Thursday, November 05, 2009

Senator Duffy Wipes His Feet With Stoffer!

I don't usually visit the CBC, but Springer from Sort of Political mentioned this and got me curious, so I wondered over there.

Duffy blasts NDP MP as 'faker'

Make up your own mind on this one by watching the video.


I like Peter Stoffer for his support of our troops, but he's way out of line with this one. It's not as if PM Harper appointed MORE Senators, he just filled vacancies. Vacancies that no provinces voted to fill, except Alberta. Maybe the NDP could get one of their own elected if they worked with the provinces to get a list of elected Senators In Waiting for the PM to choose from.

Lefties distort what the PM has said about Senate reform to suit their own purposes. Like this extreme-left lefty, Gayle.

Blogger Gayle said...

"Gayle, explain how the Liberal leader of Alberta got into the Senate?"

He was appointed of course.

First, he is obviously qualified, even if you do not agree with his politics (and as you may have noticed, I have already noted there are undoubtedly qualified conservatives out there, even though I do not agree with their politics).

Second, at no point did the man who appointed him promise he would not appoint senators, nor did he promise he would not use the senate for patronage appointments.

I thought people like you did not like politicians using the senate to reward their political friends. I do not see how you can complain about Grant Mitchell being appointed if you are OK with Mike Duffy's appointment.

Tuesday, November 03, 2009 11:17:00 PM


You see, in Gayle's mind it's okay for a political hack like Liberal Mitchell to be appointed to the Senate, from Alberta no less, when we had a list of Senators in Waiting that Martin ignored. No, he rubbed Albertan's noses in the fact that he didn't care what we wanted. He appointed Liberals in Alberta to show us how little he cared for us westerners, a typical Liberal response to western Canada. Someone like Mike Duffy, who no-one even knew was a Conservative until he got appointed, is unacceptable....to Liberals. It was okay when Liberals were appointing Liberals because they loved yanking Conservative chains, they were the natural ruling party after all. Now that Conservatives are close to a majority in the Senate, the lefties are getting hysterical.

All Senators who have been appointed by PM Harper have agreed to limit their own terms, but you won't hear that from the media, or the lefties. Gayle is happy that Mitchell is in the Senate until he's 75, seeing he was born in 1951, and appointed in 2005, he has until 2026 to suck off us taxpayers, and he can't be fired!!!!

Gayle thinks he is "obviously qualified". HA. Look at his bio, he is qualified to be a politician, one that Albertan's rejected time after time. So a failed politician gets a sweet life time deal in the Senate. Knowing this guy, I will soon be called into the HRC for slamming him.

Senator Duffy is a great addition to the Senate. I loved getting a message from him, and the Conservatives should continue to use him to promote the party policies. I like the fact that Duffy is now free to tell it like it is, instead of having to be non-partisan. PEI is lucky to have him representing them.

Go Duffy!!!

54 comments:

Simeon (Sam) George Drakich said...

Fabulous!!!!!!!
Mike has now set the standard in calling out the fakers, hope the rest of the Conservatives follow suit.

maryT said...

Stoffer asked, why did PMSH appoint 27 Senators-well 27 appointed senators, via liberal PMs reached their retirement age in the same year. Maybe those lib MPs should have figured that out when they made those appointments. Were the libs so dumb they really believed the PM would not appoint, if no elected senators were available to choose from. Did they really believe they could act like fools for 4 yrs with no election.
Did the libs really believe they could get back in power and appoint all those vacancies, no matter how many years that might take.
Have the libs refused to accept that we don't want them at the helm anymore. What don't they get from losing 95 seats over two elections.

Gabby in QC said...

http://www.ottawasun.com/news/canada/2009/11/06/11653666-sun.html
“New Democrat MP Nathan Cullen spent more on travel than any other MP this year, spending $228,603 to fly across Canada and trek around his sprawling British Columbia riding.

At the other extreme was Conservative MP Gordon O'Connor of Carleton-Mississippi Mills, who spent a mere $6,600 in travel -- the least among sitting MPs. ...”

