr.Dawg is being disingenuous in suggesting that Klanders opinions are not very newsworthy. If he were Executive Vice President of the CPC, this would be the lead story in all media today. Unfortunately this story will go virtually unreported. It's too bad whoever released this story didn't know enough to wait until Jan 3rd.
Posted by: Terry Gain at December 26, 2005 06:55 PM
"Dr.Dawg is being disingenuous in suggesting that Klanders opinions are not very newsworthy."
I suggested nothing of the kind. Are conservatives usually this poor at reading comprehension?
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 26, 2005 07:11 PM
Why is it racist to suggest Olivia Chow is a dog?
Posted by: Bear at December 26, 2005 07:47 PM
Dr Dawg,
I seem to remeber that two Backbench MP's were exciorated and the CPC campaign destroyed the last election for some odd views. They were not the views of the leader, they were not the official views of the party BUT they were lead story everywhere.
So if you see the conservative side of the ledger howling for his head, a Liberal Party official, that is close to the Prime Minister and does work for him (see Wells and Kinsella, I dont think that is surprising. The equivalency you seek is not the correct one, the equivalency is the attention given to White and Gallant the last election.
Besides he deserves what he gets on the sole basis of stupidity. In the position that he is (oops was) in, that he would publish something in "the public square" (the internet) and be surprised that it gets found just shows what a bonehead he is.
Save the concern for someone who has truely been wronged by gossip and the hounds of the blogosphere. Klander is not one them.
Posted by: Stephen at December 26, 2005 07:54 PM
This little window into the Liberal backroom mind reminds me of the Murphy tapes, which were a window a lot more scary. Someone this crude and stupid is not scary because he is so crude and stupid. If you examine the Murphy tapes and analyse what he was really saying in a more careful manner, this Murphy window into the Liberal backroom (the real liberal room) mindset will strike you as a lot more scary. unfortunately, the ethnic envelope surrounding Murphy (English Ontario ethnicity in this case) somehow changed the issue of the Murphy tapes and their implications about how Canada is governed, into the Grewal tapes issue.
Murphy expressed himself in the careful manner that make any plot seem palatable to his group so long as it is expressed with appropriate form. And so the national Ontario English-ethnic media did not even notice that the real story was not that he was exposed, but the implications for democratic values in canada in what he was actually saying in such careful use of language.
The analysis of the klander bog should also have happened with the Murphy tapes, which are a lot more scary in implication, and given his position.
Posted by: edward mills at December 26, 2005 08:18 PM
"if klanders had lasted the day"--he resigned--he was not fired--so the MSM can give the impression that he was 'just a volunteer' instead of the head Ontario organizer--he even listed his industry as 'government'--do none of them do proper investigation--have they never used google if nothing else? This is getting worse by the minute--Liberal spin is like a corkscrew--just keeps burying the truth in a deeper hole.
Posted by: George at December 26, 2005 08:20 PM
Will Klander resign from this board?
Don Cherry would be available for an interview?
http://www.rosecherryshome.ca/board/board.html
Posted by: maz2 at December 26, 2005 08:38 PM
KKKlander's politically incorrect rhetoric has put on public display the Liberal's ideological dual standard...one for their inside party elite and a zero tolerance one for non liberals..THAT is the embarrassment, not so much the infantile musings and stupid impropriety of another sandbox Liberal apparatchik.
It's about Liberal hypocrisy stupid!
Posted by: W.L.Mackenzie Redux at December 26, 2005 08:59 PM
Dr, Dawg says
But, Angry, come on--all this indignation when Kate McMillan has called for a return to residential schools for Indian kids and you yourself have posted something like this? Dr.Dawg
Tell me honestly: had you ever heard of this gink before Wells blew the gaff on him? Dr.Dawg
"Dr.Dawg is being disingenuous in suggesting that Klanders opinions are not very newsworthy." Terry Gain
I suggested nothing of the kind. Dr.Dawg
Yes Dr. Dawg, QED -a disingenuous socialist- caught red handed, oh my, how appropriate.
Posted by: at December 26, 2005 10:14 PM
Leave the socialist alone.
He can't help it. Being divorced from reality is a prerequisit to being a socialist.
Now, carry on Dr.Dawg.
Posted by: at December 26, 2005 10:35 PM
Anyone wanna wager that this won't even make the news for more than 1 day? We shall find out how deep the rot is within our media when all we hear is silence tomorrow. Perhaps? Or am I being too cynical?
Posted by: Mike Schmidt at December 26, 2005 10:40 PM
"Or am I being too cynical?" Mike Schmidt
No, you're not being too cynical Mike. In fact, you just hit a home run.
