Rob Ford - Why the Supervillian?

[TonyV]

If the lunchpail-mentality types turn out Oct 25th in numbers enough to elect Rob Ford, I dare say that Ford will have an impossible situation on his hands, and that he will have a nightmarish time in office. There will be legal challenges, and all of the left groups will band together to ensure that Ford's time gets wasted. And that will just be the start of it for poor Rob.

Suffice to say I hope that the election plays out a different way from what I have outlined above. I'm backing Smitherman now, and I expect he can mount a campaign that will show the tolerant Torontonians what Ford really is.

Expect the two major opinion makers (Star and Globe) to editorialize massively against Ford, while of course the Sun will back him.

Fundamentalist religion and anti-gay rantings -- let's just see how they play out in Toronto. I have a feeling Rob Ford has painted a massive target on himself and I also suspect he's toast now. Let's just see ...

 

[tkip]

Isn't Smitherman tainted with having been involved of the eHealth scandal where over a billion dollars was flushed down the drain and there's been zero accountability for what happened?

 

[tkip]

Politics is about character. Belief in only 'traditional marriage' is the stuff of backwards, spiteful and small-minded people. Not fit for the job. Not by a long shot.

And you just proved my point about being intolerant of others with having views and opinions that are different from your own.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with believing in traditional marriage. It's just a different opinion. A lot of people believe in traditional marriage. I do. Almost all my friends do. It doesn't make us spiteful, vengeful and small minded people. We just believe that traditional should be between a man and a woman. That's it. There's no conspiracy here.

Since a good portion of canadians believe in traditional marriage, by your account we're all too small minded to lead or participate in polictics. The larger issue now is that so many people are afraid to voice their views on a variety of topics because people like this poster will automatically label them a bigot and marginalize them.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

tkip:

And since we're talking about policy here - does your belief translate into action in that area, or support for individuals whose courses of action align with your belief? At the end of the day, talking about belief is one thing; enacting policies that is driven by belief is another. Why talk about belief in the policy arena otherwise - especially when the belief translates into a rationale for denying access to choice and recgonition by the state for others?

Beyond that, should we be equally tolerant of say the KKK or other racist groups and their beliefs just because we are afraid of labelling them as bigots or worse hurts their feelings?

AoD

 

[GraphicMatt]

Since a good portion of canadians believe in traditional marriage, by your account we're all too small minded to lead or participate in polictics.

Absolutely. (Though I should be clear that I think anyone should be able to RUN for office; I just don't think people like this deserve any kind of support.)

There are lots of personal beliefs others can hold that make them unfit to hold political office. Hell, there are lots of personal beliefs others can hold that make them absolute scum.

 

[tkip]

tkip:

And since we're talking about policy here - does your belief translate into action in that area, or support for individuals whose courses of action align with your belief? At the end of the day, talking about belief is one thing; enacting policies that is driven by belief is another. Why talk about belief in the policy arena otherwise - especially when the belief translates into a rationale for denying access to choice and recgonition by the state for others?

Beyond that, should we be equally tolerant of say the KKK or other racist groups and their beliefs just because we are afraid of labelling them as bigots or worse hurts their feelings?

AoD

No one is talking about acting on their belief systems. This was about expressing personal views and being ridiculed for them.

Every one of us holds views and have personal beliefs but the vast majority of us don't run around and try to impose them on others especially in the public. It's silly to try and reduce this debate to suggesting that people holding opinons that are contrary to your own are somehow plotting to impose them on the population.

Actually, scratch that. We do have people attempting to do this now. The Human Rights boards are being flooded with insane complaints from people wanting to have their own way and screaming discrimination when they don't get it. Anyway. If you don't agree with others, even with radical views you don't have to support them. But they are entitled to their opinions.

It's called freedom of expression and speech in this country. Or it use to be.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

It's silly to try and reduce this debate to suggesting that people that hold opinons that are contrary to your own are somehow plotting to impose them on the population.

Oh I am not suggesting that at all, but one should be on the lookout for that kind of policymaking by stealth. And no offense, but this belief you have stated - and the rationale and moral reasoning behind it has denied access to the institution of marriage for how many years? So while actively plotting wouldn't be the case for most holding that belief, you can be certain that some are, and their action and support of certain candidates in the political arena may yet translate into actual policy - simply put, you don't vote for anyone you don't expect some sort of policy payback from.

you don't suport or agree with others, even with radical views you don't have to support them. But they are entitled to their opinion. It's called freedom of expression and speech in this country.

I don't think anyone can stop anyone else from having an opinion. That said, considering the amount of labelling done on the matter of "socalists" and you'll see freedom of expression and speech is a two-way street. One is free to say that they believe in traditional marriage and policies that support such; one is also free to say that such views are archaic or worse - that's also an opinion.

AoD

 

[Redroom Studios]

well said AoD and Graphic Matt... I find it somewhat shocking that in Canada's largest city and one of its most progressive that such outdated ways of thinking still survive. And the flaw in tkip's logic is clear... any point of view that claims exclusivity or superiority can not be called open minded or tolerant.

