Blogging Tory Jarrett lets us in on how his thought processes work:
The first is that, we have this thing that declares that how Harper handles it - IE, by actually coming out and condemning Lukiwski's remarks - is of decided importance to Canadian voters.
I'd agree, but why does Harper need to get involved if Lukiwski is stupid? Did Chretien insist that the Liberal party is not full of anti-rural bigots when Hedy Fry made cross burning remarks?
So ... what you're saying, Jarrett, is that the Lukiwski affair is somehow comparable to when Liberal Hedy Fry suggested that racists were burning crosses on lawns in Prince George, B.C.? Is that what you're saying here, Jarrett? Because I really, really want to make sure that that's what you're saying before I hold you up to mockery and ridicule.
First of all, Jarrett, it's quite possible that Fry was simply out to lunch in terms of being mistaken:
Fry ignited a political backlash when, on March 21, 2001, in reply to a question in the House of Commons, she claimed that crosses were being burned on lawns in Prince George, British Columbia "as we speak". No evidence of this had ever been given and, when asked to justify her claim, she stated that the mayor of Prince George had informed her of this. When asked, the mayor denied having said such a thing. It was later suggested Fry had confused Prince George with Merritt, British Columbia, where a Ku Klux Klan grand wizard was arrested following reported racist activity. . It has also been suggested that reports of cross-burning in Prince George, Alabama may have been the cause of her confusion.
But regardless of her motivation, Jarrett, Fry was not making racist comments -- she was using that (albeit misguided) example to condemn racism. As opposed to Lukiwski, who was spewing anti-gay bigotry on that video, referring to dirty, homosexual faggots.
Jesus, what is it with law students these days? Is it a requirement to be a retard to get into law school? The evidence is certainly piling up.