Friday, April 04, 2008

Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Lukiwski

Tom Lukiwski, shown above in the greatest picture of a Tory MP ever, is in hot water for comments he made back in 1991:




Random Thought Update: I know the provincial NDP had this tape and their real target was Wall, but this probably could have made a bigger impact had it been released during an election campaign…


In Other News...

-Kady O'Malley transcribes a joint NDP-Liberal press conference. Here is Scott Brison's part of the press conference all put together - put this to music and I think Scott may have a top 40 hit:

Well the fact is, no. No, no, no. That's no no.
That's Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy.
No, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy.
That's Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy.
That's Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy, Peggy.
There's a Peggy, Peggy, Peggy.

Will you stop interrupting me? Peggy.


-Here's the Chuck Cadman scandal summarized in 155 seconds:


Labels: , , ,

48 Comments:

  • What a douchebag. He reminds me of Quagmire from Family Guy.

    By Blogger Raymaker, at 10:37 AM  

  • As mentioned on my blog yesterday - just when did Leisure Suit Larry become a Tory MP?

    By Blogger The Grumpy Voter, at 10:52 AM  

  • Ron Burgundy?

    Isn't that Harper cowboy outfit the best picture of a Tory MP?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:29 AM  

  • I can't believe the people that are defending this guy...

    Oh it was 16 years ago... back then things weren't as politically correct and it was totally ok to make comments like that.

    Actually they're pretty extreme comments and anyone involved in politics at the time should've known better especially a 40 year old.

    The Conservative party has a golden opportunity to show that they aren't the official party of intolerance by kicking him out.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 11:36 AM  

  • The Harper cowboy picture has become so mythic that it trascends the definition of "picture". Kind of like the shruging Dion one the Tories always use.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 11:58 AM  

  • He reminds me of a '70s porn actor. In fact, the whole tape looks and sounds like it was out of the '70s or early '80s.

    It's almost like western Conservatives are... out of date somehow. Gee, ya think?

    By Blogger Jennifer Smith, at 12:10 PM  

  • "The Conservative party has a golden opportunity to show that they aren't the official party of intolerance by kicking him out."

    The Liberals didn't kick Rosanne Skoke out of caucus and she was part of the governemnt when she made her anti-gay comments.
    Also, I believe if you were to check CBC footage from around the time the Chretien Liberals were changing the hate-law bill to protect gays and lesbians, you would find a clip of Liberal MP Don Boudria referring to homosexuals as "degenerates".
    The Conservatives should give Lukiwski the same leeway for something he said 16 years ago that Liberals get when they are actually part of the government. If the Conservatives were as professional as they imagine themselves to be, they would be handing out copies of the Skoke and Boudria remarks today.

    By Blogger nuna d. above, at 12:23 PM  

  • The Conservative party has a golden opportunity to show that they aren't the official party of intolerance by kicking him out.

    Oh, the irony ...

    I was going to post at length about the ironic dichotomy of the elite left applying the same blanket, misinformed, hateful statements to the right that it assigns to minorities on occasion, but "merboy" perfectly captures that double standard with this gem.

    The only thing more hateful than a right-wing extremist remarking about homosexuals is a left-wing elitist reacting to those remarks.

    By Blogger sir john a., at 12:30 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "The Conservatives should give Lukiwski the same leeway for something he said 16 years ago that Liberals get when they are actually part of the government. If the Conservatives were as professional as they imagine themselves to be, they would be handing out copies of the Skoke and Boudria remarks today."

    The Conservative party campaigned hard on setting a new ethical standard for politics and this would be one way to apply a new standard.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 12:36 PM  

  • sir john a. said...

    "I was going to post at length about the ironic dichotomy of the elite left applying the same blanket, misinformed, hateful statements to the right that it assigns to minorities on occasion, but "merboy" perfectly captures that double standard with this gem."

    One of the reasons I didn't vote Liberal when Paul Martin was leader was because of how the Liberal party did nothing about their blatantly homophobic members... but nice try anyways.

    It isn't ok for this guy... and it isn't ok for any member of any party.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 12:40 PM  

  • "It's almost like western Conservatives are... out of date somehow. Gee, ya think?"

    LOL. The Liberals have spent the better part of a year attacking a PM who left office 15 years ago, have dredged up Reform immigration policy documents from the early 1990s and tried to debate it (unlike the Liberals, Conservative policy has changed since then), are now outraged over something said 16 years ago and you're claiming the Conservatives are the ones that out of date? Can we at least discuss issues that happened this millenium?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:59 PM  

  • "The only thing more hateful than a right-wing extremist remarking about homosexuals is a left-wing elitist reacting to those remarks."

