Krystalline was willing to issue a joint statement with Andrew McKeever basically forgiving his boorish online behavior for the sake of the NDP campaign and the greater good. And it was this joint statment that Jack Layton quoted in defending his decision to let McKeever keep his position as NDP candidate for Durham. Now Ms. Kraus is having second thoughts:
I'm tired of being expected to take bullets for the NDP and stay quiet when I'm screaming inside to speak. I don't like being silenced or manipulated by anyone in my life. This McKeever -- NDP Durham candidate -- is not my fault and I won't be treated like this is my fault. I had asked for Mr. McKeever to resign and/or be removed by Layton but it was made clear to me that that would just not happen.
I cannot force the NDP to do anything.
Regardless of Mr. Layton's decision regarding Mr. McKeever, I still think he should finally stand up and speak about this issue by condemning Mr. McKeever's comment -- to speak against misogynist comments and violence.
Make that statment. Other candidates got the condemnation and correction of their party's leaders for what they said. Other parties -- whether they kept their candidates or not in the end -- made public statement to show they do not condone offensive, vulgar or insulting comments.
I can't do this with them anymore. I have given them nothing but kindness and generosity in this situation and they have ignored me and betrayed me in return.
I’m a good journalist and a strong, smart person. I can speak for myself.
krystalline kraus
Jack Layton, you want your party to be taken seriously as a governing party/official opposition. Fielding yahoos and dopers won't help you in this quest. You still have a chance to do the right thing and at least take Ms. Kraus advice. In fact, I would suggest you go further and remove Mr. McKeever.
Note: I haven't figured out how to link to individual rabble.ca posts, but this is towards the end of a very long thread. Scroll towards the bottom (post Oct 2, 2: 07 pm, by statica) to see original.
The Krystalline Entity has spoken!
ReplyDeleteSorry...I just love that name.
Wow.
ReplyDeleteAs with all the other gotcha nonsense I've been rather indifferent to the McKeever affair. But after reading her comments I fully understand why McKeever called her a dumb cunt. Good god. I don't think I've ever seen anyone carry on like that over something as trivial as being insulted on the internet; not even the right whingers.
ReplyDeleteMcClelland, you're as much of a thug as McKeever, and that's saying a great deal.
ReplyDeleteNote: I haven't figured out how to link to individual rabble.ca posts...
ReplyDeleteThat's OK. We're none the poorer for it.
And something must be wrong here, because this is the second time I've agreed with McClelland this week. (Other time was on one of the McLeans blogs).
She got called a "dumb cunt" or whatever it was. How about get the fuck over it? Anyone who can take the ramblings of a 9/11 Troofer(as I believe McKeever is, unless I'm mixing him up with another NDP crank) seriously needs her head examined. To feel insulted by such a person is retarded.
Raging,
ReplyDeleteyou've got McKeever mixed up with someone else.
McKeever blasted Kraus and others for disagreeing with his position on war resisters. His language was over the top, offensive and derogatory. It occurred on too many occasions. Now he's being quoted with other "distasteful" comments that really show he has little in common with the party he represent - poorly, I might add - and has shown he is far from ready to represent anyone or anything.
My interpretation of Krystalline's recent comments is that the NDP leaned on her to play nice and all she has gotten out of it is people of all political stripes questioning her judgement without any support returned by the NDP.
Good work MJ.
ReplyDeleteAs deplorable as McKeever's comments are, Kraus does herself no favours by bringing up shades of Al Franken gazing into his SNL mirror with PC strokes of, "I am a good person, I do matter, and people do like me."
ReplyDeleteI refer, of course, to Kraus' somewhat evident personality giveaway via, "I’m a good journalist and a strong, smart person. I can speak for myself."
Others may not go as ridiculously over the top as McKeever did in his spat with Kraus, but she would seem to vainly set herself up for such shots and then when they are duly delivered, assume the victim posture.
I completely disagree with mcclelland's, ranter and ronin's attacks on Kraus.
ReplyDeleteKraus is not running for public office. Had Layton done the right thing no one would be talking about Kraus at all.
McKeever acted like a hateful thug and any party which insists on keeping him under their party banner deserves to be condemned. Layton is fully at fault here.
NDPers attacking Kraus over this are just reinforcing the misogynistic side of the NDP which has decided to stand behind the likes of McKeever and stick it to his victims.
Classy folks. One thing women don't like about the c-word is, as Tina Fey notes in 30 Rock, there's no male equivalent. (Well there's dick, but there's no sting to it.)
ReplyDeleteIf she didn't want to take the apology, she shouldn't have. Screw the greater good, especially since it's obvious that it doesn't really care for her.
Layton's not standing behind McKeever because McKeever has a chance at winning Durham, or because McKeever is a good representive of the NDP... it would just be too embarrassing to lose another candidate and because with 10% of the vote they can recoup their expenses. Well, it's politics.
McKeever and stick it to his victims.
ReplyDeleteHis victims. Good gawd, you people are nuts. If McKeever had harrassed her or any of his other "victims" for an extended period of time I'd agree that you'd have a case. But that's clearly not what happened.
The internet is never going to be a tea party and I'd suggest to anyone who gets bent out of shape over some mildly offensive comments to spend their time in another pursuit or at the very least, stick to heavily moderated discussion venues.
Robert, the guy is a no class act and it sounds like the NDP leaned on Ms. Kraus while letting McK get off scott free.
ReplyDeleteUsed to be the party of women's rights, used to be the party of the environment...
sharonapple:
ReplyDeleteIMO, the truth lies closer to Chesler's take:
"Women can be accepted by men - be they homosexual men or heterosexual men - as either 'brains' or 'cunt,' as either 'heart' or 'cunt' or as either 'mother' or 'cunt.' Women are rarely accepted as emotional, intellectual, and sexual beings. Small wonder that women find it hard to develop all three capacities; with whom would they share them.'
it sounds like the NDP leaned on Ms. Kraus
ReplyDeleteNo it doesn't. It sounds to me like Kraus was willing to let bygones be bygones but her little faux victim support group badgered her into believing she betrayed faux victims everywhere.
Used to be the party of women's rights
Now you're just being silly.
I could understand letting bygones be bygones if the debate was over American Idol or even the state of the US... or even if the discussion were a few years back.
ReplyDeleteIt was just a few months ago.
It was on a topic that the NDP supports but that McKeever in his own words doesn't support.
I can see the NDP leaning on her to put on a good face ("be the good, quiet girl") and telling McKeever to retract, than I do that a sincere apology took place and that McKeever did a 180 in his beliefs in the last few months. The apology would have been more believable if it hadn't occurred because of the media spotlight on the incident.
"Women can be accepted by men - be they homosexual men or heterosexual men - as either 'brains' or 'cunt,' as either 'heart' or 'cunt' or as either 'mother' or 'cunt.' Women are rarely accepted as emotional, intellectual, and sexual beings. Small wonder that women find it hard to develop all three capacities; with whom would they share them.'
ReplyDeleteInteresting take.
There's a book Anna Fels called Necessary Dreams about the things we presume of women (and sometimes of men).