News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.5K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wasn't Diane suspected to be the author of Rob's first crack denial speech? Wasn't there a few episodes when the Ford response to political crisis was a meeting at mom's house? What kind of 80-year-old mother gets messed up in her child's professional duties like that, especially when he has the responsibility of running the country's largest city? None of us know what the actual dynamics are behind the doors of that extremely dysfunctional family, but we can make enough of an educated guess to fuel a little speculation on a message board. She's no innocent in this mess.

Thanks, typez. I'd forgotten those events. Totally agree that while we can't know the family dynamics, Diane is far from an innocent bystander.
 
I maybe reading off a totally different songsheet nevertheless I believe it was strategic move by Tory....Purposely to put Chow and Ford one on one. He couldn't have picked a better debate to stay away from. This one was right in Chow's wheelhouse, she knows the facts, she has the compassion, she has a ready audience. D Ford on the other hand only has his platitudes to fall back on and an audience waiting to trip him up.
It gives the opportuniy for tenants, those of TCHC, those who follow ACORN and the Wellesley Institute to take a gauge of where their vote has most meaning. From the write ups it seems Chow took the day eroded votes from D Ford. All in all could Tory want for more?

Your cogent insight is one reason I visit UT.
 
It all goes back to the Toronto Life article..and Tory's meeting with the Ford Family....paraphasing Mrs Fors telling Tory "you can be mayor for a couple of turns then it is Robbies turn"...I would suggest that was more delusions of grandeur than anything prescient....

She got the order wrong, but I'd still call her pretty prescient! It's great that all Ma Ford's favorites get to be mayor of this town. Who's she got lined up after Tory's "couple of turns"?
 
What does that have to do with my concerns?

No idea what concerns you.

I'd say that you could be concerned about her complete inability to raise any of her children to be functioning adults, which has resulted in a four-year setback of transit building and millions of tax dollars spent on babysitting. That, and a park named after her failed political husband, who by all accounts was a monumental dick.
 
No idea what concerns you.

I'd say that you could be concerned about her complete inability to raise any of her children to be functioning adults, which has resulted in a four-year setback of transit building and millions of tax dollars spent on babysitting. That, and a park named after her failed political husband, who by all accounts was a monumental dick.

It should be quite obvious from reading my post. Ignorant, generic, and holier-than-thou comments about addiction, addicts, and their families. That's what concerns me.
 
It should be quite obvious from reading my post. Ignorant, generic, and holier-than-thou comments about addiction, addicts, and their families. That's what concerns me.

And anyone who's not concerned with what concerns you can rot a slow death in hell. Yeah, yeah, we get it.

This thread's not about you, whatthe.
 
It should be quite obvious from reading my post. Ignorant, generic, and holier-than-thou comments about addiction, addicts, and their families. That's what concerns me.

You're taking this too personally by bringing up your own family dynamic...
 
Let's put aside that every single one her children has had addiction issues and/or problems with the police despite being born with a silver spoon, so mothering skills shouldn't be at the top of her resume.

In spite of Doug's Horatio Alger version of growing up, these kids had every advantage.

I still can't get over the fact that this city is seriously considering a candidate - who from what I understand - has spent almost his entire adult life outside of Canada.
 
Last edited:
It's interesting because we usually hear about young people ( most often male ) who "run afoul of the law" because they come from "the wrong side of the tracks".

In spite of the way Doug makes it sound, these kids grew up with every advantage.

I still can't get over the fact that this city is considering a candidate - who from what I understand - has spent almost his entire adult life outside of Canada.

They grew up with financial advantage. We don't know what else went on in that home. They could have grown up with a major emotional disadvantage.
 
I don't doubt it. But in my view it doesn't make such comments any less inappropriate. Or any more relevant to this thread.

The Ford family dynamic is relevant to this thread. Shall we get back to eating dogs and vegetarianism?
 
Or any more relevant to this thread.
Relevant? It's a chat room, this thread. People were going on about vegetarianism for pages yesterday. If this thread is at its core about the havoc one unbalanced person can wreak on the city when given too much power, the family that supports him and the addictions that run through it seem relevant to me.
 
They grew up with financial advantage. We don't know what else went on in that home. They could have grown up with a major emotional disadvantage.

I'm sure they did. So what? You don't get to excuse personal agency and choices by pointing to upbringing. We still put people with antisocial personality disorder in prison.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top