Please! I need to vent.
* * * *
Related: Tories threaten election over crime bill - CTV
Halls of Macadamia - Hey Steffi...
ChuckerCanuk - Liberal Senate: "Don't You Raise That Age of Consent!"
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Senator 'concerned' about raising age of consent
Did anyone else see Liberal senator Sharon Carstairs on Mike Duffy Live tonight?
Please! I need to vent.
Related: Tories threaten election over crime bill - CTV
Halls of Macadamia - Hey Steffi...
ChuckerCanuk - Liberal Senate: "Don't You Raise That Age of Consent!"
Please! I need to vent.
Related: Tories threaten election over crime bill - CTV
Halls of Macadamia - Hey Steffi...
ChuckerCanuk - Liberal Senate: "Don't You Raise That Age of Consent!"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
40 comments:
I saw it. That women needs therapy. Hope they have her helping on the next campaign.
I saw her and was totally disgusted when she said that the Senate can't be bullied by anyone. They will take their own sweet time. I was going to ask who voted for her and then I remembered that she was in the Senate. What a disgrace.
The worst part is that she was so arrogant. Did you guys catch the next segment of MDL with the NDP strategist tearing the Senate apart? He said that the system is broken. He's right. The Senate is blocking this legislation for no good reason.
Yes, the system is broken, he was right on that. Why should the Senate try and block anything, they aren't elected.
She says raising the age of consent will drive juvenile street walkers underground because it will make sex illegal if you're under 16. Someone should tell her that soliciting on the street is already illegal no matter what your age is. duh!
Apparently she was a teacher for 20 years. Doesn't say much for the profession.
Sometimes i fear for Duffys health . I don't know how he can sit there listening to some of that crap without his blood pressure going through the roof . That was the most blatant b.s. i've seen in a long time and he gets fed some every day.
I'm a little confused.
She went on about underage prostitutes being forced to go underground and how, as a former teacher, she knows that teenagers are much more sexually active these days.
She didn't even mention the internet. By omission was she implying that there is a much bigger problem with underage prostitution than there is with internet predators?
Are they even taking internet predators into consideration in the chamber of sober second thought?
I also didn't know that underage prostitutes currently operate in the open.
I must have missed something here.
Hasn't prostitution always been sort of underground or at least relegated to the seedier parts of town?
Isn't prostitution illegal?
When was the last time anyone saw a fourteen year old hooker standing on a street corner?
Was this senator actually comparing her sexually active students to teenage prostitutes?
The arrogance and ineptitude is staggering.
I personally hope that her constituents vote her out during the next..... oh, never mind.
NeilD
What a gross, disgusting,pig. I am trying to eat a bowl of cereal, and I find it hard to keep down. She is the perfect example of a liberal pig, feeding from the trough, a large poster child. Can you imagine what the children that she has brainwashed over her teaching years have turned out like? Probably don't venture outside of the Toronto boundaries.
I think all the Conservative Party needs to do in the next election is run ads of that segment. They don't even need to edit it. Just run the tape as is. Canadians will see where their money is going, and who is stopping the crime legislation from getting through.
jckirlan, you left a comment which I would love to publish, but the language needs to be toned down a bit. I know sometimes four-letter words just have a certain punch, but this is a family-rated blog. Thanks. ;)
I think I can safely reproduce this much:
Thank God she had her face hidden as I would want to hide my face with that advice as well. What kind of thought process goes on in the Senate. A 1st year philosophy student could undo that logic. I doubt her second thought is sober by the looks of her.
Why cant the Conservatives get out there and sell their message with idiots like this promoting the other side.
The CTV link keeps starting movies that don't look like an interview. Every time I click on it, a different one starts.
From the article, she says she wants to hear from experts. Since the age of consent for being sexually exploited, such as doing porn or prostitution, is already 18, higher than most other countries, it may be true that raising the age of consent drives 15 year olds further underground. Does the age of consent also apply to birth control, or treatment for STDs?
How does a senate bill become a matter of confidence? Only a defeat in the lower house can be treated as a loss of confidence. I suppose Harper could simply call an election though. Does the fixed terms law have any teeth that prevents him?
Come on people she's a non-elected senator, entitled to her entitlements. So what if she warped the minds of her students for 20 years? She's obviously trying to protect those youngsters from sexual predators....Oh wait, she isn't!
