Liberal MP Stronach leaving politics to return to Magna
Why?
1. Her Daddy offered her a multi-billion dollar company.
2. She lost the Conservative Party leadership bid to Stephen Harper.
3. She was only a cabinet minister for the few months Martin's Liberals hung on to power.
4. She wants to spend more time with her two kids.
You pick which one.
My Luther's Small Catechism taught me that the 8th commandment means "We should fear and love God so that we do not deceitfully lie, betray, backbite, nor slander our neighbor, but apologize for him, speak well of him, and put the most charitable construction on all that he says or does." So #4, I guess.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad I'm not a Lutheran anymore.
I think she's a loser in the true sense of the word. She's lost a husband, relationships, two political parties, the respect of Canadians; she's probably a lost soul who needs saved. Hosanna.
ReplyDeleteYou may want to check out Garth Turner's blog post about her. For a different point of view. http://www.garth.ca/weblog
ReplyDeletePaul,
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with what Belinda did with Tie Domi etc., but Garth Turner's report is bang on. The level of hypocrisy of those on the right is deafening. Anyone remember David Emerson? When he resigns are you going to blog about it as well?
She was treated really unfairly by the neo-con's and their fundamentalist agenda.
Rob
Hi Rob,
ReplyDeleteIf Emerson resigns I will be happy to blog about that as well - although you may need to remind me. I am not much a politics-watcher.
I read the Turner post and all the comments. Seems the majority of the commenters got it right...and Turner obviously has it out for Harper as well. His argument seems to have little merit.
ReplyDelete"It is amazing how someone who calls himself an “independent” voice can become such a blithering sycophant at the smell of money and a pretty face."
That one made me laugh. :-)
Hey Paul,
ReplyDeleteReading my comment, I didn't mean it the way it sounded. I wasn't accusing you of being a neo-con. Just wanted to make sure that was clear.
David Emerson was elected as a liberal in BC. The week after the election he switched to the conservatives. I was really wondering where the outcry from the conservatives is about that? You're right, unless you're a politics watcher you won't have any clue who David Emerson is. That's the hypocrisy of the neo-con's.
Rob
Rob -
ReplyDeleteI know who Emerson is and am aware of what he did. My own view is that anyone who runs for one party should have to step down and run again if they want to run for another party - regardless of which ship they jump from or to. That just seems fair to me...
I don't have it out for Belinda Stronach. Like I said, I am not much of a politics-watcher - my hope is not in Parliament, but in the reigning Christ Jesus.
That being said, politicians are public figures who make public statements. Now this may bother you more than anything else, but what most wrankled my ire with Ms. Stronach was the notion that her departure was motivated by wanting to spend more time with her kids. I have a difficult time buying that as I do not know many high-power exec's in the process of buying a mega-company that have a lot of time for family. I don't know the age of her children (by her age I am guessing they are under 10), but it strikes me that the best thing she could do if her kids are young and she wants to spend time with them is... wait for it... stop outside employment altogether and be a full-time homemaker.
That was the far too subtle point of my original post.
Excellent point Kerux. But anyone who finds politics too tough (and I think it is a hard life) will certainly not be able to handle homemaking. In a culture that values the amount of money brought in, the amount of prominence maintained, the amount of popularity won, a prominent, popular,billionairess is certainly not going to opt for childrearing.
ReplyDeleteI would think it would make far more sense for the father of the children to stay home because ... wait for it... she makes WAY WAY more money then the father!
ReplyDeleteJust a little poke at your assumptions it's got to be the mom staying home.
Rob
Rob,
ReplyDeleteI like your sense of humour... but not your point.
It is not an assumption that mom ought to stay home - it is Biblical truth: "Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled." (Titus 2:3-5)
I'm pretty sure that particular verse was written 2000 years ago. I would suggest that things have changed a little. ie. I don't wake up every day praying Thank God I'm not a Gentile or a Woman.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you understood I was just joking around. Have a great weekend and preach well on Sunday.
Rob
"I don't wake up every day praying Thank God I'm not a Gentile or a Woman."
ReplyDeleteNeither do I.
And neither did the Apostle Paul... who wrote the commands I quoted above... carried along by the Holy Spirit as he penned the very words of God.
Not everything has changed in 2000 years... and distinct roles for men and women are one of those unchanging, created-before-the-fall things that has never changed.
Thanks Paul. It's very unfortunate the way Christian women have bought into the world's like that true worth and value is a career outside the home.
ReplyDeleteJacob
...it's also very unfortunate that I don't proof read my posts.
ReplyDeleteSway like for lie above.
Jacob