Posted by: Terrry Gain at December 26, 2005 11:22 PM
Unfortunately the legs on this issue will be very short. There has been nothing in the last 12 years to suggest a modicum of objectivity when it comes the Liberal party and the MSM. Racism, homophobia and knuckle-dragging crudeness; for it to be front page news it must be them thar red-neck Reformers and their hidden agenda!!! Does anyone believe for a moment that Mike Duffy would show the stones, let alone journalistic integrity to follow up on this story? Of course not, he would be shunned by those morally superior intelligentsia of the Left. That's all that matters to a self-inflated little windbag like him.
Posted by: Paul at December 26, 2005 11:24 PM
I am thorougly amazed. While it is on the home page, the article is on CTV's website. Most unusual...because Bell/CTV has some close connections to the Liberal Party. Yippeee, the internets work!
Posted by: Mike Schmidt at December 26, 2005 11:33 PM
Dr. D, when I asked to be removed from McLelland's Canadian Blog Awards because of his "F*ck the Jews" post, I had all sorts of people accuse me of taking his post out of context. Here you are, doing the same with Kate's. Given the slime I've seen spew from MWW on any number of topics (although the purely toxic sludge seems to focus on SDA), I wonder why you would choose to defend MWW? And I would also argue that though Kate may be well-known in the blogging world, few on the street would know either her name or the name of her blog, the latter of which, if you replace "blog" with "party" can't be said for Klander.
Forgive the rambling, Tylenol Flu & Cold at play with my few remaining brain cells.
Posted by: Candace at December 27, 2005 12:32 AM
I don't know how long this will have legs, but I do know Angry's views on the subject will be seen by a lot of people. Bourque is now linking to this site, asking the question "WHY DID PAUL MARTIN HANG ON TO MIKE KLANDER?"
A very good question. How would you sum up the answer, Angry?
Posted by: Patrick at December 27, 2005 01:02 AM
Which one is Olivia?
Posted by: at December 27, 2005 02:40 AM
The one with the fur coat dummy.
Posted by: at December 27, 2005 02:41 AM
So many stooges for Martin to throw off the plane and so few parachutes to give them. Good-bye Paul, hello Stephen.
Vote Harper, save Canada.
Posted by: Mark-Alan Whittle at December 27, 2005 07:21 AM
I didn' claim that l'affaire Klander wasn't newsworthy--in fact, in the part of my post accidentally left out by my anonymous interlocutor,I wondered aloud why the corporate media were being so quiet about it (of course, it's front-page news today, probably backing up the theory that only interns were around on the holidays):
"I've had a few words to say over at my place about the KKKlander controversy--which appears to be slipping under the corporate media radar at present."
I wanted the full glare of media publicity on this guy, and I guess that's happened. But I found it quaint, and still do, that the Right is waxing so indignant about this racist yahoo, when they are so silent about the same kind of thing within their own ranks. There is more than a little opportunism here.
Angry suggested that I was comparing apples and oranges by juxtaposing Klander and Kate McMillan. What official role does Kate have, he asked. My response--taken somewhat out of context by the interlocutor mentioned above--was that Kate is probably as well-known in her way as Klander. Neither are household words--I'd never heard of Klander before this all blew up--but each has a public "constituency." Kate even got mentioned by David Warren a few days back.
Candace states that I quoted out of context, but I did not. I gave the complete quotes, and links. The sentiments expressed were, given the history of First Nations in Canada, grossly insensitive at the very least. And the first link I provided, to an earlier post of mine, references a snickering comment about Indians being banned from a shopping mall.
MWW has a good deal of background knowledge and has published widely, even in the National Post. I think she's let Kate get pretty far under her skin, but the feeling, I gather, is mutual. What prompted me to post this time, though, was Kate's libel threat against another member of the CBC Round Table, just for linking to an MWW post. That's going a trifle far.
In any case, and on another topic, get well soon, Candace. New Year's Eve is coming, and you wouldn't want to miss out on the fun! :)
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 27, 2005 08:48 AM
Two points
1) Kate has no occicial access to power, unl;ike Klander had. That is the concern. Any yahoo can hold whatever views they wish but we expect those in power or near it (one or two degrees) to hold reposnsible views. The difference is clear and glaring
2) Dr. Dawg if you wish to get into a slanging match with Kate be my guest. But reading MWW interpretation of Kate is hardly the way to do it. I would suggest you read and link only to the original article. When I first heard about it a few months ago, I was unable to find the originals (my bad searchin ability) and Kate supplied me with the originals. I read them. Insensitive, maybe in the way O Henry was or any many other forms of political commentary are. Racist, hardly. They were less offensive than the Klander remarks. Of course I thought community standards and decency didn't matter anymore ;->
But to repeat, Kate is elected only by herself, exercises no power and is not officially in a position to exercise the power of society. If people in power choose to read, listen and quote her that is their responsibility.