Really, I'm usually not rude, but, what a SOW, she will listen to social workers, how about parents of teens, any of those scheduled in those hearings? Thought not.
A 1st year philosophy student could undo that logic.
Go ahead.
I doubt her second thought is sober by the looks of her.
1st year logic calls this fallacy "ad hominem"
Why cant the Conservatives get out there and sell their message with idiots like this promoting the other side.
Perhaps because you are on the Conservatives' side?
Yes I agree Joanne. All apologies. That Liberal Senator just got me so worked up that I had to go ad hominem which, I am afraid, doesn't say much about me.
Shame is a good thing sometimes, so thanks for saving me the embarrassement.
The point was this Liberal Senator isn't smart enough to realize that 14 year old prostitues need protection and removal from the streets and not better working conditions.
L.S. - The CTV link keeps starting movies that don't look like an interview. Every time I click on it, a different one starts.
It's a commercial. Just be patient and try again.
Really, I'm usually not rude, but, what a SOW, she will listen to social workers, how about parents of teens, any of those scheduled in those hearings? Thought not.
Yeah, I don't blame jckirlan for losing it a bit there.
Hey, wasn't it strange that she was standing and Duff was sitting?
Anyway, I think it was Brad Levine in the next segment that said something about that the elected members of Parliament had already gone through all that stuff; had interviewed piles of people; that it was good legislation, but this stuffy Senator thinks she owns the place?
We pay her salary and she's not accountable to us. Something is very wrong here.
Even PREMIER McGUINTY wants this passed!!!
The point was this Liberal Senator isn't smart enough to realize that 14 year old prostitues need protection and removal from the streets and not better working conditions.
Exactly.
See? You are equally eloquent without the swear words. Not everyone can do that.
It's just so frustrating watching a pig at the trough and "not being able to do anything about it", as the Liberal Senator so rudely pointed out. With her arrogant attitude and smug ill informed and ill thought out responses, I lost it.
I did find it wierd that she had to run up to huff and puff in an ad hoc manner, standing off to the side, to explain the Libearl Senate point of view. It looked as though she was hastily sent out there by Dion to rescue the point of the senate holding up the legislation. It showed me that the Liberals are getting worried about Harper's demands and a real possiblity of an election.
It makes me sad to watch the Liberals destroy the country. However,I did call Dr Keith Martin's office this am to congratulate him on the Free speech legislation.
I did find it wierd that she had to run up to huff and puff in an ad hoc manner, standing off to the side, to explain the Libearl Senate point of view. It looked as though she was hastily sent out there by Dion to rescue the point of the senate holding up the legislation. It showed me that the Liberals are getting worried about Harper's demands and a real possiblity of an election.
Mmm.. Interesting. Yes, that could very well be what happened. I thought it was just that she couldn't fit on a stool. ;)
Good point about Keith Martin. I'm glad you contacted him. He needs to know how many Canadians support him on this.
She ALSO said that she was against the reverse-onus provision for bail in violent gun crimes (ie. if you commit a crime of violence with a gun, you have to show why you SHOULD get bail, instead of the prosecutor showing why you shouldn't). This cow was one of the chief "pushers" for the LIEberals' Bill C-68, which imposes reverse-onus provisions PLUS penalties for refusing to assist the police when they are investigating you, so why does she now seem to be so concerned when the possibility of reverse-onus is applied when an ACTUAL crime has been committed?
I'm boiling mad too - posted myself, here's the end:
"I sometimes think our country suffers terribly from a Willy Loman disorder - our quiet desperation for attention to be paid leads us down paths of thought so perverted from their initiating principles that the conclusions look like monstrous approximations of them. Yes, raising the age of consent has the feel of a Footloose town council by-law. But sometimes, its okay to poop on the party - especially the kinds of parties where kids aren't guests. They're favors."
"Mmm.. Interesting. Yes, that could very well be what happened. I thought it was just that she couldn't fit on a stool. ;)"
LOL If they can find a stool for Duffy,new or old, they can find a chair for this Liberal Senator. Don't forget Libby Davis is always acommodated.
Unfortunately Senator Sharon Carstairs is from Winnipeg Manitoba and was the Leader of the Liberal Party before becoming a Senator. This a perfect example of how she lectured Manitobans while leading the Liberal Party . It didn't bring a lot of support to the Liberals then and still doesn't. If find her position shocking considering the bring crime problem we have in Winnipeg.