This kind of "investigation" into the expenses of opponents shows how petty we are getting. I say "we" because one can hear the same kind of sentiment expressed about hockey players getting vaccinated before other people, or CEOs making more money than _______ (fill in the blanks).

A lot of silly stuff like the Stoffer vs Duffy criticism could be solved by removing expense accounts from MPs and Senators. Pay them enough to run their offices with their own salary, even if it's half a million. But remove the expensing of meals, travel, paper clips for their office, etc. Each MP and Senator should pay for his/her own office - frugally or lavishly on his/her own dime.

The only travel that should be subsidized by taxpayers is the PM's when he travels abroad representing the country, and similarly for ministers' travel to important international conferences. Otherwise, every MP should pay his own way.

Perhaps they could get reduced fare from the airlines, or maybe they already do - I don't know. But this kind of chicanery - whether it's the NDP, the Liberals, or the Conservatives pointing fingers - is really petty.

But the pettiness prize goes to Ken Dryden for the "torch isn't going to enough Liberal ridings" rants. Who'd have thought that the lanky goalie who stood silently at his net watching other players exchanging blows would sink to such smallness?

maryT said...

Don't they all accumulate air miles with all that travel.

Gayle said...

"Someone like Mike Duffy, who no-one even knew was a Conservative until he got appointed, is unacceptable....to Liberals."

I am laughing so hard my sides hurt. EVERYONE knew he was a conservative. He is the liar and the faker for feigning non-partisanship while hosting a political affairs show when he was obviously a rabidly partisan conservative.

And my point about Mitchell was you were in no position to complain about him if you are not complaining about Duffy. They were both appointed for the same reasons. So why is it OK for Harper to do something when it is wrong for the LPC to do it?

Never mind - I just answered my own question. People like you will never hold Harper accountable for lying to you and betraying his base.

Good old conservatives - demanding accountability from everyone but themselves.

Alberta Girl said...

Gayle - you make statements like "Duffy was a rabid conservative" with no back up.

That would be like me saying that CBC is rabid liberal, or the Toronto star is rabid liberal or Global is rabid liberal.

Given the number of times I wrote Mike Duffy to complain about his 'left wing leanings', I would say your label of 'rabid conservative" was in your eyes only.

Give it up -you lefties are so far out of touch, it makes me 'split my sides laughing'.

Mike Duffy was right - the NDP targeting Mike Duffy is solely due to the upcoming by-election.

So here is a question - simple answer please.

Do you believe that if Harper had not filled those senate positions, that the Liberals would have done so once they got into power?

And please - unless you can provide me with a direct quote from Stephen Harper directly saying he would NEVER appoint senators under any circumstances, you are simply blowing smoke and hoping to create a fire.

Nice try though.

I await your SIMPLE answer.

Geekwad said...

Did you not follow the most recent election? Did you not see Duffy shilling his dangerously compressed little heart out?

Jimmie said...

Duffy is a national disgrace.

Is he out of his mind attacking Stoffer on, of all things, veterans and support for the Canadian Forces?

The guy gets elected with increasingly margins in a military riding.

If there is any doubt about his commitment to our men and women in uniform, and his all round decency, check this out:
http://tinyurl.com/yh52w3o

I can't think of anyone Duffy "represents", other than the man who put him in the Senate.

Gayle said...

AG. The very fact that Duffy accepted his appointment on the terms demanded by Harper, and the fact he is currently one of the most rabidly partisan senators out there is proof enough he was always a conservative. Add to that the solid condemnation he received by a non-partisan panel for his unfair conduct on his show during the last election. The mere fact YOU think he is biased against the CPV holds no weight with me. You think anyone who is even mildly critical of Harper is biased. You have no perspective.

I never claimed Harper said he would not appoint people. What he said was he would not use the sennate for patronage. I think it is pretty obvious he has broken that promise

Jaytoo said...

Senate appointments are always going to be "just filling vacancies" -- red herring.

We all know Harper promised not to fill vacancies with Grit-style patronage appointments. And he has just appointed more unelected senators, including brazenly partisan ones, than any PM ever.