There is no equivalency here. Klander did the right thing and withdrew. And Dr D I would remeber this becasue inevitably there will be a boneheaded comment by a conservative in a position of power. When that happens you will be free to call all of the people here on the carpet and ask them to be accountable. If that happens I would encourage you to do it. I would be doing the same.
Posted by: Stephen at December 27, 2005 09:22 AM
"I am thorougly amazed. While it is on the home page, the article is on CTV's website. Most unusual...because Bell/CTV has some close connections to the Liberal Party" - Mike Schmidt
Mike, I actually think the CTV is doing a pretty good job being impartial or relatively friendly to the CPC compared to Canwest. The Aspers Canwest network and the CBC are the major culprits on hiding junk like this.
Whistleblower is a great division of CTV too. They crack open many big stories (and even pounded away on ITscam quite a bit.
Just my personal opinion.
Posted by: TrustOnlyMulder at December 27, 2005 09:53 AM
Stephen:
Maybe I should have used Rob Anders as my example instead of Kate. In any case, rather than making direct equivalences, I was more interested in what still appears to me to be a bit of an anomaly: conservatives everywhere rising up in righteous wrath over racist remarks. You'll have to admit that this doesn't happen every day.
Now, about Anders...oh, well.
Posted by: Dr.Dawg at December 27, 2005 11:38 AM
dr d,
well yes there have been blue moons recently :->
but as I said in my first post, this is payback for the crucifiction the Liberals put the conservatives through with Cheryl Gallant and Randy White. In both cases neither represented a formal party policy position and arguably were further from power than a someone who has worked in the PMO.
When you look at it in that light then you understand the conservative wrath and delight in this. I am sure there are other examples but these come to mind.
All I can say is there better not be any dinosaur eruptions from the CPC this election becasue the hellfire after this and Scott Reid will be immense.
Posted by: Stephen at December 27, 2005 04:28 PM
You idiots! Your Conform party sucks the hind tit for a good reason! Damned bassackward fools wishing to control everyone! Good thing this shit isn't in print, But it would make great asswipe!
Posted by: TICKEDMEOFF at December 27, 2005 09:28 PM
Aw come on folks, you're sure being hard on Klander and Reid and look how upset tickedmeoff is. You have to understand that being at the center of the Liberal braintrust and responsible for setting the moral compass for an entire nation is tough work. The boys were just unwinding a little before they venture out amongst the great unwashed to defend "Canadian Values"!!!! Bring on the flags!!!!
Posted by: Syncrodox at December 28, 2005 02:18 AM
Dr. D: "Maybe I should have used Rob Anders as my example instead of Kate."
I guess that would have invalidated your original argument, would it not? Or did MWW take Anders on as well?
Posted by: Candace at December 29, 2005 02:06 AM
I used to think the NDP were the most detestable leftist on the planet but lately the liberals have filled that spot. This Klander A hole typifies liberal thinking and contempt for anyone not in the elite liberal sphere. Lets us fervently hope they can be sent to where they belong well and truly out of office.Incidentally there are people who can raise a baby in this country without some massive government bottom wiping and indoctrination program.
Posted by: Ger at January 2, 2006 01:42 AM
A young man named Paul bought a donkey from an old farmer for $100.00
The farmer agreed to deliver the horse the next day. When the farmer drove up the next day, he said,
Sorry son, but I have some bad news...the horse is on my truck, but he's dead."
Paul replied, "Well then, just give me my money back."The farmer said, "I Can't do that. I went and spent
it already."
Paul said, "OK then, just unload the horse anyway".
The farmer asked, "What are ya gonna do with him?"
Paul said, "I'm going to raffle him off."
To which the farmer exclaimed, "You can't raffle off a dead horse!"
But Paul, with a big smile on his face, said
Sure I can. Watch me. I just won't tell anybody that he's dead."
A month later the farmer met up with Paul and asked, "What happened with that dead horse?"
Paul said, "I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at two dollars a piece and made a profit of $698.00."
Totally amazed, the farmer asked, "Didn't anyone complain that you had stolen their money because you
lied about the horse being dead?"
And Paul replied, "The only guy who found out about the horse being dead was the raffle winner, when he came to claim his prize. So I gave him his $2 back plus $200 extra, which is double the going value of a horse, so he thought I was a great guy."
Paul grew up and eventually became the Prime Minister of Canada, and no matter how many times he lied or how much money he stole from Canadian voters, as long as he gave them back some of the stolen money, most
of them thought he was a great guy.
Posted by: Mopar at January 13, 2006 11:07 AM
Well, that Earl Provost that nobody seems to know too much about turned out to be a senior advisor on Martin's campaign.
He might be throwing his hat in to take over that seat for Klander now too. Hope he can run his campaign better than they ran Martin's. And maybe this guy will stay away from the blogs.
Posted by: QuietlyWatching at February 28, 2006 01:48 PM
 
|
|
