After being exposed as having made some pretty disgusting remarks about gays 16 years ago, Tom Lukiwski, apologised and said:“I have no prejudice against gay people whatsoever. Those comments do not reflect the type of person I am.”
Really? I understand why he would say that today and I give him credit for apologising, but how do you utter such vile comments unless you believe them?
Something else came to light in House today. Apparently, another Con MP, Art Hanger I think, (of running out of committee fame), correlated an increase in crime with an increase of immigrants. I think this was in 2001, but I'll get the exact wording when Hansard is available.
The intolerance that some Con's were known for has been fairly well hidden since they took office. We know that Harper has kept most of his party on a short leash precisely so this kind of thing and true policy positions do not destroy the illusion that they have worked so diligently to create. Even journalists have suggested that the party had become moderate, moved to the left and had no hidden agenda.
Well, something tells me it's going to get a bit tougher for them to defend their new immigration policy, their proposed censorship policy, not to mention the private members bill that designates that a fetus is a person under the law.
No doubt the Harper apologists will be out in full force defending this. I'm sure they will suggest it's no big deal because it was 16 years ago.
Somehow I do not think that will wash. He's been with the party a long time and actually replaced a member of the party who was dropped from caucus for similar homophobic remarks.
The incumbent, Larry Spencer, was a member of the Canadian Alliance caucus but was dropped by the party after he told a reporter in 2003 that homosexuality should be outlawed and that a conspiracy is responsible for the successes of the gay rights movement.
Sorry, history counts when you are elected MP.
The transcript
Update: Sandra Buckler has commented. The net of her statement is that Lukiwski has apologised. Next!
Dream on Buckler. Is it just me or has anyone else noticed the irony of her surname?
20 comments:
There's also Vellacot. Diane Ablonczy prior to the beginnings of the Reform Party was an active member of the Western Concepts Group - their mission - to try to separate Man, Sask, Alta, BC and Yukon from Canada (a western BLOC party so to speak) AND to "protect European and Christian values".
Hmmm. I obviously have some digging to do Sandi.
I don't know these people well, but Ablonczy and Vellacot have always gotten under my skin. (He completely creeps me out and she's pretty Stepford-like.)
btw, was it you the other day that said that about L. Ian MacDonald? If it was, I'm with you. If I walked into a room and he was there, I think I'd leave. Very creepy.
Yes, he has been with a party for a long time. Which begs the question, what kind of party lets people with these views rise through the ranks?
I think he falls, not because of his homophobia, but the hateful delivery. You know it's bad when Bob Fife was "disgusted", he couldn't even cobble together a decent excuse.
I thought the same thing Steve.
Interestingly, Fife really showed disgust. I'm sorry but that surprised me.
Good for him.
I do hope that people like Duffy who say it was such a long time ago are drowned out.
The 90's was not that long ago people.
What was your outlook at that time?
That's a general question, not directed at you Steve.
I may be getting old but it seems to me that the 90's were just yesterday.
Duff I suppose has seen much and I respect him for that, but to excuse this crap, with that experience, only exposes his bias.
The bad news. I think LaPierre is after his job
I am also totally shcoked that 20 years ago Stephane Dion was an active Quebec separtist and his idol Pierre Trudeau was once an active member of the Communist Party.
Nope. Leapards don't change their spots unless they are Liberals I guess.
"The bad news. I think LaPierre is after his job"
Oh my! I was hoping for Richardson.
Lukiwski will stay, the Cons are dependent on him.
A check on the news archives show that he is a smooth filibusterer at the Committee level.
That the Sask NDP waited until now to trip him is surprising. Apparently, they have been sitting on the tape for a month and it was recently that Layton and Siksay got a hold of it.
anon
Oh, the OLD dodge and weave. Knb, I actually like this response, whenever you see it, it's generally an admission that they can't defend the issue at hand. Have nothing.... It's laughable really.
The sad thing for me is that Akin has fled to CanWest.
Duffy has been around since the Trudeau days. Survived heart problems and stuff. Parliamentarians loved him, although he is no longer as effective in his prime. Just like Enberg and Madden doing NFL games.
Steve, I'm with you on the anon response. Too funny, but sad really.
mushroom, you're correct.
I've been watching the filibusters and he is one of the Con stars. Smooth? Na. Just very good at keeping his jaw moving.
hmm, the sitting on the tape thing, do you have a link?
Oh, and mushroom, have you been reading Akins blog?
Even with this switch, I do not think his voice will be silenced.
Now, he may not last long, but I doubt he'll relinquish his objectivity.
Comparing hatemongers to communists and Quebec separatists?It's worse than laughable. It is wretchedly pathetic. I would expect nothing less from this too slick gang of rank amateurs. Implosion begins..
knb,
About sitting on the tape, this is from the National Post article:
"New Democrat MLA Pat Atkinson told a news conference Thursday her party found the videotape when it moved into the opposition offices after its loss in last fall's provincial election."
So they have been sitting on it for awhile. Except that the Ahenakew affair dragged this issue into the forefront.
About Akin, I enjoy his blog. With Canwest he also gets to write for the Ottawa Citizen and the Montreal Gazette. A bit better than the National Post, but who knows.
Once again the supercilious NDP has shown their true colours as the kings and queens of the muck-rakers. This from a party the decries the evil, creeping conspiracy of American style politics. It seems that all the parties of the left are so bereft of any moral standing that they now resort to digging out stupid comments made over a decade ago. What bearing this has on the politics of the day is beyond me. A more pressing issue, I would propose, is the lack of backbone displayed by those on the left who continue to support the Tory platform in spite of having their noses rubbed in it almost daily.
powell lucas...of course that is what you would propose. You entirely miss the point though.
A decade ago? Good grief man. What Lukiwsky said was not common parlance then nor now.
I find it incredible that the right is suggesting that c'mon, we all spoke like that then.
No, we didn't. The 90's aren't the 50's and if you've only evolved at that rate, well, the country is in trouble. Big touble.
Thanks mushroom.
I'm not convinced about the sitting on it, but you may be right.
I understand your time line, but I moved here 2 years ago and still have boxes to unpack.
Anyway the story will evolve, I'm certain.
Akin. Honestly, if he loses his objectivity, I think we are doomed.
I've heard from a few on the Hill and they all say that he is the best...the nicest guy...and a true professional.
I guess we wait and watch.
Can I put a different viewpoint out there for you KNB? I don't want to take away from what has come out on this and I do think that people have to take responsability for their actions or words.
Mushroom touched on what I am thinking.
Listening to Scott Brison on MDL today, he made the comment that as members of parliament, they have to be held to a higher standard because of what they do. I agree.
We should not pick what a higher standard should be though.
Personally the way that I think, if I was the one that moved into the office that the box with the briefcase that was holding the tape was in(this was what I got from the news conference...I might be wrong)would be very different.
I would not go through the contents of the box. They are not mine, and I have no right to carefully examine them. It does not take many braincells to understand where this property belongs.
This all goes toward the higher standard that Scott talked about. It is very easy to overlook this part when you find something juicy.
anon, I think you raise a fair point and in my personal life, I would not go through someone else's belongings.
That said though, this is politics. I'm presuming it was staffers who found the box and given that it was left behind, I suppose they may have thought it was garbage so they checked it. Of course once realising that it wasn't they no doubt went into political mode, which of course means to discredit your political opponents.
I take your point though and perhaps we will one day see that kind of integrity. I wouldn't hold my breathe though,;).
I would like to believe that all Canadians would accept his apology.
This acceptance however makes Tom no less accountable for his actions.
He should resign.
Post a Comment