Maybe you think that's okay. Maybe you think that changing needs or conditions justify the backtracking. Fine - I'd be open to arguments. And PMSH is a big boy who can take responsibility for breaking his promise.

But denying that he HAS broken this promise is just reckless with truth - and makes it hard to have a conversation, don't you think?

maryT said...

Were not all these vacancies the result of liberal appointed senators retiring. Was the PM just supposed to let these vacancies stay vacant, for a future lib PM to fill. Get real. Go after your premier to hold elections for senators, as AB has.
I do think the senate killed his bill to have term limits.
Are you still waiting for the libs to abolish the GST. Must be, that was a broken promise that could have been done.

wilson said...

Love how Duffy can get all these LibLuvers banging on their keyboards!!

Go Duffy:

''The guy gets elected with increasingly margins in a military riding...' Jimmie

Maybe that's because Stoffer's
VOTING RECORD has not been publicized....until now.

I donate big to the CPC, and am thoroughly enjoying actually seeing my donation dollars being spent.
First targeting ridings on the gun registry,
now Duffy can tell Stoffer's constituancy that Stoffer votes AGAINST the military!

And I am going to boot up my donations, and finaly give to a select riding...Gayle's!
Time to get rid of the fuzzy brain Dipper,
get rid of her before she gets a pension.

Jaytoo said...

Mary: I'm not saying what he should or shouldn't have done. Only this: he said he would not fill upcoming vacancies with patronage appointments - and then did.

You're right, denying that is a lot like Libs claiming they never really-really promised to abolish the GST. Or launch national pharmacare. And so on - reckless with truth.

Gayle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gayle said...

Yes wilson - spending more CPC dollars here is suddenly going to make everyone lose a few brain cells and vote CPC.

Please, please do. And don't forget to go door to door and tell everyone they should not vote for the "fuzzy brain dipper", because telling people they voted for a stupid person last time around always works.

Thanks for the laugh.

frmgrl said...

Remember the Coalition of the Losers
with Libs, Dippers and BQ. They would have filled those vacancies in short order with who knows possibly Dippers even BQ. If I remember, Liz May was promised a senate seat.
Then you would have a loon in the senate.

wilson said...

The TD commissioned Sukuzi/Pembina report CLEARLY, and every analysis inked stated,
that Alberta and Saskatchewan we BIG big losers in the environutjobs plan to combat global warming or climate change or what ever 'commercially' acceptable name they call it.

In her brilliance beyond belief,
NDP MP Linda Duncan went on record to say:

“I think what it shows is Alberta will do very well under the green scenario.”

Oh Gayle.....defend that, please do.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/climate-change-report-irresponsible-prentice-says/article1344485/

wilson said...

If I remember correctly frmgrl,
the BLOC were to get 6 Senate seats, a kick-back for their co-operation in aiding Liberals seizing the government....because the LPC had no hope of winning it any time soon.
What Liberals can't win, they steal...evidenced by Adscam.

Southern Quebec said...

"If I remember, Liz May was promised a senate seat."

Riiiiiight...keep making stuff up girl! You rock!

maryT said...

Yes, lizzie was bragging she would get a senate seat, and wanted to be enviro minister in the coalition.
Not making it up. It is out there somewhere on u-tube or some column. Find it if you dare SQ.

Gayle said...

Oh wilson. Poor wilson. Still don't seem to get the number 1 reason Duncan won was because she does not play for Harper's team.

maryT said...

I would bet that most, or at least many, had never seen or met Linda prior to the election, and have not watched her in the HofC.
And, I would bet she does not get elected next time, unless the coalition comes out to support her.
Just wondering, is her riding the one my son refers to as the granola district.

Southern Quebec said...

maryT: The way this blogging thingy works, is if you make an outrageous statement, you are supposed to back it up. With say a linky thingy. Not me. I didn't make the stupid statement

maryT said...

What stupid statement, Stoffer was out to lunch with his figures, go back and figure salary for 8 yrs, not lifetime. Maybe you are referring to someone whose name starts with G.

