Skip to comments.Attack will fail
Posted on 06/11/2004 11:24:43 AM PDT by Clive
This past week the election campaign shifted to the dreaded "social issues" --abortion, homosexual rights, multiculturalism, etc.
These are said to be the Achilles heel of the Conservatives.
Or, so Paul Martin and his gang seem to think. They've been pushing this theme all week, and are starting new "attack ads" focusing on Harper's alleged "extremism" and "hidden agenda."
It worked against Stockwell Day and Preston Manning. Maybe it will work against Harper. Anyway, it's all they have left.
Call me an optimist, but I think it will fail, badly.
It's beginning to dawn on eastern Canadians that the corruption of their federal government is not accidental.
It was inevitable. It flows from the Liberals' distorted view of freedom and justice.
That false Liberal sense of morality is why they feel entitled to pass laws against free speech. It's why they end up ignoring and suppressing the rights of provinces and MPs.
It's why they junk up the Criminal Code with useless, political vote-catchers like universal gun registration.
It's why they steal public money in the millions and waste it by the billions.
And when all else fails, it's why they end up demonizing their opponents as intolerant, extreme and dangerous, none of which are true.
Eventually, however, the contradictions become ridiculous. For example:
In American-style "attack ads," the Liberals accuse Harper and his party of being too American.
Martin goes to the U.S. and eulogizes Ronald Reagan as a great world leader, and then comes home to denounce as "extremist" and "deplorable" the pro-life position that Reagan so famously championed.
Martin promises to restore democracy to Parliament while also promising that his government will somehow disobey Parliament if it passes a private member's bill he doesn't like.
The Liberals promise never to "opt out of the Charter," even though their right and duty to do so is written in the Charter.
They say only bigots and homophobes reject gay marriage, despite the fact they all voted against it only four years ago, and a third of them have pledged to continue.
How long can such idiocy go on?
Hopefully we'll soon be rid of it.
Harper understands something the Liberals don't.
Most Canadians are distinctly more conservative than their governing class. Most would like to see abortion and divorce curtailed. They believe in the right of free speech. They do not support minority special treatment. In criminal law, they put more faith in punishment than rehabilitation.
They assume that entitlement programs lead to laziness and careless behaviour.
The Reform party understood this, and swept the West. But it failed in the rest of the country, not because it was too conservative, but because it added a new idea: Government by referendum.
This sounds just fine in the West, which was settled to a great extent by populist Americans, but not in the older parts of Canada.
Politics is driven in large part by history. Deep-rooted attitudes pass from generation to generation.
The history of Eastern Canada, going back before Confederation, is one of two parties, Liberal and Conservative.
The other strong feature is the idea that MPs should be allowed a lot of independence.
In the old days, the MP answered to his home constituency more than to his leader.
Parliament was free, and referendums unnecessary.
That's why, instead of populism, Harper is only talking about restoring the right of MPs to speak and vote more freely in the House of Commons.
As far as most Canadians are concerned, that's democracy.
So as the Liberals continue their "social issues" onslaught, watch Harper.
Every time Martin waxes indignant about socially "extremist" Conservative MPs and says he'd kick such people out of his caucus (even though he has several dozen of them), see if Harper just goes on smiling quietly and saying they have a right to speak their minds.
If he does, I think he'll win.
I'd be interested in an explanation of the Canadian conservative movement. Just how conservative are we talking about? Any movement in that direction would be a tonic for Canada, for sure. Is there one of our Canadian FReepers who would be kind enough to explain to us the tenets and positions of the Canadian conservative movement, please?
How about a link?
Dear North: Thanks for the link. It's quite informative. For you curious FReepers, go to link, go to bottom and click on"issues". It's a good start. Hope the conservatives
"Softly, softly, catchee monkey"
I'm sure there are Canadian freepers out there who can correct me or expand this explanation.
AHHH! Too bad. Nonetheless, if the Canadians do manage to corral government waste, I want the technique imported here to U.S at once.
HAD two conservative parties, the Progressive Conservative (hello, oxymoron?) party and the Reform Party. The two have merged. At one time someone had proposed a name of the Conservative-Reform Alliance Party (CRAP? heh heh). For a while the Reform party was known as the Alliance. Now the two of them together are known as the Conservative Party.
While I worry about the stupid and/or unadvisable things they might do in power, I KNOW the stupid, unethical, illegal and inadvisable things the Liberals have done and will continue to do.
Either way, progress is progress. I hope (to paraphrase The Lost Boys) the ground opens up and Martin takes a header right into the crack. In the upcoming election, I mean. ;)
Yes, they are a single unified party with one direction now. Anything less was unworkable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.