    Doesn't excuse the right-wing. So, what's your official position on those remarks?

    Can you give an example of "same blanket, misinformed, hateful statements to the right that it assigns to minorities"?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 1:03 PM  

  • There isn't a single party that doesn't have a record of tolerating extreme anti-gay bigotry in its ranks.

    There's still only one though, that's made it official policy at every opportunity. And it's not the Liberals. And when you come down to it, that's why he needs to be kicked out. Because despite bigoted slime like Tom Wappel in the Liberals and Ed Schreyer in the NDP, the vast majority of the party can be counted on to support equality for gays and lesbians. The vast majority of Conservatives have demonstrated over and over again that they are opposed to any and all measures of equality for gays and lesbians, in every aspect of life.

    By Blogger Reality Bites, at 1:15 PM  

  • I feel sorry for Tom Lukiwski as his career will never be the same and his apology seemed geniune. Saying that I doubt Tom Lukiwski would grant a Liberal or a NDP member much leinancy if a similar tape showed up. In fact, I'm pretty sure he and his Conservative friends would go for the throat.

    By Blogger Blues Clair, at 1:19 PM  

  • Please give me an honest answer.

    If a tape with a similar comment about Jews, aboriginals or Quebecois spreading diseases 17 years ago surfaced would he stay in caucus?

    This wasn't an attack on homosexual acts; this was an attack on a group of people using reductionist thinking which assumes people are no more than what they do in bed.

    My question is why would any party would keep someone in place that attacks their own constituents?

    By Blogger toujoursdan, at 1:53 PM  

  • "If a tape with a similar comment about Jews, aboriginals or Quebecois spreading diseases 17 years ago surfaced would he stay in caucus?"

    But what is the cut-off date for offensive actions, and who does it apply to? The federal Liberals refused Jewish refugees during WWII and interred Jews in camps in Canada-one of these camps still exists outside of Fredericton.
    Former PM Jean Chretien accepted lobbying fees to suck up to the Iranian government on behalf of oil companies even though Iran publically executes homosexuals. I find Chretien more offensive than Lukiwski, but I'm sure most Liberals can make excuses for him.
    And Queer-Liberal has posted a clip of Tommy Douglas making anti-gay remarks.
    People in all parties make stupid remarks and do stupid things. The question is if we have enough personal genorosity to accept an apology and move on.

    By Blogger nuna d. above, at 2:26 PM  

  • This video sums up the situation much better http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T17tRPxRWe0#GU5U2spHI_4

    By Anonymous Lukwiski, at 3:30 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "But what is the cut-off date for offensive actions, and who does it apply to?"

    I think the cut-off date for firing an MP would be "before they quit".

    "People in all parties make stupid remarks and do stupid things. The question is if we have enough personal genorosity to accept an apology and move on."

    I think there's stupid and then there's obscene... as a previous poster said... if he said something similar about jews or another visible minority... there would be no debate.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 4:39 PM  

  • "I think the cut-off date for firing an MP would be "before they quit"."

    If the Liberals had fired Skoke-who made remarks about gays spreading AIDS-you would have a valid point, but as it is, it's only partisan bullshit.

    By Blogger nuna d. above, at 5:19 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "If the Liberals had fired Skoke-who made remarks about gays spreading AIDS-you would have a valid point, but as it is, it's only partisan bullshit."

    I think your excuses are bullshit.

    What is the point of running a full campaign on bringing a new level of ethics to government only to point back at previous government failings as a reason to leave things as they are EVERY TIME anyone dares to ask you to live up to that commitment?

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 6:57 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "Queer-Liberal has posted a clip of Tommy Douglas making anti-gay remarks."

    Really... you honestly want to pretend they're comparable?

    TD's comments are extremely progressive for 1968... nice try though.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54wQBgZ02KM

    1968 (5 years before the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

    vs

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CaaJkZW9Ro

    1991 (the year Toronto's PRIDE parade turned TEN)

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 7:12 PM  

  • "What is the point of running a full campaign on bringing a new level of ethics to government"

    The new level of ethics in government means not having former Mafia employees in the cabinet running Adscam in Quebec, not pretending Liberal bigoted remarks are more acceptable than other bigoted remarks.

    By Blogger nuna d. above, at 7:21 PM  

  • And Queer-Liberal has posted a clip of Tommy Douglas making anti-gay remarks.

    I watched the clip and Tommy Douglas is not making anti-gay remarks. He is repeating the accepted but misguided psychological opinion from the time in order to call for greater compassion for gay people. Homosexuality wasn't removed from the DSM until 1973. Douglas' comments were made when Everett Klippert was languishing in jail under a life sentence as a dangerous sex offender, upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada for merely telling a cop he was gay.