Gabby in QC said...

Here, MaryT.
"CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Tue. Dec. 2 2008 6:06 PM ET
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May confirmed Tuesday that she has had discussions with Liberal Leader Stephane Dion about playing a role in a potential coalition government, which her party supports.

At a press conference in Ottawa, she suggested she would be open to the possibility of becoming a senator or cabinet minister, but the discussions with Dion were not specific.

May said that her party gained a significant number of votes in the last election and she would like to influence what happens in Ottawa under a potential coalition government.
"I would be the only senator that received a million votes," she said.

May noted that the Senate would give her party an avenue of helping shape the direction of Canada.

"We do not have a seat in the house, but we have people in this country who will mobilize to do what's right," she said"

The small fry who come by here never believe anything until it's put right under their noses, and even then, only if it suits their purpose.

maryT said...

Welcome home from all your travels, and thanks so much for that proof re Mae and the Senate.
How many really believe if she should by some freak win her seat as as MP she would not jump to the libs before being installed as an MP.
Of course she would demand to be deputy leader.

maryT said...

If she received a million votes why isn't she in the HofC. If she is going by party votes, every senators party received more than a million votes.

liberal supporter said...

but the discussions with Dion were not specific.

Thanks gabby, for the quote proving the May was not promised a Senate seat. Clearly she thought it would be a good idea, but nothing specific was discussed.

Whoever claimed she was promised anything got it wrong.

liberal supporter said...

OT (actually from yesterday's topic now under moderation):

I had a question yesterday and never got a straight answer from anyone here. Perhaps I will get a straight answer today.

Do you or do you not, support scrapping the hand gun registry?

If you do not, explain how the long gun registry can be too expensive or useless while the hand gun registry is not.

Gabby in QC said...

MaryT, you're welcome, and thanks. I may decide to do more travelling ... ;-)

Liberal Supporter at 4:00: "Thanks gabby, for the quote proving the May was not promised a Senate seat."
I see you've adopted Gayle's tactics. Birds of a feather and all that.

No specifics were discussed, but there was a discussion, as the CTV report clearly states.
For example:
"Dion: When I become the PM, you will become a Senator.
May: Oh, that would be great. I deserve it. After all, I want to save the planet!"

You see? No specifics. But a short discussion.

However, knowing May, she would probably continue with something like:
"Then I could lull all the senators to sleep with my never-ending chatter as I save the planet quicker that you can say "my carbon footprint is much smaller that yours."
She would continue with:
These are the measures I will introduce as senate bills:
• The Parliament grounds will from now on be furnished with those giant fans. No more silly fireworks or shows on the Parliament lawns.
• George Monbiot, Al Gore, and David Suzuli will form a senate appointed troika that will decide which manufactures will close so that Canada's GHG emissions will be reduced to zero by the end of the year.
• Christmas - i.e. holiday time - decorations will be banned.
• Methane producing animals will be banned.
• Each province and territory will be given a schedule advising when cars will be permitted on the roads.
Ontario Dec.15
Quebec Dec. 30
I'm full of ideas! I'm queen of the world!

OK, OK that last part may not have been part of the discussion

liberal supporter said...

I see you've adopted Gayle's tactics. Birds of a feather and all that.
Great start, ad hominem and all.

No specifics were discussed, but there was a discussion, as the CTV report clearly states.
For example:
"Dion: When I become the PM, you will become a Senator.
May: Oh, that would be great. I deserve it. After all, I want to save the planet!"

You see? No specifics. But a short discussion
.

I assume the "for example" conversation is something you just manufactured. Correct me if I am wrong and you actually found something like that. Because that is very specific and would be enough for your assertion about a "promise" to be valid.

Otherwise we have only May's wishful thinking, and your assertion based on nothing.

Gabby in QC said...

Liberal Supporter at 5:00:00 PM
" ... ad hominem and all ..."

My heavens, but you ARE such an over-sensitive soul!
How can you construe my comparing your tactics to Gayle's as an ad hominem?
Maybe you yourself find "Gayle" somehow offensive?
Is that what you think?
So who's ad hominem-ing? Not me!

liberal supporter said...