I too saw the segment and was disgusted. This is the same person who when leader of the Manitoba provincial liberal party during the meech lake fiasco went on and on about how ineffective the senate was and how it should be abolished. Seemw a different story for her now that she is swilling from the public trough
Chucker - Really good post. I linked to it on the update.
I actually support raising the age of consent, but I feel compelled to respond to some things stated here, and by Mr. Day.
First, I believe she said she thought it was important to investigate this legilsation properly to determine whether it will work the way we expect it to work. I do not believe she said she was against raising the age of consent.
Here in Alberta our provincial government passed an act called the Protection of Children Involved in Prostitution (PCHIP). This legislation allowed the police to remove child prostitutes from the streets without arresting them, which is what they did before this act. The children are placed in secure safehouses for up to 28 days. There are a lot of good and bad things that came from this, but I will spare you all the commentary except for this: a LOT of child prostitutes left the streets and now are managed by a pimp. They did this because they knew they could be arrested and detained by the police if they were found on the street. So while a number of youth were apprehended under this act, many more "went underground". The reason I know this is because I work with those youth.
That said, I do not think the age of consent legislation has anything to do with child prostitution, because prostitution is illegal no matter how old you are. There is a specific offence of prostitution with a minor (under 18), with penalties that are more severe than if the if prostitute is an adult.
It is also a criminal offence to sexually exploit a young person who is over the age of 14.
Second, Day was on the TV talking about how we need this legislation in order to stop internet predators. I guess he did not read section 172.1 of the criminal code then. This section makes it illegal to lure a person under the age of 18 over the internet.
Finally, in case you missed it, the Senate, like the House, is only just back in session. That does not give them a lot of time to consider the bill. Whether you like it or not, they have been appointed to do a job. What some of you are suggesting is that they should not do that job, and then you complain about the fact the senate is not working.
I am not surprised Harper is trying to make an issue out of this though. He is tanking on every other issue so he certainly needs something to go to the polls with...
Well, perhaps, if the Liberals back us into an election, Harper would consider putting abolishing the Senate to a vote by those who have to pay for it......Canadian taxpayer!!
I'm hoping that Harper's re-election team is banking all of the stupid things Liberals have said in the past two years for a great montage that ends with Iggy saying "He's STILL not up to the job".
Oh, and Joanne - isn't in interesting that McGuinty is now touting a "surplus"? What with his posturing about unfair federal treatment of Ontario? If Ontario has a surplus what's going to be done with it?
"He is tanking on every other issue so he certainly needs something to go to the polls with..."
You go with that Gayle.....
Before you all get in a flap - My concern is how it is worded. There's that issue in the US where 2 teens had consentual sex and the boy ended up in prison for 10 years.
If it is clearly worded re age for the girl and age for the guy okay, but if it isn't this could destroy many teens.
Nicholson/Day went way over the line bullying. They also LIED about the time the senate has had to deal with it. The senate has actually ONLY HAD 4 sessions. The 10 weeks (must be using Flaherty's math) they refer to is a LIE. Parliament was closed down for 6 weeks of that so-called 10 weeks to deal with it.
"Well, perhaps, if the Liberals back us into an election, Harper would consider putting abolishing the Senate to a vote by those who have to pay for it......Canadian taxpayer!!"
You do know it is Harper who is backing us into an election, right? Making Manley lite a confidence motion is an invitation to be defeated. (Are you also aware that Harper does not need Parliament's consent to extend the mission? This does not have to be a vote at all).
In any event, the Senate cannot be disbanded without a constitutional amendment, and I guarantee Harper has no interest in re-opening the constitution, since the last time that happened it almost resulted in Quebec separating.
Gayle,
Must be very lonely in the last bastion of the country where there's still true men and women with backbone and integrity. You really need to get out of Alberta and move back to Toronto where you would truly feel more at home...Try the Toronto-Danforth area. Jack & Olivia would be proud. ;-)
Smart alec remarks aside,
I predict the Senate will ratify the crime bill omnibus soon as they (Conservatives) have finally cornered them with a strategic 3 face election gambit...The Fibs will not want to face the electorate wearing this and the senate do not want to risk the wrath of abolishion from the trough from angered Canucks WHO WANT THIS TO PASS...Even the 416/905 corridors of socks and sandles land want it including McSquirty and SocioMiller.