Personally I dont believe in marriage at all as it is an artifact of the age of superstition, something prescribed thousands of years ago by cavemen. So to claim that marriage can and should only exist according to those rules of tradition doesnt sway me in the least. The main reason why same sex couples must be allowed to pursue marriage is so that they can be entitled to the same benefits as heterosexual couples under the law. To have a position that would deny them those rights is spiteful, harmful and small minded. And so even though I have no interest in marriage myself, I am completely in support of others having the right to choose that path for themselves...

Rob Ford is the fear and hate candidate in this race...

 

[christiesplits]

I think Ford shot himself in the foot this week.Ford was under the impression that Tory was going to jump in, and knowing that he would shoot for the middle, Ford abandoned his attempt to come off as a fuzzy and "moderate" conservative and carved a niche among the far right with his endorsement from a candidate with highly questionable comments on gays and lesbians.

What little headway he has made with the Red Tory, North Toronto crowd is deteriorating, and will likely continue to do so when the Star and Globe dish out more dirt about him in the Fall.

 

[MetroMan]

^ Good observation. I think Ford peaked too early. He will be remembered as the opening act for this campaign. I think the race will be fought between Pantalone vs Smitherman (with Ford as a side show). Things can change if another high profile candidate enters (i.e. Adam Vaughan).

 

[Tewder]

No one is talking about acting on their belief systems. This was about expressing personal views and being ridiculed for them.

Every one of us holds views and have personal beliefs but the vast majority of us don't run around and try to impose them on others especially in the public.

No, this is about a mayoral candidate expressing a personal view, which is an entirely different matter. What he thinks and feels in his own home and among his own family and friends is one thing, but to come out and espouse a personal viewpoint during an election campaign is completely different, and any such view has to be considered within this context... and all the more so when the personal view in question is being politicized by Ford through his association with Pastor Brereton.

It makes me sick that this is all being played out, yet again, as some sort of attack on the rights of an 'abused' silent majority who feel that their right to marry the opposite sex and procreate is somehow being taken away from them. Bull! Who you marry is a non-issue, or should be, which is the whole point that Ford seems to be missing here... to nobody's surprise.

 

[Fresh Start]

^ Good observation. I think Ford peaked too early. He will be remembered as the opening act for this campaign. I think the race will be fought between Pantalone vs Smitherman (with Ford as a side show). Things can change if another high profile candidate enters (i.e. Adam Vaughan).

I'm waiting for Pantalone to make his mark in the election cause thus far he's like the invisible man. He can only coast by for so long running as Miller 2.0.

 

[tkip]

No, this is about a mayoral candidate expressing a personal view, which is an entirely different matter. What he thinks and feels in his own home and among his own family and friends is one thing, but to come out and espouse a personal viewpoint during an election campaign is completely different, and any such view has to be considered within this context... and all the more so when the personal view in question is being politicized by Ford through his association with Pastor Brereton.

It makes me sick that this is all being played out, yet again, as some sort of attack on the rights of an 'abused' silent majority who feel that their right to marry the opposite sex and procreate is somehow being taken away from them. Bull! Who you marry is a non-issue, or should be, which is the whole point that Ford seems to be missing here... to nobody's surprise.

If you have to hide your beliefs at home and pretend otherwise out in public then you might as well pack it in.

Ford's motives for throwing his support to this pastor might be suspect and polictized but this is true of every single politican out there. I would rather they be open and honest with me and the public so that at least we know where they stand on some issues. Maybe I'm just too naive to think this though.

The issue of what to reveal to the public is always a dangerous move since it can backfire and not always for lacking good intentions. I didn't want to start some fight online it's just I keep running into people out there that hearing something, anything that offends them in the slightest want to shut down any conversation or debate and quickly move to marginalizing others.

Not saying it happened here but this seems to be a very common reaction these days and it's become quite tiresome.

 

[urbandreamer]

I am sick of this PC nonsense where one can't openly say what you believe in! Rob Ford believes in traditional marriage--so be it! I suspect many UT-ites' parents believe in that as well, as do many married couples. Personally, I could care less but I do think a mayoral candidate is allowed to have a position on this issue. One of the reasons I suspect RF said so publicly is many of his backers are demanding he say such things. You'd be surprised who's behind this guy.... Rob Ford isn't scary...in person, he just happens to sadly reflect the majority of Torontonians I've met.

The only reasons I'd vote for him--comedy+perceived (Scots-Irish no doubt) cheapness. The other candidates are just so boring, typical Toronto. Blah.

 

[Tewder]

If you have to hide your beliefs at home and pretend otherwise out in public then you might as well pack it in.

No, as I said before we all have our beliefs. When we enter into public service, however, we have to be a little bigger than ourselves, don't we? In this specific context it would have played out entirely differently if he had stated that although he personally believes in the traditional definition of marriage he affirms the right for all to marry according to theirs and pledges to protect the right to do so. Done. Everybody happy. Controversy over.

I agree that political correctness gets taken to ridiculous lengths at times but what we're talking about here is a deliberate lack of compassion and sensitivity for a long-marginalized segment of the population. Again, playing into the presumed latent sympathies of a large silent majority of voters at the expense of this marginalized group just seems like a cheap shot and gives us a little glimpse of what we can expect to see more of from this guy.