My heavens, but you ARE such an over-sensitive soul!
Get new material.

How can you construe my comparing your tactics to Gayle's as an ad hominem?
Because it is irrelevant to the question at hand. Though it indicates you can't refute my words, and instead attack me. Which by definition, is ad hominem.

Maybe you yourself find "Gayle" somehow offensive?
Not really. I enjoy reading her refuting your malarkey.

Is that what you think?
No, and why would this be relevant?

So who's ad hominem-ing? Not me!
If you say so. Could you now stop doing that-which-must-not-be-named and try to respond to my words?

Gayle said...

"...she suggested she would be open to the possibility of becoming a senator or cabinet minister, but the discussions with Dion were not specific..."

Welcome to conservative land, where non-specific discussions mean exactly what conservatives say they do, and reporters speculating on whether it is time the NDP and LPC form a coalition is proof positive the LPC had discussions with the NDP before the economic statement.

See LS, if you cannot read between the lines correctly, you do not understand the language.

jm said...

Add to that the solid condemnation he received by a non-partisan panel for his unfair conduct on his show during the last election.

Please remind me what this unfair conduct was Gayle. ;)

What he said was he would not use the sennate for patronage. I think it is pretty obvious he has broken that promise

If PEI had 2 liberal senators 'in waiting' and PMSH appointed Mike Duffy instead, I would probably agree with alot of what you said. Tommy Banks, who was appointed under PMJC, (over elected senators in waiting) hid behind a curtain just to run down to a committee room to end debate on Pablo's Kyoto bill, reflected how partisan he was. He wasn't concerned about what was good for AB, he was just interested in what was good for liberals.

Gayle said...

Did I say the LPC did not appoint partisans or use the senate for patronage? I am pretty sure I didn't.

No, the issue is whether Harper promised he would not use the senate for patronage, and then he went ahead and did so. Your reference to Banks is completely irrelevant.
As for the condemnation, I guess you missed it when CTV was forced to apologize on Duffy's behalf for his unethical conduct during the last election.

Just wondering. But do you think the fact McKay is sleeping with a CTV executive had anything to do with the decision to air that footage? If she were sleeping with a liberal you guys would be whining and wailing all about the unfairness of it all.

That's OK, I don't expect consistency here.

bocanut said...

Consistency like in begrudging your tax dollars going to other people's children's education while you get paid by those same tax dollars to take of other people's children?
Hypocrite.

hunter said...

Oh Gayle you really have outdone yourself with the "sleeping with" comment, talk about a lack of class, but it's what we expect from lefties.

Gayle said...

Really? Maybe they are saving themselves for marriage.

In any event, the relevant point is they are having sex. Apprehension of bias has nothing to do with it.

maryT said...

Come on Gayle, prove it, do you have pics or tapes or videos of them having sex. I request you produce hotel registrations, or something to verify what you are saying.

Gayle said...

Somehow I think they do not need to go to a hotel Mary.

But you are quite right. They may both be virgins. That would explain McKay's whining when Belinda moved on to bigger and better things. Not that it matters as the point is their relationship raises the question of a bias at CTV - sex or no sex.

jm said...

Did I say the LPC did not appoint partisans or use the senate for patronage? I am pretty sure I didn't.

No, the issue is whether Harper promised he would not use the senate for patronage, and then he went ahead and did so.


Did I say that I had any problem with liberal senate appointments? I'm pretty sure that I didn't.

As for your assertion that PMSH said he never would? I always took it that he would rather appoint someone that was elected by the people in the province. That is why I said if PEI had 2 liberal senators in waiting and PMSH appointed someone else, I would agree with you.

You look at it as patronage, I look at it as a step to get the changes that he wants.

As for my question that you never answered about CTV and Mike Duffy. Think about what the decision was about. Tell me, and then I will give you another example that liberals and the PPG have no problem with. ;)

liberal supporter said...

