Posted on 03/27/2005 8:17:30 AM PST by Heartofsong83
Linda McQuaig says Tories are still same sheep in different clothing
The romance between Peter MacKay and Belinda Stronach is undoubtedly the hottest dating story to hit Ottawa since Art Eggleton resigned as defence minister after awarding an untendered contract to an old girlfriend.
Certainly the handsome couple presented a more fetching image for the Conservative party at its founding convention last week than did veteran MP Elsie Wayne, who did her best to keep alive the party's image as the home of screaming, anti-abortion extremists.
If media reaction is any guide, the party succeeded in casting itself as moderate and open — even while endorsing a platform sharply at odds with what Canadians consistently tell pollsters they want.
Commentators assume that Canadians fear the right only on so-called moral issues, such as abortion and gay marriage.
But on other key issues as well, Conservatives differ significantly from most Canadians. For instance, they favour tax cuts over social investment, they reject a national child-care program, they want less power for the federal government and more private health care, reject Kyoto and want Ottawa to join Washington's missile defence scheme.
Some of these positions are even at odds with traditional conservatism, which favoured progressive taxation and a strong federal government to protect what used to be called the Common Good.
Traditional conservatism was blown out of the water by a new, mean-spirited conservatism, championed by Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and most nakedly by George W. Bush, which is largely about further enriching the rich.
Cutting taxes ever lower, particularly for the rich, the new conservatism leaves government without resources to do much beyond maintaining a big military.
This conservatism found considerable resonance among members of the Canadian Alliance party, which merged in 2003 with the Progressive Conservative party.
Despite media hype about the new merged party being more open and tolerant than expected, in fact the party is closed to progressive ideas that most Canadians value and that even traditional Tories endorsed.
One indication is the party's decision to boot out David Orchard, even though Orchard recruited thousands of new party members during the 2003 Conservative leadership race and came into that convention with the second largest slate of delegates.
Orchard, a fourth-generation Saskatchewan farmer, vehemently opposed the PC-Alliance merger, fearing it would strengthen the new, nasty strain of conservatism.
He called for a return to progressive conservatism, protection of the environment and a revival of the nation-building of traditional Conservatives like Sir John A. Macdonald.
But the new party — now being praised for its moderation and openness — decided it has no room for Orchard, even refunding his $500 convention registration fee two days before the event.
Apparently Orchard was considered such a threat that he wasn't even allowed to attend as an observer.
The Conservatives may have a glitzy new first couple, but as long as they remain closed to ideas held dear by mainstream Canadians and even traditional Tories, their party isn't yet ready to govern — even for 15 minutes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linda McQuaig is a Toronto-based author and commentator. lmcquaig@sympatico.ca
Quite simply, what she defined as "conservatism" is not conservatism at all. Going back to so-called Progressive "Conservatism" would alienate most of the right-leaning voters in Canada, as they are generally FAR to the right of that. Anyone who supports that would vote for the Fiberals.
Please do not change the title. Thank you.
In HeartOfSong's defense, that actually is the original title.
MY EMAIL MESSAGE TO McCuaig
"As usual McCuaig, you confuse the demand for change and treat Canadians is if they are stupid sheep. It must be disconcerting to have the gnawing doubt eating away at your heart that perhaps, just for a fleeting moment, that Bush and the Americans had it right on Iraq and you folks in the MSM came down on the wrong side.
At long last we are witnessing stability in the Middle East. Pilgrims are revisiting Jeruselum in record numbers and Iraqi casualty numbers are dropping like liberal shorts after a Chilli cookout. Canadians are seeing through the liberal/ socialist smokescreen and seeing that Conservative are not really such a scary alternative after all. Quebec Liberal patronage for political gain is being rejected by Quebecers as they witness the Sponsorship scam’s sordid details. So rant on Linda, for as we Conservatives like to say, “ if you are taking Liberal flack from the Toronto “Red” star, you must be over the target”.
It must scare you to realize you are dangerously close to your best before date and eventual obscurity."
No idea, but Linda seems to be to the left of even the NDP, which means she'd come out with an iron fist if she had her way...
I wonder if she's aware that the saying is WOLF in sheep's clothing?
Same reason why US citizens can't invest in Canadian Mutual Funds without going through an intermediary. Protectionism. Free Trade hasn't reached the investment and law industries yet. ING Bank out of Holland though is breaking through in Canada and the US and pissing off the established banks with superior interest rates both on loans and savings.
So, Canada doesn't have much of a military but if they still cut taxes all it will do is maintain a big military?
I think she's dumb enough to not realize that she proved the Tories point.
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.