    Lukiwski's content and, more importantly, his intent is completely different. He isn't repeating an established, but out of date and misguided statement about gays in order to call for greater compassion and acceptance, he is engaging in hate speech by attacking us as "homosexual faggots... who spread disease".

    Sorry, in both content and intent, they are not equivalent. All these scapegoating and diversionary tactics are getting old.

    By Blogger toujoursdan, at 7:22 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "The new level of ethics in government means not having former Mafia employees in the cabinet running Adscam in Quebec, not pretending Liberal bigoted remarks are more acceptable than other bigoted remarks."

    Yeah I don't actually recall saying that Liberal bigoted remarks are more acceptable... in fact I chose not to vote for the Liberals when Paul Martin was leader partly
    because of the party's tolerance of homophobia.

    All of your excuses boil down to
    "but they sucked first" which is hardly a compelling reason for not doing better.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 7:36 PM  

  • "All these scapegoating and diversionary tactics are getting old."

    And your double standards are pretty tired too. Lukwiski made remarks as a private citizen while drinking at a party. Rosanne Skoke made anti-gay remarks in Parliament while part of a Liberal government and her remarks are more recent than his. Your belief that you get to pass judgement based on the political party you support is a delusion.

    By Blogger nuna d. above, at 7:37 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "And your double standards are pretty tired too. Lukwiski made remarks as a private citizen while drinking at a party. Rosanne Skoke made anti-gay remarks in Parliament while part of a Liberal government and her remarks are more recent than his. Your belief that you get to pass judgement based on the political party you support is a delusion."

    It's funny how toujoursdan said nothing about Roseanne Skoke... guess it's too bad that the rest of us don't live in your make believe world... then we would see what you're talking about I'm sure.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 7:43 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "Rosanne Skoke made anti-gay remarks in Parliament while part of a Liberal government and her remarks are more recent than his."

    GREAT let's fire her too... wait a second... you mean she isn't a sitting MP and it's literally impossible to fire her... well it's definitely worth bringing into the debate you're right.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 7:46 PM  

  • The Liberal Skoke and the NDP's Ed Schreyer are relevent because their anti-gay remarks set a precedent for how parties treat their own members, compared to partisan crap about the other parties members.
    If only 2008 is relevent, that still leaves Don Boudria on TV speaking for the Liberals, and I believe working for the Liberals. We can agree that Boudria and Lukiwski should be fired at the same time for remarks they made in the past?

    By Blogger nuna d. above, at 8:42 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "The Liberal Skoke and the NDP's Ed Schreyer are relevent because their anti-gay remarks set a precedent for how parties treat their own members, compared to partisan crap about the other parties members."

    Again... wrong before... still wrong... and not an excuse to do nothing.

    "If only 2008 is relevent, that still leaves Don Boudria on TV speaking for the Liberals, and I believe working for the Liberals. We can agree that Boudria and Lukiwski should be fired at the same time for remarks they made in the past?"

    If they're in the same league as Lukiwski's comments then sure.

    Though I'm not sure I trust you to judge what is or is not homophobia given that you think the TD clip is a good example of past officials spewing homophobia when his comments were the complete opposite of homophobic.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 8:59 PM  

  • "his comments were the complete opposite of homophobic."

    So saying homsexuality is a mental illness that needs to be treated is not homophobic? In your opinion maybe.

    By Blogger nuna d. above, at 9:12 PM  

  • So saying homsexuality is a mental illness that needs to be treated is not homophobic? In your opinion maybe.

    In 1968 when the alternative was life in prison with no possibiliity of parole? No. It's not homophobic for that era and I am gay and feel like I am better able to determine that than you.

    Rosanne Skoke made anti-gay remarks in Parliament while part of a Liberal government and her remarks are more recent than his.

    This is another diversionary tactic. If Rosanne Skoke did this and she is in power she should be sanctioned as well. If she has left, then there is nothing that can be done politically now.

    But the subject of this thread is Lukiwski. Let's stick to his statements and punishment here and deal with her separately. Other people's misdeeds don't make our misdeeds less wrong. That isn't how personal responsibility works.

    Your belief that you get to pass judgement based on the political party you support is a delusion.

    Your assumption about which political party I support is amusing.

    I am an independent and voted for the Bloc in the last election, because he was the most competent candidate.

    In the past I have voted for PCs, Liberals and NDP.