"MacKay had been seen in public dating Jana Juginovic, director of programming at CTV News Channel, after having kept their relationship a secret for many months. They attended the annual Black & White Opera Soirée together at the National Arts Centre in Ottawa on Feb 21, 2009.[14] MacKay's engagement to Juginovic was announced on November 1, 2009.[15]"
From here.

I'd say there was some snoozing going on if they went to the opera. More importantly, they were in a relationship "many months" before, so it covers the time when Duffy earned his Senate seat for running the Dion blooper reel.

hunter said...

Just wondering. But do you think the fact McKay is sleeping with a CTV executive had anything to do with the decision to air that footage? If she were sleeping with a liberal you guys would be whining and wailing all about the unfairness of it all.
...
Somehow I think they do not need to go to a hotel Mary.

But you are quite right. They may both be virgins. That would explain McKay's whining when Belinda moved on to bigger and better things.


Too funny!! Belinda moved on to bigger and better things....like Bill Clinton?? That sleazy dirt bag cheated on his wife, and Gayle thinks he's bigger and better? WOW.

Gayle you re-enforce my opinion of Liberals, morals don't matter.

maryT said...

When did PEI elect any senators, I thought only AB had that. Elected by the people is different that a couple of guys waiting to be appointed.

maryT said...

She has been on a fellowship (whatever that is) in Boston for the past year.

maryT said...

Gayle seems to know a lot about Belinda's men. How does she know they were bigger and better.
Gayle, are you keeping secrets from us.

Gayle said...

Jm - if you really do not know why Duffy was cesured then you are far too out of touch for me to help you.

If you do not see appointing Duffy and the husband of a cabinet minister, along with many other party hacks as patronage, then I suggest you look up the term.

jm said...

Gayle, I know why Mike Duffy was censured

I'm just wondering if you would change your thoughts if I give you an example of the same type of thing that another journalist released that he said was not for publication?

As for patronage, you obviously have no problem with liberals doing it. Do you have the same opinion of liberals that say....lmoa, I just realized, they never commit to anything. So all is good with someone like yourself.

Gabby in QC said...

Liberal Supporter at 5:48:00 PM:
"Could you now stop doing that-which-must-not-be-named and try to respond to my words?"

Oooh, getting bossy!
Yesss, Sir!
I would gladly respond to your words, Sir!
If they made any sense, Sir!
But since they don't, you're out of luck, Sir!

Now please don't start crying about this being another ad hominem, Sir!

Gayle said...

JM - I was using the censure example as evidence of Duffy's bias. You see, Hunter here made the incredulous claim that no one knew he was a conservative before he was appointed. If you have something relevant to that point please feel free to share.

hunter said...

HA Gabby, go get him! Not that he is worth an ounce of your time.

hunter said...

A very entertaining day. Poor little lefties got all hot and bothered. It's pretty easy to get them riled up, just mention Duffy. Now scoot on back to your boring lefty blogs, you can all yap about the big bad scary Stephen Harper, and his legions of supporters, including Duffy.

BOO!

Gabby in QC said...

About Mike Duffy, from Wiki:
"Awards and honours
In 1986 he won an ACTRA Award for live television reporting, for his coverage of a terrorist attack on the Turkish Embassy in Ottawa. In 1994, Duffy was inducted into the Canadian Association of Broadcasters Hall of Fame.

Duffy has received honorary degrees from his alma mater, the University of Prince Edward Island, as well as Wilfrid Laurier University and from Niagara University in Niagara Falls, New York. He has been a visiting fellow at Duke University, in Durham, North Carolina, and has been twice nominated for the "best in the business" award by the Washington Journalism Review."

Because they do not agree with his politics, his critics now choose to denigrate him.

His response to MP Stoffer may not have been very elegant, but Stoffer was impugning his honesty. I don't know how many of us would have kept our cool under those circumstances.

But then, it's always the same old story. The lefties feel quite justified in hurling all manner of insults and accusations at their opponents, but let anyone dare respond to them in kind, oh my! It's crying time!

Hey! Crying time! Good ol' song!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0ULkUzRCSs&feature=related
'Nite.