Dion and the Fibs will certainly not wait for the Afghan confidence vote to trigger an election. They are too divided and the PM's Manley report basic position is yet another political masterstroke.
No...I predict that the Government will be defeated on the budget. In a sense the PM is graceful enough to have planned this timing for Dion's/Divided Fibs sake and at the same time deflecting the election campaign on other important issues other than USING ARE BRAVE MILITARY AS POLITICAL PAONS!
Am I missing something here ? I thought the purpose of raising the age of consent was to protect kids under 16, both girls and boys, from pedophiles. This certainly didn't appear to have crossed the vast expanse of Senator Carstairs mind. I think given the existing regulation regarding prostitution, her whole position is simply a red herring to cause some more delay and make it look like she "cares". Perhaps she should start "caring" about kids molested by fathers, uncles, neighbours, etc.
Anyone see Peter VanLoan on TV? He spoke directly to us and let everyone know the attitude that came from her yesterday. Anyone want to guess we'll be getting a referendum on Senate reform when the election is called? Here's hoping.
If this is sober second thought we need to call a detox center.
grind a grit - I am really not sure what you are trying to say, so I will respond to what I think you are trying to say.
It is quite clear Harper wants to make crime an election platform. All this huffing and puffing and "concern" about the safety of Canadians could backfire on him. Here is why:
The truth of the matter is most of these bills passed in June, after MONTHS of delays by the conservatives. The Senate had the age of consent bill as well as most of the other bills in June, just before the summer break.
Then Harper prorogued, killed the bills and rather than reintroducing them in the Senate, which he could have done, he opted to reintroduce them in the House and start the entire process over again.
You know why he did that? So he could have this legislation in the Senate (for only a few days, as it turns out) so he can create the false impression the Senate is delaying the crime bills, and the other false impression that the liberals are soft on crime. It is a lie, and if he is called on it he will appear to be playing with public safety for political gain.
To listen to Day on Duffy you would think the conservatives invented minimum penalties on gun crimes (nope - liberals did it in 1995). You would think all children are being lured over the internet and the police can do nothing (nope - see above post re: offence of internet luring passed by the liberal government).
He also failed to mention the fact the liberals created a DNA registry, a sex offenders registry, a restraining order that prevents convicted pedophiles from attending at places where there are children, anti-stalking legislation, increased drug trafficking penalties and made it easier to put violent youth in jail.
But hey, believe him if you want. You won't be any safer, but then Harper does not really care about your safety anyway - so long as you vote for him.
Finally, in case you missed it, the Senate, like the House, is only just back in session. That does not give them a lot of time to consider the bill. Whether you like it or not, they have been appointed to do a job.
I've been back on the job since the first week of January. I'm truly amazed at the (small) number of work days both the Senate and House have. I can almost understand with the House, since they need to deal with their constituents (Paul Martin excluded). But the Senate?
If we can't reform the Senate, can we at least reform their working hours?
(Are you also aware that Harper does not need Parliament's consent to extend the mission? This does not have to be a vote at all).
Well aware. And then what would the opposition parties have to say?
I think there was, and is still, an opportunity for the Libs and CPC to agree on either the Manley report or a compromise. If the Libs and CPC dig in on their respective current policies, then there obviously should be an election to gain a mandate. That's what a democratic system is all about.
I have my personal opinion about the two current policies, and am ready for an election.
"Well aware. And then what would the opposition parties have to say?"
They would whine and complain and make noise and basically sound like the conservatives do when they are complaining about the Senate.
And then the ball would be in their court and they can seek a non-confidence vote....or not.
Harper could cover himself by saying he is a man of principle, and as such he is going to use his authority to extend the mission because it is the right thing to do, and he believes Canadians agree with him, and he is not going to allow this to be politicized any longer.
That is what he should do, but he won't.
Harper could cover himself by saying he is a man of principle, and as such he is going to use his authority to extend the mission
I think this is exactly what he's trying to do. Nice to see you agree.
If both he and Dion are stuck on their principles, then, in a minority government, an election is inevitable.
Clearly we do not agree, despite you attempt to couch it otherwise.
A man of principle would not play games with this issue. Period.
Post a Comment