The Reform Party pushed for democratic reforms and were fiscally conservative. The Conservative Party is nothing like the Reform Party. By trying (very feebly) to lump them together, you shine a very bright spotlight on you ignorance of Canadian politics.
Your honest assessment of the Canadian Alliance and Steven Harper
- Thread starter cranky
- Start date
The Reform Party pushed for democratic reforms and were fiscally conservative. The Conservative Party is nothing like the Reform Party. By trying (very feebly) to lump them together, you shine a very bright spotlight on you ignorance of Canadian politics.
But Harper's Conservative party *is* the direct descendent of the Reform party after mopping up shards of the PCs.
It's just a name change, like how NDP used to be called CCP.
Are you saying that Harper has/had nothing to do with the Reform party?
As I said, you obviously know very little about the issue.
He is a founding member but left the party for the NCC. Fiscal responsibility and democratic reforms always took a back seat in his mind to social conservatism. It is social conservatism that made Joe Clark uncomfortable with the CA.
So, you're saying Harper is okay with deficit spending, and he's okay with authoritarian systems of government, as long as nobody uses birth control?!?
Evangelical Christians don't have a problem with birth control. You really should stop. You're looking more foolish with every post you make.
Okee dokee... so he's not fiscally conservative, and he's okay with authoritarian government (as long as he's in charge I would presume)...
But he's socially conservative, however not in the way where people can't use birth control.
If he's not fiscally conservative, and if he thinks birth control is okay (although wasn't he the guy who told the over-populated third-world that Canada would not support them with birth control, rather, Canada would show them how to raise unwanted kids in third-world poverty conditions)...
Then what exactly are his "socially conservative" position?
Dam, another one that wants to think for himself. I bet you talked back to your teachers as well.
Gay rights, abortion....are you really so dense that you have to be spoon fed this stuff?
Those two thorns in the sides of many aren't going to change just like gun laws aren't going to change no matter who is elected be it Harper, Ignatieff, Lenin, Doucebag or Maybe.
Harper only has 30% support and probably half of those people vote Conservative for no other reason than because they always have. Look at the Conservative supporters here. I'm hard pressed to remember one of them giving a positive reason to vote for them. It's usually just reasons not to vote for the other guys.
They just don't have enough support for their socially conservative agenda.
I've started my voting life as an NDP supporter, and I even supported Cretien for elections. I applauded Cretien's administration for extending the RRSP Home Buyer's plan indefinitely. Before that any gov could kill the program simple by doing nothing.
Anyways, my point is: I wasn't conservative. I actually hated everything about the Mulrooney government. The only reason why I am voting for Harper is they match my beliefs, not the other ways around.
So.....um.......EFF OFF with the "because they always have" routine. Stop crying and whining.
Anyways, my point is: I wasn't conservative. I actually hated everything about the Mulrooney government. The only reason why I am voting for Harper is they match my beliefs, not the other ways around.
So.....um.......EFF OFF with the "because they always have" routine. Stop crying and whining.
So... Harper doesn't want women to abort, and he hates gays, but he's not Catholic, so he'll allow for condoms.
Anything else in his "socially conservative" view on things?
No a point; an understanding. Something is not adding up.
I can tell he's motivated by some objective other than love of Canada and a will to see it well governed, but I can't figure out if it's because he thinks he's going to spiritually cleanse the nation and deliver it into the hands of God, or if it's because he wants to deliver it into the hands of the global debt-and-finance Plutocrats.
I'm tending to think the latter, after that last budget, refusal of the opposition to pass being what triggered this election.
You're reading too much into it. Harper, like most politicians wants power for power sake. Obviously, they all think they can do what's best for Canada. They just have different ideas as to what's best.
I disagree. Harper has political ideologies and leadership through out his bio,ie his interests are about as sincere an anyone can have.
In contrast, Iggy seems like a prestige seeking career man, someone that can not stroke his ego anymore with academia so he's moved into politics.
What is your opinion on this. Env Minister, peter Kent slams Cons for Terror Candidate.
Minister revokes support for Tory candidate who praised terrorists - The Globe and Mail
Conservative cabinet minister Peter Kent is taking his own party to task for allowing a man who hosted a television tribute to the terrorist Tamil Tigers to be a candidate in the May 2 election.
“This program … is unacceptable and it flies in the face of the fact that our government listed the Tamil Tigers as a terrorist organization,” Mr. Kent told The Globe and Mail on Thursday, after he viewed on YouTube the “Heroes Day” special that Gavan Paranchothy hosted on a Tamil station.
My considered opinion is that the secretive autocratic contemptuous Mr. Harper does not deserve to be PM. Unfortunately, nobody else in sight deserves it either.