"ellipsis are considered to be bad form"

Really? Howcum??

Hit the sauce early on a Saturday night?

I'll certainly grant Dennis that.. he only comes on to have his say…

..Lord knows it's not to listen or learn.

There's no demand you agree. There's a demand that you not be stupid and illogical.

While it may seem at times that these are the same thing, they're really not.

You keep saying " Next", but then you keep coming back to argue with those you dismiss.

The word " Next ", I do not think it means what you think it means.

Of course I haven't rebutted your point. You haven't made one.

Should have read the GM first. Apparently the press boys didn't know Ignatieff was going to speak. The really bizarre thing is the libs claim they didn't advertise that fact since they were afraid the PMO would try and block them – which is what happened anyway. Hasn't this happened at least once before, when Ignatieff was slated to speak a Jewish event?

Yes – LOOK at the press in Egypt/Tunisia/Libya!!! Good grief, they're being attacked, thrown out AND STILL DOING THEIR JOBS!!!

Canadian press are wimps.

Who's whining?

You are.

Your attempt to protect Elizabeth May by pointing out that "she's a girl," is far more insulting to her than anything Dot said. Ms. May doesn't ask for special treatment based on her gender, I suspect that she would resent your asking for it on her behalf.

Imagine she was calling Dot a sexist…

I suppose "imagination" is one possible route to that conclusion. Certainly neither logic nor literacy could get you there.

Jan was clearly suggesting that Dot was treating May differently because she's a woman. Based on zero evidence.

Based only on Jan's imagination…
Which is supported by Andrés imagination…
Which is supported by you.

Do any of you strangely linked individuals have anything but imagination to support a claim that Jan apparently pulled, fully-formed, from her hind quarters?

You need to simplify things lenny.

What was her assertion?

How did I mischaracterize it?

Be brief, but take care to be accurate.

You characterized Jan's comment as calling for May to be held to a different standard because she's a woman – the opposite of what she was saying.

It's not the opposite at all, it's an equivalent restatement of Jan's premise. And while her premise was groundless, my premise was supported by her own stated assumption.

Jan made a false accusation about Dot, I made a true observation about Jan. The double standard that she misapprehended in Dot's comment was evident in her own comment. That's the very definition of irony.

Strangely, my initial comment to Jan was one sentence; "I love irony." I changed it, oddly enough, because I thought people would miss my meaning.

None of this is very complicated but I think you all got a little confused by my initial comment about strong women and weak women. Strong women don't use their gender as an excuse, weak women do. I wasn't judging Elizabeth May, I was commenting on Jan and her knee-jerk reliance on her own double standard. She holds so strongly to that double standard that she perceives it – falsely – as the failing of others.

I'm not asking for special treatment – that would be sexist, wouldn't it?

Yes it would, and yes you were.

I would suggest that the advice/criticism Dot has for the Green party leader would never be given to a male leader. I can't imagine it would, anyway.

Then you haven't been paying much attention to the many, many, many criticisms that all politicians receive for hypocrisy. After dishonesty it's probably the most popular criticism out there.

And you're also ignoring the very content of Dot's complaint which was that May is not being environmentally friendly. A criticism that is often leveled against other so-called green politicians. Ever hear anybody criticize Al Gore for the size of his house(s)? Ever hear anyone mock the environmental jet-set who have to get together, in their thousands, every year in some tropical locale to once more save the world? Are those people all women? Or are they being criticized – fairly & gender neutrally – on the discrepenacy between their words and their actions?

Your knee jerked. It's hardly the worst sin in the world, but your defenders seem to be quite insistent that it never happened which tends to make me rather stubborn in insisting that it did. What say you?

You need to remember that Dot has some kind of personal 'thing' against Elizabeth May. I don't think we've ever discovered why, but Dot closely follows Elizabeth May's movements/comments solely so she can attack them. It's a little creepy in an otherwise fairly sane Dot, but like I say, I don't think we know the issue that caused it, and perhaps that would make all the difference.

Hmmm. I do think you are a woman. I don't know why I think this. But is that why I defend/analyze you? I certainly hope not, meaning I hope I would do the same thing if I thought you were a man. But I can't tell for sure, can I?

Okay, it has always seemed to me to be more personal than what "other informed individuals" think. For example, I truly, truly despise Stephen Harper as our Prime Minister. Which is not to say I hate the man, since I don't even know him. So I don't follow his every movement or go out of my way to read all the press on him or stuff like that.

Still, if Ms. May is a big phoney, I have to say I'm disappointed, and I guess I'm grateful to you for bringing that to our attention. I shall read the links.

She could just as easily announce the new ads in Victoria. Its all about her personal media attention. All the time. Any time.

Read her book: How to Save the World in Your Spare Time It's all laid out there.