    By Blogger toujoursdan, at 10:13 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "So saying homsexuality is a mental illness that needs to be treated is not homophobic? In your opinion maybe."

    When... as stated before...

    1. It was listed as a mental illness by the major medical organizations at the time.

    2. "treated sympathetically"... nuff said really.

    3. Advocated that jailing people for being gay is wrong.

    Absolutely.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 11:18 PM  

  • Lukiwski's apology was at least very quick, genuine, and emphatic...something the Liberals could learn. Forget the NDP, there are certainly conservative supporters who hate this blue-collar machismo and all politicans need to avoid simplistic insults.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:19 AM  

  • As someone who comes from Roseanne Skoke's former riding, I will remind you that while she didn't get kicked out of caucus, she lost her nomination in 1997.

    What Lukiwski said was extreme, even for 1991. He shouldn't be defended and it disheartens me to see so many do so. That said, he apologized, and the apology seemed genuine so I'd be content to leave it there.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:15 AM  

  • "But the subject of this thread is Lukiwski."

    Because you say so? For other people the subject might be about how excuses are made for NDP homphobic comments made before Lukiwski and Liberal homphobic comments made after him (by sitting politicians), but only the Conservative comments during a specific time period are supposed to be offensive. Congratualtions on supporting the BQ, the ony party that doesn't have a lot of homophobic commments on record.

    By Blogger nuna d. above, at 12:47 PM  

  • nuna d. above said...

    "For other people the subject might be about how excuses are made for NDP homphobic comments made before Lukiwski and Liberal homphobic comments made after him (by sitting politicians), but only the Conservative comments during a specific time period are supposed to be offensive."

    Well or you're using examples from the past where nothing can be done as an excuse to do nothing currently... lame lame lame lame lame.

    "Congratualtions on supporting the BQ, the ony party that doesn't have a lot of homophobic commments on record."

    That's right... because the BQ is the evil separatist party we're all supposed to accept that the other major parties will tolerate a certain level of blatant homophobia... nice try.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 1:00 PM  

  • Hmmm!

    So, what happened to Sir John? Has he disappeared again?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 1:06 PM  

  • Love thew Quality and balance of CG!

    Send an Email like this to CTV using their ** FEEDBACK** at the bottom of their [closed] comments page.

    ================================
    ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080404/lukiwski_tape_080404/20080404?hub=Canada

    CTV and Lloyd Robertson can not take this back:

    * * And didn't you just love Lloyd's painfully obvious leading question: **So, Robert, do you think this is PM Harper's worst nightmare?** INSTEAD of say, **Robert, do you think this will have a negative impact on the CPC**? * *

    CTV, agents for destruction of the Conservative Party of Canada?

    I will be contacting your sponsors. You can bet they are not your partners in this project of destructive party politics.

    We have a free vote in Canada for a reason.

    CTV deserves to face lawsuits and huge fines with conditions on CRTC license.

    Is it normal to publicize a stolen private partytime video tape? Do you have a signed release from the owner? = TG

    PS: this Email is also posted to major blogsites. = TG

    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 2:27 PM  

  • TonyGuitar said...

    "CTV and Lloyd Robertson can not take this back:

    * * And didn't you just love Lloyd's painfully obvious leading question: **So, Robert, do you think this is PM Harper's worst nightmare?** INSTEAD of say, **Robert, do you think this will have a negative impact on the CPC**? * *"

    The difference between Lloyd's comment and yours... slight at best... SO not worth a complaint campaign... well unless your goal is to distract from the actual issue of course.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 8:20 PM  

  • Merboy,

    Humm, weak, but polite though. = TG

    By Blogger TonyGuitar, at 2:13 AM  

  • TonyGuitar said...

    "Humm, weak, but polite though."

    Spamming blogs with a stupid crusade about nothing is weak.

    By Blogger MERBOY, at 8:06 AM  

  • merboy says:
    I can't believe the people that are defending this guy.

    Oh it was 16 years ago... back then things weren't as politically correct and it was totally ok to make comments like that.


    Jack Layton says:
    I think Canadian society has evolved considerably around this issue and [politician who made anti-sodomite comments in the 1980s] is a part of that evolution

    By Blogger Feynman and Coulter's Love Child, at 8:27 PM  

  • Gosh, there's a lot of helpful information above!

    By Anonymous www.pontevedra-3d.com, at 2:56 AM  

  • By Blogger Gege Dai, at 2:56 AM  

  • By Blogger 柯云, at 1:48 AM  

  • By Blogger xjd7410@gmail.com, at 2:47 AM  

  • By Blogger chenlina, at 9:36 PM  

  • By Blogger Unknown, at 2:57 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home